Talk:Ed Davis (basketball player)

Peer Review 2
I agree with the former reviewers- so far your article provides clear and solid information. It provides a great overview of Ed Davis for those who, like me, don't really know anything about him. I also like that you have references cited directly in the text. Here are some ideas of where to go from here.

Daydreambeliever (talk) 04:40, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Sections

I think that your article would benefit from being split into sections. This would increase the readability of the article and guide readers to what information they want about Ed Davis. Doing this will also show where additional information is needed and what topics about Ed might be further researched.


 * Introduction: Most Wikipedia articles start with an introduction that provides a brief description of the topic at hand. More detailed information is usually included later in the article.
 * Biography
 * Stats: Potential source: Ed Davis Stats as also suggested by a former reviewer
 * Awards/Honors: I would also be interested in knowing the answers to the questions the previous reviewer asked: "what is Mr. Basketball and what makes a player deserving of that award?"; similar questions can be applied to his being a McDonald's High School All-American player
 * Future: What are people saying about him? What do other sources suggest his future may be?  Potential source: Is Ed Davis UNC's best player?, UNC Future in good hands with Davis
 * See Also- North Carolina Tar Heels men's basketball, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Roy Williams, etc.
 * External links- main sites that an Ed Davis fan would want to go to
 * References
 * Infobox- as seen in the Ed Davis (basketball) page with which it is suggested your article be merged

You might also consider putting your article in categories. Some applicable categories include North Carolina Tar Heels men's basketball; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. See the North Carolina Tar Heels men's basketball page for an example of how to do this.

References

The credibility and relevancy of your article would benefit from gathering and using a wider variety of sources. When sources state an opinion or conjecture about Davis, you can back it up with more neutral information from a statistical source (or, as a previous reviewer said, just use quotes in such cases). Consider doing this to increase the neutrality and credibility of your article.

Most Wikipedia articles include internal links. These are links to other pages which contain information you believe would be of interest to those who are reading your article. To create an internal link, place two square brackets around the title of the page you're linking to. For instance Ed Davis (basketball player) shows up as Ed Davis (basketball player) and Ed Davis shows up as Ed Davis.

Additionally, consider going through other articles and adding links to your page where relevant. This will keep the article from being orphaned.

Ideas

All in all, what you have in your article is great. To go from here I would simply suggest expanding the article (by using resources suggested by this and previous reviews, as well as ones you find on your own), adding a picture to the article, and adding links to and from other articles. Good work!

Peer Review
This article is clear and concise and provides solid, verifiable information regarding North Carolina’s Ed Davis. The author does a great job of providing relevant background information and basic facts about Davis (such as high school statistics, family information, birth date, and college statistics). The article is strong in that it addresses and answers all immediate questions that an uninformed reader would have about Davis (such as: “Who is he?” and “Where is he from?”). The article also includes a scout’s analysis of Davis which makes the article more interesting to the reader. However the article could be improved by providing additional information regarding the athletic career of Davis. I would suggest looking at websites such as rivals.com, statsheet.com, and maxpreps.com so gather more comprehensive information regarding Davis’ high school play and recruiting information (such as his position rank). It would be interesting to know what other colleges offered Davis a position on their team and if he is a scholarship player for North Carolina. Also, it would be interesting to see where Davis ranks among his freshman class nationally and how his stats match up with those of his teammates so that readers who know nothing of Davis would understand his impact on the team. It may be helpful to include a link to the Wikipedia.org page dedicated to the Tar Heel basketball team or the official website of the University’s basketball program to help uninformed readers get a better understanding of Ed Davis. The article is slightly biased in favor of Davis in that it refers to him as an “excellent shot blocker” and a “very strong rebounder.” However, this bias could be justified by providing statistical information regarding Davis’ blocked shots and rebounds and how they relate to the other players on his team or possibly including those phrases as a quote from the scout that said it. The article could also benefit from providing information regarding the awards Davis has received (for example: what is “Mr. Basketball” and what makes a player deserving of the award?). Also, the article could benefit from transitioning smoothly through time from high school to college, rather than the other way around. Overall, the article is solid and informative but could benefit from presenting more information regarding Ed Davis. --Projectpat11 (talk) 02:55, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with the previous reviewer that more information is needed, both about his high school and college careers, scouting, etc. rivals.com does have some information about other schools that scouted Davis, so that might be a good place to start. Stats could be an important part of the article, especially since that will be the main information you will be able to get about him from reliable sources. Since Davis is only a freshman, there is, most likely, not a lot of biographical information to be found. If there is an article on Davis' father, if might be good to link to that article. Overall, you have a well-written, unbiased start to what can become the most used encyclopedic information on Ed Davis. Check out this article from News 14 Carolina: UNC's Ed Davis Excited About College for some info about how Williams recruited Davis and how Davis decided to come to UNC. Also here's a pretty extensive outline of his stats: Ed Davis Player Profile Hlove7 (talk) 17:55, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Peer Review
Great start, but there is a lot of statistical and biographical information out there that you could add, especially since he is now a national champion.

In addition, there is already another page for Ed Davis. It provides less information than this page, but it does have a nice side bar with basic information. It also splits up his college career and high school career into different sections. Perhaps you should consider adding and editing that existing page, or even better, take what is already on that existing page and add it to yours to make it more legitimate. You could dig deeper, update your Ed Davis page with links to information and words within your article, and knock out that other measly page that is already up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Davis_(basketball) there is already a suggestion that you merge with it.

On language, you do a good job of presenting the information that already exists in your page, however you do need to eliminate adjectives that create a sense of bias within your descriptions. For example, "he is an excellent shot blocker and very strong rebounder". He may be excellent, and you may have cited this opinion from ESPN. However, it is still an opinion. You could say: "Davis is a proven shot blocker and rebounder," and then add statistics to back it up. In other words, avoid gushy diction that may make your article appear biased. People may wonder if Ed is actually the author.

Overall: Add more info, divide information up with headings, merge with the existing page, and eliminate biased language. If you do that then you'll be perfect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LPFleming (talk • contribs) 16:26, 8 April 2009 (UTC)