Talk:Counter Logic Gaming

Pre-review
This article needs plenty of work before it's GA-ready. czar 22:10, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) It has a lot of information but little of it is reader-ready—the prose needs to explain jargon and simply exclude or rephrase large swaths of name lists of no benefit to the reader. Remember that this is an encyclopedia and the target is not to maintain records of games lost/won (there are other wikis for that) but of the notable events and summaries of the commentary that go along with it.
 * 2) The lede paragraphs do not completely summarize the article's text.
 * File:Counter Logic Gaming Dota team at The International 2012.jpg should be removed—there is nothing in the text that requires a non-free image to portray their faces. Even if there will be no more photo ops for the team, photos of the players can be assembled separately as they are living people.

Thanks for the swift reply. You haven't actually said what should be changed in regards to points one and two. I can't see what you might feel was jargon, nor what was not a notable event in regards to this team? I could easily trim quite a lot off the article, but I'm not sure which bits you would regard as not relevant. Fred BR (talk) 03:20, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Agree with Czar, the article reads like a gaming report. Here's some gems:
 * team's first major accomplishment
 * This victorious roster was not to last long however;
 * Despite a strong semifinal performance against SK Gaming
 * Despite having their most successful
 * CLG.EU pulled out a slow and methodical victory in an extremely close showing

The page is written like a story by a fan. Can some of tournament results just be put in a table? WP:VAGUE really needs applying. The facebook sources are unlikely to be reliable.--Vaypertrail (talk) 13:38, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Hey have fixed the things you pointed out, apart from your fourth example, the season was numerically their most successful, they placed first as opposed to below first. Are major tournaments not relevant to the general history of the team, if they're not I can change that but I'm not sure that's the case. I'm not sure how the player's personal facebooks aren't reliable sources for announcements about them? Fred BR (talk) 13:59, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia prefers summary style information, so unless there's very compelling reason not to keep to prose tram history, it should stay. I do agree it could use some POV work though.--Prisencolin (talk) 16:56, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Another thing, the achievements section can't just a listing of third place or higher finishes. First, its skews the information of the page to be overly positive thus is not in neutral point of view and second, the cut off of 3rd place is pretty arbitrary.--Prisencolin (talk) 01:44, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Split
Probably needs to be split at some point, sooner or later.--Prisencolin (talk) 05:12, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Only when warranted by reliable, secondary sources czar  22:07, 9 December 2016 (UTC)