User talk:Jpetracc
Overall I feel you guys have a pretty good start. There are a lot of facts and history in your page. I kind of got lost in the reading because there were just a lot of names and just mushed together for me. A recommendation would be to create categories for your page. You can create categories by separating your information into seasons, such as the 2000-2003 season, 2004-2008 season, present season. OR you could separate it into categories of coach, such as, Coach Willie Scroggs, David Klarrman, Haus. You could pull out some of the information about the "cinderalla run" and create a section called Memorable Games. Create another section for the NCAA, ACC Tournament appearances, and another section for memorable players. I feel like there is a little too much emphasis on the coaches and not about the whole overall program. You have a lot of information, I just feel like it's cluttered right now, but I mean it's still in production stages so don't worry about it. You have citations at the top of the page which is great, but I would push them to the bottom of the page so that it won't take away from the introduction of your page. It's alot of info from tarheel blue, maybe change up the sources a little. The introduction could be a little longer because that's what pulls people in. I would put the tournament wins in the introduction or after it because that's what most people would fine cool about the Carolina Program. You should add more about the training facilities, the field, sponsorships, or retired numbers. You could include a little info about the UNC as well since it is carolina's lacrosse program. Maybe say, "UNC is known for it excellence in academics as well as athletics." I think we are like the third or fourth best school in terms of combined athletic programs on the east coast. You guys were not bias at all, and I would say that it was engaging. At first all I saw was a huge blob of text, but it got engaging near the middle and end. So that worked well, keep at that. Overall good job, the main issue is just creating sections so that people won't get lost in the text. Other than that you have alot of information, just include some of stuff about Carolina lacrosse. Stories are interesting, but we would like to know about the program as a whole. Good job so far!!!
Myap89 (talk) 01:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Pretty interesting read. I only have a few suggestions, and a lot will agree with Myap89 as well.
1. Try to break up the information with headings (i.e. coach, years, championships, etc.)
2. Find more sources than just Tar Heel Blue (newspaper articles, magazines, etc.)
3. I noticed there were links to players' stats on the current team, I would be careful using the most recent stuff since it will change, and will need to be constantly update. However, championship teams of the past, or legendary players might be useful to add to the page and possibly link to them.
4. Try to find a picture that isn't copyrighted or take one yourself that could represent the UNC Lacrosse team. Add a little color to the page.
5. Add a section for the facilities that are used, maybe take a few pictures of that and add it to the section.
6. Link your sources at the bottom with the reference maker.
Overall, great job.
Jroldham (talk) 15:09, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
There's lots of good information on this page. I think that your job from here on out will deal less with content and more with format, prose, and organization. Here are some specific suggestions that leapt out at me while reading:
1. Minor: proofread and have someone else do the same. For example, you wrote "amassing am impressive record" in the second paragraph. These little mistakes have a negative effect on the quality of the article.
2. Headings and sections. I suggest you rip off the code for another lacrosse team's wiki page and replace the content with your own. Here's an example.
'2a. Headings suggested by your content include: recent history, statistics (team's historic, such as all tournaments won), current lineup, and outstanding players.
'2b. Create a Reference section (Reflist) at the bottom of the page and put your URLs there. Be sure to annotate your body paragraphs with "references" tags.
3. It seems all major facts and references are there, but try to expand into some news sources. A NY Times article about an impressive victory is always great, but in this case a more paper might have to suffice.
4. Formatting (again). That's really the most glaring defect in this unfinished article.
Igomes (talk) 19:23, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
hi!
This article helped me to understand some history/info about Carolina Lacross team. I have some comments might help little better!
Major 1. Need a strong, large font size, bold title..
2. You may want to move the resources and web adresses to the back for clear page view.
3. Most (or all) of your resources are from cstv.com . I think you should find some more resources to make your article strong. There are tons of reliable websites such as espn... etc
Minor
4. you might want to put an introduction paragraph in the beginning. It took me a little while to figure what the topic was..
5. I agree with Myap89 and Jroldham's comments that "break down coaches/or different time periods or something.." I think this is a very good example for a sport team's history: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/North_Carolina_Tar_Heels_men%27s_basketball
6. some photos are always helpful
well done guys, great start!
