Talk:1948 FA Charity Shield/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 09:06, 18 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Grabbing for a review over the weekend. Miyagawa (talk) 09:06, 18 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the delay. Let's get this started:
 * Non-free use license is good.
 * No DAB links.
 * Cite #8 is dead. You'll probably be able to resurrect it from archive.org. Best to archive the others while you're at it just to be safe (although that isn't a GAN requirement, only the deadlink).
 * I was going to ask about the reliability of StretfordEnd.co.uk, but having seen the official status, then it's fine.
 * Cite #6 - you don't need the spaces between Rec. Sport. Soccer, it should just be Rec.Sport.Soccer per the old newsgroup formatting.
 * In the lead, remove the piping for football so it reads Association football as it's best to be specific.
 * The Post-match section isn't mentioned in the lead.
 * Background: In the final line, you might as well be specific about the date rather than just saying the month and year. If you know the scorer for that and it was one of the players who scored in this match then it'd be good to add that as well.
 * Summary: The link to Ronnie Rooke in the second sentence is a duplicate and should be removed.
 * Summary/Details: The Summary section says that Jones scored after three minutes, but the Details section says it was Lewis, and doesn't assign a minute to the Jones and Rooke goals.
 * Can't seem to find exact minutes for Lewis' first goal or Rooke's.


 * "United regrouped and scored at once." perhaps "United regrouped and responded immediately."? The "once" puts a numeracy on it which I think jars a little.
 * I note you've quote The Times correspondent - was there anything interesting there that you could add to the ''Daily Express' correspondent's comments in Post-match?
 * For Post-match, I'd suggest adding a little at the end of the second paragraph - just simply when the two teams appeared next in the Charity Shield and why.


 * That's everything. I know it can be hard getting the information together for a Charity Shield article as back in they day the media didn't really cover them all that much. Miyagawa (talk) 21:22, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to review this. Think I've addressed all your points. Lemonade51 (talk) 15:52, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Great! Happy to promote. Miyagawa (talk) 19:07, 24 March 2016 (UTC)