Talk:2021 Indian Premier League/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: FacetsOfNonStickPans (talk · contribs) 10:29, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kpddg, a few comments before I continue with the full review as per GA criteria:

  1. Why do some sections only have lists/tables and no text in paragraph/prose format?
    Here I am not concerned about the lists/tables, but rather the lack of prose to support the tables or that particular section. (For some connected policy and guidelines: MOS:USEPROSE, WP:PARAGRAPH, WP:WHENTABLE, MOS:EMBED...) The sections "Teams and standings" and "Statistics" have no sentences at all. "Venues" has a single line and "League stage" also has minimal prose. Wouldn't a few explanatory sentences help? Don't a collection of only tables/lists seem less like just a collection of statistical trivia? As a GA reviewer I don't want to be going into editorial decisions, but I want to be sure that we are covering the basics like structure WP:MOS consciously. While this is not that important a factor for this GA, it would be worthwhile to note that no IPL season has achieved GA status, however some trends can be seen with regard to basic structure.
    On the other hand, if you think prose is unnecessary for any particular section mentioned above, please write down the reason/s succinctly.
  2. Do you think this should be in the first paragraph of the introduction - ... renamed as the Punjab Kings.
  3. The two tables in the 'Venue' section are aligned differently.

FacetsOfNonStickPans (talk) 10:29, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FacetsOfNonStickPans, I have tried to resolve these points:
1. I've added some prose content for these sections, but can't think of or find anything more. If you have any specific ideas, do tell me.
2. It has been moved to the second paragraph.
3. Both have been aligned in the same way.
Thanks, Kpddg (talk) 14:10, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My detailed review follows. I will continue to add points according to the progress.

Infobox
  • Infobox parameters 'fromdate' and 'todate' have been used unsatisfactorily. However Template:Infobox cricket tournament does not seem to provide any other parameter for the date. If you think of anything that can improve this please do so.
  • "Round-robin and Playoffs" - r and p do not need to be capitalized
 Done Kpddg (talk) 13:04, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'player of the series' parameter is not referenced adequately. The section 'End of the season awards' lists him with three awards- Gamechanger of the season, Most Valuable Player of the season and Purple Cap. The reference used does not mention directly mention 'player of the series'. Another source is needed here, for example 1, 2
There is no Player of the Series award, only the MVP. So shall I remove it from the infobox? Kpddg (talk) 13:13, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Discussed on the talk page. FacetsOfNonStickPans (talk) 09:52, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  • Mumbai Indians were the two times defending champions, having won both the 2019 and the 2020 seasons. - This line in the first para of the intro has no supporting line in the body.
 DoneKpddg (talk) 13:13, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • while Harshal Patel took the most wickets and also won the Most Valuable Player Award. - out of the four season awards he was awarded, why has Most Valuable Player Award been chosen here? What does "Most Valuable Player Award" mean? Maybe a line on this in the section "End of the season awards" and a few words in the lead or whereever most suitable.
    •  Done Linked to article in lead, and added sentence in respective section Kpddg (talk) 10:55, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Background
  • Citation detailing needs improvement, see below, in order of appearance
    • date parameter, TimesNow citation/reference
    • author and date parameters, InsideSport cite
       Done Kpddg (talk) 15:51, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • author and date parameters, ESPN cite
    • date parameter, TimesNow cite
    • not formatted properly, editor parameter can also be filled, India.com cite
       Done Kpddg (talk) 13:14, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • PTI not mentioned ESPN cite
    • TimesNow is linked inconsistency. This also means links between different citations is also inconsistent.
    • Please complete citation detailing for the remaining citations in this section (and also consider checking each citation in the entire article)
Personnel changes
  • "The players' auction was held on 18 February 2021 in Chennai" is not adequately referenced- "to be held".
COVID-19 impact
Venues
  • The map of India is placed outside the corresponding table while the map of UAE is placed inside its corresponding table.
Teams and standings
League stage
  • This section has one hatnote while playoffs has two hatnotes. UAE has one hatnote. Some consistency required between similar hatnote usage.
Playoffs
Statistics
  • The table 'End of the season awards' mentions the sponsors of some of the prizes. The Indian Express reference used does not cover this. The column for prizes is also unreferenced. Even the HT reference used in the first line does not cover the table entries adequately.
    I cannot find a reliable secondary source mentioning the sponsors and prize money. So shall I remove them? Kpddg (talk) 15:40, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Here is one reference for the awards and prize money. [1] FacetsOfNonStickPans (talk) 09:52, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Thank you Kpddg (talk) 07:51, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Some sponsors are linked and others are not.
      This is because not all sponsors have their own article. Kpddg (talk) 13:13, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Would it be clearer to write the award without the sponsor at the beginning. The sponsor name can then be placed in its own column, shifted to prizes, or removed entirely.
  • With regard to consistency between the three tables, why is the source in table three placed outside the table?
     Done Kpddg (talk) 13:17, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • The links for the column 'Team' are inconsistent when tables for 'Most runs' and 'End of the season awards' are considered. 'End of the season awards' follows linking of only the first mention, while in 'Most runs' CSK is linked twice.
 Done Kpddg (talk) 09:19, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Purple Cap and Orange Cap are mentioned under the subsections 'Most runs' and 'Most wickets', and then again mentioned. Can this duplicity be reduced.
       Done Kpddg (talk) 13:13, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Individual prizes and statistics are given. Are there no other team prizes or statistics that are relevant?
  • Is it possible to add some prose to this section? For example, describe the "Perfect Catch of the season", if there are reliable sources. If these individual awards do not have any reliable sources describing them, are they important enough to be listed in the article?
    • I have added prose Kpddg (talk) 15:02, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • The prose you have added is a general explanation of the awards which is arguably alright here. However, when I was wrote about describing the awards, I meant a short description specifically in relation to this season of IPL. For example, Ravi Bishnoi's "Perfect Catch of the season" is described in these sources [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. I also do not mean to describe each and every award, if there are one of two worth mentioning then only those can be mentioned. FacetsOfNonStickPans (talk) 13:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        Added about Bishnoi's catch Kpddg (talk) 14:15, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
References
I made some improvements to cite/ref detailing. FacetsOfNonStickPans (talk) 09:02, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Kpddg (talk) 16:40, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Second opinion requested in the hopes of finding reviewer to take over[edit]

