Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chris Gragg/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 Ian Rose via MilHistBot (talk) 02:42, 21 September 2014 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Chris Gragg edit

Nominator(s): Seattle (talk) 16:44, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When I first found the article, it looked like this. Now, it's far expanded from its beginnings, and I hope to culminate the progression with a formal recognition. Seattle (talk) 16:44, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Image review (I'll do a prose etc. review as soon as I can)
    • Only one image, File:Chris Gragg, ULM at Arkansas, 2012.jpg, which considering the length of the article is not an issue. The image is free; I am convinced that s/he was the photographer. Sadly, it is is, sadly, low quality, but barring any other free images of the individual I don't see any way around that (and I don't see anything on Flickr or Google that we can use). Images are okay — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:53, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • the team's coaching staff - perhaps trim "team's"? It would be contextually understood, I think
    • Agreed
  • in the draft, the Bills chose Gragg with the 222 overall selection, - this is probably because I don't follow football, but I don't quite get this sentence
    • Linked "draft".
  • Chris served as the team's water boy until he was in junior high school. - any word when he started?
    • I can't find anything on it; the source says "Football was something for Chris Gragg to do in rural Southeast Arkansas. His father was a football coach for whom Gragg would serve as a water boy until junior high", and a Google search doesn't reveal anything either. Seattle (talk) 16:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the Warren squad, Gragg played football as a wide receiver alongside future NFL players Jarius Wright and Greg Childs. - This is a big jump: junior high school to him playing on the team? When did he enrol? When did he start playing?
    • There's some sources listed at [2] which could produce a transition sentence, but I don't have a subscription. I'll ask around. Seattle (talk) 17:13, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • the 148-best receiver - would the 148th best receiver be more common?
    • Yes, changed.
  • Professional career / Buffalo Bills - I know why you're doing this (in case he is traded) but it looks odd to have a single subsubsection after a subsection, without any introductory text. I'd put it in hidden text for now, or move the bit about the selection competition as a lead-in paragraph
    • Commented out.
  • In his freshman season, Gragg played in all 12 of the team's games, and the Arkansas Razorbacks finished with a 5–7 win–loss record. - I'd rework to have the name of the team (Razorbacks) before "the team's"; introduce it for the reader
    • Introduced.
  • When Arkansas faced the Georgia Bulldogs, Gragg caught a touchdown on a 57-yard pass for his first reception of the year. - when? Specific games are mentioned but no dates given in several other sentences too
    • Added date
  • a game that Arkansas lost 31–26 after defensive end Solomon Thomas intercepted a pass from Ryan Mallett in the final minute of the game. - might be worth being explicit about what teams Thomas and Mallett were playing for
    • Added "Ohio State" before "Solomon Thomas", and "quarterback" before Ryan Mallett, which should provide context to understand which team Mallet plays for. Seattle (talk) 16:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prior to his junior season, a writer for Arkansas Business - reads almost as if the writer was a junior
    • Changed.
  • During Buffalo's 2014 preseason practice, Gragg was hospitalized with heat cramps. - And what's happened since? That was three weeks ago.
    • Updated.
  • I'd work "Personal life" into the college section (as a lead in to his competing in the scouting game), with the other part in his early life section.
    • Worked the degree into the college section. I prefer to keep the part on Will in the "personal life" section so that the article stays in chronological order. Seattle (talk) 16:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • As of June 2014, Gragg has received offers from forty-five collegiate schools - Will or Chris?
    • Will.

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:12, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Alright, changes look good. I'll try and trawl the internet for further sources to check comprehensiveness, though (except for his early life) this feels as if it ticks all those boxes. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:52, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on prose and images. I've been unable to find anything else. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:12, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

  • Ref 26 and 29 use different template (cite web), to Ref 15 (cite news)
  • Why is there no accessdate parameter filled in for sources with links (eg: Ref 10, 32, 33) Lemonade51 (talk) 23:07, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to cite news. I didn't include accessdates because MOS:REF#Links and ID numbers implies they're optional for web sources with dates. For references without online dates, such as Refs 33–35, I included accessdates. Thanks for the review! Seattle (talk) 23:33, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • "an American football tight end who plays" -> "an American footballer who plays tight end for..." to avoid the consecutive blue links and awkward phrasing.
  • "which culminated the 2011 season." maybe USEng but do you mean that it concluded the season? Mostly I use "culminated in... " something.
    • American English drops the preposition.
  • "the 222 overall " why isn't that "222nd"?
    • Changed
  • " win–loss record" links to winning percentage, but the record isn't given as a %, seems a little odd.
    • Changed link destination.
  • "a touchdown on a 57-yard pass" USEng again? I normally make touchdowns "from" a pass...
    • Changed, it sounds better "from" than "on", and "from" makes more sense.
  • " into a tight end, which made him the third tight end" repetitive prose.
    • Changed.
  • A mixture of MOSNUM things, sometimes it's "and two touchdowns", sometimes it's "and 3 touchdowns"... not sure why this isn't consistent throughout.
    • Fixed, I think "3" was the only instance.
  • NFL.com just redirects to the main NFL article, is there a better link or a section you could point to?
    • Changed to "a writer for the NFL" and "The writer compared"
  • Not really sure you need to link roster, the article is far too generalist and weak.
  • Shouldn't ref 25 have an en-dash in that scoreline?
    • Yes, added.

