Talk:Peter Canavan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Gaelic Games, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Gaelic Games. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] See comments

It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.

Peter Canavan has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Peter Canavan was a good article candidate, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. Once the objections listed below are addressed, the article can be renominated. You may also seek a review of the decision if you feel there was a mistake. Date of review: 2007-02-14

There is a good photo of Canavan's goal in the 2005 All Ireland. The only problem is that it is from the Flickr user that I mentioned on the [talk page] - he hasn't give n full Creative commons clearance. It would be a good pic to use mid article, notas the main picture, because it doens't show his face.--Macca7174 01:51, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thie photo I was talking about has since been removed because it is not cleared.--Macca7174 20:17, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Contents 1 Time to nominate for peer review 1.1 Peer Review: Archive 2 Good Article 3 Dates 4 Fail GA

[edit] Time to nominate for peer review

It maybe time to nomimate this article for {{peerreview}} as it's one of the best gaa articles what you think (Gnevin 23:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC))

Hey, give it a few weeks, pls. I am back in Ireland and have access to a few books that will be useful (including his 'memoirs' or sorts from 2003) so I will try to improve the article a bit more. cheers--Macca7174 01:35, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok when you ready you can nominate your self (Gnevin 09:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC))

The article has now been nominated for peer review.--Macca7174 18:11, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The only feedback we've got so far has been automated. automated responses help formalise the article, but it's not as helpful as we would like.--Macca7174 16:53, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

That maybe all we do get , if we don't get anything useful i will consider nominating for WP:GA and will definitely get feedback from that(Gnevin 17:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC))

How long is the peer review status maintained usually?? A week, I assume, going by the Nom for Deletion procedure.--Macca7174 16:12, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Its changes its last until it get right too the bottom of the peer review page (Gnevin 12:51, 15 January 2007 (UTC))

I have removed the peer-review tag, and will put the archive on this page.--Macca7174 20:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peer Review: Archive

APR _t 21:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
• Avoid using contractions like: didn't, didn't, didn't, didn't, wouldn't.
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Senators^{Talk | Contribs} 00:35, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I have fixed the article so that it satisfies the automated reviews, but some human input would be much more useful I think.--Macca7174 17:28, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to remove this from peer review now. I don't know how to archive the suggestions, but I will save them in Talk:Peter Canavan, and get a more experienced user to do this properly.--Macca7174 20:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article

I went ahead and nominated this for WP:GA. I hope this wasn't too bold, but Gnevin had already considered this about 10-12 days ago if we didn't get decent feedback from the Peer-Review. I don't think we did get much help from the Peer Review, apart from a few policy-adhering adjustments.--Macca7174 20:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a GA reviewer and don't know that much about it, but a few points would be: As said on the talk page, the article needs an image, but this could be difficult to get. The headings need to be checked so that none (unless needed) have capitals on the words after the fist (ie. Other Competitions -> Other competitions). Besides that the prose is good, and the referencing is perfectly fine. As said I'm not going to make the decisoion as to pass or fail this, but it seems pretty good. And thanks for the feedback on 'Round Springfield, much appreaciated. Gran2 15:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

that's ok - thanks for the feedback.--Macca7174 17:29, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dates

This articles says he was playing for Tyrone before his club this doesn't make sense(Gnevin 17:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC))

He was spotted when he was playing in his school teams, and rose up through the underage ranks. THe reason he hadn't played for his club was because there had been a rift between Ballygawley clubs, that led to them not being formally recognised by the Tyrone Board. It's complicated, and I don't know the entire details, but there was a Hogan Stand link describing the situation from the time.--Macca7174 17:26, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fail GA

Afraid I'm going to have to fail this GA nomination:

1.) Well written? Although a lot of information is in the article it is separated into too many small sections. There are many one sentence paragraphs that would be better either, expanded into full paragraphs or combined with others. The lead could probably be expanded for this length of article. Templates are normally found at the bottom of the article and in my opinion this would be preferable so that the prose is not broken up.

2.) factually accurate? The references look good with most statements having a citation. The information about his family in personal life could do with a reference.

3.) broad in its coverage? Yes covers all main aspects but could have more information without becoming excessively long.

4.) neutral point of view? Yes

5.) stable? Yes

6.) contains images? Fair use with rationale.

Overall it is close to GA status however needs a tidy up of the sections and improvement in the flow of paragraphs. Hope this helps you improve the article - I'm sure it can make GA status in the near future. - Suicidalhamster 23:53, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Should it of been put on hold for 2 weeks for such a minor failing ? (Gnevin 01:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC))