Jump to content

Talk:Mariano Rivera/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Hello, I will be reviewing this article. Check back soon for a full review! CarpetCrawlermessage me 23:56, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA on hold

[edit]

Overall, the article looks great! It's nicely written and well sourced. However, I have a few concerns.

- "Many were concerned that the disappointment of the previous season's end would affect Rivera's performance in the future,[2] but he put any such concerns to rest." I'd add a few more citations to that sentence, since it says "many" but only has one citation attached to it. You could do that, or say "There were concerns that the dissappintment of the previous season's end would affect Rivera's performance in the future,"

- "This contract, averaging $15 million per year, made him the highest paid reliever in baseball history." Needs a source.

- "Since Rivera relies on variations of a fastball, all of similar speed, much of his success is also attributed to his impeccable control.[42][69] Rivera's 3.83 career strikeout-to-walk ratio in the regular season ranks fifth best in Major League history.[79]" Combine this with the paragraph above it, in the "Pitching style" section.

- I see some instances where the citations are placed out of numerical order. Place them in numerical order. For example, if it says [81][34][110], instead put them in numerical order. [34][81][110]

When my concerns have been addressed, I will definitely pass this article. But for now, I must place it on hold. I will give you seven days to address my concerns. If you have any questions, or if you have finished addressing the concerns, please send me a message on my talkpage. Good luck! CarpetCrawlermessage me 04:51, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA pass

[edit]

OK, the article looks better now, so I'll pass it. Great job! :) CarpetCrawlermessage me 02:20, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]