Wikipedia:Peer review/2011 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

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

Toolbox
(more info)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'm planning to nominate it for Featured Article review in the coming weeks. The article has already passed GA review. I have expanded it more since then and I believe it represents complete coverage of the subject and is sufficiently referenced. My biggest concern with the article is the quality of the prose, so that's what I hope to get help with in this peer review.

Thanks, SkotyWATC 23:33, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Doing... I've done a few articles on football/soccer and specialize in clarity of prose for sports articles, so this sounds like it's up my alley. I'll add comments here in a bit. –Runfellow (talk) 16:14, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments
Lead
  • It looks like you've used the wikiproject's template. Good call. One of the only problems I see with that is the sample first sentence. To perhaps follow WP:LEADSENTENCE more closely, it should more accurately define the subject, rather than just give information about it. As it currently reads, it tells us that open cup final "was played" on a particular date on a particular field, but it doesn't tell us that it was a sports contest, what sport was contested, and which teams contested it. Perhaps it could read: "The 2011 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final was a soccer match between Seattle Sounders FC and the Chicago Fire Soccer Club played on October 4, 2011 at CenturyLink Field in Seattle, Washington."
Heh, yeah, I'm familiar with that template. Whoever created it was a genius! :) Excellent suggestion for rewording the lead sentence. I've changed it to your suggestion. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Linking the phrase "the oldest ongoing competition" to the Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Trophy doesn't seam intuitive, especially since it doesn't include "American Soccer". It could read: "The tournament was the 98th edition of the U.S. Open Cup, the oldest ongoing competition in American soccer."
Good suggestion. I've updated the article as suggested. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • "The Fire however did not automatically qualify," should be "The Fire, however, did not automatically qualify," or just "The Fire did not automatically qualify,". I prefer the latter, since "however" seems superfluous here.
Agreed. I've gone with the latter. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Generally speaking, the lead should include at least some mention of the major points of the article. Therefore, the following things should probably be included at some point in this section:
  • Information about the venue selection
I added a mention of the previous years attendance record which is discussed in this section. There's also this sentence in the last paragraph of the lead: This was the second consecutive year the tournament final was played at CenturyLink Field. Do you think that's enough? --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • The general consensus of pre-game analysis
I added this to the second paragraph: Prior to the final, Chicago and Seattle had met twice in 2011 with Seattle winning one game and the other ending in a draw. Does that work? --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • A very brief summary of the game itself
I was hoping mentioning the goal scorers was enough for this. Is this okay, or do you think it still needs more? --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • At least some mention of the venue selection controversy
I've added this sentence to the last paragraph of the lead: Following the final, criticism was raised regarding Seattle winning hosting rights for each round they played. In response, U.S. Soccer announced changes to the rules for determining the host for tournament matches. I think this works, but may benefit from some rewording if you have suggestions. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Road to the final
  • "The top six MLS teams from the previous season's league standings" – It seems like this would be a better place to link to the 2010 Major League Soccer season, rather than the lead.
Good suggestion. Done. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • "and therefore qualified automatically" – "to qualify" is simpler. Same thing goes for "in order to qualify" in the next sentence.
Agreed. Done. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Chicago Fire
  • "on five separate occasions" – simplify to "five times"
Agreed, but I like your next suggestion better, so I went with that. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • "The Fire reached the finals of the 1998, 2000, 2003, 2004 and 2006 tournaments, winning each time except in 2004." – While not technically mentioned in WP:OVERLINK, I do think this sentence might be a bit of an overkill, especially since you've already mentioned that they had qualified five times before. Perhaps the best way to go about this would be to combine this sentence with the one before it to best match WP:SUMMARY: "Prior to reaching the 2011 final, the Chicago Fire had reached the U.S. Open Cup final five times, the most of any MLS franchise, winning four out of five of the tournaments."
Agreed. Done. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • "nearby Peoria, Illinois" – "Nearby" is relative here, and should probably be omitted.
Done. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • "Immediately in the second half" can probably be more precise to avoid the awkward phrase here. How many minutes into the second half?
Changed it to: Just one minute into the second half based on the source. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • "gridlocked" implies that the match wasn't just tied, it was also to the point where no team really seemed to be gaining any momentum at all. Is this what you meant, or would "tied" be a better word here?
I didn't write this section, but looking at the source, there's nothing to imply gridlock. I've changed it to "tied". --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • "netted the match-winner" – "scored the match-winning goal" seems like a simpler way to phrase this.
