Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Arsenal Women 11–1 Bristol City Women/archive3

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 23 May 2021 [1].

Arsenal Women 11–1 Bristol City Women

[edit]
Nominator(s): Edwininlondon (talk) 12:00, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I bring back here this women's football match article, after a few reviewers were so kind to do a Peer Review. I believe it is in line with the football articles that recently got promoted to FA (1987 FA Cup Final, 2019 FA Cup Final), at least in terms of level of understanding to a non-expert. Edwininlondon (talk) 12:00, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for checking. Edwininlondon (talk) 16:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your comments and your support. Edwininlondon (talk) 16:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I supported at the previous nomination. I already left comments that were addressed there. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 21:27, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A few more tweaks:

Two corner kicks for the home team quickly followed, but were unsuccessful ===>>> Two corner kicks for the home team quickly followed, but neither led to a goal. (The kicks themselves were not unsuccessful.)
Arsenal had made thirty-four shots <<<=== I think just "Arsenal had thirty-four shots" or "Arsenal had taken thirty-four shots"?
South-Korean <<<=== there shouldn't be a dash
allowing Manchester City to take the lead ===>>> allowing Manchester City to take the top position. ("the lead" sounds more like the lead in a game)
They achieved a further win ===>>> They achieved a second win

That's it. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 21:27, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, Sportsfan77777, for taking time again to go over the article. Much appreciated. I have made the improvements you suggested. Thanks. Edwininlondon (talk) 16:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Hmlarson (talk) 01:08, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Hmlarson for your support. Edwininlondon (talk) 16:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments by Z1720

[edit]

I commented on the peer review. Below are some additional comments based on a prose review. Please note: I am a non-expert.

  • "Manager Joe Montemurro used his new signings and brought on Jordan Nobbs" I don't know what the first part of the sentence is trying to tell me.
I removed the "used his new signings and" bit, as indeed it does not warrant a mention that these new signings were actually used.
  • "Prior to round eight" Round eight of what?
I changed it so that the opening sentence of this paragraph says that round 1 of the season took place in Sep. That should make the meaning of round eight obvious.
  • "surpassing Liverpool's 9–0 defeat of" Perhaps change to "surpassing Liverpool's 9-0 victory over" I think "defeat of" is a little confusing.
Done
  • "After 23 February, no more of the 2019–20 season's matches were played because of the COVID-19 pandemic." "no more" sounds weird here. What about "Matches for the 2019-20 season stopped after 23 February because of the COVID-19 pandemic." Also, you use the same two citations for the next sentence, so I think you can remove the citations at the end of this one.
Done
  • "Because Arsenal did not finish in the top two," Change to "Since Arsenal did not"
Done

Those are all my comments. Z1720 (talk) 01:49, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Z1720, for taking the time again to look at the article. Much appreciated. I hope I have addressed all your points. Edwininlondon (talk) 16:59, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My concerns have been addressed. I support based on prose. Z1720 (talk) 23:56, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

[edit]

Spotchecks not done. Version reviewed.

  • Direct quotes should be cited in the lead, even if repeated later
Done
  • "The result put Arsenal top of the league on goal difference" - don't see this specific claim in the text
It summarises the first 3 sentences of the Aftermath section
Is the table position based solely on goal difference? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah sorry, I now see what you mean. No, it is based on points first, then goal difference. I removed the detail about goal difference from the lead, and just stick to the main point: The result put Arsenal top of the league.
  • FN22: why italicize BBC Sport here but not in other refs?
Good catch. All consistent now.
  • Be consistent in when you include retrieval date
There is no retrieval date when there is an archive date. I had missed a few and have just cleaned this up to be consistent.
This still isn't consistent - for example FN16 has both. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I think I have them all now. I added a bunch of archive links as well.
  • FN24 is missing author
Done
  • FN45: work title should be italicized. Ditto FN48, check for others
Done. All newspapers now in italics.
This applies to all work titles, not just newspapers - eg Kicker. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Thx!
Fixed. Good catch. Thanks very much for checking, Nikkimaria. Edwininlondon (talk) 17:28, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think I have fixed them all now. Thx. Edwininlondon (talk) 16:30, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nikkimaria, is this GTG? Gog the Mild (talk) 20:42, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:01, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Arsenal_Women_11–1_Bristol_City_Women/archive3&oldid=1024640775"