Talk:Roy Roundtree

Latest comment: 13 years ago by AaronY in topic GA Review
Good articleRoy Roundtree 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 15, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
December 8, 2010Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on October 19, 2010.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Roy Roundtree was the leading receiver for the 2009 Michigan Wolverines football team even though he only started four games?
Current status: Good article

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Grsz11 04:11, 15 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

  • Lead: Avoid dated material: it's hard to say he's the 2010 leading receiver when the season isn't even halfway over.
  • High school: all state → all-state

It's hard to have a detailed article on a player who has only played one season of college football, and that brings up comprehensiveness concerns. With lack of collegiate details (the most notable part of his life thus far) the article would need to be supplemented by more early life and high school details. Since I feel that would take more time, I am failing this for GA now. This article probably will not pass until there is substantially more detail, I can't say if it would pass AfD at that.

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Roy Roundtree/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AaronY (talk) 08:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

I think I can address my concerns about this one by just editing the article. I'll leave comments here later, also please look at my edit summaries to see what I changed. AaronY (talk) 08:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Okay, the main problems for me in this article were excessive detail, which I notice in a lot of your articles and which bogs down the narrative imho, and prose problems.
The main concerns in the previous review by User:Grsz11 were that you included time sensitive material in the lead. The case against this is that its not updated enough in many cases. Since you are one of the most active contributors on this project, if not the most active, I believe you'll keep it updated. The other concern was comprehensiveness. Through my experience a while back with William Fuller (American football), I think the length is fine, but I am going to put it on hold to see if we can get any information about his family, at least his parents names, maybe their professions, and if he has any siblings, etc. The last concern in the other review was that the article would not even survive afd, but given his accomplishments this year thats no longer an issue. AaronY (talk) 10:32, 8 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
I have removed what may have been considered excessive detail and added all the personal information I could find at this time.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
Well I had already removed what I considered excessive detail myself, so if you want to put that football info back in its fine by me. I'm passing this article. I changed one last detail; in the lead it said he finished first in the Big Ten in receiving yards in 2010, but in the body it says he finished third. I changed the figure in the lead, maybe you can check that. AaronY (talk) 20:35, 8 December 2010 (UTC)Reply