Misplaced Pages

Talk:Katsuhiko Nakajima

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ĐộclậpTudoHạnhphúc (talk | contribs) at 01:27, 8 April 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 01:27, 8 April 2007 by ĐộclậpTudoHạnhphúc (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Good articlesKatsuhiko Nakajima was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (April 8, 2007). There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconProfessional wrestling Low‑importance
WikiProject iconKatsuhiko Nakajima 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.Professional wrestlingWikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestlingTemplate:WikiProject Professional wrestlingProfessional wrestling
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:Reqfreephotoin

An entry from Katsuhiko Nakajima appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 19 March, 2007.
Misplaced Pages
Misplaced Pages

Good Article review (fail)

First see George Washington as an example of a current Good Article.
1. Well written. Comprehensible English expression. Too much red text. The narrative isn't cogent or compelling. I see a lawyers list of dates developing in the latter half of the 'career' section.
2. Accurate and verifiable. Yes. There are 29 references, appropriate to the size of the article.
3. Broad. No. No details of his personal life are given. Is he married? Does he have kids? What's known about the side of his life outside the ring?
4. Neutral. Yes. But in lead refer to his famed opponents as 'famed opponents', 'fabled performer','famed performer', or 'leading contenders', not 'legends'.
5. Stable. Yes. Not to be held against it that protection against vandals has been warranted.
6. Images. One image not showing the face. At least have a face image in the lead before you go for Good Article.
Recommendations: Note and address the above. Join the article to a Wikiproject and seek rating assessment from a peer under it, or go for peer review. Be imitating the structure, style and content of George Washington or at least Hulk Hogan.
In socialism, ĐộclậpTudoHạnhphúc 01:21, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Categories: