Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Eduard Streltsov/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Laser brain 04:14, 14 March 2011 [1].

---

Eduard Streltsov

Eduard Streltsov (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/Eduard Streltsov/archive1

Nominator(s): – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 00:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because, well, I hate to be unimaginative, but I think that it's ready, or at least nearly so. I have taken a big step back from it for quite a while, and am now doing my best to look at it objectively. It is, in my opinion, at least very close to FA standard, and so I have nominated it just to put that little bit of extra work into it and push it up to FA, which I think it deserves. – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 00:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Disambig/External Link check - no dabs or dead external links. 1 external redirects which may lead to link rot, see it with the tool in the upper right of this page. --PresN 01:49, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

External redirect resolved. – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 02:15, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Sources comments

• I am not able to comment on the large number of Russian sources. A few general comments:-
• There is evidence of considerable over-referencing. For example, this sentence: "Although he had lost some of his strength and agility,[11] his footballing intelligence was still intact;[11]" - the same citation for two successive phrases. There are numerous similar instances, and also a lack of consistency in approach. For example, in the second paragraph of the "Release and return to football" section there are no citations until the penultimate line. In the third paragraph there are four successive citations to [22]. Also, some minor facts, e.g Streltsov's claimed "drunkenness" is cited twice to the same source.
• 52 citations to a single newspaper article of c. 1500 words seems a lot. This could be construed as over-reliance, but I think is probably more likely to be over-citing such as described above.
• Refs 7 and 8 presently both link to the 1956 Ballon D'Or listings.

Otherwise sources look OK. Brianboulton (talk) 22:59, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I've brought the number of reference tags down a notch. – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 23:34, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Weak oppose Comments: I think the article needs a copy-edit from an uninvolved editor. I would offer to help, but my time is limited at the moment. Some of the prose is a little cumbersome and could be tightened up. Reading the lead and the first section threw up a few prose problems. None of them were a big issue, but the number of little issues means I am opposing for now, although it can be easily fixed. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:18, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Lead:

• "Nicknamed "the Russian Pelé", described by Soviet football writer Aleksandr Nilin as "[t]he boy [who] came to us from the land of wonder", and called "the greatest outfield player Russia has ever produced" by British journalist Jonathan Wilson, Streltsov's promising career was interrupted at the age of 20 by a conviction of rape that led to five years in prison." Not sure that the different elements of this sentence fit together. The quotes describe his whole career, but it then says a promising career is interupted. And it is quite a long sentence.
• "Latterly described by Wilson as "a tall, powerful forward, possessed of a fine first touch and extraordinary footballing intelligence"..." I don't really like the sprinkling of quotes in the lead here; they do not seem to relate to the rest of the sentences. Also, they need references as they are direct quotes. The Wilson quote has no relation to the award in 1957.
• "...he gained the seventh highest number of votes, 12, in the 1957 Ballon d'Or." A little clumsy: is the number necessary? And seventh most votes seems ... underwhelming. Maybe rephrase to make it seem more noteworthy, such as "judged by sports journalists to be among the top seven footballers in Europe during 1957."
• I think it may be better if the rape accusation is not interupted by his international career during 1956 and 1957.
• "Although the evidence against him was "confused and contradictory", Streltsov confessed to the crime, allegedly after being told that doing so would allow him to participate in the 1958 World Cup." Allegedly? How reliable is this? If it is in the lead, it should be definite or not there. Also, suggest rephrasing to "After being told an admission of guilt would allow his participation in the 1958 World Cup, Streltsov confessed to the crime, even though the evidence against him was inconclusive."
• "Sentenced to twelve years in the labour camps, Streltsov was released after five years and made a return to football two years later, once again appearing for Torpedo Moscow." Suggest: "Sentenced to twelve years in labour camps, Streltsov was released after five; two years later, he resumed his football career with Torpedo Moscow."
• "At the end of his first season back, Torpedo won the Soviet championship, a feat that the club had only accomplished once before." Suggest: "In the first season of his comeback, Torpedo won the Soviet Championship for only the second time in their history."
• "He went on to return": returned, and alter sentence to past tense.
• "After retiring in 1970, Streltsov died in Moscow in July 1990." "After" looks like he died immediately upon retiring. What about "Streltsov retired in 1970 and died in Moscow in July 1990."
• "Six years later, Torpedo renamed their home ground in his honour": Maybe name the ground here: "Six years later [I'd prefer In 1996], Torpedo renamed their home ground [stadium?] "XXXX" in his honour".
• "in 1999 Torpedo built a monument to him outside the stadium bearing his name." "Outside their stadium"? And presumably this was a statue?

