Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2009 Orange Bowl/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 23:40, 11 July 2009.

2009 Orange Bowl

 * Nominator(s): JKBrooks85 (talk) 00:37, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm nominating this article in verse, and you probably haven't heard an idea that is worse.

I stole the idea from Jappalang, and for that I probably should hang.

This article is well-written and complete, and for prose quality it can't be beat.

Its citations have been checked, and its grammar has been pecked.

I'd like to thank Ealdgyth, Strikehold, Giants2008, and Maralia; Their suggestions certainly didn't cause melancholia.

Any comments, concerns, or questions would be worth more than a particle, but if you're wondering why I didn't use the name of the article ...

It's because nothing rhymes with orange. JKBrooks85 (talk) 00:37, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Support - Like JKBrooks said, I gave the article a pre-FAC review, and all my comments were resolved. I think it looks good, so despite being subjected to the above, I'm still going to support : ) Strikehold (talk) 00:14, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I know my verse / can be a curse, / but I'm sure you've seen worse. :) JKBrooks85 (talk) 04:37, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:14, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the second link check. JKBrooks85 (talk) 07:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Support - meets FA requirements. Dincher (talk) 17:36, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Image review: two appropriately licensed photos and one logo, which I think meets the lowest bar for non-free identification of the main subject (stricter standards would disagree). Preferably, a photo of the most significant moment of the match (if any) should be it, but as pointed out, if there is none, any shot becomes a non-descript photo of play that fails to differentiate the match from any other... Jappalang (talk) 12:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - Just wanted to add that the logo used in the article is for this, and only this, particular game, the 2009 edition of the Orange Bowl. It's my belief that even the most stringent interpretation of our policies allows for the fair use of the logo that represents the subject of the article itself. And it meets the guideline specifically for logos. Strikehold (talk) 12:48, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Comment: Now sir, what ye sayeth is not true, It can rhyme through and through. Once young, I came upon an orange, Which has been squeezed into a haliborange. Jappalang (talk) 12:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Comments –

Still recovering from fatigue after attending last night's/this morning's New York Yankees game, but not reviewing another Virginia Tech bowl article would be such a shame.

On the talk page, I gave a partial review pre-FAC, how much it helped, we shall soon see.


 * Game summary: Non-breaking spaces needed for dollar amounts. And add one more in Post-game effects.
 * Can we find the first names of the officials? I would be surprised if they couldn't be found in a box score somewhere. If not, put a space in the middle of J.Quinn.
 * I was actually kind of surprised that I wasn't able to find the first names of the officials. Both schools' copies of the box scores had just the initial, and the game broadcast (which I have a copy of and consulted) didn't mention them, either.
 * On a brief search, I couldn't find them anywhere. Not a big deal, even though it leaves the initials bare.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 01:38, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Third quarter: This game summary is not easy for me to find fault with (of course, I'm useless for spotting jargon), but I found some close repetition here: "The ball was fumbled by returner Danny Milligan, but Milligan recovered the loose ball and returned it to the Cincinnati 20-yard line." Change the second Milligan to "he"?
 * Fourth quarter: Either remove Tony Pike's first name from the second paragraph, or place it earlier.
 * "With the clock continuing to tick down" → "As the clock continued to tick down"
 * "to wind down the game clock and bring the game to an end." Second part is repetitive with the first. Perhaps use "contest" near the end of the sentence.
 * Statistical summary: Would prefer if three straight sentences didn't start with "He".
 * "giving him 23 field goals and breaking the Tech single-season record for successful field goals." "field goals" repeats itself here.

The article looks great, and I'm glad I got to read the rest before it was too late.

