Talk:Irving Crane

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Irving Crane has been listed as one of the Everyday life good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
	An entry from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on November 27, 2006.
Article milestones Date Process Result December 7, 2006 Good article nominee Listed November 30, 2006 Good article nominee Not listed Current Status: Good article

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cue sports, a project to improve Wikipedia's coverage of pool, carom billiards and other cue sports. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Sports and games work group.
More information about this article... The following comments have been left for this page: Passed as GA Hi, I just passed this article as GA. Here the summary (WP:WIAGA): Well written - PASS. I am definitely more interested in Crane now. Verifiable - PASS. Very impressed how this article is perforated with references. Broad - PASS. I am not a pool fan at all, but it shows what impact he had on and off the table. NPOV - PASS. Stable - PASS. See history. Images - PASS. Offending image now fixed, I saw just now. Misc - to anyone who says the article is too short: less is sometimes more (See spoo, a FA) Amendments: seperate Biography into "Professional career" and "Personal life". Also special (albeit alread wiki-linked) pool-specific terms ("run", "safety" etc.) should be explained briefly, as they are not immediately understandable by non-experts. But this article is definitely a GA. Keep up the good work! —Onomatopoeia 15:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC) Thank you for the careful review and pass Onomatopoeia. Regarding defining terms, I'll think about how to do so without disturbing the flow. With regard the structural suggestion, I wrote this from a chronological standpoint, trying to seamlessly weave together his personal life and his professional career as they unfolded. Certainly all of our lives are messy and it's not so easy to keep them separate. While I don't dispute that separating them out into sections would also be a logical structure, to do so would involve a complete rewrite. Thanks again.--Fuhghettaboutit 00:11, 8 December 2006 (UTC) Have to concur strongly with Fuhghettaboutit. There is no compelling reason to split an article up into personal vs. professional sections if the article is well written chronologically (indeed, I think doing so would make the article lesser rather than better), especially if there isn't anything especially notable about the subject's personal life. For an article like Anna Nicole Smith, I think such sectioning would be important, but not for a non-scandalous pool player. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 00:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC) PS: If it grows to such a point that it needs sections, they should be chronological, not topical, e.g. "Early years", "Professional years", "Later years", or something to that effect. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 00:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC) Peacock language There are some slight WP:PEACOCK issues, I think (this flaw is shared with a number of other articles on BCA Hall of Famers; I'm not picking on this one in particular). Claims of emminence are hard to source as bare claims; the two sources cited for the claim here probably need to be detailed in the article prose as to what they actually say. See this edit to the Steve Davis article for an example of how to fix this sort of thing. I don't think this is a WP:GA problem for this article, but very probably would be a WP:FA problem. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 23:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC) (edit)

Find sources: Irving Crane pool — news, books, scholar
Find sources: Irving Crane billiard — news, books, scholar

[edit] Passed as GA

Resolved. Use /Comments page for further assessment.

Hi, I just passed this article as GA. Here the summary (WP:WIAGA):

1. Well written - PASS. I am definitely more interested in Crane now.
2. Verifiable - PASS. Very impressed how this article is perforated with references.
3. Broad - PASS. I am not a pool fan at all, but it shows what impact he had on and off the table.
4. NPOV - PASS.
5. Stable - PASS. See history.
6. Images - PASS. Offending image now fixed, I saw just now.
7. Misc - to anyone who says the article is too short: less is sometimes more (See spoo, a FA)

Amendments: seperate Biography into "Professional career" and "Personal life". Also special (albeit alread wiki-linked) pool-specific terms ("run", "safety" etc.) should be explained briefly, as they are not immediately understandable by non-experts. But this article is definitely a GA. Keep up the good work! —Onomatopoeia 15:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the careful review and pass Onomatopoeia. Regarding defining terms, I'll think about how to do so without disturbing the flow. With regard the structural suggestion, I wrote this from a chronological standpoint, trying to seamlessly weave together his personal life and his professional career as they unfolded. Certainly all of our lives are messy and it's not so easy to keep them separate. While I don't dispute that separating them out into sections would also be a logical structure, to do so would involve a complete rewrite. Thanks again.--Fuhghettaboutit 00:11, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[Marking topic "Resolved", as further assessment-related discussion should go in Talk:Irving Crane/Comments, the now-standard location for assessment/peer review material, which has a copy of the above plus more followup already. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 00:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC) ]

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Irving Crane.jpg

Image:Irving Crane.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)