Talk:Mauritius women's national football team/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Arsenikk (talk · contribs) 15:57, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

The lead is very short (even for such a short article). Specifically, I would like to have seen which two teams were played with the corresponding matches.
- This should now be fixed. Lead expanded. --LauraHale (talk) 11:22, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Full names of CAF and COSAFA (FIFA being abbreviated is fine).
- Done. --LauraHale (talk) 10:26, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"current" is a very problematic world on Wikipedia. I would recommend that instead use "Alain Jules has been coach since YYYY".
- Fixed by saying As of 2012^[update] in body and lead. --LauraHale (talk) 10:26, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"As of January 2013"? is the year correct?
- Erk. Yes? Basically, as of now, they are not scheduled to play any FIFA recognised matches. These matches are often set up long in advance, with draws for tournaments being chosen 6 months to a year in advance. They haven't played in any matches either. --LauraHale (talk) 10:26, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 4 needs a page number (it is 220 pages long).
- Added. --LauraHale (talk) 10:26, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"three nation tournament" should be "three-nation tournament"
- Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 10:43, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Who did Mauritius play in 2002?
- Honestly couldn't tell you. I've looked and looked for sources and just not there. :( I've clarified to say this match was not FIFA recognised match as it doesn't appear on the recognised match list. --LauraHale (talk) 10:43, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I count three matches, but the lead says two.
- Well. Crap. I fixed it to say FIFA recognised, as that is one of the important standard bearers for national team football teams. And mentioned the other match. --LauraHale (talk) 10:43, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why were the games only 80 minutes. As far as I am aware, this is not common in women's football.
- It isn't standard anywhere. It isn't normal, which is why the length of the game is worth mentioning. Not sure why it was this way as the sources do not say. :( There is a real paucity of sources. :( I can't find anything really beyond what the article cites. Given the few FIFA recognised matches, this does not entirely surprise me though. --LauraHale (talk) 10:43, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The entire second paragraph under history needs a copyedit for punctuations. There are just too few commas for it to be comfortable to read.
- Fixed by User:ThatPeskyCommoner. :D --LauraHale (talk) 10:55, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
De-link 'Mauritius' where it is bold
- Meep. Fixed. --LauraHale (talk)
Any reason 'Madagascar' isn't linked?
- Copy paste error. Fixed. (And these red links will become blue. On my to do list.) --LauraHale (talk) 10:55, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"supposed to have" is not particularly formal. Perhaps use the term "has scheduled to", "agreed to" or similar.
- Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 10:55, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Three issues with the fragment "with ten teams agreeing to send teams including". First, stick a comma before "including". Second, I could twelve teams. Third, if the list is complete, use the term "consisting of" instead of "including", as including implied or at least leaves open the question of whether the list is complete.
It would be more logical if the unplayed tournaments were presented chronologically.
- Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 11:22, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"African based" should be "African-based"
- Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 11:11, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Who was the coach while the games were actually played? How about a list of players?
- If I had one, I would include it. Cannot find this. (Or for that matter, any of the articles about African teams I have nominated for GA where it isn't in the article.) --LauraHale (talk) 11:11, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
'Ranked' links to "FIFA World Ranking", but should link to "FIFA Women's World Rankings"
- Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 11:11, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am a bit uncertain of the heading "Background". Although I understand and agree with the scope of the section, to me background is either an out-of-scope introduction or a preamble, a way of putting the article into context. Perhaps "recruitment" or "organization" would be better?
- Changed to include both? The goal is the section is to largely contextualise the previous section to give background on why they only played two FIFA recognised matches. --LauraHale (talk) 11:11, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As both the "see also" links are in the navbox, the section should be removed.
- Gone. --LauraHale (talk) 11:11, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was not aware of the poor state of African women's football. Interesting article and hopefully soon there will be a lot more to write about them. Placing the article on hold until the above issues have been resolved. Arsenikk ^(talk) 15:57, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. The few games played, and the location of the team mean few sources exist and those that do are hard to access. I think all your concerns have been addressed. Thank you for the review. --LauraHale (talk) 11:24, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work! Congratulations with a good article. Arsenikk ^(talk) 20:53, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]