Talk:Washington & Jefferson Presidents football/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: –Grondemar 16:37, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

 Working Will attempt to complete the review within the next few days. –Grondemar 16:37, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

The article in general looks very thorough and detailed. I have a few concerns however that I'd like to be addressed before this article is passed as a Good Article:

• "Since its founding in 1890, the team has played their home games at Cameron Stadium." but the infobox says the stadium was built in 2001. Please clarify.
  • Good point. That's a tricky one, and I think I clarified it. The long story is that they have always played at the same location, but has only been called Cameron Stadium since 2001 when it was renamed.--GrapedApe (talk) 04:39, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
    • I rewrote the lead sentence as follows: "Since its founding in 1890, the team has played their home games at College Field, which was remodeled and renamed Cameron Stadium in 2001." Let me know if this is accurate. –Grondemar 12:35, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
      • Yeah, that works better.--GrapedApe (talk) 21:02, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
• "The team has been coached by some of the greatest coaches in football history, including John Heisman, Greasy Neale, and Bob Folwell." Ideally, you'd have a source attesting to the fact that these are some of the greatest coaches in football history (off the top of my head I only know who John Heisman is). Otherwise, the sentence as written is too POV. "Most prominent" or "most famous" might work better, but could still use a source.
  • I changed it so that the sentence in the lead lists the four coaches who have been inducted into the college football hall of fame. I figure that would be enough to justify the "greatest" statement.--21:47, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
    • OK. Could you add the College Hall of Fame footnotes for the four coaches immediately following the statement. I know citations generally don't appear in the lead, but I think that sentence could use the immediate support and it could avoid future questions like mine. –Grondemar 12:35, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
      • I thought about it some more, and I changed the sentence to be "best-known" rather than "greatest" (By the way, is that hyphen correct?). You're right that it will just cause too many questions to say "greatest". How's that? Sorry about all the run-around on this sentence...-_GrapedApe (talk) 21:06, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
        • I added links to the College Football Hall of Fame references for the mention of Heisman, Neale, and Kerr in the lead. Could you add something similar for Bob Folwell? –Grondemar 12:31, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
          • I couldn't find a source describing Folwell is explicitly laudatory terms, so I removed him from that list.--GrapedApe (talk) 16:20, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
            • Excellent, thanks! –Grondemar 03:40, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
• You don't need to list the same reference for consecutive sentences; a single note at the end of the group of sentences covered by the same footnote is more than fine.
• "Sportswriter Walter Trumbull of The New York Sun suggested that the Michigan Aggies, Washington & Jefferson, Chicago University, and Notre Dame were the new "Big 4 of College Football" instead of the traditional grouping of Princeton, Yale, Harvard, and Penn." Is there a way to rephrase the first part of this sentence, so that all four teams either use their nickname or all four don't? Right now you have the "Michigan Aggies" and then three teams without a nickname. I didn't add them myself because I wasn't sure if the school were using their modern nicknames at that time.
  • That's another tricky one. When I wrote that portion, I used the phraseology that Trumbull used in the original quote. The Michigan Aggies presents a problem, since the school was known as "Michigan Agricultural University" and they were called the Aggies. It wouldn't be correct to say that he was praising "Michigan State" or "Mighican State Spartans." Plus, I think that having it linked makes the identity of the team clear enough. I dunno, I even like the anachronism. Let me know what you think.--GrapedApe (talk) 20:11, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
    • Since I really can't think of a better way to phrase this, I've struck the concern. –Grondemar 03:42, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
• "Folwell was succeeded by Sol Metzger, Ralph Hutchinson, and David C. Morrow." But the title of the section says that Folwell coached through 1920, and the next section picks up with another coach in 1921. Please clarify.
  • I expanded on those coaches' tenure(s).--GrapedApe (talk) 22:19, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
    • After a minor copyedit, looks good to me. –Grondemar 12:31, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
• Heisman becomes the coach, but then the section abruptly jumps to another coach. What happened to Heisman?
  • Clarified.--GrapedApe (talk) 22:05, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
    • Looks good to me. –Grondemar 12:31, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
• There should be a mention somewhere in the history of when the school formally decided to enter Division III.
  • Done--GrapedApe (talk) 21:56, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
    • Excellent, thanks. –Grondemar 12:31, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
• "Halfback Johnny Spiegel, who was the leading scorer in college football..." That season? Ever?
  • Clarified.--GrapedApe (talk) 21:47, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
    • Excellent, thanks. –Grondemar 12:31, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
• You should link American football jargon at first opportunity, such as quarterback, halfback, touchdown, etc.
  • Got 'em all, I think.--GrapedApe (talk) 22:00, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
    • Looks good to me! –Grondemar 03:45, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
• "The rivalry with West Virginia University was heightened by the fact that Wheeling was located in a dry county, making the trip to nearby Washington for a game against W&J a raucous event for students.[47]" ...except that West Virginia is located in Morgantown, WV, not Wheeling, WV. Please clarify.
  • Good catch. I checked the source and I fixed it.--GrapedApe (talk) 20:01, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
    • Thanks. –Grondemar 12:31, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

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:

   This article will be on hold for a minimum of seven days waiting for the above concerns to be addressed.

Thanks. –Grondemar 03:59, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I struck concerns of mine that have been definitely addressed; I'll review the rest in the next few days. –Grondemar 12:31, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

After further review the only open concern is on the citations, and I don't see that as a show-shopper. I've therefore decided to pass this article as a Good Article. Congratulations! –Grondemar 03:45, 10 August 2010 (UTC)