Talk:Apolo Ohno/GA1

GA Review

Good Article Review by Figureskatingfan

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

Please add sources to this section and the last sentence in this section

Done and done. on camera^(t) 02:31, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Start of review

Hi, I'll be reviewing this article. The rules for GA reviews are stated at Good Article criteria. I haven't reviewed a great many good articles, but considering the backlog (and for selfish reasons, since I currently have a GAN), I thought I'd chip in. Different reviewers have their own style; I thought I'd go through the criteria and assess how this article satisfies them. I'm happy to review this article; I'm a big fan of Ohno. --Christine (talk) 17:30, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I stated at GAN, I cannot pass this article for GA until the preliminary copyedit of the entire article is completed. Oncamera, if you go through the rest of the article, as you started to do with the first few sections, I will pass it. I will give you a week (until 8/31) to respond. If you're unable to do this, perhaps we should wait for another time to nominate it for GA. --Christine (talk) 04:25, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will work on the article moreso later today and more tomorrow in my spare time. Thanks, on camera^(t) 22:45, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I went through the other sections and did some copyedits to them. I don't think the later sections needed as much work as the early sections. I checked the references too, and they are working and are relevant to the statements cited using them. If there's more you would like me to check on, let me know. Thanks, on camera^(t) 23:48, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria 1: Well-written

The prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct.

There are several problems in this area. For one, the style and tone aren't formal enough for an encyclopedic article. For example, these sentences, in the Early Life section: Despite the younger Ohno's athletic talent, he still was becoming increasingly more unruly, hanging out with older teenagers and causing trouble. Life so far from home wasn't very easy to a teenager, He missed his friends in Seattle and didn't really like Lake Placid, which is just a small town in NY state. After the first couple of months, he became less homesick and began to train harder. A year later, he won the national overall title when he was just 14. "Still was becoming" and "hanging out" are very colloquial. "Life so far away from home wasn't..." Contractions are a no-no in more formal writing. The sentence beginning with "He missed his friends..." has similar issues. I would suggest that you go to someone for a copyedit to take care of these problems, which are throughout the article. --Christine (talk) 18:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I went through a re-wrote/copyedited that section and the "Early career" sections. I'm slowly working my way down the article and adding more information as I come along it. on camera^(t) 02:31, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken this as license to go ahead and do my own copyediting. I'll bring up questions as I have them. My first is from "Early career": "His father, concerned with Ohno's spare time, involved him in competitive swimming and in-line skating. I don't have access to Ohno's autobiography, but could you make this sentence a little clearer? Since it appears that Ohno's dad's job prevented him from supervising his son, was his concern about how his son filled his time when Ohno wasn't in school? Was it a "I don't want my kid on the streets, so I'm gonna get him involved with sports" kind of thing? I, as a reader, would really like to know that. --Christine (talk) 05:10, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason Ohno's pre-1999 wins aren't listed in the medals table? --Christine (talk) 06:08, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Next question for this section: is it convention to state "100 m", instead of "100 meter"? I mean, would it be better to spell out "meter" instead of abbreviating it? Also notice that I've deleted the final sentence in this section, since you're gonna go into detail about Ohno's qualification for the 2002 Olympic team. --Christine (talk) 06:15, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for copyediting! To answer your question about the pre-1999 wins, the only thing Ohno won before 1999, was the 1997 Nationals, and since the Nationals aren't included in the medals table, there wouldn't be anything listed prior to his 1999 Junior medals and his silver at the 1999 Worlds.

