Talk:2024 EFL Trophy final

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)

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)

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

1. 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.

2. 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);

(c) it contains no original research; and

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

3. Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and

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

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

(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.

Notes

Review

1. 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

2. 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

3. 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

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

Notes	Result
The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined

5. 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

6. 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

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)

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)

@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)

Are the rules of the competition not important context though? It's useful to know which teams are eligible for users imo Michaeldble (talk) 15:36, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

@Michaeldble I just don't think it's practical. It does not make sense to me to put in the format when the article is linking the season article of the competition and even the competition itself which both states the format. But if you what something about the format, keep the first paragraph in Background and remove the one in the lead that I mentioned JC Kotisow (talk) 20:33, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

--

"thanks to..." → resulted from

I'm not too sure this sounds natural but I can change it Michaeldble (talk) 15:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

@Michaeldble It's just the wording to make it sound encyclopaedic but it's not that serious anyway, so keep it the same if you believe it sounds better that way. JC Kotisow (talk) 20:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

"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)

--

"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)

To me this seems like important context for the lead surely? Readers would want to know who took part in the competition Michaeldble (talk) 15:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

@Michaeldble As I said before remove the text that states format and keep the first paragraph of background. JC Kotisow (talk) 20:36, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

@Michaeldble just remove the bit that says "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."

I just think thats unnecessary. JC Kotisow (talk) 20:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

--

• 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)

--

"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)  Done

--

"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.

— JC Kotisow (talk) 02:31, 27 May 2024 (UTC)  Done

--

"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)

-- With it being the League One play-offs, I've changed it slightly to: "Wycombe's manager Matt Bloomfield had previously played at Wembley as captain for the club in the 2020 EFL League One play-off final" if that's ok with you Michaeldble (talk) 13:59, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

"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)  Done

--

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)

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

@JC Kotisow Hello there, I hope you don't mind but I've re-added the 'done' templates for now for my ease to see what I've done so far Michaeldble (talk) 15:34, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I've added a few comments above too if you could have a look Michaeldble (talk) 15:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

JC Kotisow (talk · contribs) Regarding the comments above, I do slightly disagree personally. This competition is not the most well-known so I think a sentence describing who is eligible to participate would be useful. I did base a lot of the structure of this article on the 2017 EFL Trophy final article which is a featured article. This page includes this detail in both the lead and background section Michaeldble (talk) 19:45, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@Michaeldble I've checked it out, if that is the case then leave as it is. Look man, you gotta stop putting the  Done tag if you have not done or even discussed about my comments, especially for the lead. My only problem is that before the line "This was the first time that Wycombe had reached the final of the EFL Trophy." Please add something like "In contrast,'/'For their counterpart,'/'For Wycombe" to create more flow in info. That is my only concern. The rest is fine. I will review the next sections soon. JC Kotisow (talk) 21:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

My mistake, I was confused why you were saying that because I remembered doing all of your suggestions. I must've forgotten to publish for some reason(!) I think I have implemented most of that now. Thanks Michaeldble (talk) 21:51, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@Michaeldble All good, just only change that, the rest is fine I believe JC Kotisow (talk) 22:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Route to the final

So moving on, I believe we can arrange the tables and matches that state the club's routes a bit more efficiently. I'm suggesting something like this:

Note: In all results below, the score of the finalist is given first (H: home; A: away).

Peterborough United				Round	Wycombe Wanderers
Opponent	Result			Group stage	Opponent	Result
Cambridge United	2–0 (H)			Matchday 1	Crystal Palace U21	1–0 (H)
Tottenham Hotspur U21	3–1 (H)			Matchday 2	Stevenage	1–0 (A)
Colchester United	0–1 (A)			Matchday 3	AFC Wimbledon	1–0 (H)
Southern section Group D Pos Team Pld Pts 1 Peterborough United 3 6 2 Colchester United 3 6 3 Tottenham Hotspur U21 3 3 4 Cambridge United 3 3 Updated to match(es) played on 7 November 2023. Source: EFL.com				Final standings	Southern section Group C Pos Team Pld Pts 1 Wycombe Wanderers 3 9 2 AFC Wimbledon 3 5 3 Stevenage 3 4 4 Crystal Palace U21 3 0 Updated to match(es) played on 14 November 2023. Source: EFL.com
Opponent	Result			Knockout stage	Opponent	Result
Arsenal U21	3–0 (H)			Round of 32	Fulham U21	3–2 (H)
Crawley Town	2–1 (H)			Round of 16	West Ham United U21	2–1 (H)
AFC Wimbledon	3–1 (H)			Quarter-final	Brighton & Hove Albion U21	4–1 (H)
Blackpool	3–0 (A)			Semi-final	Bradford City	1–0 (A)

I believe this is better for organisation, plus leaves more room for images to be added into the section. JC Kotisow (talk) 22:32, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

---

"Peterborough controlled much of the possession throughout the match and opened the scoring thanks to Jadel Katongo.[18] A miss-hit effort from Ryan de Havilland from range fell into the path of Katongo who was able to swivel and shoot past the Cambridge goalkeeper to open the scoring in the 19th minute"

Change to Peterborough controlled much of the possession throughout the match and opened the scoring through Jadel Katongo You don't need to repeat open the scoring twice. JC Kotisow (talk) 22:32, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

---

"Peterborough's second match" → just say "second match", you already clarified it's Peterborough

"another academy side, this time" → remove this

"thanks to a de Havilland strike" → use "thanks to" less, or just say "from a goal by de Havilland"

"They doubled their lead before half time after Arsenal lost possession near their own box with the ball being squared to Clark-Harris to score.[22] Peterborough scored their third of the match after a counter attack which culminated in Malik Mothersille slotting the ball past the goalkeeper." → Too much words for one thing, say They doubled their lead before half time after a counter attack which culminated in Malik Mothersille slotting the ball past the goalkeeper.

Can you find other words to use than the phrase "thanks to," you have used it three times in one paragraph? JC Kotisow (talk) 22:32, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

"In the round of 32 stage" → change to In the Round of 32, (Captalise round and add a comma in the end)

"In the round of 16" → change to 'Round' since it is a noun

"Peterborough would be at home again for the quarter-finals, this time playing League Two AFC Wimbledon." → Say Peterborough would play at home in the quarter-finals against League Two side AFC Wimbledon.

"since their winning campaign in 2014" → say since their 2014 campaign.

"A late goal for Ryan McLean for Wimbledon set up a nervy end" → from Ryan McLean. change 'set up a nervy end' to something like to bring his side into the match and then follow with 'before...'

"Despite having lost to Blackpool only three days prior in the league" → no need to mention this

"at league rivals Blackpool" → change 'at' as it does not make sense.

"seal Posh's place in the final." → Remove this. you have already said they made it to the final twice.

Let me know your thoughts JC Kotisow (talk) 23:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

---