Talk:2022 CAFA Women's Championship/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs) 03:06, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I'm glad to see that you're eager to expand Wikipedia articles and get them to Good Article status! Unfortunately, I'm going to have to fail this article, as it does not meet the Good Article criteria. I'll describe the criteria and explain why the article does not meet them below so that you and other contributors know where this article needs to be improved. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:06, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
- Well-written: There's not much writing here to work with. The prose of the article is only a few sentences. It doesn't follow the lead rules because the lead doesn't summarize the rest of the article. It also uses too many lists instead of describing the information in prose.
- Verifiable with no original research: Twitter is not allowed to be used as a source. It's important to make sure all sources are reliable when writing an article. A lot of the information in this article doesn't have any source at all.
- Broad in its coverage: This article has hardly any information. For a good article, you would expect many paragraphs that describe each part of the subject in detail. There should probably be a few paragraphs about how the events was set up, about the different participants, about how the event happened, any commentary on the event, and any other notable things that happened. Consider looking at some successful good articles about sporting events to see how much information they have.
- Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: This one is good. The article doesn't take sides in any way or suggest one country deserved to win over another.
- Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: This one is good. There's no arguing or fighting about what should be in the article.
- Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: This one is good. There are only two images and they can both legally be used through Creative Commons. More images would be better, but it's not required.