Talk:India at the 2014 Winter Olympics

GA Review

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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:India at the 2014 Winter Olympics/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Magentic Manifestations (talk · contribs) 16:15, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Fritzmann2002 (talk · contribs) 14:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I will review this article shortly! Fritzmann (message me) 14:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Fritzmann2002 Thanks for taking this up. Will address the concerns shortly! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 13:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Prose

• Recommend splitting the sentence that starts "After Shiva Keshavan participated..." in two to increase readability, probably after "...reinstated India's National Olympic Committee" Y
• I think the background section is sufficient; other Olympics GAs give more background to the country's participation in the olympics in general though, and I don't think it would hurt to add a bit a la India at the 2006 Winter Olympics. Then, the flag controversy could be moved to its own subsection within Background. Let me know your thoughts. I have added some history to the background section similar to the referenced article. On the second part on creating a sub-section, are you referencing the suspension part or the flag part. The flag part is barely two lines. Y
• The "While Shiva Keshavan had already participated..." should also be split similar to the one in the lead Y
• What is "NOC"? I don't think that abbreviation has been explained in the article Y
• There are some tense issues (like "will be") in the qualification section of Alpine Skiing. Everything should be standardized to past tense Y
• "he/she" can be changed to "their" or "them" as appropriate Y
• The qualification sections give all of the requirements or ways to become qualified, but don't actually say how these athletes specifically qualified. I think the background on the qualification standards could be cut down, if it was just explained how the individual athletes qualified for their events. I have tried to include when they had qualified basis the information available. Exact details of points is not available as the pages are no longer available + have not been archived as well. Y
• Is there any information about the athletes' prep, or background, or anything like that? Was there any local coverage of their qualification, or reactions to their participation? I have added some background information on the athletes. Y
• The luge event section could have Keshavan's runs written out in prose, like the other event sections Y
• The last sentence says it was "his worst ever performance at the Winter Olympics", but I didn't know he had done previous Olympics from the article. That would be useful info, in my opinion, as would who is at the olympics for the first time. Y
• I've made some minor copyediting changes to the article as well, but overall the grammar and prose is well-written

References

• Is Olympedia a reliable source? The article seems to rely on it quite heavily and I wonder if there is better coverage of the events to use in lieu of it. Olympedia is used as a source for India's nth participation + event results. The event results are also backed by official results + other news sources (Olympedia is one of the 3-4 sources quoted for the same. For the first instance of India's participation, have added another source. Y
• Spotchecks of refs 28, 24, and 14 are all good for copyvio and source-text integrity. However, 14 has some more info that I think should be added to the article, like about how he got equipment so late. Seems to answer questions about why India does so poorly in the games, if their athletes have so little support and gear. Y
• Earwig gives 0.0% similarity for internally used references
• Reference formatting is good to go, no major issues

Miscellaneous

• Both images are properly licensed and used appropriately in the article
• Article is stable

The article is close to GA quality, just a few prose fixes and broadness concerns to be addressed. Please ping me when everything is good to go and I will take another look! Fritzmann (message me) 00:51, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

@Fritzmann, I have addressed the comments to the best of my knowledge. Please let me know in case of further comments or misses if any. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 16:32, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Looks great, thanks for the quick response and thorough implementation of the required changes. Promoting now, congrats! Fritzmann (message me) 14:58, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

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.

About Sportskeeda

@Magentic Manifestations and Fritzmann2002: Just something I picked up on while checking the review for the DCWC: Sportskeeda does not appear to be a reliable source, and this RSN discussion about it seems to criticize it quite harshly. You may want to consider whether its inclusion is in line with the good article criteria. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

@TechnoSquirrel69 Thanks for bringing this to the notice. I can see that this is also listed in WP:RSP, have gone ahead and replaced the source. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 08:05, 12 August 2024 (UTC)