Talk:Gerry McNamara

NPOV dispute

This is mainly a vanity article. It was created from an anonymous IP from Rochester, near Syracuse. It should either be deleted or seriously rewritten to include only facts. Joriki 08:38, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

• Not necessarily vanity, but definitely an opinionated article as would be expected from a fan of the person. This definitely needs to be changed to conform to encyclopedic standards and neutrality.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.11.205.28 (talk • contribs)

• For college basketball fans, this is by no means a vanity article. Non-fans of college basketball may think they have the right to declare this a vanity article, but they are by no means correct and lack the proper authority. As long as everything written is factual, it should stay. He is a noteable fellow.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.41.164 (talk • contribs)

• it may be and probably is POV. however, its a legitimate topic. he almost single handedly won the Big East Tournament in 2006 and is likely to be a major "story" of the NCAA Tourney. 07:21, 14 March 2006 (UTC) Caesarscott

• As a college basketball fan AND GMac fan, I have to say that this reads more like a novel than an encyclopedia article. "Righted the ship"? However, the article should stay as he is a notable grad of the school.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.58.16.118 (talk • contribs)

• The current revision is much less NPOV than when it was originally idtentified as such. Now there are considerably less uses of adjectives such as "amazing, outstanding, excellent" etc. But i agree with everyone else that he is a legit topic not only for what he did in the '06 BET, but for what he did over his 4 years at SU. If there is an article for Redick, then there sould be an article for Gerry--Darry2385 05:48, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Improvements to become GA

I am being requested by Chengwes to check out this article to see if it's ready to become a GA. I'm pretty much impressed with the article. The references are reliable and in adequate number. MoS is pretty much followed in the entire article. It's so good that I'm giving this article a fast ticket to GA, that is, as soon as the following list of improvements are completed, I'm going to give it GA status immediately. Here is the list:

• trivia section is discouraged, try put the info into different sections
• personal life should not be the last information section, move it up
• it says he's married, what is her wife's name? (if you can find it)
• statistics table should have at least one reference (try link it to NBA or some sort of stats site)

OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 23:16, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

GAC

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

5. It is stable.

   

6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

   a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

7. Overall:

   a Pass/Fail:

Improvements have been made, so I'm passing this article as GA now. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 04:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)