Talk:Seychelles women's national football team/GA2

GA Reassessment

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

I will be reassessing this article to determine whether it still meets the Good Article criteria. Any user is encouraged to assist in improving the article to keep it up to GA standards. Thanks. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 05:56, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	See issues below.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lists are not supposed to be empty, of course, though the "Recent call-ups" section is empty. I am also not convinced of the need for any of the results tables given the Seychelles has never qualified for any of them. The lead section is also poorly formatted and could use expansion. The fact that the orange-tag at the top of the article needs resolving goes without saying.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Ref 6 still is online but gives no such information and Ref 7 doesn't work at all.
	2c. it contains no original research.	The "Players" and "Competitive record" sections have no citations.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	This may be picky, but the "History" section is the only part of the body of the article with prose, and even it is a bit sparse; could this be expanded at all?
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Team logo is fair use.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Team logo is relevant.
	7. Overall assessment.

Issues with criterion 1a

Lead

• The article is orange-tagged as a whole, which could qualify for a quickfail but I will do the full review anyways in hopes that it can be salvaged.
• The lead seems to be poorly formatted, with the opening sentence failing to link Association football, and mention FIFA, the confederation and/or subconfederation in which the team plays, or any other information.

History

• Link FIFA
• "In 1985, almost no country in the world had a women's national football team" → "In 1985, few countries had a women's national football team"
• "including the Seychelles who did play in a single FIFA sanctioned match between 1950 and June 2012" → did or did not? Also, hyphenate "FIFA-sanctioned"
• "three nation tournament hosted by Mauritius" → hyphenate "three-nation" and link Mauritius women's national football team
• "Overall, they finished last, scoring only one goal in the competition." → redundant, as the previous sentence tells they lost to both of the other teams and scored one and zero goals in their two games, respectively, for a total of one goal scored.
• "In 2005, Zambia was supposed to host a regional COSAFA" → "COSAFA" is not defined or linked in the text, only the infobox
• "with ten teams agreeing to send teams including" → repetitive, replace first "teams" with "nations" or "countries"
• "Seychelles did not record a match in the event" → did the event take place at all? If not, it's bizarre not to mention this explicitly and leave it to the reader to assume
• "The country has an official under-17 team, the Seychelles women's national under-17 football team" → redundant to say that "[The Seychelles] has an under-17 team, [which is the] Seychelles women's national under-17 football team". Gives the exact same information twice in a row.

Results and fixtures

• "as well as any future matches that have been scheduled" → incorrect as no future matches are listed

Competitive record

• The "COSAFA Women's Championship" table seems to have totals pasted from another nation's page, as it goes without saying that a team which hasn't ever competed in a particular tournament couldn't have recorded 6 matches played (for a record of 1 draw and 5 losses), 4 goals scored, and 47 goals allowed in that tournament.

Overall review conclusion

WP:GAR states that An individual assessment may be closed after seven days of no activity. As there has been no activity on the review for seven days (all edits to the page are either adding tags or adding fixtures/results), I am closing the review. My conclusion is that the article fails GA criteria 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b, 2c, and 3a at least, and therefore will be delisted. If improvements are made in the future, and the article is brought up to par, it can be renominated for GA. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 21:09, 9 July 2022 (UTC)