Talk:MLS Cup 2005

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fair use rationale for Image:MLS Cup 2005.gif[edit]

Image:MLS Cup 2005.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 12:43, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resources[edit]


SounderBruce 01:48, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:MLS Cup 2005/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 11:15, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:18, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures[edit]

Links[edit]

  • checklinks states that [1] is region only Europe. I'm not sure if this needs to be tagged however. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:33, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • As far as I'm aware, region-locked articles do not need to be tagged. Being a major newspaper, it will eventually become GDPR compliant (like the LA Times did recently).
  • all other links look fine. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:33, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Prose[edit]

Lede[edit]

  • Should the article not start "The MLS Cup 2005?" Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:43, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • American sports championships in this format with the edition/date behind the name (e.g. the Super Bowl) don't use an article in front of their names. The MLS Cup is fine, The MLS Cup 2005 is not.
      • Ok, seems like a weird variation to me, but if it's how it works, that's fine.  Done Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:48, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "MLS Cup 2005 was the 10th edition of the MLS Cup, the championship match of Major League Soccer (MLS)" - The MLS Cup 2005 was the 10th edition of the MLS Cup, the championship final of the 2005 Major League Soccer (MLS) season. - This makes it sound like it was the last match of the MLS ever Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:43, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's describing the cup itself, which is the championship match. I don't see why it would be confusing, as a real finale/closer would be described as such.
  • "The final was a rematch of MLS Cup 2002 and ended in a repeat victory for Los Angeles, who won 1–0 with a goal scored by Guillermo Ramírez in extra time." - But isn't the MLS Cup only a one-match final? I'd replace final with match, or Cup. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:43, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Venue[edit]

  • "The match was hosted at Pizza Hut Park in Frisco, Texas, the newly-built home of FC Dallas" home stadium Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:50, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Don't see why we need to add an extra "stadium" in there.

Road to final[edit]

  • the tenth MLS Cup was contested by the New England Revolution and Los Angeles Galaxy in a rematch of the 2002 final, which the Galaxy won 1–0, contested between, and final, which Galaxy won 1-0,. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:52, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • First suggestion done; second one has an answer below.
  • I'm not sure club names need a "the" before them. You wouldn't see The Manchester United, or The Barcelona. I'd remove all of these. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:09, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • In American English, teams with nicknames are commonly referred to with the article, a reflection of the pluralization of team names here (explained by the CMOS). This example with several instances of "the Galaxy" shows it pretty well. For teams with more European names (e.g. Minnesota United, NYCFC), they are referred to by their full name, their city/locale, or a shortened nickname like "United" or "City".
      • If it wasn't already apparent from this review, I'm from Britain, so I'm fine with this usage now you've described it. It does seem odd that it wouldn't be identical worldwide, but with the usage you've shown, it's clear that it is different. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:55, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "who was promoted from his interim role." - When was he promoted? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:09, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any mention of "semifinals", should be in lowercase. it's not a proper noun. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:09, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Conference Semifinals" is a proper noun, and refers to the (overall) quarterfinal round.
      • So it isn't the semifinals of the Conference? But, a name given to that match? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:55, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • Going in descending order: MLS Cup final, Conference Final, Conference Semifinals; the Conference Final is equivalent to the semifinal stage in a normal bracket.
  • "Donovan then scored twice in Los Angeles's 2–0 over the Colorado Rapids in the Western Conference Final, sending the Galaxy to their fifth MLS Cup appearance as the lowest-ever seed to play in the final" - Should explain what seed they were - I'd assume 8th? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:09, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Broadcating[edit]

  • This section should be after the mathc section. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:11, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • I disagree. As these details were announced prior to the match, they fit in the quasi-chronological order that this article is arranged in.
  • I'd also prefer "Broadcast" to "broadcasting" as a header Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:11, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • As it's describing multiple broadcasts (TV in English, TV with SAP, radio in Spanish, internet radio in English), I'd rather keep it at its current title.
  • Wikilink color commentary. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:11, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done.

Match[edit]

  • "including an overhead shot" - "overhead kick." You can't have an overhead header, forinstance. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:15, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • It was actually a chip, rather than a bicycle kick.
      • So the shot was with him facing away from goal, and he chipped the ball over himself into the goal? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:58, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • The "overhead" in this case was supposed to refer to the goalkeeper. SounderBruce 15:28, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Twellman and Dempsey at the top" - As strikers Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:15, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done.
  • "After the halftime reset," is this an american term? I've never heard it referred to as this! Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:15, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Definitely an Americanism, but I've replaced it with "overtime's short halftime" to clarify things.
  • rest of text is good! Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:15, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Post-match[edit]

  • Personally, I prefer "legacy", or "aftermath" than Post-match as a section header.Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:18, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Conforming to project standards with using "Post-match". There isn't much of a legacy to talk about here.
  • "The match featured 10 yellow cards, doubling the previous MLS Cup record," - When was this? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:18, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Added the previous record-holder.
  • "on penalty kicks at Pizza Hut Park in 2006 and in Washington, D.C. in 2007" - Either list both stadiums, or neither. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:18, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Added the stadium to DC; this list is to emphasize that Pizza Hut Park returned as the host for the next year.
  • Los Angeles and New England would meet again in the 2014 final, which marked the Galaxy's fifth title and the Revolution's fifth loss. - Put the score in as well. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:18, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Given that the other cups don't have a score, I'd rather not add it.

Notes & References[edit]

  • What is page C6 in note 1? Aren't these usually page numbers. I'm unaware of a publication that uses letters for pages. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:37, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Most newspapers in the U.S. use lettered prefixes to break up sections. Section A would be World News, B local, C sports for a typical newspaper, but some vary; the Chicago Tribune uses a numbered prefix, but I've omitted it because it would look out of place.
  • should probably archive these links for future preservation Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:37, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • A bot will come around and archive the links as needed when they go dead. Some of these links don't yet have archives.
  • It was the second time that an MLS Cup final featured a previous matchup, mirroring the three-year gap for the Los Angeles–D.C. United rematch in 1999 - [citation needed] - Needs a citation regarding this. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:52, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Resolved by removing the last part, which I couldn't find in any non-database references. SounderBruce 06:39, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Article placed on hold, with a few issues raised above Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:19, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Lee Vilenski: Thanks for the review. I've answered some of your questions above and made appropriate changes where I saw fit. I'll get working on that last uncited sentence, but finding a reference might be difficult. SounderBruce 19:31, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I've done another read through. A lot of my issues I would suggest are from a cultural divide on my part (which I apologies for), and I'll pass this article now. Nothing above that's left really has any bearing on if the article is a GA or not. Thank you for your swift response, and have a nice day. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:02, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I see you've promoted a lot of these MLS Cup articles to GA status, good luck with the remaining if you choose to promote these. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:03, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:MLS_Cup_2005&oldid=1209113374"