Talk:Early life of Keith Miller/GA1

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

I've read the majority of this article, and it's in good shape. I'll fully read through it and provide a review soon.  Jamie ☆ S93  17:42, 7 January 2009 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * "Aside from the glamour of the track" - unless the ref clearly emphasizes that and uses the same verbage, the style there doesn't sound totally encyclopedic to me. Perhaps reword it to something like this: "Aside from his newfound interest in the track, ..." although there might be a better way to say that.
 * Two full dates are stated in the lead, but one date is listed in American format and the other is not. Unless there's another reason that I'm not aware of, it should remain consistent there with Australian formatting (e.g. 1 January 2009 instead of January 1, 2009).
 * The nationalities/units aren't quite consistent. In the "High School" section, it says "aged 14 and still under five feet". This should be either stated in cm or m, and maintain consistency within the article (in this case, you've already said cm for his other height updates, which seems standard, so just stick with that). Also, be sure to provide the US converted units in parentheses following each length unit (m/ft, cm/in), per MOS:CONVERSIONS.
 * I see you've linked some of the technical cricket terms, but some like "wicket", "century" and "haul" are not - otherwise, someone like me would be kind of scratching my head without knowing what all of this means. ;)
 * "Playing as a defender, Miller debuted for against Carlton" - I'm not sure exactly what that means.
 * In the last paragraph of the "Representative beginnings" section, try to re-establish the year/month in which those last early life events occured.
 * "St Kilda came second last" - Second to the last, correct?
 * "Late in the summer" (Representative beginnings section) - this is an example of using season terms, which should be avoided since it can vary across the world, per WP:SEASON.
 * The amount of text in the lead section of the article isn't bad, but try to merge the last two (smaller) paragraphs together so it doesn't look so long.

One last note: could you possibly add a sub-header in the middle of the last section (which is a kind of large portion of text)? Wherever a subsection might work there, I think it would help the readability of the article by breaking up that section (if it's reasonably possible). This article is definitely close to becoming a GA, and I am putting it on hold before these fairly minor issues are resolved. Drop a message here if you have any questions or contrary-opinions regarding what I mentioned, and we can discuss it. Good luck. :-)  Jamie ☆ S93  22:41, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * "he was one of the Saints' leading players." (from the lead) - is this exactly accurate? Besides what The Age said, it doesn't seem to me that his accomplishments were entirely notable within the team although I could be wrong - if The Age was referring to Miller within his newly-signed team, rather than just as a player in general, it's probably fine then. Not too big of a deal, just something I noticed.
 * 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:
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Ok, that should be done now. I made a footnote to explain what the notation 7/42 means.  YellowMonkey  ( bananabucket ) 00:02, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Glad to see those changes made, and adding the footnote sounds good - for the most part it's good now, but there is still an inconsistency with the units in the lead: "In the following year, Miller grew almost a foot". Also, per MOS:CONVERSIONS, the American conversions should generally use a level of precision similar to the original unit/value. So instead of rounding to the nearest foot or so, which would sometimes makes the conversion innacurate (e.g., "162 cm (5.3 ft)" = "162 cm (5 ft)", it would then be best to stick with using inches, which has a closer value to cm than ft. I understand these are fairly small things, but once they are addressed I think this will pass as a GA. Thanks,  Jamie ☆ S93  03:46, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

I went ahead and made the last remaining alterations myself, and am now passing this as a Good Article. Congratulations, and keep up the good encyclopedia work!  Jamie ☆ S93  12:31, 9 January 2009 (UTC)