Talk:Australia women's national basketball team/GA1

GA Review

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

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

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)

Disambiguations: No links found.

Linkrot: No linkrot found in this article.

Checking against the GA criteria

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)