Talk:Randy Johnson/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 18:32, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After reading through this, I am failing it as a good article because it fails most of the good article criteria as is. It fails for the following reasons:

First, citations. Ideally, there should be one per paragraph as a guide. Right now the article has 20 citations. For a man of Johnson's notability and stature (bad pun intended), I would look for a number closer to 80. On top of that, some of the sources are odd. For example, #6 is a bare link to amazon. Are you citing the book itself or the amazon site. I presume the former, and as such you need to use the appropriate template to get that right. Also, what makes Jockbio.com a reliable source?
Many of the cites you do have are bare urls. Those need to be fixed.
The 'in popular culture' section ideally should be removed, though if you can source the information and present it properly, it can stay.
There is nothing on his minor league career. He spent multiple seasons in the Montreal farm system, which need to at least be mentioned (minimum a paragraph)
Some of the language is POV (ex: "Since entering the majors, Johnson has been among the most feared pitchers in the game because of his effective fastball", "But his untapped talent was volcanic") If a source says that and you cite is as such (with words like volcanic quoted) then that would be acceptable, but as is that language can't be used. Let his accomplishments and pitches speak for themselves in the article.
Some sections have pretty good structure, but others (namely the Diamondbacks) could use some paragraph-combining and the like. 5-7 sentence paragraphs are your friend.
How long did he play at college? If it was multiple seasons then that definitely needs expansion as well.
The sections themselves can be moved around, I think. If he was nicknamed the big unit in montreal, then it could be added as a subsection to the Montreal section (since you'll be adding minor league info, Montreal and Seattle can be split)

Hopefully this isn't being too harsh. It's a great start at least, and I do want to see his article reach FA status sometime down the line. But a lot of work remains to do on the article first before GA or FA can be discussed. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 18:32, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]