Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: SounderBruce (talk · contribs) 06:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Will review in the coming days. To start, please make sure your headings are written in sentence case per MOS:CAPS. SounderBruce 06:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  ack, done. Brindille1 (talk) 17:03, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Hey, I will be out of town and unavailable for a week starting tomorrow. Will be able to respond after that if you're still able to review. If you aren't I can also resubmit this article for someone else to review. Thanks! Brindille1 (talk) 02:14, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry for the delay, I'll be writing up the review this weekend. Feel free to take as long as you need to respond to the review once it's posted. SounderBruce 05:30, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @SounderBruce, are you able to take up this review? If not, since this review never really started, you might want to get this CSD'd so someone in the backlog drive can take up the review instead. -- asilvering (talk) 02:21, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I still plan to do this review. An earlier draft was wiped by a database error and I just didn't have the motivation to continue...still redoing the notes from then. SounderBruce 02:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review summary

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Prose comments

Lead

• I recommend finding the official logo, program, or another image for the infobox. If nothing suitable can be found, then the Gillette Stadium photo should be moved here.
  • I haven't been able to find public domain pictures of the event. I've added the official logo, with a fair use justification.
• "on a penalty shootout" should be "in a penalty shootout" or "on penalties"
  • Fixed
• Link to Foxborough and Howard Webb in the infobox
  • Fixed, and changed "Howard Webb" -> "Howard Webb (England)"
• "Cloudy" should be lowercase
  • Fixed
• Association football should be soccer to comply with MOS:ENGVAR, even for a continental competition.
  • Fixed
• Include the country after mentions of the host venue in the infobox and lead
  • Added.
• Link to MLS and Liga MX in the lead.
  • Added
• The "second edition" sentence can be merged with the previous one.
  • Merged
• Link penalties to penalty shootout, and probably change it to include shootout in the pipe as well.
  • Added
• Houston's goalscorers should also be mentioned.
  • Added
• The lead is quite short and should include summaries of the pre-final sections.
  • Agreed, added a decent amount of prose to fill in these details.

Venue

• "in Gillette Stadium" should be "at Gillette Stadium".
  • Fixed
• Link to Foxborough
  • Done
• "which is" is unnecessary here.
  • Fixed
• "MLS Cup Final" should be "MLS Cup final" and also linked.
  • Fixed
• The MLS Cup sentences can be combined into one.
  • I'm inclined to keep it as is because I'm struggling to combine it without making it a run-on sentence. If I did combine it, I'd likely just drop the second sentence, but I do think that's relevant/interesting information.
• "FIFA" should be added to the Women's World Cup link.
  • Added
• The Patriots should be mentioned alongside the multi-purpose nature of the stadium; concerts can be mentioned, but specific acts probably aren't needed.
  • Moved, and removed the references to specific concerts.
• Are there any specific details for this match that are worth adding here? Ticket sales, price deals, section openings?
  • Not really- I haven't found any information regarding ticket sales, advertising for the game, or any special section openings (This match also had >10k people so it's not like they opened the nosebleeds for it). In looking for this I found a good source on the year-to-year attendance comparison, which I'll add somewhere but I don't think it makes sense here.

More to be added later. SounderBruce 02:48, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've responded to most of these, except one: removing unnecessary references to the SuperLiga website. I should have time in the next couple days to respond to this once. Appreciate the review so far! Brindille1 (talk) 04:11, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed many inline citations from the SuperLiga site and other MLS sites. I haven't removed all of them- for in-depth descriptions of gameplay within the actual final, and for most any coverage of the Dynamo in 2008, it's challenging to find independent sources. Brindille1 (talk) 02:50, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Background

