Talk:2010 Emirates Cup/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Usernameunique (talk · contribs) 17:12, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Quick fail criteria assessment

1. The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.

   • 

2. The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

   • 

3. There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.

   • 

4. The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.

   • 

5. The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

   • 

Main review

1. It is reasonably well written.

a (prose):

Lead

• "The competition follows" — Suggest "The Emirates Cup follows"
• "An additional point is awarded for every goal scored." — This was only done in some years, right? If so, the statement should be qualified.
• "The first day ... equalised for Milan." — This is a bit of a run on, I'd split in two.
• "the other game." — How about "the final game."
• How about adding mention of 2nd/3rd/4th place?

Background

• "Scottish champions Celtic" — Champions of what?

Summary

• "coach Claude Puel gave starts to Alexandre Lacazette and Clément Grenier" — Why is this significant? Are they normally bench players? What positions do they play?
• "Marc-Antoine Fortune" — What position?
• "efforts on goal" — A bit jargony
• "Grenier slotted a through ball past the Celtic backline" — More jargon
• "cut the ball" — Jargon
• "first time shot" — Do you mean one-touch shot?

• Not addressed.

• "mishit" — Perhaps elaborate on this, i.e., give a description of the shot.
• "volleyed in a cross" — Jargon
• "The comeback was complete in stoppage time as substitute Georgios Samaras headed in from Charlie Mulgrew's free kick." — I'd change "complete" to "completed", add a comma after "time", and delete "from".
• "the Arsenal" — Why "the"?

• Definite article is perfectly acceptable with Arsenal in British English, albeit old-fashioned. See here for more info. Lemonade51 (talk) 23:29, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

• "a free transfer" — What's a free transfer? Anything that could be wikilinked?
• "in the summer" — Suggest "earlier in the summer", or "only # weeks/days ago" if it seems particularly recent.
• "in the first eleven" — Jargon
• "who partnered stand-in captain" — Technically this refers to "the first eleven".
• "started against his former side. Arsenal started" — Two close uses of "started".
• "Vermaelen nearly broke the deadlock" — What minute?
• "Flamini's strike forced Łukasz Fabiański into making a save" — A little clunky, and again, what minute?
• "by and large" — Suggest "largely".
• "Andrey Arshavin’s good work." — Jargon, and confusing. You mean Arshavin passed it to him?
• "their respective sides" — Which were? Also, I'd suggest adding something such as "sides, but their shots went wide and the score remained".
• "it remained 1–1" — Suggest "the score remained 1–1".
• "The game came to life" — This sounds like a fan talking.
• "well-worked goal." — Sounds like editorializing.
• "all square." — Jargon

• Wikilinked Lemonade51 (talk) 23:29, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

• "the perfect start" — Is this a term of art (e.g., "the perfect start" is when you score in the first five minutes)? Otherwise I'd rephrase.
• "flashed a shot from long range." — Jargon
• "Celtic's late rally" — Do two goals really only deserve three words?

• Not addressed.

• "Arsenal ran out 3–2 winners." — Jargon
• "Midfielder Jack Wilshere was picked out as Arsenal's key player" — For the game, or the tournament?

Standings

• Should be in past tense.

Matches

• Bar is missing between the middle matches.

b (MoS):

— Appears compliant

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

a (references):

— A source under "Standings" would be nice.

b (citations to reliable sources):

— Sources appear reliable.

c (OR):

— No apparent OR.

d (No evidence of plagiarism or copyright violations):

— Two phrases should be rephrased:

• "if teams are tied on points, goal difference and goals scored."
• "Marouane Chamakh scored on his home debut for Arsenal"

3. It is broad in its scope.

a (major aspects):

— Covers the major aspects (but note above about 2 goals in 3 words).

b (focused):

— Article is focused

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy — Neutral (but jargon should be addressed)

5. It is stable — Article is stable

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

a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):

— Images are appropriately tagged.

b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

— First image is missing a caption, and none of the images have alt text.

7. Overall:

Pass/Fail: — Looks good Lemonade51, just the same issues as with the 2011 Emirates Cup review (jargon, mostly). --Usernameunique (talk) 18:05, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

• @Usernameunique: sorry for the hold up and thanks for taking a look at this. Think I've addressed all your points. Lemonade51 (talk) 23:29, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

• Lemonade51, almost there. Infobox picture still needs alt text, and two points above weren't addressed (2 goals in 3 words, and one-touch). Other than the alt text, if you disagree with the other two points, just let me know. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:00, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

• Hi @Usernameunique: added the alt text and addressed the one-touch bit. As for Celtic (2 goals in three words), I don't think it significant in the grand scheme of things, hence why I didn't expand it. Lemonade51 (talk) 14:45, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks Lemonade51, all set now. Passing. --Usernameunique (talk) 19:07, 19 January 2018 (UTC)