Jump to content

Talk:2024 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres hurdles/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


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

Nominator: Editør (talk · contribs) 21:16, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Arconning (talk · contribs) 14:04, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing this, comments will probably be finished in the next 72 hours! This race was so amazing, I have a soft spot for athletics so I'll review this! Arconning (talk) Arconning (talk) 14:04, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing the article, I look forward to it. – Editør (talk) 14:32, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Editør Here you go! Address the comments and it'll be set. Arconning (talk) 16:06, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe I have addressed all the issues you raised. – Editør (talk) 18:23, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Editør Sorry if it pinged you a lot, here are my subsequent comments. Arconning (talk) 09:36, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have made some additional changes and replied below. – Editør (talk) 13:28, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prose and MoS[edit]

Lead and infobox[edit]

  • Italy from 9 to 11 June 2024.[1] , remove the source. Info is sourced in the body.
    I had left this one in, because otherwise the stadium wouldn't have a source reference. I could try and add the stadium somewhere else and add the reference there if you prefer to have no references in the lead, otherwise I think it should stay. – Editør (talk) 17:34, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've removed the source and added another source to the infobox for the stadium. – Editør (talk) 08:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Rome, Italy, entry standard, ranking, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, add comma at the end.
    Changed for first two, but I don't think there is a comma after the day with the day-month(-year) date format as it would when the month-day(-year) format is used. – Editør (talk) 17:34, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • European title from 2022,, replace comma with period/full stop.
    Changed. – Editør (talk) 17:34, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove the days in the lead, basically "Sunday" etc. Days are usually omitted unless they're relevant to the article.

Background[edit]

Qualification[edit]

  • No issues on prose or MoS. Pass.

Round 1[edit]

Semifinals[edit]

Final[edit]

Images[edit]

Refs[edit]

  • I feel like you have to archive most of the sources before they become dead links.
    Is that a requirement for a good article though? – Editør (talk) 18:16, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I mean, archive them but don't put it is alright. As I said, the list is always being updated so the world record might be broken soon and the reference would be outdated. Arconning (talk) 09:31, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also source 7 doesn't support the fact that it was a European Leading before the event, as it has been updated with the time in this run. Reference 15 actually supports the claim, so you could use that. Arconning (talk) 09:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've changed the sources for the European record, championship record and European lead before the tournament so they are more stable. With regard to archiving I don't think it is required, or necessary: "Links added by editors to the English Wikipedia mainspace are automatically saved to the Wayback Machine within about 24 hours." according to WP:PLRT. – Editør (talk) 12:58, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And I've also changed the sources for the world record and world lead. – Editør (talk) 13:27, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • References are from reliable sources.
  • I think it would be better if you used a "cite web" template for references 2 to 6, and 9 to 19, then use a "reflist" template on the "References" section. I heavily encourage this, please do.
    I have added a reflist template. I don't like the cite web template, but I don't mind if others want to change it. – Editør (talk) 18:16, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Forgot to mention, please turn the commas to periods. Arconning (talk) 09:31, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think these comments are about personal preference and not about GA requirements. For the sake of consistency, I've changed the single source reference with periods to commas. – Editør (talk) 13:05, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    My apologies, CS1 sourcing uses periods, while CS2 uses commas. I forgot that there are different sourcing types on Wikipedia. Your choice. Arconning (talk) 13:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • References 6 to 9, and 11, will be severely outdated in the future once other marks have been introduced as it's always updating with every competition that has completed. Find an archived copy of it that corresponds to the statement, or find another source that claims the statement.
    See earlier question. – Editør (talk) 18:16, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Would like an answer on why reference 2 is used, would like to know the claim that it's being sourced for.
    It was added as source for the information about the tournament interval (every four years, every two years). – Editør (talk) 18:16, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spotchecks[edit]

  • Earwig and manual check for copyvio, pass.

Misc[edit]

  • No ongoing edit war, broad enough considering it's about a singular event in the whole Championships, neutral.


Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.