Talk:HC Ässät Pori/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Poriman55 (talk · contribs) 11:12, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Chipmunkdavis (talk · contribs) 11:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a look at this one. At an initial read it looks decent. The lead seems to have unique sources and information, such as the name, which should be in the article. Perhaps the name fits under team identity. The explanatory notes currently lack sources, as does the Season-by-season record section, and the Team records subsection. The Franchise records source should be converted into an inline source that includes an access-date. For the stat sections, it would be helpful to have some explanatory text in addition to the tables. For example, a quick explanation of what an International campaign is and a summary of the outcomes. As a general rule of thumb, any topic important enough to get its own header should be mentioned in the lead somehow. CMD (talk) 11:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the above, not all sections seem to be covered in the lead.

First sentence of history spot check shows text is supported.
The first paragraph of History needs some refining. "Although the RU-38 won the SM-sarja championship in 1967, the Rosenlew company seriously considered giving up sports activities, since it felt that hockey did not bring enough positive publicity to the company." This sentence expects a lot of knowledge from the reader. When was the championship, and what is the relationship of Rosenlew and RU-38? "Karhut benefited less economically from the merger, since the club had invested in player acquisitions to the point where its income did not cover expenses, especially after the Rosenlew club gained sponsors at Karhut's expense." Why would a more in-debt party benefit less economically from a merger? "As Rosenlew was abandoning its sports club, it was suggested that the RU-38 was merged into Karhut." This seems out of order, the merger was already discussed. "Rosenlew took over a portion of Karhut's debts and promised to support the new team financially in its early years." If Karhut was now part of the team, what happened to the rest of its debts? "Vilho Santala, who acted as a negotiator in uniting the clubs", who was he negotiating for?
"but one line of national team-level players joined different teams", am unclear what this means. Could "line" be wikilinked somewhere?
"The first games of Ässät went well, and even before the start of the 1967 SM-sarja season, Ässät won the Suomen Cup championship." The earlier text stated that "RU-38 won the SM-sarja championship in 1967", how did Ässät play that season?
"the number of spectators decreased by 10,000 from the last season of Karhut", is there a reason Karhut spectators are mentioned and not RU-38?
"The most important player on the team was the captain, center Veli-Pekka Ketola, who had returned from the North American WHA League" This is a partial repetition of text earlier in the paragraph.

"The final series became a thrilling play." This is an example of an issue that occurs in a few places in the History section of an unencyclopaedic tone. This is related to a really heavy amount of detail in some parts of this section. Play by play coverage of each match does not seem necessary, more so for the precise goal times. Overall, while I gave only a few key examples above, the History section needs some copyediting throughout to meet GACR1a. CMD (talk) 14:26, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closing this given the lack of activity. The key changes recommended before renominating are copyediting and ensuring all sections are clearly sourced. CMD (talk) 23:59, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]