The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose 10:03, 3 November 2013 (UTC) [1].Reply[reply]

2011 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final[edit]

2011 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): SkotyWATC 00:30, 27 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The final match of the 98th annual edition of the oldest soccer competition in the United States was historic for multiple reasons... breaking an attendance record, and a team three-peating as tournament champions for the first time a in 43 years. GA review for this article was completed last year, and a thorough PR was completed earlier this year. The article is complete in its coverage and is well referenced, but it may still benefit from some additional copy edit suggestions from some of the more experienced reviewers here. Overall, I believe this article is very close to FA level and will benefit from this final review and (hopefully) resulting promotion. Thank you for taking the time to read it and provide feedback. SkotyWATC 00:30, 27 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments from Toa Nidhiki05

Resolved comments from Toa Nidhiki05
:I'll be going through the prose of this article. Toa Nidhiki05 16:01, 27 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
General comments

Overall the prose is very well put together. The text is very good for the most part, and it flows very well.

  • There are a few duplicate links in the article, but not too many. If you have the duplicate link finder gadget you should be able to see them, but in case I you don't I'll note the ones here (the ones that need to be unlinked will be slashed:
  • 'with two goals from Orr Barouch and a goal each scored by Dominic Oduro and Yamith Cuesta.' (Chicago Fire subsection)
  • 'Chicago went up 2–0 with a goal from Dominic Oduro'
  • 'or visit Chicago Fire at Toyota Park in Bridgeview, Illinois,'
Excellent. I've cleaned these up. I'm not familiar with the tool, so thanks for providing the details. --SkotyWATC 21:36, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Lede
  • Pretty sure that 'This was the 98th edition of U.S. Open Cup...' should have a 'the' in front of the event name (ie. 'the U.S. Open Cup'). Toa Nidhiki05 01:31, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Mmm, good catch. Not sure how this one slipped through the cracks. Thanks for finding it. Fixed. --SkotyWATC 15:35, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It was linked in the body ("previous season" in Road to the Final section) section, but not in the lead. No good reason to not do it in the lead too (especially since the text of the link is different). Fixed. --SkotyWATC 15:35, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Road to the final
  • 'In 2011, MLS, which has teams that play in both the United States and Canada...' MLS needs a 'the' in front of it; you could add one and eliminate the 'in 2011', because it has already been established the tournament took place in 2011. Toa Nidhiki05 01:31, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Done. --SkotyWATC 15:35, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Change 'against fellow MLS side' to 'against a fellow MLS side'
Done. --SkotyWATC 15:35, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • 'extending Seattle's lead to 2' Should be 'extending Seattle's lead to 2 goals'. Toa Nidhiki05 01:31, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Done. --SkotyWATC 15:35, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • 'U.S. Open Cup matches, "for me...' add 'saying' before the quote. Toa Nidhiki05 01:31, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Great suggestion. Fixed. --SkotyWATC 15:35, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pre-match
  • I would add a comma after 'as he replaced Carlos de los Cobos'. Toa Nidhiki05 18:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fixed. --SkotyWATC 21:36, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Same thing here, I would add a comma after 'matches two days before the game'. Toa Nidhiki05 18:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fixed. --SkotyWATC 21:36, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comma should be added after 'The Sounders were playing well'. Toa Nidhiki05 18:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fixed. --SkotyWATC 21:36, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Match
  • Not a prose issue, but to err on the side of caution a citation might be needed to confirm Grazzini began the game on the bench. Toa Nidhiki05 18:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've added another footnote for the US Soccer match report which notes the starting players as well as those on the bench. --SkotyWATC 21:36, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I'd remove the second use of 'match' in 'As the match passed the 30 minute mark, Seattle began to take control of the match'. Toa Nidhiki05 18:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Removed "of the match" at the end of that sentence. --SkotyWATC 21:36, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Post-match
  • Add a comma after 'midfielder Daniel Hernandez on Twitter'. Toa Nidhiki05 18:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comma added. --SkotyWATC 21:36, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I would link the first mention of the 2012 U.S. Open Cup, since it hadn't been linked anywhere else. Toa Nidhiki05 18:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Mmm, good suggestion. Link added to "2012 edition". --SkotyWATC 21:36, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for taking the time to read the article and make suggestions. I've followed up on everything you've found so far and look forward to addressing more. Thanks again. --SkotyWATC 15:35, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problem. I've noted a few more issues that need to be fixed, as well as some duplicate links. Once these are fixed I'll be more than happy to support (just as a note, I will be gone until around 11:30 PM EST today so if I don't respond immediately, that is why). Toa Nidhiki05 18:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay, I've followed up on the remaining issues. Your time and attention in this review is appreciated. --SkotyWATC 21:36, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support - Good job on fixing those issues; although a full source check has not been made, I think a support is warranted due to the sheer quality of the prose. Toa Nidhiki05 18:46, 29 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments – I provided a bunch of comments on the article at its peer review, and it looks in much better shape now than it did back then. There are still some issues that I can detect, though:

