Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/SummerSlam (2003): Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 00:38, 11 August 2008

SummerSlam (2003)

Nominator(s): S_RX''

Featured article candidates/SummerSlam (2003)

I'm nominating this article for featured article because I feel this is one professional wrestling article that meets the FA criteria and addresses many concerns brought up in previous FAC's of professional wresting articles, such as jargon and reliable sources. This article fully explains terms and avoids jargon, it also contains only reliable sources. This articles has been peer reviewed for over 2 weeks, and has been reviewed by FAC reviewers who have made suggestions and comments, which have been fixed. Any concerns raised here, however, will be addressed. --S_RX 00:38, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Issues resolved, Ealdgyth - Talk 21:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~What makes http://prowrestlinghistory.com/ a reliable source? Has anything new turned up from the Peer Review?~~
- I thought I removed it during the peer review, but I removed it now, as the other source backs it up.--S_RX 14:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
From the peer review, http://www.pwtorch.com/artman/publish/ is a published magazine, and thus would be reliable as a source for non-contentious information about wrestling (I wouldn't necessarily consider it reliable for most BLP issues not related to wrestling, etc)
- Yeah, it is mostly only about results anyways.--S_RX 14:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I was mainly putting this in for the paper trail... Ealdgyth - Talk 14:40, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~What makes http://www.411mania.com/ a reliable source?~~
- Well does their about us section proves it reliability? They also have established writers and don't just get their info from nowhere.--S_RX 14:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - To determine the reliablity of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. It's their reputation for reliabilty that needs to be demonstrated. Please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches for further detailed information. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:40, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - The Sun Star refers to them, here, so does FireFox, so does this Asian news outlet not sure exactly what language it is. Are these enough or is more needed.--S_RX 14:48, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - Hm. Are any of those what we would think of as major news organizations? Or are they just portals for news? The FireFox isn't someone I've ever heard of. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:11, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        I guess not. That link that says FireFox is about news pertaining to Mozilla Firefox (the web browser), released by the company itself. I guess it's not reliable so I removed it, they are backed up by other sources.--S_RX 16:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Current ref 38 (Brock tops Kurt) the publisher is really WWE, not internet archive. IA is just the archive for it, not the original publisher.~~
- Fixed that, and other instances.--S_RX 14:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:09, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Ealdgyth - Thank you, I addressed your references concerns.--S_RX 14:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - The first wrestling FAC without jargon and with further explanations of terms. Hopefully, this FAC will help set a higher standard for wrestling articles, but there are bound to be rough edges due to the new format. Let's see if my comments can help. Giants2008 (17-14) 19:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"It was the sixteenth annual SummerSlam produced by WWE." Sixteenth is normally given as a number (16th), although editors differ on this. It feels like "event" should come after SummerSlam, and "produced by WWE" is already in the previous sentence. Giants2008 (17-14) 19:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I fixed all of that.--S_RX 23:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that the explanation of what pro wrestling is is neccessary to avoid criticism, but you have to admit it's odd that this is longer than any explanation in the lead of the pro wrestling or World Wrestling Entertainment articles. Maybe further explanations could be added to those leads at some point. Giants2008 (17-14) 19:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a new thing that the Pro Wrestling Project just came up with, it will be incorporated into all articles in the near future.--S_RX 23:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Remove comma following "and after the event"?
"The other was a standard match involving four wrestlers from the SmackDown! brand" I don't believe a comma is correct in this form. Either use a colon or semi-colon. Giants2008 (17-14) 19:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed.--S_RX 23:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"This event helped WWE's pay-per-view revenue, which was $6.2 million higher than the previous year's revenue." How about "This event helped WWE increase its pay-per-view revenue by $6.2 million from the previous year" or similar? At least get rid of the redundant second revenue." Giants2008 (17-14) 19:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Reworded with your suggestion.--S_RX 23:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More later. Giants2008 (17-14) 19:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- - I addressed your concerns, thanks!--S_RX 23:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the last batch being short. I'm back with some more comments. Giants2008 (17-14) 17:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Background: "On August 18, 2003, during the episode of Raw before SummerSlam" It sounds like the episode was directly before the PPV. Adding final or six days before will clarify it. Giants2008 (17-14) 17:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Added 6 days.--S_RX 17:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"by competing in a match enclosed by a steel cage formed by metal mash around the ring." There are always going to be rough edges when trying a new format, as I said last time, but this needs help. I'm thinking "in a match where the ring would be enclosed by a steel cage formed by metal mesh." Is the metal mesh part needed? Giants2008 (17-14) 17:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I removed metal mesh, I think steel cage is self explanatory, (I think).--S_RX 17:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comma after July 7, 2003? (In Rob Van Dam vs. Kane. Also not sure the comma after when is needed in next sentence.) Giants2008 (17-14) 17:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed.--S_RX 17:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Sgt. Slaughter (Robert Remus), a WWE official promoted a tag team match..." Comma needed after official. Giants2008 (17-14) 17:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed.--S_RX 17:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Remove comma after "via a SummerSlam advertisement"? Giants2008 (17-14) 17:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed.--S_RX 17:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Event: The link for legitimate doesn't go to the article with wrestling terms, which I've seen used before. Giants2008 (17-14) 17:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed.--S_RX 17:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The comma after "The final scheduled match for Sunday Night Heat doesn't look necessary to me. Giants2008 (17-14) 17:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed.--S_RX 17:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The cruiserweight championship match has three versions of champion used. Try switching the third (currently in "defended the championship") to title. I'm also seeing this later in the article, so try to introduce some variety. Giants2008 (17-14) 17:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I've fixed those instances.--S_RX 17:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"This followed with a cover and a successful pinfall." I think you mean "This was". Also, you may want to mention that the referee had recovered by then, or if a new official came into the ring. Giants2008 (17-14) 17:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed.--S_RX 17:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"The fourth match was Shane McMahon versus Eric Bischoff in a standard wrestling match." Um, fourth match? This is the third match of the PPV and the fifth of the night, including the SNH matches. Giants2008 (17-14) 17:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed.--S_RX 17:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To my eyes, the style does look more encyclopedic now. My main concern is that some of the descriptions of wrestling terminology, although probably required for success here, tend to drag on. This leads to a greater possibility of errors. The steel cage example above is one, and another is in the McMahon-Bischoff match: "the match would be contested in a match". Keep on working out the kinks. I haven't checked the previous items yet, so don't be worried that I haven't struck those. Giants2008 (17-14) 17:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. I'd appreciate any more concerns that I could not address.--S_RX 17:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you say you want more? All right then! I made a couple of cleanup edits and don't remember seeing much else to change. Let's see what I think a day later.

