Talk:2017 EFL Championship play-off final

2017 EFL Championship play-off final is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 7, 2020	Good article nominee	Listed
July 7, 2020	Featured article candidate	Promoted
May 23, 2021	Good topic candidate	Promoted
January 22, 2024	Good topic removal candidate	Demoted
Current status: Featured article

Football: England / Season 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.
	English football portal This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the season article task force.

Yorkshire Low‑importance

	Yorkshire portal 2017 EFL Championship play-off final is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2017 EFL Championship play-off Final/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 19:05, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)}

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures

It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
It contains copyright infringements -
It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). -
It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -

Links

Prose

Lede

Could we mention England in the lede? It seems to assume the ready knows in advance where these leagues are. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:23, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not entirely convinced. It's like suggesting Superbowl finals article should have them state "in the United States" in the lead. The article goes on to make it clear that it's the English football league system. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- - I don't think I'd be quite so strong on this - but there are other competitions called Championship and Premier League. If you look at the league, outside of the place names and EFL, there's nothing that shows it's in England. We are assuming that people know - where we could be specific. Perhaps even just saying "promotion from the EFL Championship - the second-tier of English football." Or similar. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:01, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Lee Especially for you, as Jason Donavan would have said, I've added that and linked it to English football league system, how's that? The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:00, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      - As Kevin Keegan would have said. I'll love it. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:13, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The top two teams of the 2016–17 EFL Championship season gained automatic promotion to the Premier League, while the teams placed from third to sixth place in the table partook in play-off semi-finals; the winners of these semi-finals competed for the final place for the 2017–18 season in the Premier League. - quite a long sentence. Potentially split after Premier League. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:23, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Winning the game was estimated to be worth £170 million to the successful team. - do we know who made this estimate, btw? Surely this would vary per year. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:23, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it varies, and it doesn't say in the lead that this is a general answer for all playoffs, of course. And the amount is described with source and more detail in the main body, as one woulld expect. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A penalty shootout was required to determine the winner for the third time in the history of the second tier play-off final. - might be worth mentioning when the first such one was. (1800s?)
Well it was the history of the play-off final which isn't really the subject of this article, nor specifically the lead. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Although Huddersfield's Michael Hefele was the first to miss, Liam Moore's shot was wayward and Jordan Obita's attempt was saved by Danny Ward, and the Yorkshire club won the final 4–3 on penalties. - not a big fan of using a location, as we haven't denoted that Huddersfield is in Yorkshire previously. This sentence could read that Obita played for Huddersfield, etc. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:23, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Re-worded. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe mention where they finished the league? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:23, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Who? The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The two competing teams. The lede currently just says that the top two qualified directly - but we could add that Huddersfield and Reading finished 3rd and 5th. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)}`
I've added something. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:02, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The final paragraph is a good idea, but potentially have a defining sentence, saying "in the following season, Huddersfield..." etc.
Have done. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

General

Is it worth starting the article with Reading F.C. considering it's a hard start to the article talking about the team and not the city? Only for this original link. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Have done so. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:13, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Both therefore missed out on the two automatic places for promotion to the Premiership and instead took part in the play-offs to determine the third promoted team.- I think I previously mentioned this - but we should really explain to the reader that there are two automatic spots; rather than expecting them to know. So, maybe "With two positions gaining automatic promotion to the Premier League, teams from 3-6 qualified for a play-off competition." or similar.
No, I think it's clear when it says "missed out on the two automatic places" the emphasis being my own here. There's no other interpretation, there were two automatic promotion slots, no more, no less. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:13, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
was shown a straight red for a foul - can we link "red", and call it a "red card"? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Red card linked. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:19, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The resulting penalty shoot-out finished 4–3 in Huddersfield's favour with their goalkeeper, Danny Ward saving two Wednesday penalties, from Sam Hutchinson and Fernando Forestieri. Prior to the game, Hudderfield's manager David Wagner had joked: "everyone knows Germans are able to win penalties".[6] - this one probably needs explaining that Wagner is German (hence the joke). Otherwise it could be anyone on the team. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
added. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:19, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The game was Reading's first appearance in the play-off final since 2011 when they were beaten 4–2 by Swansea City.[7] - this wording suggests that it's a particuarly long time to not be in a final, whereas, it's quite rare to be in two play-off finals within 6 years. Perhaps "In Reading's last appearance in the play-off final in 2011, they were..." Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Reworded. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:19, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
promotions from the second tier in 1995 and promotion from the third tier in 2004 and 2012, having lost the previous season - I was confused by this. I thought they had somehow lost in the final in 2016. Perhaps needs a reword. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Done. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:19, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Prior to the 2017 final, Huddersfield had played twenty-two matches in league play-offs, winning eight, drawing eight and losing six. - do we have similar stats for Reading? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, not at this time. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:27, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It was widely reported that the game was worth at least £160 million over three years to the winners through sponsorship and television deals - lede says 170m. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Adjusted. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:27, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ticket prices range from £36 to £98 for adults, with concessions being half price. ranged Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Adjusted. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:27, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Huddersfield were considered favourites to win the match^{[according to whom?]}
by the media and bookmakers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:27, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
yellow card (sport) - pipe. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Done. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:27, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps link/explain dissent? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Linked to gloss. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:27, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Link Man of the match? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Done. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:27, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Lee, everything responded to above and addressed where appropriate. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:27, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Comments

Automated note - If you fancy returning the favour, I have outstanding GA nominations that require reviewing at WP:GAN. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these, however it's definitely not mandatory. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)}

Happy days are here again - certainly motoring through these ones! I'll see if I can take one or two of your hands later. Passing Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:14, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]