| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it just passed a GA review. I would like to take to FAC and any suggestions would be welcome.
Thanks in advance, NickGibson3900 Talk 10:10, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Comments by EricEnfermero
editI'm happy to leave some comments. Keep in mind that I have not completed many peer reviews.
- I notice that the article is titled Little Athletics, but the organization's website seems to refer to itself as Little Athletics Australia.
- @EricEnfermero: Little Athletics Australia is the governing body, not the name of the competitions.
- In the lead, the language could be a little tighter. Ex.: "compete in the competitions" is redundant.
Done
- Under Structure and Governance, "They are sections of centres..." - unclear on exactly what this means.
- Done
- The History section covers a relatively brief period and creates a gap of ~40 years where we're left to wonder what happened.
- I don't find it useful to have both a timeline and a detailed history. The lead can help to summarize the most significant events.
- Removed
- The direct quotes in this section aare distracting to me. I think you can paraphrase how many people attended an event, for example.
- Paraphrased
- "There would be 14 meets..." - Do you mean that 14 meets were scheduled? Did they happen before support for the organization ran out?
- Done
- Re: the Current section. WP:WTW discourages the use of relative time references. Is there a better section title?
Unfortunately there isn't a better title I can think of
