Talk:Bert Bell

there's nothing wrong with this article

it's okay. i think it's solid. i'm happy with it. i am sure copy editing could always make it better. but it's the best i could do. as far as a long ago complaint that maybe it does not show bell's compassion for the game, i dunno, i think i have portrayed him as very, to extremely, passionate to the success of the nfl. i think it meets good article criteria, however i have no time to reply to good article judges so i had to remove my request it be considered a good article. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:03, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Bert Bell/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Resolute (talk · contribs) 03:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

General

• Images are good
  • Not a GA requirement, but alternative text for images is recommended
• References look good.
  • Spotcheck shows they support the prose without any close paraphrasing.

• I wont use this to hold up the nomination, but in general, I find the language in the article unnecessarily complex. The author of the article has an impressive vocabulary, but I think it will confuse many readers and therefore cause them to lose interest. The first paragraph of the Philadelphia Eagles section is a good example of this. But I would probably oppose a FA nomination on this basis.

Okay, I will rewrite Ijustreadbooks (talk) 06:46, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

This is a long one, so will take some time to complete...

Okay I rewrote that first paragraph. That first paragraph was atrocious. I deleted a 1000 bytes from it. The whole Eagles section is a total disaster. I need major research there. It's just really bad. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:56, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Lead

• "Bell played football at the University of Pennsylvania, and as quarterback for the Quakers, he led his team to the 1917 Rose Bowl" - I initially assumed that he led the team to a win in the Rose Bowl. Perhaps clarify slightly to "he led his team to an appearance in the 1917 Rose Bowl"?

The genius fixed this. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 04:00, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

• Small nitpick: "During the Golden Age of Television, he tailored the game's rules to strengthen its appeal to mass media, and he enforced a blackout policy of locally televised home contests to safeguard ticket receipts." - the middle "he" is unnecessary. "During the Golden Age of Television, he tailored the game's rules to strengthen its appeal to mass media and enforced a blackout policy..."

The genius fixed this. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 04:02, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Early life

• "His father, a Quaker (c' 1884) during the early days of American football..." - I have no idea what (c' 1884) means, nor do I see how his father being a Quaker connects to the early days of American football. Can this be clarified somewhat? (I later realized that he played for the Penn Quakers and graduated with the class of 1884, but the lack of a wikilink to put "Quaker" in context and the shorthand for class makes this very confusing to someone not deeply familiar with either the school or the meaning of the shorthand)

User:Go Phightins fixed this.Ijustreadbooks (talk) 04:05, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

University of Pennsylvania

• "Bell entered Penn in the fall of 1914,[15] as an English major, and joined Phi Kappa Sigma." - The commas introduce unnecessary pauses. I'd probably remove them and move cite 15 to the end of the sentence.
• "...Bell temporarily capitulated sole possession of his quarterbacking duties until he conclusively reclaimed his position in the eight game..." - Not the slightest clue what this means. "Capitulated" is an unnecessarily complicated word in this context, and I have no idea what "the eight game" is, nor is it explained how he lost it.
• "Penn finished with a record of 7–2–1, 10th seed in the east." - 10th seed in the east of what?
• "After the war ended, Bell arrived back in the US in March 1919 with a discharge soon to be." - Soon to be what?

Early Career

• "Bell assembled the Stanley professional football team in 1920, but he disbanded it due to the negative publicity produced by the Black Sox Scandal." - Is Stanley a place, a company or what? Also, it is unclear how the Black Sox Scandal would impact a professional football team in an undetermined location. Finally, did the team ever play? It is implied they did not.

OK, I will have to reevaluate the syntax.Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

• "Bell was then an employee of the Ritz-Carlton in Philadelphia and he tried his hand as a stock broker and lost $50,000..." - His employment with Ritz-Carlton and his failure at the stock market do not appear related. Should be broken into separate sentences.

Agreed, bad job by me. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

That's all for now. I will continue with the review tomorrow. Regards, Resolute 03:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Continuing...

Philadelphia Eagles

• " Day's later, his suggestion to bestow the winner of the NFL championship game with the Ed Thorp Memorial Trophy was affirmed." - I suspect that apostrophe on "Day's" is misplaced. It is also unnecessary as it provides no real useful context to when the trophy was affirmed. All the reader knows is that it happened at some point after Bell married, which happened some point after the 1933 season ended.
• "Contemporaneously, a de facto racial segregation occurred in the NFL and African Americans would not return until 1947." - Unclear relevance. This seems randomly placed. Did Philly have any notable black players in 1933 that were forced off the team, for instance? ("Contemporaneously" is also one of those complicated words used unnecessarily.)

