Talk:Women's sport in New South Wales
.svg){kind=small} | This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | A fact from Women's sport in New South Wales appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 7 December 2012 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
Women's cricket
editThis article could be expanded to include women's cricket played in the state as early as the 1800s: this link might be of some help. Harrias talk 17:54, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
Disgrace
editThis article should never have been on the main page as it was an utter disgrace. Being long enough is for some people apparently sufficient to be included, being anywhere near comprehensive, logical, or even readable is of no concern. Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Template:Did you know nominations/Women's sport in New South Wales has some discussion on this. Peole should really reflect on what they are doing here, and why articles are put on the main page. These articles are no promotion for Wikipedia. Hidden away in a dark corner, they can't do much harm, but highlighted on the main page, they set a terrible example. Fram (talk) 08:12, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Problems with purpose and parameters
editOne of the many problems with this article is that its purpose and direction are unclear. In fact, the title is misleading. It implies an overview of women’s sport generally in New South Wales. However, in contradiction to this, the text seems to be about “Women’s sports organisations” which is another thing entirely. The current structure makes it very difficult to develop either of these purposes. It should establish a structure that could allow for a coherent coverage of its topic. An “organisations” article would be much easier than attempting a general Women’s sport in New South Wales one. Readers would expect some sort of chronology, probably from the beginning of settlement. (New South Wales has a very clear beginning point). The chronology could be done in bigger periods to start with and gradually narrowed down as it developed. For example, it could be 1820-1850; 1850-1900; etc and eventually work into decades. Or, the article could be organised by theme or sport (swimming, cricket etc.)
I suggest that this article be moved to “Women’s sporting organisations in New South Wales” and rewritten with that more precise focus. Either way, its purpose needs to be clearer and its text and structure both need to be rewritten. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 05:42, 10 December 2012 (UTC)