This article is within the scope of WikiProject College football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
college football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.College footballWikipedia:WikiProject College footballTemplate:WikiProject College footballcollege football articles
This article is part of WikiProject Alabama, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to
Alabama on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the
project page to join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.AlabamaWikipedia:WikiProject AlabamaTemplate:WikiProject AlabamaAlabama articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
I really do not feel like the game summary section is neutral to any extent, and much of it is original research. Several examples:
"It was evident from the warm-ups prior to the game: one team came to hit and play, one merely showed up." (According to who?)
"The Alabama players, disheartened at the loss of Outland Trophy winner Andre Smith, were caught flatfooted by the fast and precise Utes."
"The Tide, having underestimated Utah and suffering letdowns emotionally after the Florida loss and the attrition to their O-Line, could not recover mentally in this game."
"Alabama fans honorably congratulated their tormentors..."
"...leaving Utah fans to exult in the best season their team has ever had."
I'm tempted to remove the entire section (mainly added by
Mbobmean), which I feel may just be vandalism to see what he could put on here before it was removed. If any of these things are true, they all definitely need sources per
WP:V. – LATICS talk 18:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC)reply
As someone who's written a lot of similar articles, I'd have to agree that it's really NPOV. That said, it's a fun bit of sportswriting. It just doesn't work for Wikipedia.
JKBrooks85 (
talk)
22:08, 19 March 2009 (UTC)reply
Yeah, I'm not saying the summary is incorrect or anything, as much as I hate to admit it. But yeah, it's far from being an encyclopedic read. – LATICS talk 23:04, 19 March 2009 (UTC)reply
Dead link
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!