Talk:SummerSlam (1988)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is a current featured article candidate. A featured article should exemplify Wikipedia's very best work, and is therefore expected to meet the criteria. Please feel free to leave comments. After the FAC director promotes the article or archives the nomination, a bot will update the nomination page and article talk page. Do not manually update the {{ArticleHistory}} template when the FAC closes.

SummerSlam (1988) has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

	Professional wrestling Portal SummerSlam (1988) is within the scope of WikiProject Professional wrestling, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to professional wrestling. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, visit the project to-do page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to discussions.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Pre-FA review

I'm hoping you'll accept "better late than never" as an excuse...

Overall, the article looks great. Since you're talking about nominating it for Featured Article status, I've got a bunch of minor picky details:

1. From the lead, "the longest Intercontinental Championship reign in history up to that point" seems redundant. "in history" could be removed to make the sentence flow better.
2. I like to wikilink "manager" in wrestling articles because the page explains the purpose of managers and helps take the article out of universe.
3. From the "Development" section "in history up to that point" is used again. Rephrasing would help eliminate the redundancy.
4. The article claims that McMahon "planned to air" Survivor Series the same day as Starrcade. This left me wondering if it actually happened or not. Since they did, in fact, air on the same day, "aired" might be a good alternative to "planned to air".
5. Another word or two might help clarify "closed circuit programming". Were the closed circuit events free?

   I wikilinked it. To be honest, I don't understand much about that sort of thing. I assume they weren't free (how else would they make money?), but I've never read anything that said for sure.

6. I think "the" should be removed from "the Royal Rumble". Although it is sometimes used when referring to the pay-per-view, the same goes for Survivor Series, which doesn't have a "the".

   I'm not so sure about this one. After defeating Crockett in the ratings war, McMahon created Royal Rumble, an event airing for... sounds grammatically incorrect to me.

7. Still in the "Development" section, the article claims that "Turner also began airing monthly pay-per-views". I would remove "also", as it implies that McMahon was airing monthly events.
8. As a personal preference, I would use "brought in" instead of "began bringing in". Both are grammatically correct, though. Likewise, earlier in the paragraph, I would use "created" instead of "decided to create". Again, it's a personal preference, but I find that it helps tighten up the prose. It might not be quite what you're trying to say, though, so feel free to ignore this suggestion.

   Kept "began bringing in" but changed "decided to create" to "created"

9. Another personal preference: I would use "became" instead of "went on to become" in the second paragraph of the "Development" section.
10. To help balance the length of the paragraphs in the "Development" section, I recommend splitting the first paragraph at "As the WWF continued" and adding everything after that to the second paragraph.
11. In the "Background" section, "girls" might not be the best choice of words, as it implies that they were very young. "Ladies", "young women", "women", or something along those lines might be better.
12. In the second paragraph of the "Background" section, one sentence uses two forms of the verb "to lead": "This led to a series of confrontations leading up to SummerSlam." It would read better if another verb was chosen to avoid the repetition.
13. The same thing happens in the next paragraph with "returned to wrestling, claiming to return only for the money".
14. In the "Background" section, the article states that Elizabeth got Hogan "to help save" Savage. "Help" is a little redundant. In the next sentence, it might also be nice to use something like "rescued" so that "save" isn't repeated so close together.
15. In the final paragraph of the "Background" section, "original" and "originally" are used in consecutive sentences. "Originally" could be removed without changing the meaning.
16. Is there a reference for the Hogan-Savage pairing being intended to end the singles feuds, or is this just a statement that is proven by the preceding information?

    Statement that is proven by the surrounding information.

I'll go through the other sections tomorrow. I know this list looks long, but these are all pretty minor details. I hope you find them helpful. GaryColemanFan (talk) 06:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Excellent suggestions as always! I'll start working on them later this afternoon. Thanks! Nikki311 17:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Can any picture be provided? And the match notes in the result section should be sourced. King iMatthew 2008 19:32, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

The event happened in 1988, so I highly doubt there are any free-use pictures available. I've tried to search for images on the web, but they are all really small and/or blurry, so they wouldn't add much to the article anyway. As for the notes in the results section, they are sourced by the citations in the results section. Moreover, all of that info is sourced in the prose section, as well. Nikki311 20:36, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I just did some more searching, and here are some images I found: Hogan, Andre, and Ventura before the match, The Ultimate Warrior on his way to the ring, Savage and Hogan after their win, and that's pretty much the existent of the choices. Nikki311 20:43, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I believe it can be a free use picture from any of their articles, possibly just with a caption stating ______ faced ______ in a ______ match for the _______ championship, you know? King iMatthew 2008 20:57, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't know. This was twenty years ago. They don't look the same now as they did then...so it would have to be a fair-use image. I really want a picture of Miss Elizabeth distracting Ventura. It can be argued that the moment was the highlight of the pay-per-view, so writing a fair-use rationale should be easy. Nikki311 22:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

If you can find one, it'd be great. King iMatthew 2008 22:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I found one. What do you think? I've never uploaded or had to write a fair-use rationale before, so hopefully, I did everything correctly. Nikki311 22:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the FUR looks fine. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:06, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder to finish this review. I finished looking through the article and found a few more things:

1. Near the beginning of the "Background" section, was Beefcake's injury legitimate or kayfabe?
2. In the background section, disqualified should be wikilinked.
3. In the first paragraph of the "Event" section, "upperhand" should probably be two words.
4. "who also escaped an abdominal stretch" sounds kind of awkward.
5. A wikilink for "draw" might help some readers for the Bulldogs-Rougeaus match.
6. In the description of the Bolheviks-Powers of Pain match, "however" is used in consecutive sentences. I think it might read better if one was removed.
7. For the discussion of the Warrior-Honky Tonk Man match, it might be a good idea to clarify that the Ultimate Warrior won the title.
8. Also in that match description, "who was accompanied by Jimmy Hart" might flow better.
9. For the Muraco-Bravo match, it might read better if the mention of Frenchy Martin was taken out of the first line. Perhaps "Frenchy Martin, who accompanied Bravo, distracted Muraco, allowing Bravo to perform a side suplex and pin him for the win."?
10. For the Hart Foundation-Demolition match, "took out" is a little too colloquial. There might also be a better word for "dominated".
11. The final sentence of the "Event" section is fairly long and would read better if it was split up.

Again, I hope this is useful. Please get in touch if you have any questions, and good luck with the FA nomination. GaryColemanFan (talk) 22:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! All taken care of. Nikki311 03:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC)