Talk:Michigan Wolverines men's basketball/GA1

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

GA Review[edit]

I'll start off by saying I'm not particularly a fan of the article in its current form. However, there is certainly a GA article bubbling under so I'm prepared to put it on hold rather than fail it. However, I won't do my usual full review at this stage, but make some initial comments.

Lead
  • Don't wikilink the bold title per WP:LEAD
  • Emdashes should be unspaced per WP:DASH
  • The current season link is a redlink. It doesn't seem to make sense to have such a current season link not actually exist.
  • The lead is very long compared to the text length of the actual article. However, it does I suppose meet the WP:LEAD criteria for length.
  • There is a lot of stuff in brackets in the lead. If it's worth a mention, especially in the lead, it is surely worth mentioning fully, rather than as an aside in brackets.
History
  • While the internal structure era-by-era seems an obvious choice, it gives the appearance of a stub-like section, which really shouldn't be the case for GA articles. I would suggest either rmv each sub-section, re-arrange the sub-sections or expand each one.
  • Again lots of brackets
Players
Postseason
  • Not sure why this section can't be merged into the history section? Is there any reason for it to be stand alone?
    • This section is more tabular summary of post seasons, while the history section is prose. The history describes regular season records and accomplishments as well.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:55, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
General

I'll either let you answer each point here, start to clean up the article or wait for other guidance. But for the time being I'll put it on hold. Peanut4 (talk) 00:32, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re-review[edit]

Following the first round of changes, I can see that while I think this could quickly reach GA, I think it would be better for me to fail it, and for you to work on the changes without the duress of a formal GA process. I think there's a lot to do, and would perhaps suggest a peer review to try and get more than one person's input. However, I will give me usual full GA review. Just use it to improve the article if you want and an early version of a peer review.

Lead
  • There are still too many phrases, or notes, in brackets. It breaks up the flow, particularly in the lead, too much.
  • "The Wolverines play home basketball games at the Crisler Arena in Ann Arbor, Michigan on the UofM campus." potentially change to university campus, for the same reasons for flow in the lead.
  • "that the NCAA described as the biggest financial scandal in its history," I presume "its" refers to NCAA rather than the University of Michigan?
History
  • This is one of the biggest reasons I think the article needs extra input. I stand by my comments that the postseason section could be incorporated here. I might be right or wrong, which is why I think it needs extra input. I also think the internal structure isn't the best use and makes the article look very stubby and incomplete. The section also jumps from coach to coach, without explaining much in the way of their appointments, tenures coming to an end or any crossover between coaches.
  • "As a result of public and alumni demand for a basketball team, Michigan fielded a team of members of the then-current student body and achieved a 1–4 record." When was this?
  • "However, after three years of demanding a basketball program the student did not attend the games and the program was terminated due to low attendance." Either needs to be students or student body.
  • "The teams finished 6–12 (0–10)." This seems incorrect to me.
  • "The team was coached by Elmer Mitchell who instituted the intramural sports program at Michigan." Shouldn't this come before the team record? Perhaps even combine the two sentences for a much better flow.
  • "He earned 1st(t), 3rd and 2nd(t) finishes during his three seasons," What do the (t) notes mean?
  • "Veenker continues to be the only coach in school history to win a conference championship in his first season in which the team compiled a 13–3 (10–2) record." Either needs a comma after season, or breaking up the two clauses. Currently the sentence says Veenker was the only coach to win a championship with a 13-3 record in his first season.
  • "Although the highlight of Franklin Cappon's tenure was a 16–4 (9–3) third place 1936–1937 Big Ten finish," Needs a re-write to clarify what this means.
  • "McCoy became the second former All-American Wolverine player to later coach the team." Later doesn't quite fit right with the way you have written this. I don't think you even need the word at all here.
  • "He coached Michigan's first All-Big Ten basketball players that season in Pete Elliot and captain Bob Harrison (both first team)." I'm confused by the bit in brackets.
  • "Bill Perigo took over after having served three seasons as Western Michigan coach. Despite previous success as with conference championships at Western and subsequent success as a Michigan High School Athletic Association (MHSAA) champion basketball coach, his Michigan teams endured several mediocre season." Both sentences have clumsy phrases.
  • "Bill Frieder , who had been an assistant coach for seven years, eventually coached back-to-back conference champions and the schools first post-season champion." Do you mean eventually coached the team or eventually coached back-to-back champions? If the latter you need to talk about the start of his coaching career first.
Scandal
  • "The program was punished for NCAA rules violations, principally involving payments booster Ed Martin" Don't need to explain who he is again. Just call him Martin on subsequent mentions.
  • "It is one of the largest incidents involving payments to college athletes in American collegiate history." You say "one off". Can you be more specific at all?
  • "During the investigation, Webber claimed not to have had any financial relationship with Martin, but eventually agreed to confess to having borrowed some of the money he was charged with having borrowed." Bit clumsy towards the end.
General
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:
    Peanut4 (talk) 23:36, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michigan_Wolverines_men%27s_basketball/GA1&oldid=234373039"