Talk:1906–1917 Stanford rugby teams/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Toa Nidhiki05 (talk · contribs) 19:38, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this article.  Toa   Nidhiki05  19:38, 12 March 2013 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Overall, this list is on a very interesting and mostly unknown topic to most casual football fans. Very good readability and information.
 * Thank you for the review, one question below before I get started in the next couple of days. --Esprqii (talk) 17:57, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

*The page needs to be renamed to "1906-17 Stanford rugby teams" to comply with the MOS for article titles.
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Title
 * Title
 * We would need the en-dash in there, so it should be 1906–17 Stanford rugby teams. Do you have a link to this MOS requirement? I couldn't find it, and since moves are a big deal, I want to verify this before I do. --Esprqii (talk) 17:57, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The relevant policy would be WP:YEAR, I believe - I had one of my FL nominations, List of NFL champions (1920-69), run through the same issue and it had to be named from "1920-1969" to "1920-69".  Toa   Nidhiki05  18:54, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll do that last.
 * ✅ Someone else took care of this one.

*Canada and Australia need to be linked.
 * Lede

*Might want to change "Australia national teams" to "Australian national teams".
 * ❌ The article it links to refers to the "Australia National Team" so that didn't seem the right name. I rephrased the sentence slightly to clarify that the links go to the national team articles, not the country articles. Let me know if that works.

*No need for parenthesis around "Due to World War I".

*Split "and by 1905, as many as 18 deaths were attributed to the game" into its own sentence. Currently the whole thing runs a bit long. Speaking of which, the latter part of that page is not really correct - the total of 18 deaths is for 1905 alone. It might be useful to note that 159 players were 'seriously injured' as well.
 * Switch to rugby
 * A fair point. I need to do a bit more research on this one.
 * ✅ Broke out the sentences and provided some more detailed text and a specific reference.

*Take out the 'to' in front of 'Canada'

*"The pressure at California was stronger (especially as the school had not been as successful in the Big Game as they had hoped), and in 1915, California returned to football." remove the comma after '1915'.
 * Return to football

*"Stanford played its 1915, 1916, and 1917 "Big Games" as rugby against Santa Clara while California's football "Big Game" in those years was against Washington; but both schools desired to restore the old traditions" replace 'while' with 'and' and replace the semicolon with a comma

*Link California, Nevada, and Utah.

*Clarify that James F. Lanagan was the team's football coach.
 * Season results

#:: The only issue I see is that the success of the rugby team is not mentioned - perhaps include the overall record as a rugby team, and mention the team had two undefeated seasons.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Really good point, I need to do a bit more research on that one.
 * ✅ Added this to the beginning of the "Return to football" section.


 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * All images are public domain, so no real issue here
 * 1) Overall: Fix these issues and I will pass the article. Good work, the article now meets the criteria and is passed!
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall: Fix these issues and I will pass the article. Good work, the article now meets the criteria and is passed!
 * Pass/Fail: