Talk:Smoking in association football/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Tayi Arajakate (talk · contribs) 05:47, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

• Hello C of E, I'll be taking up the review for this article which I will present it to you shortly. I hope you will find my feedback to be useful. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 05:47, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

  The C of E, I've completed the review and listed issues in the comments and assessment sections below. It is a well written article and was an interesting read, has near no issues other than that it needs considerable expansion. If you need time for that, I can put it on hold but I'll give 7 days before I either pass or fail it. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 18:22, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Comments

• The bolded portion in the lead should not have wikilinks in them.
• I could not locate any other issues in the article so its good regarding everything else but I have one big concern which needs to be addressed. It appears mostly centered around the UK and Italy, with a couple minor mentions for other countries which should be expanded on; e.g., Germany, France, etc. Not to mention, there are a lot more countries were football is a major part of the sporting culture which find no mention in the article; e.g. Spain, Netherlands, most South American countries, etc.

Assessment

1. Comprehension: The comprehension is good.
Pass

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	The prose is clear, concise and understandable.	Pass
(b) (MoS)	The article is compliant with the manual of style.	Pass

2. Verifiability: The article is verifiable.
Pass

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	The article has a list of references and inline citations for all material in the body.	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	Sources used are reliable.	Pass
(c) (original research)	No original research found.	Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	No copyright violation or plagiarism found.	Pass

3. Comprehensiveness: The article is adequately comprehensive.
Neutral

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	The article has an adequate coverage.	Neutral
(b) (focused)	The article is focused without any unnecessary deviations.	Pass

4. Neutrality: The article is neutral.
Pass

Notes	Result
The article is compliant with the policy on neutral point of view.	Pass

5. Stability: The article is stable.
Pass

Notes	Result
No edit warring or content dispute.	Pass

6. Illustration: The article is well illustrated.
Pass

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	No copyright issues found.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	Use and captions are appropriate.	Pass

@Tayi Arajakate: I have added some more worldwide content, how is this? The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 06:37, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

The C of E, the coverage is better than before but I still think its lacking a lot, especially with respect to South America. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 13:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tayi Arajakate: I've just added some more for Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 08:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

The C of E, alright. I have checked them and I still think it can be expanded a lot more but the overall coverage might be about enough for the good article criteria. Since there are no other issues with the article, I'll promote it. Good work on it in general! Tayi Arajakate _Talk 14:17, 28 July 2021 (UTC)