I don't think the No Disqualification rules need to be repeated after Austin's interference.
Main event matches: "though Angle brought him back into the ring. In the ring..." Notice the redundancy at the end.
"Following Rolling Thunder..." Is this okay?
"During this time, Triple H remained inside the chamber, although after Jericho and Michaels were eliminated; Goldberg performed a spear..." This feels odd as a whole. I think it's the semi-colon that's off.
Aftermath: Is the Unforgiven event linked anywhere? If not, add a link here.
Reception: "but that was reduced for SummerSlam (2003)." Get the parentheses out of there.
"rated a 8.5 out of ten stars" Picky, but should it be an?
There are two ugly reference errors (No. 35 and 36).

Otherwise looks okay to my eyes. Giants2008 (17-14) 23:07, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, I wanted more and I fixed all your final comments for the FAC. Thanks, hope to get some type of decision from you in the future :)--S_RX 00:45, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My first two suggestions from Reception weren't changed. Was I wrong on these or were they missed? Giants2008 (17-14) 00:38, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: There is currently a discussion here about the infoboxes of pay-per-views. -- iMatthew _T.C. 00:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: At the peer review I was concerned about the readabilty of the article for people like me, with no knowledge whatever of the pro-wrestling scene. I am impressed by the steps that have been taken to counter this concern. I would like now to suggest a few more prose tweaks, in the Preliminary matches section, to cut out repetitions and generally simplify the wording. [User:Brianboulton|Brianboulton]] (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Preliminary matches
1st para
- Suggest you say the main event began [User:Brianboulton|Brianboulton]] (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I stated that it was the "pay-per-view event" and elaborated that Sunday Night Heat was televised and aired on TNN.--S_RX 00:49, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Avoid repetition of the tag team names by: "Throughout the match both teams performed many offensive maneuvers..." etc [User:Brianboulton|Brianboulton]] (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fixed.--S_RX 00:49, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2nd para
- Rewrite and simplify the paragraph as follows: "The following bout was The Undertaker (Mark Calaway) versus A-Train (Mat Bloom) in a standard wrestling match. In the early stages both competitors wrestled inconclusively, before The Undertaker gained the advantage. He attempted to perform a move called the belly-to-belly piledriver, in which..." etc [User:Brianboulton|Brianboulton]] (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Never caught, that, great suggestion.--S_RX 00:49, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3rd para
- This doesn't need to be a new paragraph. Follow on from previous sentence: "A-Train countered the maneuver, in the process..." etc [User:Brianboulton|Brianboulton]] (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - It's not a new paragraph it was just split by the embedded image.--S_RX 00:49, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - I've moved the image up a bit to solve the problem. D.M.N. (talk) 07:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

