Talk:Trent Daavettila

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Trent Daavettila/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Unionhawk (talk · contribs) 16:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Initial Checks

• Article is referenced
• No cleanup tags
• No dead links
• No disambiguation links
• Stable
• Lacks images

Images are encouraged, but not required. But I will keep that in mind when I make my final decision.

Please also consider that I emailed the Kalamazoo Wings' director of public relations to request the release of a suitable photo, but did not receive a reply. Two Hearted River (paddle / fish) 16:48, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

All right. I'll just put 6a and b as n/a. Technically, the only image requirement is captions and proper copyright tags.--Unionhawk ^{Talk E-mail} 17:16, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Criteria

A good article is—

1. Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

2. Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose); and

(c) it contains no original research.

3. Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Final Checklist

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

   Not applicable.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Nothing has happened here for over a week. Is there anything I need to address, Unionhawk? Two Hearted River (paddle / fish) 20:59, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

I am so very sorry, I will finish this as soon as I possibly can. I will make a decision in absolutely no more than 24 hours.--Unionhawk ^{Talk E-mail} 00:24, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

And, without any further delay, I present this article as a Good Article.--Unionhawk ^{Talk E-mail} 00:42, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing, good sir! Two Hearted River (paddle / fish) 00:46, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Examples of birthplace on featured hockey players.

Here are some examples. Wayne Gretzky, Martin Brodeur, Joe Sakic, Paul Statsny. I do believe it also shows the standard on the player page format page. -DJSasso (talk) 16:10, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Player pages format makes no mention of birthplace link formatting. Regarding your examples, I find no evidence that said formatting was scrutinized at FAC, so why would you have us defer to some default when my way does not break the only explicitly stated rule? I used "Howell, Michigan" instead of "Howell, Michigan" for simplicity and because no one is coming to hockey player pages looking for state-level links. (Or if I'm mistakes about that last point, let's change Daniel Sedin's birthplace to "Örnsköldsvik, Västernorrland County, Sweden".) Two Hearted River (paddle / fish) 16:30, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Well because we attempt to have articles all conform to the same standards. Featured Articles being the best we have to offer is what we aim to match. You can look over almost all of the hockey articles out there (of course there are ones that don't conform but that is usually because they haven't been caught.) As for Sedin, there was a specific discussion at the hockey project to not use sub-national distinctions for players not from north america and to only use countries. -16:39, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree that consistency is a worthwhile goal. I disagree that the first articles to pass the FA posts automatically set the standard. If there have been discussions about US birthplace link formatting, please point me to them. If there haven't, I'd be happy to participate in one. Then we can update the infobox instructions to avoid these misunderstandings. Two Hearted River (paddle / fish) 16:52, 1 January 2012 (UTC)