Talk:2001 PDC World Darts Championship

2001 PDC World Darts Championship 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: April 9, 2020. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2001 PDC World Darts Championship article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Darts High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Darts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Darts-related articles 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.DartsWikipedia:WikiProject DartsTemplate:WikiProject DartsDarts articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

East Anglia Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Anglia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of East Anglia 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.East AngliaWikipedia:WikiProject East AngliaTemplate:WikiProject East AngliaEast Anglia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2001 PDC World Darts Championship/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MrLinkinPark333 (talk · contribs) 17:38, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! It's been awhile since I've reviewed a darts article. Thought I'd review this one to help reduce the sports backlog. If you have any comments/questions, you can leave them here in the review per usual. Depending on how long this takes, I might review some sections per day and not all at once. We'll see.

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Extended content

Tournament summary

P1 Y

"the managers Dick Allix, Tommy Cox and John Markovic as a breakaway faction" - I think this is a bit of close paraphrasing in terms of word choice and word order. If this was slightly reworded, it would pass limited wording.Y
- Changed, not so sure if it is satisfactory though MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Looks better. It now doesn't look very similar to the second paragraph of Darts World. If possible, could managers be reworded to avoid word for word copy of "managers Dick Allix, Tommy Cox and John Markovic"? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:29, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Have changed the order of the words MWright96 (talk) 07:08, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      - Perfect! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:24, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The PDC World Darts Championship was first held in 1994" - true but the tournament technically started on Boxing Day 1993, even though it was the 1994 edition. Maybe a slight reword is needed to prevent confusion?Y
- Changed MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The 2001 tournament was held between 28 December 2000 and 3 January 2001 in Purfleet, Essex, England" - new source needed as Bulls Eye News incorrectly says it ended on the 5th, but it is indeed the 3rd.Y
- Removed that source and used others MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"and was the first of 35 PDC-sanctioned events that year" - how did you come up with 35? I haven't been able to select 2001 PDC from that archived page. The live page shows 34. On the other hand, if Antwrep Open isn't counted (as it has an U for the category) then it's 33 based on that source.
- Changed MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Alright then. The archived version of the source doesn't show it, but the live version does. I'll tick this off anyways as the prose has been adjusted.Y --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:29, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

P2 Y

"with the top 8 seeded according to their final position in the PDC rankings" - of the top 8, only Askew is mentioned by his world ranking. Therefore, I think an extra source is needed to show the top 8 were listed based on their rankings. If you're referring to their points, is that the same thing as ranking?Y
- Removed; a source explaining the seedings on Planetdarts was not explicit in this regard MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"and the tournament's defending champion Phil Taylor was seeded fourth." - none of the sources shows Taylor won the tournament in 2000. Rest of the sentence is fine.Y
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"three were required by a tomlin order not to partake in any PDC-sanctioned darts competitions for one year after they had switched from the BDO. They were Richie Burnett, Roland Scholten and Denis Ovens. - Planetdarts dosen't specify that these three competitors were originally from the BDO, just that they couldnt compete during the one-year Tomlin order.Y
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Dave Askew, Les Fitton and Gary Spedding all qualified as they were prior PDC members" - similarlly, Planet Darts doesn't mention they were prior PDC members. Note: see other points section.
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The world championship featured one woman player, Gayl King, the first female to enter the tournament after the PDC invited her as part of its attempt to modernise darts" - sounds a bit redundant/off with "one woman player, Gayl King, the first female". I think this needs a bit of grammatically tweaking. Note: see other points section
- Reworded MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Also "modernise" is an unique word that The Times source uses. I suggest using a different word.Y
  - Removed MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Only the Match Results page on Mastercaller shows the sets, not the overview source.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 07:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Sponsored by the lager company Skol," - Mastercaller doesn't specify what type of company Skol is. Up to you if you want to swap it for a source that does mention it in terms of the torunament sponsor, or you could drop lager company.Y
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Only the overview of the 2001 tournament on Mastercaller shows the prize amount, not the 2001 results page.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 07:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Other points Y

