Talk:Connor Hamlett/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Lizard the Wizard (talk · contribs) 13:50, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Will begin this review within the next day or two. Lizard (talk) 13:50, 28 August 2017 (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, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

That's about it. Once the above issues are addressed I'd be happy to promote this article. Let me know if you have any questions. Lizard (talk) 16:17, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The lead should be at least one well-constructed paragraph.
 * Instances of "First Team" and "Second Team" should be lowercased, and hyphenated if used as a compound adjective (which should be most if not all of them). ✅
 * The Jaguars, Eagles, and Saints sections should be combined if there's nothing more that can be added to each section.
 * How should we combine them. I initially didn't have any team section headings. Jrooster49 added them. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 20:17, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I would do "Jacksonville Jaguars, Philadelphia Eagles, and New Orleans Saints".
 * I changed it. What do you think? We could also consider removing all the team section headings since each team has its own paragraph. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 03:13, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * That might be a better option but it's up to you.
 * If there's nothing more to add to the "Personal life" section, the bit about his brother can be moved to the "Early life" section (and mention what years Casey played).
 * Where do you think I should put it in the early years section? My current spot is a placeholder for now. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 20:17, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * It's probably best where it is.
 * Spans, years, w/l records, etc should be separated with a dash (–) as opposed to a hyphen (-). ✅
 * Use straight quotation marks and apostrophes (" ') as opposed to curly ones (“ ‘) per MOS:CURLY. ✅
 * Numbers less than 10 should be spelled out.
 * I think I did that intentionally per MOS:NUMERAL, "Comparable quantities should be all spelled out or all in figures", "five cats and thirty-two dogs, not five cats and 32 dogs". Hmm. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 20:17, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I've wondered about what exactly defines "comparable quantities." Is yards a comparable quantity to touchdowns? I would say no, but I can see it being so.
 * In the Dallas Cowboys section: "He was waived/injured on August 15" – "waived/injured" doesn't make much sense to a reader unfamiliar with transaction terminology. Even I'm having a tough time understanding what it means. Why not just say he was waived?
 * Waived/injured is different than being waived. That terminology is on a lot of articles. Should we add it to the Glossary of American football and then link it? WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 20:17, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I think that's a good idea.
 * Not a big issue, but I think the article suffers a bit from citation overkill. 88 refs for such little readable prose is a bit much, especially when it's mostly just stats and easily verifiable facts.
 * I think most of those sources are actually there for a reason. Specifics ones we can analyze? I'll try and find some more to remove. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 20:17, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I have two sources for "He played in 11 games in 2011 and earned Pac-12 All-Academic Honorable Mention honors." The first one is the Oregon bio that covers the 11 games played and the All-Academic honor. The second source is the official announcement for the All-Academic team. Should I remove the second source? WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 21:22, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I'll just remove it since the bio cites the same thing. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 00:01, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Also not crucial, and perhaps up to personal preference, but many of the refs you've cited as web citations can be better cited as news citations, since they're actually newspapers. For example, nola.com is The Times-Picayune, oregonlive.com is The Oregonian, heraldnet.com is The Herald, etc. But I see you cite with ProveIt so that may be unavoidable. Again, not a big deal at all.
 * For the record, ProveIt has cite news. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 20:17, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * All the major issues seem to be addressed, so I'll go ahead and ✅ the article. Good work. It'll be interesting to see where his career goes, or if he retires with his only NFL reception being a touchdown. Lizard  (talk) 11:03, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 22:16, 29 August 2017 (UTC)