I'll keep an eye on this, but may need some time, as I must think of more words that rhyme.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 15:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The changes have been made, and I hope your attention does not fade. JKBrooks85 (talk) 04:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * With the changes done, I'm supporting this page. Have to run, before my bad rhymes cause outrage.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 01:38, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you! JKBrooks85 (talk) 03:47, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Support, see below  Comments  from to help this article reach FAC heaven:
 * "EST" should be spelled out and defined on the first appearance just like the other abbreviations.
 * "after the game, players from each team entered the National Football League (NFL) via the 2009 NFL Draft." The exact number (of players from each team) would be nice; it's always better to be precise.
 * Use "Before" instead of "Prior to", why use two words when one will do? (multiple occurences)
 * "The Cincinnati Bearcats ended the 2007 college football season with a 10–2 final record" "ended ... final" redundancy.
 * "the game in order to better simulate the feel"
 * "moved up the team's departure." moved up the date, I assume.
 * "Various travel agencies offered"
 * I know 'tis like a curse, but we must follow MOS for better or for worse. Comparable quantities should be written the same, and there are inconsistencies you must tame. (ex: "2,168 yards, 18 touchdowns, and seven interceptions")
 * "He also scored 10 touchdowns"
 * "Evans became just the sixth freshman in the history"
 * "The ceremonial performance of the national anthem was played by Arturo Sandoval" Performed on trumpet, I assume? Please clarify.
 * "Frank Beamer ordered kicker Dustin Keys" "sent" seems like a better work than "ordered".
 * "With time running out in the first half"-->While time was running out in the first half
 * "Cincinnati's offense sputtered and could not gain another first down" Imprecise subject; It was Cincinnati, not their offense that could not gain a first down.
 * But it was their offense that did not gain a first down.
 * Very true, good sir / it is to your knowlege that I will defer. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I quite like this rhyming thing; I'm watching this page, so no need to ping. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:54, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you're paying attention; getting reviews sometimes feels like detention. JKBrooks85 (talk) 04:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Do not fear, for the time when I shall re-review is near. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * FAC can't be rushed. My anticipation will be hushed. JKBrooks85 (talk) 09:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * "The Hokies had time for just one play"
 * "as Pike completed three consecutive passes: a 16-yard throw to Gilyard, a three-yard toss to Goodman, and a 14-yard pass to Gilyard"-->as Pike completed three consecutive passes: a 16-yarder to Gilyard, a 3-yarder to Goodman, and a 14-yarder to to Gilyard
 * "began to run out the clock" section link this to Running out the clock.
 * "Taylor began kneeling on the ball to wind down the game clock" In football kneeling down is not a continuous action, it's a set play. How many times did he kneel it?
 * "recording 97 yards in that department." "department" isn't that encyclopedic, how about "category"?
 * "Each team found some success on special teams as well"
 * "but he successfully converted "
 * "boost due to visitors arriving to watch the two games" noun + -ing is awkward.
 * Do any of the notes need references? Dabomb87 (talk) 15:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * More changes have been made. As to the last item, you tell me. I don't think they do. JKBrooks85 (talk) 22:21, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Here is my humble opinion:
 * Note 1 is a statistic, surely not common knowledge. I think it should be cited.
 * Note 2 is easily found. No need for a cite.
 * Note 3 is not common knowledge, and is about a living person. This definitely should be cited.
 * Note 4, not really, although a link to redshirt would be nice.
 * Note 5, I think the second sentence might be cited.
 * Note 6, I think a cite would be nice.
 * Obviously not Note 7. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:30, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * All changed except for the redshirt one. The wikilink is at the originating point of the footnote. JKBrooks85 (talk) 11:43, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see any citations added, though. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:01, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Now that's embarrassing ... I guess I didn't save my changes. JKBrooks85 (talk) 22:52, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I've tried to get them in place, but it doesn't look as though it worked ... is there anyone who could clean up the mess I've made? JKBrooks85 (talk) 23:13, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * See this; you need to use the #tag trick. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:23, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * *The #tag trick doesn't seem to work within infoboxes . JKBrooks85 (talk) 04:52, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

The two Sun Sentinel links have gone dead. I know I supported already, but pointing them out was in my head.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 00:52, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Damn. Replaced by offline citations. JKBrooks85 (talk) 11:43, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Support I gave this a thorough review for prose and MOS just before FAC. As I said there, I find it eminently understandable even for the football-challenged (i.e. me), and I'm confident that it meets the criteria. Maralia (talk) 15:32, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Comment Images need alt text (discussion). Dabomb87 (talk) 02:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Neat idea! I can see how that'd help folks with screen readers use Wikipedia. Alt text has been added. JKBrooks85 (talk) 10:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Support A joy to review, a pleasure to read; I'll leave you with a support and this tweak to the lead. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.