Talk:2012–13 Hershey Bears season
 | 2012–13 Hershey Bears season has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: January 19, 2014. (Reviewed version). |
 | A fact from 2012–13 Hershey Bears season appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 30 March 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:2012–13 Hershey Bears season/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Sportsguy17 (talk · contribs) 16:59, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I will be reviewing this article. On first glance, looks really good and it appeared as a DYK. I look forward to reviewing this article. Sportsguy17 (talk • contribs • sign) 16:59, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
The CHECKLINKS report can be found here. So for starters, all references are alive. And for the REFLINKS report, see this, so all references are properly formatted. Looking good. Sportsguy17 (talk • contribs • sign) 17:04, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking on the review! FYI, I just had a baby (or rather, my wife did :D) so I'm not on Wikipedia as often as I'd like these days, but I will be actively checking and responding to this review. If some time passes and I don't respond to something, just ping me on my talk page. — Hunter Kahn 18:11, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry for the long wait Hunter Kahn. I will begin by doing a section-by-section analysis coming soon. Sportsguy17 (T • C) 20:40, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
- No prob. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 01:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- First thing is that I only see one navbox. Is there one for the AHL or for 2012-13 AHL season? Perhaps a second navbox couldn't hurt. Sportsguy17 (T • C) 02:05, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- In addition to the navbox concern, I also am concerned with a) The lead is somewhat confusing. By this, it is in an order of an events that makes it have a very choppy flow to the reader. Try to add things into chronological order and tinker with the division of paragraphs. b) The Offseason has very few references, and has none for the departing players. And also analyze as to whether or not it contributed to their awful 17 game start. Sportzilla | ROARR!! 03:03, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
- 1) Regarding the navbox convern, I added this to the article but am not sure if this is what you mean. I don't believe there is a specific 2012-13 AHL season template. 2) I made these changes to the lede to make it more chronological and hopefully more clear. Let me know if you think it needs further work. 3) The off-season section has fewer sources than the rest of the article because the sources that are used are all-encompassing and cover all of the areas. This is actually quite a blessing; in some of the 2013-14 season articles I started, I had to look for the info in bits and pieces from dozens of articles, and didn't have them all in one place like with these sources. And the departing players are covered by the source currently used in that section: this link, which covers everything before its citation in the first paragraph of the off-season section. — Hunter Kahn 21:32, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
- In addition to the navbox concern, I also am concerned with a) The lead is somewhat confusing. By this, it is in an order of an events that makes it have a very choppy flow to the reader. Try to add things into chronological order and tinker with the division of paragraphs. b) The Offseason has very few references, and has none for the departing players. And also analyze as to whether or not it contributed to their awful 17 game start. Sportzilla | ROARR!! 03:03, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
- First thing is that I only see one navbox. Is there one for the AHL or for 2012-13 AHL season? Perhaps a second navbox couldn't hurt. Sportsguy17 (T • C) 02:05, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- No prob. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 01:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry for the long wait Hunter Kahn. I will begin by doing a section-by-section analysis coming soon. Sportsguy17 (T • C) 20:40, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for the long wait. I have finished looking over the article and have not found additional issues. This is well-sourced and intriguing. Great work.
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
See above 
. Sportsguy17 (T • C) 01:51, 19 January 2014 (UTC)