Talk:Vengeance (2005)

Pre-GA review

Sorry this is a little late, but I wanted to make sure I got to looking at this article. It looks good, but there are a few things that I wanted to mention:

1. The lead could use more information. It should be at least two well-developed paragraphs.
2. In the first paragraph of the "Background" section, "following the aftermath of Backlash" seems redundant. "Following Backlash" is probably enough.

   --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:29, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

3. In the same paragraph, explaining what the "Gold Rush Tournament" is would be helpful.

   --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:29, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

4. Later in the paragraph (and throughout the article), "hit" sounds unencyclopedic when discussing wrestling moves (eg. "Triple H hit Batista with a Pedigree"). "Performed" or similar words are preferred, as they help keep the article "out of universe" by reinforcing the fact that wrestling is scripted.

   --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

5. The last two sentences of the paragraph could be combined so that they aren't repeating information (eg. "The following week, Batista accepted Triple H's challenge,<reference 11><reference 12> and they signed the contract on the June 6, 2005 edition of Raw.<reference 13><reference 14>").

   --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

6. In the next paragraph, "by doing a rap of his own" is kind of awkward. Rephrasing this would help.

   I sorta got it, I'm not sure if it reads well. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:34, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

7. In the same paragraph, what night does "The same night" refer to? I assume this means June 6, but it needs to be stated.

   Again, I think I sorta got it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

8. In the next paragraph, does "attacking him afterwards" mean that Angle attacked Michaels after eliminating him? This should be more clear.

   Same deal. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:42, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

9. In the third paragraph of the "Event" section, "big boot" is jargon. I would imagine a wikilink is available for this.

   --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:51, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

10. In the same paragraph, I am confused by "Moments later, he was quickly taken out". Who is "he"?

    --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

11. In the next paragraph, it says at the beginning that Michaels won the match. This is inconsistent with the rest of the section, as none of the other match descriptions start by telling who won.

    --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:44, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

12. In the same paragraph, "During the segment, Garcia proposed to Viscera, who rejected Garcia's proposal after he favored The Godfather's advice about the life he would miss out on, if he got married." is a long and awkward sentence. Breaking it up would help.

    Again. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

13. In the last line of that paragraph, the word "left" is used twice very close together. Replacing one of these would improve the flow of the sentence.

    I think I got this one, not sure. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

14. In the next paragraph, Tomko is "ejected out of the match". He wasn't in the match, so this is confusing. Was he forced to leave the ringside area?

    --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

15. In the last paragraph of the "Event" section, the second line ("The key spots of the match included Triple H getting a hold of a steel chain and using it to choke Batista, Triple H hitting Batista in the back with a steel chair wrapped with barbed wire which caused Batista to bleed from his back, and Batista managing to hit Triple H in the mouth after a sledgehammer shot.") is very long and should be split up.

    Again, I think I got it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:43, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

16. In the same paragraph, "Batista managing to hit Triple H in the mouth after a sledgehammer shot" is unclear. Who used a sledgehammer? Did Batista hit Triple H in the mouth with a sledgehammer? Did Batista hit Triple H with a sledgehammer, put down the sledgehammer and punch Triple H in the mouth (currently, it seems like this is what happened, although it isn't clear)?

    Zenlax ^{T C S} 20:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

17. The first sentence of the "Aftermath" section is long and confusing.

    Zenlax ^{T C S} 20:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

18. It would probably be good to mention what the draft lottery is before talking about the final pick.
19. In the second paragraph of the "Aftermath" section, some clarification is needed for "Before their scheduled match, Cena and Jericho took the upper hand over one another."

    Zenlax ^{T C S} 19:35, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

20. In the Hogan-Michaels paragraph of the "Aftermath" section, there are a couple of problems with "Hogan defeated Michaels at SummerSlam, therefore retaining his record at the event." First, "his" could refer to either wrestler. Second, what record is being discussed?

    Well, I ended up fixing it. But, what it was trying to say was that at SummerSlam, Hogan was undefeated and he won his match against Michaels and kept his record. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

21. In the following paragraph, I am confused by "as he was being carried backstage, Hardy counterattacked Edge in the locker room". How can Hardy attack someone in a locker room while being carried backstage?

    --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

22. In the same paragraph of the "Aftermath" section, why would losing a match cause "excessive blood loss"? And is this legit or kayfabe blood loss? I can't tell if the quotation marks are to indicate that this is kayfabe or if this is a quotation.

    I think I got it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:34, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

    It's better. Do we know if the bleeding was scripted? Was this a serious and unexpected injury, or was it the planned outcome of the match? GaryColemanFan (talk) 23:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

    Nope. The results only state that he bled a lot. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

    Then that's all that can be said about it. GaryColemanFan (talk) 23:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

23. In the final paragraph of the "Aftermath" section, I am confused as to why it is specified that Flair was a face during Triple H's absence. This seems to imply that Triple H's absence caused Flair to wrestle as a face or that some link between the two exists. "...teaming up with Ric Flair, who was wrestling as a face, to take on Chris Masters and Carlito" makes more sense to me.

    --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:23, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

24. Consistency is needed in the capitalization of steel cage match/Steel Cage match. The final two paragraphs of the "Aftermath" section have it capitalized differently.

    --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:34, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

25. I am confused by the third sentence of the "Aftermath" section: "He made a surprise appearance on SmackDown! after John "Bradshaw" Layfield (JBL) celebrated his victory in a six-man elimination match to win the new SmackDown! Championship, after the WWE Championship was now part of the RAW brand." Who won the championship? Batista is defending a title later in the paragraph, so it sounds like he did. I'm not sure how that would happen if he just came to the ring after a match, though. And what championship is it? There is no such thing as the SmackDown! Championship, is there?

    Again, I think I got it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I hope this has been helpful. Overall, the article is good, but I think that addressing these will help its chances during a GA review. Please let me know if you have any questions about these comments. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 20:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your hard work addressing all of those points. All of my concerns have been fixed, and I think the article is looking really good. Best wishes with the GA review, GaryColemanFan (talk) 23:31, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the pre-GA, Gary. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

GA Nomination Review (finally)

I know it's been quite a long time, but I'm going to review it.

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

Nicely written, with good sources, but some grammatical and lead errors.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   "John Cena, Chris Jericho, and Christian in a Triple Threat match for the WWE Championship." That sentence sounds like a fragment to me. You probably want to expand the prose a bit to at least 5 sentences each paragraph (2-3 paragraphs)

   For the event? SexySeaShark 16:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

   No, for the lead. –LAX 18:46, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, LAX. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

4. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

5. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

6. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Good luck improving this article!

Thisisborin9_{sign here!} 04:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, I have promoted this article! Good luck getting the article to a FA! Thisisborin9_{sign here!} 19:46, 25 April 2008 (UTC)