Wikipedia:Peer review/Whiz Kids (baseball)/archive1

Whiz Kids (baseball)
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to nominate it for GA. KV5  ( Talk  •  Phils ) 16:40, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: While this is interesting and parts of it are well done, much of it is still in need of a lot of work before I think it would pass at GAN (or survive a merge proposal) Here are some suggestions for improvement.
 * As it currently stands, the article would probably be merged with the 1950 Philadelphia Phillies season article - there just is not that much on the Whiz Kids themselves in the article and the best part is the section on the season (which is lacking in the other article).
 * It would be inappropriate for this article to be merged with 1950 Philadelphia Phillies season for two reasons: 1) the Whiz Kids are a phenomenon that lasted, and were referred to, beyond the 1950 season. They are not exclusive to one year. 2) Notable teams can have their own articles (see $100,000 infield and Murderer's Row. The 1950 season article should deal with the day-to-day workings of the team (see 2008 Philadelphia Phillies season as an example); the reason that it does not is because there are minimal sources available at this time. If Wikipedia had been around in 1950, it would be a different story. KV5  ( Talk  •  Phils ) 12:52, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry to be unclear, I should have said it could be merged in its current state, not that it should be. I do not doubt the notability of the Whiz Kids, but the article needs to focus more on them. A search on "Whiz Kids Phillies" on Google Books here finds a lot of potential sources. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:25, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 05:47, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I also note that when I couldn't recall the exact title and just entered "Whiz Kids", the Whiz Kids (disambiguation) page gives two facts which should be in the lead and rest of the article but are not the youngest squad to ever win the National League pennant, and at that time the youngest to ever play in a World Series. Who gave them the name Whiz Kids? When? I would also explain in much greater detail some of the items that are just mentioned in passing, like the Bonus Babies in the lead. I think this can be a very nice GA, but it needs to provide context for the reader and focus on its subject better.
 * The "Before 1950" section is jumbled and hard to follow - it also ends with the Yankees wining the World Series in 1950 and for 3 more years after (which hardly matches the section header). I would start by making the timeframe clearer in the first sentence, something like Prior to the 1950 sesaon, the Phillies' last and only appearance in the World Series was in 1915.
 * The whole second paragraph in Before 1950 is confusing. Unless the reader already knows more about the Phillies than I do, it is hard to figure out who was the manager and when. Also the whole section on bonuses needs to then include the logical consequences - because of the large bonuses awarded, the players were forced to be on the Phillies roster, leading to the youngest team ever... (right??)
 * I also wonder if it would help to briefly introduce the major players on the team before the section in the season. Since the article is about the team (Whiz Kids) and not just their season, I think this makes sense (like a cast section in an article on a movie).
 * WP:MOSHEAD says to avoid the use of "The" in headers ("The 1950 season", could this just be "1950 season"?)
 * I thought the section on the four games of the 1950 World Series seemed too short, especially compared to the much longer section on the one game season finale right before it. Any analysis on why the lost in the Series that could be included? Did their youth and relative inexperience finally catch up with them? Or was it just the hated Yankees having sold their souls to the devil for five years of baseball glory?
 * The sections after the World Series need to focus more on the Whiz Kids too - were any players traded or did any retire (contributing to their slump the next season?)
 * The block quote in the Aftermath section is too short (supposed to be at least four lines long to be a block quote)
 * The images of the Wall of Fame are very nice, but my fear is that the sculptures are works of art and thus considered non-free. This will probably not be a problem at GAN, but could be at FAC.
 * Bottom line - what made the Whiz Kids special and unique? Does this article convey that to an interested but otherwise ignorant reader?
 * Well, this obviously isn't nearly as ready for GA as I thought by a long shot. I suppose we can go ahead and button this review up, and I'll work on it piecemeal as I have time; I can't take care of this many fundamental issues in a short period of time. KV5  ( Talk  •  Phils ) 17:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * This is not a bad article, but it does need work. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:25, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * This looks like a great source here Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:45, 12 November 2009 (UTC)