Jump to content

Talk:2001 BDO World Darts Championship

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:2001 BDO World Darts Championship/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MrLinkinPark333 (talk · contribs) 01:44, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hello! As this is the only darts article out of your outstanding nominations, I might as well review this one. Please keep in mind that I have not written any darts articles. Also, feel free to correct me if I make a mistake in regards to terminology or sourcing.

Lead[edit]

Background[edit]

First round[edit]

Paragraph 1[edit]

"In this round King was 2–0 behind Chris Mason when he won three sets in a row to take a 3–2 victory after Mason missed two consecutive game-winning opportunities on the double 18 ring in the third set." - long sentence that should be broken up into two. Also comma after round. Done

Paragraph 2[edit]

"England international captain Martin Adams" - Embassy Darts doesn't say he has captained in international events, just that he's a captain for England. Maybe also specify what he was the captain of, as I had to look it up.

  • "Nevertheless, Adams won the following two sets to claim a 3–1 victory." - "Nevertheless" sounds like editorializing, so I recommend dropping it. Done
  • "Two-time finalist Ronnie Baxter took a win by the same scoreline" - The Independent source doesn't say Baxter had appeared in the final twice before the 2001 event, but the Embassy Darts source does. So I suggest bundling them. Done
    • Done MWright96 (talk)
    • "where both players averaged more than 30 points per dart thrown." - close paraphrasing per word order. A slight tweak is needed.
    • Any particular reason why the final score for Crooks/Baxter isn't there? Done
      • Have now added 20:02, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • "Robson produced a 100 checkout to take the second set and a maximum score in the fifth leg of the third set gave Van Barneveld the lead and he took the match 3–1 in the fourth set." - two separate sentences please because of the "and" twice.  Done
  • "Peter Hinkley took a 3–2 win over Nick Gedney as both players took each of the match's sets" - it was 3-1, not 3-2. Also not sure what you mean "both players took each of the match's sets" if four of out of five sets were played. Done

Paragraph three[edit]

Second round[edit]

Quarterfinals[edit]

Semi-finals[edit]

Final[edit]

Women's tournament[edit]

  • "and enabled women players to avoid having to compete with men in the International Play-Offs (which they had done since 1995)." - I think "enabled" and "avoid" might be non-neutral. A slight tweak could be needed. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:49, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • BDO doesn't state that the total prize fund for the women's tournament was £8,000, only that the winner received £4,000. Extra source is needed.
    • I see this part was reworded. Works for me.  Done
  • "third (and last) seeded player." - redudnant with third and last, especially with the bracket part. I think either third or last would be enough. Done

Semi-finals[edit]

  • "average score of per dart shown of 31.63" - not sure what you mean here. Do you mean average score of 31.63 per dart?
  • "Notwithstanding Howat being unable to win any legs" - sounds like editorializing based on "notwithstanding". This part would need to be reworded to be neutral.
  • "Solomons won the first leg and Hoensellar responded by winning the second before the former took the third and fourth legs to win the first set" - sounds like a long sentence. Could this be split into two sentences for grammar? Done
  • Minor spelling error with "by talking the second" -> taking the second. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:21, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Hoensellar produced a maximum score to force a final set decider." - I don't think this is 100% how it went. Hoesnellar hit a maximum score, then after she "held her throw" (not sure what it means) which resulted in set 3.  Done
  • "A 66 checkout gave Solomons the early advantage," - close paraphrasing in terms of word choice and order.  Done
    • "which Hoensellar nullified by claiming the second and third legs." - the source isn't clear who won leg 2 and 3 per the quote "but legs went with the throw to 2-2.".
  • "Hosensellar missed the double 16 ring and a 96 checkout from Solomons secured her a berth in the final." - this sounds like Hosenellar missed the 96 checkout, even thought Solomons made the checkout. Done

Final[edit]

  • "as he won the set" => as Solomons won the set
  • "double 14 and double 16" - i think it was triple 14, not double for Guillver in set 3.
  • "to move into a position of advantage and compiled scores of 94, 100 and a maximum as she lowered the points she required for victory to 127." - very long sentence that i suggest breaking into two (i shorten the quote to show the gist of it).
  • " Gulliver became aware that throwing six darts was needed" - sounds like editorialzing even though that's the tone The Times used. I think this should be reworded for neutrality.

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:31, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Prize fund[edit]

Draw[edit]

Side comments[edit]

I'll review the rest throughout the next couple of days or so. Feel free to comment here if you have any questions during this review. I'll let you know once I've fully reviewed the article. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:44, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MWright96: Okay. I think I've reviewed all of it. I'll have to finish up a recap of what needs to be done, but I'll leave that for tomorrow. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:17, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@MWright96: As there are some points that either haven't been addressed, plus since I've added some comments, I'll put this review on hold. I will be continuing going through what has been already done. It's taking a bit longer to tick them off than I thought since it's a long article lol. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:47, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Leftover points[edit]

  • Lead: "in Frimley Green in Surrey" redundancy, BBC broadcaster singular not plural, Imperial/Embassy sponsor - all  Done
  • Background: Frimley Green/Surrey redundancy, 44 or 45 BDO events, Hankey reigning champion source needed, minor correction with number of sets in quarter/semi finals, Imperial sponsored the event, Hankey grammar. - all  Done
    • New issues with background: top 27 automatically entered and winners of qualifying matches per the Mastercaller source
  • First round: redundancy issue in Smith and Stompé's match, grammar/spelling issue listing the final four matches.
  • Second round: grammar issue with Hinkley's whitewash loss, various issues with Walton's and King's match
  • Quarterfinals: For Hankey and Van Barnveld, source not backing up the 11-dart finish in the fourth leg. Also in their match, there were two ties, not one after the fifth leg whitewash.
  • Prize fund: minor corrections for prize amounts in the men's events based on the Darts Database source.
  • Draw: handful of errors with dart averages in the first and second round based on the Mastercaller source.
  • Women's semi-finals: source isn't clear who won leg 2 - 4 in the final set for Solomons and Hoensellar.

Update[edit]

@MWright96: As this is the last of the 7 day hold, thought I should make an update for this. Most of this article is done. What's left to be done is:

Things I'll have to check:

These three points I require to think over. I'll let you know if I think these need work on or not. Therefore, I'm willing to keep this open for a couple of more days, and reassessing after.

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:29, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MWright96: As i said above I'd let you know if these need working or not, two of the three need a bit of working on and I added one more. You're almost there. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:16, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@MrLinkinPark333: Have done all three of the points raised above. MWright96 (talk) 19:10, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@MWright96: Alright. There's a minor spacing issue with "theEngland captain" but that's not enough to prevent this article to be passed (as spacing isn't a requirement). Also, I don't see any issues in regards to stability and images. Therefore, I will pass this article. Very well done! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:19, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by 97198 (talk) 09:37, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Improved to Good Article status by MWright96 (talk). Self-nominated at 13:29, 30 October 2019 (UTC).[reply]

  • This newly promoted GA is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright or plagiarism issues. A QPQ has been done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:33, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]