Talk:1993 Women's Cricket World Cup final

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:1993 Women's Cricket World Cup Final/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AhmadLX (talk · contribs) 18:43, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

I will review this. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 18:43, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

The article largely meets the criteria. A few minor points follow:

• "However, in response, New Zealand enacted five run outs; the New Zealand captain,..." It should be mentioned here that NZ won the match. Currently it remains unclear and only a couple lines later does one know that from Raf Nicholson's comment.
  • Oops, added. Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
• " England scored 208 for five, aided by..." → "England scored 208 for five; aided by..." OR "England scored 208 for five. Aided by..."
  • Changed to a semi-colon. Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
• "New Zealand were restricted to 154 runs by India, but three run outs and miserly bowling helped them to a 42-run victory." miserly bowling? It sounds like inadequate or deficient bowling by NZ.
  • Probably too jargon-y: changed to "economic". Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
• "Tea was taken after 30 overs of the New Zealand innings: shortly thereafter..." → "Tea was taken after 30 overs of the New Zealand innings. Shortly thereafter..."
• "Shortly thereafter two more wickets fell;" → "Shortly thereafter two more wickets fell:" i.e. colon instead of semicolon.
  • Done both of these. Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
• Umpires: Valerie Gibbens and Judith West. This should be referenced.
  • Added. Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
• "The England captain, Smithies reflected..." → "The England captain Smithies reflected..." OR "The England captain, Smithies, reflected..."
  • Changed as suggested. Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
• "Former England player Sarah Potter said that "Progress..."". Either remove quotation marks and rephrase the quote or remove "that".
  • Removed "that". Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

@AhmadLX: Thanks for the review; I have responded to each point above. Harrias ^talk 16:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Pass. A nice article. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 17:18, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 19:54, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that after England won the 1993 Women's Cricket World Cup Final, women's cricket received unprecedented coverage in the English press? Source: "and even if it was for one day only, women's cricket made all the newspapers, the front pages of a few, and even the main BBC evening news. " (ESPNcricinfo)

• Reviewed: Equitable Life Building (Manhattan)

Moved to mainspace by Harrias (talk). Self-nominated at 14:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC).

• New enough (and now a GA), long enough, well referenced, neutral, no obvious close paraphrasing, hook is interesting and cited. @Harrias: Just waiting on a QPQ. Nice work. 97198 (talk) 04:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

• @97198: Thanks for the review. QPQ added. Harrias ^talk 10:01, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

• All good here. 97198 (talk) 08:38, 17 May 2020 (UTC)