Talk:History of the Cleveland Browns/GA1

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

Reviewer: Wizardman (talk · contribs) 18:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I'll review this article; given the length of it, the full review will be done over the course of a week or two. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 18:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks much. I'm ready to respond to any and all concerns, and will be as patient as you need me to be. I'll give it a go-over, too, since it's been some time since the nomination and a couple poorly sourced paragraphs seem to have been added since. --Batard0 (talk) 21:17, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Lead looks good, unfortunately that's s far as I've gotten so far. Free time was nonexistent this past week. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 05:13, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem at all. I know it's long. I can sit tight for as long as you need. --Batard0 (talk) 09:19, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Here's the first batch of comments:
 * Link Miami Seahawks in AAFC
 * Done. --Batard0 (talk) 07:37, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "and not even in a league" i think it can just say "and not in a league.."
 * Done. --Batard0 (talk) 07:37, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

AAFC now done. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 04:30, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Success section:
 * " And this time Cleveland dominated on both sides of the ball, intercepting Bobby Layne six times while Graham threw three touchdowns and ran for three more" I'd prefer not to use And to start a sentence, feels off.
 * "And" deleted. --Batard0 (talk) 05:15, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * " won their second NFL crown 56–10." I'd just say NFL championship, though this one isn't a big deal.
 * Substituted "championship", which is definitely better. --Batard0 (talk) 05:15, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

To ask, would you want another reviewer? this is going slower than I planned and I don't want to feel like I'm holding this up since I'm out of free time on my end. Wizardman 03:26, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm honestly fine to go through this as slowly as you like, but if you'd rather get someone else to do it, that's fine with me too. I can be patient; it's really not a problem. --Batard0 (talk) 03:35, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

More comments up, thru 1964:
 * "against the New York Giants – a game the Browns needed to win" could be a comma instead of a dash.
 * Done. --Batard0 (talk) 06:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * "in the NFL Championship game in frozen Green Bay against the Packers. " frozen could be rm'd, to me it feels like the language in some points is getting a bit too flowery.
 * Agreed. It needs to be more matter-of-fact in places. Definitely let me know if you see any other such instances. Changed this and also changed "battled it out" to "played". --Batard0 (talk) 06:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * " in frozen Green Bay against the Packers. The teams battled it out on a slippery, mucky Lambeau Field on January 2, 1966" The two sentences feel like they would be better combined.
 * Combined. --Batard0 (talk) 06:48, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * "While score was close" the score. Wizardman  04:45, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Nice catch. --Batard0 (talk) 06:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Next section:
 * The Jim Brown Hollywood stuff could be tightened to one paragraph, as some of the stuff feels more appropriate for his article rather than this one.
 * Agreed. Tightened to one graf, and extra material moved to Brown's page. --Batard0 (talk) 12:26, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
 * There's only one subsection in the post-64 section, so that can be removed since it isn't needed.
 * Good point. Removed. --Batard0 (talk) 12:26, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Up to 74 now, finally making some progress on my end. Wizardman 17:49, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Brian Sipe section:
 * "An aging Leroy Kelly, Jim Brown's surprisingly successful replacement in the backfield, " prose a bit too much here, extra adjectives can be cut.
 * Definitely. I got rid of the whole subclause "Jim Brown's surprisingly successful replacement in the backfield" because it seems to me it doesn't add much. I could add back "Jim Brown's replacement in the backfield" if you think it's a useful reminder for readers at that point in the article. --Batard0 (talk) 12:26, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Link Mike Pruitt.
 * Done. --Batard0 (talk) 12:26, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Up to 84 done. Wizardman 04:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

I put some time aside Thursday night to sweep through the rest of this article. Until then I'd like to at least see the above finished. Wizardman 05:03, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem. I'll wrap up the outstanding stuff tonight. The Brown stuff can easily be consolidated, and I'll move some to his bio. --Batard0 (talk) 11:51, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
 * These are addressed. Also thanks for the excellent Jim Brown suggestion. Let me know if you come across other areas where it could be condensed or feels too long -- I think the article generally is too big, although the FA-class History of the New York Jets is of similar length. --Batard0 (talk) 12:26, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Here's the review for the rest of the article:
 * "Jim Shofner was named as his replacement, at least on an interim basis, and the team finished 3–13." can be shortened to just say Shofner was named interim head coach.
 * Fixed. --Batard0 (talk) 10:47, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * "The Browns used it on quarterback Tim Couch, and took receiver Kevin Johnson and linebacker Rahim Abdullah in the second round" not sure if the second rounders are needed, and Couch can be combined with the previous sentence.
 * Added to previous sentence and deleted the second-rounders. --Batard0 (talk) 10:47, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * There are a few spots in the drive and fumble sections where things are overworded a bit, things in general that can be trimmed down to make clearer sentences.
 * Trimmed. I tried to remove everything I could without taking out anything essential. --Batard0 (talk) 11:20, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Of course, an extra paragraph will need to be added at the end with Jimmy Haslam's new ownership, now that that's official.
 * Added. --Batard0 (talk) 11:20, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I'll put this on hold, and once done this can finally be passed. Wizardman 03:10, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all the help and patience on this. Much appreciated. --Batard0 (talk) 11:20, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks good now. Moving forward, the prose may need a bit of fine-tuning still. It's at about 12,100 words now, and a good 500 could probably be removed without losing anything of substance. For now though, the article does pass GA status. Thanks for being patient with me as well, I've done 500+ plus reviews and I don't think I've ever had one that I've spent over a month on before. Wizardman  16:14, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks and I'm going to make a concerted effort to get it down to 10,000-ish words. 11,000 at maximum. It could potentially be broken into separate articles, but I'm a little against that because I think that with some more fine-tuning it could be made more manageable as one article. --Batard0 (talk) 16:59, 19 October 2012 (UTC)