Talk:Swimming at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Men's 200 metre butterfly/GA1
GA review
{{Good article tools}}
Nominator: {{User|It is a wonderful world}} 00:43, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk · contribs) 01:39, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Hey, I thought I would review this too tonight as you have been waiting since December and thought you deserved it reviewed ASAP! Another great article, well done :) Earwig shows no issues and I can't see any major issues here. Here are my comments - none of them are make or break really but would improve the article in my opinion. I have done a few minor edits too.
: Hi @DaniloDaysOfOurLives, thank you very much again for reviewing. I addressed your concerns below, but also I replied to some. Let me know what you think. IAWW (talk) 07:47, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
1.) In the lead and background, could you please clarify "defending", "favourites" and "butterfly parts"?
: {{done}}
2.) Lead - "but he had taken a break from swimming in 2023 and the Hungarian national head coach had reported that Milák had been training inconsistently" - this could use more clarity e.g. he was considered likely to win despite taking a break or something similar
: I'm worried about making connections/arguments like this that could be considered original research, per the last part of WP:EDITORIAL
3.) Lead - could you please link "previous Olympics"?
: {{done}}
4.) Background - "in 2023 he "hit rock bottom" and took a break from swimming" - I would either recommend removing "hit rock bottom" and saying that he took a break from swimming for personal reasons or keeping it but expanding briefly upon it
: I clarified that he said it himself
5.) Background - "reported that Milák had been training inconsistently" - Could you please maybe expand on this as "training inconsistently" can be quite ambiguous (e.g. was he attending only some training or was he not performing well or not training correctly)?
: I agree this is lightly unclear, however I prefer to keep the original direct quote "training inconsistently" to keep it as neutral as possible. I don't really want to expand on it too much because I think that would be giving it undue weight considering only one coach discussed it and it is a contentious topic. IAWW (talk) 07:47, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
6.) Background - Can you please clarify what "had dropped three seconds off his personal best" means?
: {{done}}
7.) Heats - "Milák qualified with the top seed, swimming 1:53.92" - Can you please clarify and also link seed?
: Reworded
8.) Semifinals - "Milák qualified first, swimming 1:52.72" - Is this the correct wording?
: Not really, reworded
9.) The first paragraph of final was a bit difficult to understand, do you think some words could be clarified for readers who are unfamiliar of sports/swimming (e.g. "Marchand again cut some of Milák's lead, but Milák again extended it through the rest of the length; Milák touched for the final turn")
: I reworded parts of this paragraph and cut quite a lot. What do you think? This race description is a little more comprehensive than the others. IAWW (talk) 07:47, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
10.) " he went on to win the 200 metres breastroke event on the same evening" - Could you please link the 200 metres breastrokes?
: Liked, this had a typo too
11.) "which made him the first to win both these events at the Olympics" - Could you clarify if he was the first ever or the first of the 2024 Olympics?
: Ever, clarified
12.) "Ponti tied his Swiss national record set from the semifinals" - I am a bit confused by what this means?
: I cut it, I think it was unnecessary detail.
Once these have been addressed I will do a source spotcheck and hopefully pass :D Please let me know if you need anything!