The nomination status is being changed to "2nd opinion" in the hopes of finding a new reviewer to take over the review. One major issue that I raised above was whether the prose is comprehensive enough and if there are enough references out there to back this up adequately. The article has been improved significantly by the nominator as per the above review, however there are some unfinished points. Thank you to whoever steps up. FacetsOfNonStickPans (talk) 09:02, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can do a fresh review; I should be able to post some comments later today. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:53, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Images are appropriately tagged; Earwig finds no issues.

  • What makes the following reliable sources?
    • crictracker.com -- the about page says it's a fan site and the "200 authors" implies anyone can contribute.
    • cricketaddictor.com -- the about page says it was a one person site and is now a "platform" for aspiring journalists, implying the contributors are not professionals.
    • scroll.in
    • cricketwa.com
  • "announced in their 89th  AGM that there would not be any additional team for this season; and the inclusion of two new teams would happen only in the 2022 season": suggest "announced in their 89th AGM that the inclusion of two new teams would be delayed until the 2022 season".
  • "spectators were allowed in, by following COVID-19 protocols": suggest "spectators who had followed COVID-19 protocols were allowed in".
  • "Each team would receive two points for a victory, one each for a no-result match, and none for a loss": suggest "received" rather than "would receive".
  • Some copyediting is required. For example:
    • "they were confident to host"
    • "considering to host"
    • "a call on letting spectators in would be taken"
  • We aren't supposed to have external links in the body of the article, as you do with the scorecards. I think the best way to handle these is to change them to {{tl|cite web}] format, and attach them as citation footnotes to the column headings "Match 1", "Match 2", and so on. Something similar could be done for the other external links used as sources in tables -- e.g. for "Most wickets", change it to "Source: ESPNcricinfo" with no external link, and attach a web citation to that.

