Wikipedia:Peer review/List of Washington Redskins players/archive2
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to know what else I should do to it to make it a Featured List. Let me know what else I can do to make it the best it can be!
Thanks, Jwalte04 (talk) 22:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
[edit]An enormous list (143K?!)! I can't check each entry (I don't think I have that much time left....!) but I'll comment on style and all that...
The title is Washington Redskins, then in the opening sentence you have "Boston / Washington Redskins". Now this is obvious to the NFL-ites but I would stick with just Washington Redskins for the lead and then go on to explain about Boston Redskins and Boston Braves subsequently. To folks like me who are used to their local club being established and named the same for the past 120 years, the NFL franchise/relocation/renaming thing is odd!
Done thats a good point. Jwalte04 (talk) 18:08, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I wonder if playing "at least one match" means that this list is going to be virtually the same as me clicking on Category:Washington Redskins players? Maybe it needs slightly harder criteria (perhaps ten matches?) - it would reduce the size of the article to something manageable...- Done I decided to bump the match requirement from one to three. This is because during the 1987 NFL season (the year the Redskins won the Super Bowl XXII) there was an NFL players strike. During the strike, NFL teams hired replacement players to play in the three games that were scheduled during the strike. I think that these players still deserve to be on the list (though I may make them there own colored box so they will stand out). However all players that have only played less than three games have been taken off the list. If someone has a problem with this or thinks I should raise the match requirement even more let me know. Jwalte04 (talk) 22:04, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Numbers in the lead less than ten should be in words.- Done
Move the citations in the lead per WP:CITE, namely [7] and [8].- Done I think I moved the citation to the right place, as well as combining citation 7 and 8. Let me know if it is still not in the right place. Jwalte04 (talk) 21:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Season years need to be separated by en-dash not hyphens. So 1945–49, not 1945-49.- Done
Positions need explaining when abbreviated, so you need a key.- Done Let me know if this isn't the key you had in mind. Jwalte04 (talk) 19:31, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Aim to keep the tables and columns the same width from letter to letter, looks neater and more professional.
Not done How would I go about doing that? Jwalte04 (talk) 21:37, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
With some relatively simple table syntax. Once you've dealt with everything else, let me know and I'll help. Or, if you're keen, look at section of List of Ipswich Town F.C. statistics and records where I've forced column widths in separate tables to be the same. It looks a lot better. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)- Done I think I did it right. There may be a kink or two in it I am not seeing. Jwalte04 (talk) 08:23, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
- Why do some players not have #?
- Not doneThose were all of the numbers I was able to find. Jwalte04 (talk) 21:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- I think this needs explanation with a footnote or something similar. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- If you reduced the number of players by introducing more stringent criteria for inclusion (see List of Ipswich Town F.C. players - an FL I wrote a while ago) then you could add additional statistics for the players such as total appearances and honours won?
That's all I have for now, good luck with progressing the list to FL! The Rambling Man (talk) 11:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)