Wikipedia

Talk:Paul Brown/GA1

< Talk:Paul Brown
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Sarastro1 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago49 comments2 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Sarastro1 (talk · contribs) 22:12, 25 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

This looks pretty good overall. There are a few concerns with encyclopedic tone, but nothing major, just a list of nit-picks.

Lead

  • "Brown in 1968 helped found and coach the Bengals": Maybe "In 1968, Brown co-founded and coached the Bengals"
  • "He was the first coach to call plays in to his quarterback…" Not too sure what this means
  • "…give players intelligence and personality tests and test players on their knowledge of a playbook.": I think this sentence has run out of steam by this point, and there are a couple too many ands.
  • "Brown also played a role in integrating the game…": This is a little clunky, but I'm not too sure that I can think of a way to improve it. "Integrating the game" does not sound quite right.

Early life

  • "imparted on his son a proclivity for meticulousness and discipline": A little wordy here, and I'm not too sure it's worth including. At the very least, it could be toned down.
  • "While he played football as a child, Brown weighed less than 150 pounds and at first concentrated his athletic energies on the pole vault": Is this "while" meaning although, or meaning at the same time?
  • "But Massillon coach Dave Stewart saw Brown's determination to be a good vaulter despite his size and brought him onto the football team": Not too sure that I can see the connection between the two parts of the sentence here; what does his size or determination have to do with the football team.
    • The point we're trying to get across is that he was small for a football player, but despite that he was undersized coaches notice his determination. I've tried to clarify this a bit.--Batard0 (talk) 07:57, 26 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • "Massillon posted a record of 15–3…": Could the win-loss thing be linked?
  • "As the Great Depression set in, Brown was happy to have a job, having married his high school sweetheart Katie Kester a year earlier.": A little random as written. Does it mean that he would not have accepted, but just wanted a job because of the depression? Otherwise, I'm not sure of the point of this sentence.

High school coaching career

  • "Brown only spent two years at Severn, but they were highly successful ones.": Not really a GA issue, but some redundancy here; maybe "Brown spent two, highly successful years at Severn".
  • "In his first season, the team went undefeated and won a Maryland state championship.": Similar, maybe "The team were undefeated in his first season, and won a Maryland state championship". Also, just checking that it is "a Maryland state championship", rather than "the Maryland state championship"?
  • "team's record was 5–2–1": A link here again? I always get confused when the 3rd number turns up!
  • "But Severn was no Massillon; it was not a hotbed of football, and academics took precedence": Unencyclopedic? And a little informal. Maybe merge with the next sentence and say something like Brown preferred the focus on football of Massillon and took the job when it became available.
  • "His assignment was simple: resuscitate a Tigers team that had fallen into mediocrity…": Again, I think we may be stretching encyclopaedic style.
  • First paragraph of Massillon Tigers: I'm not too keen on the long sentence-short sentence structure here, for example "No Tigers player was allowed to sit on the bench during a game. Brown made them stand.": It seems a little over-stylised.
  • "By then, Brown had set his football machine fully into motion…": Again, a little much?
  • "Brown invented the playbook and tested his players on their knowledge of it.": Sorry, lost me there.

College and military career

  • "Ohio State officials were skeptical about the 33-year-old Brown making the transition to college football, but they were swayed in part by the consequences of not hiring him.[32] The worry was that if Ohio State passed on Brown, the school might lose talented high school recruits loyal to him." Maybe merge these into one sentence? "Ohio State officials were skeptical about the 33-year-old making the transition to college football but worried that they might lose talented high school recruits loyal to Brown if they did not sign him."
  • "His men were to be "lean and hungry".[36] "The she-wolf fights best on an empty stomach," he told them.[36]" Not sure how necessary this is.
  • "Brown's first year at Ohio State was considered a success.": By who?
  • "which the school's boosters…": The what???
  • "The Buckeyes tied for second place in the Western Conference and finished 13th in the AP Poll, and Brown finished fourth place in balloting for national Coach of the Year." Long sentence, and a little hard to follow, but may work by cutting the first "and".
  • "The strong start was another proof both of Brown's system and his eye for talent": This looks a little too favourable to Brown and suggests editorial voice. We need to say who held this opinion.
  • One thing that does not really come across to me, as a non-specialist, is where all the college/school games were going. Were they just one of games, or part of a competition? The Western Conference is mentioned, and it says that a victory "gave the Buckeyes their first-ever national title", but I have no sense of what the teams were competing in.
    • College football is inherently confusing, but I tried to clarify it a bit. Basically teams compete in conferences -- I described the Western Conference (now the Big Ten) as one composed of teams from the Midwestern U.S. They can win conference titles by having the best record among teams in their conference, but there's no postseason tournament to decide which team is the best in the country. That is determined via a poll of sportswriters, coaches and other officials conducted by the Associated Press. The poll is not official, but teams use it to "claim" the national title. About 99.9% of the time, the claim is uncontested. I tried to clarify this part, too.--Batard0 (talk) 07:57, 26 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • "Brown was re-classified 1-A in February 1944 and commissioned two months later as a lieutenant in the U.S. Navy.": This is suggesting that he was earlier deemed unfit, but this is not in the article.
  • "Ward lined up deep-pocketed owners…": Not sure about "deep-pocketed" here. Maybe simply "wealthy".

