The article was not promoted by Ian Rose 10:01, 18 November 2013 (UTC) [1]. reply
2007 Appalachian State vs. Michigan football game ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for featured article because I think it meets the criteria needed, and it would be an excellent addition to the featured articles group. It passed GAN a couple of months ago and underwent a
comprehensive peer review in July.
To give an overview of the article, this was a college football game between the Michigan Wolverines (Division I-FBS) and Appalachian State Mountaineers (Division I-FCS). The game was a massive upset, with the Mountaineers winning 34-32 on a last-second blocked field goal; this result was so shocking because the Mountaineers were in the FCS, the lower of the two levels of Division I football. For an international soccer comparison, the result would be roughly equivalent to a non-league team beating a Premier League team. The win resulted in all sorts of shenanigans at the App. State campus in Boone, NC, as well as at the stadiums of Michigan's many rivals, and many analysts called it one of or even the biggest upsets in the history of college football. both teams went on to have successful seasons, and the two are scheduled to PLAY A rematch in 2014.
Toa
Nidhiki05 22:01, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
reply
There are interesting program comparisons at ESPN.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:31, 23 September 2013 (UTC) reply
Note that at the top, I commented with source suggestions.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:25, 24 September 2013 (UTC) reply
Image review - captions that aren't complete sentences shouldn't end in periods; licensing is fine. Nikkimaria ( talk) 03:42, 27 September 2013 (UTC) reply
Comments –
Notes -- Although there appears consensus to promote based on the comments so far, this does need some more eyes on it to be considered a comprehensive assessment. Looks like it also needs a formal source review, for which I'll post a request at WT:FAC. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 03:16, 9 November 2013 (UTC) reply
Articles on sports are generally outside my comfort zone, and I'm poorly-equipped to tell whether the article goes on unnecessary tangents, or whether the charts are appropriate, or whether a given source is reliable, etc. (Can the article safely assume the reader will know what "converting a 3rd and one" is? I don't, but then again, the article shouldn't have to teach the rules of football.) What I can say is that prose flows well, the article seems complete, and I did not detect any problems with grammar or with bias. So I'm willing to give a support based on my limited capacity as a football-ignorant reader.
Also, the "References" section seems appropriate, except for a few minor concerns. First, I'm not sure "GoASU.com" should link to Appalachian State Mountaineers. Sure, GoASU.com is their news site, but there's a difference between the Vatican and News.va. (The site redirects to appstatesports.com anyway.) The same applies to SoConSports.com linking to Southern Conference. Also, is it a violation of WP:OVERLINK to link to ESPN.com 14 times in the references (along with other multiple links)? Besides these, the references seem fine, and my few spot checks showed the statements supported without plagiarism. – Quadell ( talk) 18:58, 10 November 2013 (UTC) reply
Oppose on problems with prose, sourcing, plagiarism, and WP:LEAD
Closing comment -- I'd left this open a while to give it a chance to garner further support for promotion but as there are still issues after almost two months, I'm afraid it's time to archive the nom. I realise it's a letdown after such a long haul but pls take the opportunity to resolve things and then renominate after the regulation two-week break, per FAC instructions. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 14:17, 17 November 2013 (UTC) reply
The article was not promoted by Ian Rose 10:01, 18 November 2013 (UTC) [1]. reply
2007 Appalachian State vs. Michigan football game ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for featured article because I think it meets the criteria needed, and it would be an excellent addition to the featured articles group. It passed GAN a couple of months ago and underwent a
comprehensive peer review in July.
To give an overview of the article, this was a college football game between the Michigan Wolverines (Division I-FBS) and Appalachian State Mountaineers (Division I-FCS). The game was a massive upset, with the Mountaineers winning 34-32 on a last-second blocked field goal; this result was so shocking because the Mountaineers were in the FCS, the lower of the two levels of Division I football. For an international soccer comparison, the result would be roughly equivalent to a non-league team beating a Premier League team. The win resulted in all sorts of shenanigans at the App. State campus in Boone, NC, as well as at the stadiums of Michigan's many rivals, and many analysts called it one of or even the biggest upsets in the history of college football. both teams went on to have successful seasons, and the two are scheduled to PLAY A rematch in 2014.
Toa
Nidhiki05 22:01, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
reply
There are interesting program comparisons at ESPN.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:31, 23 September 2013 (UTC) reply
Note that at the top, I commented with source suggestions.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:25, 24 September 2013 (UTC) reply
Image review - captions that aren't complete sentences shouldn't end in periods; licensing is fine. Nikkimaria ( talk) 03:42, 27 September 2013 (UTC) reply
Comments –
Notes -- Although there appears consensus to promote based on the comments so far, this does need some more eyes on it to be considered a comprehensive assessment. Looks like it also needs a formal source review, for which I'll post a request at WT:FAC. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 03:16, 9 November 2013 (UTC) reply
Articles on sports are generally outside my comfort zone, and I'm poorly-equipped to tell whether the article goes on unnecessary tangents, or whether the charts are appropriate, or whether a given source is reliable, etc. (Can the article safely assume the reader will know what "converting a 3rd and one" is? I don't, but then again, the article shouldn't have to teach the rules of football.) What I can say is that prose flows well, the article seems complete, and I did not detect any problems with grammar or with bias. So I'm willing to give a support based on my limited capacity as a football-ignorant reader.
Also, the "References" section seems appropriate, except for a few minor concerns. First, I'm not sure "GoASU.com" should link to Appalachian State Mountaineers. Sure, GoASU.com is their news site, but there's a difference between the Vatican and News.va. (The site redirects to appstatesports.com anyway.) The same applies to SoConSports.com linking to Southern Conference. Also, is it a violation of WP:OVERLINK to link to ESPN.com 14 times in the references (along with other multiple links)? Besides these, the references seem fine, and my few spot checks showed the statements supported without plagiarism. – Quadell ( talk) 18:58, 10 November 2013 (UTC) reply
Oppose on problems with prose, sourcing, plagiarism, and WP:LEAD
Closing comment -- I'd left this open a while to give it a chance to garner further support for promotion but as there are still issues after almost two months, I'm afraid it's time to archive the nom. I realise it's a letdown after such a long haul but pls take the opportunity to resolve things and then renominate after the regulation two-week break, per FAC instructions. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 14:17, 17 November 2013 (UTC) reply