# Talk:Todd Worrell

This review is transcluded from Talk:Todd Worrell/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 18:42, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful. 
If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)
I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy. 
Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 
Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.


### Immediate Failures
It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
It contains copyright infringements -
It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). -
It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -


### Links
### Prose
#### Lede
Para two is huge, probably could be split. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:48, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
professional baseball relief pitcher - reword to avoid WP:SEAOFBLUE. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:48, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
He played all or part of eleven seasons  - he played Major League Baseball in eleven seasons. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:48, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
Might be worth adding a little on the playing style. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:48, 31 October 2020 (UTC)


#### General
Overall this is one of the better explained American sport bios I've read. I've got only a few comments. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:59, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

What exactly is a Bible student? Is this religious studies? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:59, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
Source just says Bible student. I would assume he studied the Bible. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 11:47, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
I've made a change or two, hopefully non-controversial. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:59, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
where he had a 3– record - typo? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:59, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
The number row on my computer was acting up when I wrote that: both it and the article are fixed now. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 11:49, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Link some sort of "playoff", as this has different meanings. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:59, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
-- In progress--

Worrell joined a Cardinals team that was fighting to make the playoffs - can you spell out and link you are talking about the St. Luis team? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:17, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
That's what the preceding sentence (in the last section) does. Additionally, the section header makes clear that this part of the article is about the St. Louis Cardinals. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 11:51, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Is there any more images we can use in this article? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:17, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
I feel the article could do with being split into sections by year/season. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:17, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
Through July 14, his ERA was 1.14. - one day? I'm a bit confused. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:17, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
"Earned run average" is a formula that calculates how many earned runs a pitcher typically allows if he pitches in a game for nine innings. The stat is cumulative. The use of the words "through July 14" connotes that these were his totals from the beginning of the season through July 14, as opposed to "on July 14". Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 12:01, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
On September 4, Worrell was pitching for his 127th career save, which would have tied him with Bruce Sutter for the Cardinals' career record - presumably he didn't get it that day, but did later? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:17, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
Specified that he had to leave that game, which prevented him from getting a save - by definition, you have to finish a game to get a save. The fact that he got to 129 is mentioned later. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 12:04, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Can we link ulnar nerve? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:17, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
disabled list - is this a technical term? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:17, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
Linked 12:06, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
"perhaps the biggest free-agent bust in baseball this season." - "this season", is implied. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:17, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
I think that should stay in for clarity. People might think the reporter was saying he was the biggest free agent bust of all-time. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 12:07, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Anything we have to expand the playing style? It's mostly a quote. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:17, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
That's about all that's out there. Would be longer if he had anything more unusual about him. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 12:08, 1 November 2020 (UTC)


### GA Review
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 


### Review meta comments
I'll begin the review as soon as I can! If you fancy returning the favour, I have a list of nominations for review at WP:GAN and WP:FAC, respectively. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these if you get time. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:42, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
A very nice article, I'll place on hold ready for you to address the above concerns. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:18, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
Sanfranciscogiants17 have you completed the above? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:36, 15 November 2020 (UTC)