"Dave Askew, Les Fitton and Gary Spedding were the other three qualifiers" - I think this should be clarified that they were the other three men that debuted as "other three qualifiers" suggests that only 6 people qualified when that's not the case.Y
- Changed MWright96 (talk) 07:08, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"the first woman in Gayl King to play in a world championship" -> "the first woman, Gayl King, to play in a world championship"Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 07:08, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, while The Times does say women would be playing in the 2001 BDO event, it doesn't specify that it was the first time for them. It does confirm that King would be the first woman in a PDC championship and that the BDO event would be held after. So, if you want to keep the prose, I think an extra source to show 2001 BDO was the first women's tournament is needed. Otherwise, the prose could be specified to PDC world championship.Y --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:46, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Changed the prose MWright96 (talk) 07:08, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:46, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

P3 Y

"the second favourite to claim the world championship was Shayne Burgess" - correct, but this is mentioned in the BBC Sports citation (cloud nine), not The Times one.Y
- Swapped MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- As it's the same cited source as Taylor's confidence he could do a nine-darter, you don't need to recite it if you want to citation bundle it.Y

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:59, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Prize fund Y

First round prize money was £1,500, not £1,000 per Mastercaller
- Corrected MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)Y[reply]

Draw Y

I notice that the dart average is different between Mastercaller / Darts Database (i.e. 81.85 / 81.84 for Spedding). If you did use Mastercaller for the averages, some averages need to be corrected to:
- First round: Denis Ovens 91.31, Nigel Justice 78.43, Roland Scholten 93.09, Dan Lauby 80.93
- Second round: Alan Warriner 84.61
- Quarter-finals: Jamie Harvey 80.48, Dave Aksew 96.86, Rod Harrington 93.51,
  - All changed MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)Y[reply]
Keith Deller is not the #5 seed in the second round.
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)Y[reply]

Pictures

The link for John Part's picture does not exist anymore, nor can be found in Archive.org / Archive.is. I'm not 100% sure if the picture is indeed licensed properly. Should the picture be deleted from Commons as well?
- Possibly MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Also, I can't verify if that picture is indeed from 2006 as the article is from 2008. If a different picture of Part is available (freely), then that'd be better. Otherwise, I might have to ask somewhere else to determine what to do with this issue as this is a first for me during a GAN. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:14, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Have deleted the photo from the article since I don't believe it is appropriately licensed MWright96 (talk) 05:42, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Phil Taylor's cropped picture is fine. However, the main picture with the license needs an archived link to show that at the time the picture was on Flickr, it did have this license.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:38, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Section break

All except John Part's licensing issue is done. Time to review Round 1 onwards --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:32, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content

Round 1

Paragraphs 1 and 2 Y

Would it be feasible to merge paragraph 1 into paragraph 2? It looks very small by itself. Or maybe balance out paragraphs one and two by paragraph length.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"In this round eighth seed Askew defeated Mick Manning 3–2." -> In this round, eighth seed Askew defeated Mick Manning 3–2. Note: see below point.
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - The comma is still missing for this point. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Now added the comma MWright96 (talk) 19:47, 1 April 2020 (UTC)Y[reply]
- Also, Mastercaller overall source doesn't verify this and needs to be swapped for a different source.Y
  - Done MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Ahead 2–0 Askew lost his advantage when Manning won two sets in a row." -> Ahead 2–0, Askew lost his advantage when Manning won two sets in a row.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The match ended with a sudden death leg in the fifth set...the first player to enter the second round." - two sentences please.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not 100% sure if the Bull's Eye News article by Steve Brown can be used as he competed in that tournament. However, I'll keep an eye on WP:PRIMARY for when his article is cited.
"Askew had attempted a nine-dart finish before he missed the triple 19 ring during the second leg of the opening set" - I think this should be re-ordered before the 2-0 sets as this was the opening set.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, the missed nine-dart finish happened in the third leg, not second.Y
  - Fixed MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"averaged 34.46 points per dart and had a three-dart average of 103" - I don't see this the 103 average for Burnett mentioned by Brown, only his points per dart (which I persume is the same as match average?). Note: see next point
- Clarified MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, this might be better swapping out for another source as it's not a "straightforward, descriptive statement" per WP:Primary.
  - I made a mistake with this one. Brown said 34.46 was an average, not points per dart. As per the glossary from what I'm reading, they're similar but not the same. Could you swap it to average please? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:35, 1 April 2020 (UTC)Y[reply]
    - Done MWright96 (talk) 19:47, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      - Thanks! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:55, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Fitton moved into a 2–0 lead over Ovens before the latter won the third set. Fitton took a 3–1 victory by winning the fourth set 3–2." - per Primary, it sounds like "further, specialized knowledge" would be needed based on the way that Brown is describing it. I suggest swapping to a secondary source.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:40, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph 3 Y

