Wikipedia:Peer review/Worcester Ruby Legs all-time roster/archive1

This peer review discussion has been closed.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I need the prose of the list reviewed by others, before I move this up to FL review.

Thanks, Neonblak talk - 00:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from KV5

Who better than an FL reviewer to look it over before it goes to FL, right?

  • I would use the {{city-state}} template for Worcester, Massachusetts.
  • "for a period of three seasons" is redundant, from 1880-1882 is sufficient.
  • "did respectfully well" - what does this mean? Could be POV, but needs clarification otherwise.
  • "voted in by the NL" - by who? The players? The league? The owners?
  • "including pitchers Lee Richmond and Tricky Nichols, position players Arthur Irwin, Doc Bushong, Charlie Bennett, and Chub Sullivan." - there's a conjunction missing somewhere here; I think it should be "and position players"
  • "40 wins, 43 losses, and two ties" - 2 per WP:MOSNUM
  • "which was good for fifth place" - WP:JARGON, there are better ways of expressing that they finished fifth instead of saying "good for"
  • "The team had a couple of notable achievements that first season." - this can be trimmed, you go on to explain the achievements in depth
  • "Team play had declined significantly from the year before, popular player Sullivan was sick with tuberculosis, and shortstop Irwin broke his leg on August 19, which presented a problem due the fact that the team's back-up, Buttercup Dickerson, was also injured at the time.[11]"
  • Change comma after before to semicolon
  • "popular player Sullivan" - the popular Sullivan
  • "due the fact" - "due to the fact"
  • "back-up" - backup
  • "Things did not get better, the following month," - remove comma after better, change comma after month to semicolon, and change "get better" to improve
  • "Chub Sullivan died from his disease" - what disease? I assume you mean TB; also, you can remove his first name
  • Why spell "crepe" but link to "crape"? Just use the article title.
  • "32 wins, 50 losses, and one tie" - 1 per MOSNUM
  • "12–season" - I don't think this is a correct usage of the en-dash, I believe a hyphen suffices here.
  • "Sliding into last place for the second straight year" - reword to "A second consecutive last-place finish". An early writing guideline on Wikipedia for sports-related articles (one that may be outdated but is still practiced under the auspices of the MOS) is to avoid writing like a sportswriter.
  • As a Phillies fan, this article has significance for me because the Phillies replaced the Worcesters. I think that a similar statement to the ones made in various Phillies articles and lists clarifying that the Worcesters did not become the Phillies would help to clarify this point. I see that you said they were replaced, but an additional clarification might be nice.

This was a prose-only review. Hope these comments help. Look forward to seeing this at FL. KV5 (TalkPhils) 16:28, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review, as you can see, writing is not my forte. These corrections seem easy to fix, and will get to them this weekend. A couple things, I used the crape/crepe due to the references always using crepe, but WP uses crape, so I don't actually know who is correct. As far as the definite seperation from the Phillies, I will look for more refences that make it clearer to the reader.Neonblak talk - 18:57, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I checked dictionary.com, and it gave me the following definitions: crepe, nounm, 1. paper with a crinkled texture; usually colored and used for decorations, 2. small very thin pancake [syn: crape], 3. a soft thin light fabric with a crinkled surface. So it appears that the references are correct, but WP users have it backwards. Crape seems to be a synonym for the small pancakes, while crepe's first definition is for the fabric, second is the pancake.Neonblak talk - 20:36, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a couple of references for the Worcester/Philadelphia division of ownership, hopefully it is clearer than it was before.Neonblak talk - 18:12, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]