# Talk:Bill Cottrell

... that Bill Cottrell went from being an "unheralded" high school player for a poor team to a starter in the NFL?

ALT1: ... that football player Bill Cottrell was the first black center in the NFL? Source: Free Press
ALT2: ... that it was thought that black men could not play the "thinking man's'" position of center in the NFL until the career of Bill Cottrell? Source: same
Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Barbados–Indonesia relations (2/2)

BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:01, 13 October 2025 (UTC).

Comment: future reviewer, ALT1 is permissible; see 4meter4's comment on Template:Did you know nominations/Jocelyn Borgella. I myself will not review this. Roast (talk) 21:40, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
 The article is new enough (promoted to GA on 13 October 2025), is long enough (5449 characters of prose), has no apparent copyright issues (per GA review), and is presentable (per GA review and readthrough). I find the hook hard to read, where "unheralded" and "starter" seem to be jargon and "poor" is ambiguous. I think ALT2 could be seen as contentious when it doesn't specify who thought this. So I would prefer ALT1, which is cited, short enough, and interesting. A similar hook was previously pulled, but according to User:Guerreroast, it is permissible in the current nomination. QPQ is done. I am passing ALT1. – Editør (talk) 10:46, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
@BeanieFan11 and Editør:  ALT1 definitely should not be phrased that confidently, as the source states "[Cottrell] is believed to be the first Black center". Adding that hedging to the phrasing would definitely detract from its hookiness, though, so can one of the other hooks be rephrased to address the concerns in Editør's review, or another hook proposed? (please  mention me on reply) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:55, 22 November 2025 (UTC)
The source also says "NFL's first Black center" in the title and "He was the first." in a quote, though. – Editør (talk) 17:38, 22 November 2025 (UTC)