"Fifth seed Dennis Priestley lost 3–2 against Keith Deller in a close match." - Planet Darts doesn't state Priestly was the fifth seed.Y
- Fixed MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, I suggest rewording "close match" as it's similar to Planet Darts wording.Y
  - Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Taylor lost a single leg to Nigel Justice" - not verified in Bulls Eye NewsY
- Fixed MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, the double vision Argus source does not mention the match between Justice and Taylor.Y
  - Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
" who made his first PDC competition appearance after immigration issues required him to withdraw from the 2000 World Matchplay," - this might be more suitable in the background section.Y
- Deleted sentence MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"to defeat Dan Lauby 3–1" - The final score is not 100% clear with Brown's source. He said Lauby won set one and Lim won set two. Then Lauby won the first leg of set 3, then Lim won five legs in a row to win the game. If my math is correct, then something's missing. Note: see next point
- Fixed MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - This one is still an issue in terms of the final score (3-1). If an extra source was added to verify this part, then it'd be fine as Brown talks about the PPD and checkouts. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:42, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Used Darts Database MWright96 (talk) 19:47, 1 April 2020 (UTC)Y[reply]
      - Perfect! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:56, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Mastercaller overview source doesn't have the 3-0 whitewashes for Warriner and Lazarenko. However, as you cited Darts Database too, you don't need Mastercaller.Y
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Harding had two broken ribs" - This looks out of place mentioning his broken ribs after the match results. If you want to include it, I think it should be incorporated into his match with Warriner. Otherwise, you could drop it if not needed.Y
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:03, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph 4 Y

"Seventh seed John Part had a higher finish than the 1999 Eastbourne Open champion Colin Lloyd and whitewashed him 3–0." - is the scoreline the same thing as finish? If so, then it's redundant.Y
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- "1999 Eastbourne Open champion Colin Lloyd" - word for word copy. Also, I don't think this is needed as it doesn't look like an important tournament.Y
  - Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The 2000 tournament semi-finalist and world number eleven Dennis Smith...took the next two sets unchallenged for a 3–0 victory." - two sentences please.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Rod Harrington in a high-scoring match." - none of the sources say high scoring. The closest I could see is high quality with The Times source, but that's not the same thing.Y
- Removed that particular statement MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
" after he had achieved thirteen and fourteen dart finishes" - I think this is correct but Brown doesn't specify the 13 and 14 were dart finishes, just that he won legs with 13 and 14. Extra source might be useful.Y
- Reworded the sentence MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"In the final first round match Roland Scholten took set victories" => "In the final first round match, Roland Scholten took set victories" Note: see next point
- Changed MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comma is still needed (yes I see you tweaked the sentence as well :) ) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:53, 1 April 2020 (UTC)Y[reply]
"took set victories of 3–2, 3–1, 3–2 to whitewash Burgess 3–0" - bit redundant with mentioning the sources and saying it was a whitewash. I think either or would work.Y
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- If you choose to keep the scores: "took set victories of 3–2, 3–1, 3–2" -> "took set victories of 3–2, 3–1, and 3–2"Y
  - Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"for the first time in three prior attempts" - technically this was Scholten's third attempt after the World Matchplay and Grand Prix, making it two prior attempts.Y
- Fixed MWright96 (talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2

Paragraph 1 Y

"Askew became the first player to go through to the quarter-finals with a 3–2 win over Roy," - BBC doesn't mention Askew became the first quarter-finalist.Y
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"a match that saw both players compile thirteen maximum scores." - Askew and Roy's match had a total of 13 maximums together, not each player per "13 maximums between them" (double checked the video source to be sure) Y
- Corrected MWright96 (talk) 06:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Warriner secured the opening two sets with scores of 3–2" - Planet Darts does mention 3-2 in the text, but if you see the scoring sequence it says 3-2 3-0. I've tried to find video footage of this match but no luck unfortunately. The scoring sequence could be a typo, but I'm not 100% sure.Y
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"to require the match to end after five sets." I think this needs to be reworded to clarify the tie in sets required a fifth set, not Lim's scores decided a fifth set.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk)
"Lim missed eight opportunities to win the match" - from both sources, I see at least two opportunities, not eight. Not sure where the eight came from.Y
- Fixed MWright96 (talk) 06:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"from set victories of 3–2 (x2) and 3–0" - I think x2 should be written as twice to avoid the brackets while making sure it's grammarically correct for Scholten's whitewash.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph 2 Y

