Talk:Sudan women's national football team/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 07:45, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this, starting Saturday June 9, 2012 (UTC -4.30) —Hahc21 ^{[TALK][CONTRIBS]} 07:45, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Prose

The prose has many statements and affirmations that, aside from looking biased, are a little unnecesasary. I recommend rewording them or removing them.

The team

"In 1985, almost no country in the world had a women's national football team."

This seems better if moved into the other section.

"A Sudanese national team has never participated in a major regional and international event." >> "Sudanese national teams have never participated on neither regional nor international events." If both are negative, then and might be replaced with or.
"Between 1936 and May 2012, the team didn't played a single FIFA sanctioned game."

This phrase tells me that the team was stablished in 1936, which i think is not the purpose, right?

Changed wording. --LauraHale (talk) 01:34, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"In March 2012, a national team from the country didn't appear on the FIFA worldwide ranking,[7] and a national team did not officially exist."

We have a serious contradiction. This phrase says that a national team fro Sudan actually doesn't exist, but the article talks about such team.

Fixed first paragraph of the article to say "including Sudan. A FIFA recogised Sudanese national team has" which should clear up the contradiction between official FIFA recognised team and local, unrecognised national team playing in local club competitions. Also changed the first sentence of the last paragraph to say: "The national team continues to lack FIFA recognition. " which should solve the contradiction. --LauraHale (talk) 01:43, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Sudan is one of the only two Muslim countries in the region to have a women's league, which could be critical for the development of a national team."

This clarifies a bit and introduces the difference between national team and women's league. This needs to be clarified on the lead to avoid confusion of the reader.

"Sudan is one of the only two Muslim countries in the region to have a women's league, which could be critical for the development of a national team." >> "The fact that Sudan has a women's league could be critical for the development of a national team."

I haven't checked yet the refs. It would be better of you write an in-text attribution for this phrase, since its kind of being challenged.

Fixed I think. --LauraHale (talk) 01:49, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"and played against a side from Sudan University that wore traditional garb."

And which is the tradditional garb?

Source doesn't specifically say. In context, I think it would be fully clothed and wearing a hijab. --LauraHale (talk) 01:50, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The quality of play was not high, as some players missed the ball when attempting to kick it."

I consider this is unecessary, since it gives too much information about an irrelevant point of the match.

For me, the important part is this was the unofficial national team's first match and the quality of play is very low. Did change to "The quality of play was not high and the game ended in a 2-0 win for the Challenge team." though. --LauraHale (talk) 01:34, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The national team remains unofficial."

Too many times it has been affirmed, no need to write it again =).

Removed second occurence. --LauraHale (talk) 01:52, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's all by now =). Don't take my comments too harsh, it's not my intention (in case you felt them that way, i apologize). I'm just being kind of critical. if it will be a GA, it must be a good GA. I've made some minor fixes that i felt unworthy to write here. --—Hahc21 ^{[TALK][CONTRIBS]} 00:33, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No offense taken. :) I think I've addressed all the comments. --LauraHale (talk) 01:53, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

comments from another

I just read the beginning but I have a few comments:
non-FIFA recognised - FIFA should be linked on first mention - perhaps spell it out the first time - e.g. is an unofficlal non Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA)
- Fixed. --LauraHale (talk)
"In 1985, almost no country in the world had a women's national football team" - In 1985, few countries had a women's national football team? "almost no" - what country or countries did? So this wasn't an Islamic or African problem but a worldwide problem?
- World wide problem. Changed it to "In 1985, few countries in the world had a women's national football team". My recollection is the United States, England, Germany, Australia, Scotland. --LauraHale (talk) 21:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"A FIFA recognised Sudanese national team has never participated in a major regional and international event." Does this mean that a national team was formed but never participated?

No, but there is a need to differentiate between the official non-existing team and the unofficial team playing in local club competitions. --LauraHale (talk) 21:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"While football was organised inside the country with 440 men's clubs in 2006,[18] and the first ever women's game being played that year in February between Tahadi and Sudan University at Sports’ City, Sudan University, development was hindered because a fatwa by the Fiqh Council of Islamic in 2006 condemning the creation of a women's league in Sudan."

"the first ever women's game being played that year" - the first women's game ever? or the first that year?

First ever played that year in the country. Added "in the country" to the sentence.--LauraHale (talk) 21:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So a women's team existed in 2006 but it wasn't "national" or wasn't playing a "competitive match" until 2006?
And a fatwa (should be linked, explained) by Figh Council of Islamic (what is this) "hindered" its creation? Also, "hindered" but didn't prevent? How did it "hinder" and how did the team get around the hinderance?

Linked fatwa. Figh Council of Islamic is the ones issuing the fatwa. The text doesn't say much about who they are other than making it clear they are in influential religious body that says a national team cannot be created. I don't know how to describe them more. The unofficial team is not subject to it because they are not a FIFA team playing internationally and in the other cases, they appear to be ignoring it. --LauraHale (talk) 21:37, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"country didn't appear" - contractions such as "didn't" isn't encyclopedic

Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 21:37, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

did teams exist in Sudan and (and perhaps elsewhere) or were there no women playing on teams or in "competitive matches" until 2006 in the world, or in Africa only, or only countries affected by the Figh Coucil of Islamic?

Based on the sources I've read, there were nor organised teams playing in organised competitions until 2006 in Sudan. --LauraHale (talk) 21:49, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it would help to set the general context. Was this just a FIFA-related problem, or world wide no women played?

Which paragraph needs contextualising? In the background and development section, the first one clearly states African problems. The second paragraph is about Sudan. Third paragraph is about the national football association. --LauraHale (talk) 21:49, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for being so confused!

MathewTownsend (talk) 19:24, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! --LauraHale (talk) 21:49, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Verdict

Ok, i think everything has been addressed. Since all information about the team is here, the criteria 3a and 3b are fulfilled. I doubt it'll be easy to find an image for the team, so 6a and 6b are met. 4a is met, since it's written with a NOPV. 2a, 2b and 2c are good. Everything is well-referenced, inline citations exist and no original research is fine. 1a convinces me, but i'm a little concerned about 1b, mainly the lead; but i think it meets that too. I'm passing the article.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

—Hahc 21 17:10, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]