The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 30 May 2020 [1].

2001 UEFA Cup Final[edit]

Nominator(s): NapHit (talk) 20:40, 5 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This was one of the most entertaining cup finals in recent times. A match that looked like a formality for Liverpool beforehand, turned out to be much more difficult. I feel this article is very close to featured standard and I'm opening it up to the scrutiny of the community to decide whether this is the case. NapHit (talk) 20:40, 5 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Harrias[edit]

I'll take a look at this shortly. Harrias talk 17:56, 8 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Route to the final (Liverpool)

More to follow. Harrias talk 21:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the comments so far Harrias, I've addressed them all. NapHit (talk) 15:02, 9 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the ping. Still aware of this, but got sidetracked, and now having a busy weekend. Will probably be Monday before I get back to it, sorry. Harrias talk 16:28, 11 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Route to the final (Alavés)
Match
I've got an issue with this ref as well. I've tried to archive it, but the Wayback machine doesn't seem to be working for me. I can't find another source to confirm what's in that paragraph, it was covered by the Sports Illustrated one. I'll try again later, but if I can't archive the source, I'll have to remove the paragraph as it won't be sourced. NapHit (talk) 16:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
tried again today, no luck. I've removed this paragraph as a result. NapHit (talk) 14:33, 16 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The report link underneath the scores should cover this. It links to the UEFA page for the catch which has a video of the match clearly showing what kits were worn. NapHit (talk) 16:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Post-match

That's it for the moment. Overall a well-written article, with mostly nit-picking points from me. I intend to claim WikiCup points for this review. Also, if you would consider taking a look at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Manchester United F.C. 9–0 Ipswich Town F.C./archive1, any thoughts you might have would be greatly appreciated. Harrias talk 08:11, 15 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks again Harrias. I've addressed all your comments and have responded to a couple of them above. I'll try and look at 9–0 match tonight. NapHit (talk) 16:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Further comments

That's about it from me. Harrias talk 13:10, 16 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the extra comments Harrias, I've gone through and taken out those links you mentioned. Thanks for taking the time to review the article. NapHit (talk) 14:33, 16 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image review

Hi Nikkimaria, thanks for the comment. I can't find a reference for the claim, so I removed it. The only reference I could find was one that points out that the final was held there, but doesn't explicitly say it was the first European final held at the ground. NapHit (talk) 12:14, 12 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments Support by Kosack[edit]

The ref at the end of the second paragraph references the sentence prior too. I could try and source another ref if needs be. NapHit (talk) 21:17, 14 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A few things from the first third of the article. I'll hopefully get around to more as soon as possible but it's something to get started with for now. Kosack (talk) 19:37, 14 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the comments Kosack, I've addressed all your points. NapHit (talk) 21:17, 14 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A few more things from the rest of the article

That's about all I can pick out I think. Kosack (talk) 19:06, 17 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the extra comments Kosack. I've gone through and addressed all of them. NapHit (talk) 18:13, 18 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Happy to support. Kosack (talk) 18:13, 19 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments Support by Cas Liber[edit]

Looking over this, prose looks okay at first glance - queries below:

I've added a sentence stating where the final was held. It will have been decided by UEFA in some form or another. Unfortunately, sources from this period regarding these decisions is sparse and I can't seem to find one explaining the outcome of how Dortmund was chosen. NapHit (talk) 16:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Otherwise looking on track.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:27, 15 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your comments, Casliber. I've addressed your comments and left you a reply on one of them. NapHit (talk) 16:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There hasn't been a source review yet, need one to be done. NapHit (talk) 15:26, 25 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done

I only have one book which goes into a little detail about the match. I've included a few bits from it. I don't think there is a wealth of books on the topic itself. With sports events, it's easier to source from the internet, especially regarding football matches, as they give a play by play account of the match, which is a more comprehensive account of the match than you would get in a book. NapHit (talk) 11:40, 28 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not sure that's true. For example this book has a chapter on the match. Web sources certainly will have a detailed play-by-play, but that doesn't mean other source types have nothing to offer. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:49, 28 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
While it's true that the book has a chapter on the match, it's not an altogether long one. Nor, does it mention anything that is not already in the article. I'm not disagreeing about books having something to add. I used one of my own books to add some more info in. What I'm saying is I only have access to limited books, most of which were published before this final. From the searches I've done online, there isn't much detail of the final in those books. NapHit (talk) 12:05, 29 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fixed. NapHit (talk) 11:40, 28 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Observer is the Sunday version of The Guardian hence why the website is the guardian. As the article was published on a Sunday it will have been published under The observer. I've changed it to The Guardian anyway, as this isn't clear from the web link. NapHit (talk) 11:40, 28 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Here is a list of sources rsssf use for the information on their site. NapHit (talk) 11:40, 28 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay, but the note at the top of that page suggested the main source is user-collected data. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:49, 28 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As far as I'm aware, the majority of the information comes from the books and sources listed. The organisation, RSSSF, has its own page here on Wikipedia and one of the references on that page shows it is mentioned in a football book as a source of information. I think this confers that the site is reliable. NapHit (talk) 22:28, 8 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The book you mention itself seems questionable - I'm not able to verify the publisher. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:20, 9 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
RSSSF also used as a source in this book - National Pastime . Alos used as a source by The Guardian here NapHit (talk) 22:35, 9 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your comments Nikkimaria, I've responded above. NapHit (talk) 11:40, 28 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nikkimaria: - how are your thoughts on images and sources? --Ealdgyth (talk) 13:50, 8 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Images are fine. Last point is still pending on the source review, and if possible I'd like some input from others on the first point. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:01, 8 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I get to be pesky ... @Nikkimaria: any progress? --Ealdgyth (talk) 15:18, 22 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ealdgyth: As above I'd prefer to get more input on my first point, but I'm not opposing over it. Third is fine. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:43, 22 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment What's the source for the formations diagram in the Details subsection?—indopug (talk) 15:58, 22 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's covered by the link titled 'Teams' underneath the score in the details section, Indopug. NapHit (talk) 17:09, 22 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This generally designates players as midfielder, forward etc but our diagram specifically positions them on the left, right or centre. (There is also an inconsistency: the team list has Gerrard at RM but the diagram has him as a CM)—indopug (talk) 17:37, 22 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I double-checked the image against the BBC broadcast of the final, which can be found here and the image appears to be wrong. The BBC has Gerrard listed on the right as the teams list show. I've removed the image as a result and may ask the original uploader to create a new one to rectify this. NapHit (talk) 19:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Coord note -- Hi, under Details, it's not clear to me where all the info on the players, e.g. their positions and countries of origin, is sourced. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:38, 30 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ian Rose, the two links under the scoreline, titled Report and Teams, reference the info on the players. I can add them to the references section if that helps rather than having as a link under the score. NapHit (talk) 10:51, 30 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Apologies, don't know how I missed those. Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:20, 30 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
More