User:McGlacklin/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
2019–20 Liverpool F.C. season

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This is Liverpool's best season in 30 years, and it is marked as C-tier, so I want to see why it isn't rated higher.

Evaluate the article
The lead is quite good, giving basic information on the season and competitions the team played in that season, as well as the COVID cancellation. However, it does give information on the season, namely that it is their 128th season, and 58th consecutive in the top flight, which is not placed anywhere else in the article, but I think that it is a valid decision because it is extremely basic info that doesn't fit under any of the categories in the article. There are no major gaps in the article's content, and it includes all the major statistics one would look for. There is one point at which the tone is maybe subject to review, when the team Liverpool played in their EFL Cup defeat to Aston Villa is called "vastly inexperienced," instead of just explaining that it was not the first team squad. I am unclear if this is really a problem, but I noticed it because it was the only time a judgement on the players was made in the article. Because the article is just a review of their season, there are no real viewpoints, just statistics and results. Everything is extremely well cited, as information about everything a Premier League team does is readily available, and much of the citations directly cite the Premier League's official site. There is not very much writing that is done, and it is all in a neutral tone, as it is just reporting facts. The bulk of the information is in tables of results and player statistics. There is a controversy on the Talk page about whether or not to report the career statistics of the players in the table of the first team squad, but it appears to be one loose cannon that the rest of the editors disagree with, and I disagree with him as well. The only image is well cited, and overall this article seems excellent to me. I am confused about why it is marked C-tier. Perhaps it is because it mostly just reports stats which could be found easily somewhere else, and there is little else to say. I would not change this article very much. Even the links to other articles are very well placed, and are put in quite often, whenever there is more information to be had, so as to not muck up the article too much.