Talk:Danny Duffy/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 09:54, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures[edit]

  • It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria - Pass
  • It contains copyright infringements - No Copyvio found
  • It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). - There is a CN tag there.
  • It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. - No edit warring. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 09:56, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Links[edit]

Prose[edit]

Lede[edit]

General prose[edit]

  • You bring up WP:JARGON words, such as ERA and strikeouts quite readily, but a wikilink isn't really enough on their own. We need some context. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 10:20, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • No information on his personal life? How he was brought up? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 10:20, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any info on why he chose to go into the MLB? Why he chose the Royals? Etc. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 10:20, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Rookie-level", "Class-A" etc. aren't proper nouns, so do not have capitals. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 10:20, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • How can someone retire, and then re-appear? We need to be specific about what happened. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 10:20, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lots of repetition, of concepts (Duffy had a X ERA and pitched), rather than helpful information. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 10:20, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article needs a thorough copy-edit. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 10:20, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "pitched 2⁄3 scoreless innings" - what does this even mean? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 10:20, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • J. J. Picollo, the Royals' assistant general manager of scouting and player development - do we need this full title? Is J.J. not notable? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 10:20, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- More to come. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 10:20, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notes & References[edit]

GA Review[edit]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Comments[edit]

  • Automated note - If you fancy returning the favour, I have outstanding GA nominations that require reviewing at WP:GAN. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these, however it's definately not manditory. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)
    • Sadly, I think this one has very little chance of passing the GA criteria. The biggest issues are jargon, the tiny lede and not being very broad on the subject (especially for a BLP). I'll fail this one now, but take a look at the above, and see if any of this can help you to improve the article. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 10:34, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]