Talk:Jesse Winters/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Wizardman (talk • contribs • count) 16:12, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this article shortly. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:12, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the issues I found in the lead:

I would move the last sentence in the lead to the end of the first paragraph, linking earned run average/writing it out and having the abbr. in parentheses.
I would also move the second paragraph and make it the fourth, this way it goes through his career, then notes his personality. If you prefer it as is then that's alright too, either's fine.
I'm fairly sure "top-10" has no hyphen in it.
Add the birth/death date into the start of the lead.

Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 17:40, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All corrections have been made thus far. Thanks! Alex (talk) 00:31, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Here's the rest of my comments:

I would work the second "paragraph" better into the early life section, as I don't like seeing one-sentence paragraphs. There's a few more one-sentence paragraph instances as well, so combine those with other ones.
"Winters began his professional career in 1916 with the Denison team of the Western Association. He was preparing to enter medical school, however the Giants gave him a contract." A few things here. Link the Denison Railroaders in the first sentence, and if you can make the part about the Giants flow better. Did the Giants see him training with Denison? Did they work him out afterwards? If there's nothing out there, just move the medical stuff into the first sentence, then start the second with "After trying out for the Railroaders, the New York Giants offered..." Lastly, note the year the Giants offered it, can't tell if it's 1916 as well or if it happened alongside the following sentence.
" [3] remove space
"Nevertheless, Winters made his major league debut the following season." perhaps make it clearer here that he didn't miss any time since the war ended.
Try to avoid using modifiers like "He struggled... was even worse..." Lay readers should ideally be able to figure this stuff out on their own.
"Of course, there was the aforementioned incident" ugh, no, remove the of course.

I'm going to stop here and ask for you to go through and look for modifiers to clean up and the like using what I've noted so far. I'm leaning towards failing this, as I'm seeing a lot of small problems that are bringing down the article, but will keep it under review for now. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:31, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Read through the rest, here's some more issues:

First para in 1920 needs a cite, especially since it's directly noting what a paper said, that or just combine the first two paras into one.
"He also had seven at-bats that season. He went hitless." combine both sentences into one, add cite, merge with prev. para.
The back to the minors section can realistically be 2 or three paragraph rather than the eight it currently is.
Make sure all of these - in records (6-6) are ndashes per MOS.
"He performed poorly defensively, with his four errors the fourth-most in the league." cite.
"date[32])," ref should be outside parenthesis.
2nd para of later minor needs cite at end.
"Winters pitched for the Portland Beavers in 1924 and for the Beavers and Wichita Falls Spudders in 1925." not really needed. Just link the teams in their respective paras and this can be taken out.
I would work his temper into the 1920 section rather than it being separated, as it feels odd having it over there as is.
My biggest problem with the article is the tone. It feels like it was written by a sportswriter rather than for an encyclopedia.

As a result of the last point in particular, I'm going to have to fail this article as a GA, unfortunately. Once all these are fixed, I would recommend a peer review, as someone without baseball knowledge may find further things I missed. After all that, it can be renominated. There are parts of the article I really like, mainly the detail and the earlier notes, but it's overshadowed by some serious issues. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 18:40, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well shucks. Thanks anyway! Alex (talk) 23:03, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]