Talk:Sig Jakucki/GA1

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

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 18:32, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Comments That's all I have. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 20:45, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * pitcher is overlinked in the lead.
 * "for defeating the New York Yankees" would it not be more reasonable to suggest that he was "part of the side who defeated the New York Yankees"? He didn't do it single-handedly did he?
 * It's never written the way you suggested. Pitchers are charged with wins and losses in baseball. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 03:06, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * "the American League pennant" (AL) after American League.
 * "local semipro" semi-professional
 * "Army. He spent" merge, "Army and spent..."
 * "semipro" see above. Having said that, if semipro is standard USEng, then I'll concede the point entirely.\
 * It's a standard term when referring to baseball, anyway - I've read a lot of baseball books, and I've never seen any author spell it out. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 03:07, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * "an All-Star team" as it's a general usage, no need for capitals.
 * "in Hawaii…I could" -> "in Hawaii... I could" non-breaking space before the ellipsis, then ellipsis is just three periods, then a breaking space after.
 * Could link home plate for us non-experts.
 * "pitched a six-hit, complete game in" both overlinked.
 * "His own set of rules" a shade of journalese coming in here.
 * "he abandoned " POV, he left?
 * What I meant was that he left without permission, but I explicitly spelled it out so there won't be any confusion. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 03:10, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * "His fastball helped" overlinked.
 * Ref 11 "New York Times" -> The New York Times.
 * Same ref 15. Plus en-dash in the scoreline in the title.
 * You linked Retrosheet but no other work/website/publisher, why?
 * That was left over from another editor. I took out the link for consistency's sake. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 03:19, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Ref 26 and 27 are the same, no? Re-use the ref.
 * Actually meant to cite to the Heller book on one of those; fixed. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 03:19, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Is the second external link reliable? Useful?  If so, why not incorporate whatever there is of use there into the article?
 * I'm not sure that it's reliable, but I'm also not sure that it isn't. I decided not to cite it to be on the safe side, but I put it in the external link section because it may be informative. It contains some detail that's probably a little too in depth for the article - this falls into #3 on External links. If you'd rather not have it though, feel free to take it out - I'm not strongly attached. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 03:19, 5 October 2021 (UTC)