Talk:Buster Posey/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: EricEnfermero (talk · contribs) 06:14, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

I will be glad to review this article. In the next few days I'll carefully read through the article and leave some initial feedback. Thanks! EricEnfermero ^Howdy! 06:14, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Good job on an article that reflects a great deal of research. My comments are mostly related to ensuring that the language is clear and concise. The issues should be pretty easy to sort out.

Lead

• Looks good; just keep in mind that the lead should summarize the information in each section of the body. It lacks anything from the Early years section and the very short Personal life section. Having a sentence about high school will give some context to the statement that he began playing catcher in college.  Done

• For conciseness, change "first came up" to "came up".  Done
• Same thing for "every single inning" - "every inning".  Done
• It sounds more encyclopedic to say that he was injured in a collision with Scott Cousins, rather than saying that Cousins severely injured him.  Done
• The "He became the seventh Giants..." sentence is a little hard to follow at first. The part about being the seventh Giant isn't covered in the body, so I'd take it out.  Done

Early years

• For better readability, take out "along with baseball" since that is clarified at the end of the sentence.  Done
• "Meanwhile" starts two consecutive sentences; both are probably unnecessary.  Done

College career

• It says that he began his freshman year at shortstop. It might be less confusing to say he played shortstop as a freshman and then say he moved to catcher as a sophomore.  Done
• "After just one season..." - might change to "After his first season of..." to make it sound more neutral.

Professional career

• Spring training is usually not capitalized on WP, even though it is in the giants.mlb.com sources.  Done
• Same thing for major league when not referring expressly to the Major League Baseball organization.  Done
• Class A advanced affliate - capitalize Advanced (Class A Advanced is separate from A ball)  Done
• 2010 (Rookie Season) heading - lower case for season  Done
• In the third paragraph of the same section, clarify the feat that it refers to. A game-winning HR? An eighth-inning game-winning HR?  Done
• "taking 20 first place votes" - not sure about the grammar  Done
• In the 2011 section, probably no need to link ankle as it is a common word.  Done
• 2012 (MVP Season) - lower case for season  Done
• "he asked Major League Baseball (MLB) to rule himself ineligible" - just use MLB and change to "rule him ineligible"  Done
• Consider adding something about the recent multimillion dollar contract he signed.

Posey did not sign a multimillion dollar contract recently. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 21:22, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

One year, $8,000,000 - reported by the SF Chronicle around January 18, unless I'm misreading something. EricEnfermero ^Howdy! 22:53, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Personal life

• The semicolon is out of place before the baby names.  Done

Further reading

• This section is usually found after Notes or References (see WP:LAYOUT). See WP:CITESHORT for a better way to list references that will be referred to with short citations.

References

• All refs seem to be reliable sources. Only one issue on spot checks of references: The Baseball Reference ref (currently #45) doesn't refer to Posey's backup (Whiteside) as far as I can tell.

If you look at the gamelogs, you will see that Posey played every inning of every playoff game. Because of this, Whiteside could not have made a single appearance. However, if you would like, I could always add a link to Whiteside's stats as a ref. Whatever you prefer. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 21:22, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

I would just leave out the info on the backup as redundant. EricEnfermero ^Howdy! 22:55, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Once these are addressed, I'll run through the GA Checklist to make sure that we're good to go. I may also make a few copyedits for things that are beyond the Good Article criteria. Again, great work here. I'm looking forward to passing this soon. EricEnfermero ^Howdy! 00:59, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Changes addressed; thanks for the review! Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 21:22, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Next changes addressed. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 12:47, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Minor copyedits made by nominator and reviewer.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Looks good after minor tweaks to layout and lead.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	One reference issue addressed by nominator; spot checks reveal no other issues.
	2b. 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).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. 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:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	All images check out.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Congratulations. Well done. It was a pleasure to work with the nominator on this review.

Thanks for a good read. Promoting to Good Article status. EricEnfermero ^Howdy! 00:56, 12 February 2013 (UTC)