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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 19:44, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this. JAGUAR  19:44, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments

• "is a North American eSports organization" - define North American? Is it associated with Canada and Mexico too? I note that its current roster has members from South Korea and the Philippines
• "as a League of Legends teams" - team (no plural needed)
• "CLG fields the oldest League of Legends (LoL)" - its abbreviation (LoL) should be included at its first mentioned, which is in the first paragraph in the lead

• Furthermore, the abbreviation isn't included anywhere else in the article so it may as well be removed here

• "going out in the group stage on both occasions" - 'going out' sounds vague, does this mean they were eliminated?
• "and Call of Duty (CoD) teams" - CoD abbreviation isn't included in the body either
• "The organisation" - organization
• "Located in Southern California" - the lead states it's located in Los Angeles
• "after the ruling regarding the poaching of William "Scarra" Li from Dignitas" - 'poaching'? What happened?
• "The team was heavily favoured to take" - favored
• "so not much was expected of CLG.CS as they progressed to the LAN stage of the tournament." - informal
• There's a dubious tag in the Super Smash Bros. section. Needs to be dealt with before this can pass
• The Notable Tournament Results section is unencyclopaedic and problematic. I would strongly recommend removing it as a whole

On hold

It's comprehensive, but a bit iffy with some minor prose errors, contradictions and numerous tags. I'll leave this on hold for the standard seven days, and if all of the above are addressed then I'll take another look at it. JAGUAR  20:00, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jaguar:Have fixed the issues you raised, do let me know if anything else is wrong and I will fix it asap. Fred BR (talk) 07:12, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for addressing them, I've gone through the article again and I can conclude this meets the criteria. Well done JAGUAR  14:26, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

One fact that seems to be overlooked during the GA assessment is that this article is almost completely reliant on non-reliable websites like HLTV and GosuGamers. Perhaps a reassessment is needed.--Prisencolin (talk) 18:54, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]