Talk:Phil Jevons
 | Phil Jevons was a Sports and recreation good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Articles for Deletion debate
editThis article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. -Splashtalk 01:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Match of the Day
editDidn't Jevons, whilst at Everton, feature in a piece about his performance for the club - analysis by Hanson, I think. Gwladys24 (talk) 08:17, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Phil Jevons/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: NapHit (talk · contribs) 21:14, 25 August 2012 (UTC) I will start the review shortly. NapHit (talk) 21:14, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
- Lead is not big enough, per WP:LEAD it should summarise the content of the article. We have a total of three sentences which hardly touch on the article, indeed one sentence is a POV about a goal, which has no place in encyclopaedic article
- Too much use of journalistic tone: "handed his first start", "new campaign" "instant hit"
- Too many sentences starting On such and such a date, just reads like a list and the prose doesn't flow
- "Despite his reputation for frequently scoring in the youth and reserve sides, he failed to break through into the first-team squad on a regular basis. But, he made his first team debut on 10 March 1999 coming on as a 38th minute substitute for Nick Barmby in a 2–1 Premier League victory over Blackburn Rovers at Ewood Park." sentence should be the other way around
- On 9 October 2001, he scored a long-range goal in extra time of a League Cup fixture against Liverpool to send Grimsby through to the next round knocking Liverpool out. poorly written what round was it? provide some context, takes an age to get to the point
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- the score lines should have end ashes instead of hyphens, ref 39 no need to SHOUT, just write it out normally, not convinced ref 60 or 61 are reliable or toffee web for that matter
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- Article needs a lot of expansion, the Everton is same size as the yeovil section, despite the fact he played five times the number of games he did for everton, would expect a lot more content.
- would also expect a style of play section
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Article is poorly written, not broad in its coverage as there is style of play section, which is common for player articles and section need expanding. Would expect a lot more content. Also some of the references do not appear to be reliable. Would suggest a peer review, GA nomination is not a substitute for this. NapHit (talk) 18:20, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Phil Jevons. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160815082447/http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/league-two/2004-2005/table to http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/league-two/2004-2005/table
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:41, 17 January 2018 (UTC)