Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/All Blacks/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review‎ | All Blacks

All Blacks edit

This article was just passed as Good Article standard. The reviewer said that it should be sent to FAC immediately. However I want some comments on it first. I think that the history section, lead section and referencing are good, but I'm concerned about the current/recent fixtures list, which I'm unsure about and the notable players section which I don't like. Comments regarding anything would be greatly appreciated, esp if it will help getting it to FA standard. - Shudda talk 01:38, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think the up coming and recent fixtures is rather poor - not required if you ask me - classic systematic bias. The squad should be changed as well. Use {{rugby squad}}. One last thing, clean up in the see also section. Will be happy to help with this Shudda.--HamedogTalk|@ 03:10, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree about the upcoming fixtures list, may delete it. I think the squad is good enough? Why change it? It has all the current squad, maybe add the assistant coaches to it but thats about it. What about the notable players should that be delisted? If so how should it be done? - Shudda talk 04:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rather than a list of "notable players", maybe we should have a list of all former ABs. Then we can link to that via {{main article}}. I will fix the current squad - that one is the Tri Nations.--HamedogTalk|@ 04:49, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The list of "notable players" is always going to be subjective and maybe has no place in a FA. However I think it would be worth maintaining a mention of the inductees of the International Rugby Hall of Fame GringoInChile 10:20, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's great that this is now at GA status, good work to everyone who has contributed to it. I have some ideas/suggestions:
    • I believe that the lead is kind of poor. The first sentance jumps into the name and its origins, and they should probabaly be called New Zealand's national team not international team. There is far too much info here about the origins of the name, the second paragraph is great, but the first is a little akward. I think the lead should just give a broad overview of everything in the article, but yeah, I think it needs a little clean up.
    • The History/jersey sections look fine to me.
    • The Haka section could be slightly expanded, maybe it could try and comment on the culture/popularity surrounding it...(could be hard to find sources for stuff like this, but worth a try)
    • The Record section is probably my biggest concern at the moment, all sections need to be expanded imo. Tri Nations needs more detail on their wins, and an explaination of the table would be nice. Also, I don't think Rugby Union Tri Nations is main worthy, as it's not a sub-article of the All Blacks (All Blacks in the Tri Nations would be). In Rugby World Cup, we can probably ditch Rugby from the title (as it is obvious/redundant), here, we need to get rid of the list (and replace them with one/two sentances on each appearance), and massively expand. There are heaps of sources out there on their supposed lack of titles/under performance. A reference for them being favourites at most WCs is also needed. In Overall, there is probably not a lot more that can be written about, but, maybe talk about their closest rivals, how many nations they have played, and maybe about their history on the IRB rankings. Also, though some maybe already linked previously, all the nations in the table should be wikifiied. Also, I'm not sure about external links/messages in the text (For the latest official statistics see:).
    • Upcoming fixtures/Recent results needs to go, its not needed and is probably not approprriate. It's ok to have, but not for an article striving for FA status.
    • 2006 All Blacks should just be changed to Current squad imo, and, it definantly should not be in a template like that, as when a reader gets there, it is hidden due to other templates at the botttom.
    • On Some notable All Blacks, firstly, the title needs to be changed, there is no need to mention All Blacks in the title, and Some is akward. I like the idea of making a seperate article for this, and changing the section into some text. It would take some effort, but would be worth it imo. It could talk about early notable players, those with iconic status, record holders, famous World Cup players/records, when the Hall of Fame was introduced, and what ABs are in it...etc. (See also Rugby World Cup#Records_and_statistics, the same idea was used here to delist the RWC article).
    • And yeah, See also needs a clean up, links to the World Cup and Tri Nations need to be taken out, and maybe every link could get a line or two of text explaining what it is/relation to the ABs. The External links also need little explainations. Cheers. Cvene64 10:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments Cvene, I agree with most of your comments but do have a few questions.
  • Is it notable to mention anything more then a sentence or two on their IRB rankings history? They have been No 1 most of the time and the rankings are relatively young?
  • Rivalries? I have a bit of a prob writing on this as it's so subjective to talk about their greatest rivalries etc. I suppose much of it speaks for itself in the history section (for examples the 56 and 96 Springbok series). I don't want to go and repeat things that have been mentioned in the history section as it'd be a little redundant.
  • Current squad? Shouldn't the squad be named for the series/tour it's from? It would not even be current anymore as the squad's definitely going to change for the June series. Just something to think about i suppose.
Anyway no questions regarding the rest, some really good suggestions. Thanks. - Shudda talk 02:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, AZ t 16:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • A sentance or two on the IRB rankings is probably enough. I guess rivalries does not matter that much if it is already covered. I'm not sure what you mean in relation to the current squad?? In any case, it just can't be a template, as no-one can see it.
    • Also, for the Haka section, current events need to toned down (eg. half the thing is currently about the Welsh game). There are some great articles right now where some of the ABs talked about spiritual preparation and so on...[1] this needs to be in there imo.
    • One more thing I forgot...there needs to be a section on stadiums. Talk about their first venue (Athletic Park?), regular venues, Eden Park and RWC 87, Stadium New Zealand and RWC2011 etc etc. Cheers. Cvene64 02:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Can you please give me another reason why we can't have he upcoming fixtures on the AB's page. If you look at most other national rugby teams and a lot of other sports teams wikipedia pages they include this. It is a very useful addition to the page. Kr123 talk

Is there really no fair use picture of the Haka being performed? The policy is Fair Use should only be used when "No free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information." I'm sure someone could get/create a freely licenced picture of the Haka. Alexj2002 21:09, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/All_Blacks/archive1&oldid=1110502662"