Wikipedia:Peer review/Posting system/archive2

Posting system

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for November 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I've worked pretty hard on it and brought it up to GA not too long ago but want to go farther. I've added a bit more information and copyedited it a little and have hit a wall. I think the article has pretty much all the information available and is very comprehensive, and I am interested in promoting this to a FA. Any input is welcome!

Thanks, --Torsodog^Talk 17:31, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Giants2008 - This is the kind of article I love to see move up the ranks. It's original and a treat for a sports fan like myself. These are all from the vantage point of an FAC reviewer who will be waiting eagerly for this to get there. Biggest problem I see is the quality of the citations.

This page strikes me as being half of an article and half of a list. I think that it's more the former, but be ready for that objection at FAC.
- I thought of this too. I brought it up on the FAC talk page a couple of months ago, and the consensus seemed to be that it was an article. So I guess we'll see what happens! --Torsodog^Talk 22:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The table has a cite tag for Timo Perez. I recommend trying a New York Times search for articles on him. He was an important part of the Mets' World Series run in 2000, so maybe you'll get lucky.
- Thanks, I'll check it out! For some reason finding info on this seems to be really hard. --Torsodog^Talk 22:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Reference notes: The Baseball Cube isn't considered a reliable source at FAC yet. Use Baseball Reference if possible. JockBio isn't reliable either. Not certain about GoldSea or JapanBall. MLB 365 is a blog, which usually aren't reliable.
References 8 and 12 lack publishers, and I'm don't know if they are reliable. Finally, take the caps off references 4 and 33, as they aren't used even if present on the source itself.
- Thanks for the reference help. I'll try to clear up all of these by tonight. --Torsodog^Talk 22:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Past postings: "Of the 37 Japanese-born players playing in the MLB, only twelve have entered the league using the posting system." I count 13 in the two tables.
- This was worded weird. I think I fixed it. Also, there are 13 in the lists in total because Otsuka was posted twice, once unsuccessfuly and again when he signed with the Padres. --Torsodog^Talk 22:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
History: "Unfortunately, neither team consulted with Irabu before finalizing the deal..." Remove the first word, as "unfortunately" is considered a point of view statement at FAC.
- Gone. --Torsodog^Talk 22:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want more comments, please ask here or on my talk page. Giants2008 (17-14) 22:12, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing that I meant to ask for is something on how the system is received. The ESPN external link looks promising for criticism, and positive press may be out there too. Also, reference 10 doesn't have a publisher; missed that one earlier. Giants2008 (17-14) 21:33, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]