Talk:2017 Emirates Cup/GA1

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

Reviewer: MWright96 (talk · contribs) 18:58, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Going to take a look. Comments will be coming soon. MWright96 (talk) 18:58, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * 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 (reference section): 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b ''([[WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE|appropriate
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b ''([[WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE|appropriate
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b ''([[WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE|appropriate

use]] with suitable captions)'':
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * no dab links
 * no dab links
 * no dab links


 * Background
 * "The 2017 edition was televised live on Quest in the United Kingdom" - try "The 2017 edition was televised live in the United Kingdom on Quest"


 * Summary
 * Is there anything explaining why Timo Werner missed RB Leipzig's game against Sevilla?
 * Can't find any reliable English sources which explain his absence. Lemonade51 (talk) 17:23, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Standings


 * Remove the second colon after the word "Source"


 * References
 * Reference 1 is redirected to Arsenal's homepage. Can it be archived?
 * Same issue with References 4, 6 & 19
 * Refs 10 & 12 are to the same source. Please correct this.

Overall an excellent article. Info is accurately reflected in the article and sources appear to be reliable. Once the issues have been dealt, this can become a good article. MWright96 (talk) 08:53, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for having a look at this, I've made the necessary corrections. Lemonade51 (talk) 17:22, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay then. The article is now passed as a GA. MWright96 (talk) 18:27, 8 September 2017 (UTC)