Talk:SummerSlam (2004)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee SummerSlam (2004) was a Sports and recreation good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
August 1, 2008 Good article nominee Not listed

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:SummerSlam (2004)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.


  • "featured talent" Can you use a word other than 'talent'? It sounds a bit tabloidesque.
  • "At, Vengeance, Benoit" are there meant to be that many commas?
  • "On the 5 August edition of SmackDown!, as JBL called out The Undertaker, a midget wrestler, dressed as The Undertaker, came out and began imitating the real Undertaker. The real Undertaker came out shortly afterwards and attacked JBL" I had to reread this a few times to figure out that it meant. Can you make it a bit more explicit? At first glance it reads as if the midget is the real Undertaker.
  • "to give him the title or pay the price" "pay the price" should probably be in quotes
  • The article really needs a copyedit, there's a lot of phrases that probably shouldn't be used, "only to reveal" etc.
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  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):
  7. Overall:
    The article really falls down on the prose criteria, it's just not very well written. Recommend seeking a copyedit or a peer review. naerii 15:10, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
How does is qualify for quick-fail, and not just on-hold? -- iMatthew T.C.
On hold per request on my talk page. naerii 12:54, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
I've completed a copyedit of the entire article. Cheers, -- iMatthew T.C. 14:03, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm requesting a second opinion as I still don't think it's written all that well but am completely unable to adequately articulate my concerns. naerii 19:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Compare it to other professional wrestling event articles. For GA prose doesn't need to be "brilliant", and the prose here is OK. Although the description of feuds is meant to show how the event fits in the story arc, this could be more direct here. An article on a pay-per-view event ought to say something about viewers, revenue and reception, though. Gimmetrow 02:38, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Failing this as Gimmetrow brings up some good points (which hadn't occured to me at all!) which haven't been responded to or addressed. naerii 15:49, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:SummerSlam (2003) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:15, 29 August 2013 (UTC)