Talk:Lyle Sturgeon

Latest comment: 2 months ago by ForksForks in topic GA Review

Did you know nomination

edit
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton (talk18:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

5x expanded by Gonzo fan2007 (talk). Self-nominated at 15:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Jug Bennett; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Bennett meets all the criteria. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:37, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • For Zuver:
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Zuver meets all the criteria (albeit barely, as the length is only a couple of letters over the limit - expansion would be nice but is not required). BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • For Sturgeon:
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Sturgeon meets all the criteria. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:43, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • For Englemann:
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Englemann meets all the criteria (just passes the length requirement - though further expansion is not required, I see a few additional details you might want to add from the German Wikipedia of all places, including that he narrowly missed qualifying for the 1928 Olympics and was inducted into the South Dakota Hall of Fame). BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:43, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • For Schammel:
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Schammel meets all the criteria. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • For Hinte:
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Hinte meets all the criteria. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • For Butler:
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Butler meets all the criteria (albeit barely, being seven characters over the limit). BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply


GA Review

edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This review is transcluded from Talk:Lyle Sturgeon/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Gonzo fan2007 (talk · contribs) 22:52, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: ForksForks (talk · contribs) 12:48, 16 August 2024 (UTC)Reply


1. Well-written

I have read the entire article and can confirm the prose is good.
MOS compliance: The lead is appropriate for hte legnth of the article, the layout is good, others are n/a.

2. Verifiable

I have checked all the article's claims against sources and they are verified. All citations are to reliable sources.
Copyvio is 5.7%

3. Broad in its coverage

I have spent a while searching for more information on this person and have not found any. I also asked a couple others to perform the same check and they came to a similar conclusion. I believe this article is complete at the extent to which we can at this time write it.

4. Neutral

Hard to argue otherwise.

5. Stable

Of course.

6. Illustrated

Any images in this article would probably be undue. No PD images exist.

In accordance with the criteria, I will pass this article immediately.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.