Jump to content

Talk:Bill Quackenbush

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleBill Quackenbush 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 12, 2010Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on September 26, 2010.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Hockey Hall of Famer Bill Quackenbush was promptly traded after winning the Lady Byng Trophy for gentlemanly conduct because his manager felt any player who won it did not belong on his team?

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Bill Quackenbush/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.


Reviewer: Alexanderovechkinfan (talk) 19:10, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the errors in this article have been corrected, but as I made so many corrections, I think I need a second opinion. Please review this article and add to this page what you think about it.

I would like to thank Resolute, Aaron north, and Mo Rock...Monstrous for their help with reviewing this article. I shall now proceed to grade it.

  1. It is pretty well-written.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
  5. It is stable.
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
  7. Overall
    Pass/Fail:


Please don't consider this to be an "official" second opinion, but just a quick idle comment from an uninvolved outside observer. If all you are doing is correcting punctuation and fixing grammar to improve the prose, I think you are probably still fine to review, as long as you aren't actively adding or changing content. (at that point, when you are changing content you become an involved editor, IMO) When I see very minor prose problems I often just fix it myself and continue the review, as long as I'm not re-writing whole paragraphs or it is clear the whole article badly needs a copy-edit. Aaron north (talk) 17:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Resolute

I was asked to copyedit this article for prose quality, but I do have some other concerns as well:

  • The piped link on football in Quackenbush's early life section points to American Football - seems odd that he would learn the American code rather than the Canadian. I'm led to assume that his opportunity to play pro football was in the NFL rather than one of the CFL's predecessors?
This is due to my American-centric way of thinking when I wanted to dis-am football from soccer, much like my improper use of American English words like honor. It has been changed to Canadian Football--Mo Rock...Monstrous (talk) 20:08, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The coaching life at Princeton is odd. It goes from his coaching the men's hockey team in the 1970s to coaching the women's in the 1980s to coaching the golf team at some time in between. Could you reword that paragraph to flow a little better chronologically?
I rearranged the coaching section to be more chronological.--Mo Rock...Monstrous (talk) 23:14, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I did fix numerous minor MOS issues that will be worthwhile keeping in mind for future articles, including mixed dialect (a couple of American spellings, i.e.: "honor"), use of a single digit numeral instead of spelling out out, except where a sentence also included a two-digit number, and several instances of the same word being used in close succession.
Thanks for doing that I still have difficulty with the two languages, and I was unsure about the numbers so wanted to be constant through out the article.--Mo Rock...Monstrous (talk) 20:08, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The lead should be expanded. Spefically, I would mention his eight All-Star-Game appearances and coaching career with Princeton.
I expanded the lead to include the above.
  • The lead image is concerning. I'll have to find the discussion, but I am not certain that the "restrictions on use: nil" comment at the LAC actually makes this public domain, or free for our use. I'll look it up. The other image is fine.
    From the commons:Category:Images from Library and Archives Canada header itself, we can't assume the image is PD. Unless we know the author died more than 50 years ago, I don't believe we can keep the colour photograph. Resolute 19:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the color image since it seems to be uploaded incorrectly.--Mo Rock...Monstrous (talk) 20:08, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure if there is anything that can or should be added, but a Google News Archive search shows quite a few good, freely available, articles on Quackenbush's career.
I looked through the first six pages and, of the ones that were free, there was nothing significant in these articles. --Mo Rock...Monstrous (talk) 23:14, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hope these help! Cheers, Resolute 18:57, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These are all very helpful and I'll start addressing these issues ASAP.--Mo Rock...Monstrous (talk) 20:08, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have addressed the above concerns. --Mo Rock...Monstrous (talk) 00:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bill Quckenbush Boston.jpg

[edit]

FYI - This image was removed from the article due to concerns over its PD status. It was nominated for deletion at the Commons, and the decision was to keep. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:18, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bill Quackenbush.jpg

[edit]

This image, currently being used by the article, has been nominated for deletion at the Commons, because there are no details as to where it was taken, who took it and where it was first published (the latter point being important if it was taken in the U.S.). If anyone has any details, please share them over at the Commons. Thanks. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Bill Quackenbush. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:02, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bill_Quackenbush&oldid=1209923091"