Kevin Hong-Joon Im (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:35, 4 March 2010 (UTC).
I enjoy lacrosse and I am interested in UNC lacrosse history and all the cool facts too. You guys have a lot of facts, achievements, names, tournaments and events ,etc. It has been stated already, but just make sure to really sort those things out into categories or sections to make the viewer more satisfied to what they are looking at and reading. It's more of just a blob of information being thrown at me with cool facts thrown in. You can separate the tournaments like "ACCs" and "NCAAs" and then list what happened or what awards were accepted. Also, maybe you could start off with where lacrosse started or came from, or just highlight the word lacrosse with a reference. Then perhaps inform the reader a bit about the history of UNC lacrosse. Could also have a section of UNC's present lacrosse team and their status to really keep the reader up to date with UNC lacrosse. Adding a contents box also helps too. Don't forget pictures of some action shots of UNC lacrosse would be nice. Otherwise, keep finding more stories and information about UNC lacrosse and be sure to organize and really make it flow all together. In addition to that, don't forget to reference your sources at the bottom and after information you have found along with access dates and names, etc. Keep it up and it will all come together great I'm sure. UNC LAX Get 'er Done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcgafa (talk • contribs) 20:44, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Very interesting information and topic! I think you already have enough information to create a awesome article on Wikipedia. Just few suggestion though. Try to breakdown your article into appropriate sections. Perhaps you might want to create a table of content to help viewers search faster.
Also, try to look for images related to UNC Lacrosse team and logo (if possible). I looked at the other articles on Wikipedia about other Carolin sports team and I think it was impressive that how they came up with lots of images such as team uniform, logo and more.
Moreover, I see that your sources are located top of the page. I would push them to bottom of the page and replace the top with title of the page. Also, you should try to drag more information from various sources since your references are mostly from Tarhell Blue.
overall I think you did a very good job on researching and found many interesting fact. I feel like this page will be very good source for people are interested in playing/watching UNC Lacrosse Team. Great work! Jong —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.23.17.7 (talk) 21:00, 4 March
2010 (UTC)
I think you guys did great researching the topic. But it is hard to read a section that is this long on wikipedia. You should definately break up the article into different sections like an introduction, maybe a space for the coaches, etc. Also pictures would really be a plus making the page look more interesting. The information was great but the sources being on top doesn't look appealing. Other than the organization of the article i think you did a good job with researching the topic. Also maybe you could like to the UNC-CH wikipedia article. Hernandez468 (talk) 21:21, 4 March 2010 (UTC)francisco h
This is a very informative page that allows for readers to see a detailed and recent progression of the UNC Men’s Lacrosse Team. Others have offered great advice that I think would add to the page as well. Here are some simple changes that I quickly caught on to that can make this the perfect page:
- It is a little much to read all at once so I would suggest breaking up the information more. This will make it easier for all audiences to read.
- The page needs some color. Adding some pictures will make this page aesthetically pleasing.
- Don’t forget to use Wikipedia format. This will add to the amount of information the reader will be able to take from the page.
- I’m not quite sure what other information you plan on adding to the page. Expand beyond the recent history of the team and include other interesting aspects of the team such as the history leading up to 1991.
Keep up the good work! Skhussey (talk) 22:33, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
I'd agree with most of the comments from your peers above. The one thing I'd re-emphasize is the list of criteria for 'featured articles' in Wikipedia; these are the criteria I'll be using to evaluate the final version of your entry. Is the entry well-written, compelling, and easy to read? Are there aspects of the topics that haven't been explored in the entry or linked to other entries in Wikipedia? Are you drawing from a variety of types of sources (e.g., personal/organizational/educational webpages, newspapers, journals/magazines, books, etc.) throughout your entry? Have you formatted your entry to look similar to existing Wikipedia entries on similar topics? If you're incorporating images, do you have the appropriate permissions to post those files? These are the kinds of questions I'll be asking of your final version of this entry. Pmedward (talk) 21:24, 11 March 2010 (UTC)