Talk:Phil Hughes (baseball)/GA1
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Bloom6132 (talk · contribs) 05:46, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
I'm going to be reviewing within the next few days. —Bloom6132 (talk) 05:46, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Some initial thoughts –
- Ref 84 should be replaced, since WordPress.com is a blog (and thus, not really a reliable source).
- I know that blogs normally are unreliable sources of information, but this one was written by Hughes himself. Shouldn't that make it an exception? Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 10:43, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'll make an exception. This is, after all, GAC and not the above-the-ceiling criteria of FAC. —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:24, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
For MLB sources (MLB.com, Yankees.MLB.com, miib.com, etc.), the work should be MLB.com, while the publisher should be MLB Advanced Media (per recently-promoted baseball FL lists Tip O'Neill Award and List of Major League Baseball pitchers who have struck out three batters on nine pitches)- "…in only his second MLB start. However, injury cut short his start…" – the second "start" sounds confusing. I know you mean the start of Hughes' career, but non-baseball readers might think his no-hitter game was cut short.
- His no-hitter game was cut short. That's what I meant. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 10:43, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
- Oops. Now that I've read about that in the article, sorry about the misunderstanding. —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:24, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Ref 4, 5, 25, 31, 41, 47, 60, 61, 73 and 77 should have Sports Reference LLC as the publisher. This is to ensure consistency with refs 53–56.—Bloom6132 (talk) 09:12, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
- Everything looks good to go. Passing the article. Good job! —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:27, 22 June 2013 (UTC)