Wikipedia

Talk:Jon Moxley/GA1

< Talk:Jon Moxley
Latest comment: 5 years ago by MPJ-DK in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
Latest comment: 5 years ago26 comments4 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: MPJ-DK (talk · contribs) 01:27, 21 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

I will pick up this review and hope to complete it in the next couple of days. Here are a few disclaimers to anyone that's reading his.

  • Yes I focus almost exclusively on pro wrestling articles myself, but do very little on current WWE stuff and I have checked the edit history, I did not find my name on there at all
  • Yes I am part of the WikiCup - but at present, I believe I have enough points to qualify for the next round so I don't need to block other competitors from gaining points.
Images (6)  Y
  • Licenses etc. checks out.
Stability (5)  Y
  • I am not seeing any issues in the last couple of years worth of edit history nor on the talk page
Neutral POV (4)
  • TBD
Coverage - Major Aspects (3A)
  • I wish there was more about his personal life, but I also know from experience that this information can be hard to come by or having it quickly turn into a trivia factory. I think there could be some prose added around him "almost dying" section, give the context of the injury he suffered etc. the sources listed provides additional context.
  • I'm not sure if there are any sources or reporting on this - but the fact that Young is an interviewer/commentator on the same show leads to situations where Rene Young comes off as quiet or awkward when real life and Kayfabe mixes. At the very least it could mention that she is a commentator on the same show as he is on.
  • A little more context about the role he played in "12 rounds", just a quick recap so that it doesn't just come of as a bullet point written as prose.
  • NXT Is mentioned in the lead, but not in the article at all - the lead should not contain info not also in the article
  • Two matches for ROH and five for EVOLVE is hardly significant enough for the lead to mention it
  • Lead does not need to have the fed abbreviations listed when the article lists them the first time they are mentioned in the article (personal preference, but a row of acronyms makes it harder to read)
  • FIrst sentence in the lead is an excellent place to mention his marriage
I tried to tackle this as best as I could. I'm probably going to come back to attempt some more. JTP (talk • contribs) 03:24, 25 January 2019 (UTC)Reply
Coverage - Focused (3B)
  • TBD
Verifiable - References (2A)
  • Entries in green means that the URL used is being redirected. To protect the article against WP:LINKROT I recommend they all be updated to the appropriate link
  • Entries in red means they are dead, archive.org or other sources could be searched to find a cached version or possibly replaced with other sources
  • Entries in blue needs to be manually checked, they may have problems.
  • 9 - No accessdate  Y
  • 10 - No date  Y
  • 15 - No date  Y
  • 23 - No date  Y
  • 26 - No date  Y
  • 27 - No date  Y
  • 28 - No date  Y
  • 29 - No date  Y
  • 30 - No date  Y
  • 31 - No date  Y
  • 32 - No date  Y
  • 33 - No date  Y
  • 34 - No date  Y
  • 35 - No date  Y
  • 36 - No date  Y
  • 37 - No date  Y
  • 38 - No date  Y
  • 39 - No date  Y
  • 40 - No date  Y
  • 41 - No date  Y
  • 42 - No date  Y
  • 43 - No date  Y
  • 44 - No date  Y
  • 45 - No date  Y
  • 49 - No date  Y
  • 58 - No date  Y
  • 70 - No date  Y
  • 95 - No date  Y
  • 103 - No date  Y
  • 108 - No date  Y
  • 109 - No date  Y
  • 110 - No date  Y
  • 118 - No date  Y
  • 120 - No date  Y
  • 123 - No date  Y
  • 136 - No date
  • 137 - No date
  • 138 - No date
  • 139 - No date
  • 141 - No date
  • 142 - No date
  • 144 - No date
  • 146 - No date
  • 151 - No date
  • 153 - No date
  • 155 - No date
  • 156 - No date, no author
  • 158 - No date
  • 160 - No date
  • 164 - No date
  • 165 - No accessdate or details beyond title
  • 175 - No date
  • 176 - No date
  • 180 - No date, no author
  • 186 - No date
  • 193 - No date, no author
  • 198 - No date
  • 209 - No date
  • 200 - missing information on the publisher, etc.
  • 215 - missing information on the publisher, etc.
  • 220 - has no info other than title  Y
  • 221 - has no info other than title  Y
  • 222 - has no info other than title  Y
  • 225 - has no info other than title  Y
  • 226 - has no info other than title  Y
Verifiable - Reliable Sources (2B)  Y
  • 411Mania
  • PWMania
  • IMDB
  • Wrestling Inc.
  • VultureHound
Verifiable - Original Research (2C)
  • TBD
Verifiable - Copyvio (2D)  Y
  • Looking at the copyvio tool results I don't see any issues here, the quotes look like they are appropriately attributed.
  • The hits on "edbonsports" are clearly copied FROM Wikipedia, not TO Wikipedia
Well written - prose, spelling, and grammar (1A)
  • After signing with WWE under his current ring name, Ambrose competed in their former developmental territory Florida Championship Wrestling (FCW), along with their current territory NXT through 2011, before joining the main roster in 2012 as a member of The Shield with Roman Reigns and Seth Rollins. - this is a massive run-on sentence, I recommend it be rewritten as 2 separate sentences - development/main roster. On and it should be "then-developmental", unless you meant to say that FCW was not a developmental territory when Ambrose worked there?
  Done I split the sentence as requested. JTP (talk • contribs) 03:24, 25 January 2019 (UTC)Reply
Well written - MoS for lead, layout, word choice etc. (1B)
  • I suspect that most if not all the red links in the "Heartland Wrestling Association" section fails WP:RED and should be unlinked, none look to be notable enough for their own article.
    •  Y Done.
  • Man with the latest news I hope this remains stable, I guess we'll see. I will be picking up this review ASAP. MPJ-DK (talk) 01:02, 30 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Alright back to review feedback

