Talk:Redbirds–Sounds rivalry

Latest comment: 4 years ago by Kosack in topic GA Review
Good articleRedbirds–Sounds rivalry has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Featured topic starRedbirds–Sounds rivalry is part of the Nashville Sounds series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 13, 2020Good article nomineeListed
March 1, 2020Featured topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Redbirds–Sounds rivalry/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kosack (talk · contribs) 13:21, 12 February 2020 (UTC)Reply


I'll take this one, will post review as soon as possible. Kosack (talk) 13:21, 12 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Lead

edit
  • "Head-to-head games". More of a query, are there any other type of matches? Would games not suffice?
  • "knotted the record at an even 22 games apiece", is knotted a common term in baseball? I can't say I've ever heard it myself in this context but that could be a British/American thing.

Previous Memphis and Nashville teams

edit

Redbirds vs. Sounds

edit

References

edit
  • References from Newspapers.com will need the url-access=subscription field to notify users that it lies behind a paywall. A via=Newspapers.com would be worth including also I would say.
    • I added "|via=Newspapers.com", but I'm not sure the paywall needs to be noted because I don't think it is behind a paywall. All of the Newspapers.com links are to clippings which can be freely viewed by anyone. I logged out of my account and checked. I can add the "url-access" field if needed, but it doesn't appear to be needed. Let me know. NatureBoyMD (talk) 19:42, 12 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Overall, a high quality article. Very little to bring up, this is basically ready for promotion but I'll place it on hold for now while the points above addressed. Kosack (talk) 18:55, 12 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Kosack: I've made several changes as noted above. I have one question about the Newspapers.com links which may still need to be addressed. NatureBoyMD (talk) 19:42, 12 February 2020 (UTC)Reply
You live and learn! I never knew the clippings were freely available. If they are, then there is no need for the subscription field. I'll take a quick go through again tomorrow but don't forsee any other issues. Kosack (talk) 22:13, 12 February 2020 (UTC)Reply
I can't see anything else to quibble over on another run through. Happy to promote this, nice work. Kosack (talk) 13:26, 13 February 2020 (UTC)Reply