Talk:Pittsburgh Riverhounds SC/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: MPJ-DK (talk · contribs) 12:51, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Full disclosure: I am a WIki Cup participant, I have my own GAN (CMLL World Tag Team Championship) and I also have a Feature Article (CMLL World Heavyweight Championship) and Feature List (Mexican National Light Heavyweight Championship) candidates in need of input. Not that it's a factor in my review but it would be appreciated.

I am about to start my review of this article, normally I provide my input in bits and pieces over a day or two so expect running updates for a while.  MPJ-US  12:51, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

GA Toolbox

So getting the obvious out of the way first, I am checking everything in the GA Toolbox

Peer Review

• Lead is too short, WP:Lead states that an article of this size should have about 3-4 paragraphs
• Captions - the info box image does not have a caption or an alt text
• The Gallery of fans has no captions nor alt texts
• The Gallery of stadiums has no captions nor alt texts

Copyright Violations

• The tool list two possible violations at 47.6% and 46.8%

• The timeline table seems to take verbatim info from web.archive.org/web/20060529120112/http://www.riverhounds.com/history.html and web.archive.org/web/20020815194040/http://www.riverhounds.com/archives/timeline.htm I would say that you should reword those a little

Disambig Links

• Y no problems

External Links

• The following references are dead

• 13
• 5
• 45
• 48
• 46
• 55
• 99
• 118

• Probably dead

• 33
• 124
• 143

• Connection issues

• 9
• 50
• 103
• usopencup.com

• The following references changes url, consider updating the links to prevent link rot

• 28
• 32
• 31
• 35
• 57
• 58
• 68
• 79
• 114
• 123
• 134
• 133
• 136
• 167
• oursportscentral.com

This article is huge, there is really too much detail in the season sections since there are sub articles for those. I am putting this on hold until the 2013 through 2016 sections are cut down to a summary since they already have separate history articles. And I would suggest a similar approach to the last two sections of the history as well. I will leave it on hold for 7 days for the work on summarizing those sections to at least begin - not necessarily end in that point in time as long as work is going on.

@Gri3720: - Status: Hold for summarizing and addressing the reference link issues. I can pick up the review again if these issues get addressed. MPJ-US  13:14, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

@Gri3720: This has been on hold for 7 days with no sign of improvements being made on the article. I am going to fail the article, but at least you have a list of issues to work on if you feel like submitting it for GA again.  MPJ-US  14:10, 12 March 2016 (UTC)