Talk:2010 Michigan Wolverines football team

2010 Michigan Wolverines football team has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 3, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

College football Mid‑importance

	College football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject College football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of college football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.College footballWikipedia:WikiProject College footballTemplate:WikiProject College footballcollege football articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Michigan High‑importance

	Michigan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Michigan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Michigan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MichiganWikipedia:WikiProject MichiganTemplate:WikiProject MichiganMichigan articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Dead links

I found 2 dead links under the Penn State game summary. TomCat4680 (talk) 09:32, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I managed to find the archived version of both articles and have replaced both links so that they are now active. Thanks for the heads up. Note that any Detroit Free Press article is likely to go dead roughly one month after being published. SCS100 (talk) 18:07, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- Yes I know, same for Detroit News, that why I checked them. I prefer MLive, it doesn't expire. TomCat4680 (talk) 23:47, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2010 Michigan Wolverines football team/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: JKBrooks85 (talk) 23:20, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The authors of this article did a nice job of covering the high points of the season, but there are a few things I'd like to see corrected before I pass it:

The correct pronoun for a team is "it", not "they".
- Disagree, as the previous season used this exact convention, and is currently at GA status. In addition, I found this, which states that it is plural. Let Tomcat and me know which one you want us to use. SCS100 (talk) 23:55, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then. I use "it", since we're talking about a collective noun, "team", but as long as the article is internally consistent, there shouldn't be a problem. As an aside, the link you have doesn't talk about the pronoun; it only deals with subject-verb agreement. Something like this discusses the pronoun aspect of team. JKBrooks85 (talk) 02:15, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Ok. Thanks for correcting me, I guess I misread my link. I wouldn't mind changing it if it didn't make half of the article sound awkward. I'll leave it the way it is just for continuity with every other college football article at GA or FA status that I've seen. SCS100 (talk) 02:25, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - No problem. It's something that might come up if you take it to FAC, but it's not a big deal for a GAN. JKBrooks85 (talk) 02:40, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
According to the broken links tool, you've got two broken citations.
- Fixed. SCS100 (talk) 00:17, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In regards to replacing Rodriguez, I'd like to see more about the coaching change; a subsection is warranted, I believe. That section should also contain information about the loss of position coaches and the appointment of Hoke. The departure of players following Rodriguez's dismissal also might be worth mentioning, even if it's to only say "Several players, including backup quarterback Tate Forcier, announced intentions to leave Michigan after Rodriguez's dismissal."
- Why? He was fired/replaced on January 5, AFTER the season ended on January 1. He and his staff coached the team in 2010 (which is the season this article is about). That section belongs in the 2011 season article. TomCat4680 (talk) 00:31, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - April draft information that is encyclopedic will still be in the domain of this article. Certainly a January firing is also.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:06, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Additionally, this article should mention 2011 Senior Bowl and 2011 East-West Shrine Game participants. this] mentions Stephen Schilling in the SB.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:45, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Jonas Mouton does not appear to have played in either. There may be a story about him not playing for some reason. Maybe on an agent's advice.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:52, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - P.S. the other post season issue was the Tate Forcier issue, which should be mentioned if you are going to talk about the coaching change, since it was the most notable result. Among the coaching changes make sure to note Fred Jackson (American football coach) as a holdover.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:11, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Added. Let me know if that is enough. SCS100 (talk) 18:33, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Two things. First, I want to confirm that you did a media search for an explanation why Mouton did not appear in a post-season All-star game. It would seem to me that he should have been invited at least. Second, you might want to name the players who have completed their eligibility and provide draft projections for players such as Schilling and Mouton. At this time last year, I think, I had something in the 2009 article saying something like Brandon Graham (American football) is projected as the first Big Ten player to be drafted according to some and maybe mentioned that Zoltan Mesko (American football) is expected to be drafted. Since the draft will be an update that you must make you will probably want to have a section their now.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:52, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done. SCS100 (talk) 23:12, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Remember that after the draft you will want to have a section like 2009_Michigan_Wolverines_football_team#2010_NFL_Draft. Make room for it now with some sourced content.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:54, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done. SCS100 (talk) 23:12, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Note that players lost this spring will also be in the preseason stuff for the 2011 article, so you will be filling out two articles by researching this now.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:03, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done. SCS100 (talk) 23:12, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - Great.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:54, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Do a very thorough look-through for weasel words. For example: "While many people expected a close game".
- I believe I've fixed this, but let me know if I missed any. SCS100 (talk) 05:43, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Some paragraphs are missing references. For example, see the final paragraph of the UMass game and the second paragraph of the Indiana game.
- Done. SCS100 (talk) 05:43, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also like to see more information about off-the-field happenings. Did any players have legal trouble during/before/after the season? Michigan's athletic director changed during this period, and I'm curious as to fan/media reaction as the season progressed. For that, I suggest looking at sportswriter columns and commentary from reliable sources.
- You're confused again, Dave Brandon began his tenure as AD on January 5 AFTER the season ended on January 1, so info about the transition belongs in the 2011 article. TomCat4680 (talk) 00:34, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Actually, the reviewer is correct on this one. Brandon took over on January 5, 2010, and Martin became an advisor, retiring on September 4 during the UConn game. Anyways, I have added this part to the preseason section, hope that is enough. SCS100 (talk) 01:08, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - My mistake, I forgot what year it is. TomCat4680 (talk) 02:33, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck with this; my comments are a bit brief, and I know that each of these suggestions means a lot of work, but given the quantity of writing you've managed here, I think you're up to the challenge. When you think you've addressed these comments, send me a message and I'll take a second look and give it a quick copy edit. Thanks for writing.

JKBrooks85 (talk) 23:20, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for butting in so much on your review. Everything looks fine to me now.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:54, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Passed. If you could clarify which records (school/conference/NCAA) the defense set, that would be a help. There are some places where a good copy edit could help, but it's not enough to hold this up any more. JKBrooks85 (talk) 03:28, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 2010 Michigan Wolverines 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) 22:24, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]