Jump to content

Talk:Chris Wroblewski

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 (talk14:28, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 19:17, 29 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Chris Wroblewski; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

My bad. Did another spot check of the article. Had already approved the submission, now approving ALT7, which I like the best. Longhornsg (talk) 13:36, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Record book self-contradictions

[edit]

I have never seen a player whose career was misrepresented in record books as curiously as Chris Wroblewski. I have dug up parts of various Ivy League record books and found three self-contradictions:

  1. The 2013–14 edition: list him on page 79 as the 2008–09 3-pt% season leader (Ivy Games only) at 52.4%, but on page 78 omits him from the list of best all-time Ivy Seasons in a list extending to 16th-T 51.2%.
  2. The 2018–19 edition: lists him on page 19 as only a 2011 Academic All-Ivy selection, but in both the 2010–11 and 2011–12 season sections on page 42 lists him as Academic All-Ivy
  3. The 2018–19 Ivy Record book lists his Ivy Rookie of the Week Performances on page 41, but the 2022–23 Cornell record book omits these on page 52.
Does anyone have access to more recent editions that might include corrections?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:39, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


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

Reviewer: Gonzo fan2007 (talk · contribs) 20:54, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


I'll review this one. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:54, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Overall:
Pass/Fail:

· · ·

Comments

[edit]

Pausing for now, will look at references in a bit. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:38, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

Looks good. Putting on hold. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:19, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.