Talk:UEFA Women's Euro 2022 final

UEFA Women's Euro 2022 final 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: March 6, 2023. (Reviewed version).

A news item involving UEFA Women's Euro 2022 final was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 1 August 2022.

Wikipedia

Football: England / Women's football 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).
	Women's association football portal This article is supported by the women's football task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because it detailed the Euro final and provided the details it needed. --2603:8080:A00:6A34:ECD9:94B5:7198:FAE9 (talk) 21:46, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

England–Germany rivalry

"The rivalry between the English and German national teams is considered the greatest in football."

By whom? Even the main article doesn't really support this hypothesis. ANd the claim lacxks sources. 165.1.194.41 (talk) 09:11, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The BBC source at the end of the paragraph, though there should be more nuance; I assume since it’s a more in-depth look and intended for English football fans, the source only touches. If you can introduce other sources (there are several) which discuss the rivalry in the context of this match, please amend and expand! Kingsif (talk) 16:02, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article's protected, so I can't edit. THat's why I posted on the talk page in the first place.

The BBC article describes it well: In English football history, there is no greater rival than Germany

And wiki's own article on the rivalry as well: it is mostly an English phenomenon since most German fans consider the Netherlands or Italy to be their traditional footballing rivals.

That's why I wrote that the statement needs to be amended. 165.1.194.41 (talk) 10:15, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've amended it to not make any superlative statements. If nothing else, it was a breach of WP:WEASEL, and it's the sort of "fact" that would require more than just a throwaway comment in a news article. — Amakuru (talk) 10:34, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of the photo of the German team

As for the change [1] by Kingsif:

To remove the photo of the German team on the grounds that it is not from the final is a very strange argument, because the photos of Monzul, Popp, Kelly, Walsh, Wiegman are also not from the final but from 2014, 2018 and 2019. The photo of the German team was up to date, it was taken a month before! I chose the formatting in such a way that the players can be seen clearly without magnification and placed the photo in "a white hole". WeiterWeg (talk) 04:38, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Photos identifying people can be from any period, but saying "here's a team photo" directly implies (if not is actually claiming to be) that it's a photo of the team at the match. Line-ups change. Kit changes. And it wasn't "in a white hole", it was added in code below the infobox before the body text, so it became a half-page-width (as you say, you made it stupidly big) buffer pushing all the sections out of place (and before the lead? Have you ever edited an article before?) This really isn't worth discussion, your addition was bad and if why needs explaining, you need some experience. Kingsif (talk) 04:44, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Like, it's a great photo, but this is an article about a specific match, and the photo is not from the match. It may be better suited at the article listing all the squads for the tournament, if you want to add it somewhere. And that's the real issue, that this is the match article, not the tournament article, and this match had a specific line-up in a specific kit, and that photo shows neither. For individual people, faces don't change enough to not show them when doing so adds to some body text. Kingsif (talk) 04:49, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:18, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:UEFA Women's Euro 2022 final/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 18:11, 23 January 2023 (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 may 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.

Links

Checked for copyvio, nothing found. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:58, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

Lede

Whilst we usually link cities, London is usually well known enough to not require a link. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:03, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Did we need the citation in the lede. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:03, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
England won the match 2–1 after extra time for their first European Championship title; first women's European Championship title; first major women's international title; and the first time a senior England side had won a major football tournament since the 1966 FIFA World Cup, in which they also defeated Germany at Wembley. - we are talking a bit of chalk and cheese here. Whilst there's something to be said for "it was the first time a national England team had won a major trophy since 1966" or similar, but this seems to talk a lot more about the mens game than is really suitable. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:03, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Could we maybe cite the infobox stuff in the body? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:03, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
claim a mainstream level of popularity in Europe; attendances at regular season games in both England and Germany grew massively, while the final became iconic of the sport's growth, and clubs spent more money on players and games. - seems a bit soon to talk like this. It was only 7 months ago. Hasn't even been a full season since the event. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:03, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Lee Vilenski: I've removed the wikilink and moved refs where appropriate. Re. your third point on tournaments in the men's game - ending the trophy drought for the nation is something that has been basically universally noted in the media coverage. Perhaps that is strange, but we'd be remiss to not mention it when that's the media coverage. I have a similar response for your last point here, too - that while media coverage may be somewhat hyperbolic in this regard, it has been emphatic. Of course, that part of the lede an attempt to include a summary of the post-match section (the longest, perhaps most notable, part), and any suggested amendments are appreciated. Kingsif (talk) 10:09, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

General

Having been selected as host for the UEFA Women's Euro 2022 edition - maybe link the event here - I also noticed we haven't mentioned what UEFA is so far. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:11, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the summary there's a lot of run on sentences. For example, the following is all one sentence. " In the 55th minute, England made two substitutions, replacing White and Fran Kirby with Russo and Toone, the latter of whom gave England the lead seven minutes later:[41] a long ball from Keira Walsh sent Toone clear of the defence and she chipped the ball over Frohms." Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:11, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This took the match to extra time with the score at 1–1. - should cite as it's the end of a para. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:11, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
honoured.[82][83][84][85] - WP:CITEKILL. Either remove one or WP:BUNDLING Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:11, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Lee Vilenski: Done (all these general comments) Kingsif (talk) 10:32, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Review meta comments

I'll begin the review as soon as I can! If you fancy returning the favour, I have a list of nominations for review at WP:GAN and WP:FAC, respectively. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these if you get time. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:11, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Lee Vilenski: Hello, I just wanted to know if you are still planning to review this article. I can help you with a second opinion, if needed, since I already worked on the it.wiki version and watched the whole game myself. : D Oltrepier (talk) 09:53, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, yeah I'll get to it in a mo, forgot I'd picked it up. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:14, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Lee Vilenski No worries! Feel free to ping me if you need a second pair of eyes. Oltrepier (talk) 14:19, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.