Talk:Carl Zoll

Pre-FA comments

Hi @BeanieFan11, thoughts to come this afternoon. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 17:58, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Lead/infobox

• He fought against a number of notable wrestlers in his career → perhaps ...a number of prominent wrestlers in his career... instead? I'm always hesitant to use the word "notable" in wiki-voice, though maybe that's just WP:PEACOCK in the back of my mind.
  • Changed.
• and contended for the World Light Heavyweight Championship in 1920, although he was defeated → if you're looking to trim this sentence a bit (or get rid of a comma), you could shorten this by saying and unsuccessfully contended for the World Light Heavyweight Championship in 1920. Not strictly recommending this, just an option if you (or FA reviewers) think that sentence wanders a bit.
  • Changed to your suggestion.
• In addition to wrestling, Zoll also played football. → Not in love with this as a standalone sentence since football is mentioned in the first sentence of the previous paragraph; I think you could get away with combining sentences (maybe In addition to wrestling, Zoll was a member of the Green Bay Packers in their... if you think the link to Green Bay Packers and "in addition to wrestling" constitute enough of a context clue that you've switched to football). Not married to my solution though.
  • I think it is helpful to have the football context – someone with no knowledge of football / the Packers could possibly get confused otherwise.

Early life

• Add full name to first sentence of this paragraph so you get it covered by the citation (SR cite in FN 2 covers his full name).
  • Done.
• who were notably active in local sports - as above
  • Done.
• eventually being "the strongest young guy in town," → eventually becoming "the strongest young guy in town," perhaps?
  • Done.

Professional career § Wrestling

• FA folks might take issue with the big block quote - the quote doesn't look terribly easy to paraphrase but if you could cut it down to a sentence or two I think that would help.
  • I kind of liked that quote ... maybe I'll keep it for now and see if anyone at FA complains.
• Green Bay in 1917, and at the time → remove comma (WP:CINS)
  • Done.
• and noted he could show "a world of speed." → move full stop outside quotes (show "a world of speed".) per MOS:LQ
  • Done.
• He tied in a match in April 1918 → I know "he" refers to Carl, but the last person you mention by name is Martin, which leads to a little ambiguity. Recommend Carl tied in a match....
  • Done.
• woods for a long time." → same LQ issue as above.
  • Done.
• he is a hard as nails." → same LQ issue, plus I think there's a typo in this portion of the quote (I'm guessing as hard as nails was intended)
  • Done.
• been staged [in] Green Bay." → LQ
  • Done.
• Is Elmer Saunders notable enough for a redlink?
  • Probably; added redlink.
• they were forced to quit." → LQ
  • Done.
• anybody on earth, anywhere." → LQ
  • Done.
• Zoll was noted to be "unquestionably... → direct quote needs attribution
  • Done.
• "Italian champion of the world," → LQ
  • Done.
• wrestler on the earth." → LQ
  • Done.
• when in action." → LQ
  • Done.
• a "flashy Hindu" → I would add attribution to this, seems a little iffy to say in Wiki-voice
  • Changed to Three months later, he competed at an annual event held by the United Spanish War Veterans and defeated Beno, described in the Associated Press as a "flashy Hindu".
• he returned in February 1925 and fought Nazzareno Pogi, the Italian heavyweight champion, being defeated → tense switch from past (returned, fought) to present (being)
  • Changed to After being out of training for an extended period of time, he returned in February 1925 and fought Nazzareno Pogi, the Italian heavyweight champion, but was defeated.
• ahead of him in wrestlling." → LQ and typo
  • Done.
• out for a match." → LQ
  • Done.

Professional career § Football

• in the season-finale, by a score of 6–0 → I think you can ditch the comma here
  • Done.
• compared with football." → LQ
  • Done.
• record of 10–1–1 → recommend {{Win-loss record}} here
  • Done.

