Talk:2010 East–West Shrine Game/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: –Grondemar 18:12, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I moved the article to 2010 East–West Shrine Game (with the endash) as that is the more appropriate title per WP:MOSDASH. –Grondemar 04:46, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, this is the first collegiate all-star game to be submitted as a good article candidate, so there are no direct examples it can be compared to. I reviewed the GA bowl game articles as well as other examples of GA all-star games (2007 Major League Baseball All-Star Game, 2009 NBA All-Star Game) as references.

I have the following concerns that need to be addressed before I will pass this article as a good article:

There should be a "Team selection" section describing why these players were selected to play in the game. What is the criteria for section, and who makes the decision as to who is invited? What factors cause a player to decide between playing in this game and the other post-season all-star games (the Senior Bowl and the Texas vs the Nation game)?
- There is no information on the official website about player nominations or a selection committee. As recently as 2003, there was a reference in the press to a "East-West Shrine Game Player Selection Committee", but I can not find anything more recent and do not know if such a committee continues to be the primary or only selection process.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:11, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I also note that I see no evidence of a fan (internet) ballot for the all-star game.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:12, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- My perception is that the premier game is the Senior Bowl. This is number 2. If you can't get in one of these then the Texas game is an acceptable game to appear in. I have no WP:RS on this and think it is more appropriate in a East–West Shrine Game article than this particular game.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - OK, I agree it makes more sense to put this information in the main East-West Shrine Game article. –Grondemar 01:31, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The lead section needs to be rewritten to be more of a summary of the article. Right now it contains details that aren't discussed in the rest of the article, and doesn't summarize what happened in the game.
- How is it now?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:08, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Lead looks good now, thanks. –Grondemar 11:09, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There should be an "Aftermath" section describing what happened to these players following the game. Presumably they played in the game in order to improve their draft stock; what impact did their performances have on how they were perceived by NFL teams? (Once again, similar to 2009 Michigan Wolverines football team, I realize it's hard to provide much detail until the 2010 NFL Draft happens, but there should be some sourced speculation at least.)
- In order to have a substantive aftermath section, we could put this evaluation on hold until after the April 22 draft.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:48, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sounds reasonable to me. –Grondemar 01:31, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - This is done, I believe.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:08, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - Could you add some citations to this section? I've been working on the article 2009 International Bowl; take a look at the Aftermath section there and the citations for the draft section from NFL.com. Something like that would be sufficient in my mind. –Grondemar 11:09, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        I need help finding a permalink for the 2009 CFL Draft.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:06, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        I posted one on my talk page: [1]. –Grondemar 04:20, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
~~It would be nice to add some images of the players or coaches in the game, even if they aren't from the game itself, to make the article look less sparse.~~
- Added some images.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:00, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Looks good, thanks. –Grondemar 01:31, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In the roster section, I think it would make sense to wikilink the positions and schools at first mention. Schools should probably be linked to the football team article rather than the general university article.
- Done.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:27, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks. –Grondemar 01:31, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise this article looks good. I'll place it on hold waiting for a response to the above issues.

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
This article will be on hold for ~~seven days~~ until April 29, 2010 waiting for responses to the above concerns.

Thanks. –Grondemar 16:46, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other opinions

Hi, i think this review and edits done has confirmed that the article is GA ready. I support GA status.--ÅlandÖland (talk) 20:02, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was waiting for TonyTheTiger to add the CFL reference to the article. I just took care of that, so I agree and will

pass the article. –Grondemar 04:23, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]