Talk:1901 FA Cup final/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:32, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I'll make copyedits as I go (please revert if I inadvertently change the meaning) and jot queries below: Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:32, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, Cas Liber. Thank you for picking up this review. Very busy in real life at present but I'll keep looking in and will help as much as I can. All the best and stay safe. No Great Shaker (talk) 11:08, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay great - I will jot some notes down soon and ping. Take your time. I've left these open for months sometimes to give people a chance to get the things done. Take yr time and make sure you take care of RL issues first...wikipedia don't put grub on the table... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:25, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right then, where was I...oh yes. I have been more proactive with copyediting straightforward issues given your situation but please check...

~~In the Final section, I'd meld into two paras so we don't have a stubby 2-sentence para.~~

Yes, good point. I've restructured the whole section so that each paragraph has at least three sentences and the controversial goal is contained within its own paragraph.

, ~~home of Bolton Wanderers,~~ ~~- I'd put this in spaced endashes or unspaced emdashes to mix it up a bit....~~

~~The replay took place a week later at Burnden Park, home of Bolton Wanderers, and both teams were unchanged. The weather was windy with showers.~~ - I'd put the segment about unchanged teams with teh weather or reword like...."The replay took place a week later under windy conditions with showers at Burnden Park—home of Bolton Wanderers—with both teams unchanged."

Done. I like the wording and format you've suggested.

~~Tottenham Hotspur have gone on to play in nine finals, winning eight and losing only one, in 1987.~~ ~~- I'd convert the last comma to an en/emdash here too.~~

I think a link is the better solution here. I agree that "losing only one, in 1987" is a bit clumsy.

Agreed - I like the way you've done it...some might grumble about an easter-egg link but meh....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~I'd move the most important images in the gallery to in-text.~~

The gallery is a bit problematic, I agree. Could I adjourn so I can look into this and decide which if any should be kept and placed in-text? Will try and come back on this later today.

Done. I think the two goal photos should be in-text but none of the others.

Overall looks very comprehensive. Prose is pretty good too, a nice engaging read though might need some tightening for FAC. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:23, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Cas Liber, you've made good points and I agree they all need action. Please let me know if you're okay with the 1987 link I've re-applied. I'll consider the gallery items as soon as I can. All the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 11:36, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This actually took very little time to complete because the goal photos are the obvious ones to use, one in the final and one in the replay. Could you please take another look when you have time and I'll be happy to help if I can. Best wishes, again, and stay safe. No Great Shaker (talk) 11:53, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well written?:

Prose quality: