Wikipedia:Peer review/Otto Graham/archive1

Otto Graham

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to prepare it for an FA review. I'd be especially interested in knowing where it's lacking. I'm unsure, for example, whether it would be wise to expand upon Graham's career as the head coach of the Washington Redskins, or whether that would constitute unnecessary detail. I'm also curious whether it would be advisable to add a section with a table showing his year-by-year statistics. And of course any other criticisms and suggestions would be much appreciated. Are the fair-use rationales for the images sufficient? What about the reliability of the sources?

Thanks, Batard0 (talk) 12:29, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: I don't know much about football, though I have reviewed a few articles. This one looks pretty tidy and well presented. In regard to the specific questions you raise:-

• I don't think it is necessary to add more detail about Graham's unsuccessful time with the Redskins, a relatively minor hiccup in an otherwise successful career. It might be a good idea, though, to add any further information you can glean on the 15-year period that followed his return to the Coast Guard Academy in 1969.
  • I've added more detail on what happened after he returned to Coast Guard in 1969 up until his retirement in 1984.
• If you can prepare a statistical summary of Graham's career, that would be good (many people prefer to glance at lists rather than read articles). Be sure that the information in the table is accompanied by clear column headings and/or a key.
  • I'll put in a stat box with the appropriate headings and see where that goes.
    • I put in a stat box with full headings and a key, plus a coaching record. I'm not sure if this'll be seen as too much detail, but I threw it in there at the end in case it works.--Batard0 (talk) 20:37, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
• Of the two non-free images, I'd say the second is OK. I'm less sure that the first can be justified, bearing in mind that Graham is not identified; even if he can be, how does this picture help demonstrate his effectiveness as a passer or runner?
  • OK, I'll take the first out. He can be identified from his jersey number; the source also says it's him. I suppose it's hard to say how this demonstrates his effectiveness other than that it simply shows him running.

Other than these points I have numerous prose issues, some of which you should treat as suggestions rather than criticisms.

• British readers would appreciate links on terms such as sophomore, which are not used in the UK. Also "intramural fraternity" could do with a bit of explanation.
  • freshman, sophomore and senior are wikilinked now.
• Is "first-tem" a typo ("first-term")?
  • Indeed a typo. Thanks for the spot.
• The association between Northwestern and the Wildcats football team should be made explicit, not left to a link. Otherwise readers have to leave the article to discover who the wildcats are.
  • Called it the Northwestern Wildcats football team; would Northwestern's Wildcats football team be better?
• Care has to be taken in encyclopedia articles to maintain a neutral tone, hence the language has to be more formal than one would find in a sports journal. Thus I am a little wary of the use of terms such as "rout" to describe a heavy defeat. I will draw attention to other instances as they occur.
  • Called it "victory" instead.
• "Graham threw for two touchdowns in an upset of an Ohio State team coached by Paul Brown, handing the school its only loss of the 1941 season." Be a bit more specific than "the school".
  • Repeating "Ohio State" for clarity's sake.
• "signed up for the service" - I'd delete "the"
  • Better. Done.
• "But the Wildcats..." In encyclopedic prose it is generally inadvisable to begin sentences with "But..", which adds nothing here.
  • Deleted.
• What is "MVP"?
  • Americanism. Spelled out Most Valuable Player where it occurs and linked on first instance.
• "Big Ten Conference" linked in successive paragraphs
  • Second instance unlinked.
• $7500 a year and a monthly stipend of $250 makes the contract worth $10,500 a year; wouldn't this be simpler? You later say that the stipend was a large amount of money at the time - is that Referring to just the monthly amount? If so, £7,500 a year was absolutely huge.
  • Hmm...maybe the language isn't clear enough. The idea was he'd get $250 a month for the remainder of the war until he started playing for the team, at which point he'd make a salary of $7,500. Basically he was getting $3,000 a year during the war for doing nothing (although the sources don't put it this way, so I can't) and then would get $7,500 a year when he started playing. I've attempted to make this more explicit.
• "February of 1944": "of" seems superfluous
  • Yep. Removed.
• What was the Navy;s V5 cadet program?
  • Described in text as a pilot training course.
• "The war, however, did not last forever..." Indeed, but no literary flourishes, please. Likewise "droves of athletes streamed home...". Perhaps: "Towards the end of the war large numbers of serving athletes arrived home as the conflict..." etc
  • Changed to simply "Large numbers of athletes arrived home as the conflict..."
• I imagine that a perfect season means winning every game, but it might be as well to make this explicit.
  • It does. Tried to clear it up.
• "Graham became the team's uncontested leader..." As this is a fresh paragraph, identify the team; "the Browns'"
  • Did this.
• Link "interception". Does "He also threw three interceptions" mean that three of his throws were intercepted?
  • Linked. And yes, it does mean three throws were intercepted. It's football jargon Americans will likely know, but I'll try to word it more simply so everyone can understand.
• Link "shutout"
  • I changed it to "win" since 27-0 shutout in my view is redundant. It's like saying they won 27-0, holding their opponents scoreless.
• "...soon made mandatory". Can you be more specific, e.g. give the year masks became mandatory?
  • The source says "before long became mandatory". I'll look for a source that gives a specific year.
• "infamous" is POV/peacock, should be removed.
  • Removed.
• "When Brown pulled Graham..." Needs rewording in plain (non-football) prose).
  • Rephrased to say "When Brown took Graham out of the game..."
• "Graham's record as a starter was 114–20–4, including a 9–3 mark in the playoffs." Needs translating for us non-football people.
  • Rephrased to say the Browns' record with Graham as the starting quarterback ... including a 9-3 record in the playoffs..."
• "to focus on managing insurance and appliance businesses he owned." Needs a "the" after "managing"
  • Added.
• "With Graham at the helm in 1958, the all-stars beat the Detroit Lions 35–19". Clarify that this refers to the 1958 All-Stars game.
  • Rephrased.

I wish you every success with the article. If you wish to raise any point with me, or would like me to look again, please ping my talkpage. Brianboulton (talk) 16:18, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the help with this. People less familiar with the game always have the freshest eyes.--Batard0 (talk) 19:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)