Agreed. Less jargon. Done. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • "the Fire leveled the score thanks to a strike from Yamith Cuesta." – I'd be careful about using sportswriting terms and phrases. Although it does get tiresome to write "he scored a goal, then another guy scored a goal" over and over again, it's important to remember this is an encyclopedia, and thus a "just the facts, ma'am" approach is most often the best one.
Heh, agreed. I didn't write this section and have tried to touch it up as best I can. These are good suggestions. I've made the change here. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • "extra time" currently links to overtime, which concerns the kind related to work schedules. Probably a better link would be to this section of "Overtime (Sports)" instead.
Great catch. Link updated. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • "in which" should probably be "during which", but I'm not 100% sure.
I'm not sure either. Yours sounds more correct. I've updated it. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • "remained level" may imply that they remained level-headed, seeing as how the previous sentence regarded a player ejected for dissent. Using "tied" would probably work fine here.
Yup, more sportswriting terms here. Removed. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comma after "only goal in the 37th minute of play". No comma after "MLS Eastern Conference rival"
Good catches. Updated. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • "Against mostly reserves for New York" – Not sure "reserves" is common parlance. Maybe wikilink to MLS Reserve League?
Yeah, not sure what term to use instead (maybe "B-team" or "backup players"). I like the wikilink suggestion, so I went with that. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • "Chicago went up 2-0 on Richmond" – "on Richmond" can probably be removed here.
Yes. Done. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • No commma after "cut the lead in half".
Removed. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Probably strike "However, the late goal was not enough as" and begin the sentence with "The Fire won..."
Simplified as suggested. --SkotyWATC 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Seattle Sounders FC
  • Since you explain the individual tournament wins in the next sentence, the first sentence seems superfluous. You can probably begin with "In 2009, Seattle Sounders FC became the second MLS expansion club to win the U.S. Open Cup tournament, after the Chicago Fire in 1998. They defended their title in 2010 to win a second straight championship."
This is a good improvement. I've kept all 3 sources from before. I've also tried to make appropriate wikilinks in the new sentences. I think this works well. --SkotyWATC 04:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Another "nearby" can probably be deleted. See above.
Yep. That word keeps creeping into various parts of the article. Thanks for helping clean them up. --SkotyWATC 04:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "early lead in the 39th minute" – The 39th minute doesn't seem "early" to me. Perhaps they took the first lead, but "early" implies they scored in the first few minutes of the match.
Agreed. I've just removed "early". --SkotyWATC 04:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "finished a cross from Robert Christner" – should probably be more explicit that he actually scored a goal.
Changed it to "scored off of a crossing pass" --SkotyWATC 04:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Strike "In the end".
Gone. --SkotyWATC 04:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Instead of "Seattle got off to an early start in the 4th minute when", I'd just say "Nate Jaqua scored following a pass from Pat Noonan in the fourth minute." Remember that you're just giving a rundown, not analysis.
Agreed. I've changed it to match your suggestion. --SkotyWATC 04:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Same thing here: "In the 25th minute, Jaqua provided a pass to Fredy Montero whose left footed shot found the back of the net giving Seattle a 2–0 lead." could be "In the 25th minute, Fredy Montero scored a goal off an assist from Jaqua."
Changed it to almost what you suggested: In the 25th minute, Fredy Montero scored with a left footed shot off of an assist from Jaqua I decided to keep the "left footed" detail. Hope that's okay. --SkotyWATC 04:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "ensuring the win" – I don't think a two-goal lead really "ensures" a win.
Right. I've removed "and ensuring the win" from the sentence. --SkotyWATC 04:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  • The quote from the goalkeeper just seems like regular press conference banter, not really worth including here.
Yeah, it was a stretch to include it I remember. Just wanted to fill out the section a little more. I'll remove it. --SkotyWATC 04:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "finally broke through with a goal" put some analysis and opinion where it shouldn't really be. The "finally" is the issue, here.
Agreed. I've removed "finally". --SkotyWATC 04:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "just missed a bicycle-kick" – Did he miss the kick (a.k.a. whiff it) or did he miss the shot?
Changed it to "just missed with a bicycle-kick shot". Hopefully that's clearer. --SkotyWATC 04:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  • The Dallas FC coach's complaints seem out of place here. It's definitely better suited for the "criticism" section below.
I considered it more of a foreshadowing of the criticism. If you don't think it's appropriate to do that here, I can move it. Leaving it for now. --SkotyWATC 04:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Pre-match
Venue selection
  • "U.S. Soccer" should probably be "United States Soccer Federation", since that's the official title.
