Login
Login

Talk:B3 (classification)/GA1

GA Review

{{Good article tools}}

{{al|{{#titleparts:B3 (classification)/GA1|-1}}|noname=yes}}
:This review is transcluded from Talk:B3 (classification)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 17:17, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments

  • "disability sport classification for blind sport" can we remove one of the "sport"s?

:: It is not used outside of sport, so not entirely certain. --LauraHale (talk) 11:40, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

:::I meant something along the lines of "disability classification for blind sport"? The Rambling Man (talk) 13:25, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

:::: My misunderstanding. Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 20:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

:: Done. --LauraHale (talk) 11:40, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

:: Done. --LauraHale (talk) 11:48, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • "classification is LTA-B3. athletics where the comparative" probably should be a comma.

:: Done. --LauraHale (talk) 11:48, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Is there a reason our IBSA article calls it "International Blind Sports Federation"?

:: Fixed link. --LauraHale (talk) 11:48, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • "This classification was first..." reinfroce subject, i.e. "The B3 classification was first..."

:: Done. --LauraHale (talk) 11:48, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • "functional and evidence based" -> "functional- and evidence-based".

:: Done. --LauraHale (talk) 11:48, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • "though the B3 class is comparable to the IBSA created class" I thought the B3 was the class created by the IBSA?

:: Clarified the wording.--LauraHale (talk) 11:48, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

:: Done. --LauraHale (talk) 11:48, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • "whereas cycling and skiing do require a guide." -> "...skiing require one."

:: Done. --LauraHale (talk) 11:48, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

::Done. --LauraHale (talk) 12:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • "The International Blind Sports Association (IBSA) defines..." and "The International Paralympic Committee" both of these have already been abbreviated in the preceding section, so use the abbreviations.

:: Not sure. Fixed link so it was not to a redirect. --LauraHale (talk) 12:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • "This classification has parallels in other sports. For adaptive rowing, the comparable classification is LTA-B3.[10] For athletics, the class is T13.[11][12] The B3 equivalent for swimming is S13.[5]" merge that into the previous paragraph and reinforce "The B3 classification has parallels..."

::Done. --LauraHale (talk) 12:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • "During the actual evaluation" no need for "actual".

:: Removed. --LauraHale (talk) 12:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • In general, there seems to be a lot repeated in this section from the lead, so perhaps trim the lead down a little.

:: Trimmed. --LauraHale (talk) 12:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Define and link FINA before using the abbreviation.

:: Fixed.--LauraHale (talk) 12:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

:: Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 13:00, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

:: Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 13:00, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • "recognised" vs "meter" vs "utilized " - which variant of English is being used in this article?

:: Changed to American. My bad. I generally do UK/Aussie but obviously not paying as much attention as I should. --LauraHale (talk) 13:00, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • "This classification traces its history"... "The B3 classification..."

:: Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 13:00, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • "When a cyclist is looking for a guide, they are encouraged to find one with a pace similar to their own" seems like common sense to me. Does it need to be reported here?

:: Yes, I think so because it is a point that comes up in literature about what is desirable for looking for in guides and then how you improve from there. --LauraHale (talk) 13:00, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • The portal graphic is squashing all the references up, could it be placed elsewhere?

:: Not sure. No see alsos and no external links where they might otherwise be placed. Can remove. --LauraHale (talk) 13:00, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Check reference titles for correct use of WP:DASH i.e. date ranges etc should use an en-dash, not a hyphen.

:: Confused because my knowledge of dashes and hyphen usage is non-existent. --LauraHale (talk) 13:00, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Also, references which are PDF usually have format=pdf.

:: Fixed.LauraHale (talk) 13:00, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Be consistent with author names in the refs, e.g. is it First Name Surname or Surname, First Name?

The Rambling Man (talk) 11:32, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

:: Fixed.LauraHale (talk) 13:00, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

=GA criteria=

:GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

  1. It is reasonably well written.
  2. :a (prose): {{GAList/check|n}} b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): {{GAList/check|y}}
  3. :: Prose issues as noted above.
  4. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
  5. :a (reference section): {{GAList/check|y}} b (citations to reliable sources): {{GAList/check|y}} c (OR): {{GAList/check|y}}
  6. ::
  7. It is broad in its coverage.
  8. :a (major aspects): {{GAList/check|y}} b (focused): {{GAList/check|y}}
  9. ::
  10. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
  11. :Fair representation without bias: {{GAList/check|y}}
  12. ::
  13. It is stable.
  14. :No edit wars, etc.: {{GAList/check|y}}
  15. ::
  16. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
  17. :a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): {{GAList/check|y}} b (appropriate use with suitable captions): {{GAList/check|y}}
  18. ::
  19. Overall:
  20. :Pass/Fail: {{GAList/check|}}
  21. :: Not a bad start, I'll put it on hold while the comments are addressed. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:32, 9 July 2013 (UTC)