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

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 21:43, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Update - As of November 27, 2012, ΛΧΣ21™ has no internet connection and will finish the review at a later point in time. Thank you. DivaKnockouts (talk) 03:40, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: LlamaAl (talk · contribs) who requested this GA review is currently blocked for sock-puppetting. Their block is scheduled to be lifted on Dec 4, so reviewers and others should not expect a response from the requestor until after that time. --TreyGeek (talk) 03:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice. — ΛΧΣ21™ 20:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note An image in this article (the one with Silva and Sonnen fighting in the cage) has been flagged as a copyright violation on commons.wikimedia.org. Unless I'm mistaken, the image would need to be removed from the article before it can attain GA status. --TreyGeek (talk) 03:31, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I've removed the image from the article since it has already been deleted from commons. --TreyGeek (talk) 06:01, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment/Suggestion The article contains prose about the background leading up to the event, a paragraph about the weigh ins, and a single paragraph about the actual event (the fights). Was there nothing notable about the fights themselves and that is why there is no prose about them? (That's a rhetorical question since if the actual fights weren't notable then it is very unlikely the event is notable and thus deserving of an article.) Based upon another MMA event article that's been promoted to GA (UFC 94) there should be a separate section discussing the event and its fights, and another section discussing the subsequent events (what was the ramifications of this event?) --TreyGeek (talk) 04:23, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Working in my sandbox. Will be finished in less than a week. --LlamaAl (talk) 23:35, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Subsequent events -  Done

Preliminary card -  Done

Main card -  In progress --LlamaAl (talk) 03:05, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Other suggestions

• Remove all flags per WP:INFOBOXFLAG (the one in the infobox) and per the recently closed RFC on use of flags for MMA fighters.

 Done in sandbox. --LlamaAl (talk) 03:13, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Could/Should bonus awards and purses be combined? Both sections discuss payouts to the fighters. I'm not I'm happy with how it looks but one possibility could be similar to UFC 140#Payouts. I'm not sure the best way to approach this.

 Not done. It is based on UFC 94, a GA. --LlamaAl (talk) 03:13, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. It was something I was thinking about as I was revisiting UFC 140 to improve it some more (from my last round of prose additions during the summer). As I said I wasn't excited about how I have it presented in UFC 140, but I can't help but wonder if there is a better way to present it than in UFC 94 and here. Probably something best suited to someone's or some article's talk page. --TreyGeek (talk) 03:35, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Remove some (all?) references from the infobox. This is assuming that the same information is mentioned and cited in the prose of the article. For this article I think that this is the case for most of the four references in the infobox (and might help make it look a little cleaner).

 Done in sandbox. --LlamaAl (talk) 03:18, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's all of the suggestions I have. --TreyGeek (talk) 03:03, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

Lead

• The lead seems too short for the legth of the article. I'd recommend expanding it into two paragraphs with more relevant information. Also, if the information you have on the lead is cited on the body, there is no need for references, check WP:LEAD.

 Done. --LlamaAl (talk) 21:44, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I'm still not convinced that the lead is long enough. I'd suggest to expand it adding more information about the background section. I guess that if you expand the first paragraph a little more, it should be good to go. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 03:12, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 What about the current version? --LlamaAl (talk) 05:12, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More convincing :) Although, I'd guess you should try to expand it further, but that's me being nit-picky. I will do another fast scan tomorrow before passing the article. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 05:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Silva vs. Sonnen

• "Sonnen is also undefeated since UFC 117," I see that 'UFC 117 is italicized here, but not elsewhere. Which is correct?

 Done. Every UFC event should be italicized, except in navigational boxes. --LlamaAl (talk) 02:08, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

• Reference #37 covers all the "Entrance music" section. I guess you should write a short introductory text and put the reference there.

 Done. --LlamaAl (talk) 23:44, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Okay that's all by now.

— ΛΧΣ21™ 22:19, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Any update? I will scan the article again tomorrow. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 05:22, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • As I stated above, I'll be finishing it in my sandbox. --LlamaAl (talk) 19:06, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Okay :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 00:37, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• This GA review has now been open for seven weeks. Perhaps, if the article's improvements are going to take much more time to complete, the review should be closed and the article renominated when the updates are done. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:41, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I will finish it this week. Improvements won't take more time. --LlamaAl (talk) 13:09, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It now looks like he's made the modifications planned if this can be looked at again. Wizardman 19:00, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like he's still finishing the main card part. I'll take another look tonite. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 19:11, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Everything done. --LlamaAl (talk) 21:35, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Passed. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 20:23, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]