Talk:Sahlen Field/GA1
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Mike Christie in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 01:16, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:16, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Images are all tagged appropriately.
- What makes the following reliable sources?
sportshistorycollectibles.combuffaloah.comstatscrew.comdaktronics.comwrestlingdata.comwrestleheat.comwrestling-news.netftfnext.com -- appears to be a fan-run site (this is your FN 219, which you have listed as "lax".- rotofanatic.com
buffalowing.com
- The following are generally unreliable sources and should not be cited in most cases:
buffalochronicle.com (see here for discussion)TwitterYoutubeFlickr
I'll go through the article itself next, probably tomorrow. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:18, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- Greetings! I replaced everything with reliable sources and removed original research where no other source could be found. FTF Next is a legitimate streaming platform that airs live sporting events and licenses old sporting events for streaming. I only cited it because it had the final score for the lacrosse exhibition (believe it or not finding results for a poorly attended lacrosse game is rather difficult). Rotofanatic is weird as it was a very well-written fantasy baseball site, but unbeknownst to me it must have went under and now redirects to malware. I fixed the reference with an archived version of the page. Thanks so much for reviewing this! 07:39, 23 August 2022 (UTC) TheNewMinistry (talk) 07:39, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- I'll have a look this evening at what you've done with the sources, and strike anything dealt with in the list above. One general comment from just looking through the article without reading it thoroughly yet: I think giving the scores of the individual games played there, and similar information, is excessive detail. Take a look at the article on Lumen Field, a stadium in Seattle; it summarizes the various events that have taken place there, and gives the scores of major events only. Other events are not given in detail. The Lumen Field article also manages to assemble its information into narrative paragraphs; as you currently have the article structured, parts of it read like lists. I will look again tonight, but I think the article as a whole is structured as a series of facts listed in consecutive sentences, without enough connecting tissue or narrative structure. More tonight. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:40, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- Group consensus on the talk page was for the Sahlen Field page to be reorganized, with PNC Park given as a specific example (also a major league baseball stadium). I took that idea and ran with it, and the PNC Park article is extremely sparse with detail to begin with. Open to suggestions.16:46, 23 August 2022 (UTC) TheNewMinistry (talk) 16:46, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- I think PNC Park is a pretty good model, but if you compare the two you can see it's much less detailed in some ways, and I think that's a good thing. Its "Concerts" section (unsourced, unfortunately) simply lists some (not all, I would think) of the bands who have played there. In comparison, you have eight short paragraphs with a profusion of names and dates. I don't think you have to cut it to a single sentence, as in the PNC Park article, but I think it shouldn't be more than two or three sentences. Similarly, compare the baseball sections -- a few notable events listed, with dates and results, in the PNC Park article; you have eight or ten times that much information. The professional wrestling section in this article could be reduced to two or three sentences, with a link to a separate article about them, which you could create with the sourced information you have here. The problem is mainly in the sections that list events; the other sections could probably use some tightening too, but I would suggest trimming down the events first. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:40, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- No can do - Ballpark Brawl was previously a standalone page but was deleted back in 2007 as the promotion wasn't deemed noteworthy of its own page. I figured the information deserved a home...somewhere. And this seemed like the best page. The post-Bisons game wrestling shows essentially took over for the post-Bisons game concerts in 2003 as the team's "get a non-traditional crowd to a baseball game" marketing ploy. TheNewMinistry (talk) 23:00, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- I have to say I would fail the article in that case -- not just because of the wrestling, but the other detailed lists. If you're unwilling to trim this material, I think the best thing to do is for me to fail this article, citing GA criterion 3b: "it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail", and you can then work on it or not as you wish. Of course I can't guarantee the article would pass even if you do decide to trim it -- I have not given the article a full review yet. Let me know what you'd like to do. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:16, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Oh no, I'll trim it out. I'm just saying that the Ballpark Brawl material would never end up as its own article. Give me a bit. TheNewMinistry (talk) 01:22, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Great; glad to hear it. No hurry -- I have several other GA reviews going at the moment and can come back in a few days or whenever you're ready for me to take another look. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:46, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- I trimmed a lot and am pretty happy with it. Incorporated some events into the History section where appropriate. Adjusted the photo layout accordingly. TheNewMinistry (talk) 05:01, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- OK -- I'll take a look, probably tonight or tomorrow. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:06, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- I trimmed a lot and am pretty happy with it. Incorporated some events into the History section where appropriate. Adjusted the photo layout accordingly. TheNewMinistry (talk) 05:01, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Great; glad to hear it. No hurry -- I have several other GA reviews going at the moment and can come back in a few days or whenever you're ready for me to take another look. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:46, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Oh no, I'll trim it out. I'm just saying that the Ballpark Brawl material would never end up as its own article. Give me a bit. TheNewMinistry (talk) 01:22, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- I have to say I would fail the article in that case -- not just because of the wrestling, but the other detailed lists. If you're unwilling to trim this material, I think the best thing to do is for me to fail this article, citing GA criterion 3b: "it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail", and you can then work on it or not as you wish. Of course I can't guarantee the article would pass even if you do decide to trim it -- I have not given the article a full review yet. Let me know what you'd like to do. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:16, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- No can do - Ballpark Brawl was previously a standalone page but was deleted back in 2007 as the promotion wasn't deemed noteworthy of its own page. I figured the information deserved a home...somewhere. And this seemed like the best page. The post-Bisons game wrestling shows essentially took over for the post-Bisons game concerts in 2003 as the team's "get a non-traditional crowd to a baseball game" marketing ploy. TheNewMinistry (talk) 23:00, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- I think PNC Park is a pretty good model, but if you compare the two you can see it's much less detailed in some ways, and I think that's a good thing. Its "Concerts" section (unsourced, unfortunately) simply lists some (not all, I would think) of the bands who have played there. In comparison, you have eight short paragraphs with a profusion of names and dates. I don't think you have to cut it to a single sentence, as in the PNC Park article, but I think it shouldn't be more than two or three sentences. Similarly, compare the baseball sections -- a few notable events listed, with dates and results, in the PNC Park article; you have eight or ten times that much information. The professional wrestling section in this article could be reduced to two or three sentences, with a link to a separate article about them, which you could create with the sourced information you have here. The problem is mainly in the sections that list events; the other sections could probably use some tightening too, but I would suggest trimming down the events first. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:40, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- Group consensus on the talk page was for the Sahlen Field page to be reorganized, with PNC Park given as a specific example (also a major league baseball stadium). I took that idea and ran with it, and the PNC Park article is extremely sparse with detail to begin with. Open to suggestions.16:46, 23 August 2022 (UTC) TheNewMinistry (talk) 16:46, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- I'll have a look this evening at what you've done with the sources, and strike anything dealt with in the list above. One general comment from just looking through the article without reading it thoroughly yet: I think giving the scores of the individual games played there, and similar information, is excessive detail. Take a look at the article on Lumen Field, a stadium in Seattle; it summarizes the various events that have taken place there, and gives the scores of major events only. Other events are not given in detail. The Lumen Field article also manages to assemble its information into narrative paragraphs; as you currently have the article structured, parts of it read like lists. I will look again tonight, but I think the article as a whole is structured as a series of facts listed in consecutive sentences, without enough connecting tissue or narrative structure. More tonight. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:40, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Second pass. I've struck the sources from the list of questioned sources above and will have another look at rotofanatic.com. Notes below to follow. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:52, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- I think rotofanatic.com is OK to use, but I think we're quoting too much -- there's no reason we can't paraphrase and shorten what they said.
- There are some uncited sentences at the end of paragraphs in the "Professional baseball in Buffalo, 1877–1970" section. However, I think this section is too long -- this history is covered elsewhere. All we need to know for Sahlen Field is that there were prior baseball stadiums, with a mention of their names, and the reason for the construction of Sahlen Field. I would think that after an initial sentence mentioning that professional baseball first was played in Buffalo in 1877, at Riverside Park, we could say something like "and several minor and major league teams followed over the next century, including <short list>. Then jump to the paragraph that currently starts "In April 1968".
- " drawing record crowds with innovative promotional tie-ins": suggest cutting "innovative" as promotional.
- That's another long quote from Pete McMartin. Can we trim it a bit?
- Can we join up some of the short paragraphs throughout the article? This is not really necessary for GA, which only requires the prose to be clear, but it makes for a jerky reading experience. It suffers a bit from WP:PROSELINE; anything you can do to smooth the transitions between the facts listed in chronological order, and turn it into more of a flowing narrative, would really help.
- There's an uncited sentence in "Alterations and seating reduction, 1996-2019".
- "Rich Jr. moved his Class A Short Season Jamestown Jammers after attendance dwindled at Russell Diethrick Park. The team resumed play as the West Virginia Black Bears in June 2015." Why is this relevant? Did the Black Bears play at Sahlen Field?
- "and it was renamed Sahlen Field for the 2019 season": is it still named Sahlen Field?
- Uncited sentence in "Transportation access".
Generally the prose is pretty clean; it's straightforwardly written. Most of the above is minor. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:30, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Working on it now - I'll let you know when everything's kosher. TheNewMinistry (talk) 00:54, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Everything's been addressed - feel free to take another look when you can. TheNewMinistry (talk) 08:53, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Fixes look good -- passing. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:08, 26 August 2022 (UTC)