Good catch, I don't know how such a glaring mistake has made it through so many reviews. I changed "seventh" to "sixth" and I've double checked the sources to make sure this is correct. --SkotyWATC 04:06, 4 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Good suggestion. I've removed the first instance completely and shortened the second. --SkotyWATC 04:06, 4 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I changed it to "the Fire had improved throughout the year through improved play from their wingers and midfielders." --SkotyWATC 04:06, 4 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I added a reference for that. There were a number that could have fit.
Same. Fixed. Thank you for taking the time to review the article again. I'm glad that you found the things you did this time. These are great improvements. --SkotyWATC 04:06, 4 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support – Now that all of my comments have been addressed, I'm convinced that the article meets the FA criteria. Nice work on the page. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:09, 5 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image check - all OK (CC, CC OTRS). Sources and authors provided - tweaked a few Commons categories. GermanJoe (talk) 06:59, 1 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to review the images! --SkotyWATC 04:07, 4 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comments from TonyTheTiger
Resolved comments from TonyTheTiger Talk
;Road to the final
Done. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Chicago Fire
  • "had reached the U.S. Open Cup final five times". I am guessing that most of these are recent (in comparison to 98 tournaments). I might add something like "between YYYY and YYYY" to clarify how recent these appearances have been.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:40, 12 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've added "in their 14-year history" to the sentence to add this context. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "winning four out of five of the tournaments." I would also be interested to know the last win. Maybe add ", most recently YYYY". You may want to split this into two sentences.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:40, 12 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nice. I added "most recently in 2006". --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I don't understand why New York sent reserves.
The USOC is, for some teams, less of a priority than doing well in league play. It's an additional burden on teams above and beyond the regular MLS schedule. New York is a team that didn't prioritize the tournament as much that year. Ironically, the backlash from New York fans because of this caused New York to put more of a priority on the tournament than they had been. But this article isn't about that. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well that depends. In the USOC tournament, they defeated F.C. New York in the third round played 3 weeks earlier (on June 28th) to losing to the Chicago Fire in the semifinals. In MLS season play, they had just lost to D.C. United two days earlier on July 9th. Since the quote from the New York coach cites "fatigue" as the reason for playing reserves, it's probably worth adding this context (about playing 2 days earlier). I've added "New York had lost to DC United in league play just 2 days earlier." with a reference to provide more context here. Good questions. I hope this helps. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The U.S. Open Cup was at stake, however as I kind of explained above, clubs are competing in multiple tournaments every year and, as a result, are forced to prioritize/deprioritize some games over others when there's a short turnaround. I hope this makes sense. I know it's kind of unusual for American sports, but internationally, soccer clubs face these types of prioritization decisions all the time. For example, Manchester United plays games in the English Premier League, the UEFA Champions League, and the FA Cup (similar to America's U.S. Open Cup) pretty much every season. Sometimes the scheduling of these games is very tight and they have to decide which games they'll play their best players in. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wikilinked. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Seattle Sounders FC
I can't find any. It just means the pass was made with his head. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sure. Expanded to "Starfire Sports Complex". --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm a little surprised to discover that there is an article for bicycle kick. I didn't expect that. Wikilinked. Great suggestion. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There sort of is. It's a redirect to an appropriate section in the goal article. Wikilink added. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Analysis
Removed the word "unexpectedly". I supposed it was unexpected because of the recent coaching change, but the word is not necessary, and you're right, it's a borderline issue with WP:NPOV. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Host selection process changes
I'm not sure these have ever been made public. The source I point to does not go into detail. I've heard that it has to do with quality of the field (turf vs. grass), lighting, separate locker rooms, broadcasting booth, etc. but since I don't have a source (and I doubt a publicly available one exists), this is all I can put in the article. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
WP:LEAD
Good suggestion. Most of the time the term "U.S. Soccer" is used in the article, however, I've updated the 3 other places where the whole term was used to "USSF". --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You should not use two different nicknames, especially if you only define one at the beginning. Either start with United States Soccer Federation (USSF or U.S. Soccer) or (preferably) use one nicknamethroughout. --TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:51, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've standardized the article on "U.S. Soccer" wherever a nickname is used. This is more in-line with out it's referred to among fans and in news reports. --SkotyWATC 23:22, 26 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Venue selection
  • "On August 26, 2011, the United States Soccer Federation announced the potential sites for the final, depending on the outcome of the semifinals." random, by committee or is this the bid process below?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:10, 13 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's the bid process. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Saying it was determined is somewhat mystical. You should mention the bid process here.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:08, 22 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Done. --SkotyWATC 23:03, 26 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Clarified that they're "bleacher seats". --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Link bleacher.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:08, 22 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Done. --SkotyWATC 23:03, 26 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Second half
Merged. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wikilinked all of them. Good stuff. These seem obvious to most of the people who have reviewed this already, but they're very familiar with soccer nuances and rules. Thank you for these suggestions. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why are you piping goal mouth to goal all of a sudden and leaving post unlinked later in the sentence?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:52, 27 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry about missing rebound. Fixed. Also, I think I misunderstood your request for the goal post wikilink. I've moved it to the word "post" from "goal mouth". I think I've found an appropriate wikilink for "goal mouth" here: Association_football_pitch#Goals. Hopefully that addresses these remaining concerns. --SkotyWATC 00:37, 28 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Post-match
Well, there's a picture of the club celebrating at the top of the article. They may have been broadcast, but I don't have a reference for that. The specifics (from the source referenced) are that they were handed t-shirts and awarded their trophy. I've reworded it a bit "engaged in the post match trophy awarding ceremony and celebrated on the field." I hope this works better. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No idea. It probably would have been a municipal airport since this wasn't being pulled around by some jet. Just a small propeller plane. That said, I have no source for that detail. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As above, no idea. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The source doesn't say, just that it was a "scarf". IIRC it said "Seattle Sounders FC", but if I put that in, it would be WP:OR. What's in the article now, matches the source referenced. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is actually mentioned in the source. I've reworded the latter half of the sentence to this: "over Seattle and Bellevue in the afternoon and early evening respectively, in celebration of their victory." --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Neat. Done. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is no source that says how it was divided up. MLS teams (and the league) are always very secretive about player salaries, prize money, sponsorship funds, etc., so it's by no means unusual that this level of detail is just not available. --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've added the following sentence with a reference: "In the Champions League, Seattle won their group and were eventually knocked out of the tournament in the semifinals by Mexican club Santos Laguna." --SkotyWATC 01:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Images
Thank you for reviewing the images. I've made updates to the captions I thought were problematic. If you still think there are issues with the captions that need to be addressed, please provide specific suggestions. --SkotyWATC 05:26, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Resolved comments from Resolute
Comments from Resolute


