Wikipedia:Peer review/Adelaide Rams/archive1

Adelaide Rams

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to move it up to GA status, and may need some more help in possible imporvements. Thanks, The Windler talk 06:47, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)

Expand the lead per WP:LEAD, two paras at least.
Date ranges, scores, page ranges etc should use an en-dash to separate the values, not a hyphen.
Sources/References section should be named per WP:HEAD.
"...of trhe 1998 season..." typo.
While I appreciate a lot of good work has gone into the tables of results, I don't really think they're appropriate. I'd prefer (with my GA hat on) to read some prose about the two seasons, by all means comment on the significant wins, losses, individual performances etc.
"...Rams didn’t fare much ..." avoid contractions so "...did not..."
The jersey image needs a thumb parameter and a caption. Use the upright modifier to get the image the right size per WP:MOS#Images.
Fix the [citation needed].
"Adelaide had none of it's players reach international status during it's tenture" - its, and I guess you mean tenure?
In general, if a number is over 10 then it should be written out as a numerical value. More so in these sporting articles in my opinion.

That should be enough to get you started. All the best. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:04, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Risker (talk · contribs)

I concur with The Rambling Man's comments above.
As you had requested, I have also copy-edited this article, although it may need some additional work after updating per the peer reviews.
Consider that some standard local expressions mean different things elsewhere:

"The Adelaide Rams were wound up..." - in my country (Canada), that would mean they were hyperactive; is there another suitable expression?

Cite error for Ref #5
Please ensure all direct quotes have a reference, even if the same reference is used for the rest of the paragraph; even though the information may not be controversial, direct quotes tend to be challenged, so it's better to it now as a preventative action
What was the nature of the "ongoing problems" with the Cricket association and the Rams and the use of that stadium? Were the Rams violating their contract? Were there scheduling conflicts? Damage to the field?
"The SARL appointed Liz Dawson..." did the league appoint Dawson, and did she work for the Rams or for the league? Does News Limited fit in there somewhere?
I use this guide for copy editing; although it is aimed at preparing for featured articles, it is very useful for all articles and has lots of best practices. It's even written by an Aussie.

Thanks for asking me to review and copy-edit. I've learned something new about a sport I have never seen (poor deprived Canadian that I am), and found it very interesting. I hope you will find my comments useful, and I apologise for having taken so long to get here. I'll keep this watchlisted for a few days in case you have any questions. Risker (talk) 04:52, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]