Talk:1991 San Diego Chargers season

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:1991 San Diego Chargers season/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: NSNW (talk · contribs) 13:36, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Intro...

Hello! I will be reviewing this Sports and recreation article, feel free to come by on my user page or talk page if you want to ask questions. The process of reviewing this article may take ~7 days more or less. Most likely less. I feel like I am pretty knowledgeable in this topic so it shouldn't take too long. I will start reviewing the nomination tomorrow as I have personal issues that I need to deal with. NSNW (talk) 13:36, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I've tweaked a few citations today, nothing drastic. I look forward to your comments.--Harper J. Cole (talk) 20:17, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

NSNW Thanks, I think I've mostly been able to deal with these. The practice squad is a problem, as that sort of information isn't readily available for older seasons. The only player who was listed there (Jeff Graham) appears to have been in there incorrectly, so I've moved him out. Ideally, I'd simply take out the practice squad section, but it appears automatically when I use the "NFL final roster" template.--Harper J. Cole (talk) 01:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Good. I see that all of my suggestions were fixed, I will pass the nomination now. NSNW (talk) 02:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

A lot of the issues that I had with this article are similar to the issues you had to fix in 1990 San Diego Chargers season, but they should be fixable.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Lead: Can you add more info on the notable players that season? Departures and Arrivals: "he had been a starter through most of his first three season"...season should be plural, "rumours"... as far as I know this article is in American English so "rumors" would fit that, "defensive tackle" should be linked to the position, "houston" should also be linked to the team since it hasn't been mentioned yet in the article; same thing with "Tampa Bay", "Charger defense"... "Charger" should be plural. NFL Draft: "Finally, Beathard agreed a draft-day deal"... "a" should be changed to "to a" per proposition usage. Roster: Why is only the Quarterback listed in the practice squad? There should be more players. Preseason: "Neither quarterback passed for 100 yards"... this should be changed to "Neither quarterback had over 100 passing yards", change "going 7 of 17 for 94 yards" to "going 7 of 17 attempts for 94 yards"; same with "17 of 19 for 210 yards", change to "17 of 19 attempts for 210 yards". Overview: "kicker" should be linked to position; same with "kickoff returner", "fumble" and "punt". Week 1: Can you clarify what "swept" means in this context? Week 6: "Stanley Richard was flagged for a 36-yard pass interference penalty"... clarify if this is offensive or defensive interference. I know that Pro Bowl nods were mentioned in the 1990 season article, why aren't they mentioned here?

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   I would add a references to the standings

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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   If you fix these issues then the article should be passible.

8. Updated Overall:

   Pass or Fail: