Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Lockdown (2008)/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

Hello!, I've been trying to get Lockdown (2008) to GA status for about a 2 months now (with alot of help from The Hybrid) and I would like to get some better feed back about the article. So tell me about any mistakes I have left or anything I can do to it to make it better. Because I would really like to get it to GA status by TNA's next PPV Victory Road (2008), which is on July 13.--WillC 10:12, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by SRX
Lead
  • The first sentence in the lead (not the intro), should be reworded to The main event was Wrestler A versus Wrestler B for Blank title
  • Team Cage won the match after Rhino pinned Storm following a Gore. - Should be reworded as well, Team Cage won the match when Rhino pinned Storm after performing a Gore
  • All the matches in the lead should not be sourced with the same source, if only one source is available, dont source the lead at all, its not required by WP:LEAD unless their is some questionable statement, like As a tradition, every match took place inside the Six Sides of Steel, this needs verification.
Background
  • iMPACT! should not be written like this, per WP:PW/MoS it should be written as the article's name which is Impact.
  • During the weeks leading up to Lockdown, Joe said that if he did not win the title at Lockdown, then he would quit professional wrestling forever - so every week leading up to the PPV he said this?
  • Joe then did not show up on iMPACT! for several weeks, the reason being he was (kayfabe) training for his and Angle's world title match. - needs to be reworded, as he stated that he was training for his match against Angle at Lockdown or along those lines.
  • During the time of Joe's training, Angle was also training. He faced new opponents on iMPACT! each week in MMA fights. - doesnt make sense to link opponents to jobber, just say jobber.
  • In one of these fights, Tomko and A.J. Styles switched back and forth every sixty seconds to fight Angle.[8][10] During Angle's time training, Angle said that he would beat Joe at Lockdown to show to all of the world that he was the best wrestler in the business today. - the time of these events needs to be more specific
  • For the second feud, the teams should be elaborated.
  • Tomko decided that his teammates would be Styles and Team 3D (Brother Ray and Brother Devon). - If AJ Styles is meant here, then it should be written out completely, just not linked.
  • Sting returned the next week on the first "Live iMPACT!" during a brawl between Team Cage and Team Tomko. - Live Impact doesnt need to be stated here, its not that special of an episode.
  • In the third feud, Booker should not be used throughout, his full name should be used since its short.
  • There isnt a limit to the amount of feuds that need to be outlined, but preferably it should be 3-4, I insist on removing the women's feud, the Kip James/BG feud, and if possible the Xscape match, but seeing the caliber of that match, it can remain. Though consider placing the qualification matches in a table used in WrestleMania XXIV for the Money in the Bank qualification matches.
  • These video segments were called Rough Cut.[6][13][8][9][10][7] - Six references is outrageous and redundant, a link to every video is not needed, just one or two.
  • Besides this, this is to much over referencing in the BG, 1-2 sources should only be used, and try to remain consistent.
Event
  • The pay-per-view (PPV) began with a pre-tape of Mike Tenay inside the Six Sides of Steel, where he promoted the TNA World Heavyweight Championship match between Samoa Joe and Kurt Angle, and reminded everyone that if Joe lost, he had to retire.[16][17][18] - 1) Over referencing, 2) This is nontable, pre taped segments are non notable to the PPV, 3) PPV should not be abbreviated in parenthesis
  • The table of on screen talent should be made collapsible as it is in other PPV articles, See here for an example. Also because the same reference sources the on screen talent, make them general references and place them at the top as it is in the example.
  • Actually the whole first paragraph of the event section needs to be removed its all non-notable and non relevant to the article per WP:PW/MOS
  • Im not event gonna go through this whole section, this whole article is in need of desperate copy-editing, here is an example Before the match began, Mike Tenay went down the X-Factors. The order of entrances were as follows: were as follows???
  • The following match was the Queen of Cage Match - Queen of cage match? Maybe, Queen of the Cage match?
  • Like I said before, the article is need of desperate copy editing, remove promos, segments from the event section, they are non notable and unrelevant. Cut down on some of the match, the Styles match is enormous as is the Angle/Joe match, and does not need play-by-play.
Aftermath
  • Most of the stuff I mentioned in the BG section applies here as well, and a copy-edit is needed.
Results
  • The table needs to be updates like the one used here and here
  • I'm not sure whether we incorporate and idea about elimination matches, I think it was not to list it, as it would be in the prose, but if I'm wrong look at WT:PW or discuss it there.
Notes
  • Not needed, some of it is relevant but not to the article, except the ticket sales, that could be placed in the BG of the event.
References
  • Needs to be changed to two columns
  • Also, many of these refs rely on 3-4 refs, some of them are used over 20 times, that is ridiculous, it needs to be cut down. You need more diverse sources, but reliable ones. WWE-Zone is not reliable, 411 Mania is questionable today. Consider using sources from the Wrestling Observer, Slam Sports, and PW Torch, and others outlined here
Closing comments
  • This article needs major work, I do respect that you expand TNA articles, as WP:PW is mostly WWE based, but you should use WWE GA's as a guide to help you when you write these articles.SRX--LatinoHeat 00:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

