Talk:1985 European Cup final/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: InTheAM (talk · contribs) 13:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing the article shortly. I read through it, and it looks like it should pass with a small amount of revision. InTheAM 13:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well-written

a)Prose

The last two paragraphs of the lead repeat the same point.
"...banned from Europe." Clarify—Which tournaments/competitions were they banned from? However, since this is in the lead, the ban should be summarized only.
"win the tie." This phrase is used a few times. Is this common terminology?
The article has many run-ons and very little flow. It is not very easy to read and understand.
In the "Route to the final" section, I do not think it is necessary to go over the scores of each match since they are in the table to the right. Rather, I think it would be better to bring out notable events in the matches.
This sentence is troublesome: "This meant that they finished outside of the European qualification positions, in order to participate in European the competition, they needed to win the European Cup."
"At approximately 7pm..." I would change this to a time in relation to the game, i.e. one hour before kickoff.
"Missiles began to be thrown between the two sets of fans, due to the fact that the stadium was crumbling so fans could pick stones up and throw them across the divide." This sentence is a little wordy. Changing it to active voice would be beneficial.
Did the wall fall on other fans? When/where did the casualties occur? (in the fall, crush, both?)
"Five minutes before half-time, Juventus were awarded a free-kick, after Boniek, who had beaten three Liverpool players with a run, was brought down outside the Liverpool penalty area by Wark who was shown a yellow card for the foul." This sentence is too long. Could be broken up to be made more clear.
"Liverpool created more chances near the end of the match, Tacconi saved from Whelan and both Wark and Steve Nicol saw headers go wide of the Juventus goal." This sentence is a run-on.
"English Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher put pressure on the The Football Association to withdraw English clubs from European competition and two days alter UEFA banned English clubs for "an indeterminate period of time." FIFA extended the ban to worldwide matches on 6 June, the ban was modified a week later to allow friendly matches to be played and did not affect the English national team." These sentences have multiple issues. They do not make sense as written. They are both run-ons. The quote: "indeterminate period of time is nowhere to be found in the SI or ESPN articles referenced. Thatcher is not mentioned in the SI article, either.
In the postmatch section, where is Anfield?

b)MOS

The "References" section should be titled "Works" and should be placed before the "Footnotes" (which should be titled "Notes").
Lead is good, except for the repeated material mentioned above.

2. Factually accurate and verifiable

Sources seem reliable.
No apparent copyright violation.
Links are all good.
Inline citations are good, except where mentioned above.
I think the Hale/Ponting book needs to be cited as Hale in the notes since he is listed first in the references.

3. Broad in its coverage

Route to the finals should include more detail about noteworthy events in the matches rather than just rehashing the table.
Other issues are mentioned in the Prose section of this review.

4. Neutral

Article is written from a neutral POV.

5. Stable

The article appears stable.

6. Illustrated

Images are appropriately tagged.
I wonder, though, if the picture of the remodeled stadium is appropriate to this article.

The article has a good start, but needs more than a little work to pass GA Review. I think it would be best to fix the issues above and nominate the article again later. I am not listing the article at this time. InTheAM 16:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]