Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Frank McGee (ice hockey)/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 8 August 2023 [1].

Frank McGee (ice hockey)

[edit]
Nominator(s): Kaiser matias (talk) 16:32, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A second attempt here. The previous nomination was withdrawn to work on prose, and after work by the WP:GOCE, I hope it's good to go now. I'm going to ping both @ChrisTheDude and Gog the Mild: as they were good enough to go through the first nomination, and if they're willing I would appreciate a second look from them. Kaiser matias (talk) 16:32, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
  • What value is the health form image believed to provide? It's not particularly legible at this size
It confirms details relating to his enlistment, but based on your note about legibility and uncertainty to copyright status (from below) I've removed it.
  • Don't use fixed px size
Fixed
  • Suggest adding alt text
Done
  • File:Silver7.jpg: what is the author's date of death?
1961, so I removed that tag
Since this is hosted on Commons, it does still need a tag for country of origin. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:07, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is fixed, but please let me know if I'm missing something. Image licensing tags always confuse me. Kaiser matias (talk) 14:34, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Uncertain, so based on this and above it's removed.
That should clear up all concerns here, thanks for reviewing everything. Kaiser matias (talk) 00:38, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport from Chris

[edit]
  • "After his hockey career ended, McGee worked with the Department of Indian Affairs" - unless this is standard Canadian English, I would change it to "worked for" or "worked in", as current wording makes it sound like he didn't actually work for the dept but just collaborated with them
  • "McGee had a passion for sports; he participated in ice hockey, rugby football, lacrosse, and rowing.[8] McGee played" => "McGee had a passion for sports; he participated in ice hockey, rugby football, lacrosse, and rowing.[8] He played" (avoid starting two consecutive sentences with his name)
  • Link ice hockey on first use in body
  • "McGee's rise in the civil service was aided in part due to" => "McGee's rise in the civil service was aided in part by"
  • "However, he excelled on the ice" => "He excelled on the ice, however"
  • "for lead goalscorer for most during the challenge games" => "for lead goalscorer during the challenge games"
  • "McGee's brother Jim died in a horse-riding accident" - no need to relink Jim
  • Think that's it from me! :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:28, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Great thanks for taking a second look. Addressed everything up here, but if you see anything more just let me know. Kaiser matias (talk) 01:56, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments from Sportsfan77777

[edit]

I'll leave comments in a week or so. Intend to support. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 19:32, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sportsfan77777. I hate to seem to harass you, but this one is going to be timing out vey soon unless it gets some further attention. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:54, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I said when I would do the review. You've got a problem with that? Sportsfan77777 (talk) 06:30, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • Add a footnote to briefly explain what a rover is.
Done
  • a lieutenant in the Canadian Army ===>>> and later became a lieutenant in the Canadian Army.
Done

Personal life

Done
  • Should "clerk" be capitalized?
The article for the position doesn't capitalize it, so I'll follow that lead.
  • "a role considered to be the top civil servant position" <<<=== perhaps just "the top civil servant position". I assume it's not ambiguous (?), and removing "considered" would make it seem more official and important (it is official and important, right?)
Agreed, and done
  • briefly explain what "Father of Confederation" means
Done
  • instead of "and was assassinated", "which led to his assassination" (otherwise, it seems ambiguous)
The circumstances of his assassination aren't directly tied to his role in Confederation, though it is related. I've moved that note to a separate clause though, which should help I think.
  • McGee was one of nine children born to John Joseph McGee and Elizabeth Helen McGee (née Crotty). <<<=== Suggest making this the second sentence of the first paragraph (and starting with "He was"). The main issue is introducing his father twice.
Done
  • Suggest reducing the number of paragraphs from four to two (perhaps combine the first three, or combine the first two and the last two). It doesn't seem like they would be too long if combined, and they're kind of short as is.
Done
  • his father, a clerk of the Privy Council, ===>>> rephrase to "his father as a clerk of the Privy Council," to avoid sounding like you're introducing him again
Done