  • Okay, I fixed the lead problems. I didn't notice that they were screwed up since, User:The Hybrid and User:Nikki311 didn't say anything about them. I thought they were fine but I fixed them. My sources are Pro wrestling history, Pro wrestling edge, and Online World of Wrestling. Those are just results. Not a report. Just a results page.
  • I've placed a reference for the Six Sides of Steel part. Should I just remove all the references from the lead. I do have 2 other ones I can place in there. What should I do there? This is the first article I've ever done this with, trying to get it to GA is what I mean.

Background

  • I've changed the Joe saying he'll retire part.
  • I've changed the part where is training.
  • I thought opponents sounded better than He fought Jobbers each week. Though Tomko and AJ weren't jobbers.
  • I've rewrote the part where he says he is the best and fighting AJ and Tomko.
  • In what way should they be elaborated?
  • I've fixed the Styles part.
  • I feel the Live iMPACT should be special since it is the first one in the history of the show. That seems really notable to me.
    • Yes, but it's not a special episode, for example, the first LIVE episode of SmackDown!, so what, its still SmackDown.
  • I've fixed all mentions of Booker and changed them to Booker T.
  • I feel they should all stay since the article is about the ppv. So if it is about the ppv then they should all be mentioned. I don't know what you mean by Money in the Bank. The matches aren't even in the article. I changed it though to something else. Maybe it will work.
    • Oh, my bad. Just place the qualifying matches in the prose and not in a list, they aren't needed, and a section is not needed just for those matches.
  • I've removed 4 and left 2.
  • Okay is that all with the Background? I fixed everything you said.

Event

  • Why is pre-tapes not notable? That is how the event began. That seems notable to me. I removed it though.
  • I've fixed the were as follows part.
  • Why should "The" be Italicized? It is called Queen of the Cage.
    • It shouldnt, I was just highlighting the word that should go there, in the event section, it only said Queen of Cage, and not Queen of the Cage.
  • Why are we removing stuff that happened at the event? What is the point of the event if it is just going to say they fought and Joe won? Promos are notable. It was bulidt to the match. I was told by Mikki311 that stuff before the match sure be added but not doing pla by play which I didn't. I said there was chain wrestling, hard hits, punches, and kicks. That isn't play by play. I placed more enfasis on the main 2 matches.

Results

  • Fixed

Notes

  • How is not telling about the Fan Interaction okay but in WrestleMania it was okay to talk about production?
    • Because production is important, its how the event was produced, the fans have nothing to do with production.

References

  • How do I make 2 colums?
    • {{reflist|2}}
  • I got the references from a discussion in WT:PW where LAX said they were all good. Also I have probably 10 more sites that I can use.

Re:Closing comments

  • Thanks for the advice. I've fixed everything you said. I don't think it is that bad. Just small mistakes. This is my first time at writting a article and trying to get it to GA status but I don't know what to do after the peer review though.--WillC 11:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Mainly, this article needs major rewording, and more compliances to WP:PW/MOS. IMO, it's not in shape to pass it's GAN. Also to answer your question, you have to wait for the Peer Review to close, which takes about 10 days after no one writes in this PR. Then you place it on the waiting list at WP:PW for a week, then you nominate it once a week is up. But it's not ready, sorry (IMO).SRX--LatinoHeat 14:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • After I remove the promos and segments and change a few little things. Will it be ready then?--WillC 19:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • In response to the comments on my talk page, no, this article has a far alot of work to do. Wait for other users to give their review, im just one user with his own mindset, others may have different ideas. So just hold on ;)--SRX--LatinoHeat 23:39, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't see how it has alot of work left. I have references. If I place more references in there that say the samething as my others then it would be redundant. Also it wouldn't be consistent. I've removed everything you said and fixed everything else. I've had 2 editors copyedit it. I don't see what is left. Will you please tell me what is left? I just want to get it to GA status. I don't see many others saying much about Lockdown since everyone else works on WWE stuff. This is the first time I've ever done this and I just want to learn the ins and outs.--WillC 23:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I can give you a tutorial on how to write PPVs. In all honesty, this article is far from becoming a GA. Would you like a tutorial?SRX--LatinoHeat 23:54, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, In all honesty I hope you're wrong. I've worked really hard. It was in my sandbox for a long time. But yeah I'll take it.--WillC 00:12, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Lockdown_(2008)/archive1&oldid=1126871306"