Jump to content

Talk:Russell Branyan/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:59, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take on this review piece by piece over the next few days. I'll be working in chunks, so hopefully issues can be cleared up in one tranche before the next becomes available. Cheers. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:59, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A few comments from me after a skim of this. KV will probably elaborate on them, but they're pretty major notes and I wanted to quickly get them down:

  • Pre-major league information has to be added in.
  • There can't be any bare urls in the article; add in the publication data for those refs like it is for the others.
  • On a surface read, the structure looks poor, with lots of one and two-sentence paragraphs.

The referencing and information seems good, and it's definitely much better than it used to be. The first one though is an issue that ideally should have been done pre-GA, but might as well occur now. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 01:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First group of comments (KV5)

[edit]
General comments
  • Make sure that you are checking the article for MOS compliance. At first glance, some recommendations that I have include looking for date ranges (1997–2001, for example, must use an en-dash instead of a hyphen) and checking your section headers for comma splices. Just tacking a year onto the end of the header looks sloppy. I suggest changing something like "Sidelined by injuries, 2003" to 2003: Sidelined by injuries, since the year itself defines the section header, and the other words are merely descriptive of the year.
  • At the moment, the article looks like it's having recentism issues. More recent seasons (namely, 2006 to present) have a lot of wide coverage. Equal weight should be given to all time periods.
  • They all do seem to be "equal weight." If you look at it subtracting the images and factoring in that some years he was traded (creating more coverage) and some years he was injured (creating less coverage) it all seems about equal. You can't really pick at the sections like "Atlanta Braves and Cleveland Indians" because his time on those two teams was so short that it becomes "equal" in comparison to playing time. --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 21:51, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  • Can you provide citations for the nicknames?
  • "However, he compensates by drawing more walks and hitting more home runs than the average player." - what's "the average player"? Can this be cited?
  • "Also he hit the first home run off of The Mohegan Sun Bar at the new Yankee Stadium." - not leadworthy, very minor.
  • "Branyan rose up" - very jargony, and it's not even standard baseball jargon. Perhaps something like Branyan reached the major leagues by advancing through the Cleveland Indians minor league system..., etc.
Amateur career
  • The info in this section looks good, but it's so short that I don't think it needs its own level-2 header. Paul Bako, a current GA that's similar to this article in some respects, combines high school and college (which Branyan doesn't have) under a single level-3 subhead as part of his "Baseball career".
  • Again, this is what I mean. It just becomes preference. The fact that the Bako article does it, doesn't mean thats the way it is. I would argue, under that logic, the "Personal" section of Bako should be combined and the level-2 head should read "Biography." --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 22:34, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please don't misconstrue what I've said as turning that article into a model. The only reason that I use it as an example is because it's also a baseball biography, it's an article that I'm intimately familiar with, and the players are somewhat similar, in that they've both played for a number of teams, they've both been both a starter and a backup throughout their career, and they've both been around for a number of years. I'm not saying "Add this because it's there" under any circumstances. I'm just making suggestions based on what I know from previous GA reviews. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 18:35, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cleveland Indians
  • "Rookie-Level" - not a proper noun
  • Linking hit to batting average is kind of misleading, as the article looks like it goes to Hit (baseball) on first glance. I would suggest changing to batted or specifically delineate that you are talking about batting average.
  • "he set a league record for most home runs, with 40" - he set a league record with 40 home runs in a single season is less wordy and clarifies that you don't mean the most home runs in a SALLY league career, for example.
  • "in '96" - don't use abbreviated years.
  • "In 1997" - I really don't like the fact that you are linking all of the years in prose, but if you are going to, link this one too.
  • The "Major League begining, 1997-2001", aside from the fact that beginning is misspelled in the level-4 subsubhead, could use some expansion. Using Bako as an example again, the section on his first three seasons mentions his first hit, his first home run, his top performances throughout those three seasons, and is more than twice as long.
  • We can't really use the argument "Article A has this, so it should be put in Article B." You and I are both aware that this article is not the Bako article. They both have different things that the other might not have. This also goes for the "style" of the article. I can understand adding what is notable, but putting it in just because the other article has it is nonsense. I am not, however, suggesting that is what you are doing. I'm just saying, please be forward with what you are trying to convey. --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 22:01, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll return with a second tranche of comments the next time I am able to have some time in front of the computer to look this over. Good luck! KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:17, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Further comments hopefully to come tonight, and then Sunday. Sorry I've been unavailable/distracted by pressing matters. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:45, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Second tranche (KV5)

