Talk:Randall Cunningham II/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: ChrisGualtieri (talk · contribs) 17:29, 1 January 2014 (UTC) I'll take this. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:29, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article Checklist

Well-written -the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct; and it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
Verifiable with no original research: it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline; it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines; and it contains no original research.
Broad in its coverage: it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
Illustrated, if possible, by images: images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Disambig links:OK
External links:OK
Reference check: 3 issues

Booker T. Washington heads to Las Vegas to square off against Bishop Gorman (info) [miamiherald.com] - Expiring link, please archive.
Late touchdowns lead Booker T. Washington past Bishop Gorman in Las Vegas (info) [miamiherald.com] - Expiring link, please archive this one as well.
Cunningham resigns as Silverado aide (info) [nevadapreps.com] - Removes www and changes path.

Comments: Alright, time for another review. This one looks fairly good at first impression, but if you don't mind, I'm going to be a bit nitpicky. The lead looks fine. Though there is no picture, not even a fair use claim, which makes it rather difficult to identify the subject for any readers. Please consider adding one. The parents section of the infobox also misses his mother's name. For the career, we skip right over the early life which is a bit of a concern for me given the fact we do not even know the age of the subject or where he is born. Some of the text's prose also reads awkwardly. "However, in August..." Why is "however" needed here? It works better to just restructure the sentence. Now, I don't understand NIAA rules, you'll need to explain why he was required to sit out his sophomore year in football and track. Just stating so really doesn't help me understand "why". The next sentence has little context "Then, he backed up Anu Solomon as a junior." who is Anu Solomon, a school, a person, the link's red, but I don't get it or why it is mentioned at all. Instead of TDs, you should use the full term. Is it relevant to have his dash speed "laser-timed"? Of curious note is the USA Today prediction of Cunningham's possible favorites... this is just speculation and shouldn't be included.

See WP:NFCC regarding image.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:59, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mother added.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:59, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Birth date and birth place missing. We know that as of December 28, 1995, his mother's due date was December 31 in Las Vegas, according to this source. I'll have to contact some Vegas and/or Philly libraries to see when Randall Sr. and Felicity had their first child. It was probably in the Vegas and/or Philly newspapers, but only a local could accesss it for us.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:59, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- P.S. I have also left notes at WT:NFL and WT:CFB.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:25, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Added via WP:Highbeam. A Thursday, January 5, 1996 article refers to the birth being the previous Wednesday, which was January 3, 1996. I added it into the infobox. You guys can incorporate into prose if wished.--GrapedApe (talk) 13:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
He is still living his early life. All the content starting from his age 13-14 stuff is early life.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:05, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
However removed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:58, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
NIAA rule explained.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:58, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Solomon clarified--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
touchdown in place of TD.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:08, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
laser-timed is very different from hand-timed. So we make a note of it.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:08, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think the USA Today prediction is O.K. according to "Predictions, speculation, forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included, though editors should be aware of creating undue bias to any specific point-of-view." stated at WP:CRYSTAL.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:19, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The section for his senior season is just written awkwardly. I can't pick out much of a reason why, but the descriptions and word flow was a bit disorienting. The infobox here also contains that averaging of height and weight from Scout and Rival, why? Though it also has no sources listed. Another issue for me.

Until he has and official height and weight that is published in reliable sources, such as a college football team measurements, those are the best height and weights to use.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:20, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For track, I don't care what his father's best high jump was... how's it relevant? Again some wording and prose choices get in the way here, but nothing too bad. I believe it is "Well-known" not "well known" because its not an adverb. Also, the next thing to stand out is the fact his brother died at the age of 2 in the family hot tub... why is this really important to bring up on the biography page? Personally, this seems like a little unusual and not really suitable, it came from a one line response that probably was not the best inclusion on an ESPN article and certainly something I wouldn't expect to see on Cunningham's bio. Its not really relevant to him, personally, and its improper weight. I'll place this on hold. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:16, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- It is common to compare athletes to similar athletes. It is sometimes even requested in reviews like this. His father is the most relevant notable comparable to use as a measuring stick at this point in his career.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:18, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I have eliminated the reference to the hot tub death.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:22, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Tony left a message on WT:NFL requesting information on the time and place of Cunningham's birth. Based on an article I found from HighBeam, it appears the baby was due on Sunday December 31, and was born on Thursday, which contradicts the article from HighBeam currently cited. See this as compared to this. The former says Thursday morning, the latter says Wednesday night. FWIW. Go Phightins! 14:53, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update, many of the issues are being resolved, thank you for doing it so quickly. Whenever I question something and a reasonable explaination or need is given, that is more to fix my own ignorance of the definition or the matter. Like the NIAA rules, I doubt many people unfamiliar with the topic would understand it. For laser-timed, the explanation here is more for my own understanding and a test to see if its really important or relevant. Thank you for all the work so far. Just let me know once you can address the rest. I'd really prefer if we can remove the part about the death of his brother, those details may be public, but I do not think it adds to the article or was of anything related to Cunningham's doing. Tragedy, need not always be cited or included just because it is sourced and the family most certainly would not want this on Wikipedia. For that reason, I believe BLP policy on this matter warrants its removal. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 14:58, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All the issues and questions have been resolved. While I do not like the matter of the brother's death being present, it is verifiable and not done an intrusive way. A good compromise given the situation. The details on the birth date do clarify and properly address an ambiguity in reliable sources, but it has been handled in a proper way. I'm going to pass this because I see no reason not to. Passed. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:19, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]