Talk:2006 ACC Championship Game

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good article2006 ACC Championship Game has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 25, 2008Good article nomineeListed
May 24, 2008Featured topic candidatePromoted
September 28, 2009Featured topic removal candidateKept
March 31, 2010Featured topic removal candidateDemoted
May 4, 2011Featured topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

GA review[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    In the overview section the sentence --->"Neither team was highly regarded at the beginning of the 2006 season, but each team outperformed expectations to earn the right to play in the conference championship game, which was the second in the conference's history." might need to be re-worded a little, since it reads like a POV. In the Georgia Tech part, "appeared to have a chance to upset heavily-favored Notre Dame until the Fighting Irish scored 14 unanswered points to win the game." that sentence really needs to be re-written, as it also seems like POV. Wake Forest section, the word foe is there, but wouldn't rival be a better word? Same section, "The Blue Devils were considered one of the worst teams in Division I college football at the time..." is it necessary to include that the Blue Devils were considered one of the worst teams at that time? Same part, "In its sixth game of the season, Wake Forest suffered its first loss, a semi-colon needs to replace the comma, since its talking about the the team suffering the loss. "The Demon Deacons recovered quickly from the loss and proceeded to begin another winning streak, this time against ACC opponents." what ACC opponents? "The 30-0 win over Florida State marked several milestones for the Deacons." was the team that bad? I have a question for the Offensive matchups - Georgia Tech; as I've been reading 2007 Hawai'i Bowl and 1947 Sun Bowl and no where does it have anything with "John Doe, who was the ACC player of the year" stated. My question, does that need to be included in the beginning of the Georgia Tech sentence? "The person throwing the ball to Johnson, quarterback Reggie Ball, was not nearly as acclaimed." needs to be re-written. "how well Ball would recover from the setback was an important question heading into the ACC Championship Game." POV. "Despite being inexperienced coming into the season, Skinner performed superbly...", needs to re-written. Defensive matchups - Wake Forest, remove "honorable mention" from the first sentence, as it seems like POV. Game summary - Third quarter, "because" should not start at the beginning of the sentence. Fourth quarter, remove "the potential" from the second paragraph. Is there an article for the 2007 Gator Bowl? If not, then unlink 2007 Gator Bowl from the post-game effects. Same section, if your talking about Jacksonville, Florida, please add a link to it.
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
    It would be best if the overview section had sources to confirm what its stating. In the Wake Forest section, a source is needed for Riley Skinner replacing Benjamin Mauk for the time of Mauk's injury. In the pre-game buildup, a source for Wake Forest not won an ACC championship since 1970. Refs 36, 37 and 42 need to be fixed. A source is needed for the attendance in the game summary.
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article! Also, contact me if the above statements are answered.

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:26, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't mind me adding a quick comment, the lead section should also be expanded per Wikipedia:Lead section. GaryColemanFan (talk) 23:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh, I was going to say that, but 1966 Liberty Bowl passed as GA and only has one lead part. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:41, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A few comments and explanations on your review.

  • I'm not sure where it happened, but the lede was split into an overview section, which was uncited because it was originally part of the lede. I don't know if I did it or someone else did, but as I originally wrote it, it was all one part. I've restored that.
  • ACC Player of the Year isn't mentioned in 1947 Sun Bowl or 2007 Hawai'i Bowl because neither game featured a player who had earned that honor.
  • Honorable mention is part of the title, as in "All-America honorable mention linebacker". It's a bit of a mouthful, but it's the correct title.
  • Neither team was highly regarded -- which is why I put the citation to the preseason media poll to justify that phrase.
  • I can't say how bad Florida State was, as that would likely be NPOV, but I do agree that a 30-0 loss is pretty bad.

Let me know if there's anything else I can clear up for you. JKBrooks85 (talk) 08:45, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to JKBrooks, the article looks decent and has passed GA. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:10, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 15:13, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 2[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 15:13, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 3[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 15:13, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 4[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 15:14, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2006_ACC_Championship_Game&oldid=1196478693"