Wikipedia

Talk:2008 Indian Premier League final/GA1

< Talk:2008 Indian Premier League final
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Vibhijain in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago21 comments4 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: TheSpecialUser (talk · contribs) 05:38, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Sure! TheSpecialUser TSU 05:38, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Apologies for the drive-by tagging. I will wait until after the review and give my notes here as well as help improve the article. SocietyBox (talk) 10:46, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • Unlink common thing such as Cricket as you've already got 2020 linked per WP:OVERLINK. ✗ Not done Someone living in Latin America or Oceania won't understand cricket, so I think that linking is a good option.
  • at the DY Patil Stadium in Navi Mumbai, India - Remove India as Navi Mumbai itself is in India (probably ;)) so it gets a bit too much and it is also covered later in the line ✗ Not done Again, all those not living in or near India would know that Navi Mumbai is in India.
  • captained by Mahendra Singh Dhoni, stood as the third team -> captained by Mahendra Singh Dhoni, stood at the third position.   Done
  • Is it possible to include points gained by both teams in the 1st line of 2nd para?
  • It is, but then we will have to explain the whole point structure. 2 for win, 0 for loss, 1 for NR, ball-out for tie. That would just go off-topic.
  • Pathan, who was the best performer for the Rajasthan Royals with both bat and ball, was named man of the match. - there is no "best" in cricket but who has done better overall. Please re-word with inclusion of runs scored and wickets taken in balls.
  • But Pathan score the most runs and had the best bowling figures. Again, I want to keep the lead on-focus, so that anyone who want to know more can read it in the respective section.
  • The table in "Group stage" is odd. Team should be in-line with Group matches
  • I don't understand how is it "odd". It is a team/group match table, so the space should be left. Its a general practice.
  • Rajasthan Royals played the Delhi Daredevils - need "the" in the start   Done
  • The Rajasthan Royals got an opening partnership of 65 runs. After that Shane Watson and Pathan achieved 52 and 45 runs respectively. - I'm confused here. Was Pathan in the opening partnership?   Done
  • Also, Farveez Maharoof took 3 wickets for 34 runs. -> Farveez Maharoof, for The Delhi Daredevils, had the best bowling record in the match by taking three wickets for 34 runs.   Done Although made some copy-editing.
  • Tillakaratne Dilshan played for 33 runs, but due to no contributions from the late order, the Delhi Daredevils got all out in the 17th over for 87 runs -> Tillakaratne Dilshan scored 33 runs, but due to poor contributions from the middle and late order, the Delhi Daredevils got all out in the 17th over at 87 runs.   Done However changed poor to low due to WP:NPOV, and obviously my personal support for the DD ;)
  • Watson took 3 wickets for Rajasthan Royals, giving only 10 runs. -> Watson took 3 wickets for the Rajasthan Royals, conceding only 10 runs.   Done
  • Rajasthan Royals won the match by 105 runs, with Watson being the man of the match -> The Rajasthan Royals won the match by 105 runs, and Watson was selected as the man of the match for his all round performance.   Done But I didn't add "for his all round performance", because we have know source that which says that he was given the award for this only.
  • Buildup - is there any alternative for this heading?
  • I can remember two GAs using that, and its completely fine.
  • The match was hosted in Mumbai, India because the franchise owner of Mumbai placed the largest bid for the franchise. (111.9 million) -> The match was hosted in Mumbai because the franchise owner of the Mumbai Indians placed the largest bid for acquisition which summed up at 111.9 million.   Done Good English! ^^ :P
  • Prior to the league's formation, the Rajasthan Royals was recognized as underdogs - please add the reason why. As far as I remember, it was because the franchise had got the team on lowest wages.
  • Thee was no particular reason. One possible reason is lack of big names, but I can't find any source for that either.
  • The Chennai Super Kings stood as the third team after Kings XI Punjab, getting 16 points with winning eight matches -> The Chennai Super Kings stood as the third team after Kings XI Punjab, who got 16 points after winning eight matches.   Done
  • Also, please add how many points did CSK and RR gained.   Done
  • There were two changes in the Rajasthan Royals side -> For the final, there were two changes in the Rajasthan Royals side   Done
  • to win over the Kings XI Punjab - already covered above so please remove it.   Done
  • The Rajasthan Royals' Tanvir was given the purple cap -> The Rajasthan Royals' Tanvir was reworded the purple cap - Also, please add up what does a "purple cap" means in brackets ()
  • "The Rajasthan Royals' Tanvir was given the purple cap for getting the highest number of wickets in the league." It already tells that!
  • Watson was declared as the man of the series; Watson scored 474 runs and took 17 wickets in the season - replace the "Watson" with "he"   Done
  • Dhoni said, w"I think the standard of - um...what?   Done
  • However, the tournament was cancelled due to the 2008 Mumbai attacks. Both teams were given 22 crore (US$3.98 million) each as compensation. -> However, the tournament was cancelled due to the 2008 Mumbai attacks and both the teams were given 22 crore (US$3.98 million) each as compensation.   Done
  • However due to important contribution from the late order, Kings XI Punjab managed to reach a -> However due to significant contributions from the late order, Kings XI Punjab managed to reach a   Done
  • Manpreet Gony had taken 3 wickets for the Chennai Super Kings, giving them 14 runs. -> Manpreet Gony having taken 3 wickets, conceded 14 runs for the Chennai Super Kings.   Done
  • In reply, Chennai Super Kings lost their first wicket in the form of Vidyut Sivaramakrishnan, who went out for 6 runs - "In repy" is really an awkward term.
  • You will find it being used thousand times in cricket. Come on! We can't write a cricket article in Shakespeare English.
  • However, Parthiv Patel and Suresh Raina each scored a half century and took Chennai Super Kings to the target with 31 balls in hand   Done
  • Irfan Pathan took the only wicket for Punjab, giving 24 run -> Irfan Pathan was the only bowler to take a wicket for Punjab by conceding 24 runs.   Done