I did the GA review on this article, and had remarkably few quibbles then. I don't expect I'll have many now either.

  • In "Road to the Final", you mention "top-six" three times in a sentence and a half. Perhaps add a little variety by noting the specific position Chicago placed in 2010?
Agreed this is a little redundant. I've removed the last one. --SkotyWATC 06:06, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Would Hyndman's complaints about the host selection process be better in the relevant section rather than the Sounders' road to the finals section? Not necessarily asking for a change here though.
I did consider this a couple of times previously. In the end, I felt it was best to include in the context of the game he was commenting on. It also serves as a bit of foreshadowing of the last section which covers the hosting controversy. That section I feel stands on it's own and didn't need repeating of Hyndman's comments to cover to topic fully. Let me know if you have concerns about any of my reasoning for it's placement, and I'm happy to replay and/or make changes. --SkotyWATC 06:06, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Nine days later ticket sales surpassed 30,000... - missing comma?
Fixed. --SkotyWATC 06:06, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Fire coach Frank Klopas made two substitutes late in the match... - should that be "made two substitutions"?
That's probably better. Changed. --SkotyWATC 06:06, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I might wikilink stoppage time, though it is a redirect to a relevant section of the association football article.
Wikilinked. Good suggestion. Thanks. --SkotyWATC 06:06, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I was about to comment that the referee was missing from the "match officials" part of the results table, then found that he was listed in the upper right corner. This is probably a flaw in the template design, but I would like to see all four officials listed together.
I added the referee to the match officials section too. Probably fine to list him twice actually. --SkotyWATC 06:06, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Who were the other two finalists for "player of the tournament"?
I've added a mention of the other two finalists (both from the Richmond Kickers) with wikilinks. I've also verified that the reference supports this (which it does). --SkotyWATC 06:06, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Following the final, MLS and U.S. Soccer officials began meeting to discuss ... - I would simplify that down to "Following the final, MLS and U.S. Soccer met to discuss...".
Changed per your suggestion. --SkotyWATC 06:06, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's about it for now. Resolute 00:31, 17 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for taking a second pass through the article and providing more suggestions. Your help and feedback is greatly appreciated. --SkotyWATC 06:06, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments from ArsenalFan700

I added the template for the Chicago Fire's matches as they have been in quite a few Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cups and some MLS Cups as well. However, when I added the template I saw that the Seattle Sounders FC matches template was added in a different format from what I am used to... is that right? I just want to make sure because if it is then I would recommend the same be done for the Chicago Fire template. Also, there are a lot of red links in the Chicago Fire matches template, I will create those pages when I can, just thought I let you know. Cheers. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 01:12, 28 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. The format looks the same to me, so I don't see a problem. If you have further comments on this topic, let's take them to the talk page since they're not really related to reviewing the content of the article. Thanks! --SkotyWATC 03:39, 28 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ha, I noticed that, I just wanted to get this to your attention. Anyway, I made the change and it worked fine so my problem is fixed... now I need Ford to make his pro debut and I am set. Cheers mate and any more questions will be on the talk page. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 03:43, 28 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
More