Well, I must have decided at some point early on in editing his article, that after reading WP:STYLE Unit Names and Symbols to use m instead of meter as along as I included the nonbreak in it i.e. 100 m. Since there are multiple uses of meter throughout the article, I didn't know if it would be redundant/distracting to the reader to constantly see the word. So, I'm not sure if m or meter would be better since it is used multiple times, but I have used the nonbreak at least. I went and added more details into the Early Life section about his father and all, but I don't know if I answered your concerned; I don't want to make it seem like Ohno was going to join a gang when it was his protective father who didn't want Ohno to "stray" as a young adult or become a Latchkey kid, if that makes sense. on camera^(t) 00:48, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for explaining the abbreviation use; one of things I love about WP is how much stuff there is to learn! That's why it's a good idea to work on a variety of types of articles, so that the next time this kind of thing comes up, I'll know that this is the best convention. I liked your explanation of Ohno's father's proactive stance in raising what I suspect was a difficult kid to deal with. (All the really talented ones are, doncha know.) At any rate, it's clearer now; good job! --Christine (talk) 04:51, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It complies with the manual of style guidelines for:

lead sections

The lead should be expanded. The article's long (41 kilobytes), so according to the criteria, it should be 3-4 paragraphs. --Christine (talk) 17:48, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

layout

I have no problems with the layout; well done. --Christine (talk) 18:01, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

jargon

The issues here are similar to the above discussion. You use a great deal of slang here; another example is "...his father drove him to meets..." You have to assume that there are those out there unfamiliar with sport terms. IOW, what's a "meet"? --Christine (talk) 18:08, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

words to avoid

Again, similar issue. (Forgive the repetition.) I think that if you took care of the informal tone through a copyedit, this issue would be resolved. For example, Eventually he made it to Lake Placid, as Ohno's father accompanied his reluctant son to the airport and ensured his departure. It's the "reluctant son" phrase I have issues with. It constitutes a label, which doesn't follow the MOS. --Christine (talk) 18:14, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

fiction

N/A here.

list incorporation

I understand the necessity of embedded lists in sports bios. I'm not familiar enough with similar articles, though, to access the effectiveness of the two lists here, Ohno's medal records and his DWTS stats. Someone else will have to access the lists, perhaps when and/or if you ever bring this article to FAC. --Christine (talk) 18:43, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here, I made the opening longer by including records and awards he has won who was nominated for. I took a peek at Evan Lysacek's article as a base because there really isn't another skater's page to use. I guess it's hard for me to really judge all the words I used when I re-wrote the sections prior to the Salt Lake controversies, but I kept words to avoid and jargon in mind as I did so. Perhaps another editor can comb through and make adjustments. on camera^(t) 02:31, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Factually accurate and verifiable

(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout;
(b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons; and
(c) it contains no original research.