Not sure on this one. Changed it based on your suggestion, but the original was accurate enough and felt like it read better to me. Happy to change it though. More clarity is always better--SkotyWATC 04:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  • The paragraph beginning with "Seattle defeated" can probably be merged into the previous one.
Good suggestion. Done. --SkotyWATC 04:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "9 days later" – should be "Nine days later,"
Ah yes. I thought I had caught all of these. Missed this one. Fixed. --SkotyWATC 04:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Analysis
  • The first couple of sentences have some awkward syntax. Perhaps "With a better MLS regular season record and home field advantage, Sounders FC were the favorites to win the match; however, the Fire had improved throughout the year by improving the play of their wingers and midfielders."
Very good suggestion. I've changed it to that except that I included the "s" in the midfielders wikilink. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Delete "In 2011, prior to meeting in the Open Cup final," then add "in 2011" to the end of the sentence.
Much better. Done. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Delete "but only their first win after a slow start". Always be wary of "only" and "just" statements.
Done. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "the week prior" – "the previous week" sounds more natural here.
Agreed. Done. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Rather than "he was credited" (a passive phrase), perhaps it might be more precise to say ESPNChicago.com analyst Charlie Corr credited him with..."
Hmm, this one feels a little weird, but I went with it. Feels like too many details about the source rather than the content. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "Seattle had recently finished a long road trip while Chicago's schedule made the match their third in a week's time." – Awkward syntax here.
I split the sentence and got rid of "while". I think this is better. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "The Sounders were in good form" implies you're referring to their physical shape, rather than their standings, which is what I think you're referring to here.
Changed it to "playing well". Not sure if that violates NPOV, but given the context I hope it's okay. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Match
  • Not a criticism, but I did want to point out that I had never heard of the phrase "tifo" before. Learn something every day, I guess.
I think it has Italian origins, but it's a very common term among American soccer fans. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Not sure, but I think the information about injuries would best be in the "Pre-game" section.
I decided not to move this. Much of the information contained in the paragraph was not known prior to the day of the game. For that, this location felt more appropriate. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
First half
  • "opening 2 minutes" – "opening two minutes"
Fixed. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "Neither side appearing to gain control as the match progressed through the first 10 minutes." – "Neither side appeared to gain control in the first 10 minutes of the match."
Good. Done. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • This seems like a good place to wikilink "yellow card".
Done. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Fixed and wikilinked. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "slowing play down as they held possession and created more scoring opportunities" – Awkward syntax.
Got rid of "slowing play down" since it was kind of redundant with the rest of the sentence. Hopefully this is better. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "5 minutes before half time" – "Five minutes before halftime,"
Fixed. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "30-yards" – "30 yards"
Fixed. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "On minute later," – "One minute later,"
Fixed. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "bounced squarely" – Strike "squarely"
Fixed. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "still tied" – Strike "still"
Fixed. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Second half
  • "flicked on to Mike Fucito" – Not sure what this means.
A "flick on" is a pass that's more like a deflection, but intentional. It's usually with the head. The player just touches the ball to slightly change it's direction or keep in airborne as it travels (in this case). It's a term very commonly used in American soccer. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "Finally, in the 78th minute," – Strike "Finally"
Gone. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • How does one "closely mark" a player? Is this the same as closely defending him?
Yes. Changed it to "closely defending" instead of "closely marking". --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "Pavel Pardo" – Should be "Pável Pardo", with accent mark.
Fixed. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Strike "trying to swing the momentum in his favor"
Gone. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "breakaway play finally tapping" – Strike "finally"
Done. Added "and then" to help the sentence make sense still. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Post-game
  • "Most of the record crowd remained after the game" – Your source doesn't indicate this.
Reworded sentence to this: Most of the record crowd remained after the game as they watched Seattle players and coaches engaged in the post match ceremonies and celebrations on the field. Hopefully this is better --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • The first sentence here can probably be merged with the next paragraph, instead of being on its own as it is now.
Merged. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Seems like the sentence about the scarf can be put somewhere so that it doesn't have to be its own paragraph.
Merged it with the paragraph below. Not great, but we no longer have a lone sentence like that. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Wikilinked. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Criticism
  • Other than the Dallas FC manager and player, who raised the criticisms? This is one area where passive vs. active text makes a big difference. Rather than saying "the criticisms were raised", say who raised them.