Hockey career

  • McGee was the youngest member of the team and was 5 ft 6 in (1.68 m) tall, small for hockey players of the era <<<=== For better flow, suggest "and at a height of just 5 ft 6 in (1.68 m) was small for hockey players of the era"
Done
  • "and was considered to have an ideal body type" ===>>> "which was considered to be an ideal body type" (to avoid an extra "and")
Done
  • "second overall in the league." ===>>> suggest "second in the league behind Russell Bowie". (unclear what "overall" adds to the sentence?)
Done
  • Before the last sentence of that paragraph, make a note that they won the right to play for the Stanley Cup (how? and against who?)
I tried to clear this up, let me know if it makes sense.
  • You need to say that the team won the Stanley Cup too.
Done
  • After a brief retirement from the sport, <<<=== remind the reader that this is related to his job. As is, it sounds like it's related to his family wanting him to retire because of the potential danger.
Done
  • "in the league, with 17 goals each" ===>>> just "in the league with 17 goals"
Done
  • Suggest combining the 1904-05 season paragraph with the next paragraph on the challenge games from that season
Done
  • Stanley Cup hockey game ===>>> Stanley Cup game ("hockey" isn't necessary as a qualifier)
Done
  • "with Ottawa's 23 goals setting a record" ===>>> "and Ottawa's 23 goals also set a record"
Done
  • "it was learned that McGee" <<<=== learned by who? McGee or everyone else?
Changed to disclosed

Legacy

  • described McGee ===>>> "described him as" (one too many "McGee"s)
Done
  • both league and challenge ===>>> including both league and challenge
Done
  • ever scored in a single Cup challenge match <<<=== suggest "game". "match" sounds like "series"
Done
  • same comment on the next sentence
Done

First World War

  • Okay.

Career statistics

  • Suggest writing out "St-Cup totals" as "Stanley Cup totals"
This is a convention of the tables used, and I find it's abbreviation isn't too much of an issue, honestly.

References

  • In "Frank McGee Biography", "biography" shouldn't be capitalized. It should also be something more like "Frank McGee biography, HHoF".
Done
  • "Bibliography" isn't the right way to title the section because it's confusing as to whether it refers to the sources (which it does) or McGee's own works (which it isn't). Suggest calling it "Sources".
Done

Looks good, nothing major. The biggest comment is probably the context on the Stanley Cup. It's a short article, so I didn't expect too many issues. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 15:51, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I've addressed everything here, but if you have anything else please let me know. Kaiser matias (talk) 00:06, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A few more small comments:

  • In the lead, "Government" in "Government of Canada" probably shouldn't be capitalized.
Changed
  • On "A well-known player of his era, and known as a prolific scorer" <<<=== suggest something other than "well-known" so that "known" doesn't appear twice, or just combine to "A well-known player of his era for his prolific scoring"
Changed
  • On the "despite risking total blindness" comment brought up by SchroCat, perhaps it is not total blindness he is risking specifically, but rather he would have a greater risk for any kind of hockey injury because he is already blind in one eye.
I changed it to "one good eye". What do you and @SchroCat: think of that? Open to further suggestions of course. Kaiser matias (talk) 23:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support, regardless. Excellent work! Sportsfan77777 (talk) 20:18, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments, I really do appreciate it. Kaiser matias (talk) 23:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment

[edit]

