Talk:1968 European Cup final/GA1

(Redirected from Talk:1968 European Cup Final/GA1)
Latest comment: 3 years ago by The Rambling Man in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

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

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 10:14, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply


Comments

  • The "n.a."s in the fair use programme image need to be addressed. I'd be surprised if this really meets the spirit of fair use anyway, I don't see how the programme cover enhances our reader's understanding of the article, the programme itself is not even mentioned in the prose.
  • There's a link for two-legged tie I think.
  • You could link generic European Cup in the lead.
  • Link all the football jargon, so header, penalty, free kick, etc.
  • "a major club" I think it's best to stick with just "club" and perhaps find something that says it's considered the premier club competition (as you have in the lead).
    • Removed "major": I think that the second part of the sentence "..contested by the best teams across Europe." provides enough context. Harrias talk 18:38, 26 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • "Until the 1990s, only the league champion from each country qualified.[1] The competition was first played in 1955–56." feels like the wrong way round.
    • Rearranged and specified for clarity. Harrias talk 13:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • " Until the 1990s, only the league champion from each..." you then go on to prove this wasn't true for the first tournament.
    • Resolved this by making it more specific. Harrias talk 13:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • Be consistent with your capitalisation of Final when saying "European Cup final/Final" as it differs across the article.
    • Done. Harrias talk 18:39, 26 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
      • I don't think this was necessary. Whether or not "final" is a proper noun depends on the context, so you can't say it needs to be one or the other all the way through without looking at how it's used each time. – PeeJay 19:05, 27 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • "They defended... They were losing..." in each case you've lost who "they" were because you mention another club in between.
    • Replaced with "Benfica" in each instance. Harrias talk 13:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • "in each of 1956–57 and 1957–58.[4]" missing a word, like "tournaments" perhaps?
  • Not sure what relevance Munich has to this article.
    • Munich and United's European campaigns under Busby are completely intertwined not just in United's history, but in contemporary news reports. It would be a glaring omission not to include it. Harrias talk 13:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • Link UEFA when you use it on its own.
  • "the English Football Association" just "The Football Association" will do, there is after all only one "The Football Association".
    • You and I know that, but does everyone? Harrias talk 13:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • "but were subsequently eliminated in the semi-final" no need for subsequently.
  • Shame the table columns aren't the same in each Route to the final section.
    • Agreed, but I'm always wary of fixing widths, in case it messes things up for small screens. Harrias talk 13:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • Eusébio is overlinked.
    • Sorted (and the other duplicate links). Harrias talk 13:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • "once again thanks to" not really encyclopedic in tone.
  • "the second leg.[15] In the second leg" repetitive.
  • " The Guardian said" who in the Guardian?
    • Staff writer, not attributed: changed from "said" to "reported". Harrias talk 13:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • "and booked them" perhaps "secured" rather than booked for tone.
  • "got two goals each" scored rather than got?
  • The Guardian is overlinked.
  • "a "sad succession of near misses"" according to whom?
  • "Manchester United were expected to beat them" ditto.
  • " narrowly avoided going behind in the 27th minute" any more detail than the minute?
  • "had to go off injured," worth a footnote here explaining that substitutions were disallowed, because most readers will be like, "well wut? Bring on another player".
  • "back-heeled the ball into the goal after a shot from Jimmy Ryan" was it after Ryan's shot was saved or because Ryan's shot ended up at his feet?
    • Rephrased to "In the dying minutes of the game, Jimmy Ryan shot into a melee of players in the penalty area, including Brian Kidd, who backheeled the ball into the goal to make it 2–0.", how is that? Harrias talk 11:06, 4 June 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • Real Madrid is overlinked.
  • "only a goal " perhaps "a single goal" to avoid that POV "only".
  • "In The Guardian, Albert " Guardian overlinked again.
  • Hugh McIlvanney has an article.
  • "newspaper A Bola concurred" not sure they concurred, the previous sentence slates the Man Utd team but A Bola said they were the last team they wanted to face...
    • Made a little blander, hopefully that removes the apparent contradiction. Harrias talk 13:42, 25 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • Denis Law is overlinked.
  • Might want to link Surrey as this is a geographically "agnostic" article.
  • Especially as you link Harlow.
  • " the 30,000 Manchester United asked for." -> " the 30,000 for which Manchester United asked."
  • "standing tickets originally priced at 10 shillings were selling for £7" link shilling and presumably these were by touts? That's not clear.
  • No need to link London.
  • "estimated television audience of 250 million" where/who broadcast?
    • Clarified to "..had an estimated European television audience.." per the source, which gives no more detail than that. Harrias talk 13:42, 25 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • "10 yards from " usually convert.
  • " high over the bar, before he hit the crossbar" bar/crossbar repeat.
  • And shot/shot in that sentence too.
  • "José Augusto and José Torres " both overlinked.
  • "two dangerous chances" dangerous is POV.
  • What is referencing the 4-3-3 for each team?
    • @PeeJay2K3: Looking through the history of the article, it looks like you set the positions based on the DVD. Newspaper sources seem to differ: the only one that explicitly includes formations agrees that United played a 4-3-3, but lists Benfica as playing a 4-2-4. Do you have anything we can use as a reliable source for a Benfica 4-3-3? Harrias talk 08:13, 28 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
      • Going to chime in here. The marvellous Jonathan Wilson in his book, The Anatomy of Manchester United, states that Benfica lined up in a 4-3-3. He's not as forthright on the formation United adopted, suggesting the intention was to match it but that they differed from that plan. See here Hope this helps somewhat. NapHit (talk) 11:39, 28 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • I think the referee should be mentioned in the prose.
  • MOSFLAG, not sure they're doing much here, and in any case, they should explain what they mean on first use.
  • Where are linesmen referenced?
  • No need to link Italy. Twice.
  • European Cup, Charlton and Foulkes are overlinked.
  • "just a year after" remove "just".
  • " captain Bobby Charlton and Bill Foulkes were the only survivors of the crash to play in the 1968 final." to be fair, it's quite unusual that players remain with a club for ten years.
  • "contested the 1968 Intercontinental Cup" when where?
    • I don't think that level of detail about another tie is necessary in this article. Harrias talk 11:24, 4 June 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • "Both teams competed" which "both"?
  • "Benfica have subsequently reached "probably needs WP:ASOF.
  • "six more European" further (to avoid repeat of X more Y)
  • You link Daily Telegraph in the refs but not any other works/publishers.
  • Oh you do, The Guardian but not consistently and not on its first instance.
    • I have given the references a thorough going over, hopefully all nice and tidy now. Harrias talk 18:48, 26 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

That's all I have on the first pass, so I'll put it on hold. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

@The Rambling Man: Note: I'm just starting to work through this. I'm skipping a few points on my first pass, but I'm highlighting them in red so that I don't miss them later, I hope you don't mind. Harrias talk 13:17, 25 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
I don't mind. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 13:20, 25 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
@The Rambling Man: Eventually I have responded to each point above, would you be able to take another look? Harrias talk 11:24, 4 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

All good, literally. Happy to promote. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 09:19, 5 June 2020 (UTC)Reply