Early life:

• "Eduard Anatoliyevich Streltsov was born in Perovo, a suburb of Moscow, on 21 July 1937, the son of Anatoly Streltsov, a front-line soldier and reconnaissance officer, and Sofia Frolovna." A long sentence, suggest breaking after 1937 and restarting with "he was the son of..."
• "working as a metal worker at the Fraser Cutting Instruments Factory in Moscow to support Eduard and herself": "working ... worker" Finding employment as a metal worker? And do we need to say the factory is in Moscow as that is where they are living?
• ""the only pleasure, the only beam of light among the grey weekdays was football"" Quote needs attributing in the text. If it is not a direct quote from Streltsov, could it be paraphrased?
• "He had been representing Fraser for three years when in 1953 a friendly match was organised between Fraser and a youth team from Torpedo Moscow." Cut the opening to "Three years later in 1953..."
• Presumably he impressed the coach? And we don't need to give his age as 16 as the reader can probably work out 13 add 3!

General points

• There seem to be a lot of unattributed quotes. If they are not quotes by players, I would be inclined to paraphrase. However, if direct quotation is needed, it should be attributed.
• A quick glance at the playing section makes me think there may be a touch too much detail. It is a little "he played X and then he scored Y and then he played X" (not in such grim prose, though!) It looks like a list of games which can be tedious for the reader. However, I haven't read it in any detail, so I could be talking rubbish!
• Some more on his playing style would be good if it is avaliable, such as technique. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Funny, I had reference marks on all of the quotes but just took them out to avoid over-referencing! Hmm, I'll put them all back in then. I've just had a quick hack through, but probably best somebody copy-edits this as you say. – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 22:53, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I notice you've put them back; however, if you are quoting several sections from the same source in one sentence, it only needs a ref at the end. And some of the quotes are just one or two words long, so I don't think you need to be directly quoting these. Certainly you don't need as many as you have. For example, "effectively down to nine men" does not need quoting if you phrase it as "had only nine fit men". And by attributing, I mean you need to say in the text who said it, not just in the ref: "John Smith believes that 'Streltsov was great'."--Sarastro1 (talk) 23:29, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I see. I've had another go, taken out a load of the quotations and worked on the sourcing and attributing. What do you think now? – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 01:38, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Looks better, I'll look more closely in a day or two. I may be able to attempt a copy-edit at the weekend, if you have no objections. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Go right ahead. – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 22:17, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Comments –

• "and was named Soviet Footballer of the Year in 1967 and in 1968." The second "in" is a tiny bit of wordiness that could be removed without affecting the meaning. It would make the wording just a little tighter, which always helps.
• Career: "The Soviets were into the final, but Streltsov missed the final...". The use of "final" is a little redundant, don't you think?
• There are what appear to the naked eye to be simple year links in a few places; it's only when you hover over them that you can tell they go to Soviet league season articles. A handy way to deal with these is to place the link over a phrase like "1957 season" instead of just linking the year.
• "were incriminating photographs of both Lebedeva and of Streltsov...". This is similar to my first comment in that the second "of" isn't really needed and could stand to be tightened.
• There was a comment above about the presence of too many unattributed quotes. To me, the quote about his confession is an example of that, although nothing else jumped out at me in that regard.
• The English and Swedish national teams were linked in a prior section, and the repeats aren't necessary.
• I don't see anything in the body to verify the claim in a photo caption that he "excelled" in his first game back.
• Style of play and legacy: "was founded in order to attempt...". Some more excess writing here with "in order". It doesn't add anything. In fact, I'm not sure if the next one is useful either. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 02:44, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
  • The two "in"s and "of"s results from trying to make clear my meaning: I thought that "in 1967 and 1968" could imply just one award for the two years... I've changed it now though. Done the rest. Cheers. – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 03:52, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

More comments, leaning to supportSupport: I've completed a copy-edit, but another pair of eyes is always good. No real problems that I can see, and the article is very well researched and comprehensive. It is a very interesting tale about a player I had never heard of. Just a couple of questions/points before I support.

• It may be worth having some comments about how his teams fared in his absence. The article suggests he pulled Torpedo up from no-where to title contenders, but yet they managed their first championship in his absence. Did they do well without him?
• Were there any other differences in his play after his release? His record does not seem too different, so how was he able to do so well?
• It seems that the scandal may have restricted his post-imprisonment international appearances as his record was excellent, but is there anything explicitly saying so?
• Anything else about his imprisonment?
• "...and was allowed to return to football..." Allowed to return by...? Who?
• The playing style section is a little sparse. Apart from the back-heeled pass, what made him so good? How did he score? What was his pace like, ability on the ball, etc? I think more is needed here to meet the comprehensiveness requirements, if such info is available.
• Maybe also, a little more on his coaching. How successful was he? How did his teams perform? How did the players rate him? (Again, assuming this is available, but I think it is worth having a good look for it.) --Sarastro1 (talk) 14:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Okay, a bit more. I've tried to get it all but the coaching, which I can't find right now. I'll have another look later. – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 16:18, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Switched to support now, great work. Obviously add the coaching if you find it, though! --Sarastro1 (talk) 18:39, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