More than four weeks in and just the single general support. Unless this nomination makes significant further progress towards a consensus to promote over the next two or three days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:27, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting that a different FAC coordinator handle this nomination and Gog cease all involvement. Gog recused coordinator duties to review on the previous nomination and now they're harassing me as a coordinator. Complete hypocrisy of "recusing". Sportsfan77777 (talk) 06:28, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sportsfan77777, I don't think this is harassment, nor does recusing on one FAC mean a co-ord has to recuse on all subsequent ones. And I advise against accusing any of the co-ords of hypocrisy when they're just doing their job. - SchroCat (talk)
Sportsfan77777, please read WP:AGF and WP:NOPA. I carry out this role as a volunteer, for "fun", and do not appreciate that sort of attack. If you are unhappy with anything I do, you can let me know without calling me a hypocrite. For my information, if I am considering archiving one of your FAC nominations in the future, would you prefer that I simply do so, without giving you and any prospective reviewers a few days' notice? Gog the Mild (talk) 12:51, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, I don't mean to suggest you are a hypocrite. The process is at fault for allowing this kind of "un-recusing". Sportsfan77777 (talk) 20:30, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a question of giving notice. You shouldn't be trying to archive the nomination at all. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 20:30, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sportsfan77777, the FAC instructions are very brief, but a key part is that starting "A nomination will be removed from the list and archived if, in the judgment of the coordinators ..." One of the less pleasant parts of my role as a coordinator is having to make those judgements, it is not something I enjoy. If you feel strongly, perhaps you could start a discussion on the FAC talk page? I would shed few tears if the requirement were removed. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:14, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, nominations that have been around several weeks and don't appear to be heading for consensus to promote are archived as matter of course to help ensure the list doesn't get too long and unwieldy. There is no shame in this for the nominator, and there's no limit to how many times an article may be re-nominated at FAC if it doesn't achieve consensus to promote the first time round. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:24, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(outdent) While this is my nomination, I didn't want to comment here, but feel I should make a few quick remarks: I appreciate any and all reviews, and also am familiar enough with the FAC process to not be worried if a nomination is archived due to lack of action. While I of course would not want that, I do understand it happens. Kaiser matias (talk) 23:06, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SC

[edit]
Lead
  • "A legendary player of his era": legendary is a MOS:PEACOCK term that shouldn't be there
Changed to "well-known"
Personal life
  • "awarded the Military Cross for his efforts": "for his efforts" seems a bit weak (and what else was it going to be awarded for?) Just delete the last three words.
Done
  • "quitting" isn't encyclopaedic: "giving up" would be less jarring
Done
Hockey career
  • "1899–1900 season. During that season": two "seasons" in quick succession jars a bit. "During that period" or "At that time" would work better
Doen
  • "However": delete. It's not great at the start of a sentence in most cases, particularly here
Done
  • "was known to be strong and muscular, and which was considered to be an ideal body type for the sport": I'm struggling with "and which was": it's grammatically poor and makes no sense.
Deleted the "and", which should help clarify things.
  • "with Ottawa's 23 goals also set a record": again, grammatically wrong
Should have been "setting a record" as per comments from earlier in the review, but wasn't properly adjusted. This is fixed now.
  • "1906 season, but returned to the team midway through the season.[37] Appearing in seven of the ten regular season": I think some variety in terminology would be best here
I've changed up two of the "season" uses here, so it should be a little better.
  • "Historian Paul Kitchen": you've already introduced and full named him above. You can just call him "Kitchen" here
Done
Legacy
  • "Only Russell Bowie": making a comparison to someone many people won't have heard of isn't the best way to demonstrate his ability.
I clarified it's only one other player now.
  • "14 goals against Dawson City, he holds": hopefully you'll take out the Bowie reference in the preceding sentence, because "he holds" could be misconstrued as meaning Bowie, not McGee
Changed "he" to "McGee" so it should be clear.
First World War
  • 'with either eye."[2]': should be 'with either eye".[2]', per WP:LQ

""Fixed

Notes
  • "and all players would then skate to the other end": All players? Including the goaltender?
Would "opposing players" work here?
Yep., much better. - SchroCat (talk) 09:07, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Refs
  • "Ref 42 is "Frank McGee biography, Hockey Hall of Fame"; Ref 47 is "Francis 'Frank' McGee": it would probably benefit from being consistent by making it "Francis 'Frank' McGee, Ottawa Sports Hall of Fame"
Done

