Talk:John Beilein/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   In the Education section, "After graduating returned to Western New York" something is missing there. Same section, capitalize "Bachelor" and "Arts". In the Canisius section, is this ---> "Canisius earned the team's first postseason victory in 32 years against Seton Hall[32]", missing a period? In the West Virginia section, the beginning of this sentence ---> "Beilein's 18–9 2004–2005 team entered the 2005 Big East Tournament", reads odd. Same section, "They lost to the second- seeded Louisville Cardinals", is that space needed between "second" and "seeded"? Same section, "As the number one seed West Virginia was able to play", add a comma between "seed" and "West Virginia. Do the same with this ---> "Before West Virginia started play in the semifinals in New York rumors started that Beilein would take the Michigan job"; add a comma between "New York" and "rumors". In the Michigan section, "On December 6 Michigan posted its second consecutive win", comma between "6" and "Michigan". Same section, "As a result of the major victories and continuing team success the team reached the top 25 in the national rankings in late December" ---> "As a result of the major victories and continuing team success the Wolverines reached the top 25 in the national rankings in late December".

   Done.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:51, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

   Half-check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:07, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

   fixed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:47, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

   Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:59, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   Throughout the article, link "NAIA", "Lockport", and "The Times Union" to their correspondence articles. In the Canisius section, this sentence ---> "In 1992, Beilein arrived at Canisius College, which was also the first position at which he hired assistant coaches.[19].", only needs one period. Same section, "At Canisius - his first Division I coaching position - Beilein reached the NCAA Tournament once and the National Invitation Tournament (NIT) twice in his five seasons", the hypens need to be dashes. In the Richmond section, it would be best if "South Carolina" was linked once, per here. In the West Virginia section, it would be best if "West Virginia University" was followed by ---> (WVU), I mean, I know what it means, but how 'bout your reader. The fact tag in the Michigan is a problem. You might want to remove the flag icon from the infobox, per here.

   I don't understand the "NAIA", "Lockport", and "The Times Union" comment.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:54, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

   They're disambiguations. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:07, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

   I fixed 4 of the 5 links associated with these three words. I honestly don't know which Lockport to link to.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:38, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

   Check. This would probably be a problem if you want to take it to FAC, but otherwise here, its fine. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:59, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

   Otherwise, done.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:30, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

   Half-check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:07, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   Reference 4 needs to be properly formatted. Also, References 137 and 138 are dead links, per here.

   Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 12:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

   Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:07, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   Are there any sources available for the Coaching style section?

   Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:48, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

   Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:07, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

   In the West Virginia section, "On the eve", sounds POV.

   Is "The day before" any better?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:52, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

   Sure. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:07, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

   Not very good, per the article's history page.

   The main problem has been resolved. There was an issue about how to refer to the University of Michigan basketball scandal that was controversial.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:50, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

   I had a sense it was about that. But, if the edit warring has died down, then its fine. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:07, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   If the above statement can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:29, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you to TTT for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:59, 11 April 2009 (UTC)