Talk:Cliff Alexander/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 21:47, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Nominator: TonyTheTiger(T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD)

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have my full review up shortly. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 21:47, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

1: Well-written

• a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors: .
• b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

WP:LEAD:

Done Check for Correct Structure of Lead Section:  Done Check for Citations (WP:LEADCITE):  Done Check for Introductory text:  Done Check for Provide an accessible overview (MOS:INTRO):  Done Major Point 1: Freshman "He did not play organized basketball until eighth grade, but by late in his freshman season he became a notable contributor to his high school's varsity team". (summarised well in the lead) Major Point 2: Sophomore "He has been ranked among the top 20 prospects in the national class of 2014 since prior to his sophomore season although he started slowly as a freshman.". (summarised well in the lead) Major Point 3: Junior "" None. (The lead is not a concise summary of the content in the body) Major Point 4: Senior "He has given a verbal commitment to the Kansas University men's basketball team and will be a freshman for the 2014–15 team." summarises only Summer and preseason and it's not concise. (The lead is not a concise summary of the content in the body) Major Point 5: Comparisons "" None. (The lead is not a concise summary of the content in the body) Check for Relative emphasis:  Done Major Point 1: Freshman (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body) Major Point 2: Sophomore (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body) Major Point 3: Junior (the lead does not give due weight as is given in the body) Major Point 4: Senior (the lead does not give due weight as is given in the body) Major Point 5: Comparisons (the lead does not give due weight as is given in the body) Check for Opening paragraph (MOS:BEGIN):  Done Check for First sentence (WP:LEADSENTENCE):  Done Check for Format of the first sentence (MOS:BOLDTITLE):  Done Check for Proper names and titles:  Done Check for Abbreviations and synonyms (MOS:BOLDSYN): None Check for Foreign language (MOS:FORLANG): None Check for Pronunciation: None Check for Contextual links (MOS:CONTEXTLINK):  Done Check for Alternative names (MOS:LEADALT):  Done Check for Non-English titles: Check for Usage in first sentence: Check for Separate section usage: Check for Length (WP:LEADLENGTH):  Done The lead is too short in comparison to the content in the body and should be expanded. Check for Clutter (WP:LEADCLUTTER): None

WP:LAYOUT:

Done Check for WP:LAYOUT:  Done Check for Body sections: WP:BODY, MOS:BODY.  Done Check for Headings and sections:  Done Check for Section templates and summary style:  Done Check for Paragraphs (MOS:PARAGRAPHS):  Done Paragraphs should be short enough to be readable, but long enough to develop an idea. Overly long paragraphs should be split up, as long as the cousin paragraphs keep the idea in focus. WP:BETTER Fix long paragraph in subsection Summer and preseason - "On September 15 Alexander ... " Fix short paragraph in subsection Comparisons - "He is known as the type of player ... " Check for Standard appendices and footers (MOS:APPENDIX):  Done Check for Order of sections (WP:ORDER):  Done Check for Works or publications: None Check for See also section (MOS:SEEALSO): None Check for Notes and references (WP:FNNR):  Done Check for Further reading (WP:FURTHER): None Check for External links (WP:LAYOUTEL):  Done Check for Links to sister projects: None Check for Navigation templates: None Check for Formatting:  Done Check for Images (WP:LAYIM):  Done Check for Links:  Done Check for Horizontal rule (WP:LINE):  Done

WP:WTW:

Done Check for WP:WTW:  Done Check for Words that may introduce bias:  Done Check for Puffery (WP:PEA):  Done Check for Contentious labels (WP:LABEL):  Done Check for Unsupported attributions (WP:WEASEL):  Done Check for Expressions of doubt (WP:ALLEGED):  Done Check for Editorializing (MOS:OPED):  Done Check for Synonyms for said (WP:SAY):  Done Check for Expressions that lack precision:  Done Check for Euphemisms (WP:EUPHEMISM):  Done Check for Clichés and idioms (WP:IDIOM):  Done Check for Relative time references (WP:REALTIME):  Done Check for Neologisms (WP:PEA):  Done Check for Offensive material (WP:F***):  Done Check for WP:MOSFICT: NA Check for Real-world perspective (WP:Real world): NA Check for Primary and secondary information (WP:PASI): NA Check for Contextual presentation (MOS:PLOT): NA

WP:EMBED:
Done Prose is preferred over list (WP:PROSE):  Done Check for Tables (MOS:TABLES):  Done The table is standard in such articles.