Agreed, bad job by me. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

• "In 1934, the Eagles finished with a 4–7 record,[48] and the Cincinnati Reds went bankrupt." - Unclear relevance. Why is Cincinatti's bankruptcy important to Bell?

Agreed, bad job by me. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

• "In December, an application for a franchise in Los Angeles was obstructed by Bell and Rooney as they deemed it too far of a distance to travel for games." - I was left wondering who Rooney was, since you do not note he was the owner of the Steelers until the following section.
• The interjections about his marriage and birth of children are non sequiturs that don't fit the rest of the section at all. They might be better located in a personal life section that includes his later home and conversion to Catholicism. A paragraph on his being a published author could also fit there.

Agree on personal life section. Absolutely disagree, with emotion, to give him any credit for being a published author. 'The Story of Professional Football in Summary' is not a real book. It's propaganda and marketing in response to the U.S. Congress investigating the NFL. Everything else he wrote is marketing in favor of the NFL or to counteract negative publicity. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Pittsburgh Steelers

• "During the training camp of the Steelers' inaugural season, Bell was buoyant with optimism about the team's prospect, but he became crestfallen after Rooney denigrated the squad and flippantly remarked that they looked like the "[s]ame old Steelers" (SOS)." - How can the team be the "same old Steelers" if it is also their inaugural season?

Agreed, bad job by me. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

• "...and for coaches with at least five years in the NFL, it was the worst record ever (as of the 2013 season)." - Improper tense. it is the worst record of all-time (as of the 2013 season)". For that matter, how can the record be as of a season that has not yet been played? These should all be "as of the 2012 season".
• "His first daughter and last child, Jane Upton, was born several months later." - Several months after what? There's no context here.

Agreed, bad job by me. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

• "By 1943, 40% of the NFL rosters had been drafted into the United States Armed Forces for World War II, and this shortage could have been, but was not, eradicated by reintegration." - Editorializing. The comment on reintegration is POVish and lacks context.

Complicated, I will have to reevaluate.

• "Compounding Bell's problems, Arch Ward organized the AAFC in 1944 to displace the NFL's sovereignty in professional football." - AAFC should be fully spelled out here. In general, links used in the lead should also be used in the body, and given how deep into the article the AAFC is introduced, simply using the acronym here is a little confusing.

Agreed, bad job by me. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

• "Furthermore, by the end of 1945, the Steelers were in its most economically perilous situation in its history" - Suggestion only, but in general, North American teams use the collective plural. Probably should be "...the Steelers were in their most economically perilous situation in their history."

Fair, no biggie, seems like personal preference. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

NFL Commissioner

• "Layden's perceived conflict of interest concerning the AAFC[83] led to his firing in January 1946." - Context required - what was Layden's conflict of interest?

Agreed, bad job by me. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

• "On the eve of the 1946 championship game, Bell was notified that Merle Hapes and Frank Filchock of the Giants had been implicated in a bribing scandal." - The Giants have not been introduced at this point. This should be fully linked as New York Giants.

Agreed, bad job by me. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

NFL-AAFC merger

• "The primary impediment in an AAFC-NFL merger was in making the requests of Paul Brown amenable to the NFL owners,[116] but Bell gathered enough support to effectuate a compromise with the AAFC." - No context. What were Brown's requests, and why were they an impediment?

Agreed, however, this is a poor research problem or sources may be unclear. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Marketing of the NFL

• "In 1950, Bell originated a blackout rule into the NFL which forbid all teams to televise their home games within a 75 mile radius of their stadium - except for the Rams." - Is there any particular reason why the Rams were exempt?

Agreed, bad job by me. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

• "However, preceding 1951..." - The link doesn't reduce confusion here. This should be "However, preceding the 1951 season..."

Legacy and honors

• I am a little concerned with the editorializing in this section. Much of it reads as the article author's opinion rather than that of the sources. Particularly: "Bell's ability to mediate disputes was unparalleled in the history of the NFL.[177] One of the best things the owners ever did was to designate Bell with the responsibility to construct the league schedule." - Who said this, and what makes their opinion authoritative?

