Talk:Art Ross/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sarastro1 (talk) 21:31, 9 June 2010 (UTC) I will be reviewing this article over the next day or two. First thoughts are that it looks very good. I know very little about Ice Hockey, and most of what I have read so far makes sense to me.

Lead

• "One of the best defenders of his era...": Says who? Needs attributing to someone or it is an opinion. I usually say "critics/commentators believed/considered him to be..."

I've added a reference to that in the post-playing career section, at the start of the final paragraph.

• "in January, 1907": As I understand the MoS on dates, there should not be a comma after January. I also think that a colon or a semi-colon would be better than a comma before "in January" or you get a run on sentence.

Done

• It may be worth adding a little about his personal life to the lead, as it does have a reasonably big section of its own.

Done

Personal life

• Was it normal for someone of his background to speak Ojibwe? Or was there a particular reason for it?

None of my sources specify anything why, but I would imagine that it had to do with the region being sparsley populated, and a large population of natives who spoke the language. Along with his father running a trading post, I think it might have just been a regular thing to do in the area.

• "Along with Lester..." Does this mean Lester also had a business or they had one together? Probably needs clarifying.

Done

• "After the war the younger Art..." I know this means his son, but it sounds a little clumsy. But "Art Jr." sounds worse! Not sure I can think of a better way to put it, but I'd suggest rewording it a touch.

Changed it around. Hopefully thats better

• Do we know why did he became an American citizen?

Pure speculation on my part, but I think it was just because he was living in the US, and having citizenship just added some extra benefits and made life easier in some regards. Again, nothing really explains why.

• Anything more about his wife, such as maiden name, where she was from, when she died, etc.?

I added where she was from, but I've only been able to find one article that even mentions her, so its probably not going to be better.

• It is slightly confusing mentioning "Upon being named coach and manager of the Bruins" as this has not been mentioned in the main article yet. I know it is in the lead and later on in the article, but possibly expand this to explain the move a little (but not too much as it is obviously explained fully later). My only minor grumble here is that this part is not chronological. It talks about his later life before his career. My personal preference in this kind of article is an "Early Life" section at the beginning (for the home and family stuff) then a later section for the post-career stuff and personal life such as marriage. However, do not feel you have to do this for me to pass, it is not essential at all, and I only mention it because the Bruins are mentioned in this section. In fact, feel free to ignore this whole point if you prefer.

I added a date of him being hired, so it shoul clean it up.

One other question before I finish for now. The statistics section does not seem to have any refs, and I noticed this is the case in most Ice Hockey articles. Most other sports tend to give references for the statistics, I just wondered if it is the position for Ice Hockey to not give a reference and where the stats actually come from.

Thats mostly just lack of effort. I've gone and added references for both sections.

--Sarastro1 (talk) 21:31, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Playing Career

This paragraph is quite difficult to read and needs a good copy-edit. It seems to jump from one topic to another with little to join them together. There seems to be very little about his actual playing career. I know that there are stats at the end of the article, but it would be good to have some mention of them in the text, and some comment on how well he did as a player. There is not too much on his playing style except "kitty bar the door". More like this would be good. It might also be good to mention the significance of some of the things he did such as demanding more money.

The sentences are also a bit clunky. For example, "After the proposed new league failed to happen, Ross applied to be reinstated to the NHA. A meeting on December 18, 1914 between NHA team owners agreed to let Ross back in the league.[19] The league decided on this after considering that if Ross was suspended, then all the players he signed should be suspended as well, something that would hurt the league." In three sentences, the word "league" is used 4 times, "Ross" is used in each sentence, "decided on this after" does not read well. Something like this may be better: "Following the failure of the proposed new league, Ross applied for reinstatement to the NHA. A meeting on December 18, 1914 between the team owners allowed the player to return once it was realised that any suspension of Ross would also apply to any players he signed, which would hurt the league." However, there are a few parts which could be recast like this. I can give more specific instances if required.

I modified what you said, and will give the rest of the section a good look over.

• Not important, and possibly displaying my ignorance here, but is there any more detail on what he did before the organised league. What I'd like to know if he was regarded as good before he joined Montreal Westmount.

Added a brief mention at the start of the playing career.

• Slightly more important, there is little sense of how high a standard he was playing in the first paragraph. As a non ice-hockey person, I have no idea of whether the teams he was playing for were good, and whether the moves he made were steps up or not.

I mentioned the succession of leagues in regards to what was what. If I missed one, let me know.

• "was regarded as one of the best rushing defencemen". Again, regarded by who? Also, what is a rushing defenceman?

Fixed

I still don't know what a rushing defenceman is!

Changed the words, should explain it

• "The Kenora Thistles, a team from the same league, paid Ross $1,000 to play two games for their team": This seems a little strange? Is there any background or explanation, or was it common?

