Talk:Tim Foli

Tim Foli was one of the Sports and recreation good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 2, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
October 23, 2008	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Sports and Games

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	Sports portal This article is supported by the sports and games work group.

Baseball: Reds / Angels / Mets / Yankees Mid‑importance

	Baseball portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BaseballWikipedia:WikiProject BaseballTemplate:WikiProject BaseballBaseball articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Cincinnati Reds.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim.
	This article is supported by WikiProject New York Mets.
	This article is supported by WikiProject New York Yankees (assessed as Low-importance).

It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Technical terms[edit]

Hi. Baseball is a complete mystery to me - I'm English. This is a nicely written article, but you may want to think about a couple of remainin uses of jargon. I've got no idea what things like 'free swinger' or 'draft pick' mean and, unlike most of the terms in the article, they're not explained or linked. Cheers. 4u1e 06:35, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion. I linked to Draft (sports), although following the trail from Major League Baseball Draft or List of MLB first overall draft choices would have gotten you there eventually. :) As for "free swinger", that's not a real technical term. It's a more casual term meaning a batter that doesn't wait for walks very often. In the article, use of this term is followed by an example of how Foli even broke a record for his low walk total. I'll try to think of a way to explain this more thoroughly. Thanks again! :) —Wknight94 (talk) 11:16, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment[edit]

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Tim Foli/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are a number of issues that need to be addressed.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):

The prose is not great, maybe a 4/10. It is too emotive and judgemental for encyclopedia standards and needs to be brought dback to NPOV standards. It is also shaky grammatically and there are a number of short paragraphs that need to be expanded.--Jackyd101 (talk) 18:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The lead does not do an adequate job of introducing Tim Foli - list some career highlights and notable things he has done to expand it a bit more.

Overview section is in the wrong place -put it at the end of the article, not the beginning.--Jackyd101 (talk) 18:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

Severe referencing problems, I have highlighted the worst ones with tags in the article.--Jackyd101 (talk) 18:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

"Foli was known as a fiery player who was a reliable fielder, but only an average hitter." - Unless this is a direct quote (in which case it must be sourced), this is an unreliable judgement in the very first sentence.

"Foli's dubious record", "His free swinging did not aim for the fences, however", "Foli hit well when it counted most" - all unsourced commentary in the first paragraph.

More examples of unsourced or unexplained commentary: "Foli posted decent numbers", "was a typical season for Foli", "as well as other intangibles, dropped from World Champions to mediocrity", "when his fiery personality made news." I haven't got them all, so do a thorough sweep through the article.

"At age seventeen, Foli started out poorly" - How so? explain.

It is stable.
It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

No images. They aren't essential, but would certainly improve the article substantially.--Jackyd101 (talk) 18:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Overall:
a Pass/Fail:

I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN again. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Regards--Jackyd101 (talk) 18:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This has been up here for two weeks, notifications have been made and still no work. This is no longer a GA, I'm sorry.--Jackyd101 (talk) 15:41, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]