This is it. I haven't done the big "Summary". I'll do it tomorrow. Thanks! TheSpecialUser TSU 10:55, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Review (2)

edit
  • General
    • Consistency with semi-final/semifinal.   Done
    • We cricket fans may like it better otherwise but Wikipedia:Make technical articles understandable. (e.g. "lost their first wicket in the form of")
      • I will try my best to work on this, but I really don't think that this comes under the GA criteria.
    • Add some external links.   Done
  • Lead
  • Group stage
    • Requires expansion. Here are some suggestions:
      • Give a brief summary (1 to 2 paragraphs each) of how the two teams fared in the group stage (e.g. momentum, losing/winning streaks, team changes, injuries), or
      • List every result for both teams (perhaps with a short table, anything more than a result would be excessive), or
      • At the very least, give the results of the two Chennai v Rajasthan matches.
        • Doing
  • Semifinals
    • "first 5 batmen only by 55 runs". 5 → five. only by → for   Done
    • What is "less contributions"? I can't tell if the late order did well.   Done
    • "the double figures"
    • I've actually never heard "late order". It's always "lower order" or "tail".
  • Buildup
    • Link "underdog" sentence with the following sentences. (e.g. "despite being seen as underdogs, they won 11 matches...")
  • Summary
    • Will await TheSpecialUser's review. But I can say that if it's a "summary", it's too long to be in Wikipedia:Summary style. At least break it up into paragraphs.
      • It already broken up. Its fine I think.
  • Scorecard
    • Would you not prefer the other style of having "Totals (5 wickets, 20 overs) 163"? That would keep the "runs" column with just "163" and explain what the "5" means.
      • Added key for that.
        • Don't you mean "runs/wickets"? Did you use "totals" instead of the usual "total" because you have both runs and wickets?
          •   Done
  • Aftermath
    • Rajasthan Royal's → Royals'
    • If you're quoting a large chunk, perhaps use something from Category:Quotation templates.
    • I think "purple cap" may sound like some sort of novelty item. State it's an "award". I actually thought there was some cash prize to go with it but can't find anything on that. If it's nothing but a cap (and that "hard hat" trophy version), might not even be worth mentioning. Just "highest wicket taker" will do.
      • This is rather a famous trophy but some cash prize (1 lakh I think). Its a widely used term in the IPL.
        • Yes, along with Citi moment of success. Then I think "trophy" can be added.
          • I think there was no Citi moment of success at the time of 2008.
    • You can mention how the teams did in the following seasons if you want a real "aftermath" section. Otherwise, this section is misnamed. Something like "Reactions" or "Outcome", perhaps.

SocietyBox (talk) 13:44, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

      • Aftermath is more about prize moneys and qualifications. Other season information will make it off-topic.

Got some more suggestions. Since I'm not giving the verdict, I may have suggested more than you need for GA.

  • You can promote all the subsections in Match to 2nd level as the whole article is "the match". Though rename Summary to Match summary to be clear.
    •   Done
  • I've been thinking of a more descriptive and appropriate alternative to Buildup. I can only think of Background, organisation and preparation but still think it's not quite right.
    • I still believe that buildup is the right term. It talks about comparisons, previews and pre-match developments.
  • There is an inconsistency with when you write, e.g., 5/five wickets.   Done

SocietyBox (talk) 21:55, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Are you considering FA after this? SocietyBox (talk) 03:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Not really, it depends on the feedback I get. If I will go for it, I will get it even more copy-edited. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 10:12, 24 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
Batting powerplay (44-49)
  • which was the home team not playing - "was" or "were"?   Done
  • Sunil Gavaskar in his match report said, that the batsmen will be required to play more on the front foot because of the inconstant bounce. - what does this have to do with spectators and celebrates? =P It doesn't at all fit in the flow. Please move it to somewhere else. Most probably, place it before The match was a day/night match,[2] and starte   Done
  • and match referee Javagal Srinath. - need a comma after referee
  • ✗ Not done According to my knowledge, it shouldn't be there. Feel free to correct.
  • Modi flipped the coin, and Rajasthan Royals captain Warne called heads. The coin flip turned out to be heads, and Warne won the toss. - merge both of them
  •   Done
  • resulting in a good catch by Jadeja - good? POV? neutral?
  • ✗ Not done POV means personal analysis, whereas this is a commentary by an professional expert on the game. See the ref.
  • P. Patel was caught by wicket-keeper Akmal in the last ball of the ninth over. - the same thing is covered up later in so please remove this extra and make some changes to fulfill the removal.   Done
  • However the ball resulted in Akmal and Mohammad Kaif being injured. Kaif along with Akmal, crashed with each other while trying to take that catch - merge em'   Done
  • Sometimes "Rajasthan Royals", sometimes "RR" and sometimes "the Rajasthan Royals" is used. Please be consistent.   Done
  • Pathan together started playing aggressively - I'd appreciate if this is neutralized a bit. Aggressively can be POV and not so true as there are many other times when they play at run rate of 11 or 10. Comparatively it is not thus little in-correct as well as not-so neutral to say.
  • Change to more aggressively, as the run rate was very high compared to the one at the time of Akmal.
  • as they played a fourth wicket partnership of 65 runs, scoring at a run rate of 8.66. This was the highest partnership of the match - merge em'   Done
  • score of 100 runs. [2] - simple! remove the space between . and [2]   Done jfd34 (talk) 09:28, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • The next wicket was off of Kaif, - what?   Done jfd34 (talk) 09:37, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • resulting in a simple catch by Dhoni at cover - remove "simple" (POV) and was Dhoni at cover?
  • Yeah he was (you forgot that they had Parthiv Patel as the WK). As I said before, its not a personal analysis, so its not POV.
  • In the next ball, Jadeja went out for a golden duck, getting caught by Kapugedera on Morkel - remove this and make changes in the following sentence to fulfill the removal.   Done
  • hitting four three fours and four sixes - what?   Done jfd34 (talk) 09:28, 27 August 2012 (UTC) (three fours)Reply
  • last over was bowled by Ntini, who gave up 10 runs in that over - make it change so that "over" doesn't repeat   Done
  • In the last over, the Rajasthan Royals required eight runs. Lakshmipathy Balaji was given the ball by Dhoni - merge (hint: use "and")
  •   Done Is this an English test? :P
  • last three balls, but Balaji bowled a wide outside - but? nah.."but" is not proper grammar. use "and" instead
  • No. RR required 6 from 3, ie 12.00 runs/over, an its a tough job. But Balaji' ball made everything bad for CSK. But is the correct use here.
  • 2 extra runs - 2 -> two   Done jfd34 (talk) 09:28, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • In the next ball, Warne hit and reached out for a full ball for one run. - cannot understand what you mean?   Done
  • The Rajasthan Royals needed more three runs from the last two balls -> The Rajasthan Royals needed three more runs from the last two balls to win
  • needed one more run off of the last ball - off of?   Already done
  • Warne has already covered the - has or had?   Done jfd34 (talk) 09:37, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • giving 25 and 39 runs each - "each" -> "respectively"   Done jfd34 (talk) 09:38, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • He was also announced -> announced? "named" would be a better option.   Done 09:39, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Group stage procession - the title-box "Team" should be in line with "Group matches". You may leave the box in the "team" above the names empty but please bring "Team" a box up.   Done jfd34 (talk) 09:39, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • No need of this: Main article: 2008 Indian Premier League as it is linked later in the section.

Batting-powerplay over. TheSpecialUser TSU 16:09, 26 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

All done, thanks to Jfd34. :) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 11:18, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2008_Indian_Premier_League_final/GA1&oldid=1150318032"