Wikipedia:Peer review/2007 Fiesta Bowl/archive1

2007 Fiesta Bowl
Looking to get this article up to GA quality. Any tips would be appreciated.↔NMajdan &bull;talk 19:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Automated Peer Review
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question. You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, ↔NMajdan &bull;talk 19:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The lead of this article may be too long, or may contain too many paragraphs. Please follow guidelines at WP:LEAD; be aware that the lead should adequately summarize the article.[?]
 * If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.[?]
 * Per Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called  ==The Biography== , it should be changed to  ==Biography== .[?]
 * Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at Guide to layout.[?]
 * There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
 * it has been
 * might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).[?]
 * The script has spotted the following contractions: wouldn't, couldn't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
 * Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

Wafulz

 * The article is full of weasel words, and the writing does not hold the appropriate tone. For example: "Oklahoma was the designated home team and was favored by 7½ points, but in a classic battle, the Broncos won in overtime, 43-42" should be "Oklahoma was the designated home team and was favored by 7½ points, but the Broncos won in overtime, 43-42"
 * The majority of the third sentence is not needed. Just tell us relevant facts- we don't need to know everything about the Fiesta Bowl to find out who is playing. We have Fiesta Bowl for that.
 * The lead is too short. See WP:LEAD.
 * Avoid phrases like "many felt" and "some say". These are weasel words again.
 * Try to write it more like an encyclopedia article and less like a news feature.
 * Does the new stadium needs its own section?
 * "Game legacy" should be replaced with "Game summary." It should really be shorted- it's not supposed to be a full play-by-play
 * Rename the section "OT" to "Overtime". Non-sports fans may not understand what's going on.
 * Get rid of personal commentary like "She seemed surprised, but enthusiastically accepted". Just say she accepted.
 * Remove most of the "Instant classic" section. This is speculation and opinion, which is not allowed
 * "Final game facts" is not necessary. Redundant material should be removed, and other material should be merged into the rest of the article.
 * The "Reaction" section has too many quotes. Try and summarize opinions.
 * Image:TFB Logo Brand tag2.gif needs a fair use rationale.

This article has a ways to go before being a good article. Be sure to read the good article criteria.-Wafulz 22:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)