I'll access this section generally. I've looked at the first two sources, the ones from the ISU, and they're very difficult to navigate to the information you're citing. I know from looking up figure skating results that the ISU site really sucks. I would suggest making sure all their links are correct and actually brings you to the right information. Ref 3 is broken. Ref #4 isn't complete; the author is the AP. Ref 5: Is the Kidzworld site reliable? I'm not so sure. Ok, you get my point, I'm sure. The references in this article has loads of problems. You need to go through each one methodically and make sure they support your facts, that they're reliable, and that they're completely cited. I reviewed the sources in the "Games" section, especially the potentially contentious information about the Korean reaction to Ohno's win. I think that section is handled well, taking the discussion on the talk page into account. (BTW, ref 21 is broken.) As the other reviewers states, the DWTS section has no sources. I know that the reporting of the results on the DTWS article aren't necessarily sourced, and that they depend upon viewer reports, but I'm wondering if a discussion about the kind of dances and his scores is appropriate for this kind of article, especially with the amount of detail it goes into. This is definately something to discuss and consider. --Christine (talk) 20:06, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted much of the details in DWTS and sourced the remaining information. I'm not sure what to do about the table that has his scores in it, nor do I know where I can find an "official" source for the scores. I'm working my way through the references and updating or replacing ones that are broken or no longer work. My thing there is that because they're host online, the sites have a tendency to change/modify their sitemaps and so the links go broken with time. Especially with sites like usspeedskating.org, which seems to be using flash now and it makes it impossible for me to link to the news articles. So, I have to go and look for a source elsewhere... which leads to another issue that sometimes the reference link will be dead and the same story will be printed in a news archive that costs money to browse, so it makes it tough to look back at old articles in search of one that works/is free. I'm also changing the sources to more reliable ones and replacing dead ones. on camera^(t) 02:31, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I liked what you did to the DWTS section. Now that I look at it, and after thinking about it some, I think that you should keep the table. Not that I'm an expert or anything, but isn't it true that this kind of "OR" goes into sports stats listed in WP? I would get input from an editor who works on these kinds of articles to make sure, though. It's completely appropriate to use a television program as a source, and that's basically what you're doing here. (Perhaps you should cite the TV episode, or the DVD, if there's one of Ohno's season.) Regarding the dead link issue: I refer you here, which recommends using WebCite (http://www.webcitation.org). If you're stuck, my pal and wikimentor, User:Scartol could probably help you, since he's helpful in all things. --Christine (talk) 04:52, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to see if there's a nice source for the scores, but I was looking around at other sport figures' pages and it seems this sort of OR is "acceptable" for Sports a la Rafael Nadal career statistics. There's no DVD of the season, either; even though this seems tedious, I could possibly source each episode with a separate news-article... Thank you for the information on the dead link issue; for the most part, I've been able to find different versions or the same version somewhere else on google achive... on camera^(t) 01:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yah, I think that this is something you may have to do. If you brought this article to FAC (and I think the potential's there), you may be asked to do it. But then again, I dunno; sometimes the demands made over there can seem arbitrary. I'm not going to demand that you do it for GA, though, since I think this way is adequate. You may want to get some additional input. Of course, we could be setting precedent for the other DWTS winners. --Christine (talk) 04:56, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh FAC~ yes, I can see more I add to the article when/if it gets to that stage and getting references for the scores would be beneficial if anything to the DWTS articles. In the upcoming days I'll start looking for the references! on camera^(t) 02:46, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

This article, for the most part, satisfies this criteria. My only issues are the DWTS section, which may go into too much unnecessary detail, and "Personal Life" and "Selected events" sections. I personally have problems with naming current BFFs and girlfriends in an encyclopedic article (and I think that the BLP policy back me up on that). I also think that the one line about Ohno's award could be placed in another section, like in "Post-Olympic hiatus and return". --Christine (talk) 21:10, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I merged the "Selected events" section into the "Post-Olympic hiatus and return" section and removed the Personal life section altogether because I also agree with your assessment. The DWTS section has been vastly reduced and the remaining information has been sourced. on camera^(t) 02:31, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good job, nicely done. --Christine (talk) 04:53, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral:

It represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.

I'm very impressed with how well the Korean controversy is handled in this article, especially after reading the talk page. A potentially contentious subject has been handled very well, IMO. I agree with the consensus that a discussion about Japanese/Korean/US relations in this article is unnecessary. Good job! --Christine (talk) 21:14, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stable:

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

I find this article relatively stable. The Korean and DWTS disputes have been resolved. The vandalism here isn't unusual, and it seems to be reverted quickly. --Christine (talk) 21:47, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrated, if possible, by images:

(a) Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;
(b) Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

To be honest, analyzing images aren't my strong suit. I'd suggest going to Awadewit for assistance. They seem to me, though, few in number. I think that increasing the amount of images is something to address here. --Christine (talk) 22:04, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can look for more images that are owned by the owner of OhnoZone.net to address this concern, but that will probably take a while to do (my internet connection is rather slow and I wouldn't want to waste so much time letting images load). on camera^(t) 02:31, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the opportunity of reviewing this article. I learned a great deal about a very interesting individual. It's important to keep in the information about Ohno's "past", and how his dad and his sport helped him get past his "teenage rebellion". --Christine (talk) 22:04, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I sent an e-mail to Oncamera about this as she hasn't edited in a while, so it might need to stay on hold for some time. I'll fix what I can in a couple days. Wizardman 15:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sending the email, Wizardman~ I'll try working on the issues in the upcoming days too. I agree with the assessment and it'll probably take a few days to look into all of the issues. Thanks again, on camera^(t) 19:56, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]