Talk:Adelaide Oval/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Kosack (talk · contribs) 09:29, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
I'll take a look at this one. I'll post my review as soon as possible. Kosack (talk) 09:29, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
Lead
[edit]- There are seven refs in the lead which seems like a very large amount. If information in the lead is also used within the article, there's no need to include a ref in the lead.
Development
[edit]- This section is very choppy, the first seven paragraphs add up to only nine sentences and most of it is unsourced. This section needs rewriting to connect these events into a more flowing prose.
- There is an issue with sourcing further down also. There are chunks of information that are seemingly unreferenced.
- Do we really need a table for a redevelopment vote? This could easily be explained in prose.
Layout
[edit]- There are six subsections here that have no souring, one of which is even tagged as needing a citation.
International cricket
[edit]- "Test and One Day International", I'm not really sure why this is on its own?
- "many exciting events", exciting is POV and a WP:PEACOCK word.
- Sourcing issues in this section also.
Australian rules football
[edit]- Spectacular is used twice in picture captions and is another WP:PEACOCK term.
References
[edit]- Avoid shouting in ref titles, per WP:ALLCAPS
I'm calling it a day there as I think it's pretty clear this meets at least one of the GA quickfail criteria. The major issue here is sourcing, there are large chunks of the article that are seemingly completely unsourced. The article needs going through to ensure that any significant claims or facts are backed up by reliable sources. The prose also needs streamlining to avoid very short, single sentence paragraphs.
I would also say there are too many tables included. We have tables for literally everything here. For example, I'm not sure we need tables for "Most career games at the ground" or "Lowest score by a team". There's no reason some of these tables can't be converted into prose instead. Unfortunately, due to the points noted above, this is some way off becoming a GA. Kosack (talk) 12:23, 13 September 2019 (UTC)