• "official" is probably not needed in the opening sentence.
• UNCAF/CFU do not need to be mentioned here.
• "was first held in 2007 and was canceled" can lose the second "was".
• The airline sponsorship is completely irrelevant and does not need to be mentioned here.
• "10" should be spelled out. Also, the last bit can be changed to "teams that began play in 1996" to avoid a noun plus ing issue.
• "only previous edition" is awkward.
  • The new wording should be better
• "However, this was not their first foray into continental competition, as they'd participated" needs to be made more neutral.
• "Champions' Cup" does not need to be repeated twice in the same sentence.
• "hosted matches" should mention "home matches" to make it clear to readers.
• "Champions cup" needs to be properly capitalized.
• "won the MLS Cup"; links to the MLS Cup finals should avoid MOS:EASTEREGGing.
  • I removed the links, this article doesn't need a list of Revolution's MLS cup history
• The two Open Cup sentences can be merged and shortened; the section needs to be balanced between the teams, since it reads like a Revolution-oriented section at this point.
  • Merged these, and also removed some of the unnecessary details of the Revolution's MLS Cups
• "original incarnation" should be dropped, as that can also refer to the NASL team.
• "found success" can be dropped, as can the duplicate links.
  • Due to the above changes, the links are no longer duplicate
• "2007 edition of the SuperLiga" can be unlinked, as it is again a duplicate.
  • Spent some time with a duplicate link script. I believe this article now complies with MOS:REPEATLINK
• "prevailed" should be replaced with "won"; aggregate score should be linked.
• "MLS cup" needs to be capitalized in all three uses and unlinked; the 2007 MLS Cup sentence should also be merged up.
• The last paragraph isn't needed at all and just seems like filler.
  • Thanks @SounderBruce: I've corrected each of the issues you've pointed out in this section. Brindille1 (talk) 01:28, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

• "mlssoccer.com" and "www.mlssoccer.com" should be properly capitalized as "MLSsoccer.com"
  • Fixed
• Citations that use unfurnished website names (e.g. www.telegram.com) in the work/website field need to be fixed.
  • Fixed, although I'm not seeing a lot of examples of this. Some of these are the actual website/publisher name: CityTownInfo.com, THECUP.US, MLSsoccer.com.
• Heavy reliance on the SuperLiga website is not great for reliability and NPOV; please use other sources where possible.
  • I've gone back through and replaced a bunch of these with sources. Where I couldn't adequately replace sources, I tried to remove claims that could be seen as opinion. There are a few cases in which I left these sources in:
    • Clerical description of the format/for the SuperLiga such as in the last paragraph of `Background`, which was not well-covered even in the Globe article about this
    • Availability reports for the Revs' games. For whatever reason the news articles tended to leave out details about who was injured
    • General coverage about the Dynamo. The Chivas and Pachuca games got good coverage, but I think the poor coverage of the team in this era makes sense given that they just relocated from San José.
• Citation 1 needs its website or publisher.
  • Fixed (now Citation 50 after changes to lead)
• Citation 3 needs to be formatted
  • Yup, sorry about that. Fixed
• Citation 6: FIFA works just fine.
  • Fixed
• Citations 8 and 9 should be replaced with a third-party source.
  • Will remove since referencing specific concert acts is not particularly relevant.
• Citation 10 needs its website or publisher.
  • Added.
• Citation 13 has an unnecessary repeat of Reuters.
  • removed "|work=Reuters"
• Citation 21 needs its website or publisher.
  • Fixed.
• Citation 23 needs date information and has the wrong publisher.
  • Removed publisher and added date
• Citation 26 needs its website or publisher.
  • Done
• Citation 31 needs its website or publisher.
  • Fixed
• Citation 38 needs to move Washington Examiner to the work parameter.
  • TIL that for "cite news", the "work" field should be used rather than publisher. Thanks.
• Citation 40 needs date information.
  • Done
• Citation 41 does not need the publisher.
  • Done, I also moved "The Guardian" from website to work
• Citation 44 needs date information.
  • Done
• Citation 46 has a typo ("Revolutiion").
  • Throwing the extra "i" overboard, thanks.
• Citation 48 has two too many uses of "ESPN".
  • Fixed
• Citation 50 needs its website or publisher.
  • Fixed
• Citation 52 needs its website or publisher.
  • Fixed