Talk:Hunter Mariners/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]- Lead
- I would suggest saying in the first sentence, that they were an Austrlian team. Either "were an Australian rugby league team" or "based in ... Newcastle, Australia".
- Second, third and fourth sentences all start "The club" I would suggest changing at least one.
- I'd suggest adding even just one line to explain why they disbanded in the lead. It's a vital part of the club's history.
Done I think. Last sentence of the 2nd lead paragraph. The Windler talk 08:58, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- History
- "The New South Wales Rugby League competition (NSWRL) had been formed in 1908 and there was a Newcastle based club in the first two seasons, but eventually left to form their own Newcastle Rugby League." Run-on sentence. I suggest splitting after 1908. It also needs "they" after but.
- "It was then that News Limited began proposing and deliberating a rival rugby league competition and by the end of the year the current twenty teams which competed in the ARL were split between the Super League and ARL competitions." What does current refer to. I would seriously suggest re-writing this to put a specific time frame on it. See WP:DATE for more details about the use of current.
- "aligned itself with the ARL and the new competition Super League was left without a Newcastle based team." new competition Super League is worded the wrong way round I think.
- "members of the Leagues Club" incorrect use of possessive. It needs an apostrophe somewhere, but I'm not sure where, because I'm not entirely sure what you're referring to.
Not done, I'm not entirely good at English. It is referring to members of a club, people of that club. The Windler talk 09:35, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- "In early 1996, the Hunter Mariners club was officially launched, without a home ground," When did they find a ground - it doesn't say anywhere. Where was the ground?
Do you have any images?
- I doubt there are any, or I don't know of any "free" images. Theres already a non-free image used, so I'm unsure whether if they need images or not. The Windler talk 09:35, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
A couple of things to do, so I'll put it on hold. Peanut4 (talk) 13:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
A nice short but thorough article. It meets all the GA criteria, although a couple of images would be great. Good luck with further improving the article. If you want to push it on further, I would suggest getting a peer review or asking members of the relevant Rugby League wikiproject. Well done. Peanut4 (talk) 00:37, 13 August 2008 (UTC)