Talk:Kris Bryant/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Courcelles (talk · contribs) 02:53, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

To do tomorrow. Courcelles (talk) 02:53, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Alright, I'm ready to go with fixes. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

• DO we need to mention he made his MLB debut in 2015 twice in the lead?
  • No, that's redundant. I removed the first mention. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:07, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
• "Playing for the school's varsity baseball team all four years, he recorded a .418 batting average, a .958 slugging percentage (SLG), 103 hits, and 47 career home runs." What's sourcing these statistics?
  • The citation behind the American Legion sentence following it, "All eyes on Bonanza slugger Kris Bryant, a likely first-round draft pick", covers all of what precedes it. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:07, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
• "Bryant played collegiate summer ba−seball for the Chatham Anglers of the Cape Cod Baseball League. Bryant batted 29-for-130 (.223) with three home runs and 16 RBIs with Chatham." Don't need to repeat "Chatham" twice in one sentence. Could just drop the last two words.
  • Sure can! I merged that sentence with the one before it, should flow better. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:07, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
• "He was also rated as the best hitter" By whom?
  • The source following that, "Cubs get it right with Bryant", says "They got it right in taking University of San Diego third baseman Kris Bryant, the best hitter in the draft." I agree that needs more specificity. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:09, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
• "He hit .333 with five home runs for Daytona, and helped them win the Class A-Advanced championship." Source?
  • Adding this. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:05, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
• Ref 34 is dead. We're going to need another source for the whole service time nonsense the Cubs pulled.
  • Ref has been rescued. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:09, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Intermediate save, More to come after I chase the cats off the keyboard. Courcelles (talk) 14:17, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

• "Bryant batted for a .318 average, a .455 on-base percentage, and earned 10 walks and 10 RBI." For what period? All of 2015?

• Clarified - for his first month. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

• "With the Cubs finishing the season, 97–65, the team clinched a Wild Card spot and it was their first playoff berth in seven years." Source?

• Added source to mlb.com Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

• "As of June 2016, the grievance had yet" Any update?

No update yet. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:14, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

As of April 2017, no update. I will add that. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:25, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Is fanrags RS? If so here's something from Mar of this year saying no resolution (I know I read something to this effect on twitter this spring too from a beat writer but...) [1] Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:45, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Fanrags, like DNAInfo, should be reliable. It's also lesser known than the big publications, but a lot of these authors are serious people. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:37, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

• "During the 2016 postseason, Bryant hit for a .308 average with three home runs and eight RBI." Unsourced

• Fixed Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

• "He finished second to Nolan Arenado of the Colorado Rockies as the starting NL third baseman i" Second in the voteing for starting 3B, I assume?

• Fixed Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

• What makes ref 84, dnainfo, reliable?
  • DNAinfo was operated by noteworthy journalists/organizations. I could probably source that from a more familiar organization if you like. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:34, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
• What about ref 59, the trade rumors website?

This source is cited by other WP:RS e.g. [2] [3] suggesting it meets the standard of WP:NEWSORG. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:14, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Good enough for me, if the WaPo and WSJ are citing them. Courcelles (talk) 19:28, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

• This is not part of the GA criteria, but there are multiple problems with reference formatting that would get you dinged at a potential FAC.
  • Yes, many of them need to be fleshed out. I've already fixed a few and will go through them as I continue responding. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:09, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Done for now! Courcelles (talk) 15:57, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

@Courcelles: Ready for reconsideration. I've made other edits in addition to what's documented above. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:38, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Great. I'll re-read it... after coffee. Courcelles (talk) 12:53, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Coffee is the most important meal of the day. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:06, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

• Reading de novo:
• Feels like we've got enough article for a three-paragraph lead to be more appropriate?
  • I thought about that myself. I can flesh it out some. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:42, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
• Did he play in the 2017 All-Star game? Infobox says no, but I would think the second-leading vote getter would be chosen as a substitute?
  • One would think. He didn't. He was in the All-Star Final Vote but finished second. I'll add that to the article. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:44, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

That's all I've got. Great work. Courcelles (talk) 15:13, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

@Courcelles: Lead expanded to three paragraphs, 2017 ASG mention included, and some more things added as well. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:52, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

@Muboshgu: Looks ready to promote to me! Courcelles (talk) 22:59, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! – Muboshgu (talk) 23:06, 1 May 2018 (UTC)