Talk:Zud Schammel

Latest comment: 1 month ago by Wizardman in topic GA Review

Did you know nomination

edit
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton (talk18:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

5x expanded by Gonzo fan2007 (talk). Self-nominated at 15:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Jug Bennett; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Bennett meets all the criteria. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:37, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • For Zuver:
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Zuver meets all the criteria (albeit barely, as the length is only a couple of letters over the limit - expansion would be nice but is not required). BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • For Sturgeon:
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Sturgeon meets all the criteria. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:43, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • For Englemann:
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Englemann meets all the criteria (just passes the length requirement - though further expansion is not required, I see a few additional details you might want to add from the German Wikipedia of all places, including that he narrowly missed qualifying for the 1928 Olympics and was inducted into the South Dakota Hall of Fame). BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:43, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • For Schammel:
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Schammel meets all the criteria. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • For Hinte:
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Hinte meets all the criteria. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • For Butler:
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Butler meets all the criteria (albeit barely, being seven characters over the limit). BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply


GA Review

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

Nominator: Gonzo fan2007 (talk · contribs) 22:52, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: Wizardman (talk · contribs) 01:12, 6 October 2024 (UTC)Reply


I'll grab another of these to review, though with the caveat that I'm going to wait until the newspapers approval kicks in so I can do my check for breadth. Wizardman 01:12, 6 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

I did give the article a read-through and did a source check, and found no issues with anything there. I did just get the e-mail for getting things set up on Newspapers so I should be able to double-check both this and the other article on that front tomorrow. Wizardman 02:24, 11 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Now that I have approval, I did a skim of sources and I found a few that could expand the article a bit. I'll research further and post my findings on that front in a couple days. Wizardman 00:37, 12 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

One thing I did find is that apparently he was set to be traded to the NFL's Brooklyn Dodgers in October 1937, then two weeks later they realized he had a no-trade clause (I genuinely did not know they had things like that in contracts back then) and gave him back to Green Bay. I'd say that's worth adding into the article and it would explain only playing in 8 of the 11 games. Wizardman 23:31, 13 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks Wizardman, I have add a few sentences on it. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 13:54, 14 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Looks good. I'll do a second run-through in a day or two to make sure there's nothing I missed but I think we're good here. Wizardman 23:54, 16 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

I see no further issues on a re-read and re-newspapers check so I'm happy to pass this as a GA. Wizardman 23:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)Reply