Talk:Denise O'Sullivan/GA1

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

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 08:14, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Comments There's quite a bit to fix here, so the first pass:

  • Some overlinking in there, e.g. North Carolina Courage, Chicago Red Stars, Paul Riley etc etc.
  • "Cork Women's FC " -> "Cork City W.F.C."
Pedantically, the Women's National League club in Cork was independent and called "Cork Women's FC" until they merged with the men's League of Ireland club Cork City in 2014. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 16:20, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "She enjoyed" did she?
  • Newspapers, magazines etc should be in italics.
  • It looks like this was taken care of, but let me know if there's something specific missed. Hmlarson (talk) 21:05, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Where is height/date of birth referenced?
  • " admired local hero" reads like a tabloid.
  • "behavior" if this is BritEng, behaviour.
  • "founded Cork, one" use full and proper name first time round in the prose.
  • Check all claims are cited, e.g. where is " ... against Zhytlobud-1 Kharkiv on 14 August 2014." cited? not in the following citation, certainly...
  • " a total of 9 appearances" nine.
  • "one the title.[38][36] " ref numerical order.
  • "4-1 " en-dash for scorelines.
  • "International goals" where are they referenced.
  • Don't use hash for No.
  • Tynecastle Stadium or Tynecastle Park?
  • " in The 100 Best Female Footballers In The World, listed " our article seems to italicise this, and how runs it, what's the provenance?
  • Spaced hyphens in ref titles should be en-dashes.
  • Updated ref #7: "Women's (Junior) Wilton United 3 – 1 Longford Town". Blarney United. Hmlarson (talk) 21:11, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's enough for a start, on hold for now. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 11:57, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I plan to re-work the lead a bit once we get further along in the review. Thank you. Hmlarson (talk) 22:08, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The table of goals needs to comply with MOS:DTT with row and col scopes.
  • Consistent formatting in refs, i.e. sometimes BBC Sport is italicised.
  • Newspapers, e.g. The Herald, The Sydney Morning Herald etc should be in italics.
  • What's the strategy on linking publishers/works in the refs, looks a bit random to me.
  • Is it The 42 or the 42 or The42.ie or The42...?
  • Scorelines should use en-dash, e.g. title of ref 63.
  • RTE or Raidió Teilifís Éireann?
  • The above points re ref formats are specific examples: you need to go through all 76 of them and check they are compliant with MOS and consistent with one another.
  • Updated. Hmlarson (talk) 03:51, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Double-checked and fixed :) (sorry I'm not as quick as you Hmlarson, but am pretty busy at work and with uni rn ;) ) --SuperJew (talk) 21:40, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 11:24, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned above I'm the last person to rush someone else ;) --SuperJew (talk) 09:18, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, some comments on sources, what makes the following WP:RS (pardon my ignorance)?

