Wikipedia:WikiProject Chess/Review/Alexander Alekhine

Review of Alexander Alekhine

This review is done in the scope of the WikiProject Chess and is transcluded from Wikipedia:WikiProject Chess/Review/Alexander Alekhine. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nomination by youngvalter
Currently assessed as A-Class by User:Ioannes Pragensis. Any objections? youngvalter 01:24, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Review by Voorlandt: conclusion was "Oppose"

Object per peerreviewer (especially the Lead and Trivia section and own comments below). The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question. You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?] Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.[?] If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.[?] Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.[?] Generally, trivia sections are looked down upon; please either remove the trivia section or incorporate any important facts into the rest of the article.[?] There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view. allege might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).[?] Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: honor (A) (British: honour), favourite (B) (American: favorite), defence (B) (American: defense), organize (A) (British: organise), organise (B) (American: organize), traveled (A) (British: travelled). Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.) Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.” The script has spotted the following contractions: don't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded. As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2][?] I also think that the General references section could be expanded. Currently there is listed 1 biography and 3 general reference works. It would be nice to list a few biographies. Needs more in text references (using footnotes). Voorlandt 07:41, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Review by SyG: conclusion was "Oppose"

Object for most of Voorlandt's reasons, and some other minor points below. This is already a great article with a lot of useful content, but it is not A-class status (which is near-perfection in my view). it is a pity that the "Early life" section does not indicate when Alekhine first learned chess. more generally, the details on his family are too scarce. I would appreciate dates of birth/death of his father/mother, the age of his mother when she gave him birth, the age difference between him and his brothers/sisters (I find it relevant because they have taught him to play). most sections are too compact. For example the "Early chess career" is roughly a list for the moment, so maybe we could organise it as a list ? maybe we should point out that the "Grandmaster of chess" title from the tsar was the first time this distinction was used ? there are sometimes some opinions, like "On December 15, 1935 Max Euwe fortunately had won". Why is it fortunate ? "narrowly" would sound more neutral to me. some citations are needed for assessments like "The loss is largely attributed to Alekhine's alcoholism". the "Contributions" section may be expanded. all quotations should be referenced. the "References" section does not seem to be sorted SyG 13:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Conclusion by SyG: A-class was failed
Close this review As noone has garnered here for one week to add something, this review is finished and the article has failed its test for A-class (2 negative opinions, 0 positive opinions). As it is still a very good article, I will change it to GA-class. SyG 10:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)