Talk:Seychelles at the 2010 Summer Youth Olympics/GA1

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

Reviewer: Brad78 (talk) 22:38, 8 September 2010 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Although the prose itself is largely well written, the sheer paucity of the details does not meet GA criteria. At the moment the article is little more than a lead sentence and a few brief details about each athlete; it is no more than a series of stub-type articles loosely based on the same subject. The article needs more work to tie the piece together, like a section saying how many athletes, coaches and officials went to the games, how each athlete was selected, perhaps better details on their individual performances. Criteria 1 is definitely the weaker part of this article. At the moment, the article is a disparate section of different details without any main focus. If no more details can be found at this stage, just because an article is a comprehensive as it can be, does not make it a GA. I would class this article at the moment as either stub or start quality only. To offer some further guidance, avoid linking the bold terms in the lead. Indeed there does not need to be bolds for descriptive titles such as this. The first line is very forced. The lead also contains information not held elsewhere in the article.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * At present, everything is sourced.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Perhaps similar to criteria 1, the article does not seem comprehensive. There is no overall focus to the article to bring all the facts together.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Further details as well as perhaps some images (though not vital for GA) are needed to address this article. A lot of work needs to be done to improve this from a stub/start class article up to GA. Brad78 (talk) 22:49, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Further details as well as perhaps some images (though not vital for GA) are needed to address this article. A lot of work needs to be done to improve this from a stub/start class article up to GA. Brad78 (talk) 22:49, 8 September 2010 (UTC)