Jump to content

Talk:Maria Kühn/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: ComputerJA (talk · contribs) 02:03, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]

I'll be reviewing this article and will be finished in the next 3-5 days. The article looks pretty good. Thanks for your work on this one! Stay tuned. ComputerJA (talk) 02:03, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First overview
  • 1.0-point wheelchair basketball player – I don't really know what a 1.0 point player is, nor is it cited in the text.
    • Added a reference in the main body. The term is linked. Medical jargon aside, a 1 point player has considerable disability, usually being completely paralysed from the waist down, and wheelchair bound. Good 1 point players are a vital part of the team, because they allow the high-point players to play.
  • worked in Human Resources at the Gesellschaft für Technische Überwachung (GTÜ). – What is the organization GTU? Adding a comma after it and a short description would be helpful.
    • Gesellschaft für Technische Überwachung = Society for Technical Supervision
  • winning the championships in Nazareth, Israel. – Is the tournament plural or singular?
  • ... while in Stuttgart. – Just a thought but is the mention of Stuttgart particularly important for her career? If so, please explain why.
  • Kühn was named as one of the team that competed at the 2012 Summer Paralympic Games in London. – I am a bit confused by this. Was she called to join the national team? Maybe you should write "Kühn was called to compete with the national team at the 2012 Summer Paralympic Games in London."
    • No, that would be confusing; a reader might think she joined the team in London. Teams like Germany and Australia have more players than they can take to the Paralympic Games, so they have to whittle it down a bit.
  • won in women's wheelchair basketball in 28 years – I think it would sound better if you but at the end "since [year]" instead of "in 28 years." Does the source mention the exact year?
  • again named Team of the Year for 2012 – Again implies that they were named Team of the Year in 2011. Can you add that in the article with an appropriate source?

Thank you for your work. It is a really interesting article. ComputerJA (talk) 22:34, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail: