Talk:Mark Baldwin (baseball)/GA1

GA Review

Passed. 123Writer ^talk 07:48, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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

Reviewer: 1TWO3Writer (talk · contribs) 11:39, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Diberoonis. Part of the August 2023 backlog.

I'll get to this soon. Thank you for the review. Therapyisgood (talk) 19:19, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Therapyisgood Check here for issues. Just found that nifty tool. :) 123Writer ^talk 13:11, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@1TWO3Writer: it won't work for me. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:24, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@1TWO3Writer: I believe I've responded to all of your comments. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:39, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox, Lead, Early life, References

Spot-check went well.

Infobox contains portrait and relevant information. Either cited in-line or in article body.

Lead contains only info also found in body. Relevant summary of career. No style issues, and length proportionate to article.

Early life concise. No style issues. Probably doesn't need expansion as focus is on his baseball career.

No formatting issues with references; seems consistent and does not use blacklisted sources. Usage of online and archived newspaper clippings; good and easy verifiability. Notes usage also good.

123Writer ^talk 16:14, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While spot checking the Columbus Solons and Chicago Pirates (1889–90) section, I noticed reference 40 also being removed. I'll list any I catch here, be sure to check the others:

19, 40

Fixed. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:23, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ones I spot checked and are OK (good links and relevant):

1, 2, 3, 5, 9, 11, 12, 15, 21 27, 35, 38, 46, 49, 51, 55, 56, 57, 63, 67, 72, 78, 80, 83, 90, 92, 98, 99, 102

Another issue is an untitled ref: 64

Fixed. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:23, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

123Writer ^talk 16:56, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Professional career (Layout, first section)

Length denotes proper focus. Subheadings good. Usage of blockquote and photo good.

Spot-check for initial section went well. Does the team Baldwin debuted with have a name? If it does, I recommend adding it.

- The source doesn't say. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:29, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago wanted Baldwin to play in the 1886 World Series, but the St. Louis Browns, against whom Chicago played, objected, and Baldwin never played. Could be rewritten. Suggestion: ...but the St. Louis Browns, the/an opposing team, objected, so Baldwin never played. Your discretion.

- Reworked. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:29, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

123Writer ^talk 16:34, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Professional career (Chicago White Stockings (1887–88))

Spot check: 19. Seems to have been moved. Other checks went well.

...Spalding's 1888–89 World Tour, in which he participated, after Baldwin... Probably unnecessary.

- Agreed, good catch, changed. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:38, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Added a comma. Added a wikilink to the AA.

123Writer ^talk 16:50, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Columbus Solons and Chicago Pirates (1889–90)

Spot-check: 40. has the same issue as 19. All other spot-checks went OK.

...in a showing described as "anything but credible,"... The sudden quote feels a little awkward so perhaps rewrite the sentence or use my suggestion.

- Agreed. Changed. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:30, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

123Writer ^talk 20:44, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pittsburgh Pirates and New York Giants (1891–93)

Spot-check: No bad links. Also all relevant.

...good for fifth in the NL. What does this mean?

123Writer ^talk 21:01, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Realized what it meant. Good according to whom? 123Writer ^talk 21:34, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Changed. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:31, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Independent ball (1894–95)

Spot-check good. No writing issues.

123Writer ^talk 21:14, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:31, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

After professional baseball and personal life

Spot-check OK.

The first paragraph contains info that happened during his career and should be placed up during that time frame to maintain chronological order. Title could be changed to: Life after baseball and death, or something along those lines.

- I moved everything but one sentence. The problem with calling it "Life after baseball and death" is he was still involved in baseball after his retirement from playing pro ball. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:37, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Anyways, good job! 123Writer ^talk 07:48, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

123Writer ^talk 21:28, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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:
· · ·

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.