Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2020 US Open (tennis)/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 22 May 2021 [1].

2020 US Open (tennis)

Nominator(s): PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 20:59, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a Grand Slam tennis tournament that took place in August and September 2020 (during the COVID-19 pandemic) in New York. I worked to improve this article both at the time it occurred (to get it approved at ITN) and over much of the month of March during its GA review (many thanks to Sportsfan77777 for that). It is currently one of two GA tennis tournament articles (the other being 2009 Sony Ericsson Open), and the only FA tennis tournament article is 1877 Wimbledon Championships, so I figured trying to get another one there wouldn't hurt. This is my first FA nomination, and I was mentored by Casliber prior to this nomination (see here). I'd appreciate any and all feedback I can get. Thanks! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 20:59, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Images appear to be freely licensed. However, you should only be using |upright= to scale images, not fixed pixels which cause display to be suboptimal depending on the device and settings. See MOS:UPRIGHT. (t · c) buidhe 21:15, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was unaware of that, thank you for the fix! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 21:44, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility

review MOS:DTAB for table formatting. They're missing row and column scopes, row headers, and some lack captions.
the images need alt text. Heartfox (talk) 16:50, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heartfox, alt text has been added for all images, and row/col scopes, row headers, and captions have been added to all tables. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:07, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Heartfox (talk) 22:10, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by nominator

The tables, paragraphs of prose, and image seen in the "Players" section here were removed with this edit by Fyunck(click). Regardless of my support of or disagreement with these edits, I am bringing them here to avoid any confusion as to why this part of the article, which was advised to be added in the GA review, has been removed. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 04:53, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An image was inadvertently removed but has been re-added. The "Players" section has been re-added but trimmed for duplicate info in prose, and Covid-related material has been placed in the Covid section. The "Singles players" section is per consensus, and seed chart removal is per consensus. I hope that helps with the understanding. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:16, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Drive by comments by Nick-D Just a few comments mainly on the COVID-19 section:

The first sentence of this section is a bit over complex
"described as a "bubble within a bubble" by players" - this is odd given that no 'bubble' is previously described as being part of the COVID safety protocol (the term usually refers to a group of individuals who don't mix with people outside the group)
The para starting with 'In the event a player was deemed a close contact of someone who had tested positive' is problematic. The second sentence implies that a change in policy took place, but the source doesn't support this - it actually says that requiring a 14 day period of isolation was the standard protocol required by the health authorities, and is discussing how this was applied for some specific cases (with the players being named).
"thus impacting their ability to continue competing in the tournament." - surely it ended their ability to participate?
" Additionally, the men's singles third round match between Alexander Zverev and Adrian Mannarino was delayed for three hours due to a "collaborative dialogue with health officials"" - it is not clear what this means.
The geographic region the statistics for viewership noted in the second para of the 'Broadcasting and viewership' are for section is unclear - is this just for the US? Nick-D (talk) 11:20, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note

More than two weeks in and this has yet to attract a general support. Unless there is clear evidence of a consensus to promote beginning to form over the next two or three days I am afraid that this nomination is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:13, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving as mentioned above. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:15, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.