[edit]
2002
  • "Branyan called the trade to Cincinnati "a clean slate"" - comma after slate and the quotation mark
  • "compared to" - as opposed to might be better here
  • "On August 4, 2002" - comma after the year
  • "with two Bobby J. Jones" - something missing here?
  • "he hit 16 home runs" - in what time frame?
  • "seasons end" season's
  • "Branyan played winter ball in the Dominican Republic where on November 18, Branyan injured his shoulder." - don't need to repeat his name twice in the same sentence; he would suffice for the second Branyan. Also, comma after "where"
  • "The injury wasn't thought" - contractions aren't formal encyclopedic tone
  • "serious at first" - comma after
  • "team's physician" - comma after
  • "serious damage" - comma after
  • "He suffered through an injury-plagued season" - starting a new section here, you should use his name
  • "season in 2003" - comma after
  • "recovering from arthroscopic surgery on his right shoulder performed on in December of the previous year" - you did already talk about the surgery in close proximity, so this doesn't need to be so detailed. Perhaps just recovering from the shoulder surgery.
  • "Branyan was reinstated May 29" - what do you mean by "reinstated"? Activated from the DL?
  • "Branyan's shoulder was said to be at less than 100 percent but the Reds reinstated despite Branyan's preference to undergo more rehab" - again, two Branyans in one sentence
  • "incident against the Chicago Cubs" - add in a game after incident
  • "hit outfielder Moisés Alou" - I know there's a link, but to a non-baseball person, he may have hit him with a bat, with his hands, with his hat... I would add with a pitch after Alou
  • Do you know what inning the aforementioned incident, as well as the following incident with Farnsworth, happened? A timeframe within the game would be a valuable thing. Was it the next inning? Four innings later?
  • "after a verbal altercation between him and Cubs first basemen Eric Karros" - remove "between him and", replace with with; change "Cubs" to Cubs', "basemen" to baseman
  • "His home run on June 7, against the Toronto Blue Jays' pitcher Jeff Tam was his first of the season and the 100th at the Great Ameri:can Ball Park" - was it his 100th at GABP or the ballpark's 100th? Not sure from the wording.
  • "he attained" - I think this should be obtained (to get) or sustained rather than "attained" (to reach)
  • "second basemen" - second baseman. Also, per WP:LINK, stringing three links together consecutively as is done here is discouraged.
  • "on August 28" - comma after
  • "with a .216 average with" - second "with" is extraneous, replace with a comma
  • "On January 21, 2004" - comma after
  • "Branyan was cut form spring training" - from
  • No need to link to the "year in baseball" and the "MLB season" in quick succession. The MLB year would always be preferred during a major league season because it's got more context. The 2004 in baseball article is easily accessible from the MLB season article.
  • "the Triple-A affiliate"
  • "He was then traded"

Also, going back to something earlier in the article that I just noticed: "he batted a dismal .208" - unless dismal is quoted from a source, it could be considered POV. Let the facts speak for themselves.

All issues addressed. --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 01:01, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hope that this second group of comments helps out some more. I will continue from the Brewers when I return from my trip this weekend. Cheers. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 01:50, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Third tranche (KV5)

[edit]

Sorry this has taken so long.

2004
  • "He made his Brewers debut" - Brewers'
  • "He said this about the trade to the Brewers" - informal, consider About the trade, Branyan said
  • "off the Chicago Cubs' pitcher"
  • "with 11 homers 27 RBIs" - missing a word here?
  • "He played 44 games at third base (40 starts), and two games at first base (one start)." - all numbers here are comparable; change "two" to 2 and "one" to 1.
2005
  • "went in to spring training"
  • "six rehab games with Triple-A Nashville" - what team? Never heard of them (if I don't know baseball).
  • "At the end of the 2005 season" - "at" should be by
  • "59 games at third base, five at first base and three in left field" - all comparable numbers; change to 5 and 3
  • "He was resigned by the Brewers" - change to re-signed to avoid confusion with resign as in quit
  • "December 20, 2005" - comma after 2005
  • "but after the they acquired third basemen Corey Koskie from the Toronto Blue Jays, they designated Branyan for assignment." - strike extra word, also seems informal, consider re-wording
Tampa
  • "and was then sent"
  • "He didn't play in a game" - remove contraction
  • "due to and injury"
  • "every day starter" - everyday
San Diego
  • "On August 24, 2006" - delink year, as it was already linked above
  • "On the trade Branyan said this" - comma after trade, and remove "this"
  • "on August 29, against the Arizona Diamondbacks" - remove comma
  • "second home came in the ninth inning" - I think you meant home run, but it's unneeded here because you're specifically talking about home runs in this phrase, so just remove "home"
  • "six home runs, nine RBIs, 14 runs scored and 15 walks" - all numbers comparable, 6 and 9
  • "three errors in 45 total chances" - comparable, 3
  • "His 18 home runs overall in 2006 were the most he had hit"
  • "one million dollar option" - change to $1 million and add {{inflation}} template to account for inflation

