This article is already a GA, and I feel that it matches the FA criteria. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 12:22, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
A couple of general points:-
In ref formats, only print sources should be italicised. Thus Kicker, which is a magazine, should be in italics, whereas otganisation such as "Bayern Munich", BBC, FIFA, UEFA etc should not be in italics.
How would I change this? The work= field automatically italicises. Which field should I be using instead? ArtVandelay13 (talk) 09:30, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Use the "publisher= " field for all non-print sources. Brianboulton (talk) 15:17, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Ref 13 is in German, and as with the other German sources, this one should be noted.
OK, fair enough.
What makes Ontheminute.com (Ref. 30) a reliable source, and was does the digit "4" in the reference signify?
I'll get rid of it, it's a duplicate anyway. 4 is the day of the month.
None of the eight FIFA page links are working
Dammit. I'll hunt around for replacements.
Huh? I've checked them 5 minutes ago and except for one (which I corrected) they were working fine. --Jaellee (talk) 16:27, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Someone else went in and fixed them after this review. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 16:55, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
I am concerned about the number of citations to the official cite of FC Bayern Munich (28 citations in all). These are heavily PR-oriented, presenting a highly positive picture of the club's star young player. Although at a glance I don't see obvious POV content in your text (I have skimmed, not read), this abundant use of the club's own PR material does not bode well for a supposedly neutral encyclopedic article.
I see your point, but all I'm really referencing is objective facts like results, Müller's participation in games and his goalscoring. The Bayern website is the most comprehensive English language source for this.
A sample of verification checks on English sources produced no issues. I have not considered the German sources.
Otherwise, sourcing and citation OK Brianboulton (talk) 00:42, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
The lead doesn't require citations if the material is cited in the body (and it should be included there). Even if they are kept, the several cites that don't follow punctuation really make the lead difficult to read. I would recommend moving such references to a place following the next punctuation, whether it be a comma or period.
Early years: Remove the hyphen from "newly-formed", as there should be no hyphen after an -ly in most cases (compounding elements can have them, but I don't think this qualifies).
Breakthrough season: "During the second half of the season, Muller has continued to be a regular first-team starter". This is about last season, not the current campaign, and should be converted to past tense.
Current season: Add "the" to "he missed much of pre-season"?
"Muller hasn't been able to match last season's goalscoring exploits." There should not be any contractions like "hasn't".
"the best of these being the first goal in a 2–0 Champions League win against AS Roma on 15 September." By what objective standard is this his best goal so far this season? Or is this what the Bayern Munich website says? This sounds like an example of the POV content that Brian expressed concern about above.
2010 World Cup: The hyphens before and after "his fifth of the tournament" should be changed to dashes.
Remove s from "medals" in "to take the bronze medals."
Is there anything that could possibly be added to the Personal life section? The one sentence looks quite stubby at the moment.Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:31, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
OK, those have been addressed, I think, except a couple of language points:
It's not really "the pre-season", in footballing vernacular: it's not really a fixed event, more a vague period of time.
I think the honours template is untidy, it uses too many lines, and assist stats are often inconsistent and hard to verify. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 10:30, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
It uses only two lines. And I think assits statistics are inevitable for Featured article.
Oppose for the time being, although what is there looks fine. The lead says he's been praised for his "pace, technique and composure" but this is not really elaborated on in the text. Ideally in a football bio there would be a section on "playing style" with a description of it, using various quotes from newspapers, other players, manager, and so on. Given his young age, there may not be enough written about him for that - I haven't checked for sources - but in that case I think more about it needs to be woven into the career sections (for instance, none of the words "pace", "technique" and "composure" is used again).
The other thing I think is lacking is his reaction to events. Surely there have been interviews after his more significant matches or accomplishments, and I think the article should include something about how he felt at various points. At the moment (and it's very easy to do this without meaning to), it reads more like a list of achievements in prose form; ideally, it would tell more of a story, and give a wider view of his whole life. Gilberto Silva, while not perfect, demonstrates both of the things I'm suggesting fairly well. Trebor (talk) 15:16, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
I've expanded on this a bit further, given a bit more reaction from himself and others, and added a section particularly about his playing style. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 18:58, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Looks pretty good from a quick read. I'll come back and have a more thorough look in the next few days. Trebor (talk) 20:43, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Oppose Assists statistics are imminent — Taro-Gabunia (talk) 17:34, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
I edited the article with the new sport honours so as I see this article needs to be expanded are only Personal Life and statistics. Taro-Gabunia (talk) 12:24, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
Oppose For me, the use of sources published by Bayern Munich is too extensive for an FA. Among other things, such sources are used to make positive comments about the article's subject. See for example the way that footnote 37 is used in an overwhelmingly positive manner. The BM sources produce lots of nice quotes about how good Muller is, but of course there is not going to be any real criticism that one might see if the article relied exclusively on, say, newspaper sources. A football club's website will speak to its fans and therefore cannot be relied on to form the basis of a neutral and balanced article. --Mkativerata (talk) 04:50, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I'd argue that what's really sourced is quotes from him, his coaches, team-mates and opponents, and the kind of basic facts referred to above. Where the website itself is praising Müller, I've tended to ignore it. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 16:12, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
The difficulty is that the quotes are all praiseworthy, as is to be expected. There's none of the critical analysis that one would expect from neutral sources. Footnote 37 is also used for one non-quote: praise for Muller's "awareness and positioning". So its a combination both of the use of BM sources and the relative non-use of neutral sources. --Mkativerata (talk) 18:48, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.