4th para
- Delete "which" after "arena ramp" [User:Brianboulton|Brianboulton]] (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fixed.--S_RX 00:49, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try and find time over the next few days for some further prose checks. Brianboulton (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, I would appreciate any further comments.S_RX 00:49, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comments: I have extended my comments to cover the "main event matches" section. Note: I have done a fair bit of additional copyediting in this section, to overcome some minor prose lapses. [User:Brianboulton|Brianboulton]] (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1st para: In the article as a whole I beleive a good job has been done in tanslating wrestling jargon into plain English, without over-reliance on links. Sometimes, however, wrestling holds are too complicated to allow for verbal description; I think that this the case with the cloverleaf hold, and also the crossface. I couldn't make anything of your tortured descriptions - it's not your fault. So in these two cases, I'm going to suggest you ditch the explanations, relying on the links for those who have to know the gory details, and simply saying: "During the encounter Guerrero a complicated cloverleaf submission hold on Tajiri, while Benoit employed an equally intricate crossface submission hold on Rhyno. Afterwards..." etc. The remaining hold descriptions in the section should stay, as they can more readily be visualised by non wrestling fans. [User:Brianboulton|Brianboulton]] (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- - That is true. Fixed.--S_RX 18:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
2nd para
- "...falls down or backwards" - what does this mean? Is the "or" superfluous? [User:Brianboulton|Brianboulton]] (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I reworded that.--S_RX 18:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "During this encounter, Lesnar countered..." This is awkward. How about: "During this tussle, Lesnar countered..."? [User:Brianboulton|Brianboulton]] (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fixed.--S_RX 18:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Some additional wording suggested for clarification: "As a result of the referee having been knocked down, and therefore unable to adjudicate, Lesnar could not..." etc. [User:Brianboulton|Brianboulton]] (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fixed.--S_RX 18:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
3rd para
- Instead of "Van Dam would then attempt..." try "Van Dam then attempted..." [User:Brianboulton|Brianboulton]] (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fixed.--S_RX 18:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Van Dam's name after the belly-to-belly piledriver - it's not necessary there. [User:Brianboulton|Brianboulton]] (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fixed.--S_RX 18:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
4th para
- "The Elimination Chamber match for the Rab..." What's the Rab? [User:Brianboulton|Brianboulton]] (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Woops, typo.--S_RX 18:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- In this article, which is about a male event, I don't think you have to say "his or her"
  - True. Fixed.--S_RX 18:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You say "Triple-H remained in his chamber thoughout the match", but in the same sentence you say: "...in the process pushing him (Triple-H) out of his chamber". This seems inconsistent. [User:Brianboulton|Brianboulton]] (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fixed that.--S_RX 18:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to cover the remaining sections soon. Brianboulton (talk) 18:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the copyedit and I appreciate the review and look forward to additional comments :)S_RX 18:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A few last comments

Aftermath section: Way too much detail here. A brief summary of each main wrestler's post-event fortunes is all that is necessary. For example your first paragraph could be reduced to: "After Summerslam, during an episode of Raw, Goldberg challenged Triple H for the World Heavyweight Championship. This bout took place at the Unforgiven promotion on (date), with a stipulation that, should he lose, Goldberg would retire from WWE. However, Goldberg defeated Triple H to become the new champion". Other paragraphs ccould also be cut down to the bare details. Brianboulton (talk) 23:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Reception: Not sure about the heading (what does it actually mean?). I find the repeated comparisons of revenue, etc., with the following year a bit irritating. It's more normal to use the results of previous events to assess the relative success of a current promotion. And a single year's comparison isn't very informative. Unless you can make more general references to other years, I'd drop the comparisons. Brianboulton (talk) 23:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope that some other reviewers will chime in soon - this is becoming a one-man show. Brianboulton (talk) 23:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I cut down the aftermath and took most of the comparisons to the following year away. Thank you for your time in reviewing this article and I hope that more reviewers comment. Thanks again!--S_RX 00:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 73: / Line 73: @@
 :::Otherwise looks okay to my eyes. '''[[User:Giants2008|<font color="blue">Giants2008</font>]]''' ([[User talk:Giants2008|<font color="red">17-14</font>]]) 23:07, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 ::::Ha, I wanted more and I fixed all your final comments for the FAC. Thanks, hope to get some type of decision from you in the future :)--'''''[[User:SRX|<font color="black">S</font></font>]]<sub>[[User talk:SRX|<font color="orange">R</font>]]</sub>[[User:SRX/Guestbook|<font color="black">X</font></font>]]''''' 00:45, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
+:::::My first two suggestions from Reception weren't changed. Was I wrong on these or were they missed? '''[[User:Giants2008|<font color="blue">Giants2008</font>]]''' ([[User talk:Giants2008|<font color="red">17-14</font>]]) 00:38, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 '''Note:''' There is currently a discussion [[WT:PW#Can we shorten the infobox?|here]] about the infoboxes of pay-per-views. <span style="font-family: tahoma">'''-- [[User:iMatthew|<span style="color:brown">iMa<span style="color:teal">tth<span style="color:olive">ew</span>]] <sub>[[User talk:IMatthew|T.]][[Special:Contributions/iMatthew|C.]]</sub>'''</span> 00:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)