Hmm. I can add more sources if that's interesting. The hosting system was widely criticized. I've already specifically called out Hernandez's criticism because it was so public. I'm going to change --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Since the "Criticism" and "Rules changes" sections both regard the same thing, the host selection process, I suggest that the two sections be merged, and that it be retitled "host selection process" or something to that effect.
Done. --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I know these can feel like a beat down, but please know that's not how I intend them. All of the above are just suggestions for improving the article, and are not meant as any sort of personal criticisms of style or content. Best of luck in improving the article, and please let me know if you have any questions. – Runfellow (talk) 18:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I have not yet read through all of the feedback, but regardless, don't worry for a second that I'm feeling beat down. On the contrary, I'm grateful for what appears to be a very thorough review of the article. I'll try to address each of them over the next day or tow. Thank you so much for taking the time to review the article. --SkotyWATC 05:42, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Okay. Finally got through all of the comments. These were great. Sorry it took me so long. Too much real life happening to me these days. :) --SkotyWATC 08:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments – I haven't gone through that big batch of feedback above; if there are any duplicated issues, I apologize in advance. Overall, I found a lot of typos and other issues, and they will have to be dealt with before this is ready for FAC.

  • The links to the two competing clubs don't need to be repeated in the lead.
Good catch. Removed the wikilinks. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Try not to start a sentnece with a number, as in "36,615 were in attendance...".
Changed it to "The attendance was 36,615" which still works with the rest of the sentence. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • One word too many in "set the previous year when Seattle also won hosted."
It was intended to have both. I added an "and". --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "by finishing among the top six of the 2010 Major League Soccer season." "of" → "in"?
That's fine. Changed. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "The Fire did not automatically qualify, and had play through two qualification rounds before entering the official tournament." Needs "to" to be added before "play".
I introduced that mistake when I made the changes based on above comments. Thank you for catching that. I should have proofread that better. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Road to the final: I normally advocate that articles use less linking whenever possible, but even a hard-liner like me thinks adding a Major League Soccer link would be a good idea here.
Wikilink added. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Chicago Fire: Space needed in "toextra time".
Sigh. My bad. Adding the wikilink tricked me. Thanks for catching it. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • En dash needed for 2-0 in the Fire–Kickers summary.
Added. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Seattle Sounders FC: "In the 74th minute, Seattle midfielder Lamar Neagle scored from cross by Alvaro Fernandez". Needs "a" before "cross".
Yes it does. Added. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Venue selection: An excess space needs removal around where ref 29 is.
Wow. Good catch. Fixed. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Match: "For Chicago, midfielder Sebastian Grazzini was a key player that was questionable before the match." "that" → "who".
Changed to your suggestion. This is better. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
I still see the original version in the article. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:15, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I missed this one. I think I made the change and then forgot to save. Anyway. It's done now. Thanks for double checking. --SkotyWATC 01:19, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
  • First half: "Neither side appearing to gain control...". "appearing" → "appeared". Otherwise, this is an undesirable sentence fragment.
The reviewer above had caught this as well and I just hadn't gotten to it yet. Fixed already. Sorry for how slowly I followed up on these this week. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Another number-starting sentence in "5 minutes before half time...". You could just change the number to "Five" to fix it.
Caught by both reviewers again. I'm slow. It's fixed. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "On minute later". First word should be "One".
Again. Fixed already. Thank you. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Second half: En dash is needed for the score range in "Sounders FC now had a 1-0 lead."
Fixed. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Post-match: "while Chicago was give $50,000 as the runner up." "give" should be "given".
Fixed. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Charleston Battery should be linked here if it hasn't been already.
Fixed. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • The first word of the Rules Changes subheading is the only one that should be capitalized here.
Got rid of the subheading altogether based on review feedback. Though this guideline was followed with the new, combined subheading "Host selection process changes". --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • "However, U.S. Soccer announced in 2013 that hosing for all rounds of the tournament would be determined randomly as long as both venue's met minimum standards." "hosing" should be "hosting", and "venue's" shouldn't have the apostrophe.
Fixed both. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Publisher of ref 2 (Tacoma News Tribune) should be italicized as a print publication.
Done. I accomplished this by using the "newspaper" parameter instead of the "publisher". --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Same goes for ref 32 (The Seattle Times). Giants2008 (Talk) 01:50, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Fixed. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your thorough review. --SkotyWATC 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

  • While I was reviewing comments to strike them, I noticed a stray quotation mark at the start of the Analysis section. That should be taken care of along with the one pesky issue noted above. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:15, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
I've fixed both. Thanks for double checking everything. --SkotyWATC 01:19, 17 June 2013 (UTC)