Jump to content

Talk:1950 Maryland Terrapins football team

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nominee1950 Maryland Terrapins football team was a Sports and recreation good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 23, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:1950 Maryland Terrapins football team/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I'll be reviewing this article shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:51, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Specific concerns

  • The biggest single problem with this article is that it's mostly disconnected information. There is information in the lead which isn't in the body of the article. There are two big long lists at the very start of the article. There is only the lead to tie anything together. IT reads like a featured list candidate, not an article on the team itself. There really isn't any ARTICLE to judge. Look at 2007 Texas Longhorns football team where there is information to connect the bits and pieces into a coherent whole. I don't expect as much information as given in that article, but I expect there to be something tying all the information together.
  • I"m also not seeing an assertion of notablity here, which is needed in an article. Why is it important to have an article on this particular team? They didn't make a bowl appearance, so I'm not sure a single season article is required.
  • Also lacking is an overview of the season itself. What controversies took place? Who were the coaching staff? When did the season take place? Any records set?
  • Who were the players honored by the team itself? Who were the captains?
  • Another concern is that most of the information is sourced to primary sources. There is little outside sources used, and this can lead to bias
  • A smaller concern is the use of the logo on the article. I'm not sure that fair use applies for its use on a single season article.
  • I haven't reveiwed the article in any more depth, so the prose and other aspects of the article haven't been reviewed against the criteria.
Given my concerns laid out above, I'm not sure you'll be able to bring this around to GA standard in a week. It needs a complete overhaul, as well as additional research to assert notablity and to fill in the large gaps information. For that reason, I'm going to fail the nomination. If you disagree with this assessment, you are, of course, welcome to being the article to WP:GAR. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:23, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A few other things that are missing: team changes, retirements and new recruits, or trades to other teams. Also missing is information on the team structure, forwards, defenders, wingers, centremen etc, strengths and weaknesses: height, speed, tackling power etc? What was team strategy? Formations like in soccer 4-4-2, 3-5-1-1 etc or whatever I don't know what the possible tactics are but I don't see any discussed. YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 01:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 17:27, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 17:27, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 17:27, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 1950 Maryland Terrapins football team. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:53, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 1950 Maryland Terrapins football team. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:58, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:1950_Maryland_Terrapins_football_team&oldid=1195998171"