Talk:Allen Craig/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wizardman (talk · contribs) 00:04, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

I'll review this article sometime this week. Wizardman 00:04, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Here are some issues I found for non-prose stuff (sources, images, etc.):

• Ref #4 (northwoods league) just redirects to the home page; if you can find the new link, otherwise get the archive link.
  • Changed. --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 17:59, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
• Ref #17 (bleacher report) isn't generally a reliable source; it depends on the writer in some cases, but for this one I wouldn't accept it.
  • I removed it. When Tony La Russa declared him a "starter who isn't starting" (which I also removed from the article, given that BR was the direct source of the quote), that quote succinctly frames the situation that the subject came into when attempting to become a regularly in the Major Leagues. It just seemed fitting. Other than that Bleacher Report article, that quote seems impossible to find. --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 22:41, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
• Ref #44 (playerwives) doesn't appear to be a reliable source.
  • Fixed. --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 00:51, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
• The lead should be ideally two paragraphs, maybe three shorter ones.
  • Modified and slightly expanded. --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 02:52, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

I'll look over the prose soon, in the meantime fix those issues. Wizardman 01:37, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Just saw this. Will address the requests as soon as I can, probably starting tomorrow. --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 05:34, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Not a problem. My time is particularly limited this week so the prose likely won't be reviewed until Saturday. Wizardman 00:52, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Here are some prose issues I found:

• "Each season in the minor leagues from 2007–09, he batted at over .300 with at least 20 home runs." awkwardly worded even for a guy who knows baseball jargon. Modify part "...had a batting average of over .300..." and reword from there.
  • This is one I meant to address earlier but overlooked. Modified at your suggestion. I also noticed an extra batting average link I slipped into back-to-back sentences and removed the second one. --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 20:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
• "Craig has shown remarkably increased production with runners in scoring position (RISP)." not sure about the remarkably there. that's not noted in the body anywhere. If that phrasing has been used in a source include that further down, if not reword.
  • Removed "remarkably." Was that sufficient? --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 20:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
• "Always passionate about sports, Craig's father was an early voluteer to help build the baseball fields" That first part seems unnecessary. Also it's volunteer
  • Fixed "volunteer" and removed "always passionate about sports." --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 20:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
• "He earned Pac-10 Player of the Week honors for February 4–10, 2003, after his 7-for-17 (.412) effort with two doubles, a grand slam and five RBI at San Francisco February 4 and versus Loyola Marymount." having that February 4 date thrown in there makes it read oddly; I'd just remove it since the week is already noted.
  • Removed. --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 20:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
• "Craig started largely in left field," I'd change largely to primarily; just sounds better.
  • Modified. --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 20:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
• I've never been a fan of the "x in baseball" pipelinks in the prose (minor league section). If you really want them in that's fine, though I would prefer removal.
  • Removed. They are not essential. --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 20:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
• Throughout the article you seem to interchange RBIs and RBI. Try to keep them consistent. I imagine most readers would know they're the same but best to not risk confusion. (I prefer RBIs but if you prefer the other that's fine)
  • Was trying to maintain consistency with "RBI" but that slipped through. I'm scanned and changed throughout to ensure consistency; hopefully none were missed. --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 20:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
• "However, the situation was less than ideal for him to realize regular playing time" This paragraph is a bit iffy. I get where it's going, but given that sentence I would expect the note on the other three players to come right after, rather than at the end of the paragraph. It could do with a bit of restructuring; moving the knee issue to the next paragraph, where it's noted in more detail, may be better anyway.
  • I rearranged that part according to your suggestion. I added a point about Craig starting to play second base to get his bat into the lineup more. --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 20:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
• "allowed the Cardinals to end a five-game losing streak with 5–4 win" with a
  • It is unclear what you are requesting as this sentence is incomplete. --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 20:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
• "A Lisfranc injury on September 4 on an infield hit against the Reds forced him from appearing for the rest of the regular season" The wording here's a little off, maybe "kept him from appearing" instead?
  • Substituted "prevented" for "forced" and added "in a game." --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 20:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
• "Therefore, he served as the designated hitter (DH) in at Fenway Park in Boston and a pinch hitter at Busch Stadium in St. Louis, a National League park where DH is not normally played" A word's missing here (in at?)
  • "In" is an extra word which I previously meant to delete but overlooked. Done. --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 20:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
• "baseball player was Ken Griffey, Jr.." two periods not needed.
  • Done. Same as prior point, actually.

` I'll put the article on hold. Once the issues are fixed, I'll double-check the article and will pass it barring me missing anything the first time though. Wizardman 17:39, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

It appears I've addressed everything you have asked for so far, save the point about Craig's first career grand slam as your point about that sentence is incomplete. --Elcid.ruderico (talk) 20:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

I meant the letter a was missing; it read "with 5..." instead of "with a 5..." That's now been resolved, so I'll take another look at the article. Wizardman 20:52, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Everything looks good now, so I'll pass this as a GA. Wizardman 02:03, 24 March 2014 (UTC)