Again, I apologize for the delay. I'll get to my next tranche of comments from 2007 ASAP. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 23:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fourth tranche (KV5)

[edit]
2007
  • "Going into the 2007 spring training" - "the 2007" doesn't work here; could be Going into spring training in 2007
  • The first paragraph in this section states that he started the season as a bench player twice; can this be combined or re-written to reduce redundancy?
  • "The first was against Kip Wells and the second against Brian Falkenborg." - comma after Wells since "and the second against Brian Falkenborg" is a dependent clause.
  • "in a 0-1 win on June 16." - check the score here, and it must be an en-dash regardless
  • "In 2007" - comma after "five doubles, one triple, seven home runs and 19 RBIs" - all comparable, change to 5, 1 and 7
Indians/Phillies/Cardinals
  • These two subsections are so short that they should be combined into a single paragraph.
  • "at bat" - at-bat
  • "Branyan filled-in" - filled in
Second Brewers
  • Rather than "Milwaukee Brewers, second tenure", which reads awkwardly, reference the year as earlier with a header such as 2008: Second tenure with Milwaukee
  • "platoon-role" - platoon role, and comma after
  • "Manager" isn't a proper noun, de-capitalize
  • Fix "oblique" dablink.
  • "Branyan rehabbed" - rehabbed is jargony, expand to rehabilitated
  • "and was reinstated"
  • "right field bleachers of the stadium" - right-field, since it's a compound adjective here, and comma after stadium
  • "Brewers gain a 4–1 win" - I don't think "gain" is the right word here. Perhaps secure?
  • "with 12 home runs," - remove comma
  • "35 starts, 33 at third base, and 2 at first base" - comma splice, change the comma after starts to a colon
  • "He became the first player in franchise history to hit 10 home runs in 20 games or fewer into his season." - awkward wording. Consider He became the first player in franchise history to hit 10 home runs while playing 20 or fewer games in a season.
  • "He batted .455 with two homers as a pinch hitter." - cite?
Seattle
  • Link Seattle Mariners at its first occurrence.
  • This section is out of order. Re-work it so that it's chronological like the rest of the article. For example: you mention his injury but then ignore it until you reach that point. Then you talk about end of the season stuff before going back to the middle of the season.
  • "on the year" - of the year
  • "He has also set career records in in RBIs, doubles, hits, runs and total bases in the 2009 season" - all of a sudden, we're in present tense. Should be past, as it already happened.
  • Any time you talk about a "herniated disk", it needs to be changed to disc, as a disc in the back is spelled with a "c". Gotta have a link to Spinal disc herniation somewhere too, preferably on the first occurrence of herniated disc.
Free agency
  • "On November 5" - what year? There's two in the header so it's not clear.
  • Just noticed a formatting error throughout the article. Before all of your quote templates, you need to use colons, not commas (example: "on the possible return Branyan said:"). In that example, you need a comma after "return" too.
  • "General Manager" - not a proper noun, de-cap
  • "then settle for anything less" - "then" should be than

This should be the end of my major comments. Once they are completed, I will give the article another run-over to ensure that everything looks shipshape, and we'll see if promotion is in order. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 15:56, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to withdraw my request due to the at times condescending and picky tone of the reviewer (changing the section to read "Baseball career," and comments like "something missing here?" when the reviewer could have just been direct with what the issue was). I think my work is better put other places than waiting around for a week to see if comments were left or not. I think most of the reviewers comments were constructive, but i'm just not in the mood to play wait and see. Thank you for your help KV5, nothing personal. --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 19:53, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As you wish, but if it's "nothing personal", then you have no reason to call my review "condescending and picky". This is a pretty rigorous process, and if you don't want suggestions or you don't want to make changes, then you shouldn't undertake it. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 22:39, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My point was that some of the changes you said to make weren't crucial to the GA process. I understand the GA process, as I did quite a bit of research before nominating the article. I do, however, see where you're coming from. It is nothing personal, if you choose to take that tone, it's your prerogative, and doesn't change my goal. I just felt it wasn't very professional, and not the way I would have conducted a review, and not the atmosphere I want to work under. Again, thank you. --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 23:38, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Russell_Branyan/GA1&oldid=344339989"