Comprehensive article on a short career so far. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:33, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have concerns with the ability of the article to meet criterion 1b, which stipulates the subject must be placed in context, as well as 1e, which stipulates the article must be stable, and not change significantly day-to-day. As a young player whose career is yet to evolve, it is almost impossible to place him in context, and the article is likely to change frequently as the season progresses. I think for a veteran player, it might be possible to achieve these criteria, but for a young player like this one, I am not sure the criteria can be met. Tentative oppose. Go Phightins! 16:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Given other tried featured articles, I think your oppose overstates how much the article will actually change in the next few years. All events are included and given appropriate weight regarding what already happened in his career. Will the lead, infobox, and sections of Derek Jeter change over the course of the Major League Baseball season and into his retirement? Yes. Will our article on Reese Witherspoon change after she stars in another film? Yes. Similarly, Gragg's infobox will need updating over the course of the season, as will a paragraph in the "Professional career" section, a few changes to the lead, and a statement once Will accepts an offer. The article, as of August 16, is stable day-to-day in a way that Jeter and Witherspoon's articles are as well. Seattle (talk) 17:07, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have no idea how anyone could object as to whether the subject has been "placed in context" (1b) as most of the article deals with his position contextually within his sport, even daring to note that while notable, he's not going to break any records soon or be on the front page of many newspapers. As for objections on the grounds of stability, (1e), that's going to apply to any active player in any sport in the world. We consider "instability" in this sense as a result of a series of edit wars, or as a result of some unforeseen event. The former doesn't apply, the latter isn't applying yet (and if it does, I'm certain the nominator will cope with it and update any part of this article accordingly). An oppose based on 1b and particularly 1e should be disregarded as unactionable. If we do allow this kind of oppose to stand, then we can kiss goodbye to anyone being prepared to write featured quality articles on young athletes whose careers are up and coming. I see no merit nor any value in that opposition. The Rambling Man (talk)
  • My question (and yes it's a question, hence the "tentative" in my !vote) is whether a player whose notability stems from his playing career can have a comprehensive article written on him in such early states of the aforementioned career. Go Phightins! 20:56, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The answer is clearly yes. The real question is "will the article remain comprehensive as his career progresses?" and we'll have to rely on Seattle or WP:FAR to resolve that. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:08, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fair point, and therein lies a valid concern. I know at WP:BASEBALL, we have had one and a half FAs ever on current players (the half is one who had just retired when the FAC started), and the concern has been over comprehensiveness and contextualization ... Go Phightins! 12:08, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any article that's notable enough for a Wikipedia article ought to be notable enough to become a featured article as long as the article meets the criteria for the item at that point. We shouldn't be precluding articles on young sportspeople because there's a potential concern that the article will not remain comprehensive and meet the criteria at some undefined point in the future. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:32, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any article can change at any time for any reason (if sources back it up). That shouldn't prevent anything from being promoted to FA. Worst-case scenario is that something major happens to Chris Gragg and User:Seattle or someone else doesn't change it. The article is demoted. It's that simple (although I have faith in the user(s) who worked on this page).--Gen. Quon (Talk) 19:25, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the most part, the prose is really well done, although there's a few issues I want to bring up:
    "Otis Kirk of Rivals.com credits Gragg with only 409 receiving yards in his senior year." Is there a reason for this, or is it just an error made by Rivals.com?
    • I don't know. Rivals.com and Scout.com are the two big-name recruiting websites and display high school stats. Most other sources use the Scout.com figure of 420, but because I don't know the correct statistic, I don't know if it's an error, so that's why I made it a footnote.
    I feel like the first line of "Personal life" could be completely rewritten. As it stands, it pretty much is substantially changing the text enough that you could probably remove the quotes, tweak it a bit, and make it 'your own', so to speak.
    • Rewritten.
    I see that there are no access dates, but apparently that's not required (you learn something every day).
    • Not for websites with publication dates, to my interpretation of the MOS.
    In the template box, should "1990 births" be before "American football tight ends"?
    • Moved.
But those are the only 'issues' I could find.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 19:25, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good now. Support--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:06, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Comment This is a tidy article; I can't see much wrong with the prose.

  • I'd make it "Warren High School in Arkansas" in both the lead and the first section; no reason not to let the reader know this is an in-state player.
    • Added.
  • "the 222 overall selection": should be 222nd, surely?
    • Yes, changed.
  • "on the 53-man roster, with 53 as the maximum number of players a team can have on its active roster ": no need to repeat the "53"; I'd cut "53-man"; or maybe simplify it to "tried to earn one of the 53 positions available on the active roster".
    • Changed.
  • What is "vertical speed"?
    • Added quotes.
      Sorry, I still don't understand. What is it? Speed in jumping vertically? I see the quote in the original but I have no idea what he's referring to.
      • Tried to clarify. "While the team trained at St. John Fisher College, Buffalo head coach Doug Marrone praised Gragg for his knowledge of the Bills' playbook and his vertical running speed."
        Now you have "vertical running speed"; I'm not trying to be difficult, but I really have no idea what this means. Is it a specialized American football term that means something to NFL fans? What's the difference between running speed and vertical running speed? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:07, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        OK, that's fine. Vertical running speed means how fast a player can run up and down the field, as opposed to lateral speed, which is side-to-side. On a football field, vertical speed means how fast one player can run from, say, the 10 to the 40 yard line, straight, without much side-to-side motion. The yellow arrows at [3] are a good representation of vertical speed. The orange is lateral speed. If I could find a good external definition I'd include it, but I can't, and "vertical running speed" should be clear enough as to what kind of activity Gragg did well (i.e running, not jumping). Seattle (talk) 16:11, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        I see from some Googling that it's a common term in the NFL. I've switched to support; if you can think of a way to provide an explanation, that would be very helpful to other readers like me. Perhaps an entry for "vertical speed" in glossary of American football, and a link from this article? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:36, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:06, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comment -- I've reviewed the discussion re. 1b. Fair point to raise but I think TRM, in particular, has provided an equally fair response, so given the resolution of all other comments and requisite checks being complete I'll be promoting it shortly. Tks all for your input. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:39, 16 September 2014 (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/Chris_Gragg/archive1&oldid=1138457545"