"and took the match to a final set decider" - seems a bit close to BBC (Ice Man melts challenge) for Deller's match as they say "deciding set" so I suggest a small tweak.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"before he averaged 32.32 point per dart to secure three consecutive sets" - I'm not sure if Taylor's PPD was during sets 2-4 or 1-4 as Brown mentions Taylor's PPD after his three set wins. BBC doesn't say either. So, I suggest mentioning the PPD after his 3 consecutive set wins for chronological order.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- "before he averaged 32.32 point per dart" -> before he averaged 32.32 points per dartY
  - Done MWright96 (talk) 06:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Taylor said afterwards he was worried about being eliminated from the tournament." - true, but as BBC Sport specifically uses "worried", I recommend using a different word to avoid copying.Y
- Changed to concerned MWright96 (talk) 06:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"the first set without conceding a leg" - word for word copy of BBC Sport (Ice Man) for Harrington's match that needs a tweak to pass limited wording.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"He then completed the match victory in the third set 3–1" -> He then completed the match in the third set with a 3-1 victory (or something else as "match victory in the third set 3–1" sounds a bit off) for Harrington. Note: see next point.
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - "third set 3-1" is a bit of word for word copy. If a slight tweak is done, then I think limited wording would be fine here. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:23, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done MWright96 (talk) 06:11, 3 April 2020 (UTC)Y[reply]
"took the second after a final leg decider" - close paraphrasing of BBC Sport (Ice Man) with "took the second" and "leg decider". I'm more concerned about "took the second" in describing Harrington's matchY
- Changed MWright96 (talk) 06:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"and was drawn to compete against Scholten" - true, but none of the other sentences in this section mention who the winners would be facing in the quarterfinals. I think in order to remain balanced, either this needs removing or the other sentences needs mentioning who the winners would meet in the quarterfinals.Y
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:27, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quarterfinals

Paragraph 1 Y

"produced a three-dart average finish approaching 100" - very close paraphrasing of The Independent (Askew aims straight) especially with "approaching 100".Y
- Reworded MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"and achieved three maximums to winning the first set from Harvey" -> and achieved three maximums to win the first set from HarveyY
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"He then compiled a 161 checkout and took the next three sets to whitewash Harvey 4–0" - true, but Askew also had 3 additional maximums with his 161 checkout during that second set according to the source (I verified it with a video source as well).Y
- Added MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- While The Independent does state it was a four set game, it doesn't state it was a whitewash. I think an extra source would be needed, especially as the quarterfinals was best out of 7.Y
- Used a source from BBC Sport MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Askew attributed claiming the victory to him not partaking in celebrations for the start of 2001:" - this is grammatically off with "attributed claiming the victory to him not" Also, as The Independent uses the word attributed, I recommend dropping that word while making this sentence grammatically correct.Y
- Reworded MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Harrington took the first set without losing a leg and a 116 checkout." -> Harrington took the first set without losing a leg and had a 116 checkout.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
" Scholten took the lead with victories in the following two sets until Harrington made three maximums levelled the match after none of Scholten's darts landed in the double 16 ring." - I think this could be separated into two sentences because of "until" and "after".Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- "until Harrington made three maximums levelled the match" -> until Harrington made three maximums to level the matchY
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Harrington took the first set without losing a leg and a 116 checkout." -> Harrington took the first set without losing a leg and had a 116 checkout.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Oops. Duplicate point. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:08, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Scholten took the lead with victories in the following two sets until Harrington made three maximums levelled the match after none of Scholten's darts landed in the double 16 ring." - 1) BBC Sport (Diamond Shines) doesen't mention Harrington's three maximums 2) Scholten did miss the double 16 ring, but the same source only says it was one dart that missed, not mulitple Note: see next point.
- Fixed MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Almost. #1 is verified with Brown's source. As for #2, "after none of Scholten's darts landed in the double 16 ring" needs to be singular as BBC Sport only mentions 1 dart missed the ring, not more than one. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:16, 4 April 2020 (UTC)Y[reply]
    - Done MWright96 (talk) 20:45, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I see you mentioned that Harrington levelled the match after mentioning he took the lead. This is redundant.Y
  - Corrected MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- If you want to keep that Harrington levelled the match, this happened after Scholten missed the double ring but before Harrington took the lead.Y
  - Corrected MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Otherwise, if you want to keep that Harrington took the lead with wins tin the following two sets, you don't need the levelling part (as it was already 2-1 in sets). Also, "until Harrington made three maximums levelled the match" is grammatically and factually incorrect. Up to you which way you would like to phrase it.Y
  - Reworded MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Harrington subsequently regained the advantage with a finish of twelve darts and took the win in set six" - no mention of twelve dart finish in set five/six.Y
- Used another source MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:24, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph two Y

