Talk:1997 Women's Cricket World Cup final/GA1
Appearance
GA Review[edit]
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Kosack (talk · contribs) 09:12, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
I'll take this one on, will post review as soon as possible. Kosack (talk) 09:12, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
Lead[edit]
- Might be worth linking wickets here for the uninitiated.
- Links for the Indian and English teams in the second paragraph?
Background[edit]
- You use both eleven and 12 in successive sections here.
- Worth mentioning that England were the reigning holders?
Australia[edit]
- Would the Ireland match have been counted in the final table standings? If so, would be worth explaining how they awarded points for it.
- Worth linking wickets and One Day International again here.
- "Australia scored 123 for seven led scores of 33 and 31", led by?
New Zealand[edit]
- "uneven number of teams, only featured four other teams", a little repetitive with the double use of teams perhaps.
- Worth linking umpires perhaps?
Summary[edit]
- In the lead, you have no link for Calcutta but include one here. I'd either have both linked or neither.
- Emily Drumm is linked here but there is a Drumm mentioned in their route to the final section. I'm assuming it's the same one so the link needs moving up.
- Along similar lines, you drop the first name for Fitzpatrick, but include the first name for Hockley (and Drumm if the above point is agreed) in the same sentence.
- Note b is a little oddly placed as it seems to be describing the scoring method, but at this point it's halfway through the article and there are frequent uses of it prior.
References[edit]
In all honesty, I could probably pass this now and have no complaints as it's a very well-written piece. A couple of minor suggestions and adjustments above that could be looked at though, so placed on hold for now. Kosack (talk) 08:43, 14 August 2020 (UTC)