Wikipedia:Peer review/Washington Redskins seasons/archive1

Washington Redskins seasons
I've listed this article for peer review because with a little more work, it can compete for Featured List status. I think its up-to-par with other like it (Cleveland Browns seasons and New England Patriots seasons) and would be a valuable part to the rest of the Team season pages. Any comments, criticisms, or questions would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Jwalte04 (talk) 23:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR t 15:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Comments from Twigboy
I am aware that some of these issues are also present in your referenced lists, but that does not conventionalize them: &mdash;Twigboy (talk) 22:26, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not a big fan of the self-referential statement This is a list of .... Consider rewording.
 * I could not think of anything other than that to start it, but since its the same on all similar pages, I decided to just keep it.
 * The Redskins won the ... also played in and lost can be condensed to pipe-link the years, i.e.: won the 1937 and 1942 NFL championships and Super Bowls ...
 * ✅ done.
 * Only three teams have appeared ...: change Redskins' five to just Redskins. Express the count of five in the next sentence, adding something like with five to the end.
 * ✅ completed.
 * The "periods of success" should be refined (as a nontitle year could still be considered successful) to state, for example, All of the Redskins league titles were attained during two ten-year spans. From 1936 to 1945...
 * ✅ Did it, but could not think of anything for period of failure.
 * A brief explanation of the differences in division titles (pre-1970, post-1970), league titles (Super Bowl era/before) and Wild Card qualification (pre- and post-realignment) would aid the understanding. Wikilink to History of National Football League Championship, because it doesn't need to be an exhaustive explanation.
 * not sure what that means
 * Abbreviations—such as COY, ROY, BBA—should be defined in a footnote or next to the color key. Or better yet, spell it out (there's enough room) on at least the first reference. Per WP:EGG.
 * ✅ I wrote them out in full during their first reference. I don't know if I like too much how it looks, but if people want it, they got it.
 * Spell out Cleveland in C. Rams. I would also spell out L.A., but I could concede based on the ubiquitousness of the abbreviation. Maybe note somewhere about your convention of listing the city name if the opponent has since left that city.
 * ✅ completed.
 * Conventionally, postseason is used rather than playoffs when referring to win-loss records of such. Divisional Playoffs and Wild Card Playoffs are proper terminology. Also the header for that column should be one word Postseason.
 * ✅ completed.
 * The Eastern Division playoff existed as a tiebreaker, as a variant of the modern tiebreaker system. Therefore, the 1st in 1943 does not require unique highlighting. It should be highlighted as a division title. Those games are considered by the NFL to be equivalent to the Divisional Playoffs of today. Remove the one-game playoff from the key as well.
 * ✅ completed.
 * Use footnotes to explain tiebreakers, much like Browns and Patriots, just not as wordy as those.
 * ✅ completed.
 * Thumbs up for thorough references.
 * Thanks. Jwalte04 (talk) 23:05, 6 January 2008 (UTC)