Talk:Cal Ripken Sr./GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: CutOffTies (talk · contribs) 03:35, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I will be reviewing this article.

Initial comments

• 0 dab links , good.

• The image does not contain alt text or a caption. I actually just nominated the image for deletion since according to the information on flickr, it does not have the right CC license and should not be on Wikimedia commons. There are other obvious problems on Flickr, most notably saying the image was taken ten years after Sr died.

• That's fine. The image was already there, but if it should not be in commons, delete it by all means. Oriolesfan8 (talk) 23:05, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Given that it is very likely this image will be deleted from commons, I suggest trying to find an image you can use as low resolution per the Non-Free Content guidelines. Here is an example for a deceased actress.

• For the Rosenfeld book, is there a reason the reference format as explained in WP:CITESHORT was not used?

• There is: ignorance. I corrected this problem. Oriolesfan8 (talk) 23:05, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks. Though I actually meant having a "notes" section as a footnote and the "references" section as a bibliography. A better example is here. Though this is just an optimal method - leaving as is is fine for a Good Article. If you ever want to go for Featured Article, I think you'll need to change it.

• Given the cautionary comments on the Find a Grave template, can you please justify having the link?

• Nope. Again, that was already there, but I have removed it. Oriolesfan8 (talk) 23:05, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks.

• Note that Baltimore Sun articles I think after like 1992 are found on the Sun's website via a quick google of the article title. They have a unusually open archive for a newspaper site. Here is the Strauss article that was referenced. Where does it verify the dubious assertion that Sr. was often seen smoking in the dugout?

• Replaced with a verified anecdote that serves the same purpose. Oriolesfan8 (talk) 23:05, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks. Since the full article is available online, it is best to include that in the reference rather than an abstract on proquest. The same goes for the other Sun articles you have as references.

• Do you think perhaps there is too much info about the Vi kidnapping, given that Sr had been dead well over a decade?

• I don't think so, as Vi was Ripken's wife. The fact that he has been dead so long does not diminish her notability in regards to his life; the fact that he has been dead since 1999 should make no difference. If this bothers you enough, though, I could reduce it. Oriolesfan8 (talk) 23:05, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • I do think it is a bit of excessive detail and both incidents that could be shortened. A follow-up about the reward Jr posted a year later helps puts it in the family context and provides an update.

More to follow. Overall, article looks pretty good. Please reply with any comments. Thank you. -- --CutOffTies (talk) 03:55, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Sections

I'm going to comment by section. Most of these are just suggestions that are not part of the assessment, but are for general improvement of the article; take what you want from them. I will do the assessment in a few days. If any of my comments require clarification, please let me know.

Overall

You have some great content and use a variety of sources, but I encourage you to dig around for some more references. There should be some fairly accessible Sun, Post, Sports Illustrated articles that will improve the article and fulfill the "broad" criteria of GA. A search through Google Newspaper archives can be helpful as well.

Lead

Excellent summary per the guidelines for the lead. I like that it isn't too long. In the grand scheme of a worldwide encyclopedia, this isn't a highly notable subject and it doesn't warrant too long of a lead.

My only suggestion is to take out the height and weight since I don't see the significance.

Early life

I don't see the need for "the position of" Catcher. I think "was a catcher" is fine. If someone doesn't know what catcher means they can click on the link.

For soccer, how old was he when he played and coached? "As a youth" is not specific enough. Nice fact though.

A sentence about his parents and/or family background would be nice, if possible.

Minor league playing career

I don't think "signed as a player" is necessary since the section head says player, and at that point they wouldn't have signed him as anything else.

There are too many statistics and not enough meaningful summaries. If you're going to have the statistics, add more detail to explain the significance (ex. He "excelled" with a .400 batting average, "improved with..." "regressed...".

"for obvious reasons" not necessary.

I like the transition from foul tips injuries to exploring coaching career. If possible something about his decision to retire as a player would be good.

Minor league managerial career

Listing of players he mentored is good.

Like the driving / fixing bus.

Like the Jr. quotes too. Nice section

Coaching

suggest "last members of the team to leave following games" to "last members of the team to leave after games" or something like that. following is a bit awkward.

speaking of, that is a nice way to illustrate his contribution as a coach but I'd like more. There's probably something out there about hitting those fungos before the game (I remember seeing that at 33rd), a quote from someone else (Earl?) about his importance to the organization.

suggest changing "quite a bit" to something more formal

Managing

Excellent first paragraph. The quote from Jr. about the 1 game in '85 he managed is great.

2nd paragraph is very good too, nice summary and like the part about the inning streak. I didn't know Ron Washington was an Oriole.

3rd para also good.

Final years

Nice Hemond quote.

Is there any explanations behind the Orioles letting him go after '92, and why Sr. didn't accept the other position?

Legacy

can remove today "He is remembered today"

Is the being tough and lunkhead part best for the legacy or could it be moved to the coaching section?

Great Boswell quote.

Personal life

IMO not necessarily to say Vi is "still alive today". The part about the kidnapping and lack of death details asserts that.

A street name in Aberdeen is not helpful. A description of the type of neighborhood/house (or Aberdeen in general) would be.

How did he support Hooper? An endorsement, attendance at rallies?

External links

Something tying Sr. to the foundation should be included in the article, otherwise remove it from links.

Checklist

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Prose is well-written overall in summary style. I think a Feature Article review may say it relies too much on quotes but that is not an issue here.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   The clear facts are well referenced from a variety of reliable sources. The part stating that Cal Sr. didn't take the job offered him after the '92 season because he was removed from third base coach is a bit of a gray area. It is certainly implied in the Steadman article that this is the case but it is not stated explicitly. You may want to rephrase or find another source. Again, it may be an issue if you decide to go for a FA.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The article does a nice job providing an overview of his early life (though the soccer thing can be cleared up - what kind of team was it? amateur?), professional life and why he is notable.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Solid tone throughout, no pov. Well referenced.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Article is very stable - almost no vandalism and no edit wars that I can see.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   The one image used turned out to be fine after I thought it would be deleted. Understandably it is difficult to get more images on subject. Since it is in infobox no caption needed

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: Pass

Nice job, congratulations. Let's Go O's. -- --CutOffTies (talk) 08:42, 9 August 2014 (UTC)