Talk:Recopa Sudamericana/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:24, 8 July 2010 (UTC) To start the review off, I looked at the images and a bit of the format.[reply]

I'm not seeing a reason to have File:Recopa-old.PNG on the article, and I'm surprised we can't find a free image of the trophy. I'm not sure about having that image in either per fair use guidelines.
- To show what the old logo looks like. BTW, there isn't a single free image of the trophy online. Trust me...I checked thoughly. If you can find one, I will give you 10 green bucks online.
  - Fair enough on the trophy, but there's no reason to have the old logo image if the only rationale is "to show what it looks like". I'll delete it if that's alright.

Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 17:07, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References need to go after punctuation, not before. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:24, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Done.Jamen Somasu (talk) 17:02, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the old logo. Anything else? This article deserves to be a GA and it has been long overdue.Jamen Somasu (talk) 19:08, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The references check out, though the format and sponsorship sections need citations. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 21:36, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Jamen Somasu (talk) 23:14, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll finish the review tomorrow. Sorry for the delay, I'm falling apart on the review end of things. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 04:29, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's cool. Just let me know if this page needs anything else. This has loooooong warranted being a GA (as well as the Copa Libertadores). Jamen Somasu (talk) 18:04, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the rest of the review:

"Contrary to many other super cups around the world, the Recopa Sudamericana is highly regarded in its continent and rarely disputed by second-tier lineups from participating clubs." Despite being in the lead, a statement like that needs a cite. Would probably fit better in the last lead paragraph as well.
"Previously, the Recopa Sudamericana was disputed between the Copa Libertadores winner and the Supercopa Sudamericana champion until the Supercopa was disbanded" disputed's probably not a good word there. reword, perhaps "previously, the CL winner and SS champion competed for the RS until..." (not abbreviated of course) Same for the following sentence, pick a different word.
"Thus, CONMEBOL named the new competition after the defunct Recopa Sudamericana de Clubes played in 1970 and 1971 and named it the Recopa Sudamericana." Reword; "Thus, CONMEBOL named the new competition Recopa Sudamericana after the defunct..."
"It is noteworthy to mention" not encyclopedia to use phrases like that; remove/reword. Actually, you can combine that with the previous sentence and just note it by saying the two are not related chronologically.
All scores (0-1, etc.) need to use the – in place of the dash.
"Nacional managed to lift the trophy after winning 4-1 on points" sounds somewhat odd, mainly the lift part; reword.
I'd like a citation for the Olimpia automatic win.
"São Paulo will win" change to won. Plus, 'ever' later in the sentence can be removed.
"São Paulo successfully defends the trophy against Botafogo" again, watch your tense. Everything has to be past tense.
The second history paragraph is uncited.
"CONMEBOL had Copa CONMEBOL winners Botafogo dispute the Recopa Sudamericana only to lose 3-1 to the defending champions." I'm confused; reword.

I'm gonna stop here since there's more issues than I thought, and some likely appear later in the article and can be doubly fixed. Let me know when the above is done and I'll do the rest. It's not a long article so it shouldn't take long to finish. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 04:02, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Everything above was fixed. Jamen Somasu (talk) 11:18, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And now, the rest of the rest of the review:

"led by iconic figure Jorge Burruchaga" iconic figure's a bit overboard and can be removed.
"Independiente will participate in a second final" tense
"in order to determine who will become the first tricampeon" tense
"The Xeneizes won 4–1 on points and successfully defended the title becoming the first side since Telê Santana's São Paulo to win consecutive Recopas." missing a comma
"LDU Quito are set to defend the title against Estudiantes in 2010." LDU's linked in the previous sentence, can be unlinked here.
"Thus, CONMEBOL states that Nacional from Uruguay won the first Recopa of 1989, whereas the RSSSF refers to that championship as Recopa 1988." cite needed

That's all. I'll put this on hold, and after these are fixed I'll do one more look through on the language, as some of it is rather superficial and not too encyclopedic. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:16, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nom was indefblocked, so GA fails. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 19:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anything more I could do?Leedman2 (talk) 00:23, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look over the article again shortly and see if there's anything else. I would suggest going through and making a copyedit though to find any prose that doesn't sound right. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 13:07, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Going through one more time now. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 00:56, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What I'm going to do is re-nominate this, because I think it's really close, but at the same time I really think it needs a new pair of reviewer eyes. Any other issues I'll probably miss at this point. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 02:27, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]