WP:OVELINK - the following is linked more than once in the body of the article, only first mention should be linked
  • Hardcore wrestling
  • FCW Florida Heavyweight Championship
  • Roman Reigns
  • CM Punk
  • WWE World Heavyweight Championship
  • Randy Orton
  • Bray Wyatt
  • Luke Harper
  • Dolph Ziggler
  • "Five-way match"
  • "No Holds Barred"
  • roll-up
  • Curtis Axel
  • Raw Tag Team Championship
  • Big E
  • Xavier Woods
  • "Money in the Bank contract"
  • Triple H
  • WWE
  • The Shield
  • WWE Raw
  Done JTP (talk • contribs) 05:11, 7 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

Alright while I am a little concerned about stability I will provide some prose review, sorry it has taken a while to get to this.

General
  • This reads way too "in universe", we don't have to hit the reader over the head with "oh this is scripted" but now and again make it clear it's planned/scipted/whatever.
    • Could you explain how though? I think use of jargons (heel, pin, feud etc) are enough. Additional, his wrestling booking is referred to persona and reception
      • Jargon really doesn't help though - "pin" is a real-world term where one person forces the other, against their will, against the mat. So that term is not unique to wrestling and its connotation everywhere else is a real thing. "Feud" is not unique to wrestling and implicates a real-life rivalry/hate/loathing between two or more people. I am not suggesting you remove these, leave "pin" because it's harmless, but for "feud" the first time that term is used you could put "storyline feud" and occasionally use the word "storyline" instead of feud in subsequent uses. Like I said, it's not about hitting the reader over the head and put "was booked to win" ever place the article states "won", but occasionally. Example - Shield break-up is a perfect place to replace The following night on Raw, Rollins turned on Ambrose and Reigns, disbanding the faction and subsequently aligning himself with Triple H to something along the lines of At this point WWE bookers decided to break up the Shield team by having Rollins turn on Ambrose and Reigns and instead aligning himself with Triple H or words to that effect. that makes it totally clear that Rollins wasn't fed up with the Sheild and attacked them. There are plenty of GAs and FAs that manage to balance this out, if you need inspiration I would suggest you read some of those. MPJ-DK (talk) 16:50, 17 February 2019 (UTC)Reply
Lead
  • the lead is all about his wrestling career, no mention of anything else - lead summarizes the article.
  • No need to add a link to "Once" and "twice" in the lead since the articles are linked right next to those words Y
  • "Under his current ring name" - avoid "current" if at all possible to make the article easier to maintain. Y
  • US championship - just stick to longest in WWE history, that way the lead does not have to explain the context, that can be done in the article. Lead is a summary related to the topic of the article. Y
Early life
  • So for the purpose of the actual main body we ignore the lead - so starting the article itself with just stating his last name is not appropriate Y
Heartland Wrestling Association (2004–2010)
  • "At the Heartland" - that sounds wrong, the HWA is not a location. He either worked for or the location gets added in if it's the same building. Y
