Wikipedia:Peer review/Washington Nationals seasons/archive1

Washington Nationals seasons[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for December 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I'm looking to get this list upgraded to Featured List status. I've followed the basic structure of the Philadelphia Phillies seasons, which is a FL as well, so I'm hoping this would be promoted as well.

Thanks, Eagles Fan In Tampa 18:35, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement.

The list itself seems fine, but the lead needs some work. The biggest problem I see is a lack of refs in the lead. The lead is a summary of the rest of the article, but many of the basic statements in the lead need refs (as they are not in the rest of the article, or if the are as notes, they have no refs). My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref. Footnotes n through t need refs too. See WP:CITE and WP:V
My guess is that this is covered by sports MOS or naming conventions, but it seems odd for an article with 35 or so seasons in Montreal and only 4 in Washington to be listed under this title. Could it be called Montreal Expos and Washington Nationals seasons? I know that the Expos seasons is a redirect here.
I would add some things to the lead that are now just notes or in the lists. Try to give the reader a sense of the seasons. For example, the fact that they have never been to the World Series or only made the playoffs once on 39 or so years could be mentioned. Also the lead already mentions three of four stadiums (stadia?) they have plyed in, why not the other one?
Would it make sense to summarize the players awards in the lead - "Players for the team have won X Cy Yong awards, ..."
Make sure all of the refs meet WP:RS - what makes [1] a reliable source? I also note this ref says nothing about the Expos or Montreal on a search. The MLB strike was so big, there are much better refs than this (go to a library and look up old Sports Illustrated issues, for example).

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 14:04, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]