• Image review? --Andy Walsh (talk) 15:12, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
  • They're all public domain except for the top image, for which fair use is claimed. I'm pretty sure it's all lekker. – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 15:37, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
    • Thanks! Need an independent review, though. Please ping Fasach Nua, Jappalang, or another experienced image reviewer. --Andy Walsh (talk) 16:04, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Earlier image review

There are only five images. I'll have a look at them. Carcharoth (talk) 01:26, 23 February 2011 (UTC) (1) File:EduardStreltsov.jpg - this is a copyrighted image used here under fair use claims. More paperwork needs to be filled out here, even before the question is addressed of whether this is a valid claim. Please describe the source properly - currently it is just a bare URL, which is not acceptable. Secondly, it is best practice to fill out a non-free use rationale. I would suggest using {{Non-free use rationale}} and filling in the fields there. Thirdly, I'm not sure that the 'historic' upload tag is the correct one, but I can't remember what tag is normally used when uploading such images. Please look for similar images and model the image information page here on what is used on those image pages. After that, someone will need to assess whether your non-free image use rationale is valid or not. For starters, you need to demonstrate that you have done searches for free images of Streltsov. I suspect this image is ultimately replaceable. Even if it is OK to use it, there is not much information provided - when was it taken is the basic information needed - does the source provide that information? (2) File:Mbnolypkst.jpg - user uploaded picture - licensing is fine. The description field should be filled in by someone who can confirm that it is actually showing what the uploader claimed it is showing (or get the uploader to fill it in if they are still around). In terms of the image itself, it is not really the best image - is it not possible to find one from the 1956 Olympics, showing the USSR playing one of their matches? That would be far better for this section. The current image is of the stadium 52 years later (and its not even the right sport!). Australian government sources must have public domain pictures from the 1956 Olympics, surely? (3) File:Hampden Park WP EN.JPG - user uploaded picture - licensing is fine. However, I'm not entirely sure the transfer from en-wikipedia to Commons was done correctly. You may want to point this out to an experienced image admin here and on Commons and see if they can fix it (or say it is OK after all, despite my doubts - I think it needs a copy of the original upload log, as is present in File:Mbnolypkst.jpg). And again, this image isn't really that relevant to the article - the stadium 38 years later is not that relevant. Are there no pictures from that era of that match? You could at least point readers in the right direction towards non-free images, instead of providing images of stadia years after the games in question. (4) File:Torpedo-stadium.jpg - user uploaded picture - licensing is fine. The picture is not really the best one for what it is trying to show. Is there not something showing the name of the stadium? Personally, I'd drop the picture as it distracts from the other ones (which are all good) and is the weakest image in the article. The umbro advertising is incidental, so not of concern, and I doubt the stadium architecture is copyrighted (and I don't know what Russian freedom of panorama is anyway). (5) File:Reverse of a Russian two-ruble bank coin with a portrait of Eduard Streltsov.gif - since there are whole categories of these on Commons, I'm prepared to assume this one is OK as well. If possible, a link to a page on Commons explaining whether coins really do fall under the law quoted in that license tag would be good. Overall, the article image captions are fine, though I do think the lead image should say how old he is in that picture - the reader shouldn't have to click through to the image page to find that out (and even if they do click through, there is no information there anyway - see the points I made above). Currently, if the non-free use claim fails and the poor and irrrelevant images are removed, you are only left with the coin image. Would you be happy with the only image being the coin one? If not, I think you need to try and track down some more images before this can be considered a well-illustrated article Carcharoth (talk) 02:02, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

• Second image review - following the changes to the images, I've reviewed them again. The two coin images are fine (according to the licensing at Commons) and the Brezhnev image is from the Bundesarchiv and is fine as well. The image captions in the article are fine as well. If no freely licensed photograph of Streltsov can be found, I would suggest linking from the external links to one or two pages where such images can be viewed. Carcharoth (talk) 03:49, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

• Support - The article has been improved enough in the last two weeks for it to be made an FA. Spiderone 16:51, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Weak supportComments. Reading through now; may have to finish reviewing this evening if I run out of time.. I found a few areas where the prose was confusing, but those have been fixed. Support is weak because I think the prose is more than workmanlike, but not really high quality. If I get time I will copyedit but I think a weak support is justified as it stands.

