Jump to content

Talk:Pittsburgh Riverhounds SC/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: MPJ-DK (talk · contribs) 12:51, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Full disclosure: I am a WIki Cup participant, I have my own GAN (CMLL World Tag Team Championship) and I also have a Feature Article (CMLL World Heavyweight Championship) and Feature List (Mexican National Light Heavyweight Championship) candidates in need of input. Not that it's a factor in my review but it would be appreciated.

I am about to start my review of this article, normally I provide my input in bits and pieces over a day or two so expect running updates for a while.  MPJ-US  12:51, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Toolbox

[edit]

So getting the obvious out of the way first, I am checking everything in the GA Toolbox

Peer Review
  • Lead is too short, WP:Lead states that an article of this size should have about 3-4 paragraphs
  • Captions - the info box image does not have a caption or an alt text
  • The Gallery of fans has no captions nor alt texts
  • The Gallery of stadiums has no captions nor alt texts
Copyright Violations
  • The tool list two possible violations at 47.6% and 46.8%
Disambig Links
  • Green tickY no problems
External Links
  • The following references are dead
  • 13
  • 5
  • 45
  • 48
  • 46
  • 55
  • 99
  • 118
  • Probably dead
  • 33
  • 124
  • 143
  • Connection issues
  • 9
  • 50
  • 103
  • usopencup.com
  • The following references changes url, consider updating the links to prevent link rot
  • 28
  • 32
  • 31
  • 35
  • 57
  • 58
  • 68
  • 79
  • 114
  • 123
  • 134
  • 133
  • 136
  • 167
  • oursportscentral.com

This article is huge, there is really too much detail in the season sections since there are sub articles for those. I am putting this on hold until the 2013 through 2016 sections are cut down to a summary since they already have separate history articles. And I would suggest a similar approach to the last two sections of the history as well. I will leave it on hold for 7 days for the work on summarizing those sections to at least begin - not necessarily end in that point in time as long as work is going on.

@Gri3720: - Status: Hold for summarizing and addressing the reference link issues. I can pick up the review again if these issues get addressed. MPJ-US  13:14, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Gri3720: This has been on hold for 7 days with no sign of improvements being made on the article. I am going to fail the article, but at least you have a list of issues to work on if you feel like submitting it for GA again.  MPJ-US  14:10, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]