Jump to content

Talk:1920 Rock Island Independents season/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Shudde (talk · contribs) 10:34, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am in the process of reviewing this article. I'll make sure the review is posted in the next day or two. - Shudde talk 10:34, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll add problems or questions I have regarding the article first, then I'll specifically address each of the specific Wikipedia:Good article criteria. Bear with me, I'll try and get through everything as quickly as I can. Once I've finished commenting, I usually allow a week to address the comments, however I'm happy to extend that within reason:

addressed comments
  • I'll start with 1920 Rock Island Independents season#Offseason, and do the lead last. Should this section maybe be named Background? Offseason may be appropriate, but surely background is a little more encompassing, and I think may be better considering the section does discuss the formation of a new league?
  • The first sentence concerns me, the references do not refer to a "mythical USA Championship" (they do mention "National Championship") — where does this name come from? The other point is the use of the term "mythical" — again neither reference uses that term. You might be better to be more explicit regarding this, rather than describing it as mythical; what was mythical about it?
    • I edited it, so it fit the references. To the word mythical, there was no set leagues in 1919, so when the RII finished their season, they called themselves "champions".17:12, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
  • "Did not change much"? Could you be more specific? Is there a reason that Keith Dooley's inclusion is notable?
  • "After the 1919 season, representatives of four Ohio League, a professional football league, teams—the Canton Bulldogs, the Cleveland Tigers, the Dayton Triangles, and the Akron Pros—called a meeting on August 20, 1920 to discuss the formation of a new league." — that sentence reads very badly, and should be rewritten. Also, did they call the meeting and other team representatives attend, or was it just those four? The wording of the sentence doesn't make this clear.
  • "Team representatives changed the league's name slightly to the American Professional Football Association and elected officers, installing Jim Thorpe as president" - this is a run-on sentence.
  • "Schedule"? Is this the correct term, maybe in American English it is different, but my understanding is that it refers to a future series of events. Therefore including scores etc wouldn't happen. Maybe I'm wrong on this?
  • I think kick-off times should be removed here. I just don't think it adds anything important, and clearly there is only data from two matches. Also the two references listed don't match regarding the series, can you explain this?
  • I'm a bit worried there is not much information regarding the team, coaches, management in here. Surely there is more two say than the once sentence about the roster not changing much? This should be expanded considerably I believe.
  • Game summaries:
  • "the first game in the history of the league" - is there a reference for this?
  • So basically they only scored "rushing touchdowns"? Maybe consider rewriting a little bit, seems needlessly repetitive. Also I think rushing touchdown, or at least touchdown should be wikilinked to an appropriate article. Not all readers will be familiar with the term.
  • "Rock Island Independents played against the Muncie Flyers after their victory. It is considered to be one of the first games played with two APFA teams.[19] Since kickoff times were not standardized, it is unknown if the Muncie–Rock Island or Columbus–Dayton game is the first game." — this just doesn't read that well; consider rewording.
  • " In the second quarter, Ursella scored kicked a 25-yard field goal, and Wyman scored from an 86-yard kickoff return. In the third quarter, Sid Nichols had a 5-yard rushing touchdown, and Waddy Kuehl scored 7-yard rushing touchdown, en route to a final score of the game was 45–0." - English
  • "This game was the only one that counted in the Flyers' standing for the entire 1920 season." - towards not in
  • You use a lot of jargon in this article. If you're going to do so, you should link to an explanation in the first instance of the terms use.
  • "Lastly, Ed Healey was kicked in the face needed five stitches in the cheek" - English
  • "In week 4, the Independents played again the Decatur Staleys." - English
  • There are a lot of problems with English in this article. A simple copy-edit would probably address most of them. Simple things like the examples listed above. Hopefully it has been a while since you've had a read through the article, it is time to read through again and fix these errors. I'm going to stop listing them, but please check through it carefully.
  • You use yards throughout the article. Some, for example maybe once every section, should be converted to metres with the conversion template (maybe not every time the unit is used though). The use of yards outside the US is becoming rarer and rarer — readers may be unfamiliar with it.
  • "The Thorns' players decided to have 10 minute quarters." - is this unusual? There is not information regarding rules; how did this work? Did they agree on them on the day, did the home side dictate?
  • Why did they play two matches in one week? Also be careful, you use the term "week eight", but throughout the article you use "week x" where x is the numberal rather than word.
  • "Ties" - make sure this is wikilinked in the first instance. Tie can also mean fixture or match, and it may confuse some readers.
  • Roster — You use letters following some of the players. I'm guessing (which is half the problem) that these are describing their positions. Why do only some of the players have this? If they are positions I think two things need to be added; either a footnote, clearly saying what they are, and with possible a wiki-link to an appropriate article about each position.

