Jump to content

Talk:2002 Scottish Challenge Cup final/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 18:09, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • In the lead you have some sentences/paragraphs referenced, some others not. Why? Ordinarily a lead shouldn't contain information that isn't expanded on in the main article (so in general a lead needs no refs at all).
    • I have removed two references from the lead and left one which refers to the sponsorship name. Cal Umbra
  • "second appearance in the final of the tournament since losing" do you mean second appearance or first appearance since losing? Or perhaps "second appearance ... having lost..."?
    • I reworded to "having lost" as it is the club's second appearance in a cup final ever. Cal Umbra
  • " game and scored the first goal in the 33rd minute from John O'Neill" -> "game with John O'Neill scoring the first goal in the 33rd minute".
  • Be aware of football jargon like "header"... we have a glossary of terms you could hashlink to specific sections as required.
    • I have linked "header", "substitution" and "corner kick" to relevant articles. Cal Umbra
  • The lead you refer to it as using "elimination rounds" but the main article states (and links) it to be a "knock-out" tournament. Would try to be consistent here.
    • Changed to "knock-out" for consistency. Cal Umbra
  • "28 of the teams " avoid starting sentences with a number.
  • "two received random byes into the second round" is this referenced anywhere?
    • Provided a reference which mentions this. Cal Umbra
  • "produce a shock" is that a quote? To stay neutral I'd ask for a reference or attributable quotation here.
    • Quoted "shock" and referenced to where it is mentioned. Cal Umbra
  • "The stadium had played host to" -> "The stadium hosted..."
  • "Dumfries based" needs a hyphen.
  • References should use WP:DASH where appropriate and should avoid SHOUTING too.

The Rambling Man (talk) 19:23, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA criteria

[edit]
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):
    Prose and style comments noted above.
  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:

All-round good stuff, just need to address the above comments, so I'll place the nomination on-hold for a week. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:23, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]