Talk:David Freese/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Resolute (talk · contribs) 23:06, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

General

• Images are good
  • Not required for GA, but alternative text is always a good idea for images
• Sources are good
  • No concerns with close paraphrasing

Lead

• No need to state twice that he declined a scholarship from Missouri.
• Player of the week award in the infobox? That seems remarkably trivial when compared to the rest of the awards.

Early life

• It seems that RBI was never spelled out and linked to the appropriate article on first mention.

Professional career

• Link to sacrifice fly on first mention?
• Link to Option (baseball) on first mention?

Overall

The issues I found are all very minor, pretty much only a couple of spots where linking to an article is beneficial to a reader without a great understanding of baseball. I've added these links myself, and see no reason not to pass this nomination outright. Regards, Resolute 23:06, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! This feedback will be useful if I ever attempt to take this to FA. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:28, 1 April 2012 (UTC)