Wikipedia:Peer review/List of PGA Championship champions/archive1

List of PGA Championship champions

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for September 2008.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for September 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I'm putting this list up for peer review, as I believe it will eventually meet all the criteria necessary to be a featured list. Also the numerous red links will disappear, as I'm periodically working on this. Thanks, NapHit (talk) 19:39, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Review

Nice list, but apart from the images, the information is essentially that already listed in PGA Championship. What is the rationale for starting an entirely new list, when the existing one could easily be improved and enhanced? Brianboulton (talk) 11:31, 1 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Well this was the case with List of Masters Tournament and more recently [[List of The Open Championship champions, the simple thing to do is delete the info in the main article, add a link to the list, and have a brief paragraph about the champions. NapHit (talk) 16:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)


 * An even simpler thing to do would be to replace the list in the main article with your enhanced list, bringing all the information into one place. I note the other examples you give; what is it about golf tournaments that requires parallel information? Anyway, I’ll comment on your list, but I feel that its future lies in integration with the main article.


 * Too many redlinks: I assume that the years are redlinked to provide future links to articles on the individual annual tournaments. Likewise the redlinked courses and locations. I fear that it will be a very long time before all the necessary articles are written, and meantime your list will have this mottled appearance; casual readers will wonder why some information is in red. My advice is to remove the redlinks and replace them with proper links as the required articles get written.


 * Golf information: Golfers will understand what "6 & 5" and "1 up" mean, some readers may not. A couple of explanatory footnotes should suffice. Likewise, understanding of concepts such as "par" should not be taken for granted


 * Prose questions: There are a number of these:-
 * "From 1917 to 1918" is better as "in 1917 and 1918"
 * "and are exempt" = "and is exempt"
 * "They also receive" = "He also receives"
 * Not a prose issue, but the prize is stated to be the Wanamaker Trophy. I imagine there is also cash involved?
 * "personally keep" – "personally" is redundant
 * "the next competition the following year" is a bit clumsy. Try "the following year’s competition"

That's all, really. Brianboulton (talk) 11:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC)