Wikipedia

Talk:Sam Kerr/GA1

< Talk:Sam Kerr
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Whiteguru in topic GA Review
Learn more about this page

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.

GA Review

edit
Latest comment: 3 years ago11 comments3 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Whiteguru (talk · contribs) 06:02, 31 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Starts GA Review; the review will follow the same sections of the Article.

 


Lead

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • This is an extensive lead with a lot of links. It lays the foundation for the remainder of the article.


Early life

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Link 10, McLea, Stuart (4 February 2009). "Kerr name in new ball game". Community Newspapers ... is a dead link.
  • Link 15 requires subscription.

Club career

edit

Western Knights, 2006–2008

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • OK

Perth Glory FC, 2008–2011

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • OK

Western New York Flash, 2013–2014

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Link 23 ( Soccer wire) is a dead link. It is also a dead link on Archive.org

Return to Perth Glory, 2014–2015

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Links in the first paragraph all good.
  • MoS for numbers and words indicates 400 thousand should be 400,000. Ditto 100 thousand in the same sentence.

Sky Blue FC, 2015–2017

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Link 44 is a dead link. This archive.org link of 9 July 2017 does not mention Sam Kerr.

Chicago Red Stars, 2018–19

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • That's it. GA Review stops here. 100 minutes of checking dead links online and waiting at Archive.org - this is nearly a situation for QuickFail of GA. (See Para 3 referencing QF)
  • GA Review on hold. It is up to the nominee to verify and correct all links and/or edit the article appropriately.

 GA on hold

Chelsea, 2019–Present

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Noted

International career

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Link 57 is a dead link.
  • My over-riding sense here is that this section (and others above) have too many links. This is a page about the sporting history of Sam Kerr, not a statisticians history of her sporting career. A fine line has to be struck here. Consider.

2011 FIFA Women's World Cup, Germany

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Links 67, 68, 69 are dead links.

2015 FIFA Women's World Cup, Canada

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Links 71, 72, 75.76,77 are dead links.

2016–2018

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Link 78 requires subscription

2019 FIFA Women's World Cup, France

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Links are OK, section reads well.

Career statistics

edit

Club

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?

International

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Link 93 is a dead link.
  • Links 104,105 are dead.
  • Link 111 has an archive version
  • Links 114,115 have archived versions
  • Link 118 does not reference Sam Kerr.

Honours

edit

Club

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Noted

Individual

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?

Records

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Link 144 gives, Sadly whimn.com.au has put on her PJs and slippers, tucked up in bed and closed the doors for good
edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • This is a good section, well scribed and linked.

Personal life

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Noted

See also

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Noted

References

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Examined. See comments above about dead links

Further reading

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
edit
  • Noted, all good.

 

End Matter

edit

Is it is Broad in its coverage?

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Gives a good coverage of the sporting achievements of Samantha Kerr, if overlinked.
  • MOS:OVERLINK says that 66% of links on English Wikipedia were not used.
  • This, then, leads to WP:LINKROT which is highlighted in this review.
  • There are 566 links to this page.
  • There are 189 external links.

More End Matter Stuff:

edit
  1. Does it follow WP:NPOV Neutral Point of View?
  • Yes, the article is neutral in its presentation.
  1. Is it stable?
  • This page started life on 18 February 2009.
  • In the last 60 days, there have been 22,889 page views
  • There have been 816 pages edits by 292 editors, and the page has 42 watchers.
  1. Top editors are
   * Hmlarson 
   * SuperJew  
   * Haydos0019  
   * Joeykai  
   * Matilda Maniac  
   * 124.188.22.30  
   * HawkAussie  
   * Macosal  
   * Playlet  
   * Clifton9


  1. It is illustrated by images ?
  • The page is sufficiently replete with images
  • All images have Creative Commons Attribution citations, Generic, Share Alike or 4.0 ported.
  • There is an appropriate balance with the images used. Good locations.

Overall

edit

A well presented page on the sporting achievements of Samantha Kerr, if overlinked, full of dead links and subject to Linkrot.

Conclusion

edit

Twenty (20) Additional dead links were found, indicating the nominator did not follow the suggestion given above at Chicago Red Stars.

There are links to every international match Kerr has played and the goals she has kicked.

Consideration might be given to WP:TNT, blowing up the article and rewriting the article with a sensible number of links in each section. The reality is that this woman will remain in the public domain for the rest of her sporting career (possibly another 10 years, if not more). So the article will attract more linkrot over time.

Earlier commentary by this reviewer points out My over-riding sense here is that this section (and others above) have too many links. This is a page about the sporting history of Sam Kerr, not a statistician's history of her sporting career. A fine line has to be struck here. Consider.

We look forward to reading considerations regarding improvement and corrections of further linkrot detected. On Hold correction of linkrot and further considerations --Whiteguru (talk) 02:19, 7 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

 

Nominator has not shown any inclination to address issues outlined.

Article fails GA Review

--Whiteguru (talk) 05:01, 16 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Whiteguru:, If you look at the history of the page, you'll see that almost half of the refs have been formatted and updated with archived or replacement links. Apologies, that it is taking a long time, but both Hmlarson and myself have quite a lot going on IRL right now. --SuperJew (talk) 08:05, 16 February 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Whiteguru:, A complete run-through of all the refs has been done - all formatted correctly, and deadlinks replaced with alternative or archived links. --SuperJew (talk) 09:07, 2 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
@SuperJew: Thank you for notifying me. I have verified all the links. What I can do is archive this GA Review, which I will do anon, (please reply) and if you could renominate it again on the talk page after archiving this review, I may then proceed to action the new GA nomination. --Whiteguru (talk) 09:50, 2 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
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.
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sam_Kerr/GA1&oldid=1011467022"