Talk:Lee Hughes/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: GAtechnical (talk · contribs) 23:15, 20 February 2013 (UTC) I shall review this in the morning. GAtechnical (talk) 23:15, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Main referencing issues. Lead needs to be 2 to 3 paragraphs at least. One paragraph should be about his brushes with the law.

Club Career

Kidderminster

What is a YTS contract? Reference for the team finishing second.

Youth Training Scheme. The article suggests they were abandoned in 1989 but perhaps not so for young footballers. I changed it to say "not offered a youth team contract".--EchetusXe 21:00, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

=West Brom

Despite having recently signed a long-term contract, his form and goal record led to constant rumours of a big money move to a host of Premier League clubs.[12][13] West Brom eventually issued a "hands-off" warning to other club Might be better as his form attracted Premier League clubs to show and intrest in him, which led to West Brom saying that he was not for sale. Might need references for the other two hat tricks Team of the year, I don't think we need to list other players. He remained at the club for the 1999–2000 season, and scored 17 goals in 43 appearances. Albion struggled in the First Division under new manager Brian Little, though improved after Gary Megson replaced Little as manager in March and eventually ended the campaign one place and three points above the relegation zone. He was partnered with Jason Roberts for the 2000–01 season; the pair went on to score 40 goals between them to help secure the "Baggies" a play-off place. With 22 league goals to his name, only Matt Jansen and Louis Saha scored more First Division goals than Hughes. References anyone? Don't think we need to name players.

Added references. Removed player names.--EchetusXe 21:00, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Coventry

£5,000,001 (the unusual figure was because he had a £5 million escape clause in his West Brom contract) in August 2001. Eh? If he had a 5 million clause then why not pay 5 million However his time at Highfield Road was disrupted as manager Gordon Strachan was sacked after five games and replaced by player-manager Roland Nilsson. Hughes scored 14 goals in 40 games, including a hat-trick in a 6–1 win at Crewe Alexandra, and finished the 2001–02 season as the club's stop-scorer. However Coventry just missed out on the play-offs, while former club West Bromwich Albion were promoted in second place.[26][27] Coventry rejected a loan offer from West Brom in March 2002.[28]. The bit about Grodon Strachan is OR. And possibley need references for goals scored and that hat trick. Don't know if West Brom need to be mentioned. Although the loan offer does.

Added references. Removed Strachan research.--EchetusXe 21:00, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

West Brom Part 2

Despite being a regular in the first team, Hughes failed to score a single Premier League goal in the 2002–03 season and Albion were relegated in 19th place with just six wins and 26 points from 38 matches. Reference?

Added references.

He rediscovered his form back in the First Division, scoring 12 goals in 36 games in 2003–04 as West Brom secured promotion with a second place finish. Reference? Also probably get away with one paragraph for the section

Added references. Merged paragraphs.--EchetusXe 21:00, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Oldham

Don't think the last sentence is really needed in the first paragraph. Ref need for penultimate sentence.

Paragraph 2 first sentence reference needed. Final sentence probably should go.

Ref for Plymouth and Oldham goals

Notts and Port, style

Ref needed for Northampton. However the club endured a turbulent time, with manager Ian McParland sacked and replaced by Hans Backe, who himself resigned after Qadbak Investments proved unable to fund Backe's wages. New owner Ray Trew appointed Steve Cotterill as manager. All needs referencing

Ref for Morecambe. Ref also needed for 30 goals stat and for winning title. Need to probably take out late collapse from Rochdale.

He remained with the "Magpies", and ended the 2010–11 season as the club's top-scorer with 16 goals in 37 appearances. The club again went through a succession of managers – Craig Short, Paul Ince and then Martin Allen – and ended the season three points above the relegation zone. Refs needed.

Take out Italian Giants. And find a ref for this and probably remove the other player: He ended the 2011–12 campaign on 11 goals in 44 games, six behind namesake Jeff Hughes.

manager of the league leaders and Vale's next opponents, Gillingham. Completely irrelavent that Gillingham just so happened to be next.

Style of play needs expanding as it's based on one person's view.

Personal life

Nothing about his parents and where he was born etc. During his trial at Coventry Crown Court, Hughes was accused of driving too fast in wet conditions "like a madman". Like a madman doesn't make sense in that sentence unless you add he was described as driving.

Maybe intelligent and excellent finishing should be removed from the lead as no one has said this anywhere. GAtechnical (talk) 14:19, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Followed all of your recommendations.--EchetusXe 13:50, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Ok I'm prepared to pass, now that the prose has been cleaned up. FYI there is three dead refs (not a GA problem). GAtechnical (talk) 17:21, 4 March 2013 (UTC)