Jump to content

Talk:Nate Schierholtz/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: SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 16:35, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Lead
  • "Nathan John Schierholtz (Nickname: 'Nate')" → "Nathan John 'Nate' Schierholtz"
  • "is an American professional baseball outfielder who is a free agent"..... awkward phrasing
  • Why are his height and weight mentioned immediately following the opening sentence? If including in the lead, it shouldn't just be thrown in like that.
  • I'm concerned about having one short paragraph and one really long paragraph here- either even them out or split the second one into two paragraphs
High school and college
  • This section seems rather short. I'd recommend making this into an "early life" section with details on his upbringing and the family he grew up with.
Professional career
San Francisco Giants
  • Is it really necessary to split each year into different sections? Some are longer than others, and WP:LAYOUT generally discourages sections/subsections that do not exceed a short paragraph
2007
  • "His most notable moment while on the big league club in 2007"..... POV and inappropriate tone
  • "when he blooped an RBI single"..... I'm skeptical about using the term "blooped"
2008
  • This is rather short, and is shorter than any of the other year sections.
  • "He was again called up in September 2008"..... something about "called up" doesn't seem right
2009
  • It would help to include how Schierholtz bruised his hip
2010
  • I would explain why Schierholtz replaced John Bowker as right fielder
  • Still not confident about the used of "called up"
  • "When José Guillén was acquired on August 13"..... maybe joined the team?
2011
  • Is "some" really needed in "began playing some left field"?
  • There is no detail on how he broke his foot
2012
  • "but five games into the season he found himself back in the lineup as the Giants' everyday right fielder" → "but soon became the Giants' everyday right fielder"
Philadelphia Phillies
  • "In the transition Schierholtz changed his number from 12 to 22"..... add a comma after "Schierholtz"
  • "He homered against Edwin Jackson in his debut"..... awkward phrasing
  • There is no explanation of how he fractured his toe
  • "They chose to non-tender him"..... not everyone is going to automatically know what this means, so use a different term than "non-tender"
Chicago Cubs
  • "He was the Cubs starting right fielder"..... should read "Cubs' stating right fielder"
  • "set a career-high"..... how about record or peak?
  • "2013 was the best season of his career" is unsourced and POV in its current form. "Most successful" would be more neutral.
Washington Nationals
  • "NL East Division" → "National League East Division"
2008 USA Baseball Olympic Team
  • This section is about the same length as the "2008" subsection from "San Francisco Giants". I recommend moving this section's contents to there, even though it isn't his work with the Giants.
Personal life
  • Family life shouldn't come immediately after mentioning his marriage
  • I would definitely include how he met Kate Eveland and how long they were together before marrying.
References
Overall
  • Well-written?: Not up to par
  • Verifiable?: one unsourced statement
  • Broad in coverage?: There is nothing on how Schierholtz became interested in pursuing baseball or anything on his player profile. For examples, see articles like Derek Jeter (which is FA) or Trevor Hoffman (which is GA). There is nothing on how he met Kate Eveland, how long they were together before marrying, or any detail on his life before high school.
  • Neutral?: Almost
  • Stable?: Nothing of concern
  • Illustrated, if possible, by images?: All photos are appropriately licensed and relevant, but the captions aren't very descriptive. They only give locations or time ranges. Using both time and location in descriptions would be better.
  • Pass or Fail?: The article would need quite an expansion to meet GA criteria, and prose also needs work. Failing this as a result.