Knowledge

:Peer review/2009 Duel in the Pool/archive1 - Knowledge

Source 📝

157:, so bringing this article up to the standard will allow editors of existing and future championship articles to get a feel for the kind of content and prose discussion that is required alongside the typical results section. At this time I'd particularly welcome comments on the quantity of the prose discussion and any areas of interest that are not mentioned. 192:
The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article and as such needs to be expanded here. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead
199:
In the Background section there are two problems, one is that the article does not identify whose idea this was - who organized the meet? The other is the language - this happened in the past, but the language is future tense
206:
The team lists do not seem to have references and there are several other places without refs. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a
254:
In the United Kingdom the event was be broadcast live on the BBC's channels and via it's website. Friday's session was be on BBC Three, and Saturday's on BBC One.
126: 122: 76: 107: 263:(which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, 99: 153:
I've listed this article for peer review to determine what steps could be taken to move this article towards GA status. There are no other
292: 154: 69: 177:: While it is clear a lot of work has gone into this interesting article, it needs a fair amount of work before it can pass 240:
series until the Format section, about halfway through the article. This should be in the Background section I would think.
260: 186: 278: 169: 115: 62: 50: 44: 259:
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at
92: 17: 185:
A model article is often useful for ideas and suggestions to follow - there are many FAs on sports at
268: 217: 237: 165: 233:
Who were the teams' coaches? Who selected the team members for the US and European teams?
264: 224: 202:
This event will include the first competitive performance by Michael Phelps in Britain.
194: 286: 247: 178: 243:
I think there needs to be some brief descriptions of the events, not just the tables
228: 161: 213:
Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed.
155:
swimming competition/championship articles with this assessment
141: 134: 103: 210:The Venue section has no refs either, for example 187:Knowledge:Featured_articles#Sport_and_recreation 181:. Here are some suggestions for improvement. 223:and other cite templates may be helpful. See 70: 8: 150:This peer review discussion has been closed. 236:There is no mention that there is a whole 77: 63: 32: 35: 246:There is no alt text for images - see 7: 252:Language is really rough in spots 24: 1: 261:Knowledge:Peer review/backlog 279:03:59, 24 January 2010 (UTC) 170:23:31, 16 January 2010 (UTC) 309: 293:February 2010 peer reviews 193:in some way. Please see 28:2009 Duel in the Pool 18:Knowledge:Peer review 175:Ruhrfisch comments 275: 142:Watch peer review 87: 86: 300: 273: 238:Duel in the Pool 222: 216: 139: 130: 111: 79: 72: 65: 47: 33: 308: 307: 303: 302: 301: 299: 298: 297: 283: 282: 272: 220: 214: 145: 120: 97: 91: 83: 51:Manual of Style 43: 31: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 306: 304: 296: 295: 285: 284: 269: 257: 256: 250: 244: 241: 234: 231: 211: 208: 204: 197: 190: 152: 147: 146: 144: 90: 85: 84: 82: 81: 74: 67: 59: 56: 55: 54: 53: 48: 38: 37: 30: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 305: 294: 291: 290: 288: 281: 280: 277: 276: 266: 262: 255: 251: 249: 245: 242: 239: 235: 232: 230: 226: 219: 212: 209: 205: 203: 198: 196: 191: 188: 184: 183: 182: 180: 176: 172: 171: 167: 163: 158: 156: 151: 143: 138: 137: 133: 128: 124: 119: 118: 114: 109: 105: 101: 96: 95: 89: 88: 80: 75: 73: 68: 66: 61: 60: 58: 57: 52: 49: 46: 45:Copying check 42: 41: 40: 39: 34: 29: 26: 19: 267: 258: 253: 201: 174: 173: 159: 149: 148: 135: 131: 117:Article talk 116: 112: 93: 27: 104:visual edit 189:, although 271:<: --> 265:Ruhrfisch 287:Category 218:cite web 160:Thanks, 225:WP:CITE 195:WP:LEAD 127:history 108:history 94:Article 36:Toolbox 248:WP:ALT 179:WP:GAN 162:Yboy83 270:: --> 136:Watch 16:< 229:WP:V 227:and 207:ref. 166:talk 123:edit 100:edit 289:: 221:}} 215:{{ 168:) 140:• 125:| 106:| 102:| 274:° 164:( 132:· 129:) 121:( 113:· 110:) 98:( 78:e 71:t 64:v

Index

Knowledge:Peer review
2009 Duel in the Pool
Copying check
Manual of Style
v
t
e
Article
edit
visual edit
history
Article talk
edit
history
Watch
Watch peer review
swimming competition/championship articles with this assessment
Yboy83
talk
23:31, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
WP:GAN
Knowledge:Featured_articles#Sport_and_recreation
WP:LEAD
cite web
WP:CITE
WP:V
Duel in the Pool
WP:ALT
Knowledge:Peer review/backlog
Ruhrfisch

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.