Talk:Stuart Parnaby/GA1

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

Reviewer: PCN02WPS (talk · contribs) 08:27, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, I'll be reviewing this nomination in the coming days. PCN02WPS ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 08:27, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Lead

 * I'll leave this up to you, but I don't know if being an unused substitute in the League Cup final is important enough to be in the lead - to me, it just seems like him not playing in a game is considered a highlight of his career.
 * For a player who'd won multiple trophies in their career, I'd agree, but considering this is the only competition Parnaby won in his career I think it's worthy of inclusion. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "...but struggled with injuries before being leaving two years later." → remove "being"
 * Removed. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Middlesbrough

 * "Parnaby did not feature in the 2001–02 season, due to long-lasting injuries." → remove the comma; also specifying the type of injury would be a good detail.
 * Comma removed and added detail about the injury. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "long-lasting injuries" is also used two sentences later; I'd remove "long-lasting" to cut down on the repetitiveness.
 * Removed. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The following paragraph also is a touch repetitive; "Following his debut against Leeds..." could probably be cut to "Following his debut" or "Following this debut" since Leeds is mentioned in the previous sentence as their opponent.
 * Removed. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "Despite this return" feels out of place; the sentence before doesn't say anything about a return (actually the opposite).
 * Removed. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Specific injury details in the first paragraph of the 2003–2007 section, specifically about the 2003–04 season.
 * Expanded. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "...as well as the arrival of Danny Mills." → Did Mills replace him in the lineup? I'd specify this.
 * Expanded. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "In the 2004–05 season, he played in over half Middlesbrough's Premier League matches until it was disrupted..." → what does "it" refer to here?
 * Reworded. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "...and was sidelined for three or weeks." → There's either a word missing here or an extra word.
 * Expanded. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "He made his return to on 26 March against Bolton..." → There's a word missing between "to" and "on".
 * Reworded. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "He was the first-choice right-back..." → add bolded word
 * Reworded. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Birmingham City

 * "...and so he was unable to dislodge Stephen Kelly from the right-back spot." → A word or two missing; I've added my suggestions in bold.
 * Reworded. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "However, Parnaby's injuries overshadowed his season, including missing the rest of the season." → Reword to avoid repetition (emphasis is mine).
 * Reworded. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd make some mention that Birmingham was relegated in 2007-08, so that their promotion back to the Premier League in 2008-09 makes more sense to the reader.
 * Expanded. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "Following the Birmingham's relegation at the end of the 2010–11 season" → remove bolded word
 * Removed. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Return to Middlesbrough/Hartlepool United
These sections look good to me.

International career

 * "on 23 June 1998 when starting their 4–1 defeat to the United States" → doesn't really make sense.
 * Is it the 'starting' part that doesn't make sense? It means that he participated in the match from the start. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "...to the United States (US), as part of the tour of US." → A touch repetitive; I'd remove "(US)" and record "as part of the tour of the US" to read "as part of the tour of the country".
 * Reworded. I've kept "(US)" as I've abbreviated United States to US later in the article. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "...as they were eliminated by the Czech Republic..." → makes more sense as something like "before they were eliminated..."
 * Reworded. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Personal life

 * "In late 2013, Parnaby and his wife were expecting their first child. However, the baby died." → Needs sourcing
 * Referenced. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Did the baby die before or after birth? The current phrasing "were expecting" implies the baby was lost before birth.
 * Reworded. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "...resides in the United States." → add bolded word.
 * Added. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Overall comments
One question I have is about the formatting of scores where Parnaby's team lost; I'm much more familiar with another variety of football, where the Wikipedia convention would be to say "lost 14–21" rather than "lost 21–14". I'm not sure if soccer has a similar convention but the following scores would need to be changed if there was one:
 * "1–0 home loss against Manchester United"
 * "2–0 home loss to Blackburn"
 * "3–2 away loss against Chelsea"
 * "2–1 home loss against Leicester City"
 * "1–0 away loss to Stevenage"
 * "4–1 defeat to the United States"
 * "3–0 defeat to France"
 * "2–0 defeat to Portugal"
 * In my experience, it's standard for the larger figure to be presented first in a scoreline in English football, regardless of whether the result was a win or a loss for the player's team. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

I'll place the nomination on hold for now, no rush with the changes. PCN02WPS ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 21:29, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review, I've attempted to address your comments, and credit to who kindly made some fixes. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * From what I can see the article looks good! I appreciate your clarification on the score formatting and the lead. I'm not sure what tripped me up so much about "when starting their 4-1 defeat" - upon rereading it, that sentence was totally clear. Earwig looks totally fine, the references I checked look good, the images are relevant and their licensing is good, and the article is very well-written. All of my concerns have been addressed so I'm happy to pass this! Well done!  PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 04:12, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Great! Thanks again for the thorough review. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC)