 | Cookie Brinkman has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: July 22, 2024. (Reviewed version). |
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Cookie Brinkman/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: JTtheOG (talk · contribs) 03:38, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Wizardman (talk · contribs) 20:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
I'll give this article a review shortly. Wizardman 20:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Image and source review: No images to review, but given the subject's scant career that's understandable. I tried looking for even a yearbook photo that might be free use but came up empty. I don't believe in requiring a fair use image just to have one, so this criteria passes. Ref #32 needs a publisher. Other than that all the references look like they are quality sources, and I appreciate the clippings so I can do a closer spotcheck later. Wizardman 21:10, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Prose review: The lead feels on the short side, but in fairness I can't really think of anything that would have to be added to it, and lengthening it for the sake of length wouldn't really be helpful in this case. I did a little bit of copyediting rather than noting every little thing here and didn't see anything egregious. I've never been a fan of the "as of" type sentences as it feels dated (As of 2009, Brinkman was the vice president of marketing at ASI Building Products) so that could use a rewrite. Other than that the prose seems good, so I'll move on to a spotcheck (I did already check the 50 pound source because I found that hard to believe, but sure enough there it was). Wizardman 21:52, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Source spotcheck: I reviewed sources 6, 12, 18, 24, and 40 for both copyright and making sure the material is actually in the source. All of them are appropriately cited and I see no issues. I can split hairs and say Refs #24 and 25 showcase the same information so only one is needed, but that's a minor issue.
Overall the only remaining issue I see is that I would like to see the lead expanded a bit. It doesn't have to be anything crazy but it should be a full paragraph of information. I'll put the article on hold pending that fix. Wizardman 19:20, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Done. Please let me know about any suggestions, however nitpicky, as I am not the best at writing leads. JTtheOG (talk) 21:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Looks much better now. Leads are my weak spot so I can relate but this looks good. Since that was my only remaining issue I'm happy to pass the article. Wizardman 23:30, 22 July 2024 (UTC)