Talk:2024 EFL Trophy final

2024 EFL Trophy final is currently a Football good article nominee. Nominated by Michaeldble (talk) at 18:40, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer.

Football: England Low‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	English football portal This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as Low-importance).

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2024 EFL Trophy final/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Michaeldble (talk · contribs) 18:40, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: JC Kotisow (talk · contribs)

Hello, please to be reviewing the article 2024 EFL Trophy final for the next few days --JC Kotisow (talk) 22:25, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.^[1]

Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);^[2]

(c) it contains no original research; and

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;^[3] and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

^[4]

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

^[5]

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.^[6]

Notes

^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
^ Footnotes must be used for in-line citations.
^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

Review

Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined
(b) (MoS)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined

Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined
(c) (original research)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined

Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined
(b) (focused)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Comment	Result
Relatively new and no sign of edit warring or ongoing	Pass

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined

Result

Result	Notes
Undetermined	The reviewer has left no comments here

Discussion

Lead:

"The 2024 EFL Trophy final, known as the Bristol Street Motors Trophy final for sponsorship reasons, was an association football match that was played on 7 April 2024 at Wembley Stadium, London. It was played between League One teams Peterborough United and Wycombe Wanderers."

I feel that could be reworded more simply to The 2024 EFL Trophy final, known as the Bristol Street Motors Trophy final for sponsorship reasons, was an association football match played between Peterborough United and Wycombe Wanderers on 7 April 2024 at Wembley Stadium in London, England.

Keeps it more consistent with other English final articles. JC Kotisow (talk) 00:53, 27 May 2024 (UTC) Done[reply]

Also add the citation [1] (which you used in the first paragraph of the Background) after "for sponsorship reasons," JC Kotisow (talk) 00:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not too sure what you mean here sorry. I thought we avoided using citations in the lead if it is sourced further down? Michaeldble (talk) 07:57, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Michaeldble I only said that because the first paragraph, which stated the format rules of the competition, was to be removed. It's just to add verification that it is called that in the lead. JC Kotisow (talk) 08:05, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--

"thanks to..." → resulted from

"However, in stoppage time..." → remove However Done

"Burrows scored a second goal to win the match..." → add the scoreline at the end. Done

– JC Kotisow (talk) 00:53, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--

"The match decided the winners of the 2023–24 EFL Trophy, a knock-out tournament comprising clubs from League One and League Two of the English Football League (EFL), as well as 16 Category One academy sides representing Premier League and Championship clubs."

Remove this and the first paragraph of the Background section, you don't need to recount the format rules of a competition in a final article. The rest of the lead I believe is good unless more information is added in the main sections. JC Kotisow (talk) 00:53, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--

Background:

"having won the competition in the 2013–14 season, beating Chesterfield 3–1 in the 2014 final..."

Can be reworded for simplicity to having won the competition in the 2014 final against Chesterfield. Done

— JC Kotisow (talk) 02:31, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--

"This victory in 2014 was achieved during Darren Ferguson's second spell as Peterborough's manager, with the 2024 final being held during his fourth spell with the club"

Could be changed to Manager Darren Ferguson led Peterborough to that victory and entered the 2024 final during his fourth spell at the club

Although it is reworded similarly, this allows better flow and readability. This can be discussed further if you wish. JC Kotisow (talk) 02:31, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--

"This was the first time that Wycombe had reached the final of the EFL Trophy"

Add 'In contrast,'/'For their counterpart,'/'For Wycombe,' before saying 'this was'/'it was' for clarification. I feel you are jumping into information quickly without transitioning. Also, add "aimed to win their first professional trophy" so it can be like this as an example: Done

In contrast, it was the first time that Wycombe had reached the final of the EFL Trophy and contested for the club's first professional trophy. Their previous best performance in the competition was in the semi-finals of the 2016–17 season. Despite this, Wycombe had previously played at Wembley on six occasions, winning four times in other tournaments. Done

— JC Kotisow (talk) 02:31, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--

"Wycombe's manager Matt Bloomfield had previously played for the club and had captained Wycombe to promotion at Wembley to the Championship for the first time in 2020 via the play-offs."

Change to Wycombe's manager Matt Bloomfield had previously played at Wembley as captain for the club in the 2020 play-offs of the Championship

— JC Kotisow (talk) 02:31, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--

"The two sides had met twice already during the league that season. At Peterborough's London Road Stadium, the two sides played out a 2–2 draw in October 2023."

Change the first "side" to 'clubs' and "the two" in the second line to "both". Remove "Peterborough's". JC Kotisow (talk) 02:31, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--

Comments: The background is pretty good and the prose is well aligned with guidelines as I see it. For the third paragraph (or second if the first is removed), when the article describes past meetings, only account for the scorelines and not the players who scored in the game to prevent the paragraph from dragging out too much information. Other than that, if you considered my previous comments, I think this section is fine as it is.

@User: JC Kotisow, Thank you very much for taking this on. I've made a start at addressing some of your comments but I'll finish the rest over the next day or so. Thanks Michaeldble (talk) 07:57, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Michaeldble No problem I'll keep adding comments in the following days. JC Kotisow (talk) 08:07, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.

[2] Footnotes must be used for in-line citations.

[3] This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.

[4] Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.

[5] Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.

[6] The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]