Talk:Jackie Robinson Day

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Jackie Robinson Day/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I will be doing the GA review on this article.--LAAFan^sign _review 21:40, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   The Spock reference isn't reliable.

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

   Remove the word "historical" under the first Jackie Robinson day

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Overall, it only needs minor fixing. If the above is answered, I'll pass it. Good luck.--LAAFan^sign _review 21:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

 Fixed – Spock.com replaced with africanamericans.com, and removed "historical" in the "2004" section. – RyanCross (talk) 00:38, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Unsourced (2009) section

The following section is unsourced:

---

2009

The 2009 Jackie Robinson Day, planned to be held on Wednesday, April 15th in honor of the 62nd anniversary of Robinson's debut, with the official Major League Baseball tribute scheduled to be held at Citi Field, the new home of the New York Mets as the second game ever to be played in that new facility. The host Mets will play the San Diego Padres in that game, and the pre-game tribute will include the formal dedication of a rotunda behind home plate in the new stadium in that will be named in Robinson's honor.

---

Until sourced, the above section will be kept here. We don't want anything unsourced. – RyanCross (talk) 22:10, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Good article review

A request for good article review has been up for a few years now and I am thinking that one is needed. Unsourced content has since been added and it probably needs an update. I would expect an outline about Robinson and why a day has been named after him. maybe some reactions or other commentary. This is more a list of Jackie Robinson days than an article about the day itself. @RyanCross and NoseNuggets: AIRcorn (talk) 21:21, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

@LAAFan: as previous reviewer. AIRcorn (talk) 21:22, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Jackie Robinson Day/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

A request for good article review has been up for a few years now and I am thinking that one is needed. Unsourced content has since been added and it probably needs an update. I would expect an outline about Robinson and why a day has been named after him. Maybe some reactions or other commentary. This is more a list of Jackie Robinson days than an article about the day itself. AIRcorn (talk) 23:08, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

I agree with you. Hopefully we can improve this. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:38, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Awesome. As long as we are making progress I will keep this open. AIRcorn (talk) 00:11, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

@Muboshgu: I am going away for two weeks soon so won't be able to respond to queries then. You are experienced with Good Articles so I am confident you know what needs to be done to get this up to a decent standard. If you have any specific questions though you can ask them in the next few days. When I get back I will look into this article again and decide whether to close it or keep it open. If you don't think you will get time let me know now and I will close it now. Cheers AIRcorn (talk) 00:59, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

I will keep working on this, but slowly. Check back in when you get back. Have a good trip. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:12, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

I am back. Not much seems to have happened here though. I am thinking it will be easier to delist this and let you work on it during your own time and then you can renominate it when it is ready. I dislike dragging these on and am actively trying to get some control back into GARs. It has been a month since I opened this, six weeks since I first mentioned it on the talk page and two years since a GAR request was first made. AIRcorn (talk) 10:44, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

• Delisted This has been open for a while now and still a lot of work to do. Feel free to re nominate at WP:GAN when ready. AIRcorn (talk) 08:06, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Add Chadwick Boseman note?

Actor Chadwick Boseman, who portrayed Robinson in the 2013 movie '42', died on August 28th 2020, which was designated as 2020's Jackie Robinson Day due to the pandemic.

Should that be noted, since it's a tragic coincidence? 86.91.29.106 (talk) 02:49, 27 September 2021 (UTC)