Talk:1981 Intercontinental Cup

1981 Intercontinental Cup has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: May 5, 2020. (Reviewed version).

Football: Brazil / England / Liverpool Low‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Brazilian football task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	English football portal This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Liverpool task force (assessed as Low-importance).

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 1981 Intercontinental Cup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:01, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:1981 Intercontinental Cup/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kosack (talk · contribs) 08:08, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll pick this one up, will post review as soon as possible. Kosack (talk) 08:08, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Initial review

Lead

The opening sentence is quite long and I'm not sure the "annual Intercontinental Cup" connector actually works. I would suggest splitting into two.
"The teams had qualified for the competition by winning their continent's primary cup competition", this is already kind of implied in the first paragraph and is further mentioned in the following sentences.
"Flamengo won the match to secure the first victory in the Intercontinental Cup. It was their first success in the competition", again these two parts are reiterating the same point.

Background

After the lead, you're essentially starting from scratch with links again. So we need links for Liverpool, Intercontinental Cup, European Cup and Flamengo here.
"scheduled to take in 1977", something missing here.
The one source in the first paragraph doesn't support beating Real Madrid in the final.
Was the cut by a rock incident in the second leg? Worth pointing out if so.

Details

The referee is listed here and in the infobox but there's no source to support him.

Post-match

I'm not seeing Carpegiani's quote in either of the refs provided in the first paragraph.

Footnotes

Ref 1 has an available author.

Placed on hold for now while the above issues are addressed. Kosack (talk) 18:14, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to review the article Kosack, I've addressed the comments you raised. NapHit (talk) 19:43, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work. One minor thing I noticed, refs 10 and 11 need accessdates. Other than that this is pretty much done, I made some minor changes to the lead if you wish to review them. Let me know when the accessdates are added. Kosack (talk) 09:09, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Kosack, changes look good to me. I've added the accessdates in now. NapHit (talk) 11:03, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The refs were displaying an error message as it seems accessdates are not required without a url. My misyltake, wasn't aware of that. All good, happy to promote. Kosack (talk) 12:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]