Talk:Sig Mejdal/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Vile-eight (talk · contribs) 08:46, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

@user:Vile-eight: Just wanted to make sure you haven't forgotten about the GA review! You're probably on christmas vacation by now, so hopefully I'll see you in January. CorporateM (Talk) 03:52, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   Consider linking "crew pilots" to the relevant page(s) or rephrasing for clarity. Not sure what that sentence means right now.

    Done I think the source just meant "pilots" - I'm not really sure what a "crew pilot" is either. So I just scratched out the word "crew" CorporateM (Talk) 21:13, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

   I still wasn't satisfied with the clarity so I've looked it up and changed the sentence to better reflect the most on-point source, which is no longer available but I retrieved at https://web.archive.org/web/20070813055221/http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/magazine/03/14/fantasy.book0320/ Vile-eight (talk) 22:30, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

   After performing some minor grammar edits and based on the above change I believe the prose is good Vile-eight (talk) 23:13, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

   Good

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   References are appropriate

   B. Citations to reliable sources, where necessary:

   Master's degrees conflicting sources: The article indicates two engineering master's degrees (human factors engineering/industrial and systems engineering) earned by Mejdal which is backed up by the reference in the sentence and at least one other reference on the page. However, the sports illustrated article http://www.si.com/longform/astros/index.html says: "Mejdal, who is now 48 and married with a stepson, would go on to earn two master’s degrees from San Jose State, in operations research and cognitive psychology. "

Ok, I suggest going with what's said on his official bio and in the exhaustive Sports Illustrated article "operations research and cognitive psychology". (I changed it in article-space) However, I also think it might be a good place to get a tad of original research from Mejdal (I can just ask him why there is a discrepancy), which may or may not provide useful input to figure out why sources conflict. I think one is probably the official title of the degree, while another is a more casual reference CorporateM (Talk) 15:16, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

1. C. No original research:

2. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

3. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

4. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

5. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

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

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

6. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

The reviewer seems to have disappeared, so I'll give this a read-through and wrap up the review tonight. Wizardman 18:47, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Wizardman! CorporateM (Talk) 23:03, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Read through and saw no issues. I was going to ask about where the SABR note was, since it read like he had membership as a kid. Then I checked the source, and that was precisely the case. Can't say I expected that, was a nice fun fact to see. Anyway, since everything is addressed I'll pass the article. Wizardman 21:41, 10 January 2015 (UTC)