Spotchecks:

  • FN 8 cites "On 30 January 2021, the BCCI announced that they were confident to host the tournament in India". Verified, but "confident to host" is poor English. I would suggest "confident they would be able to host" but that's what the source has, so I suggest completely recasting the sentence.
  • FNs 11 & 12 cite "As of late February, the BCCI was considering to host the tournament in a few shortlisted cities, which included Kolkata, Delhi, Bangalore, Ahmedabad and Chennai, with Mumbai as an additional option". Verified, , but I wouldn't use "included" when this is actually the full list, since it implies there are other cities.
  • FN 14 cites "Six venues, including all the five shortlisted venues and the additional option Mumbai were scheduled to host matches. To avoid home advantage, no team was scheduled to play at their home venue." Verified.
  • FN 32 cites "However, on 4 May 2021, the Chennai Super Kings versus Rajasthan Royals match, scheduled for the following day, was also postponed due to the Chennai players being in quarantine." Verified.
  • FN 81 cites "Fairplay award is given to the team which has the best record of playing in accordance with the rules and being fair." The source has "...fair play award is an annual cricket award and it is awarded to the team which have the best record of playing as per the rules and playing fair..." It's hard to rephrase definitions, but I think this is just a little too close to the original phrasing.
  • FNs 88 & 89 cite "Ravi Bishnoi of the Punjab Kings won the award for his catch taken against Kolkata Knight Riders in match 21 to dismiss Sunil Narine, where he covered a lot of ground and took a diving catch at deep mid-wicket." The sources have "Ravi Bishnoi (PBKS) took a terrific catch in the game against Kolkata Knight Riders in match 21 of the season covering diving ahead after covering a lot of ground in the deep": I would rephrase to avoid "covering a lot of ground" -- perhaps just delete it.
  • FN 28 cites "On the same day, three members of the Chennai Super Kings camp – including their bowling coach Lakshmipathy Balaji and CEO Kasi Viswanathan, tested positive." OK, with some unavoidablesimilarities of phrasing.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:31, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mike Christie for picking up the review. I'll try to address these points. Kpddg (talk) 10:45, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Christie, I think I have addressed the points. Kpddg (talk) 13:49, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've copyedited to address a couple of remaining points. Since the spotchecks did not come up clean, I'm going to do a few more:

  • FN 28 cites "On the same day, three members of the Chennai Super Kings camp – including their bowling coach Lakshmipathy Balaji and CEO Kasi Viswanathan, tested positive." The source has "Three members of the Chennai Super Kings' IPL contingent - chief executive Kasi Viswanathan, bowling coach L Balaji, and a bus cleaner - have tested positive for Covid-19." This is too close to the original phrasing.
  • FNs 16 & 17 cite "The BCCI also confirmed that the tournament would begin behind closed doors, and a call on letting spectators in would be taken at a later stage." The source has "BCCI has also confirmed that the tournament will begin behind closed doors, and a call on letting spectators in will be taken at a later stage." This is almost exactly the wording in the source.
  • FN 36 cites "On 5 May 2021, Michael Hussey, the batting coach of Chennai, became the first overseas individual to test positive." The source has "Chennai Super Kings' batting coach Mike Hussey has become the latest member in the IPL 2021 bubble to test positive for Covid-19...Hussey is the first member of the overseas contingent to test positive in the 2021 IPL". Verified.
  • FN 46 cites "After the relocation to the UAE, the organisers were looking to allow at least 50% capacity of vaccinated audience in the stadium, if permitted by the local government." The source has "The vaccinated fans can be allowed up to 50 per cent of the [stadium] capacity". Marginal, but I think this is too close; you might resolve this by using the quote given in the source from the UAE board official.

Unfortunately I'm going to have to fail this because of these spotchecks -- given that I found issues on the first spotchecks, I would have needed these to come up clean to pass it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:38, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie, I can resolve these issues if given some time. Also, the instructions for users answering a second opionion say that the decision to pass or fail the review should be left to the original reviewer, or they should be contacted. Pinging FacetsOfNonStickPans. Kpddg (talk) 15:55, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I treated this as a fresh review, rather than a second opinion on a specific point of disagreement. I agree that in most cases finding errors in a review is not a cause for a fail; the nominator should get a chance to fix the issues. Failing multiple spotchecks on a second spotcheck is an immediate failure per WP:GACR; I think in these circumstances every single citation has to be checked, and that's not something that should happen at GA. You might consider posting a query at WT:GAN to get other opinions if you think this fail is unfair or inappropriate. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:13, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Since I have been pinged, just want to jot that I have left a comment on Kpddg's talk page in response. That's all. FacetsOfNonStickPans (talk) 19:34, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2021_Indian_Premier_League/GA1&oldid=1112120807"