Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Little Athletics/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose on 11:48, 12 November 2014 [1].

---

Little Athletics

Nominator(s): NickGibson3900 ^Talk 00:43, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

This article is about a type of junior athletics in Australia. On the 17 July 2014, Little Athletics turned up on my SuggestBot suggestions. I had a look and this is what I found: A POV, unreferenced, messy and factually incorrect article. Over time I have found 29 refs, 2 pictures and reworded the whole article.

I would like to thank: User:TheQ Editor for his GA review, User:Valfury for his copyedit, User:EricEnfermero for his peer review, User:86.38.235.33 for finding a photo and adding sponsorship information, User:Mitch Ames for his response to my request at the Australian wikipedians noticeboard, User:Oceanh for nominating Little Athletics for DYK, User:Cwmhiraeth for reviewing the DYK nomination and User:211.27.69.120 for creating the article in October 2004. This is my first FAC and any comments (positive or negative) are welcome. -- NickGibson3900 ^Talk 00:43, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose 1b/1c (and others), and urge withdrawal. I don't want to sound unduly harsh, but this really falls short of the FA criteria. The references represent a significant problem. Most of these references are not independent sources. For several of them, I don't see any evidence that they are reliable. "Little Athletics Early History" is a Microsoft Word document with no publication data and somewhat unclear authorship, converted to a PDF. That's not a reliable source. The results hosted at assets.imgstg.com with no publication information aren't reliable sources, either. There are other issues here, too; there's no discussion about the proposed (and failed) merger with Athletics Australia, for example, and no clear explanation of the difference between Little Athletics (the events and program) and Little Athletics Australia (the governing body). But the fact that this article is referenced the way that it is overrides the other concerns; I would not have passed this through the GA process as it appears here. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 04:09, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

@Squeamish Ossifrage: Wow, ok. The GAN was completed by User:TheQ Editor and there has been no referencing changes since then. TheQ Editor is pretty experienced when it comes to GAN. I am quite annoyed that the DYK nomination nor the GAN picked these problems up. The DYK was by User:Cwmhiraeth a very experienced editor and Wikicup winner. If you understood Little Athletics you would realise that the assets.imgstg.com ref is reliable. The results of state championships are entered straight after each event, assets.imgstg.com don't publish them, but just host the results. The results are published by the state Little Athletics branch. If you contacted Little Athletics Australia they would provide confirmation or you could AGF. Also I will withdraw shortly, if another user agrees with you, just in case their is a mis-understanding. -- NickGibson3900 ^Talk 04:51, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Closing comment Squeamish Ossifrage is right. FA standards are much higher than GA (and, obviously DYK) and this article does not come close to the quality of referencing required for promotion. Graham Colm (talk) 18:43, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I hate to say it, but the references aren't even at GA standard, I don't think. GA requires reliable sources. It's just that GANs don't typically scrape as deeply for problems, so maybe their questionability wasn't noticed. Tezero (talk) 18:53, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Graham Colm (talk) 18:43, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Please close this Graham Colm. Thanks - NickGibson3900 ^Talk 04:03, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.