Talk:1988 Women's Cricket World Cup final/GA1

GA Review edit

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

Reviewer: MWright96 (talk · contribs) 13:47, 1 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Will be reviewing this article as part of the GAN Backlog Drive of April to May 2020. MWright96 (talk) 13:47, 1 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the review, will take a look through in detail tomorrow. Harrias talk 20:42, 1 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  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:  

Background edit

  • "England had won the first world cup" - World Cup
  • "Australia had beaten England" - defeated
  • Wikilink wickets to the relevant article

Route to the final edit

  • "once against Australia and once against New Zealand." - possible minor rewrite to avoid repetition of the same phrase?
  • "Ireland and the Netherlands were well adrift," - behind

Summary edit

  • "in Melbourne, Australia on 18 December." - comma after Australia please
  • "Heather Smith, of The Sydney Morning Herald suggested that," - the first comma isn't needed I think
  • Wikilink the first mention of the term "crease" to the relevant article and the same for the terms "delivery" and "over"
  • "earning praise from both The Sydney Morning Herald and The Times,[9][6]" - refs in numerical order
  • The MOS specifically states this is not necessary: "References need not be moved solely to maintain the chronological order of footnotes as they appear in the article..". Harrias talk 20:42, 1 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
    • It's a part of the MOS that I don't agree with but it's no deal breaker MWright96 (talk) 08:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • "and in the fourteenth over," - 14th

Aftermath edit

  • Both mentions of "world cup" should be spelt as "World Cup"
@MWright96: Other than the point I responded to last night, all have been changed as suggested. Thanks for the review. Harrias talk 08:53, 2 May 2020 (UTC)Reply