I'll add the rest of my comments soon. - Shudde talk 10:37, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Images:

addressed comments

References:

- Shudde talk 11:03, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • As far as writing goes, this section needs to be better. "The 1920 Rock Island Independents season was the franchise's inaugural season in the American Professional Football Association (APFA), an American football league, and thirteenth season as a team. " reads poorly. Maybe "The 1920 Rock Island Independents season was the American football franchise's thirteen season, and inaugural season in the American Professional Football Association (APFA)."
  • 'The Independents entered 2010 coming off a nine-win, one-loss, one-tie (9–1–1) record in 1919 as an independent team, which the team proclaimed to be the "Champions of the USA".' Obvious error here; maybe 'The Independents entered 1920 after a 9-1-1 win-loss-tie record in 1919 that the team claimed earned them the title "Champions of the USA".[with citation]'
  • The whole thing needs a rewrite unfortunately. Maybe take into account my comments above. I would consider leaving this until all the other comments have been addressed. It could be expanded a little also, especially regarding the teams record, which encompasses the majority of the article at the moment.

- Shudde talk 11:11, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia:Good article criteria

1. Well-written

  •  Partly done I have some serious concerns here. I think a lot of work needs to be done, most of it simple, but the lead needs to be a lot better. I've tried to give examples where I can.

2. Verifiable with no original research

  •  Done

3. Broad in its coverage:

  •  Partly done I have serious concerns here as well. I think this is probably the weakest aspect of the article. My main concerns are discussion of the squad and coaches/managers. Some of the match summaries are not more than "x scored a touchdown here" and a run down of the scores after each quarter. I'm a bit on the fence regarding this aspect of the criteria. I think the article could do with some expansion; I mentioned a few things in the comments above — if these are addressed hopefully the coverage will be broad enough.

4. Neutral

  •  Done

5. Stable

  •  Done

6. Illustrated, if possible, by images

  •  Partly done
  •  Done

Congratulations on the work that's been put into the article. I think it's in a position to fulfil the criteria within a reasonable time-period (was thinking one week, two max). I'm going to place this article on hold. I'll check back in a week. If you want any more feedback/clarification then just ping me on my talk page and I'll try and answer reasonably promptly. - Shudde talk 11:25, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comments Something I forgot to add when I did my initial review. This influences the broadness of the article. I know that the teams would create their schedules dynamically as the season went on, but there is not information regarding Douglas Park (Rock Island) — for example it was obviously shared with other sports teams. Even more importantly, why did they play all but one of their matches at "Home"? Did other teams use this as their home ground as well, or was this simply a quirky result of the dynamic scheduling? - Shudde talk 02:03, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I think this article is getting there, and a lot of the problems have been addressed. I'll leave it on hold for another week because things have momentum. Hopefully that is enough time to address everything. - Shudde talk 09:06, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are basically two things which still need to be done for this article to pass. One is that the lead needs to be cleaned up—the language doesn't read particularly well, and could also do with a bit of an expansion. The second is the match in January 1921 which has not been included; considering the short length of the season, I think omitting this means that the article doesn't meet the "broad" criteria. Considering it's relative insignificance, I don't think much needs to be said about it. The article has been on hold for a while, so I'll give it another 3-4 days for these things to be fixed. Otherwise I'll fail it, and it can be renominated once those two things are addressed. - Shudde talk 04:19, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've given it a few days. It's a reluctant fail. There is very little that needs to be done, so if the article gets improved and renominated in the future, ping me on my talk page and unless I'm bogged down, I'll try and find the time to review it. Good luck. - Shudde talk 10:18, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:1920_Rock_Island_Independents_season/GA1&oldid=1127487405"