Talk:Cardiff Blues vs Leicester Tigers (2008–09 Heineken Cup)

Cardiff Blues vs Leicester Tigers (2008–09 Heineken Cup) has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 22, 2015	Good article nominee	Listed
August 14, 2018	Featured article candidate	Not promoted

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 26, 2015.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Cardiff Blues vs Leicester Tigers in the 2008–09 Heineken Cup was the first professional rugby union match to feature a penalty shootout?

Current status: Good article

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Cardiff Blues vs Leicester Tigers (2008–09 Heineken Cup)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Harrias (talk · contribs) 12:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take on this rarity! Not often that a Rugby article pops up here.

General comments

Overall, this looks pretty good. One thing that stands out is the lack of pictures. I know it can be hard to source pictures for recent events if you weren't there, but a picture of the Millenium Stadium at least, as the host venue, might add a bit of colour?

A couple of photos now appear in the article. Rugger80 (talk) 14:47, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The match details section is a little hard to follow unless you know rugby. The positions are abbreviations without any explanation; a layperson is unlike to know what OF, BF etc stand for. Perhaps use {{Abbr|OF|Openside flanker}}, to display OF and so forth?

Position as now abbreviated and wikilinked to the appropriate pages. Rugger80 (talk) 14:47, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, a key might be useful to explain that "c" indicates that the try was converted, and (4/7) means that the kicker scored four out of seven penalties/conversions, with the times of those successful attempts shown after.

A more detailed review will follow. Harrias ^talk 12:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Quotes in the lead need inline citations.

Done Rugger80 (talk) 23:14, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regular time

Link or explain terms on first use; penalty, try, line break, converted, yellow card, killing the ball, knock-on, sin bin, 22.

Extra time

Out of interest more than anything else, but was there any indication that the Hipkiss blood injury was a feint?

The reference in the article [1] alludes to it being gamesmanship, but Cardiff seemed happy it was legit in this source: [2]. I'll see if I can expand it a little to cover the incident and the reaction. Rugger80 (talk) 23:01, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article covers this in a bit more detail now: [3]. Rugger80 (talk) 13:37, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Penalty shoot-out

"The teams were both successful with their next three kicks..." I think it's only their next two kicks? Shanklin and Rees for Cardiff, and Mauger and Newby for Leicester?

Ah yes, I counted 3 for some reason, maybe because we go from talking about kick 5 to kick 8, but there's only 2 kicks in between them, so I've fixed this. Rugger80 (talk) 23:14, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilink forward, and backs.

Done. Rugger80 (talk) 14:47, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Match details

See above, but also add some alt text to the line-up image indicating what it is. A user with a screen-reader will never get any benefit from the image, but at least they will know what others are seeing.

Done. Rugger80 (talk) 14:47, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Post-match reaction

"..noted that only three of four players.." I assume it should be "three or four"?

Good spot! Rugger80 (talk) 23:01, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"..what would have happened had in the event the shoot-out.." I don't think "had" needs to be there.

Nope, looks like it was reworded without taking out the original wording at some point. Fixed. Rugger80 (talk) 23:01, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

The formats are inconsistent: most of the newspaper sources don't have an accessdate or publisher, but some (#12, #16) do.

Access dates added for all the newspaper sources. I've kept the publisher for the Daily Mail reference, but dropped it for the others per the guidance on Template:Cite news: "Omit where the publisher's name is substantially the same as the name of the work" ("Guardian News and Media", "Telegraph Media Group" and "Independent Print Limited") Rugger80 (talk) 23:01, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Non-newspaper sources, such as the BBC, RTE, Sky Sports, ercrugby.com need accessdates.

Access dates added for the broadcasters, and the still live ERC link. Not sure what to do about the deadlinks, as the content on the archive links won't change over time, so the archive date is in effect the access date? The only guidance I could find was on Help:Using the Wayback Machine, which states "Where an archived resource notes its original publication date, use |date= in place of |accessdate=.", which is what is currently done. Rugger80 (talk) 23:01, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, as I say, a good piece of work that doesn't need much to pass as a GA. I'll place this on hold to give you time to address my points above. Harrias ^talk 09:57, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to review, I'll take a look at addressing the issues raised. Rugger80 (talk) 22:19, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm now satisfied that with those changes, this easily meets the GA criteria. Nice work. Harrias ^talk 10:38, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Review[edit]

" The scores were level after regular time and neither team was able to score during extra time, resulting in the first ever penalty shoot-out[a] in a professional rugby match"

- Needs a reference. Also should it be rugby union match or does this also cover professional rugby league?

"allowing Jordan Crane to hit the winner."

- doesn't read quite right/have right tone. How about "allowing Jordan Crane to score the winning kick"? Or something along those lines?

"however, Leicester selected Johne Murphy, who was not a regular kicker" - he had kicked goals for Leicester in two games before at first team level and many times for reserves and youth teams. I think this still stands as a comment but was not sure if that information might change the wording slightly.

Comment on criticisms of the format - Should it be pointed out, in the context of format being criticized for having forwards kick goals, that Leicester did not even use all their backs as Harry Ellis did not take a kick? Also that Craig Newby had also previously kicked a conversion for Leicester that season? Or that Jordan Crane had actually kicked goals for his school side? Both sides also made late changes in anticipation of the shoot out but neither replaced a forward with a back. I appreciate the press largely ignored these things too and we have to rely on reliable sources.

Anyway, food for thought on a great article.Skeene88 (talk) 12:56, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]