Talk:2013 Alabama Crimson Tide football team/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sportsguy17 (talk · contribs) 21:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

I shall review this article. Please note that I am a WikiCup participant, but am not doing this just to collect points. I do have a new semester of classes starting tomorrow and may only be available during the weekend and sometimes on the weekdays. But I'd love to review this article.  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 21:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)


 * No worries on a timeline getting this done as it is a longer article. Thanks for taking the time to do this and I look forward to working with you through this review. Patriarca12 (talk) 22:26, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

I will be using 2012 Alabama Crimson Tide football team as a point of reference, an article you were a main contributor to. So, lets begin:


 * Lead
 * In the first paragraph, turn Sugar Bowl to 2014 Sugar Bowl without the nowiki tags. It can be confusing and some might confuse it with the 2013 Sugar Bowl, since the NCAA football season goes into early 2014, thus 2013 teams play in 2014 bowls.
 * Good call, changed to read 2014 Sugar Bowl.


 * In the second paragraph, remove the comma in between "two-time" and "defending".
 * Done


 * In the third paragraph, change "the Alabama defense" to "Alabama's defense".
 * Done


 * Before the season
 * Previous season is all good.
 * In February player arrests, add some wikilinks to perhaps the player names if and only if they are not redlinks. I also think the whole thing could be combined into one flowing paragraph.
 * None of the four players have separate articles as each at this time would likely fail WP:NCOLLATH at this time. I have reworked the section a bit and managed to arrange it as a single paragraph.


 * Spring practice looks good.
 * Fall camp also looks good.

I'm going to leave it at that for now and when your done, you can ping me if I don't respond within 24 hours or leave me a talkback template on my talk page. This article looks good and Alabama once again never fails to impress me.  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 22:20, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * First round of comments addressed. Please let me know if you see anything else in these areas that need addressing as we move forward through this review and it will be handled. As an aside, thanks for the compliment on this article in general as it is appreciated as I continue to work through all 119 completed Alabama seasons! Patriarca12 (talk) 01:50, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

OK, my last round of comments before my final review:


 * Personnel
 * In the section about returning starters, reference that. Its pretty important. Just references comparing the rosters or news reports are fine.
 * Citations added

That's it. Otherwise, everything else looks great and ping me once you've added the reference and I shall be passing the article.  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 03:30, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to look at this as it was much appreciated. Roll Tide! Patriarca12 (talk) 00:45, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

After a careful, sweeping review, I do not see any further outstanding issues, so see below for my review:

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality, no copyvios, spelling and grammar:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) 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:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) 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:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Pass! Excellent work. Roll Tide!  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 02:12, 30 January 2014 (UTC)