Talk:2012 FA Cup final/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:15, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

ok i will take a look at this. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:15, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

The date of the final clashed with Premier League fixtures,[5] it was scheduled to provide a clear four-week period between the end of the English season and the start of UEFA Euro 2012. - the construction is wrong - either convert the comma to a semicolon or period, or take out "it was" and flip the construction to something like "Scheduled to provide a clear four-week period between the end of the English season and the start of UEFA Euro 2012, the date of the final clashed with Premier League fixtures."

Done NapHit (talk) 16:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Ramires put Chelsea in front in the 11th minute after he disposed Liverpool midfielder Jay Spearing and beat Pepe Reina in the Liverpool goal - I'd add "area" after this, which sounds more natural to me.

done NapHit (talk) 16:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

The first half was dogged, with both sides enjoying long spells of possession, - not sure what you mean by "dogged" here. "Tough"/"even" ?

changed NapHit (talk) 16:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

The second half began with immediate controversy, - sounds odd/stilted - rephrase.

reworded NapHit (talk) 16:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

This booked Chelsea's place in their first FA Cup Final since 2010, in which they beat Portsmouth. - could be trimmed to "This booked Chelsea's place in their first FA Cup Final since their 2010 triumph over Portsmouth."

done NapHit (talk) 16:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

in what was described as "arguably the biggest match of the season" for the two clubs at the time - reword so we don't need direct quotes.

removed this, don't think it's necessary. NapHit (talk) 16:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Chelsea's victory set up a Community Shield match against Manchester City, the winners of the 2011–12 Premier League. The two sides met in the Premier League three days after the final, a match that Liverpool won 4–1 - Huh? You're talking about Chelsea and Man City...and then mention Liverpool. Confusing....

Moved to the end of the para. NapHit (talk) 16:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

1. Well written?:

Prose quality: - few twaeks needed as above

Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:

Citations to reliable sources, where required:

No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:

Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:

Pass or Fail: minor prose tweaks and we're there...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:17, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the review @Casliber:, I've addressed your concerns. NapHit (talk) 16:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Yikes - just noticed ref 40 is a deadlink....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:19, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Oops, must of forgot to remove that before I nominated. Sorted now, thanks again @Casliber:, appreciate the review. NapHit (talk) 12:38, 8 July 2015 (UTC)