WP:BLP:

Done Check for WP:BLP:  Done Check for Writing style (WP:BLPSTYLE):  Done Check for Tone:  Done Check for Balance (WP:COAT):  Done Check for Reliable sources:  Done Check for Challenged or likely to be challenged (WP:BLPSOURCES):  Done Check for Remove unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material (WP:GRAPEVINE):  Done Check for Avoid gossip and feedback loops (WP:BLPGOSSIP):  Done Check for Avoid misuse of primary sources (WP:BLPPRIMARY):  Done Check for Avoid self-published sources (WP:BLPSPS):  Done Twitter. Addressed in RS. Check for Further reading, external links, and see also (WP:BLPEL):  Done Twitter. Addressed in RS. Check for Presumption in favor of privacy:  Done Check for Avoid victimization (WP:AVOIDVICTIM):  Done Check for Public figures (WP:PUBLICFIGURE):  Done Check for Privacy of personal information and using primary sources (WP:DOB):  Done Check for People who are relatively unknown (WP:NPF):  Done Check for Subjects notable only for one event (WP:BLP1E):  Done Check for Persons accused of crime[ (WP:BLPCRIME):  Done Check for Privacy of names (WP:BLPNAME):  Done

2: Verifiable with no original research

• a. Has an appropriate reference section: Yes
• b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: good

WP:RS:

Done Check for the material (WP:RSVETTING): (BLP)  Done Is it contentious?: Yes Does the ref indeed support the material?: Check for the author (WP:RSVETTING):  Done Who is the author?: Scout.com Rivals.com ESPN Chicago Tribune Chicago Sun-Times Comcast SportsNet Chicago Sun-Times ESPN HS SLAM Magazine KUSports.com Marshall County Daily The Hoosier Scoop High School Cube Journal Star NBC Sports Lake County News-Sun HighSchoolHardwood.com Twitter SB Nation The Courier-Journal Kansas City Star Bleacher Report MassLive.com USA Today Kansas.com StudentSports.com Sporting News NBADraft.net USA Basketball Does the author have a Wikipedia article?: Yes (for major sources) What are the author's academic credentials and professional experience?: What else has the author published?: Is the author, or this work, cited in other reliable sources? In academic works?: Check for the publication (WP:RSVETTING):  Done Reliable. Twitter is used as a source but it satisfies about themselves criteria. Blogs of Chicago Sun-Times are used as sources (Source 16) but it satisfies WP:NEWSBLOG. All sources are accessible Random check on sources (1-7,26,27,32,33,35,38,46,49,51,55,58,61-64,95). Check for Self-published sources (WP:SPS):  Done Twitter is used as a source in 55,64,66,67,68,70,75 but self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field.

WP:MINREF:

Check for inline citations WP:MINREF:  Done Check for Direct quotations:  Done "NO ORDER❗❗❗ TOP 10 School Kansas, Michigan state, Kentucky, Louisville, Illinois, DePaul, Indiana, Memphis, Baylor, Arizona NO ORDER"[55] " perhaps the most powerful player in the high school ranks".[4] "My top 6 schools NO ORDER Michigan state, Illinois, Memphis, DePaul, Kansas, Arizona".[64] "...can shoot the 15-footer, put it on the floor, post moves, sets good screens."[52] Check for Likely to be challenged:  Done (cited well) For instance: He is known[who?] as a powerful big man.[4] Following his freshman season, Alexander began to be recognized by local evaluators as a potential top national recruit.[11] After Jabari Parker and Jahlil Okafor, Alexander was already considered the best Chicago area basketball prospect.[6] However, as Alexander entered his sophomore season, he was one of three area prospects that were firmly among the national class of 2014's top 25 prospects (along with Whitney M. Young Magnet High School teammates Okafor and Paul White).[16] ... Check for Contentious material about living persons (WP:BLP):  Done

