Talk:1981 European Cup final/GA1

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

Reviewer: Resolute (talk · contribs) 20:57, 4 December 2011 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:


 * General
 * Images good
 * Sources good
 * No deadlinks, fixed one link needing disambiguation
 * NPOV good
 * spotcheck of online sources shows no concern with close paraphrasing


 * Background
 * Three players with injury concerns are noted in the final paragraph, but only one has an injury specifically noted. Is it known which injuries Kennedy and Cunningham were dealing with?
 * There's no mention of the injuries to other players in my book unfortunately


 * Summary
 * "One problem was to get the best out of their winger Cunningham. Not fully fit, he was tightly marked throughout the match and made little impact in the match." - This sentence is somewhat jarring as you go from Real Madrid's scoring chance immediately to a barely defined problem for Cunningham. I presume that the purpose of this sentence is to explain part of Real's offensive challenges, but it does need reworded.  Also, the latter half can be simplified: "...he was tightly marked throughout the match and made little impact in the match."
 * Had a go at rewording think it reads better now. NapHit (talk) 21:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)


 * "...Camacho attempted to lob the keeper, but his shot went over the goal." - specify that he attempted to lob the ball over the keeper.
 * done NapHit (talk) 21:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)


 * "...Real man marked Liverpool's best players such as Dalglish and Souness..." - link "man marked" to Marking (association football) for people like me who aren't fully up to date with football terminology.
 * done NapHit (talk) 21:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)


 * General thought: Is anything known about prize money won for winning? Television coverage and ratings? Any crowd-related issues?  I vaguely recollect that hooliganism was an issue at that time, particularly with supporters of English clubs.  If these are not available or not applicable, disregard.  I wouldn't hold back a GA pass for these, but offer them as food for thought.
 * There's no info available on prize money or tv coverage unfortunately (well none that I've come across anyway). As for the hooliganism you're right that it was a problem, but I think you are referring to the 1985 final, as I'm certain there was no hooliganism at this match. NapHit (talk) 21:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Overall, just a few minor prose issues. Should be easily resolved. Until then, I am placing the article on hold. Regards, Resolute 20:57, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Cheers for the review, I've addressed all your comments. Thanks NapHit (talk) 21:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks good! I am now passing the article. Congrats! Resolute 00:50, 6 December 2011 (UTC)