Wikipedia

Talk:2008 Pittsburgh Steelers season

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page
Good article2008 Pittsburgh Steelers season 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 11, 2009Good article nomineeListed

SOS

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

You need a source stating that the Steelers have the toughest schedule--and even then you should probably qualify it to indicate how that judgment is reached. Samer (talk) 16:57, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

I figured that it meant that the teams they play in '08 had the highest combined winning percentage in '07; higher than any other team's '08 opponents that is. Blackngold29 (talk) 19:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

It was on SportsCenter today. I added the citation, but do not have the season or episode as SportsCenter doesn't really have them (that I can find). The episode aired at 8 AM EST. If anyone knows how to find this info please add it. Blackngold29 (talk) 13:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC) Another citation has been added, that should suffice. Blackngold29 03:56, 26 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

I found the page on the NFL Website that listed the teams by their strength of schedule, showing the Steelers opponents with a winning percentage of .598 in 2007, 12 teams with +.500 record in 2007, and 8 teams that were in the playoffs in 2007.Terry Chapman (talk) 06:31, 7 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Dates in game heading

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Would there be any opposition to removing the date from each week's heading? I think it would look better if it was just "Week One: Houston Texans". We can include the date right above the "Game time" and it is still in the Schedule at the top. I think that it is more important to put the emphisis on the team played instead of the date, because when all is said and done it's the opponent, not the date that counts. Thanks! Blackngold29 06:20, 2 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Article length

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

I have been working to keep this article updated and in top form for a few months now—including altering a few things from past seasons as well as developing new features in search of that "perfect season artcle". For better or worse, in that time it has grown to 67 kilobytes in length after only the first week of regular season play. The prose recap for game one was nearly 3,500 bytes in itself. I have realized that, due to the guidelines of article size, we must take action to prevent it from becoming too long. I've considered removing the "Ownership restructure" section as it is identical to the paragraph on the franchise article. I feel that we should concentrate primarily on the team's on-field play, though as of now I would like to keep the "Off field activity" of the offseason. If I make any changes or large removals from the article, please do not hesitate to contact me here or my talk page with any concerns that you may have. Thank you. Blackngold29 14:57, 8 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hey Blakngold, I'll do a thorough copy-edit when I get a chance. Hopefully we can get that source count down. Grsz11 →Review! 17:43, 10 November 2008 (UTC)Reply
I really don't see a reason to reduce the number of cites. Citations do not count as article length, and I always think it's better to have too many souces than not enough. There's some here and there which repeat themselves that could probably go, but I don't think we should remove them just to remove them. I think the copy edit is a good idea, but try to keep everything about the same length (game summaries are about 200 words). Blackngold29 19:42, 10 November 2008 (UTC)Reply
Ya, what I meant was consolitading two cites that may say the same thing, or like I did in the draft: instead of citing an article once for 5 consecutive sentences, it only needs cited once at the end. Grsz11 →Review! 20:36, 10 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Scoring summaries

edit

I developed the weekly scoring summaries and the statistics leaders to try to find something new for the article, but I didn't anticipate that it would increase the length as much as they have. I estimate each week's summary at around 1,500 bytes and if they are put on every week the article length will near around 150,000 bytes which is a little too big per the guidelines of article size. I think that by eliminating the scoring recap and leaders each week we could save a significant amount of space. I would like to leave some info, like time, referee, link to NFL.com recap, and attendance. In place of this, I would like to create a statistics section similar to that of NHL season articles; which would also be something new to NFL season articles. I hope to start the transition over the next few days, unless somebody has another idea. I have tried to trim the weekly prose recaps to 250–300 words, which I think is a good length, I think the emphisis should be on the prose rather than the scoring. Pending a playoff run, I would love to bring the summaries back for those games. Thanks! Blackngold29 17:49, 26 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Harrison

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I can't find where it's mentioned that Harrison is Defensive MVP, but he's the first undrafted player to do so per [1]. Grsz11 19:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Good info. It's right under the "Regular season" heading. Added. Thanks. blackngold29 21:19, 6 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

The article announcing James Harrison as Defensive Player of the Year was at NFL.com, here it is: http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d80de6f94&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

I added the reference to the article behind the quote about Harrison. Terry Chapman (talk) 06:49, 7 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

writing style, GA, etc

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago8 comments4 people in discussion

Okay: I saw this article at GAN, and as a long-time Steelers fan myself, thought I might consider reviewing it, but when I read through it I saw that the writing is pretty spotty, flat in some places and awkward in others, not really GA-level in my opinion -- so I thought I would be able to contribute more by helping out with a writing tune-up. I started by reworking the lede yesterday, but today I am discouraged to see that the edit has been reverted with an edit summary of "Changes were too specific and POV". I sort of understand where the "POV" part is coming from, but I don't really understand what "too specific" means, and more importantly, I am wondering whether it makes sense to stick around. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 22:22, 16 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I reverted those edits because basically the lead should be general as it has to cover the whole article and shouldn't be too long. I have found sports to be a unique topic to write about on WP because of the NPOV policies, whereas the sports section in any newspaper (most of which also try to be NPOV) is full of POVs that most people probably don't even recognize at first glance. Keep in mind that as WP writers we don't have any obligation to make the articles fun or exciting to read—it's about the info not entertainment. There are only two other season article GAs, and neither is from a recent year, so there is little to base this on. I can see where you are coming from, but I have been working on this article for over a year and feel that it is up to GA quality at this point. blackngold29 03:20, 18 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
I like many of the edits made by Looie496. It seems a bit heavy-handed to simply revert them completely. -- Deejayk (talk) 21:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
Things that are cited in the article's body do not also need cited in the lead, that one should probably be reverted back. The wording (try to improve vs. coming off...) is fine with me. blackngold29 22:49, 18 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
I wouldn't pass this article as GA for one reason: too long. I suggest trying to snip away at some of the details in the week-by-week parts. --Midnightdreary (talk) 17:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Considering prose this article is not that long, and prose is all that counts for WP:LENGTH. When you add up multiple schedules, draft selection list, and over two hundred citations with templates it adds a lot of empty size. I could have easily made this article four times as long; I was concious of length from the beginning (see the "Article length" section above for more). blackngold29 20:50, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
This is the sort of thing where we should look for precedents. A couple pre-existing GA status football season articles: 1986 New York Giants season and 1990 New York Giants season - they both still easily fall below the 50k recommended limit. Even with the tables, references, etc., this article is huge. I'm not trying to be critical or argumentative, but that's my two cents. --Midnightdreary (talk) 04:29, 6 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
The tables in those articles are much simpler because they don't include TV info, etc. Also the articles do not include the week-by-week info and links because they don't exist for those seasons. There are about one quarter number of the citations in this article (remember how template "size" adds up when you have 200). Those two articles were approved nearly two years ago and criteria changes, entire sections are lacking citations that should be there. I understand that we should follow precedents, but not at the expense of quality, and I feel the quality of this article is higher than those. blackngold29 21:43, 9 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
edit
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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) 14:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on 2008 Pittsburgh Steelers season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

 N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:23, 22 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on 2008 Pittsburgh Steelers season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

 N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:39, 23 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on 2008 Pittsburgh Steelers season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

 N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:49, 1 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 19 external links on 2008 Pittsburgh Steelers season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 2008 Pittsburgh Steelers season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:04, 13 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on 2008 Pittsburgh Steelers season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2008_Pittsburgh_Steelers_season&oldid=1196522169"