• c. No original research:  Done

WP:NOR:
Done Check for primary sources (WP:PRIMARY):  Done Check for synthesis (WP:SYN):  Done Check for original images (WP:OI):  Done

3: Broad in its coverage

a. Major aspects:

Done Check for Article scope as defined by reliable sources:  Done Check for The extent of the subject matter in these RS:  Done Check for Out of scope:  Done Check for The range of material that belongs in the article:  Done Check for All material that is notable is covered:  Done Check for All material that is referenced is covered:  Done Check for All material that a reader would be likely to agree matches the specified scope is covered:  Done Check for The most general scope that summarises essentially all knowledge:  Done Check for Stay on topic and no wandering off-topic (WP:OFFTOPIC):

 Done

b. Focused:
Done Check for Readability issues (WP:LENGTH):  Done Check for Article size (WP:TOO LONG!):  Done

4: Neutral

WP:NPOV:

Done 4. Fair representation without bias:  Done Check for POV (WP:YESPOV):  Done Check for naming (WP:POVNAMING):  Done Check for structure (WP:STRUCTURE):  Done Check for Due and undue weight (WP:DUE):  Done Check for Balancing aspects (WP:BALASPS):  Done Check for Giving "equal validity" (WP:VALID):  Done Check for Balance (WP:YESPOV):  Done Check for Impartial tone (WP:IMPARTIAL):  Done Check for Describing aesthetic opinions (WP:SUBJECTIVE):  Done Check for Words to watch (WP:YESPOV):  Done Check for Attributing and specifying biased statements (WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV):  Done Check for Fringe theories and pseudoscience (WP:PSCI): None Check for Religion (WP:RNPOV): None

5: Stable: No edit wars, etc:

6: Images  Done (Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license)

Images:

Done 6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:  Done Check for copyright tags (WP:TAGS):  Done Image 1 (20130307 Cliff Alexander drives on Jahlil Okafor cropped.jpg): This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. This version permits free use, including commercial use. Hence this image complies with The license must permit both commercial reuse and derivative works. Image 2 (20130307 Cliff Alexander blocks Paul White cropped.JPG): This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. This version permits free use, including commercial use. Hence this image complies with The license must permit both commercial reuse and derivative works. Image 3 (20130307 Cliff Alexander dunking.JPG): This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. This version permits free use, including commercial use. Hence this image complies with The license must permit both commercial reuse and derivative works. Image 4 (20130307 Cliff Alexander against Jahlil Okafor cropped): This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. This version permits free use, including commercial use. Hence this image complies with The license must permit both commercial reuse and derivative works. Check for copyright status:  Done Image 1 (20130307 Cliff Alexander drives on Jahlil Okafor cropped.jpg): Free. Image 2 (20130307 Cliff Alexander blocks Paul White cropped.JPG): Free. Image 3 (20130307 Cliff Alexander dunking.JPG): Free. Image 4 (20130307 Cliff Alexander against Jahlil Okafor cropped): Free. Check for non-free content (WP:NFC): None Check for valid fair use rationales (WP:FUR): NA 6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  Done Check for image relevance (WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE):  Done Image 1 (20130307 Cliff Alexander drives on Jahlil Okafor cropped.jpg): Relevant. Image 2 (20130307 Cliff Alexander blocks Paul White cropped.JPG): Relevant. Image 3 (20130307 Cliff Alexander dunking.JPG): Relevant. Image 4 (20130307 Cliff Alexander against Jahlil Okafor cropped): Relevant. Check for Images for the lead (WP:LEADIMAGE):  Done Image 1 (20130307 Cliff Alexander drives on Jahlil Okafor cropped.jpg): Appropriate & Representative. Check for suitable captions (WP:CAPTION):  Done Caption 1: "Alexander drives on Jahlil Okafor (March 7, 2013)" succinct and informative Caption 2: "Alexander blocks Paul White during the March 7, 2013 IHSA playoffs" succinct and informative Caption 3: "Alexander dunking during the March 7, 2013 IHSA playoffs" succinct and informative Caption 4: "Alexander in the low post against Jahlil Okafor as Paul White collapses on help defense." succinct and informative