• I think there's a little too much recitation of the goals he scored in the main text. Hat-tricks and notable goals, certainly, but for example the first three sentences of the third paragraph of "Early career" are probably unnecessary. You have the full list of his international goals in a table at the bottom, after all.
• The lead doesn't make it clear that he was not allowed to play in the 1958 World Cup; when I read the lead I assumed he was allowed to play while the trial was going on, or under some similar arrangement.
• Why is "labour camps" plural, both in the lead or the body? Did he spend time at more than one? At another point you say "at the camp", so it appears he was at only one.
• "Consequently, 100,000 workers at Moscow's ZiL car factory, the base of the Torpedo club, abandoned plans to march in support of Streltsov": I don't follow this -- they abandoned the march because he was convicted? Does this mean the march was intended to be during the trial but the verdict came in before the march could be arranged?

  Sorry, I still don't follow this. Now it says: "Instead, he was sentenced to twelve years in a labour camp and barred from ever returning to professional football. Consequently, 100,000 workers at Moscow's ZiL car factory, the base of the Torpedo club, abandoned plans to march in support of Streltsov during the trial." It's the "consequently" I don't get. Why would this stop the march? What were they marching for? If you mean that they gave up the march because it was too late, with the verdict already given, then I'd say so: "Plans for a march by 100,000 workers at Moscow's ZiL car factory, the base of the Torpedo club, to show support during the trial, were abandoned when Streltsov was sentenced before the march could be arranged." That's assuming the sources actually support that, of course. Mike Christie (talk – library) 02:06, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

• Is there any information on why he was not allowed to return to football with Torpedo immediately following his release?

-- Mike Christie (talk – library) 11:24, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Okay, have done a lot of work on this this morning. I've attended to most of the photo issues brought up above and have fixed all of Mike's problems, will do some more later. – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 12:47, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Alright; moved coin image up to infobox, added another for the 1956 Olympics and a Bundesarchiv picture of Brezhnev about half-way down. I'm trying to find some more that are relevant, will keep you informed. – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 15:56, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

All but one of my issues addressed; I will try to have another read through tomorrow and copyedit. Mike Christie (talk – library) 02:06, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I've used your suggestion. I was having trouble finding the words to make it clear, that's all. Thanks – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 11:27, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

That works. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk – library) 04:46, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Comments from Cryptic C62:

• Lead balancing: The lead doesn't seem to have any content from Early life. I would insert perhaps just a single sentence describing his transition from Fraser to Torpedo. Also, no mention of "Streltsov's pass" in the lead?
• Reference overlinking: The publisher names should only be linked on first occurrence. "Rec.Sport.Soccer Statistics Foundation" in particular is linked far too many times.
• Reference layout: I'm not sure that I like the "General/Specific" scheme going on, especially since one of the "specific references" is actually an explanatory note. I think "Notes" and either "References" or "Bibliography" would be more appropriate.

-- Cryptic C62 · Talk 05:06, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

• • Okay, all done. I've changed to "Bibliography" and "Notes". – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 11:05, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
    • Good, thank you. What about the inclusion of "Streltsov's pass" in the lead? I do think this would be a good thing to mention, particularly to answer the inevitable question of why Streltsov was such a good player. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 00:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
      • It's mentioned pretty clearly lower down what made him a good player but you're right that it could be mentioned more in the lead. Okay, try again now. – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 00:55, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
        • Works for me! Thanks for the time and effort, orange comrade. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 08:12, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Support I made a couple of minor edits which (of course) you are free to revert, but in any case, having seen this grow from a stub to a successful GA to this level of comprehensiveness is truly encouraging. Good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:15, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Comments from NortyNort

• In Ref 1, Google translates his father as an intelligence officer as opposed to reconnaissance. Of course this may be completely wrong but I figured I'd comment in case there was an error. In the U.S. military, intel and recon are closely related but much different when it comes to the job preformed and training.
• "Streltsov was dropped from the Soviet team for the first three national team matches of 1968." and "Streltsov was left out of the tournament squad," Why? He was footballer of the year the year prior.
• "which his first wife Alla" He was married twice?
• The "RSSSF" acronym in the references should be spelled out.

Above are just a few comments. Overall, the article was an excellent read and I learned a bit, especially about Soviet football.--NortyNort (Holla) 10:57, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

• • Ah, you're right on the first point. I must have made a translation error. Well spotted.
  • Can't find anything on the second point. Maybe he was injured? I don't know.
  • Yah, put that in.
  • Okay, done. – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 15:21, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

If there is nothing on the second point then oh well. Mainly a curiosity and nicety. But you have address my concerns and I support this article's promotion to featured status.--NortyNort (Holla) 21:40, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.