Talk:Josiane Lima/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Harrias (talk · contribs) 10:22, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

I'll take a look over this. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 10:22, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Sources

2. Verifiable with no original research:

1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
2. 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);
3. it contains no original research; and
4. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

• 2a. The article contains a list of references, in an appropriately titled section. A few non-GA required recommendations for the formatting of the references themselves below.
  • Recommend adding the date of publication (30 January 2022) to reference #1.
  • Recommend adding the date of publication (30 July 2020) to reference #2.
  • Recommend changing to title case for the title in reference #3, per the MOS.
  • Recommend adding the date of publication (16 February 2014) to reference #4.
  • Recommend adding the date of publication (1 February 2011) to reference #5.
  • Recommend adding the date of publication (17 March 2022) to reference #7.
  • Recommend shortening the title to just "For these para rowers it is all four Paralympic Games", and adding the date of publication (19 August 2021) to reference #8.
  • Recommend adding the date of publication (30 July 2020) to reference #9.
  • Recommend adding the date of publication (27 January 2012) to reference #11.
  • Recommend adding that reference #12 is in Portuguese.
  • Recommend adding that reference #13 is in the PDF format.
  • Recommend adding the author (Mike Rowbottom) to reference #14.
  • Recommend being consistent whether "World Rowing" is listed as the publisher or the website. Refs #3, #5, #6, #8, #9, #11, #13, and #15 all use it, but vary in style.

•  Done All above - "World Rowing" was only listed as author/publisher when the source was not the World Rowing website (Twitter, document at Olympics.com) and I have made this clearer. Kingsif (talk) 22:10, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

• 2b. With the caveat below, all citations are from reliable sources.
  • Three of the sources are to social media (Twitter, YouTube and Instagram), but in each case are justified: the Twitter post is from World Rowing, the YouTube video is from ESPN, and the Instagram post is from the subject herself, and is used to source a personal belief. As such, I have also removed the "non-primary source needed" tag.
• 2c. All significant information is sourced. Spotchecks carried out on three facts cited to accessible sources:
  • "She was immediately entered into competition for the 2006 World Rowing Championships with Rafael Luz in the mixed doubles sculls. She came back with Lucas Pagani as her partner for the 2007 World Rowing Championships, and the pair took the gold." Sourced to ref #8 – appears in the source.
  • "Lima contracted a sinus infection shortly before the Games and was displeased with the air quality in Beijing, noting that while she and Santana dominated the race for the first three-quarters, she got blurred vision and was seeing stars at the end." Sourced to ref #9 – appears in the source.
  • "This medal led to them being described as ones to watch ahead of the Rio 2016 Summer Paralympics, held in Brazil, by World Rowing." Sourced to ref #13 – appears in the source.
• 2d. Spotchecks on those same sources for copyvio or close-paraphrasing reveals no concerns.

Images

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

1. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
2. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

• 6a. None present.
• 6b. None present.

Prose

1. Well-written:

1. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
2. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

• 1a. A few queries below, but nothing major.
  • Consider linking "sculls" to Sculling on first use.

•  Done Added a simple mention with link; I considered adding it to text already present but "double sculls"/"single sculls" are the proper names of events, so the link feels improper (breaking up the name and linking to the motion rather than event). Kingsif (talk) 22:20, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

• • "..at the Olympic lane.." What does this mean?

• The rowing equivalent of an Olympic pool. Would "Olympic rowing lane" be clearer? Kingsif (talk) 22:20, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

• • "This medal led to them being described as ones to watch ahead of the Rio 2016 Summer Paralympics, held in Brazil, by World Rowing." I'm not keen on the "by World Rowing" tacked on at the end here, it feels awkward. Maybe something like: "This medal led to them being described by World Rowing as ones to watch ahead of the Rio 2016 Summer Paralympics, held in Brazil."

•  Done

• • "..to win the small final." What is a small final?

• A race to place the teams who do not make the final, in events where overall placement is important. Fairly common across sports that have world rankings or qualifying positions (rather than times), there might be a wiktionary entry to link but I doubt it. Kingsif (talk) 22:20, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

• I added a Wiktionary link, with which I'm happy to pass this. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 10:38, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

• • "..as well as politicians in Brazil since the crisis in 2015.." What crisis in 2015?

•  Done Added a wikilink. Kingsif (talk) 22:20, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

• 1b. No relevant MOS issues.

3. Broad in its coverage:

1. it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
2. 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.

• 3a. No apparent significant gaps.
• 3b. The article follows a suitable summary style, without going into excessive depth.
• 4. No issues.
• 5. No issues.

Overall a good piece of work. A few issues above, although nothing major. I'll stick it on hold. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 11:10, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, I've addressed everything either - some with responses here. Kingsif (talk) 22:21, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.