Talk:Auston Matthews/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Kosack (talk · contribs) 14:06, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

I'll take this one on, will post review as soon as possible. Kosack (talk) 14:06, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Initial review

Lead

• Is there a reason ref 1 is in the lead and not the main body? Refs are generally avoided in the lead, only the town names don't feature in the main text which is a bit odd.

Early life

• No need to link Mexico, per WP:OVERLINK.
• "taking in a Phoenix Coyotes Game against the Washington Capitals where he would view" > where he witnessed?
• "his incredible hand-eye coordination made him an excellent hitter", where is this observation coming from? Is it a quote? If so it needs attributing.

Junior

• "set by Chicago Blackhawks star Patrick Kane", star is a bit of a WP:PEACOCK term.
• Second paragraph is unsourced.

Switzerland

• Last sentence of this section is unsourced.

Toronto Maple Leafs

• "Matthews had been widely expected to go first overall for over a year leading up to the event, consistently topping prospect charts and major scouting reporters", what sources are supporting this?
• "It is widely expected that first overall selections, as well as any other highly touted early draft picks, receive the maximum entry-level compensation under the NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement." Same as above.

2016–17

• "his historic accomplishments", historic also seems a bit like a peacock term. Accomplisments is probably sufficient.
• "He was the first Maple Leafs' rookie to receive the trophy in 50 years after Brit Selby in 1966.", since Brit Selby?
• Last sentence is unsourced.

2017–18

• "with 34 goals and average over one point per game", average > averaged?
• Last sentence is unsourced.

2018–19

• Last paragraph is unsourced.

International play

• Second paragraph is partly unsourced.

Personal life

• Last sentence of the first paragraph is unsourced.

References

• There are a few available authors missing from the references, I notice 3, 5, 6, 11, 13, 15 and 16 from the first 20. Seems to be less of an issue after this but make sure that all references are complete where possible.
• Refs 25, 52 and 53 link NHL while others don't,
• Publishing date (as well as an author) missing from ref 58.
• Ref 73 is a bare url.

Overall, a nice article, detailed and well written. A bit of an issue with sourcing in some areas but this should be relatively simple to fix. Placed on hold while the above issues are addressed. Kosack (talk) 15:47, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Lafayette Baguette:, it's been over a week now since this review. I notice you did seem to start making some changes, do you intend to complete the review? Kosack (talk) 05:50, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

It's been two weeks since the initial review and there seems to be no activity on this one. I'll close this tomorrow unless we start making progress. Kosack (talk) 16:25, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Failing this for now due to the lack of activity. It's not a long way away which is a shame but if the obvious issues above are fixed, this should be relatively straight forward if you wish to re-nominate in future. Kosack (talk) 11:23, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

@Kosack: I was entirely unaware this was a GAN. If I were to fix it and renominate, would you consider a re-review? dannymusiceditor ^oops 17:17, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

@DannyMusicEditor: Yeah of course, drop me a line when you nominate again. Kosack (talk) 19:06, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

@Kosack: excluding the formatting of the references, the actions you've requested are nearing completion. Just making sure, are you still game to re-review? dannymusiceditor ^oops 22:12, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

@DannyMusicEditor: Yeah no problem, drop me a line when it's listed again and I'll pick it back up. Kosack (talk) 06:35, 7 September 2019 (UTC)