Talk:Kevin Youkilis/GA3

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I'll review the GAN this time through. I won't quick-fail it since it's certainly better than before. Wizardman 16:23, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, here's what need fixing:

Helpful comments; much appreciate. I will try to address them below and in the article.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To start off, the dead links in the refs go to web archives, which is fine. However, it still needs the titles, publishers, etc. in them. Those can be fixed to start. (currently refs #5, 24, and 31)

I've addressed the first two by replacing them with a live link MLB article.

As to the last, I've deleted the entire sentence (I likely put it in in the first place), as the vote has now taken place. I thought that info more notable pre-vote, and now that time has passed I think we can delete the entire sentence. I also amplified the discussion of his third place finish, with supporting citations.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The college section is very underdone. How long was he in college? Given the school record and all-american bids, I Know this can be expanded into a 2-paragraph piece. If there's anything on a quote about Boston's selection of Youkilis in the 8th round too, that would be a nice addition (granted, since it's a late pick i doubt it'll exist)

Done. Great instinct on your part -- the article is far, far better (I think) with the human additions from his early years. Thanks for pushing me to find them. Curiously, Baseball Cube doesn't reflect more than one of his college years.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The lead could feel a bit longer and more summary-ish, and i'd like to see a bit of work done, but it's not too bad.

I think you were right; again, thanks for the push. I think it is better now.--Epeefleche (talk) 04:37, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The first basemen's fielding record should be put in with the appropriate years, doesn't really need its own section.

Done.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"After leaving Lowell, he played five games with the Augusta GreenJackets of the South Atlantic League, a Low-A Class league." Reword to imply he was promoted to Augusta, it sounds now like he just up and left a team.

Done.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"In recognition of his performance on the field, the Boston Red Sox named Youkilis their 2002 Minor League Player of the Year." cite needed

Done.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"He played 43 more games for Pawtucket in 2005 before being called up again permanently." I'd move this to the 04-05 section, expanding on why he was moved back down then back up.

Done.--Epeefleche (talk) 09:36, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"In 2004, Youkilis appeared in 32 games for Pawtucket, hitting .258 with three home runs, and a .347 on-base percentage, before being called up to the Red Sox on May 15." cite needed

Done.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:22, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"In the book, Lewis discusses then-prospect Youkilis in detail, and refers to him as "Euclis, the Greek God of Walks", a moniker that has stuck" quotes need to be cited.

Done.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:30, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"On the Opening Day roster for the first time in his career," does this include minor leagues as well? This seems to imply so.

Addressed.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Make sure numbers ten and under are spelled out when not used in parentheses/dates. (I think I caught them all, just double-check)

Just to be sure we're on the same page, that's only when it's not in a series, right?--Epeefleche (talk) 08:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Wizardman 03:29, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm just checking now, and I note another Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) exception: "Comparable quantities should be all spelled out or all figures: we may write either 5 cats and 32 dogs or five cats and thirty-two dogs, not five cats and 32 dogs." I read that as saying we can substitute homers for cats, and RBIs for dogs ... so it is fine to say that he hit "2 homers and 22 RBIs."--Epeefleche (talk) 03:36, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. I'm not too picky on that stuff. Wizardman 03:58, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2007 hit by pitch info needs to be cited.
Done.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:29, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's not much on his 2007 playoff performance, I imagine that'd be interesting to the reader.

Right again, as his benching in the WS away games following his record-breaking performance in the prior round was notable. Done.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:25, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The career sections pretty much feel like reciting stats. I'm not going to hold this against you, as fixing this can be admittedly difficult, but if you can combine the personal life info into the career, or add in some managerial performance notes or something, it would make the article flow much better.

I'll put this on hold and give you a week to fix all this. After all this is handled I'll pass the article. If it's not touched I'll fail it. Wizardman 01:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After reading through the article again, it is miles better than before. Keep the final point in mind as the article progresses, but as of now I feel comfortable passing the article as a GA. Well done! Wizardman 03:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and thank you for the thoughtful guidance. How close do you think this is to FA quality, and what is the process for seeking FA status? Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:58, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say see if you can get someone to copyedit it and tweak the prose around a bit. After that, the only way to know for sure if it's FA is to just go for it. (which now it's at least near FA status) Wizardman 16:14, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To answer a couple questions, yes the concerns are addressed. I'm going to keep it at GA/mid (though you can change the redsox importance to whatever if you think he's deserving). I say that because we don't really have an A-class thing; Gedeon went through the milhist one hence why he has it. Besides, the GA to FA gap is small enough. I'll keep it at mid-imp for now because I'd reserve high importance for hall of famers and the like. Wizardman 14:09, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]