Talk:2014 GoDaddy Bowl/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: CRwikiCA (talk · contribs) 22:59, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll start this review and hope to have it completed by the nominators return from holiday. CRwikiCA talk 22:59, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Overall it is well written and complete, I have some minor comments listed below.

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
The spread is listed as 7 in the infobox and 9.5 in the lead, which one is it? The last sentence of the lead "Arkansas State promptly responded via a touchdown pass, and though Ball State got the ball quickly into field goal range as time waned, their field goal try was blocked, and ultimately Arkansas State held onto win the game, 23–20." needs some copy-editing.
~~How is it now?~~ - GP!
Okay now. CRwikiCA talk 17:35, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
Stats seem to mostly check out, although some references have now been updated to also include the actual bowl game, so averages are off. I will accept this if someone can confirm they had checked these numbers at any point against typo's.
Could you point out some specific examples? I should have known this would happen and archived the sources when I grabbed the stats, but I stupidly didn't ... I can check archive.org,though, to see if there happen to be any archived copies. - GP!
I initially saw it in the team averages, some references point to a main page that is now updated to 2014 (and have 2013 still available), other websites are down. I do not have the time to check all references right now for a complete list. Maybe later in the week I can do that. CRwikiCA talk 17:35, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~@Go Phightins!: I went through the stats references in this version and listed the following issues:~~

6) Points to 2014 version rather than 2013

13) Reference averages include bowl game (probably)

14) Points to 2014 version and includes bowl game

16) Okay, could be used for some now-broken refs...

18) Reference averages include bowl game

20) Dead link, but probably in 16, and not contentious material

22,23) Both refer to 2012 season

24) Reference does not name numbers quoted

26) Dead link

28,29,30) Includes bowl game, note it is not hard-linked to the 2013 stats, maybe do that.

32) The yardage doesn't match between text and ref

33) Not hardlinked to 2013, might include bowl game

34) Includes bowl game

36) Points to 2014 season now (can be set to 2013 probably)

37) Does not reflect numbers, totals after earlier game

38) Includes bowl game

41) Refers to 2012 season

42) Totals include bowl game

Some of these are easy to fix, because the 2013 version can be hardlinked. A more contentious point is the stats that include the bowl game for the background section. A choice needs to be made here, include season totals with or with-out the bowl games. In the first case the numbers are there, in the second case this can probably be references in combination with WP:CALC if there is a game-by-game overview. Alternatively, it might be feasible to lighten the stats, but that might be an undesirable option. CRwikiCA talk 19:26, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think I got most of these; the Yahoo links that say they refer to the 2012 season do refer to the 2013 season; I seem to remember double-checking that. I was able to pull some links from archive.org. Would you mind one more quick once-over to double check that I didn't miss anything? Thanks, CRwikiCA! Go Phightins! 19:30, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'll go over it when I have time and take it from there. CRwikiCA talk 19:49, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Go Phightins!: I added p. 4 to current ref 25 (see edit history). The 2012 totals seem to be 2012 totals in (current) refs 23 and 41 when taking http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/stats/_/id/2032/year/2013/arkansas-state-red-wolves as reference for the yardage. I can't quickly find the rankings for the 2013 season, but I assume they should be available somewhere. Some of the stats still include the bowl game, I confirmed per WP:CALC (substracting http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/boxscore?gameId=340052050) that current refs 18 (Williamson rushing), 36 (Knighten, McKissic rushing), 38 (Davis kicking). You might want to add a ref with those game stats in addition to those three refs for completeness. I also added up the table in ref 32 and confirmed its correctness. Overall it's almost there, would it be easy to source the ranking in current refs 23 and 41? If not, we can probably find an alternative solution. CRwikiCA talk 23:34, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
How would you feel about just adding a game box score to the external links section as a general reference for sources that include bowl game stats? I really don't know about those Yahoo references ... on the page, it says last updated for games through December 7, 2013. I will look into it ... Go Phightins! 01:23, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That would work as well as EL, optionally also keep noting it in the Scoring summary/Statistics sections. CRwikiCA talk 03:04, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Go Phightins!, those last two Yahoo sources might instead be sourced from here perhaps? CRwikiCA talk 20:15, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In particular, ref 41 might be replaced with http://stats.ncaa.org/team/index/11520?org_id=47 and ref 23 with http://stats.ncaa.org/team/index/11520?org_id=30. See whether you agree with that, and if so change the refs accordingly. CRwikiCA talk 22:58, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Go Phightins!: Just some minor points left here, what is your response? CRwikiCA talk 17:54, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~My response is that I forgot about this review. Fixed, I believe. Thanks! Go Phightins! 18:53, 21 August 2014 (UTC)~~[reply]

~~All stats have been verified, some were calculated from averages including the bowl game (and deducting the actual bowl game). CRwikiCA talk 19:49, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]~~

~~C. No original research:~~

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:

Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:

Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:

Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
No images present

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
~~There are no images included in the article. Are there any suitable images available, seeing how the nomination and writing occured several months ago?~~
~~I could not find any free images of the game itself; perhaps eventually we can find some of the players, but I haven't seen any as of yet. I will look though ... - GP!~~
~~Also consider looking for stadium images, or for images from earlier games (in the season) of the teams. If there is nothing, then that is fine as well. CRwikiCA talk 17:35, 9 August 2014 (UTC)~~[reply]
Adressed CRwikiCA talk 19:26, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Several minor issues need to be addressed. I am aware that the nominator is on holiday till August 2nd, please reply by August 9 that you are back and willing to work on the suggestions. CRwikiCA talk 23:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The hold period has been extended per User_talk:Go_Phightins!#Your_GA_nomination_of_2014_GoDaddy_Bowl. CRwikiCA talk 22:11, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It passes now all issues have been addressed. Congratulations! CRwikiCA talk 19:49, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]