Talk:Tina McKenzie/GA1
Appearance
(Redirected from Talk:Tina Mckenzie/GA1)
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 17:31, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Comments
- I think you could expand the lead to cover how she became a Paralympian.
- Expanded introduction. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- " As of 2012," it's mid-2013 now, do we have an update?
- No. News is infrequent now that she's retired. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- If you link Albury, why not St Peters, New South Wales?
- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- Suggest linking paraplegia.
- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- "Gliders" is mentioned in the infobox but nowhere else.
- Changed to infobox to her clubs. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- " a result of a fall" presumably "as... " but a fall from what? More detail would be good here.
- Added some details. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- There must be a link for a "guard"?
- More or less. Added. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- "In 2011/2012," nah, they gave her a grant at a specific point in time, but perhaps "For the 2011–12 season..."?
- It would be the financial year, being a government grant. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- "MacQuarie University" no need for capital Q.
- Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- "Chancellors Award" apostrophe somewhere I expect?
- Addded. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- "She is a.." for new sections reintroduce Mckenzie.
- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- Is it Mckenzie or McKenzie?
- Aaaaargggh. It's McKenzie. Had the pages moved. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- "three game test series" -> "three-game Test series"?
- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- "62-37 " en-dash per WP:DASH.
- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- What's "10:47 minutes"? Do you mean 10 minutes, 47 seconds?
- Yes. Changed to that. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- Standardise the accessdate format for refs.
- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- Ref titles need en-dashes rather than hyphens (per WP:DASH).
- What are ref titles? Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- When you cite a source, you usually use a "title" field, or in simple terms, the headline of the webpage you're using. These should use en-dashes, not hyphens. If it's too problematic, leave me a note and I'll show you what I mean. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:45, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
- Done, but that's a really, really bad rule. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:11, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
- When you cite a source, you usually use a "title" field, or in simple terms, the headline of the webpage you're using. These should use en-dashes, not hyphens. If it's too problematic, leave me a note and I'll show you what I mean. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:45, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
- What are ref titles? Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:44, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- When the links decay the first thing I do is run a search on the title. Most of the time, the page has merely moved. Otherwise I have to fish it out of an archive. When we alter the titles, we reduce the chance of being able to find it again. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:22, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
- Most search engines totally ignore punctuation, so there'd be no difference in results between looking for an en-dash or a hyphen. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:39, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
- When the links decay the first thing I do is run a search on the title. Most of the time, the page has merely moved. Otherwise I have to fish it out of an archive. When we alter the titles, we reduce the chance of being able to find it again. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:22, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
On-hold "good article" nomination
[edit]This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of July 2, 2013, compares against the six good article criteria:
- 1. Well written?: Comments above.
- 2. Factually accurate?: No issues.
- 3. Broad in coverage?: Yes, seems okay, although worried about the fact she has a club called "Gliders" in her infobox but no mention of it at all in the article.
- 4. Neutral point of view?: No worries.
- 5. Article stability?: Yes.
- 6. Images?: No problems here.
Let me know when you're through these issues. Thank you for your work so far. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:44, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- All points addressed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:11, 3 July 2013 (UTC)