Talk:Juggernaut (wrestler)/GA1

GA Review

Intro

Hello. My name is weebiloobil, I will be your reviewer for the forseeable future. Due to the lengthy wait before this review, I shall attempt to complete this review as quick as possible, although of course I will never sacrifice quality. Due to the fact that I will be revewing Dark Angel (wrestler) and Juggernaut (wrestler) at the same time, comments about one of the articles can be left on the review page for the other, if you so desire, to save time flitting between the articles. Whilst reviewing articles is a speciality of mine, wrestling is not, and so I may appreciate some help with terms, and the like. Good luck!

Note: It has been five days since the above was posted and the reviewer hasn't edited on Wikipedia since then, so I am removing the "under review" tag at WP:GAN in the hope of finding a reviewer. GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:30, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Whoops! Sorry about that. I got called away unavoidably, and I had no chance to edit WikiPedia. I am succesfully back, however, and so I can continue this review. Glad to see Dark Angel passed without me, though. Once again, good luck, and I promise not to run away this time. - Weebiloobil (talk) 15:37, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I've almost finished the review. I will leave this article alone until 11:00 August 18th (UTC), to check the stability of the article (Criterion 5), although this shouldn't really be a problem. See you tomorrow - Weebiloobil (talk) 20:41, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

The Review

Here it is: GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

Sorry about the lengthy wait with this aritcle. I am glad to say that I've finished the review; read on and find out how the article shaped up.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Difficult for an aritcle that could just be an extended list. Well done.

   B. MoS compliance:

   The criteria "highly recommend" that the Manual of Style is "broadly followed", in particular 6 points: Lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation. Layout, jargon, words to avoid and fiction are fine; the lead section and lists, however, are not. WP:LEAD states that "Consideration should be given to creating interest in reading the whole article", whilst at the moment, it just serves as a list of the titles he has won. The other problem is the In Wrestling section, with the lists. WP:EMBED says that "In an article, significant items should be mentioned naturally within the text rather than merely listed". The listing of the events won is fine for a good article, but the 'Finishing and signature moves' and 'Managers' list could both be incorperated into prose. Otherwise, the rest of the aritcle is fine.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   Reference 1 could be covered by Reference 2; seeing as it would be difficult for a reader to come by Reference 1, but Reference 2 is online, Reference 1 seems unnecessary. The material in the infobox (the height and weight in particular), which I think comes from Reference 14, is different to the information given in some sources, particularly Reference 2. A little clarification here would be nice.

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   On hold. The big thing to focus on here is the list in the middle. Good luck in improving the article, and I will be back in 7 days (I promise!) - weebiloobil (talk) 09:24, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Replies

1. I will look at fixing up the lead section.
2. As for the references, the one you mentioned as unnecessary (which is now reference 2) gives the correct spelling of Juggernaut's real name. It also gives the name of one of his trainers that isn't mentioned in any of the other sources. Many editors also prefer print sources to web sources, as web sources can go dead. I believe that these are sufficient reasons to keep the print source.
3. Juggernaut's weight has changed over the years. I used the weight from the "Juggernaut ready to take his last stand" article, as it is the most recent source. In response to your request, I cited the height and weight so that readers can see where the numbers came from.
4. The "In wrestling" section follows the conventions of Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling. The lists are used as quick references and are found in every professional wrestling biography article (including Featured articles Bobby Eaton, Shelton Benjamin, and CM Punk).

Thanks for the review. I'll see what I can do and let you know when it's ready for another look. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 19:32, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Replies to the Replies

1. Good; I look forward to seeing it in good shape. "Begin as you mean to go on", as someone once said.
2. The only reason I mention it is that the guide I refer to when assessing articles, over at WP:RGA, says that "Ideally, a reviewer should have access to the sources cited", and I do not have access to the source; therefore, I cannot check the reliability. However, your record speaks for itself, and so I am willing to trust you in terms of the verifiability. You're wrong, by the way; both trainers can be found in the German article (although it did take me half an hour to find them - damn my A-Level not including a Wrestling module!). Nevertheless, I think the inclusion of a print source or 2 is probably a good idea.
3. Whoops. Dear me. This summer holiday has addled my brain, of course wight can change. Whoops again.
4. Quite right too, on reflection it does seem an easier way to access the information.

Good luck with the rest of the improvements - weebiloobil (talk) 20:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Comment per talk page request

• So the lead doesn't seem like so much of a list, maybe it could mention his feud with Kurrgan in ECCW, as it seems to be his most high profile feud (its mention is significantly longer than any other). You could also mention his early retirement to avoid lifelong injury...that's pretty unique in the wrestling world as most wrestlers continue to wrestle long after they shouldn't. That should make it more interesting. Hope that helps. :) Nikki311 02:14, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I rewrote much of the lead to make it more interesting. How does it look now? GaryColemanFan (talk) 18:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, much better. My only concernis the sentence about the martial art training and moving to Florida; it just seems narrative rather than summaritive. I'll leave it to you to fix it - I feel a passing coming along - weebiloobil (talk) 19:49, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

The Review II

Well, I can see no reason now not to pass the article. Well done, this has been a valuable process. In terms of further improvements, I would recommend a picture, and less clunkiness in the article. I hope I've been of some help, and congratulations! - weebiloobil (talk) 20:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)