Talk:Jim Wallhead/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 01:37, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After reviewing this article, I feel it is quite a ways off from good article status yet. Here are the problems I noticed:

Forum postings don't count as reliable sources. If the poster of the info can be found as reliable then I could let it slide, but that's still iffy to me.
The references should be filled out, with titles, publishers, dates, etc. They're all just bare URLs right now.
For someone who's been in MMA 5+ years, there's just very little beef in the article. There's nothing about his pre-MMA career except for a bit on judo. I'm sure there's some early life info on him somewhere. Doesn't have to be a lot of course, but a little would at least be nice.
The structure in general is pretty jarring. The first non-lead sentence is "Like fellow Team Rough House member Andre Winner, Wallhead trains under Head Coach Nathan Leverton at the Leicester Shootfighters gym, where Wallhead also coaches." Woah, when did he get his start in MMA? When he join Team Rough House? You have to help the reader flow from point to point. I don't know much about MMA personally, but nonetheless I should be able to follow the article pretty easily.
Very few of his matches are discussed in the main text at all. Were any of them major fights or career modifiers for him? If so talk about them a bit and explain them. You talk about some of them, but they're at best touched on only. For example, "Wallhead has also seen Title glory during his MMA career as he has previously captured the Cage Gladiators British Welterweight Title defeating the UFC veteran Jason Tan." Add the date and the decision, even though they're in the table below, and discuss the fight a bit. Split decision fights seem uncommon to me in MMA fights so I'm sure there's something on there. The last bit of info in the section is good; the rest of the article can be improved to work like that.
After improving the points, going through a Wikipedia:Peer review may help as well, to hit the finer points.

Overall, it's not a bad article, and it's a good start on the fighter. It needs work though, and it may require some digging in google news and other sources, but the information's there. In terms of prose size, I think the article should at least be double what it is. As a result, I'm failing this article as a GA, but keep working at it and the article certainly could be down the road. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 01:37, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the feedback. I've obviously glanced completely over a forum post and that must have been added by another user.

Also, the observation you make about split decisions in MMA. They happen a LOT. I'm quite sure what you want me to address in this article regarding that. Could you perhaps clarify, please? Thanks very much. Paralympiakos (talk) 01:41, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The split decision note wasn't an issue with the article, just something that i wasn't sure about personally/just a non-ga related question. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 01:56, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]