Talk:Afghanistan at the 2004 Summer Olympics/GA1

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

Reviewer: Adityavagarwal (talk · contribs) 10:40, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Hey, this looks like a wonderful article. Kindly feel free to revert any changes/mistakes I make as I review this article!




 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:




 * "They have competed in most Summer Olympics since, missing the Olympics only in five occasions between 1936 and 2004. These were in 1952, 1976, 1984, 1992 and 2000." Here, if it is certain they competed in all but 5 olympics, then "each" or "every" would be more appropriate than "most".


 * It would be better to include the coaches with whom Muqimayar and Rezayee trained.


 * Could you explain a bit about the "B" qualifying standard for the event?


 * "On 20 August" which year?


 * "Olympic Solidarity programme" could you explain a bit with this is?

This is an exceptionally well-written article! Just a few minor corrections there but other than those, it qualifies for a GA status.
 * Have done all of the points bar the Coaches for Muqimayar and Rezayee of which there is no information on. MWright96 (talk) 12:26, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * MWright96 Congratulations on yet another Good Article! This is a brilliantly written article and has now achieved a Good Article status. Keep up the wonderful work! Adityavagarwal (talk) 04:26, 18 April 2019 (UTC)