Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Calgary Hitmen

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 01:23, 8 June 2008 [1].

Calgary Hitmen

[edit]

After much work, I believe this article now passes all FA criteria. It is comprehensive, well cited, numerous complimentary images and remains focussed on the topic. Currently a GA, and I look forward to all feedback. Self-nom Resolute 15:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Issues resolved Giants2008 (talk) 15:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - I'm first up, so here are my comments so far.

  • Shouldn't it be Bret "The Hitman" Hart, capitalizing the second word? This matches Hart's article. Same thing in Controversial beginnings.
  • "onto" should be two words when used like this.
  • History: Spell out WWF? Its context is clear here, but we wouldn't want any confusion with this WWF.
  • Controversial beginnings: I don't see why Hart needs another link here.
  • Remove comma from In January, 1997.
  • Remove of from in June of 1997.
  • Recent years: 3rd or 4th. Change to third or fourth?
  • Typo: it's→its.
  • "The 2005–06 Hitmen battled the Medicine Hat Tigers for top spot in the WHL for much of the season." Top spot seems like it should have the behind it.

More later Giants2008 (talk) 18:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • All of these fixed or changed. Thanks for catching some of those grammatical errors... hard to see after reading over the text 100 times, heh. Resolute 19:09, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I noticed just now that wrestler is linked in Controversial beginnings, and not in History, where the term is first mentioned. I would move the link.
  • Fixed. Actually, most of that statement was redundant, given it was already mentioned that Hart is a Calgary based wrestler in the previous sub-section
  • A lot of overlinking in Recent years. Brandon Wheat Kings and Moose Jaw Warriors are both linked twice despite already being linked in the previous section.
  • We do need a link for Kootenay Ice, however.
  • Checked for and removed redundant wikilinks from each section, linked Kootenay in recent years section.
  • Community impact: Comma after "southern Alberta schools" in second paragraph.
  • Fixed.
  • NHL alumni: Comma after "2004 draft by Carolina".
  • Fixed.
  • Move Carolina Hurricanes link from second to first paragraph.
  • Fixed.
  • "Ryan Getzlaf with the Anaheim Ducks." Something looks wrong with this part. Would "of" be better, or does this sentence need some work?
  • In the context of the statement, I think it is correct as stated: "Ryan Getzlaf [won the Stanley Cup] with the Anaheim Ducks".
  • Head coaches: Coach of the year should have the last word capitalized.
  • Fixed x2.
  • "In his time in Calgary" Redundancy. Try "During his time in Calgary".
  • Removed that entire sentence. Even using "during" it remains redundant.
  • "has also served as the team's head coach" Also dosen't work well here.
  • reworded.
  • Awards and honours: Change comma after 2005–06 to a period.
  • fixed.
That's about it from me. The article is better than I would expect for a junior team, and I look forward to supporting it in the future. Giants2008 (talk) 23:44, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: My understanding is that the official rendering of Hart's WWF persona was/is Bret "Hit Man" Hart (not Bret "The Hitman" Hart or Bret "Hitman" Hart). AreJay (talk) 21:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not certain of how he was portrayed in his WWF days, but he calls himself "Bret 'the Hitman' Hart" on his own website. I think I will take his word for it.  ;) Resolute 22:50, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • What makes the following reliable sources.
  • For consistency, either italicise the newspapers or not, but right now they are sometimes italicised and sometimes not in the references
Sources look good. Links checked out okay. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
hm. It'd be better if they credited the sources on each page, so folks would be able to find the source for each piece of information (kinda like Wikipedia requiring inline cites now). I'll leave this one out for others to decide on, I'm on the fence. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:51, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've encountered few reliability problems with hockeydb, and in fact, it is linked to a great many hockey articles, including at least two FA's as sources. However, looking over where I used the link to hockeydb, I realize that it was redundant to another citation set where I used the WHL media guide to get the same information for other seasons. I have replaced the hockeydb refs with the media guide ones to condense the references. So this point is now moot.  ;) Resolute 21:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support (04:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC))

  • "However, the name and logo also faced heavy criticism from segments of the public and the business community, with both being panned as negative stereotypes of violence in the sport." - would it read better without the also?
    • removed.
  • "with the surprise resignation of Graham James" - just refer to him using surname?
    • Check that throughout.
      • Changed up the statement you mentioned. There is one other spot where I use Graham James' full name after the first mention, but I believe that "...the spectre of the Graham James scandal..." reads better than "...the spectre of the James scandal..."
  • "18–51–3" - what do these numbers mean? Should say so at least once.
    • Hmmm. I guess being a sports fan, the record seems intuitive to me. The season-by-season section also denotes that a record like 18–51–3 represents wins, losses and ties, respectively. I changed the first mention to "...with a record of 18 wins, 51 losses and three ties...", though I am not certain that is any better, imo.
  • "however, as Calgary lost its second" - they're usually referred to as the Hitmen, be consistent.

dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:00, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Changed the wording of the quoted passage, as it just came off awkward on re-reading. I've interchanged the use of Calgary and the Hitmen throughout, mostly to avoid repeating "the Hitmen" numerous times in the same paragraph. I've made some changes for better consistency, however.

Support - All my concerns above were addressed, so this article gets a thumbs-up from me. Giants2008 (talk) 23:41, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support, no further issues here. Oppose, 1a (prose) and 2a (lead). At the very least, the lead needs expanding and the text needs attention from a thorough copy-editor. A lot of the problems could have been ironed out during a good peer review before bringing the article here.
Issues resolved. --Laser brain (talk) 22:55, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • When I did an initial visual scan of this article, my first thought was that it is too heavy on tables and statistics. This should be mostly prose. For a start, the Awards and Honours table should go. It's sufficient to say that several players have won awards and list a key few in prose. Most of that information belongs in the player articles.
    • The lead needs to be beefed up to more accurately summarize the article. Add some major points in the team history.
    • The prose needs a lot of work. The comma situation is out of control—almost every sentence has unnecessary commas that break up the text and affect readability (ex. "The Hitmen name is derived from Calgary-born wrestler, and original part owner, Bret "The Hitman" Hart."). Many sentences string several statements together and are tough to read (ex. "James organized a group of eighteen investors in the club, which included star National Hockey League players Theoren Fleury and Joe Sakic, along with World Wrestling Federation wrestler Bret Hart, for whom the franchise was named."). --Laser brain (talk) 22:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I disagree that the article is too heavy on tables and statistics. Sports, by its nature, lends itself to tables and statistics. Given this, I believe that the weighting of tables is appropriate to the subject and the expectations of the intended audience. As an example of this, this is how a recent edition of the Hitmen game program is formatted:

  1. Feature article
  2. Q & A section with a player
  3. List of WHL teams
  4. List of Hitmen staff
  5. Team schedule (chart)
  6. Second article
  7. List of important dates
  8. List of team record holders
  9. List of players who participated in the World Under 17 Hockey Challenge
  10. Gallery related to the Teddy Bear Toss
  11. List of Hitmen to play in the NHL
  12. List of head coaches
  13. List of award winners
  14. Third article
  15. Roster list
  16. Closing article

I've used prose to introduce list/chart sections, where appropriate, and personally believe the article will suffer if some of the charts are removed. Resolute 00:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't quite follow how an encyclopedia article compares with a hockey game program. Wikipedia has a general audience, and all articles should be mindful of that. A hockey game program or a sports almanac has a specialized audience. That being said, the only table I suggested removing is Awards and honours. I don't like it in the Panthers article either. --Laser brain (talk) 02:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, a general audience would still be able to understand what information the charts are expressing. As far as NHL articles go, some have had the awards lists moved to child articles. I could do the same here, but given the size of the article at present, such a split did not seem necessary to me. That said, I am willing to remove it and contemplate how best to deal with it. Resolute 02:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, I may be on the wrong side of this issue. It's subjective anyway and not a deal-breaker for an FA. --Laser brain (talk) 02:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I can see both sides as well. I added that section a long time ago because the NHL articles had them, only to remove it from the Calgary Flames article in preparation of it's FAC. Not many other WHL/CHL articles have a similar section either. How best to present it is a tough question to answer, however. I do hope I've addressed your concerns regarding the lead and the state of the prose, however. Resolute 03:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Additional comments pursuant to my 1a opposition above. Still quite rough—I caught several little mistakes that would be caught in peer review or just by a fresh pair of eyes. Please get a fresh copy-editor to go through the whole text. It's really not far off, but I think you may have gotten too close to the text to identify further issues. Examples of issues:
    • "... the violent nature of the look." Seems an awkward phrase. "Look" is too colloquial and we need to explain how the source thought it was violent.
    • Terms like "'Jason Voorhees' style" and "newly formed" should be hyphenated.
    • "The losses lead to serious questions about the viability of the club." As opposed to joking questions?
    • "The Hitmen's second season began with the surprise resignation of James on September 5, 1996, citing 'personal reasons'." "[R]esignation of James" seems labored, and the final clause dangles out there without a clear subject.
    • "... the Hitmen attempted to distance themselves from the disgraced coach." seems a bit POV. Does the source call him "disgraced"? You can clarify that the source referred to him as "disgraced", but you can't just call him disgraced. Also, why are we citing a reprinting of the magazine article instead of the actual article?
    • At first mention of dollar figures, you should specify that you are using the Canadian dollar (I assume you are). --Laser brain (talk) 05:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prose: ordinary, but hard to object to in an actionable way.
  • "narrowly edging the Kamloops Blazers for the regular season title"—"Edging out"?
  • Paragraphing a little choppy in places; e.g., "WHL championship".

But more importantly:

  • Why isn't this nominated for Featured List? There are three biggies in it that seem to take more space than the prose. TONY (talk) 16:20, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Because it is an article that incorporates lists and charts. With all due respect, suggesting this should be considered a list rather than an article is silly. Corrected the "edging out" bit, however. Resolute 17:40, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Calgary_Hitmen&oldid=1126593554"