Talk:Unforgiven (2004)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Unforgiven (2004) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Unforgiven (2004) 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
Date	Process	Result
March 2, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed

Professional wrestling Mid‑importance

	Unforgiven (2004) is within the scope of WikiProject Professional wrestling, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to professional wrestling. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, visit the project to-do page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to discussions.Professional wrestlingWikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestlingTemplate:WikiProject Professional wrestlingProfessional wrestling articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Oregon Low‑importance

	Oregon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

Good article review

I will take a couple of days to review this so please check back. Nicholas Perkins (T•C) 22:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Informative article which could easily make the GA grade. However it needs some more work to bring it up to GA class.

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
This article could use some copy editing and punctuation correction. For example in the Background section: "On the 16 August 2004 edition of Raw, Orton had a rematch with Benoit, in which ~~it saw~~ Orton successfully retain the title."

B. MoS compliance:
I referred to The WP Professional Wrestling Style Guide as well as the standard WP:MOS for this GA review. There are a lot of wikilinks which could be removed without reducing the article's value. As an example, linking to Triple H at least six time seems excessive. I suggest checking out MOS:LINK.
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
There are many inline citations repeated within the same paragraph. Where two or three sentences grouped together come from one reference source, one citation at the end of the group would be better than one for each sentence. An example here is the last paragraph before the Results section - reference 42 cited five times for six sentences - once would be enough.

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
It is a shame that Image:Trishwmxix.jpg is blurry. A better quality image should be looked for, but I don't think this hinders GA status.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
This article needs some more work to be GA quality but it is not very far off. The information is there and sources are verifiable. With some copyediting and some trimming of excess wiki markup this could easily make the grade.

This is the first GA review that I have completed so if you believe that I've misjudged something please leave a comment. I'll mark this nomination on hold at WP:GAN until these things are corrected. Nicholas Perkins (T•C) 02:16, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Something else that I forgot to mention was that near some vote scores it states that votes were won by 'a mere xx%'. This seems to place a judgement on the percentage received. Nicholas Perkins (T•C) 03:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like it removed? -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 03:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that also. I think it should be removed. iMatthew 20 08 03:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed it. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 03:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are the superstars that Benjamin beat out, notable enough to mention? iMatthew 20 08 03:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its in the ref. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 03:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Second review

I have reviewed the article once again and it is definitely improved. There are a few more things that need fixing up.

Wikilinks - much better than the first time I read this. Link to mock seems to me unnecessary. Perhaps change to "fake" if you are concerned people won't know what mock means.

Done -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 23:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citations - "On the 16 August 2004 edition of Raw, Orton successfully retained the title in a rematch with Benoit.[10] After the match, Evolution (Batista, Ric Flair, and Triple H) threw Orton a mock celebration, only to reveal that they were not pleased with his new victory. While Batista had Orton propped on his shoulders in elation, Triple H gave him a pleased thumbs up; however, Triple H abruptly changed the thumbs up to a thumbs-down and told Batista to drop Orton to the mat. Flair and Batista then began to beat Orton in the ring as Triple H claimed that Orton was nothing without Evolution.[10]" - The first citation should be removed, as a citation at the end of the section is clear enough.

Done -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 23:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"On the August 23 edition of Raw, after Orton refused to give Triple H the World title, Orton spit in Triple H's face and hit him with the title belt.[11] Raw General Manager Eric Bischoff then booked a match between the two for the World Heavyweight title at Unforgiven.[11]" Same again here.

Done -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 23:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are actually quite a few sections which have the issue. I won't list them all.

Unclear sentence - "Tomko continued his attack on Richards, as he hit a swinging neckbreaker and won the match via pinfall." Who won the match? It's unclear from this sentence.

Done iMatthew 20 08 00:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"On the 4 October 2004 edition of Raw, three candidates were named as potential contenders for Triple H's World Heavyweight Championship at Taboo Tuesday; Chris Benoit and Edge were revealed as two of the candidates~~for Taboo Tuesday~~." Repeating Taboo Tuesday seems redundant, not to mention redundant.

Done iMatthew 20 08 23:58, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are some extra commas in places that could be removed, but since this is GA class I won't mark down the article for that.

I'm impressed with all the good work that has been completed so far. If you can clear these final things up I'll be happy to give this GA status. Nicholas Perkins (T•C) 23:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pass

I have now passed this as a GA class article. Good work Nicholas Perkins (T•C) 00:14, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And, thank YOU for reviewing Unforgiven and giving us your feedback on what needed to be done. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]