Wikipedia:Peer review/2007–08 Pittsburgh Penguins season/archive1

2007–08 Pittsburgh Penguins season

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for September 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. This peer review discussion has been closed.
This article developed pretty well as the season progressed, and now that the season is over, I'd like to see what others think.

Thanks, Grsz ^talk 02:22, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, first I have to say that I hate you. I am just starting in 2003–04 Calgary Flames season and was hoping it could become the first hockey seasonal GA. Guess you're gonna beat me on that one. ;o)
Overall looks good. First thing that jumps out at me though is the size of the TOC. I'd suggest removing some sections. An easy one would be to remove the "pre-season events" section and move the prose down to the Transactions and Draft sections. Those sections are going to require prose anyway, so this kills two birds with one stone.

Mostly Done.

I don't really like the Winter Classic logo in this article, and it may be invalid as a fair use image. I think replacing it with the image of the outdoor rink would be better, both in terms of free use images, and in that it conveys much more information about the event than the logo does.

Done. Much better.

Roster changes is excessive, in my view. A little too detailed. If I were writing it, I'd probably move the paragraphs regarding trades and players released on waivers to the transactions section, and roll the more important points (i.e.: injuries to Fleury and Crosby) into the regular season section.

Done. Worked into different sections.

Plans for the future belongs in the 2008-09 article, not this one, imo.
Images? I'm sure there are some images of players from the season that can be added.
Milestones:1st NHL fighting major? Very trivial, imo. I'd say same with things like 100th game, 100th PIM. I'd focus on the more significant milestones.

Done. You're right, that got pretty long.

Player stats, awards and records and draft picks sections need prose sections. Though, as mentioned above, moving some sections from the lead sections down will kill two birds with one stone.

Just some random thoughts, feel free to ignore what you wish. ;o) Reso lute 04:27, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]