Talk:Eight-ball jacket/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: The Most Comfortable Chair (talk · contribs) 04:21, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello. I will review this soon. — The Most Comfortable Chair 04:21, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Lead

• "created by San Francisco–based designer Michael Hoban in 1990." — We mention in the article that '... Salt-N-Pepa, who wore the jackets in the video for "Push It"'. Since that song was released in 1987, I would not be so sure if "1990" is the accurate origin year.

• Huh...wound up down a bit of a rabbit hole here. The Push It video is available on YouTube, and it's obvious that they aren't wearing 8 ball jackets at all. Very similar loudly color-blocked leather jackets, but very clearly not the actual 8-ball design. And in fact this Vanity Fair article shows them in the same jackets and mentions that they were actually designed by the legendary Dapper Dan. (Now, whether Dan was specifically knocking off Hoban's already-existent loud-leather-jacket schtick there is another story). So that's a fuck-up from multiple sources that I've unintentionally been spreading. Fixed now with a hatnote and explanation just so one else tries to "correct" it in the future.

Design and knockoffs

• "which originally retailed for approximately $800" — since this was around 30 years ago, would you say that the inflation template could be useful for perspective? $800 in 1990 ≈ $1800 in 2022.

• I really hate including the inflation template; it makes everything so cluttered

• "partnered with one shop" — Better if we can name the shop.

• Sure

• "and sold at a lower price point than the mainline jackets" — Would we know that approximate price or price range?

• $299 as it turns out

Original trend

• "Other rappers referenced the jackets in their songs" — I noticed that the source does not say names, but are there other sources that name notable rappers we can mention here?

• I didn't find any other contemporary notables named in sources; I suspect it may have been an underground thing at the time, or just something that went unremarked in secondary sources

• "In 2009, two suspects...were arrested." — Since this was 13 years ago, do mention whether they were convicted or acquitted, if there are sources you can find on that.

• Couldn't find any updates on them. Probably pled out, which wouldn't really have been all that newsworthy.

Legacy

• "hip-hop culture" — has been linked previously in "Design and knockoffs".

• Fixed

References

• Use consistent date formats — yyyy-mm-dd or mm-dd-yyyy
• Linking could be more consistent — if you are linking "work" and "website" whenever first mentioned, make sure you do them for all (for instance, Vulture is not linked and The New York Times is linked twice).

• Both done (I believe, but I am liable to miss things occasionally)

That should do it. The article is concise and a fun read! — The Most Comfortable Chair 01:55, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

• Glad you enjoyed it! I saw it on the requested articles list and was like, "what the fuck is an eight-ball jacket?" Turns out the answer is "a great deal of fun to write about." Hopefully my fixes are suitable and I didn't miss anything. The only one I didn't do was the inflation template (let me know your thoughts). Cheers! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:54, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

I wasn't sure if the template would be useful so I asked — it does make things look cluttered, and on another look, it isn't very necessary here. I wish we had a template that would show the inflation adjusted amount when you hover the mouse over it. "what the fuck is an eight-ball jacket?" is what I thought when I saw it on GAN and thought it would make for a fun review; it did not disappoint! — The Most Comfortable Chair 11:18, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Final

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Succinct and well-written, the article references reliable sources and is illustrated appropriately. It is a delightful article — even if its subject might not be. — The Most Comfortable Chair 11:18, 13 August 2022 (UTC)