Talk:Kathy Arendsen/GA1

Latest comment: 3 years ago by HickoryOughtShirt?4 in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

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

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 20:37, 11 October 2020 (UTC)Reply


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures edit

  • It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
  • It contains copyright infringements -
  • It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). -
  • It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -

Links edit

Prose edit

Lede edit

  • Much the same as the other article I reviewed, probably needs combining into say two paragraphs (could be one big one). Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:36, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • Lede needs an expansion, something like "Sports Illustrated as one of the 50 greatest sports figures from Michigan" should be in the lede. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:36, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
    •   Done
  • former player - former professional player? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:36, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
    •   Done
  • helped pitch Holland Christian High School to the state championship - doesn't make much sense without explaination. something like: "pitched (link) for the Holland Christian High School, where they won the state championship." Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:36, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
    •   Done
  • Upon concluding her collegiate career, Arendsen played professional softball with the Raybestos Brakettes for 15 years, earning All-American honors 13 times and winning nine national championships and three world championships. - split into two sentences. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:36, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
    •   Done
  • Is there no links for the national or world championship articles? At the very least the world championships will be notable. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:36, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
    •   Done
  • softball in three consecutive years. - for three consecutive years. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:36, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
    •   Done
  • Link struck out (strikeout). Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:36, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
    •   Done
  • Perhaps reword that whole sentence, start "In an Exhibition game, during the....". Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:36, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
    •   Done
  • winningest coach in program history. - very American terminology. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:36, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • This actually needs explaining that she only did this at Oregon. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:36, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
    •   Done

General edit

GA Review edit

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):   d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

Review meta comments edit