In the other quarter-finals" -> In the third quarter-final, (as you're only listing one quarterfinal here, and the final one later)
- Changed MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC) Note: see next point.[reply]
  - "In the third quarter-final Part defeated Warriner 4–1." -> In the third quarter-final, Part defeated Warriner 4–1.Y
    - Reworded MWright96 (talk) 20:45, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The match was tied at 1–1 after two sets before Part took a 2–1 advantage." -> The match was tied after two sets before Part took a 2–1 advantage. (as 1-1 is redundant to tied).Y
- Removed aforementioned scoreline MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Part then won the next six legs to win the following two sets" - not from what I'm seeing in Planet Darts. Yes, Part won six legs during sets 3/4, but Warrnier did win a leg each in set 3/4 (i checked a video source). A slight tweak is needed. Note: see next point.
- Reworded MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - "Part then won the following two sets" - This is a bit out of place as this is in between Part's 2-1 set lead and Part winning set five, making it redundant to the set five win.Y
    - Removed 20:45, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
"In the second leg of the fifth set a nine-dart finish was unable to be completed by Part to which he responded with a 69 checkout with thirteen dart throws." => In the second leg of the fifth set, a nine-dart finish was unable to be completed by Part to which he responded with a 69 checkout with thirteen dart throws. Note: see next point
- Reworded MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - "In the second leg of the fifth set Part could not complete a nine-dart finish" -> In the second leg of the fifth set, Part could not complete a nine-dart finish.
    - Done MWright96 (talk) 20:45, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, this sounds a bit wordy that I suggest breaking it into two sentences (while clarifiying that the 69 checkout is also by Part as well).Y
  - Changed MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- "He attained a three-dart finishing average of 103.41" - Darts Database says 103.20 but this also contradicts the Draw section which says 103.19.Y
  - Corrected MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"As Deller was not able to challenge Taylor" - doesn't sound netural. I think if if was explained why with the Independent source (Deller swept aside), then it might work. Otherwise, I suggest removing it.Y
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Taylor said his performance had improved from the day before and noted Deller's play" - Before the quote you included, Taylor said "Keith didn't play as well as he can". I think this needs to be included (whether it being summarized/quoted) as the quote doesn't sound right without it. Note: see next point.
- Fixed MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - "Deller did not play as well as he could" needs to be reworded a bit to pass limited wording as it's very close to the source.Y
    - Reworded MWright96 (talk) 20:45, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, Taylor didn't specify when his performance had improved, just that it did. So "the day before" isn't needed.Y
  - Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:16, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-finals

