Talk:2011 Cricket World Cup final/GA1

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

Reviewer: Vibhijain (talk · contribs) 15:35, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Good work, but still some work needs to be done before it can reach GA status. The lead seriously need work. First of all, the second sentence (This was the 10th ICC Cricket World Cup) looks odd. You haven't talked of the World Cup specifically in the first sentence, and therefore it should be "10th ICC Cricket World Cup final". The lead is however very very short, as it should have a brief description of every aspect. In other words, some material from each section should be there. I will do a detailed review of the lead once it is complete.

The Road to the final section should come first, and the finalists section could be renamed to something like "Previous World Cup matches". The Road to final section only has information about the knockout stage. I suggest you to make a two sub-sections, one for each team. Give the details for each match (you may describe the group stage matches in brief). The finalists section should mention the 1996 SF played between India and Sri Lanka.

The Road to the final section is highly unreferenced, and is in a need of many sources. Worse is the case with the Team composition section, and it has a lot of content which is not needed. As of the sentence "Taufel had never been able to ... and Steve Davis the reserve umpire" is also in need of references. You should also tell that Taufel was not able to umpire in any final because one can't umpire in a final in which its country is participating.

The Sri Lankan innings section also needs sources, so is the Indian innings one. The Scorecard needs some work (see 2008 Indian Premier League Final to get an example). The Post-match ceremony and celebrations section also needs sources.

"Another agency" - which agency?

Reception in Sri Lanka and Reception in India needs sources.

I will do a detailed review once all this issues are fixed. I think that six days should be enough for fixing these points, but if you want more time, just inform me. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 15:35, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Article failed Sorry but I have got no response in seven days. Anyhow the article is not ready to be a GA, and some good work with referencing is required. But still some good work can get it to GA status. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 15:09, 16 January 2013 (UTC)