Talk:Albert White (basketball)/GA1
Latest comment: 16 years ago by Peanut4 in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit- Lead
- "In high school, he was a Street & Smith, Parade, and McDonald's All-American and in college he became a first team All-Big 12 Conference player and CNN/Sports Illustrated Big 12 Player of the Year." I realise these are wikilinked, but it seems too much like jargon for the lead especially the first two lines. It would easily put people off from reading further.
- After saying he was a professional basketball player in the first sentence we need to define his notability. These subjects for a basketball player might be like saying a soldier has earned the Bronze Star, Purple Heart, & Army Commendation Medal. Removing them would lead to WP:PEACOCKING by saying he was an excellent high school player. People interested in basketball biographies would be interested in knowing what types of All-American honors he earned. I stand by this text for a non-NBA athlete who does not have the later career things to describe his notability.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:15, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- I understand what you mean, but you need to remember you're writing for more than just basketball fans. I don't have any problem with this information being used, but I think a better way of writing this in the first couple of sentences would be better. It would make sense and easier reading to those reading it without good basketball knowledge. Peanut4 (talk) 21:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- I have expanded the lead to take the details out of the introductory paragraph. Clearly, a players awards are suppose to be in the WP:LEAD. See, for example,
Michael Jordan and Bill Russell.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:48, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- It looks much better now, and reads far more appealing. Peanut4 (talk) 16:42, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- I have expanded the lead to take the details out of the introductory paragraph. Clearly, a players awards are suppose to be in the WP:LEAD. See, for example,
- I understand what you mean, but you need to remember you're writing for more than just basketball fans. I don't have any problem with this information being used, but I think a better way of writing this in the first couple of sentences would be better. It would make sense and easier reading to those reading it without good basketball knowledge. Peanut4 (talk) 21:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- After saying he was a professional basketball player in the first sentence we need to define his notability. These subjects for a basketball player might be like saying a soldier has earned the Bronze Star, Purple Heart, & Army Commendation Medal. Removing them would lead to WP:PEACOCKING by saying he was an excellent high school player. People interested in basketball biographies would be interested in knowing what types of All-American honors he earned. I stand by this text for a non-NBA athlete who does not have the later career things to describe his notability.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:15, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- High school
- "In high school, he starred at Metro Detroit's Inkster High School," This seems to jump straight in without putting White's life in context. Even if you only add his date of birth and place of birth and say "He attended Inkster High School, ..." etc. I would suggest a brief re-write to open the main body of the article.
- I don't have POB info.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:32, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- I still think the first line could do with re-writing to essentially open up the main article. Even if it's only a minor re-write. It doesn't put the article in any context at the moment. Peanut4 (talk) 23:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- It is not really clear what you are asking me to do.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:46, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- If this was a full bio and you had more details, you would explain who White was, i.e. where and when born, parents, schooling and how he started his basketball career. These details will help towards FAC. However, since this is GA, not all these details are necessary. However, you still need to write the start of the bio to try best and explain who he was. The article currently jumps half-way through his life without any explanation. There are a couple of options.
- 1) "Born XXX, White went to high school at XX school, where he played ..." or
- 2) "White's basketball career started ..." Peanut4 (talk) 16:41, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- Both of the s above jump right to the NBA career. What is different about this one and those? Can we get a second opinion?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
- Both Jordan and Russell are perfect. They explain how the men are, as well as the players they are. Jordan starts "Jordan was born in Brooklyn, New York, the son of Deloris (née Peoples), who worked in banking, James R. Jordan, Sr., an equipment supervisor." and Russell starts "Bill Russell was born to Charles and Katie Russell in West Monroe, Louisiana. West Monroe was strictly segregated, and the Russells often struggled with racism." I.e. they don't just jump into their career in the first line. All it needs is a simple change. Like I said this is GA not FA, so I'm not asking for an entire section, just a slight re-word, to start the article from his birth and explain where he went to school, since you've already listed it, rather than jump into how he started as a basketball player. Peanut4 (talk) 21:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- I apologize, I kept looking at your comment and looking at the WP:LEAD and getting confused on what you were talking about. I was looking at the wrong sentence.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:55, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- Both Jordan and Russell are perfect. They explain how the men are, as well as the players they are. Jordan starts "Jordan was born in Brooklyn, New York, the son of Deloris (née Peoples), who worked in banking, James R. Jordan, Sr., an equipment supervisor." and Russell starts "Bill Russell was born to Charles and Katie Russell in West Monroe, Louisiana. West Monroe was strictly segregated, and the Russells often struggled with racism." I.e. they don't just jump into their career in the first line. All it needs is a simple change. Like I said this is GA not FA, so I'm not asking for an entire section, just a slight re-word, to start the article from his birth and explain where he went to school, since you've already listed it, rather than jump into how he started as a basketball player. Peanut4 (talk) 21:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- Both of the
- It is not really clear what you are asking me to do.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:46, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- I still think the first line could do with re-writing to essentially open up the main article. Even if it's only a minor re-write. It doesn't put the article in any context at the moment. Peanut4 (talk) 23:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- I don't have POB info.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:32, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- College
- "White was implicated in early investigations of the University of Michigan basketball scandal for having accepted US$37,000" I think the latter part sounds a bit clunky, I would suggest " ... because he accepted US$37,000," I would also suggest splitting the sentence after $37,000. Although the two clauses are linked, there's nothing wrong with short sentences, and it would help to add impact to the charges being dropped against him.
- "White went undrafted in the NBA draft in a year where the first four selections (Elton Brand, Steve Francis, Baron Davis, and Lamar Odom) also had declared with eligibility remaining and high schoolers Jonathan Bender and Leon Smith were drafted in the first round." I don't understnad this sentence.
- I hope this is better.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:46, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'm still unsure, I think it's "the first four selections also had declared with eligibility remaining" bit I'm struggling with. Peanut4 (talk) 21:50, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- I tried to explain this a little better.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'm still unsure, I think it's "the first four selections also had declared with eligibility remaining" bit I'm struggling with. Peanut4 (talk) 21:50, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- I hope this is better.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:46, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- General
- There is a difference in styles for seasons, e.g. 1994–95 and 1995–1996. Stick with one for consistency.
- I only see ndashes in the article now. I think you edited this mistake.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- It was the difference between the second year of the two written fully out or missing the century. It was only one that was different in the end so I've changed it. Peanut4 (talk) 21:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- I only see ndashes in the article now. I think you edited this mistake.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- Numerals and any units should be split by a non-breaking space, e.g. 9.0 points, per WP:DASH.
- Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:59, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- Still a few more needed to be done. Peanut4 (talk) 21:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- I think I get them.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- Still a few more needed to be done. Peanut4 (talk) 21:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:59, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- Are there any images available?
- There are no images of White that I know of.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:59, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
A few things to do, but nothing substantial, so I'll put it on hold. Peanut4 (talk) 21:26, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
No worries about the final misunderstanding. I think this is now in a much better position than at the start of the GA process. It meets the GA criteria, and although the lead is perhaps a little too long, I would rather keep what is a good intro, and hope you can expand the main article. If you can find more information about his personal life, and make any other expansions, there is no reason you can't push this beyond the GA process. Peanut4 (talk) 22:52, 29 August 2008 (UTC)