Talk:CMLL World Heavyweight Championship/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Wugapodes (talk · contribs) 16:53, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Disclaimer: I am a WikiCup participant, as is the nominator. Will review. Wugapodes (talk) 16:53, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Checklist

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Cites reliable sources, where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Comments

If the comment is numbered, it must be addressed for the article to pass, if it is bulleted, it's an optional suggestion or comment that you don't need to act on right now.
When I quote things, you can use ctrl+f to search the page for the specific line I quoted.

1. "CMLL introduced The championship they moved away from the National Wrestling Alliance (NWA)" This should be reworded

   Reworded, clearer??

2. "In most professional wrestling promotions around the world the "Heavyweight" designation is normally one used to indicate the highest ranking championship instead of an actual weight division." Is that different in this case?

   Explained, hopefully enough to show the difference

3. The section titles shouldn't all start with "championship"

   Fixed, I think I over complicated them.

4. The sections for reigns and rules are very short. I think the last paragraph of history should be moved into the reigns section. and the rules section should be expanded.

Results

On hold for 7 days. Wugapodes (talk) 17:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

• Thank you for your review @Wugapodes:, I appreciate your input on this, I know the commitment it can be to do the GA reviews. I have addressed some of your comments already. I am working on a few ideas for the last comment.  MPJ-US  20:48, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
• @Wugapodes: - I have added to both the Reigns and Rules section, I felt that moving part of the history section down made the cut off between what is history and what is reign kinda arbitrary. Hope this falls more in line with the thoughts of covering all aspects.  MPJ-US  22:14, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

I like your solution much better than mine! Wugapodes (talk) 22:19, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Listed A well done article! I hope you continue the good work you've been doing, and that I get to see more of it. Wugapodes (talk) 22:19, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Some other comments

Would the second paragraph in the lead sound better as "In most professional wrestling promotions around the world, the "heavyweight" designation is used to indicate the highest ranking championship, instead of an actual weight division"? I am also ambivalent about the term "legitimately", and whether to link "scripted." Aside from that, the article looks pretty good. 'Promotion' as a kind of institutional noun is something I'll just have to put up with. Cake (talk) 07:40, 21 March 2016 (UTC)