Professional coaching career

  • "from the wreckage of the AAFC…" Encyclopedic tone?
  • "bringing the team the best running back in the game but also planting the seed of Brown's fall from grace in Cleveland": Again, a little grand, but also which Brown are we talking about, as we were recently introduced to another?
    • Indeed. I removed this part. The "Brown" is Paul Brown.
  • "It all came to crashing down…" Encyclopedic tone?
  • "He became particularly tight…" Encyclopedic tone?
  • "The final straw…" Encyclopedic tone?
  • "Ultimately, the relationship between coach and owner was never repaired, and Ernie Davis never played in a professional game, dying of his disease on May 18, 1963."
  • "Because Brown was still receiving his annual salary and liked to golf, it was said that the only two people who made more money at the sport were Arnold Palmer and Jack Nicklaus.": This could be rephrased to make it clear that "sport" here refers to golf.
  • "he was calling it quits" Encyclopedic tone?

Coaching tree

  • Slightly odd title here! And are there any references for this?
    • Hmm...I don't have any direct references. This has been in the article for some time. I could remove it, I think, until some decent sourcing can be found. I commented it out for now. "Coaching tree" is an American football term (borrowed from "family tree"). It's used to show how coaches influenced and were influenced by other coaches.--Batard0 (talk) 09:12, 26 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Head coaching record

General

  • I'm not a fan of citing every sentence, particularly when consecutive sentences have the same reference. It looks messy, if nothing else. Although not about GAs, I would recommend having a lokk at this, but this is not a pass/fail issue for this review, and I am happy to pass with the references like this.
  • Without anything too bad, I get a vague feeling that this article is a little slanted towards Brown. Just the odd phrase which seems to suggest he was very good. Again, not really a problem here, and anything which suggests POV is listed above. So, not a pass/fail issue.
    • I agree that it has some subtle bias. I put in a paragraph at the end of the lead to say Brown wasn't universally liked, which is reflected in the article. I also toned down some of the language here and there, and added in a bit about his firing saying the team's captain thought the Browns couldn't win with Brown as coach. Any other suggestions much appreciated.--Batard0 (talk) 09:12, 26 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • Dablink to AAFC.
  • Problem with ISBN on Levy book.

Sources

  • Unable to do full spot-checks, but able to do a few, just a few issues:
  • "His son Robin died of cancer in 1978. Brown and his first wife are buried at Rose Hill Cemetery in Massillon." not fully supported; only that Brown buried there, nothing about his first wife or son in either ref.
    • Added a citation for his son's death; I'm not sure where the rest of it came from. I don't see anything on his wife being buried there, so I removed it and substituted a more reliable source for Brown's burial place.--Batard0 (talk) 10:00, 26 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • "Brown was re-classified 1-A in February 1944 and commissioned two months later as a lieutenant in the U.S. Navy.": Ref gives wrong page: according to google books, this information is on the previous page and does not support "re-classified as 1-A".
  • Not sure what reference 136 is supposed to be supporting.

Images

  • I'm not sure that 3 fair-use images are justified here. One would be fine, but what justification do the other two have?
    • The two within the body of the article have been released by the copyright owner for use in non-commercial contexts, but still of course need a fair-use rationale. I was hoping to keep them on that basis, but would be happy to remove them if it's a stretch.--Batard0 (talk) 10:00, 26 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

I will place the article on hold for the moment, but there should be no real problems. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:22, 25 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Just want to say thanks for the excellent and thorough review. Everything is much appreciated.--Batard0 (talk) 14:20, 26 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

  • I also want to note, just FYI, that the article's lead section has been the subject of a minor editing dispute during the past month or so as it was waiting for a GA review. A user made some additions to the lead that called the Browns a "minor league" team, highlighted his losses in championship games and deleted some cited information, apparently in an effort to downplay Brown's accomplishments. While I think the spirit of these edits was good -- the article clearly needs to focus some more on the negative aspects of Brown's career -- they were generally disruptive. Another user reverted a first round of edits, and I reverted a second round of edits. I don't believe this qualifies as an edit war, which would be grounds for a quickfail, but I thought I ought to at least bring it to your attention in case you want to give it any consideration.--Batard0 (talk) 14:41, 26 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Final replies

  • All changes look good now, and happy to pass.
  • On sourcing, I was able to do enough spot-checks to be happy to pass, so no problem on the Cantor.
  • I'm not an image expert, and have no firm opinion either way. The cautious way would be to take them out, but I'll leave that up to you. Maybe check with someone better with images than me!
  • I think the situation you describe about editing is not necessarily a problem for GA the way you describe it, and I'm happy to pass anyway.
  • Passing now, well done! Sarastro1 (talk) 21:41, 26 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Paul_Brown/GA1&oldid=509316249"