I hope these help. I'm close to opposing on this at the moment, but we'll see what happens with these comments and another readthrough. - SchroCat (talk) 11:00, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. I've addressed what you noted here, and if you have more please let me know. Hopefully can swing your opinion here. Kaiser matias (talk) 16:34, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  • "(also known as the Silver Seven)": Not sure we need that in the lead. It's not a repeated term in the lead and this is an article about McGee, not the club. Having said that, you don't make the same connection in the rest of the article, the next references in the text are "ending the Silver Seven's three-year reign" and the picture caption. Best to include the nickname further up in the body – probably on the first mention of the club.
I added a mention there. The team is far more well-known as "Silver Seven" so it would be good to keep that there.
  • "two years of play due to the injury" -- > "two years of play because of the injury" (you have "due to" repeated in close succession)
Done
Personal life
  • "McGee was one of nine": -- > "He was one..." (named in the previous sentence)
Done
  • "Elizabeth Helen McGee (née Crotty)": -- > "Elizabeth Helen (née Crotty)"
Done
Hockey career
  • "despite risking total blindness": was this a common occurrence of the time? I'm presuming they played without the protection common today, but it still comes across slightly oddly.
I wouldn't say it was common, but injuries to the face did happen. The concern was that he was already blind in one eye, which happened directly from the sport, so the chances of it happening again were not impossible. Not sure how to convey that here, but if you have any thought I'm happy to incorporate it.
It's difficult to know what to say (if anything), as I don't know what the sources say. If it's possible, something like "despite risking blindness from an injury to his other eye". I know it may sound like stating the obvious, but at the moment it reads like playing hockey causes blindness. - SchroCat (talk) 15:47, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have Jenish available on hand (though can have it ready in 24-48 hours if need be), but the McKinley ref (#17) says: "...putting his remaining eye at considerable risk, given the propensity for stick-swinging melees in the early sport, he came back to play hockey." Kaiser matias (talk) 23:11, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 1903, McGee decided to return": there are four uses of "McGee" in this paragraph: you only need the first and last
Fixed
  • "but it was noteworthy that McGee only scored one goal in that game": -- >"but it was noteworthy that and McGee only scored one goal in that game"
Fixed

"After the first game, the Nuggets' manager": -- > "After the game, the Nuggets' manager"

Fixed
First World War
  • "known how McGee was allowed": Change McGee to "he"
Fixed
  • "McGee was initially assigned": there are three uses of "McGee" in this paragraph: you only need the first
Fixed
  • "McGee was later": again, just "he" will suffice
Fixed

Reading much better now, and I think this extra polish will help. - SchroCat (talk) 09:07, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, all these addressed, with one note for you above there. Kaiser matias (talk) 16:34, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review, I definitely think the article is in better shape for it. And I agree, a very interesting figure, for more than one reason. Kaiser matias (talk) 23:44, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Tim riley

[edit]

Booking a slot. My friend and colleague SchroCat has drawn this review to my attention and I'll be adding my two penn'orth shortly. Tim riley talk 16:04, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Only one suggested tweak from me: in "He was given the option to transfer to a less-active post" I don't think we want the hyphen. Otherwise the prose is clear and pleasing to read, the sourcing looks wide and thorough, the text seems comprehensive and impartial, and the illustrations are, I'd guess, as good as possible given the period. I'm happy to add my support. Tim riley talk 17:02, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Great thanks for reviewing, and hyphen removed. Kaiser matias (talk) 02:47, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport from UC

[edit]

