Talk:Tony Pajaczkowski

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tony Pajaczkowski/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: WikiOriginal-9 (talk · contribs) 01:20, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

I'll take a look at this one. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 01:20, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

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 (No original research): 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:

Notes

• Added the Canadian football defensive lineman, Canadian football placekickers, and U Sports football cats
• I fixed his jersey numbers per PFA
• Where did you see he was a CFL West All Star in 1964. He isn't listed there at 1964 CFL season.
• "The Vancouver Sun reported in July 1958 that Pajaczkowski was "not far behind" teammate Harry Langford as the league's most outstanding guard. He was re-signed that year and played in every game" The signing happened before July, so how about "Pajaczkowski signed another contract extension in May 1958." Then put the July stuff after.
• "After playing in 14 games in 1959, Pajaczkowski was named the team's best lineman by a fan vote" Since we're including the team records for the prior years, I think we could add that they finished 8-8. That's notable for that season since he was named the teams best lineman and it's the first non-losing record mentioned in the article.
• Ref 2 says not available when I click on it. I was trying to double check the claim about the announcer.
• Also, should it say Wells was a radio announcer instead of just announcer
• "1495 yards" and "2845 yards" Add a comma after the 1 and the 2
• Should we include his 1962 kicking stats too? He had significant kicking time that year as well.
• "Pajaczkowski appeared in 16 games in 1960" Change to all 16 games since every season before said that.
• Add that they finished 7-9 in 1961. I think it's worth adding the record to the year he won the MOC.
• "The following year, Pajaczkowski was named for the first time of his career to the CFL All-Star team" Suggest changing to "The following year, Pajaczkowski was named to the CFL All-Star team for the first time in his career"
• In regards to the paragraph where he had 4 CFL All Stars in a row, is there anything else we can add to that? I know offensive lineman don't really have stats to talk about but do you know if anything interesting happened during those years?
• Also, we should probably add the team records at least somehow to that section because those four years were his first four winning seasons. And all that's in the article right now is losing seasons.
• Add his induction into the Stampeders Wall of Fame in 1996
• I found the below paragraph in ref 3. Should we add this info to the article?

"Pajaczkowski suffered from dementia in recent years. His wife Catherine plans to donate his brain to researchers studying the longterm effects of blows to the head."

• Do you think we should add his career totals (198 games, 9 fumble recoveries, kicking etc.)

That's all I think. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 04:10, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Status query

WikiOriginal-9, BeanieFan11, where does this nomination stand? It's been nearly two months since the review was posted, and I don't see that BeanieFan11 has made any edits at all despite literally thousands elsewhere in that period. If there still isn't any significant progress in the next couple of weeks, I'd like to suggest that the nomination be closed as unsuccessful. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:06, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

 Closed with the nominator BeanieFan11's permission. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:14, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.