- For an article that has a 8.5k prose size, the lede is too long and gives much weight on the subject's awards. See WP:LEADLENGTH, should be rewritten into two paragraphs without losing important points.
- Unless the statements here have been the subject of dispute before, I don't think it's necessary to support them with citations since they're sourced elsewhere in the article. See WP:LEADCITE
- born June 23, 1970 → born on
- 4-year-old → four-year-old
- 1984 was the first year James and Scamper competed at the professional level. → "It was in 1984 that James and Scamper began competing at the professional level."
- US$53,499 → $53,499. On the rest of the prose there's no need to precede the dollar symbol with US as it's perfectly understood that the prize money are American dollar.
- This section looks like an indiscriminate list to me, unless you could explain how this is relevant.
- These citations need a minor tweak. I would drop the |website= parameters and just type in the name of the publication/website from where they were retrieved in the |work= param. (e.g. TheHorse.com. → The Horse; erhof.com. → Ellensburg Rodeo Hall of Fame Association).
- FN 15 needs another reliable, third-party source since it's not totally clear that it's online with proper evidence of copyright
- I saw in James' Facebook bio—presumably written by her—that she's married with children; this can be added in a dedicated "Personal life" section. Her autobiographical book Charmayne James on Barrel Racing may be cited since the "About the author" page supports this.
Should be easy fixes as I verify the article against the sources. Slightlymad 09:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
- Hi Slightlymad, thanks for reviewing! I'm co-nom because I have several GAs and this is Dawnleelynn's first time. We are working to fix the issues you highlighted and will check back for further comments. White Arabian Filly Neigh 22:53, 6 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
- Comments on review: As another writer on this article (and having worked on over 50 prior GA-class articles), I respectfully disagree with a couple of comments, though the reviewer of course does have the discretion to make suggestions and I hope we can reach a compromise. Montanabw(talk) 23:09, 6 November 2017 (UTC) To wit:Reply
- The lead is not too long for a GA, though it could be tightened and where content is sourced in the article body, there is not a need for footnotes. For an FA, it would have to be this long at a minimum.
- |website= is what the citation templates use. The "work" parameter is not used much any more. In practice, they look the same on the page.
- Career earnings is relevant because this is why she's famous, she became a leading rodeo money-winner across all events, and over competitors in the better-known rough stock events who usually get more publicity. She put barrel racing on the map. How would you suggest we further demonstrate this?
- There is no need for a "dedicated personal life" section, particularly one that would be one sentence long. Usually, I put this sort of stuff into a family history or background section, which already exists. Also, I think her personal life is more complicated than her bio indicates (I think there was an earlier first marriage) and we really don't need to go there. If needed, we can verify the marriage and children here and here.
I'll take a look at the video link. If I can find an original source, I'll note it accordingly. Montanabw(talk) 23:09, 6 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks for chipping in Montanabw and clarifying points herein. About your first point, while I confess not being a subject matter expert, WP:LEADLENGTH is not really an absolute rule as stated there, so you may expand it as you see fit. And for the last one, I believe her current residence, which has been covered in the Cowboys and Indians piece, can also be added in the article wherever section you believe they be put. Slightlymad 07:39, 7 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
- Hi, Slightlymad, kudos for accepting this GA candidate. I was one of the co-authors, and am also a GA/FA reviewer. Montanabw already covered the points I was going to address and she did an excellent job of it so unless there are further concerns that you need addressed, I will remain a quiet (talk page stalker). Happy reviewing! Atsme📞📧 14:03, 7 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
- Hello Slightlymad Forgive my delay in welcoming you. I am the original creator of the article, but it is a far cry from that now, LOL! As you have already seen, three other editors who have all been mentors to me have had a hand in authoring this article to its current stance. I still can't say enough about their assistance and skills. Thank you for taking on this article; I will do everything in my power to work with you to get this article to where it needs to go. I have done considerable work on the citations. I have put the publishers into the website parameter which as, montanabw says, makes them look the same as if they were in the work parameter. Plus, there were publishers and websites in both parameters and they were not consistent, so I made them consistent. I also worked on the titles to get them to look more professional. I worked on the leadin before I saw montanabw's reply. Perhaps you saw? I moved some of it down to a new section called Career summary. And now there are no citations in the leadin. I might tweak the leadin a bit more and others are welcome to do so as well. I also did some general editing as I came across it. And I added a small explanation in the Earnings section of how the money earned determines the winners. Also please anyone else free to edit although I did paraphrase that from the PRCA website. I think for laypeople, they do not understand and this helps explain. Hope that helps! I will see what else I need to do. dawnleelynn(talk) 04:21, 8 November 2017 (UTC) forgot to sign originally. p.s. I used the website parameter - the work parameter is not accessible to me in any of the templates I use or am aware of, btw. I use the one on the Source Editor window. Cite -> Templates -> cite web and so forth. Even when you click the button for more parameters, it's not available. What I've done looks the same, so it should be good, I hope. dawnleelynn(talk) 04:21, 8 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
- Slightlymad Hello again. I believe we have completed all of the agreed upon changes. I also ran the Checklinks: tool tonight and found two deadlinks which I fixed. A rodeo circuit named Elite Rodeo Athletes has shut its doors in 2017, and I guess they recently took down their website. I pointed the links to the Wayback Machine. All of the links are verified as live now. I also cleaned up some empty parameters that the Visual Editor needlessly adds to citations. They look much cleaner now in the code. I also replaced the dubious video with other citations and rewrote the content that was based on it. Please let me know if there is anything else while you complete your end. Thanks again. dawnleelynn(talk) 04:18, 10 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
|
b (citations to reliable sources): 