  • " Became an adult" - I know 40 year olds who are not "adults"` ;)  Y
  • Consider revising the first long sentence into two sentences, it would read better I think Y
  • Link to "ring name" since it's wrestling jargon Y
  • Once with his former trainer Cody Hawk" the fact that Hawked training his was mentioned moments earlier. Y
Other promotions (2007–2011)
  • What is "Mercury Rising"?  Y
  • Injury, maybe elaborate on how it happened, be a good place to make it clear it was a real, not scripted issue. Helps make it seem less "in universe" also Y
  • His ROH and Evolve matches seem almost trivial to mention Y
  • No details on why he relinquished the championship? Y
Developmental territories (2011–2012)
  • Was the bleeding ear a legitimate injury? It is presented as such
    • I don't know if it was legit or not, or was it originally planned.
  • "Failed to win the title" - so either he lost, or he won the match in a way that was not a title change? please specify which Y
The Shield (2012–2014)
  • FIrst time the name "Roman Reigns" is mentioned it needs to be wikilinked Y
  • his manager Paul Heyman had been paying The Shield and Brad Maddox to work for them all along. that detail adds nothing to the readers knowledge of Dean Ambrose Y
  • The Shield then quietly ended their association with Punk while a feud with John Cena, Ryback and Sheamus led to a six-man tag team match at Elimination Chamber, which the Shield won - this was not their first match, just a rando PPV match. This is the kind of detail that I think can be cut down on, it is borderline trivial. Y
  • The Shield's undefeated streak in televised six-man tag team matches that is a lot of qualifiers to say that "The Shield lost undefeated streak as a unit ended" Y
  • to win the United States Championship, his first singles title in WWE yes that is clear already, no need to add it. Y
  • On the June 14 episode of SmackDown, The Shield's unpinned/unsubmitted streak in televised six-man tag team matches was ended by Randy Orton and Team Hell No, when Daniel Bryan made Rollins submit again a lot of qualifiers, I think it can be rewritten. Y
  • Ambrose retained his championship against Kane at Payback and the following night on Raw. this could really be removed and not harm the article. Y
  • with Ambrose disappearing during the finish of the match sounds like he went up in smoke?  Y
  • Despite more tension, The Shield reconciled in March - "reconciled" would indicate that they broke up?  Y
  • The following week on SmackDown, Ambrose retained the title in a fatal four-way match against Curtis Axel, Alberto Del Rio, and Ryback big picture wise, this is trivial. Y
  • in a 20-man battle royal with Rollins and Reigns not part of the match, => in a 20-man battle royal, where Rollins and Reigns were not part of the match,  Y
  • thus ending his record title reign - already mentioned it was a record  Y
More to come MPJ-DK (talk) 20:21, 13 February 2019 (UTC)Reply
  • A couple of minor updates to a huge article seems insufficient. Search for the word "cinder block" and see examples of what to avoid. This has been on hold for a while, it seems to only inch closer to the finish. I am going to fail this to give you time to address the in universe issues and apply again at a later time. MPJ-DK (talk) 01:28, 25 February 2019 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jon_Moxley/GA1&oldid=901420578"