  • Cork Beo
  • Extratime.ie (and why isn't that Extratime.com in ref 6?)
  • Cork Beo is used in combination with other refs (just added another ref from Sydney Morning Herald to support the "junkyard" title). Anyways you can see their reliability under About Us page. Or I might be misunderstanding and I would appreciate if you give an example of evidence that a source meets RS, say for The Guardian? --SuperJew (talk) 21:12, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll repeat: Let me know if there's something specific in WP:RS you have questions/concerns about for any of those The Rambling Man. Hmlarson (talk)
  • I don't find this particularly constructive. Let me know if you want to move forward. If not, it is what it is. Hmlarson (talk) 21:10, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm sorry you feel that way. It's a common question to ask how people think certain sources are of sufficient quality and meet RS. As far as a quick search goes, Corkbeo looks like it's a Daily Mirror offshoot so it's reliability is questionable. extratime.com is a "volunteer drive (sic) portal" so where's the editorial oversight for it? The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 21:14, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regarding Extratime.ie (seems they moved their domain to Extratime.com but still reference themselves as Extratime.ie), they say about them Extratime.ie is the leading provider of information on the League of Ireland. Established in 2008 and run as a volunteer driven portal, the enterprise has gained recognition domestically and internationally as a provider of accurate,innovative and timely news and statistics on the Irish domestic league and associated events such as international fixtures.. Again, I'm not sure what evidence you're looking for The Rambling Man, and seems Hmlarson isn't either. It would be helpful if you could provide an example of demonstration for a source you know meets RS. --SuperJew (talk) 21:17, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Frankly I'm baffled. WP:RS describes what is meant by reliable sources. WP:PEREN (for instance) gives a list of known good sources and known verboten sources (like Daily Mirror which must not be used). Perhaps if you can't demonstrate that these two sources meet the policy, you should ask someone at WP:RSN for their opinion. Using a website's own blurb about itself is not really suitable evidence. Do other reliable sources use extratime.ie for instance? The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 21:20, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think we can drop Cork Beo as it is used in combination with other refs, so for the info it supports it's reliable enough. Regarding extratime.ie, I tried to search on google, but it's hard to find stuff as all the results are what extratime.ie published. But I might be searching wrong. --SuperJew (talk) 21:30, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's why I suggested the WP:RSN, it may have been discussed before or there may be knowledgable people there who can help, and once something is given a green light there, it tends to be a healthy precedent to point at for all future conversations around reliability for a given source. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 22:00, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I added a question there. --SuperJew (talk) 22:38, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In what sense is the Daily Mirror supposed to be "verboten" @The Rambling Man:? At your linked list of deprecated sources it only says there is no consensus (and deprecated ≠ verboten, although I don't want to open that can of worms). If we exclude every single source published by Trinity Mirror, as you seem to be implying, we would be ruling out half the local newspapers in the UK and Ireland. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 17:19, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, you're right, it uses the warning triangle there. But if we can avoid using tabloid papers, so much the better. I note "Cork Beo"'s own "ethics" statement uses the phrase "The maintenance of high editorial standards is at the core of the Irish Mirror's business philosophy." so if this is the Irish Mirror then we can do better. I never mentioned Trinity Mirror. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 17:28, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But honestly, I've asked for evidence that both these two are WP:RS. It's incumbent on the nominator(s) to demonstrate that, not for me to demonstrate that they are not reliable sources. If you want this review punted back to GAN, by all means that's fine. I'm sure another editor will simply just give it the green light and we can all move on with our lives. I just asked a simple (very common) question and was met with hostility which I don't need in my life at this time. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 17:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No hostility intended - I just asked a question for my own clarification then you seem to have gone in a huff! Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 17:48, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @The Rambling Man: Based on my previous interactions with Hmlarson and with BbDS, I don't think there was any hostility intended by them. They're both hardworking editors who are aiming to build this Wikipedia, especially improving the scope of women's soccer, bettering pages, and making sure stuff is notable and well-fleshed (not just a bunch of presumed notability stubs as some editors do). On a personal note, I definitely did not intend any hostility, and I do apologise if it felt that way. I just honestly do not have experience in determining if a source is RS or not and wanted to understand. And I really appreciate the time you're putting into this review to help better the article.

Now regarding the questions in hand:
  • Regarding the Cork Beo source, it was used in two places. In one of them I completely replaced it with a different source (The Sydney Morning Herald) and in the other I added another source supporting the saying. So I think it is irrelevant if it isn't fully RS - it is RS enough to be a supporting reference with another one (I think we should keep it as it words the point sourced better).
  • Regarding the Extratime.ie sources, I put in the question for WP:RSN as you kindly suggested, and you can see there that the users who answered say it is an RS for soccer and Irish soccer players.
I hope this takes care of the issues at hand :) --SuperJew (talk) 18:46, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Final comments on the article and refs:

  • Is it MDY or DMY?
    • DMY - Only American and Canadian English is MDY. --SuperJew (talk) 14:59, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ideally images should have alt text.
  • I would leave the FC's in the publishers, i.e. Glasgow City because it's unclear if that's some council or govt organisation, or the football club.
    • Personally, I think it's clear from context, but fixed. --SuperJew (talk) 14:59, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 41 missing accessdate
  • Ref 48 missing accessdate
  • Ref 65, 66 score shouldn't be spaced.

Then I think we're there! Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 11:41, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • The Rambling Man - just noticed your change on the Talk page to Second Opinion - but you've not included: "Be sure the review page specifies in what way you are looking for a second opinion." (#3 at WP:GAN/I#2O). Are you sure you don't want the credit for the review you've already done all the work for? If you don't, can you please indicate that the second opinion reviewer should be looking at specifically? Thanks. Hmlarson (talk) 03:13, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Denise_O%27Sullivan/GA1&oldid=1003253401"