Paragraph one Y

"three-dart finish average of near to 103" -> three-dart finish average of almost 103 ("of near to" sounds a bit odd, but that could be just me)Y
- Changed MWright96 (talk) 06:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"to be the first player through to the final" - need a source to verify this part as RTE doesn't mention it.Y
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Taylor won the first four sets as Askew won two legs within the first four sets." - bit redundant with "first four sets" being mentioned twice.Y
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Askew commenced the fifth set with a 126 checkout" - true, but I think an extra source is needed since he's mentioned by his nickname (Diamond) and non-dart readers wouldn't know who Diamond is.Y
- Added MWright96 (talk) 06:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"After the match, Taylor said he felt he could improve his throw because he was out of trajectory in his throw." - bit redundant mentioning throw twice.Y
- Changed MWright96 (talk) 06:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Taylor quote is a bit excessive in compared to other quotes throughout the article. I suggest trimming it down. Note: see last point.
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, you already mentioned Taylor felt he could improve his form before the quote, so that part could be removed at least in the quote.Y --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:24, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Removed MWright96 (talk) 06:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"He commented on Askew's play" - well, Taylor also commented on his own play as well (with the 14 180s / nine darts part). So, if you just want to keep Askew's part only, anything of Taylor's would need trimming. Otherwise, you could rephrase "commented on Askew's play".
- Changed the quotation MWright96 (talk) 19:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC) Note: see next two points.[reply]

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:01, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- - I see. But now, the summarizing before the quote is now redundant with the quote lol! In particular, the two sentences beforehand sound similar to each other as well (improving form/wanting to win the championship). Also, form is mentioned in the quote as well.
- On the other hand, the quoted part was before Taylor stated he wanted to win his ninth title and he felt no one else would take the title. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:18, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Made further changes to the quote MWright96 (talk) 05:43, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Taylor was considered by a bookmaker as the favourite to win the title the following day" - I don't see any mentions of a bookmaker in the Planet Darts source.Y
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 18:58, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"and did not foresee another player denying him the world title." - already mentioned in the quote so you don't need it via the summary.Y --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:38, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Removed MWright96 (talk) 18:58, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph two Y

"Both players shared the first three sets" - I think "shared" isn't the right word here as three is an odd number. I think another word is needed to describe the wins.Y
- Changed MWright96 (talk) 06:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Works in this case as it was a 1-1 score. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:12, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"before Part established a 3–1 advantage after he won the fourth set." - well, Part already had the advantage twice (1-0 and 2-1) so he didn't have an advantage after winning set 4. If you mean he extended his lead, then yes.Y
- Changed MWright96 (talk) 06:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
" before he won the following two sets that went to five legs each" -> before Part won the following two sets that went to five legs each. Note: see next point.
- Also, Bulls Eye News doesn't state set 6 and 7 took 5 legs each.Y
  - Removed both MWright96 (talk) 06:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"before he won the following two sets." - I think it should be clarified that Part won the following two sets, since Harrington won set 5.Y --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:12, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done MWright96 (talk) 19:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"before he missed the double 16 ring" - this happened at a different leg (leg 3) than Part's 122 checkout (leg 1). Note: see next point
- Changed MWright96 (talk) 06:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Harrington tied the set at 2–2 on the double 20 ring." - Is there a source that mentions leg 2? If not, then I think Harrington's set 4 win needs to be separate for grammar.Y --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:12, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Separated it for grammar MWright96 (talk) 19:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"This required a player to win the match by two legs" - true, but I think this should be mentioned it was in a tiebreaker.Y --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:24, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Changed MWright96 (talk) 06:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - I see this is still the same. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:12, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - I need an vision test lol. Have now changed MWright96 (talk) 19:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      - Nah! No worries :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:11, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Final

Paragraph one / two Y

"He had previously won the world championship eight times (in 1990, 1992, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999 and 2000)" - I think the bracketed part should be rewritten for Taylor in order to remove the brackets and avoid sounding like a side-note.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:12, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"A finish in fourteen darts won Taylor the first set 3–1." => Taylor won the first set 3-1 with a finish of fourteen darts.Y
- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:12, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"He then took the second set and prevented Part from attempting to win a leg with a dart landing inside a double ring." - sorta. Planet Darts does say Part didn't get a chance with the double ring, but it wasn't an attempt for Part to win a leg. Note: see next point
- Reworded MWright96 (talk) 06:12, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - " and stopping Part from getting a chance to hit a double ring" -> and stopped Part from getting a chance to hit a double ring Y --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:24, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done MWright96 (talk) 19:51, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Taylor compiled the tournament's highest checkout, a 167 in ten dart throws," - I'm not sure if the 10 dart finish and 167 checkout were in the same leg per The Indepednent (Taylor takes game to new level). PlanetDarts also mentiones the 10 dart finish was in the fifth set, not third. So, if you want to keep this, it'd have to be reordered for chronlogical puproses.Y
- Reworded MWright96 (talk) 06:12, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"and won the set after Part missed the bullseye ring in the leg prior." - true, but this would need to be reordered as Part's missed bullseye happened in leg one, Taylor hit the 167 checkout in leg 2, then Taylor won the set in leg 3.Y
- Reworded MWright96 (talk) 06:12, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Part was unable to convert seven chances to land a dart in one of the double rings." - also true, but since BBC Sport (Faultless Taylor) mentiones this was up to set four, this sentence would need to be re-ordered withY
- Reworded MWright96 (talk) 06:12, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - I see you removed it. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:24, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

