Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Peer review/2007 Hawaii Bowl

2007 Hawaii Bowl
I have added a lot of information to this article. I have used 2006 Chick-fil-A Bowl as a template. My goal is to first get it to Good Article, than Featured Article listed. I will improve on both when help is listed.  P G Pirate  01:59, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I've got a few comments:
 * There's a big problem with Image:Boise State offense in the 2007 Hawaii Bowl.jpg . The copyright information you've provided doesn't jive with the watermark given on the image itself. Wikipedia can't use copyrighted images. If the author gave permission for his image to be used, he's got to state as much and provide a non-watermarked image. This is a problem I ran into with 2006 Chick-fil-A Bowl, and if you can get an email from the photographer granting his permission to use that license on Wikipedia, and if you can get him to provide an unwatermarked image, we should be good.
 * Need some citations in the "Selection Process" section -- at least one per paragraph.[[Image:Yes check.svg|15px]]
 * Try switching the headers to white text in the statistical summary tables. It's kind of difficult to read the black text against the blue and purple of the headers.[[Image:Yes check.svg|15px]]
 * There's a few citation problems, mostly formatting issues. Be sure to provide the title, publisher, author, publishing date, and access date for websites. The Awful Announcing link, for example, needs to have all of these things, and I know they're available.[[Image:Yes check.svg|15px]]
 * Be sure to upload your photographs on Wikimedia Commons as well -- that's something most Featured Article reviewers will suggest, and it makes them accessible to a lot of other searchers.
 * My main suggestion would be to add more citations. There's no real reason to have something that was publicized this widely rely on a single citation for 10 cites (ECU Media Guide).
 * Add indexing categories for the individual teams.[[Image:Yes check.svg|15px]]
 * Copyedit for consistency. You refer to Conference USA as both CUSA and C-USA throughout the article. I'd recommend choosing one format and sticking with it.[[Image:Yes check.svg|15px]]
 * In the team selection section, it might be helpful to give a brief overview of each team's season prior to the bowl selection. How did each team earn the right to be selected?[[Image:Yes check.svg|15px]]
 * In the first paragraph of the game summary, try wikilinking the officials' positions rather than weblinking them. Weblinks in the middle of text are usually frowned upon as you start to move into Good and Featured Article territory.[[Image:Yes check.svg|15px]]
 * All in all, it's a good article, and you've definitely come a long way with it in such a short time since the game. I'd say the photographs, team selection and statistical summary portions need the most work. The copyright issues with the photographs need to be worked out, the team selection section needs to go into a bit of detail about each team's 2007 season, and the statistical summary section really needs to have more citations. It's about as long as it should be, but you really need more citations from different sources -- newspapers saying that "such-and-such decided the game" are perfect but tough to find. I'd suggest recaps from local newspapers would do the trick -- check the Honolulu, Carolina, and Boise papers for good stories to cite. JKBrooks85 (talk) 03:15, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Review by Johntex
One of the first things I do when reviewing an article is to run the semi-automatic javascript program. It has the following suggestions for that article: I am going to work on some of the above and I'll list more suggestions here as I find them. I am going to number them so they will be easier to reference in case you want to discuss any of them here. Johntex\talk 02:32, 9 February 2008 (UTC) Johntex\talk 02:51, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This is a very good article. I have added some thoughts to User_talk:PGPirate but I will copy them here in case anyone else is inspired to work on these or comment on them:
 * 1) Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
 * 2) Consider adding more links to the article; per Manual of Style (links) and Build the web, create links to relevant articles.[?]
 * 3) Per What is a featured article?, Images should have concise captions.[?]  I fixed two captions.  The script still complains but it is just complaining about the image in the infobox because the script does not recognize that it is in fact an infobox (see below).
 * 4) You may wish to consider adding an appropriate infobox for this article, if one exists relating to the topic of the article. [?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually) - You can ignore this one because it just does not recognize the infobox because it does not start with the word "infobox".''
 * 5) Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 89 yards, use 89 yards, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 89&amp;nbsp;yards.[?] - I fixed all of these.
 * 6) Per Wikipedia:Context and Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, if January 15, 2006 appeared in the article, link it as January 15, 2006.[?]
 * 7) The script has spotted the following contractions: didn't, couldn't, weren't, didn't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
 * 1) I suggest added some links to articles that can help explain the game to a reader who is unfamiliar with the topic. In 2005 Texas Longhorn football team we handled this will See also links.  (E.g. See also: American football positions and Glossary of American football)  UPDATE:  I see now you do have two links like that at the very bottom, but I tried to put them in the sections where I thought the reader might need them.  I prefer that approach since I think it is more helpful.
 * 2) Per WP:LEDE the introduction of the article should only summarize facts found in the body of the article. In other words, there should be no fact found exclusively in the lead.  However, the info about the attendance: "the attendance of 30,467 was the largest crowd to attend a Hawaiʻi Bowl game that didn't feature the host school." does not seem to be in the article.  I'm not sure about the schools final records either.
 * 3) Several football-specific or football-centric terms do not seem to be explained or linked on their first usage. These include "first half", "first quarter" and "return" from the lead section.   There are probably others.  I would link them to the appropriate letter in Glossary of American football, for example "return" would become return.  If the term is not in the glossary you can add it!  I added several new terms along the way like that.