Talk:Danny Valencia/GA1

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

Reviewer: Staxringold talkcontribs 21:42, 31 March 2011 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Citations should be moved out of the lead. 2, 3, and 4 aren't even replicated in the body, which suggests that the lead isn't following WP:LEAD and summarizing the body. Staxringold talkcontribs 21:59, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:30, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:30, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Baseball terminology needs linking. Things like third base, Milwaukee Brewers' farm system, slugging percentage, At bats per home run, RBI, etc at their first instance. RBI, for example, is abbreviated and unlinked in high school and then spelled out fully and linked later under minor league. Staxringold talkcontribs 21:59, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:11, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * "In two years (and 122 games) with the Hurricanes, Valencia hit .312 with 124 RBIs, and played in the College World Series" I would reword it to 'Valencia hit .312 with 124 RBIs in 122 games over two years with the Hurricanes and played in the College World Series." Staxringold talkcontribs 21:59, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:11, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I would replace the instances (lead and body) and "576th player chosen" with "576th player overall" Staxringoldtalkcontribs 21:59, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:11, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * "Twins director of minor leagues", "Twins management", "Twins general manager", "Twins scout", "Twins manager", "Twins franchise history", and "first Twins rookie" needs a ' to be possessive. Staxringold talkcontribs 21:59, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to change it if you insist, but I'm not sure it is correct to do so. Here, "Twins" seems to operate the same as a singular team name -- see, eg., all the ref titles that don't use the possessive, though by your interpretation they would have to.  Just as we call Obama the United States President, not the United States' President. Let me know your thoughts.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:11, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Whoops, sorry, I replied to this a day ago but I guess my edit wasn't saved. Anyways, you need consistency either way (as the article currently sometimes uses Twins' and sometimes uses Twins). I would say Twins is pretty clearly plural, however. Individuals are sometimes called a Yankee, Twin, Dodger, Giant, Rockie (Rocky?), etc, but the franchise names are pretty self-evidently plural. Staxringold talkcontribs 14:02, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Tx. I imagine that the thinking is as follows -- sometimes a word that on its face appears to be plural stands, in fact, for a singular entity, and is therefore a singular noun.  For example, "the United States President".  That stands for "the President of the country named x".  Same, I think, with the Twins.  I'll go through the article for consistency.--Epeefleche (talk) 16:39, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I've gone through, and editing in accord with what the refs seem to do. Treating "Minnesota Twins" as a singular noun, standing for "the name named ..."  Sometimes, that does call for an apostrophe--where a singular noun calls for an apostrophe.  Basically, it requires reading "Twins President" as though it were "Yankee President"--where no apostrophe is required.  The "s" in that case is really irrelevant, as both stand for "the president of team x".  Hence, MLB.com has a headline that says: " Twins third baseman showed promise", another that says "Twins infield prospect goes 2-for-4", another that says "Lots of stars waiting in the Twins' wings", and another that says "Mauer leads Twins' Diamond Award winners", as reflected in the refs to the article.  Make sense?--Epeefleche (talk) 16:53, 6 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you kindly, passing. Staxringold talkcontribs 17:14, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 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, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail: