Talk:Bob Ward (American football, born 1927)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Review forthcoming. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 13:49, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Quick-fail assessment

1. The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability. - Doesn't completely lack them. It'll take a more in-depth review to see if the citation density is fair.
2. The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. - A few superlatives are used, but they're sourced.
3. There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including {{cleanup}}, {{wikify}}, {{NPOV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{fact}}, {{clarifyme}}, or similar tags. - Article is clean.
4. The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars. - Article has been edited once in the last two months. If nothing else, that's stability.
5. The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint. - Man has been dead for four years.

Proceeding with further review. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 16:55, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality: Mostly okay, but a few phrases are kind of sticking out to me:

   • Ward was undersized for a lineman, even for that time, Any chance of clarifying? Does it matter what the different standards for the size of linemen was as compared from that era to this? Is this something any reader can reasonably be expected to know?

• I think if it is not qualified in that way it would be somewhat ambiguous. Linemen in that era were smaller as a rule and generally players were not nearly as athletic as they are today. If it simply said he was undersized for a lineman, it could be taken to mean that he was simply undersized by today's standards. If you think it is unnecessary though, I'm don't feel that strongly about it and would not oppose its removal. Strikehold (talk) 06:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

• I revised to Ward was undersized for a lineman, in comparison to linemen of the day (and would be drastically undersized when compared to current linemen), It doesn't seem too wordy to me, and it effectively addresses the matter. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 03:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

1. • He is the only player to have ever achieved the honor for both an offensive and defensive position. Seems like a pretty significant fact. Maybe it should go in the lead?

• Y Done. Strikehold (talk) 06:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

1. • Tatum had previously coached eight first-team All-Americans at Oklahoma and coached six aside from Ward at Maryland. Is this necessarily relevant? I've heard coaches give extreme superlatives before, and usually they're a bit flip and not necessarily taking the coach's whole career into account. That is, just meant as a compliment that one time to the particular player.

• In my opinion it is, as it puts his opinion into perspective. The qualification shows that he coached several players considered the best in the nation at their respective positions at the time. It may well have been hyperbole, but I think that is a matter to let the reader judge. Also to address your "whole career" concern, Tatum died in 1959, just a few years after coaching Ward. I do not believe he coached any All-Americans in his next assignment at North Carolina, whose teams were mediocre under him. Strikehold (talk) 06:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

• Ehh, I'm not sold on it, but I'm not losing any sleep over it either (no pun intended). Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 03:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

1. • He declined a professional playing career himself, turning down contract offers from the Baltimore Colts and a 24th-round NFL Draft selection by the Dallas Texans. Why? Did he just prefer to enter the coaching ranks, or was there another reason for it?

• I don't know. Did not see any reasons given in my research when writing the article. I assume he preferred coaching, but that is just my opinion. Strikehold (talk) 06:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

• This isn't all that important. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 03:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

1. • Ward listened to the protestations While "protestations" is a word, it's kind of a dollar ninety-eight word. Suggest protests or complaints

• I don't see a problem with it, but would have no problem with a change to "protests" as they are synonymous. I changed to "player's grievances" as it may be more specific. Feel free to change to "protests" if you'd like. Strikehold (talk) 06:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

• Grievances works. "Protestations" just seemed a little overly formal. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 03:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

1. • A fairly long paragraph in the "College career" section just rattles off awards Ward won. Perhaps this should go as a separate subsection?

• Y I split off an "Awards and honors" subsection. Strikehold (talk) 06:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

• I like it. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 03:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

1. B. MOS compliance: Again, mostly okay, but...

   • The lead seems a little short. Even though this isn't a super long article, I think the lead should almost always be at least 2 paragraphs. However, this might actually be satisfied by simply putting whitespace in the lead, say, make everything after "In 1950" a new paragraph.

• Y It was also slightly lengthened by the AP All-American mention. Strikehold (talk) 06:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

1. • Article seems a little reliant on block quotes. Not sure if this is a big deal.

• I tried to minimize the usage (think I cut one or two I originally had put in), but think those remaining are better given verbatim in the words of the speaker rather than as a paraphrase. I shortened the Friedgen quote and incorporated without a block quotation. Strikehold (talk) 06:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

• Looks good. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 03:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

1. • Is there a source for the embedded list in the infobox?

• What specifically? I believe all the information is repeated in the main body where it is cited. Strikehold (talk) 06:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

• Ahh good point. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 03:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

1. • How about the dates for his tenures as an assistant coach with the various schools?

• The sources only said that he coached at those places for unspecified years before his head coaching career. I actually remembered that assistant coaching tenures are included in the Maryland media guides, and added his tenure as an assistant there. I'll have to look for the other schools' media guides, and will add the info if I can find it. Strikehold (talk) 06:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

• Found info on Iowa State, but couldn't find anything with specific years for Oklahoma or Army. Strikehold (talk) 07:53, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

• Well they're there now. Did you find them later? I found years for his time in Canada myself. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 03:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I've been called away, but I'll be back this evening with more. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 17:43, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok...

1. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources: Well structured, and covered through the article. There were two references that were the same individually linked twice in the article, but I just went ahead and fixed that myself. Assume good faith with the print source.

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary: Tentative plus here. I'm a little worried about reference 8 being inherently dated (2007 record book), but as long as it's kpet up to date, it's not really a problem.

• Neither of the facts for which it is cited are time-dependent, and the same is true for all references. I don't think there is any information on records he currently holds, so I don't think information becoming outdated should be a concern. One of the CR #8 cites is for awards he won and the other for how many All-Americans Tatum had at Maryland. Tatum's long dead, so there's no chance he will go back to coach any more All-Americans at Maryland :) Strikehold

(talk) 06:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

My mistake, then. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 03:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

1. C. No original research:

2. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects: I think so. It's tough to really research a playing career from 60 years, and this article does well at it. It's not to featured-quality or anything, but it doesn't have to be.

   B. Focused:

3. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias: Looks to be so

4. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

5. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: Very reasonable fair-use rationale for the one image in the article.

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: The image needs a caption. I was going to put it in myself, but the file page doesn't afford very much information.

• Y Added. Strikehold (talk) 06:54, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

1. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: Pretty close, but I can't pass it just yet. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 17:44, 26 August 2009 (UTC) Looks good. Well done. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 03:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks. I'll address these concerns in the next few days and will respond here when I do. Strikehold (talk) 09:16, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

• Okay, I think I've addressed all the concerns. I'll respond here to any follow-up questions or comments. Strikehold (talk) 06:54, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

• I've added some new information because I found a few new sources. You may want to check the diffs and add any additional commentary if necessary. Strikehold (talk) 07:53, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll be back to this article later tonight. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 20:29, 30 August 2009 (UTC)