Talk:Dominik Hašek/Archive 2

message: Should this talk page use an archive? This page is getting too crowded, and is tougher for low internet connected computers to access pages with many data and size. Thanks. (Oh yeah, we can still keep the templates on.) --- Hasek is the best 22:50, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, the templates are a given. I'll make an archive now (keeping the most recent few messages here). --Wafulz 03:04, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archives? 

message: I failed the GA as it had too many 1-3 sentence paragraphs and too many  tags. No one seemed to be willing to address my objections or even state whether they disagreed with them so I failed it. If you disagree just drop me a line or relist it and I'll step aside to let someone else review it. Quadzilla99 05:46, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I took off a couple tags. I know this article can be better. (But I found this site  that has tons of info, so I'll add a section of goalie records Hasek is the best 04:18, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. I found another pic for him, one that demonstrates his flexibility. Quadzilla99 09:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Failed

message: Why was the image of Hasek in Buffalo deleted? It's tag is a 'movie screenshot' and I read WP:FAIRUSE and had a list of fair use types (GFDL, etc.) which did include a screenshot from a movie. That meant it had to be fair use. So I'm sort of confused. Hasek is the best 16:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The fair-use image would only be necessary if there was no other way to identify Hasek (ie he died and there were no free images to use) or if the moment that you showed was absolutely critical to his career and necessary for identification (ie the Hull goal). Fair use is basically a last resort when it comes to images of living people. --Wafulz 17:18, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, to the first reason, that could be identifying him from Buffalo. But perhaps we don't need the image, I guess. Those reasons could be for the infoboxes' image as well. Hasek is the best 23:42, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, someone wrote "i'mm stoopid!" right here. But someone did it under my username. It wasn't my brother or me so maybe someone figured out my password? Whoever did that better not make bad edits. Hasek is the best 01:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why was my image deleted? 

message: I'm a part of WikiProject Hockey, but I'll try my best to review this article with a neutral view.
This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of February 24, 2007, compares against the  six good article criteria:
:1. Well written?: Fail. For the most part, it's fairly well-written. But, the Lead could use some improvement: "consecutive Hart Trophies; in the same year", is there really a need for a semi-colon? The "Conflict with Ted Nolan" section is pretty sloppy. Also, the progression boxes should go at the very bottom of the article.
:2. Factually accurate?: Fail. The fact that there is a needs citation tag in the article is an immediate fail of this part. The following sections need at least one citation: Nominations, Transactions, All-Star honours, Career statistics (You should add "according to NHL.com or something). Check the Wayne Gretzky article to see how those sections are sourced. Any part that says he won a certain trophy should have a citation. NHL.com has a pretty good trophis section, so you could link there.
:3. Broad in coverage?: Pass. Very comprehensive.
:4. Neutral point of view?: Pass. For the most part, it's written from a neutral POV.
:5. Article stability? Pass. From what I can tell, it's neutral
:6. Images?: Pass. Good use of images. Would it be possible to get an image of him early in his career?
When these issues are addressed, the article can be resubmitted for consideration.  Thanks for your work so far. 
I was going to put the article on hold and allow you time to fix it. But, two criteria fails is a general fail. If you like, I can help clean up the prose of the article, but that would mean that I can not re-review it. --Scorpion 01:50, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is the source I used for all three good now? The one website has tons of info on everything that we pretty much need to cite. Hasek is the best 02:02, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added some sources and cleaned up some sections. Doing so means that I won't be able to review the article should it be re-nominated. -- Scorpion 19:25, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Failed "good article" nomination

message: I had to remove this part because we need a better citation other than a compilation of videos, especially if we want good (and eventually featured) status for this article. The viewer defaults to Hasek's most recent games, so you'd have to dig very deep to get a proper source. Here's the material I removed:
Especially in his years in Buffalo, Hašek would unpredictably dive his body out sideways to take away the puck or trip the player with possesion of the puck in a breakaway situation, to result in covering the puck or get possesion of the puck for his teammates to bring up ice. (1:23)
I don't think it's worder properly either- do you mean the saves where Hasek comes way way out of the crease? I've seen him skate way the hell out to the blue line to dive and trip a player chasing the puck (as illustrated in this parody image). --Wafulz 00:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I couldn't respond cause I was at my hockey game, but yeah, that's  what I meant; where he sprawls out of his crease to stop the puck. Weird how this wasn't mentioned by anybody or myself broght it up; even that no internet articles ever wrote something about it. Though it doesn't have have a great source, it should be included. Skating out to the blue line was Buffalo stuff; I never seen him yet play the puck far for at least this year unless it was a Detroit powerplay to pass it up ice recently. -- Hasek is the best 03:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Breakaway saves