Saving a space, though it might be next week before I can properly get to this. On a quick read, I've got a few fairly minor points I'd like to see addressed, but it's certainly almost at the line for me. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 21:10, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A bit quicker than I thought. Nothing too difficult here, I hope. A tightly-written piece of work. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 03:22, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As expected, a fairly straightforward support from me. What's left is far too minor to affect the passage of what I believe to be an excellent article. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 15:35, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note a: as someone with no knowledge of ice hockey, I think I'm the target audience for this explanation, but it's quite a long way over my head. In particular, I'm not sure what would often play on both ends of the ice means.
It refers to doing both offence and defence. I've updated the wording to explicitly use those terms for clarity.
  • the top civil servant position reads as a little vague and informal: "the head of the Canadian Civil Service"; "Canada's most senior civil servant" or similar?
Done
  • Which football did McGee play for Ottowa?
Rugby football, as noted before, and now noted here.
Generally called Rugby in the UK; is that term used in Canada, and if so, should we simply say that at least on second mention plus? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 15:35, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • disputes among top-level hockey in Canada: not sure this works with a singular abstract noun: top-level hockey teams or hockey players?
I've added the qualifier "teams"
  • appointed Temporary Lieutenant: as this title isn't in apposition with his name, should be lc (and probably "appointed as a...", "...to the post of..." or similar).
The source (Reddick) writes it with upper-case ("...he was appointed Temporary Lieutenant, 21st Battalion."). I'm not familiar enough with Canadian military ranks to say whether that was a mistake or not.
  • when the armoured car he was driving was blown into a ditch by a shell explosion. he was sent back to England on December: either capitalise he or replace the full stop with a colon.
Fixed
  • He was given the option to transfer to a less active post in Le Havre: do we know what sort of job this was: staff work, managing logistics...?
Yes, clerical. This has been noted.
  • Hyphenate less-active as a compound modifier. I realise that I'm dissenting from User:Tim riley here: our MOS (MOS:HYPHEN) makes an exception for regularly formed comparatives ending in -ly, but this isn't one of those.
I'll split the difference and remove the phrasing with the above-noted "clerical".
  • McGee was killed in action on September 16, 1916, near Courcelette, France; his body was never recovered. An artillery shell landed on or beside him and he was killed instantly. : suggest moving this bit around to be chronological: McGee was killed in action on September 16, 1916, near Courcelette, France. An artillery shell landed on or beside him and he was killed instantly; his body was never recovered.
Done
  • Harper 2013: we wouldn't normally capitalise the midstream in title case.
Done
  • D'Arcy 1992: we would normally capitalise its.
Done
  • Clarke 2011: capitalise McGee per our usage.
Before I do so, I'll note that this was a typo included in the original article.
  • Ottawans in casualties, Lt. Frank McGee's Death Was Officially Announced Saturday: capitalise casualties.
Done
  • Lieut. Frank McGee Heroic Unto Death: Former Ottawa Hockey Idol inspired His Men Killed At Coucellete: capitalise inspired but decap unto and at.
  • John Jos. McGee Died Last Night At Age 81 Years: decap at
Done
  • Frank McGee biography,: capitalise biography
Done
  • Houston 1992: we should be consistent here on whether newspaper titles use sentence or title case (rather than simply following what the original publication did: many will have used all-caps, which we certainly shouldn't!)
What do you suggest modifying here? The heading as it stands is what the article has, but happy to adjust to fit MOS.
Thanks for your review, I believe everything here is addressed, with two comments on titles noted above. Kaiser matias (talk) 23:42, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On a few matters above: our MOS (MOS:CONFORM) would have us change punctuation, capitalisation and any other features that don't affect the meaning or reading aloud of a quotation to fit Wikipedia's MOS. If it's really important to give it exactly as written (for instance, if the capitalisation of Mcgee was somehow important), use {{sic}}UndercoverClassicist (talk) 08:53, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the clarification, that really helps. And thanks for supporting as well. Kaiser matias (talk) 16:33, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

[edit]

Reviewing this version, spot-check only upon request. Is Hockey Hall of Fame Book of Players a commonly cited source? Do "Free Kicks", The Globe, Toronto, Ontario, September 12, 1900, "Lieut. Frank McGee Heroic unto Death: Former Ottawa Hockey Idol Inspired His Men Killed at Coucellete", The Globe, Toronto, Ontario, November 11, 1916, "Ottawans in Casualties, Lt. Frank McGee's Death Was Officially Announced Saturday", Ottawa Citizen, Ottawa, Ontario, September 25, 1916 and "John Jos. McGee Died Last Night At Age 81 Years", Ottawa Citizen, Ottawa, Ontario, April 11, 1927, "Sad Death of Ottawa's Captain", The Globe, Toronto, Ontario, May 15, 1904 have a byline?

Thanks for the review. The Hockey Hall of Fame Book of Players is authorized by the Hall of Fame itself, and would be reliable. For the newspaper articles you mention, no bylines are provided. Kaiser matias (talk) 22:58, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK, then. With the caveats regarding not knowing most sources and no spotcheck. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 19:17, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Frank_McGee_(ice_hockey)/archive2&oldid=1169417676"