Overall

I'm going to place on hold, as I think most issues should be easily addressable. Regards, Resolute 03:02, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done with pretty much everything; if I didn't do something, I left a note in the edit summary as to why. Thanks. Go Phightins! 20:03, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Excellent work, thanks! Hopefully Ijustreadbooks returns with their sources and can add the final pieces of context you couldn't, but I don't see anything that was removed holding up this nomination. As such, I am passing the nomination. Cheers! Resolute 23:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes I will return and we will have to go through the whole process again. I only have one hangup with what Phightins did. But I can't believe he did what he did so fast (he must be a genius), I thought it would take me 6months. The latter part of the Philadelphia Eagles section is, from a research standpoint, a complete disaster. I am going to have to get bloody and go down to Philly and dig stuff up with new sources. I know the sources exist and I know where they are. I just have to access those sources. Forget about the other complaints (those are for great editors and writers to handle), the missing story between 1937 and 1939 is just a total disaster. Some people are great writers and editors, I am not. I will get that research done.Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:47, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

As for anything that happened outside of 1937-1939, I just might have deleted a citation accidentally. I have them all ...somewhere. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:49, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

To get this puppy up to FA by next Super Bowl would be great, although I do not have the skills to do it an as editor. But I'll worry about that later. First order of business is to handle that missing timeframe between 1937 and 1939. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:51, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

If you need any help, feel free to ping me at my talk. Go Phightins! 19:07, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Wow, what a disaster. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Philadelphia Eagles (1933–1940)

First paragraph needs major copy edit - that will not be easy. The fourth paragraph is a complete joke - need major research to be done. Atrocious job in this section. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:26, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Need fix on Bert Bell's father being selected or elected as AG

"His father was an attorney who served a term as the Pennsylvania Attorney General."

My citation does not really support this. Need a fix on a better source. Notified editor who made the change and requested he provide a better source. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 04:37, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, technically speaking, your source does not support that. For all anyone knows, Bell Sr. changed his mind and did not serve and your source simply did not point this out. For the record, however, the important thing is that Bell Sr. did serve, and this is well-documented in numerous official state documents from the AG office with his name prominently listed as AG.

I changed the sentence to concentrate on the important issue: Bell Sr. served a term as state AG. How he got there isn't too important to an article about the son. As it is, your source was a book about the history of football, and the author did not bother to doublecheck how things were done in Pennsylvania politics in 1911. PA had always had an appointed AG until around 1980, when the law was changed and the office became elective.

I have been spending the past week cleaning up and greatly expanding the whole PA AG topic, adding several articles, and numerous more are on the way. As part of the cleanup I've been finding minor little falsehoods in related articles, like this one. So for your sake I will create an article on Bell Sr. later today, sooner than I expected to, and I will provide there several citations, including his NYT obituary and at least one official PA state document with a brief bio, both of which mention that he was appointed. Look for Bell Sr.'s name to become a blue link on the article page.

In addition, earlier in his career, Bell Sr. had been appointed Philadelphia DA to fill out someone's unfinished term, and then he ran and was elected back to the same office. Choor monster (talk) 11:56, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done

Bell astutely argued

I have not been involved in Wikipedia for a few years so I will have to dig up my username. I really do not like "Bell astutely argued" in the introduction. No one reads the article, even less no one writes on the talk page. So, I do not see any problem with removing the word astutely. I have looked at that "astutely" for quite some time. There are all kinds of wikipedia rules - which I know nothing about. But, I am going to remove that word astutely before the end of the year. I am sure that I was the one that wrote that, but you just can not put the word "astutely" in an introduction. It's just wrong. I just must have made a mistake. 66.234.58.130 (talk) 07:24, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

I made the change. 66.234.58.130 (talk) 10:44, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

He survived to oversee

"He survived to oversee the 'Greatest Game Ever Played' and to envision what the league would become in the future." I do not really like this in the introduction because of what I wrote here "to envision what the league would become in the future". That statement is supported by an anecdotal statement via the current footnote 157 from Raymond Berry. But I really do not like that kind of things because anyone can say anything. I want to trim it down to "He survived to oversee the 'Greatest Game Ever Played'" and maybe combine that statement with another sentence in the paragraph. I will have to think about this.

Oh, I know my username - ijustreadbooks -, but i do not feel like recovering my password.

I think I want to delete the whole sentence: "He survived to oversee the "Greatest Game Ever Played" and to envision what the league would become in the future." The sentence really makes no sense to me. 66.234.58.130 (talk) 00:31, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

The sentence is OK in the body of the article. But I really do not want it in the introduction. 66.234.58.130 (talk) 00:33, 18 February 2021 (UTC)