Talk:Adelaide Oval/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Kosack (talk · contribs) 09:29, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

I'll take a look at this one. I'll post my review as soon as possible. Kosack (talk) 09:29, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Lead

 * There are seven refs in the lead which seems like a very large amount. If information in the lead is also used within the article, there's no need to include a ref in the lead.

Development

 * This section is very choppy, the first seven paragraphs add up to only nine sentences and most of it is unsourced. This section needs rewriting to connect these events into a more flowing prose.
 * There is an issue with sourcing further down also. There are chunks of information that are seemingly unreferenced.
 * Do we really need a table for a redevelopment vote? This could easily be explained in prose.

Layout

 * There are six subsections here that have no souring, one of which is even tagged as needing a citation.

International cricket

 * "Test and One Day International", I'm not really sure why this is on its own?
 * "many exciting events", exciting is POV and a WP:PEACOCK word.
 * Sourcing issues in this section also.

Australian rules football

 * Spectacular is used twice in picture captions and is another WP:PEACOCK term.