Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Michael Gomez

Michael Gomez

Hoping to improve this article to Good Article status but I have kind of hit the wall with it. ANy help appricated.--Vintagekits 18:27, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Review by Scartol

This article has a lot of good information and referenced data. Its main problems seem to be organization and grammar (spelling and usage). I'd recommend some thematic reorganization (see notes below) and an afternoon with the Wikipedia Manual of Style, going through and fixing the little bits.

Note: This is my first peer review. I apologize in advance if I lead you astray in any areas. Also, I just noticed that someone did a review of sorts on the article's talk page. I don't think I'm duplicating anything written there, but I apologize if this is the case.

1. A picture in the top-right. I'm sure it's hard to find a free image, and WP:F doesn't seem to offer us much help. But an image would really help the page look better.
2. "Michael Gomez known as "the Predator" (born…" Put a comma after Gomez, and another after the close-parentheses.
3. "He now usually fights at lightweight however earlier in his career has also fought in the featherweight and super featherweight divisions." First off, avoid time-specific terms like "now". If he changes his weight class, the article will have to be modified. See if you can phrase it in a better way. Also, word it: "fights in the lightweight class; however, earlier…"
4. "Gomez, who is compared to Johnny Tapia who also lived a turbulant life, is often…" Try: "Gomez, often compared to Johnny Tapia – who also lived a turbulent life, is often…"
5. "…controversial and explosive fights with all of his last 15 fights have ended within the distance." Unclear. Say "…controversial and explosive fights. Each of his last 15 fights have [explain what "the distance" is]."
6. The word turbulent is spelled in a variety of incorrect ways throughout the page.
7. Explain why he was forced to change his name.
8. Try to group your information in each paragraph along logical lines; if the first ¶ is about his family (as suggested by the first sentence), then the basic info about his family should be in that ¶, not the second.
9. Firstly is frequently less useful than first (as in Background ¶ 2).
10. If two items are in the same sentence ("After they moved to England, the eyesight of Gomez's father…") they really ought to have something to do with each other or at least be related in scope or concept. That sentence is very puzzling, despite the fact it conveys the information itself plainly enough. (As it's worded now, it seems to suggest that the two things have something to do with each other.)
11. The bit about him being a truant and living in children's homes (add the s) should be sourced.
12. "Gomez began training…" is a big run-on sentence. Break it up into two sentences.
13. The info about his fighting style interrupts the flow of that first section. Maybe you could group Some of the paragraphs there into an "Early career" section. When discussing his style, it's best to explain what other people have said about it, rather than putting forth generalizations (even if they seem obvious to you – or indeed to every spectator in the world).
14. In general, a number of the paragraphs and sentences are inserted seemingly at random. For example, the Background section has a ¶ about his style, and then immediately goes into an overview of his career itself. The next ¶ is about a murder charge. A biography page ought to move chronologically – start with info on his family (Background), then move to 'Early career'. (You could incorporate the "Debut as a professional" info into such a section.) Some of this is done already; the "Title fights" section is especially well-organized. But it seems to me that something as significant as a trial for murder deserves its own section.
15. Is Alison the mother of his three children? If not, who is/are? What's Alison's last name? More info on how they met would be good.

Rather than go through and pinpoint every item which catches my eye, I'll end my review here. Good luck with the article and let me know if you have any questions. — Scartol · Talk 01:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)