Talk:Frank Butler (American football)/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Nominator: Gonzo fan2007 (talk · contribs) 22:50, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: AirshipJungleman29 (talk · contribs) 20:39, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your congratulations at WT:CUP! Thought I might as well take this review (I am in need of points to keep ahead of the Bean!). Comments to follow. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:39, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Three FAs is more than I have ever done, and you did it in a month!! Awesome job. Thanks for the review! It's short and sweet. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:56, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Prose good. Sources generally reliable and verify the content. The elephant in the room, which I think might be the reason this hasn't been reviewed, is the short bit of the "short and sweet"—at 1514 bytes, it would be somewhere around the 35th shortest GA.

I know that the GA criteria do say that the "broad coverage" criterion is much weaker than the "comprehensiveness" of FAs, but I do think it would be a good idea to be as comprehensive as possible with an article this short. Good thing is that I did see some stuff in the sources that could be added, for example:

• [1] says he also attended Notre Dame
• [3] makes numerous references to his size (and in fact gives exact numbers!) and also says that his government job was to do with harbour survey and research
• [4] says that he offered to play only Sundays when he took up the harbour job, but the coach rejected it because he wanted players to train
• Might also want to mention his career NFL statistics in the body?

There may have been more that I missed, but those details would be good to have. Everything else is satifactory. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks AirshipJungleman29. I have implemented all your changes! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 23:10, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

All good Gonzo_fan2007. If you have the time/inclination I have a couple of nominations up for review at WP:GAN; if not no worries. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:19, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Oh by the way, there was an image of Butler in the penultimate source—I don't know US copyright, but maybe that's old enough to use? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.