Talk:2020 FA Cup final

Not a good article review, but some comments re the prose of the article which I think needs to be improved
Hello,

I don't feel as though I a) know enough or b) care enough about most of the good article criteria to provide a full review, but I do know and care enough about good writing to make some comments in relation to the article's prose. Nice to see that some people - such as you, dear author - obviously care a lot about the FA Cup, even if those replay abolishing, final kick-off shifting, tradition ending administrators are intent on diminshing the qualities I thought made the competition special. Thank you television money!

Back on topic, I think the prose could be greatly improved. I saw many examples of writing which could (and should) be better. I was tempted to correct them myself, but I don't know what the ettiquite is in relation to good article nominees - do I leave that for you to correct? - so instead I will provide some examples below:

'The match was contested and was held behind closed doors.' - Would 'The match was played behind closed doors' fail to convey the same meaning?

'The referee for the final was Anthony Taylor' - this article is about the final, so do you need to say the referee for the final? Is there any reason why 'The referee was Anthony Taylor' would have an unclear meaning?

'Arsenal, as a Premier League club, started their FA Cup campaign in the third round at home against EFL Championship side Leeds United at their home ground' - No need to mention home twice

'The two finalists shared a London derby rivalry.' - The use of the word shared implies the rivalry no longer exists. Granted, the special one no longer clashes with the specialist in failure, but the rivalry still exists, so would 'Arsenal and Chelsea share a London derby rivalry' be acceptable?

'a repeat of the previous year's UEFA Europa League final'- is there a stylistic reason for preferring previous year's to 2019's?

'Neither side made any personnel issues during the interval' - what on earth is a personnel issue? Sounds like something the HR department should fix. Is there any reason why something simple, like 'No substitutions were made during the interval,' would be inadequate?

There are many more examples in the article where the prose could be shortened without obscuring its meaning. I am not criticising the content itself - good job on that front - but I genuinely believe the prose could (and should) be much better than it is. Would you mind if I made some of those changes myself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scatalogical Reference (talk • contribs) 16:58, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:1872 FA Cup Final which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 18:36, 5 January 2023 (UTC)