Talk:Australia women's national basketball team

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Australia women's national basketball team/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 22:26, 19 April 2016 (UTC)Reply


I shall be reviewing this against the GA criteria as part of a GAN sweep. I'll leave some comments soon. JAGUAR  22:26, 19 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Disambiguations: No links found.

Linkrot: No linkrot found in this article.

Checking against the GA criteria

edit
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
    The lead should be expanded to summarise the article, per WP:LEADLENGTH
    I would recommend moving the citations out of the lead and into the body of the article, per WP:LEADCITE
    "game with their long-time rivals" - why is rivals linked?
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
    No original research found.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

I couldn't find anything major enough to put this on hold, so I'll pass this now as it meets the criteria. The lead should still be expanded slightly, but the comprehensiveness of the body seems to make up for it.   JAGUAR  14:16, 20 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Australia women's national basketball team. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:34, 12 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

edit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:22, 1 August 2019 (UTC)Reply