It was, so I added mention of that

• "as was common at the time, he would also play a few games with other teams who paid for his services for important matches": Presumably this relates to the above point, but it would make more sense to say it for the Kenora Thistles as that comes first.

Mentioned it at both points. He jumped around a bit theree

• "In a game against the Quebec Bulldogs on February 25, 1911, Ross knocked out Eddie Oatman in a fight. This resulted in a massive brawl between the two teams that needed the police to break up": This does not seem to relate to the previous sentence or to the rest of the paragraph. Were the events connected?

I added some more information to try and make it relevant.

• "Prior to the 1913–14 NHA season...eight dollars." This paragraph does not read very well. It jumps around quite a lot, and repeats words too often. It needs a copy edit to make it flow better.

I cleaned it up a bit, but will go over it again more thoroughly.

More to follow. --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:44, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for looking it over. I've addressed everything here, and look forward to anything else you have to add. Kaiser matias (talk) 18:14, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

More on Playing Career This section is reading much better now. I would still give it another quick copy-edit as well as the points I raise here.

• "practise" is used once where it should be "practice".

Changed

• 1909: He signed for the Haileybury Comets in the NHA. But then the article doesn't mention what he did for them, but goes on to say he played for the Wanderers again.

Added what happened

• Dates/seasons: It is a little confusing to read an actual date such as 1909 and then to put into the context of a season such as 1909-10. For example, he signed for Haileybury "in 1910" but then it talks about the start of the 1910-11 season. Is this before or after he signed? There are a few more instances of this. To a non-fan, this is confusing as I don't know when seasons start.

Found a date, and changed it around so it should make sense now

• "After three games the Wanderers were forced to fold, as a fire destroyed the Montreal Arena, where they played, burned down on January 2, 1918." "burned down" is unnecessary.

Fixed

• This section is still a little dense and would benefit from being split into smaller paragraphs.

I split the first paragraph, but the rest kind of flow together, though I'll see what I can do

• His stats and performances are mentioned more now but it is still slightly inconsistent from season to season. I'm a sad completist who would probably mention every season, but I'm not necessarily asking for that. Just some comment on each seasons performances would help the section to flow better and give it a solid chronology.

Added all of them

• I still think some comments on his performances and/or style would be helpful but they are not essential for this to pass. I think it would be necessary for this to go to FA, however. I don't know if there are any sources which commented on individual players performances in a season.

I'll see if theres anything I can find about that and incorporate it..

Post playing career

• What is "an expansion team"?

Linked the term

• "and utilised them to help build the team, named the Boston Bruins." This repeats the name of the team from the previous sentence.

Removed that

• "In 1926 the Western Hockey League was in decline. The Patricks controlled the league, and offered to sell the five remaining teams in the league for $300,000." This sentence just seems to appear out of no-where and does not relate to what has gone on before. What was the Western Hockey League, who were The Patricks? This needs some context as it seems very important.

Added explanation to what the league was; the Patricks were the same brothers from earlier in the article; I mentioned they were brothers, and as they are already discussed earlier, I don't really think its necessary to describe them again

• "to pull his goaltender" This sounds a bit too informal. Replace? Substitute?

Fixed

• After being coach, did Ross become some kind of general manager? It is not clear from the article.

Clarified

• The section of Lynn Patrick seems a little sparse. He resigned from the Rangers and moved to Victoria to be a coach. Then suddenly he is a coach for Ross. I think more detail is needed to explain the missing steps.

Added a little more detail, but thats about all that is provided of what happened

• As with his playing career, I think some evaluation of his role and methods as a coach (other than the methods that are mentioned for the Hamilton Tigers) would improve this section.

I'll look into that

The article is nearly there, and I think will be really good when it is finished. As I say, another copy-edit would probably help. I will read over it again in the next day or so, and also check other issues such as links, refs, images, etc. Sorry if I'm being too pedantic and fussy! --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:26, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

• "didn't" is used in "Playing Career". Contractions should not be used in GAs.

Fixed

• Links and DAB links are all fine.
• Images are fine. However, I suspect they might need more information about their source to go to FA.
• PERSONDATA fine.
• Sources check out fine, as far as possible. They might even add a bit more: the newspaper about him becoming a US citizen has some information on his life not in the article, such as his parents wish for him to go into banking.

Added that

I will put the article on hold for seven days to allow the remaining issues to be sorted out. Once these have been done, I'll be happy to pass it. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:39, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Addressed everything here. Like I said in a few places, I need to go and check out some things before I can add them. Other than that, it should all be good now. Kaiser matias (talk) 18:50, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Happy to pass it as it stands. If you want to take it to FA, I think the remaining issues over prose need addressing. I also notice that the images do not all have alt-text, which is a requirement for FA but not for GA. I've made a few tweaks to the article but feel free to revert any where I've altered the meaning too much or misunderstood ice hockey. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:17, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: