Talk:Rowing (sport)/GA1

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

I will do the GA Reassessment on this article as part of the GA Sweeps project. H1nkles (talk) 19:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I am only a very small percentage of the way through the article but I can see that the Lead will need to be greatly expanded per WP:LEAD. The Lead is to be a summary of all the points brought up in the article. An article of this length should have a 2-3 paragraph lead.

I'm also concerned about a lack of references in the Rowing section. Thus far I see that the description of the two forms of rowing is not referenced, also the Rowing propulsion and Fitness and health subsections are not referenced. This is a concern that will likely be raised again given the fact that there are only 27 in-line citations and a majority of them appear to be in the History section. More to come. H1nkles (talk) 20:23, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

The History section looks good, I put a template in the FISA subsection though at the point of facts about Rowing's participation in the Olympics, this should have a reference.

Speaking of references the Equipment section is devoid of a single in-line citation, this should be remedied. Also the Colours subsection is two sentences, a bit short for its own section, can it be combined with the Oars subsection?

In the Competition section I put another template after the statement that rowers have the highest power outputs of any athletes in any sport. This should be referenced. In the Side by side subsection, why is side by side bold? This doesn't seem to fit with the MOS. As a general comment, when there are distances they should show both metric and imperial conversions. Per WP:UNIT that would mean the imperial conversion would be in parentheses. For example 10 km (6.2 miles). Also be consistent with putting metric first and imperial in parentheses. H1nkles (talk) 16:58, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

In the World Championships subsection there should be a reference after the assertion that athletes consider the Olympic events to be the premier events. This could be a violation of WP:WEASEL unless there is a citation. There is a general lack of references in this section. The Women subsection seems to have a lot of specific information about the rowing conditions in the U.S. There is no comparable information about other countries. This could be construed as a bias. Also some of the information is a bit superfluous.
 * Rewrote the section on Women and added cites. Moved the pre-existing content to the main article Women's rowing. Whizz40 (talk) 19:17, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

In the References section # 24 is dead and # 25 times out. Please repair. The formatting is pretty good, usually italics is reserved for newspaper, book or jounal titles, but that's not a big deal.

Overarching comments: The primary problems with the article are a general lack of references and the lead needs to be expanded to encompass all subjects addressed in the article. I put a couple of templates into the article but this is just a start. The writing is solid, the photos are good, the article is stable. There are a few MOS issues but I wouldn't hold up GA listing on them. It really comes down to the references and the lead. I will put the article on hold for a week pending work. I will notify interested projects and editors in the hope that these issues can be addressed and the article can be kept at GA. Should you have any questions please contact me on my talk page. H1nkles (talk) 17:56, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The article has been on hold for the better part of three weeks and no appreciable work has been done on my recommendations. As such I will delist the article from GA and encourage any interested editors to bring the article back up to GA Criteria and renominate at WP:GAC.  H1nkles (talk) 16:12, 11 September 2009 (UTC)