Jump to content

Talk:Jack Clancy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleJack Clancy 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
January 20, 2007Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 4, 2007.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that although several Michigan Wolverines football wide receivers have eclipsed most of Jack Clancy's team records, they all have needed more games to do so?

Auto Peer Review

[edit]

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 16:23, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

[edit]
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    A few prose issues
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Had to love seeing the Ironwood newspaper listed as a source... what a dinky little town in the UP!
  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):
    I've marked these two as 'pass' because without any pictures, you follow the policy. If you find and add pictures before the final review, I'll double check them as they are added
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

And here we go again...(haven't we been here before?)

  • Lede, last sentence, I'd be more comfortable with a citation, since saying he's one of the greatest receivers is an opinion.Green tickY reworded and linked --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:27, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • College section, 1965 season. It's a one sentence paragraph and subsection. Consider combining it with the previous section, as "1964 and 1965 seasons" so it's less choppy.
  • Same section, 1966 season subsection. Consider wikilinking "touchdown" in the second paragraph. YOu have touchdown wikilinked later in the article, so if you wikilink here, you'll need to remove it later. Green tickY--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:32, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Same section and subsection, this is opinion, and doesn't have to be acted on, but the paragraphs are kinda short and choppy. Just not sure there is a better way to deal with the information. Maybe pad it up a bit if possible? This is not a detail that will hold the article back, btw.
  • Same section, records subsection. Second paragraph. First sentence, might reword it to reflect a finite date instead of "is still" so that you don't have to keep reviving it. Perhaps "As of early 2008, his 197 yards..."Green tickY--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:19, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Same section, third paragraph, second sentence, it's unclear who the last "his" refers to.. Carter or Clancy. I suspect Carter, but would make things clearer if you switched out his with Carter.
  • Same section and subsection, third sentence. Same thing with the first his, is it Clancy or Carter?
  • Same section and subsection, fourth sentence, rework the first part of the sentence as it's awkward. Perhaps "Clancy is tied with Mario ..."
  • Same section and subsection, last sentence. There are three "ranks" in this sentence, which is repetiative. Consider changing one or two of them.
  • Same section, last paragraph, second sentence. What record?
  • Same section and paragraph, Third sentence, very convoluted sentence.
  • Same section and paragraph, last sentence is also very convoluted.
  • Professional career section, could certainly use some expansion. And citations for the last two sentences.Green tickY--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:58, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • If the item in the External Links section is a book, it should be "Further reading" instead.
  • I'm guessing there is zilch available on what he's doing now? You knew I'd ask....
  • this is probably not something you can fix, but in the infobox, is that statistics for his pro career or for his college career? Pro (standard policy for this template)--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 19:36, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • And while I'm asking for the impossible, pictures? If you can't find any, it won't fail the article, but if you want to go to FA, you'll need 'em.

I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on.Ealdgyth | Talk 18:13, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice expansion, I really like the organization of the records subsection, makes it much easier to understand. One quick thing:
  • Professional career section, Dolphins subsection, the last sentence in the last paragraph needs a source citation. I suspect that you moved a sentence and it got orphaned from it's citation. (I've never done that, no .. not me!)
When that gets taken care of, I'll be happy to pass the article. Ealdgyth | Talk 19:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great! And it's passed. ePaperwork in progress as we speak. Ealdgyth | Talk 19:48, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jack Clancy. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 08:30, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jack Clancy. 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) 21:06, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Jack Clancy. 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) 23:56, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jack Clancy. 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) 03:32, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jack_Clancy&oldid=1206707792"