As per the above checklist, the issues identified are:

• The lead does not provide an accessible overview and does not give relative emphasis.
• The lead is too short in comparison to the content in the body and should be expanded.
• Paragraphs that are very long and very short.

This article is a very promising GA nominee. I'm glad to see your work here. I'm putting the article on hold. All the best! --Seabuckthorn ♥ 23:45, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

A rough analysis of Relative emphasis and due weight for this article could be as given below.

The body of the article is of 2500 words approximately. The distribution of words among sections and subsections is:

• High school career (2400 words)
  • Freshman (200 words)
  • Sophomore (200 words)
  • Junior (700 words)
  • Senior (1100 words)
    • Summer and preseason (900 words)
    • 2013-14 regular season (200 words)
  • Comparisons (200)
• International play (60 words)

The percentage distribution of words is:

• High school career (96% of 2500 words)
  • Freshman (8% of 2500 words)
  • Sophomore (8% of 2500 words)
  • Junior (28% of 2500 words)
  • Senior (44% of 2500 words)
    • Summer and preseason (36% of 2500 words)
    • 2013-14 regular season (8% of 2500 words)
  • Comparisons (8% of 2500 words)
• International play (2.5% of 2500 words)

Lets assume the lead is about 10% of the body. The number of words in the lead would be around 250. Considering the percentage distribution and the due weight, the distribution of words in the lead would be:

• High school career (96% of 250 words = 240)
  • Freshman (8% of 250 words = 20)
  • Sophomore (8% of 250 words = 20)
  • Junior (28% of 250 words = 70)
  • Senior (44% of 250 words = 110)
    • Summer and preseason (36% of 250 words = 90)
    • 2013-14 regular season (8% of 250 words = 20)
  • Comparisons (8% of 250 words = 20)
• International play (2.5% of 250 words = 7)

The lead representative of the body should roughly give due weight in terms of the proportion as is given below:

• High school career (240 words)
  • Freshman (20 words)
  • Sophomore (20 words)
  • Junior (70 words)
  • Senior (110 words)
    • Summer and preseason (90 words)
    • 2013-14 regular season (20 words)
  • Comparisons (20 words)
• International play (7 words)

I'm giving you a very rough analysis of relative emphasis and due weight which I hope would be useful in conveying my expectations, as a GA reviewer, of a good lead. The lead should approximate my analysis. If you feel I'm wrong anywhere, feel free to correct me or ignore the suggestions altogether. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 19:16, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

• First, I have never seen a proportionate emphasis request for a WP:LEAD. I understand that is what Wikipedia:LEAD#Relative emphasis says, but I have never been asked to do so. I am not sure how close I want to get to the numbers suggested, but I will take a look.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:02, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Apologies. Ignore the example altogether. But do you agree that the lead needs to be expanded for it to provide an accessible overview and give relative emphasis? --Seabuckthorn ♥ 23:24, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

The lead looks much better now. Tell me when you are done. I'll take a final look then. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 23:33, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm sort of done.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:09, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Although I'm still not satisfied with the lead, but I think I'll go with your good judgement. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 04:48, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Passing the article to GA status. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 04:48, 13 January 2014 (UTC)