Later life and death

• No comments

Overall notes

@BeanieFan11: Well done, as always. In my opinion the use of direct quotes is a touch too heavy; I think it would benefit you at FAC to paraphrase a good number of those, but other than that I don't see any major issues. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 21:23, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

• @PCN02WPS: Thanks for the review. I think I addressed everything. Regarding the quotes, are there a few you have in mind that I should paraphrase now, or do you think I should just go ahead and nominate it and see what people at FAC suggest? BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:01, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
  • @PCN02WPS: Sorry to keep bugging you about this, but do you think there's anything else I should do or is it decent enough to nominate now? BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:32, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

  @BeanieFan11 As far as your question from Saturday, I think it's less a matter of specific quotes needing a paraphrase than it is an overall higher frequency of quotes than usual (in my experience, at least). It certainly wouldn't be a dealbreaker for me at FAC, so you could probably go ahead and nominate it - if you want to potentially get ahead of the issue, I'd focus on Professional career § Wrestling ("Later career" in particular). PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:34, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

  Thanks. I cut two quotes for now – I think I'll make the nomination later today. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:42, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

  Sweet, I'll be on the lookout and I'll throw you a support since I don't have any more comments prose-wise. I can also tackle the source review at FAC if you want, just let me know. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:46, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Peer review

Carl Zoll

I've brought this article twice to FAC, and it has has come close (four support, one oppose at first nom; three support at second nom) but failed to achieve promotion each time. I still hope to have this eventually reach featured article status. Pinging some of the previous FAC reviewers who were neutral: @Graham Beards, Hog Farm, SchroCat, and Pokelego999: (also pinging @Gonzo fan2007:) – do any of you have suggestions as to what could get this to sufficient quality to earn your support at a future FAC?

Thanks, BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:19, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

For my part, my only real gripe was the sourcing issue. If the sourcing were more diverse, I would be fine, but it being cited almost entirely to one local newspaper doesn't seem to indicate great source diversity covering this subject. If you can find some way to work around that my support is yours, since prose was solid on my last read-through. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:44, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

The thing is that I've pretty extensively searched for coverage of the subject. I don't think anything further outside of newspapers exists. One could technically replace some of the Press-Gazette citations with other local newspapers (so it wouldn't be "one local newspaper"), but I don't think that would be much of an improvement. Thoughts? BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:15, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

69 inline citations in the article. 43 are from the Green Bay Press-Gazette. The remaining 26 are from Pro Football Reference (2), The New York Times (1), Pro Football Archives (3), and then an accumulation of local midwestern newspapers. There are also two books that have inline citations. Although I understand the concern, it is important to note that the Green Bay Press-Gazette was one of the key sources for early NFL news. As an example, the Press-Gazette gave out national All-Pro designations in the early years. They also had very notable NFL people (George Whitney Calhoun, Andrew B. Turnbull, Cliff Christl, Lee Remmel). This wasn't just a small town newspaper reporting on local activities. I can take a crack at looking in one book and adding that to the article. But otherwise, I think having 26 sources from maybe 10 different reliable publications offsets the other 43 from the Press-Gazette, which are really used to try to fill out the "comprehensive" requirement for articles. The information is there, it is available from reliable sources, and thus it should be included in the other article, otherwise it would fail to be comprehensive. Should we really just ask Beanie to cut out parts of his wrestling career just to have less Press-Gazette citations? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:54, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

I believe I'm being misunderstood here. My issue is not with source type but source diversity. Largely being cited to one paper is my problem, if you can improve the distribution of sources by incorporating other, non Press-Gazette sources, is what I would prefer, since it indicates wide coverage outside of a single specialist. If info is only covered by the Press-Gazette, obviously retain it, but if other, equally reliable sources exist, I don't see why we're relying exclusively on Press-Gazette. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:41, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

@Pokelego999: To what extent do you want to see Press-Gazette citations replaced? The reason I went with them is because in a lot of the cases they were the most high-quality source available and gave the most detailed coverage. Technically I could replace some of the longer Press-Gazette articles with more brief stories like this from smaller papers, but would that be an improvement? BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:00, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

FAC PR sidebar

@BeanieFan11: I have added this to the Template:FAC peer review sidebar. Please consider reviewing other articles listed there. Z1720 (talk) 17:10, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

There's been no edits here in a month, so I'm going to close this PR. RoySmith (talk) 12:54, 15 June 2026 (UTC)