From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski ( talk · contribs) 15:03, 12 June 2019 (UTC) reply


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 11:18, 21 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures

Prose

Lede

Comment: WWE is a pseudo-acronym. It does technically stand for World Wrestling Entertainment, but they no longer go by that name for the promotion. It's just WWE. -- JDC808 07:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Comment: Reworded to remove some repetition. -- JDC808 07:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Comment: Lee, why is that ridiculous? It's a fact that he was the first two-time champion. -- JDC808 07:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
A record second title reign? Embelishment. Sure, technically it's a record because no one had held it more than once, but to call it a record second title reign is over-the-top. Second reign is plenty. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 07:31, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply

Background

Comment: This has been rewritten so the focus is more on the partnership than Greatest Royal Rumble. -- JDC808 08:55, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply

Storylines

Comment: That literally means exactly what it means. The rewording introduced an odd flow. He had a guaranteed rematch, but the general manager stated he would not receive it for a very long time. -- JDC808 07:56, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
It's his title here. -- JDC808 07:56, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Disagree with the change of this. At this time, wrestlers could only appear on one brand. John Cena, however, could appear on both as a "free agent". -- JDC808 07:56, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
That's not what I'm calling an issue. The issue is, that he wasn't a free agent, he was a contracted employee (well, as close as you can be in wrestling). In kayfabe, he was free to compete for both brands, and called a free agent. However, in sports a free agent is someone who is yet to sign a contract, and cannot compete for any club. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 09:15, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Agree. the free agent is written In-universe. Cena is under contract with WWE, a no-wrestling fan would think he is a real free agent, like Minoru Suzuki in NJPW. A note is required (WWE calls their unassigned taletn free agent or something like that) -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 14:15, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Reworded to explain the situation. -- JDC808 01:25, 18 June 2019 (UTC) reply
That's what it was callled to insensate that the match was not only American wrestlers. -- JDC808 07:56, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
        • Is that notable though? Surely that irrelevent. Even if it's important, it should be explained. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 09:15, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
          • As with free agent, I completely removed it, as it is not relevant for the article itself. (It was a mock battle royal with jobbers dressed up as French or Spanish etc.)
  • On the October 29 episode of Raw, Acting General Manager Baron Corbin replaced Cena with Bobby Lashley after praising Lashley's post-match beat down of Finn Bálor earlier that night - Couple things - How can he just replace him? And it's not a real "beat down". Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 23:08, 14 June 2019 (UTC) reply

Event

Controversy

Reception

Note: I have three very busy weeks at work ahead of me. I will try to do this over the weekend but in case I don't find the time, be aware that I might not be able to improve this until early July. Unless someone else volunteers to rewrite it of course, which I would absolutely support.-- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 16:43, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply

Aftermath

Notes & References

GA Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b ( MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a ( reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c ( OR): d ( copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a ( major aspects): b ( focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b ( appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Comments

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski ( talk · contribs) 15:03, 12 June 2019 (UTC) reply


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 11:18, 21 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures

Prose

Lede

Comment: WWE is a pseudo-acronym. It does technically stand for World Wrestling Entertainment, but they no longer go by that name for the promotion. It's just WWE. -- JDC808 07:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Comment: Reworded to remove some repetition. -- JDC808 07:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Comment: Lee, why is that ridiculous? It's a fact that he was the first two-time champion. -- JDC808 07:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
A record second title reign? Embelishment. Sure, technically it's a record because no one had held it more than once, but to call it a record second title reign is over-the-top. Second reign is plenty. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 07:31, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply

Background

Comment: This has been rewritten so the focus is more on the partnership than Greatest Royal Rumble. -- JDC808 08:55, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply

Storylines

Comment: That literally means exactly what it means. The rewording introduced an odd flow. He had a guaranteed rematch, but the general manager stated he would not receive it for a very long time. -- JDC808 07:56, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
It's his title here. -- JDC808 07:56, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Disagree with the change of this. At this time, wrestlers could only appear on one brand. John Cena, however, could appear on both as a "free agent". -- JDC808 07:56, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
That's not what I'm calling an issue. The issue is, that he wasn't a free agent, he was a contracted employee (well, as close as you can be in wrestling). In kayfabe, he was free to compete for both brands, and called a free agent. However, in sports a free agent is someone who is yet to sign a contract, and cannot compete for any club. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 09:15, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Agree. the free agent is written In-universe. Cena is under contract with WWE, a no-wrestling fan would think he is a real free agent, like Minoru Suzuki in NJPW. A note is required (WWE calls their unassigned taletn free agent or something like that) -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 14:15, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Reworded to explain the situation. -- JDC808 01:25, 18 June 2019 (UTC) reply
That's what it was callled to insensate that the match was not only American wrestlers. -- JDC808 07:56, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
        • Is that notable though? Surely that irrelevent. Even if it's important, it should be explained. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 09:15, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply
          • As with free agent, I completely removed it, as it is not relevant for the article itself. (It was a mock battle royal with jobbers dressed up as French or Spanish etc.)
  • On the October 29 episode of Raw, Acting General Manager Baron Corbin replaced Cena with Bobby Lashley after praising Lashley's post-match beat down of Finn Bálor earlier that night - Couple things - How can he just replace him? And it's not a real "beat down". Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 23:08, 14 June 2019 (UTC) reply

Event

Controversy

Reception

Note: I have three very busy weeks at work ahead of me. I will try to do this over the weekend but in case I don't find the time, be aware that I might not be able to improve this until early July. Unless someone else volunteers to rewrite it of course, which I would absolutely support.-- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 16:43, 17 June 2019 (UTC) reply

Aftermath

Notes & References

GA Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b ( MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a ( reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c ( OR): d ( copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a ( major aspects): b ( focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b ( appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Comments


Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook