Talk:1993 Women's Cricket World Cup final/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: AhmadLX (talk · contribs) 18:43, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 18:43, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article largely meets the criteria. A few minor points follow:

"However, in response, New Zealand enacted five run outs; the New Zealand captain,..." It should be mentioned here that NZ won the match. Currently it remains unclear and only a couple lines later does one know that from Raf Nicholson's comment.
- Oops, added. Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
" England scored 208 for five, aided by..." → "England scored 208 for five; aided by..." OR "England scored 208 for five. Aided by..."
- Changed to a semi-colon. Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"New Zealand were restricted to 154 runs by India, but three run outs and miserly bowling helped them to a 42-run victory." miserly bowling? It sounds like inadequate or deficient bowling by NZ.
- Probably too jargon-y: changed to "economic". Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Tea was taken after 30 overs of the New Zealand innings: shortly thereafter..." → "Tea was taken after 30 overs of the New Zealand innings. Shortly thereafter..."
"Shortly thereafter two more wickets fell;" → "Shortly thereafter two more wickets fell:" i.e. colon instead of semicolon.
- Done both of these. Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Umpires: Valerie Gibbens and Judith West. This should be referenced.
- Added. Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The England captain, Smithies reflected..." → "The England captain Smithies reflected..." OR "The England captain, Smithies, reflected..."
- Changed as suggested. Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Former England player Sarah Potter said that "Progress..."". Either remove quotation marks and rephrase the quote or remove "that".
- Removed "that". Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@AhmadLX: Thanks for the review; I have responded to each point above. Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pass. A nice article. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 17:18, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed