Wikipedia:Peer review/List of The Open Championship champions/archive1

List of The Open 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 August 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 August 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I want to get this list to featured list standard, and I'm hoping any faults can be ironed out here. The red links will disappear over time. Thanks in advance for your comments. NapHit (talk) 20:20, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, NapHit (talk) 20:20, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Sillyfolkboy First of all: just to say I'm not fully aware of FL criteria so some of my comments may contradict them &mdash; if so please ignore them.


 * Lead
 * I would full stop straight after "established in 1860" instead of comma.
 * Done


 * I would mention that it is one of the Men's major golf championships in the very first sentence
 * I think it's fine where it is, as long as it is in the first paragraph I think it doesn't matter where it is


 * The second should mention the "played on third friday of July" and the third of the majors each year info.
 * Not sure what you mean here
 * It was a rewrite suggestion but it's solved now.


 * Amongst the missed tournament info &mdash; what about 1871? Why was it not held then?
 * Added this


 * There is no citation for this first paragraph. No need to go citation crazy but I'm sure there's a short history article that could verify most if not all this info and you could cite it at the end of the whole paragraph.
 * Added citation for 1871, common sense should suffice for the world war bit


 * Second paragraph &mdash; "The Open champions" is a little ambiguous in light of the fact there's a US Open too. Perhaps say "the reigning champion of the tournament is automatically invited to..."
 * Changed


 * Rephrase the claret jug info to "The prize of the tournament is the Golf Champion Trophy, commonly known as the claret jug, and the champion personally keeps the trophy until the next competition the following year." Or similar.
 * Done


 * Say they get to keep the gold medal permanently to contrast between the medal and the jug.
 * Done


 * Remove the citation next to "allowed to keep" as the source follows on until the end of the paragraph anyway.
 * Done


 * On a related note: Does the belt information have anything to do with the reason why there was no 1871 tournament?
 * Yes it does, I might add that in


 * Third paragraph: for the oldest youngest info split the sentence up to read "...in 1867. His son, Tom Morris Jr., became the youngest winner of the championship when he won the 1868 Open Championship aged 17 years and 181 days."
 * Done


 * The Greg Norman and Tiger Woods info seems slightly contradictory. Does the number of shots over the 72 holes change from year to year? I'm not a golfing expert but it suggests a variation of what par is from time to time. Can these changes be summarised in the lead or will that be excessive information?
 * There is a note for this; Note A which should suffice


 * I'm unsure if these next two suggestions step outside the articles scope but: The tournament has only been held in Scotland, England and once in Northern Ireland. Some note of this should be made in the lead. Also briefly note that the location changes each year.
 * I think it is outside the article scope, as it champions, there is a separate list for venues


 * Additionally, saying that the tournament was founded in Scotland is pretty important information and should be in the first paragraph.
 * Done


 * Table
 * Is both colour highlighting and symbol usage for the playoff/amateur necessary? If this is for ease of accessibility to disabled/colour blind users then keep it.
 * Yep it's for disabled/blind users


 * I was going to suggest delinking a name/place when it had already been mentioned but for means of presentation I think it probably works better as it is now.
 * Agree


 * I think a little explanation little "Not held" would be better than simply "None", when the gaps are there. The footnotes explain it well - good work.
 * None relates to there being no champion, which I think is better than not held


 * Multiple Champions
 * It appears this needs some rearrangement - I guess it's supposed to be listed by who won it first when the positions are tied. Willie Park Senior and John Henry Taylor are out of synch is this is the listing method
 * Done


 * References
 * Generally these are in really good shape. Sports Illustrated should be italicised though.
 * Done


 * Not that I know everything about golfing websites but... what makes "Golf Legends" a reliable source? Can the information it supports not be found elsewhere on a more official site?
 * I'll find a different source


 * Links all check out fine with the link checker tool (Very useful - see here if you want a go yourself) Firewalling from Sports Illustrated is normal just so you know
 * Other
 * I agree that redlinks will be bluelinked within time so it's not a major problem.
 * Images seem fine and chronologically order with succinct captions.
 * This seems to lack information and doesn't look like a usual self-made photo so it raises my suspicions about the intentions of the uploader. May have to be excluded at FLC.
 * Yep seems that way, I'll find a new one


 * The rest seem fine to me.

Seems in pretty good shape and the prose in the lead should be clearer if you follow my suggestions. Good luck with FLC. Cheers. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 13:48, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the comments they are greatly appreciated NapHit (talk) 19:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

'''Changes look good. Still a few minor problems:'''
 * You should delink Tom Morris, Jr. in the last paragraph as it appears and is linked in the second paragraph about the belt info anyway.
 * In terms of capitalisation I think it should either be "a gold medal" or "the Gold Medal". Does it have an official name or is it just informally called a gold medal?
 * You're going to hate me for this one but... you've used hyphens not minus signs for under par haven't you? You can find the minus sign in the "insert" section in the drop down under the save page button. Minus is between the "plussy-minussy" sign and the "times" sign. Yes, both hyphen and minus sign do appear exactly the same in edit mode but you can see the difference in the preview (minus is eeeeeever so slightly higher). Again, sorry for pointing out such a minor and tedious problem but that's what FLC is for anyway no?
 * I've added two red links to the article. I am unsure of the sources available on Andrew Kirkaldy (there's a recent racing driver of the same name unfortunately) but some information does seem to be out there. I know Roger Wethered is definitely possible. Do you have access to the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography? Needs a subscription but may be available through a university connection. If not then I'll look to make the article myself from the information there.
 * Finally: I've fixed up a few things in the references you missed.link Sillyfolkboy (talk) 10:55, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

'If you found this peer review helpful please consider doing one yourself. Choose one from the backlog, where i found this article or take a look at WP:Peer Review.'