Wikipedia:Peer review/Lawrence Taylor/archive1
I've been working hard on this article and would like to see what could be done to improve it. Thanks in advance for your suggestions. Quadzilla99 12:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I've skimmed over it, and two things could help:
Get a different picture for the box, I don't think a mugshot really defines what he's done in life, and if you can, the college career section could be made bigger. Soxrock 14:06, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Okay I'll work on expanding the college section, being there are no creative commons pics on flickr for him and none on any Government website getting another pic's going to be a tall order. Quadzilla99 16:00, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment The two things that stand out is the picture and the college section. Improving these two will help the article's overall quality. --Happyman22 16:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Response I did some work on the college section. Check it out. Do you think I should just remove the picture even if I can't find an alternative? Quadzilla99 16:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment For the impact that Lawrence Taylor had on the New York Giants and the NFL, I think you should expand his playing career section. The impact section is nice, as well as the controversy section, but the playing career should be the highlight of the article. It seems a bit short to me. Nishkid64 18:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - The 60 minutes image says "Note: Do not use this picture in the article's infobox, it only passes fair use criteria if it appears next to the mention of the Sports Illustrated issue in the article.". However, this image has nothing to do with Sports Illustrated. "Notes" should be changed to "References" (or "Notes and references" if you plan on having both there). "External link" should be changed to "External links", regardless if there is only one listed or not. You should not have a note and a reference in the same line (look at ref #13). The article needs to be expanded a lot in general. Right now I would hesitate to even rate the article B-class due to its shortness in length. Make the article twice and long and it would easily qualify for GA status. VegaDark 19:54, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Response to Nishkid and Vega I was the one that added the image. I added the disclaimer as that makes it qualify as fair use, also people move pics to the infobox a lot and I wanted to make sure no one did that. I copied the fair use rationale to the image page from the one I did for the SI article and tweaked it. I forgot to change "Sports Illustrated" to "60 Minutes interview" so that's fixed. As for the length I've decided to subscribe to the NY Times, as they have a large archive of articles from the 1980's when he was playing. I was having a hard time finding sources about his playing career other than isolated stories. They have hundreds of articles about him and the Giants in their archive, so that should make the expansion easier. Thanks for the responses. Quadzilla99 22:56, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment You could easily get GA status with the current length, but to get FA status, you'd definitely need to double the size of the article. I'll see if I can find sources and lend a hand. (book sources would be good) Nishkid64 00:39, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Response Okay I changed the template on the page (it was the {{inuse}} template) feel free to help. Quadzilla99 02:34, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment You could easily get GA status with the current length, but to get FA status, you'd definitely need to double the size of the article. I'll see if I can find sources and lend a hand. (book sources would be good) Nishkid64 00:39, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Response to Nishkid and Vega I was the one that added the image. I added the disclaimer as that makes it qualify as fair use, also people move pics to the infobox a lot and I wanted to make sure no one did that. I copied the fair use rationale to the image page from the one I did for the SI article and tweaked it. I forgot to change "Sports Illustrated" to "60 Minutes interview" so that's fixed. As for the length I've decided to subscribe to the NY Times, as they have a large archive of articles from the 1980's when he was playing. I was having a hard time finding sources about his playing career other than isolated stories. They have hundreds of articles about him and the Giants in their archive, so that should make the expansion easier. Thanks for the responses. Quadzilla99 22:56, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. It looks pretty good so far. More information added on his "rehabilitation" would be good. :^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 06:33, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Okay I did some major work today. Tomorrow, I'm going to copyedit the stuff I added and read the NY Times archives some more for more depth to the individual seasons. Thanks. Quadzilla99 11:43, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Further Comment I will point out one problem myself it has no early life section, as I don't own any of his autobiographies and sources are hard to find. It definitely needs that. Quadzilla99 16:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - Double-check your math... I don't think all the career stats add up correctly. --JerryOrr 16:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- ResponseI checked it, that's because the rookie sacks do not officially count. See the notes under the table. Quadzilla99 22:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Response - um, unless I have forgotten basic addition (which is possible), it's not the sacks that are the problem. I didn't add everything up, but TD and FR do not add up correctly. --JerryOrr 19:21, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- My bad I misaligned the columns and made a couple of errors. I thought I was more thorough and assumed it was because of the sacks. Good eye. I 'll put links above the table for the sources. Quadzilla99 02:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Response - um, unless I have forgotten basic addition (which is possible), it's not the sacks that are the problem. I didn't add everything up, but TD and FR do not add up correctly. --JerryOrr 19:21, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- ResponseI checked it, that's because the rookie sacks do not officially count. See the notes under the table. Quadzilla99 22:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Comment I put the Lawrence Taylor article as a "good article", there's no doubt it should be one. --Phbasketball6 00:51, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Automated
[edit]- Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR t 20:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Here's the automated results (I cut and pasted them here):
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.[?]
- Done, the image is free use. Quadzilla99 22:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
- Always had one. I think the bot is malfunctioning. Quadzilla99 22:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
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:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space - between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 97 yards, use 97 yards, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 97 yards.[?]
- Done, fixed. Quadzilla99 23:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
When writing standard abbreviations, the abbreviations should not have a 's' to demark plurality (for example, change kms to km and lbs to lb).
- I assume this refers to GMs, sorry but that's common reference in sports circles. I've never seen anyone write in a sports article, "Most GM in the leagues believe so and so is one of the best prospects..." Quadzilla99 23:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Also all the NFL's official stats are formatted under Yds see here. Quadzilla99 23:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.[?]
- Comment I assume this refers to the reference section. This really hurts the appearance of the article and as in this FAC among others it was deemed not necessary to add the format to the reference section when considered by the community. Quadzilla99 22:51, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), dates shouldn't use th; for example, instead of using January 30th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.[?]
- I don't see that in there at all. I hope this bot didn't malfunction and make me waste 10 minutes of my time looking for it. Quadzilla99 23:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I should make the script more specific. It was set off by "November 8th". AZ t 19:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oh so I did miss it? I'm confused, oh well as long as it's out of there. Quadzilla99 00:17, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I should make the script more specific. It was set off by "November 8th". AZ t 19:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Avoid using contractions like (outside of quotations): wouldn't.
- All were used only in direct quotes. Quadzilla99 23:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]
- Done, I'm going to submit it to the League of copyeditors before I make it a FAC. Quadzilla99 22:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, APR t 20:30, 19 February 2007 (UTC)