" He then won six successive legs to go 5–0 ahead with a finish of ten dart throws and an 82 checkout" as Taylor's ten dart finish/82 checkout happened in set 5.Y

- Done MWright96 (talk) 06:12, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"by winning the set 3–1 and the tournament." - need a source to show the final set was 3-1 BBC Sport (Faultless Taylor) only mentions that Part won one set, but not how many Taylor won.Y
- Added extra source MWright96 (talk) 06:12, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:53, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph three Y

"Part said Taylor was a deserved champion:" - This one is odd as the colon suggests the "deserved champion" part is introducing the quoted part, but it's to a different reference (Faultless Taylor BBC Sport vs. Taylor takes final adversary The Times). If you want the deserved champion part, it'd have to be separate from the quoted part and not a colon. Note: see next point
- Done MWright96 (talk)
  - After reading BBC Sport, I don't see this part. The closest I see is "He beat me thoroughly", but that's not a synonym of deserved. A slight reword is needed. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:28, 8 April 2020 (UTC)Y[reply]
    - Reworded MWright96 (talk) 19:51, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Playing Phil is completely oppressive, take Tiger Woods and double it,...It was a special performance, unreal, and I just couldn't measure up." - none of this quote is in the Taylor takes final adversary apart source. I see part of it mentioned in the Faultless Taylor source, but not all of it. Note: see next point
- Used another source MWright96 (talk) 06:12, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Nice find! I think you should also include that quote was by Part as well. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:28, 8 April 2020 (UTC)Y[reply]
    - Added that mention MWright96 (talk) 19:51, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lead/infobox Y

"and the eighth time it took place at the Circus Tavern." - not mentioned in the background section.Y
- I see you removed it. Didn't realize you did XD --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:31, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Taylor also achieved a 167 checkout, the highest of the competition, in the second leg of the third set of the final against Part." - this is a bit wordy. I suggest either breaking into 2 sentences or reducing the wording. Note: see next point
- I see you trimmed it, but "in the second leg of the third set of the final against Part" still sounds wordy with "in the second leg of the third set of the final". --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:31, 8 April 2020 (UTC)Y[reply]
  - Removed the mention of the exact leg MWright96 (talk) 19:33, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Sounds better now. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:35, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
no issue with infobox

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:58, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Leftover points

As i feel that this review will be long, I'll leave the leftover points here in case they were not fully fixed the first time around:

Round 1: missing comma in Askew's matchY, replacing points per dart with average for Burnett (my mistake, not yours)Y, extra source to verify 3-1 final score for LimY, comma for Scholten's match

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:46, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Overall

Overall, the main issue is grammar whether it being tenses, commas or sentence structure. For other issues: there are instances of OR (e.g., the Tiger Woods quote by Part not existing in the reference), question of whether the John Part picture is properly licensed or not (as I can't access an archived copy of the link in the Commons page), and making sure that the Steve Brown reference does pass WP:Primary as he was a competitor at the tournament for reliability. There was an issue of neturality ("Deller was not able to challenge Taylor") and focus (mentioning that Lloyd won the 1999 Eastbourne Open) but both have been resolved already. As most of the article has been worked on while I was reviewing the article, I'm willing to place this article on hold for a week. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:21, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise, article has a ref layout, MOS is good for lead, layout and words to watch, is broad, stable, and has relevant pics.

Note: I've left a talk page message to the uploader of the John Part picture here. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:21, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MWright96: I see you removed the Part picture. If the licensing does get confirmed, you could restore the picture at a later date. But for now, everything has been done. I'll be promoting this. Well done! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:28, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]