Talk:Vengeance: Night of Champions/GA1

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

GA Review[edit]

GA Review by SRX
Lead
  • Every championship was on the line. - Well that is the gimmick of the PPV, but it is too short of a sentence, the sentence should be expanded something along the line of, Every championship from the promotion was defended during the event or All the matches on the card were for a WWE Championship, or something similar along those lines.
  • The main match on the Raw brand was for the WWE Championship between John Cena, Mick Foley, Bobby Lashley, Randy Orton and King Booker. Cena won the match and retained the WWE Championship by pinning Foley after executing an FU.[3] The featured match on the SmackDown! brand was a "Last Chance match" for the World Heavyweight Championship between Edge and Batista, which Edge won by count-out.[4] The primary match on the ECW brand was CM Punk versus Johnny Nitro for the vacant ECW World Championship, which Nitro won by pinfall after performing a corkscrew neckbreaker from the middle rope. - the beginning of the sentences should be altered, it sounds like the introduction of a BG, should be reworded with The main event was a ..., The Primary match on the card was from the _ brand, it is better worded in that way.

 Done. –LAX 00:55, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BG
  • The feud began when Bobby Lashley was drafted to the Raw brand and stripped of the ECW World Championship. - how is this the beginning of the feud? No elaboration is made on how this began the feud, this is just a statement on an action.
  • On the June 18 edition of Raw, Mick Foley, Randy Orton, King Booker, and Lashley all cut promos on why they deserve to be the number one contender to the WWE Championship. Cena also cut a promo on who deserved it. - Needs consistency, why is Lashley (the last name used) while the other names who are mentioned earlier are all spelled out? The part about Cena is not worded right and does not flow, how about Cena would then come out and cut a promo on who deserved to face him for the WWE Championship.
  • Following this, Acting General Manager Jonathan Coachman announced that all five men would compete for the title in a match billed as the "WWE Championship Challenge" at Vengeance. - the word Acting General Manager is not used in the list of authority figures, Coachman appears as the interim GM, which is what should be used here.
  • The main feud heading into Vengeance on the SmackDown! brand was between Edge and Batista, with the two feuding over the World Heavyweight Championship - why is this not like the first feud, and World Heavyweight Champion Batista, it should be consistent.
  • The ECW feud should be outlined.
    • But there was no feud whatsoever between Punk and Morrison. –LAX 00:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. –LAX 00:55, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Event
  • The first match was between Lance Cade and Trevor Murdoch and The Hardys (Matt Jeff) for the World Tag Team Championship. - it should be noted that each team is a "team", between the team of __..., also an "and" should be place between Matt and Jeff.
  • Cade and Matt started the match, with Matt in control until tagging Jeff. - So how did they lose control because he tagged in Jeff? After this it states, The two teams tagged in and out until Cade and Murdoch attempted to walk out of the match, but the Hardys went after them, and brought them back into the ring. - which doesn't flow with the clause that states "until Matt tagged in Jeff."
  • Jeff attempted a Swanton Bomb onto Cade, but Murdoch interfered. Matt tried to interfere on Jeff's behalf, but was stopped by the referee. - a transition is needed here, these two sentences don't connect whatsoever, though, they are about related events.
  • Cade gained the pinfall onto Jeff to win the match and retain the tiles.[16] - "onto", it should be "on."
  • Guerrero pinned Yang after to win the match and retain the Cruiserweight Championship. - badly put together, the after makes the sentence confusing, how about, Afterwards, Guerrero pinned Yang..
  • Nitro won the match and became the new ECW World Champion after pinning Punk following a corkscrew neckbreaker. - this doesn't tie up well, it goes from Nitro performing an enzurigi, and then Nitro won, but the process is listed last, the process should come first so the match can flow and the events can tie up.
  • delivering a splash and a Samoan Spike. - this doesn't flow with the first part of the sentence, how about as he delivered a ...
  • Flair kept the advantage and applied the figure four leglock. MVP, however, reached the ropes and, while the referee was attempting to pull Flair off, executed a low blow. - serious rewording, more on the lines of MVP however, reached the ropes to break the hold, thereafter, he executed a low blow while the referee attempted to pull Flair off.
  • After the match, Deuce 'n Domino attacked Snuka and Slaughter until Tony Garea and Rick Martel, who were sitting at ringside, came into the ring and made the save. - too much jargon, just say they came into to assist them.
  • This was a "Last Chance match," meaning if Batista lost, he could not get another shot at the World Heavyweight Championship as long as Edge is champion - tenses, change from is to was. Why is this explained here and not in the BG?
  • Throughout the match, all five men fought each other.- well that's obvious, the main event is the only match in the article that should have a good length of a prose, more action should be described and elaborated more than that they "fought each other."

 Done -- iMatthew T.C. 00:52, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aftermath
  • but immediately escaped the ring and hid under the ring. - repetition, after the first instance of ring, use the word "it" as it is known what you are talking about.
  • With all of the cruiserweights layed out with the exception of Noble, Hornswoggle came out from under the ring. Hornswoggle delivered a Tadpole Splash to Noble, and pinned him to win the Cruiserweight Championship. - "layed out?" need to be elaborated and if it's gonna be used, "laid" should be spelled correctly.
  • That same night, Bobby Lashley won a "Beat The Clock" match, defeating Shelton Benjamin. As a result, he became the number one contender to the WWE Championship. - I'm pretty sure this was a tournament and not just a regular match.
  • Morrison retained the title after hitting Punk with both of his knees. - Is there a proper name for this move?
    • Nope. It's been said that way for as long as I can remember in the GAB article. –LAX 00:53, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Edge held a celebration for himself on the July 13 edition of SmackDown!, and was attacked by Kane.[32] On the July 20 edition of SmackDown!, Edge vacated the World Heavyweight Championship as a result of a legitamite injury. - I remember this event, it should be elaborated that Kane caused the injury.

 Done. –LAX 00:55, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Quick-Fail
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    Per the many comments above.
    All are  Done -- iMatthew T.C. 00:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    B. MoS compliance:
    A couple of MOS violations, one is that the article is overlinked, once the subject is linked in a section (once), it should not be linked again, and other MOS violations are noted above.
     Done -- iMatthew T.C. 00:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    Lordsofpain.com is not reliable, prowrestling.com is not reliable, wrestling101.com is not reliable, and Warned.net is not reliable.
     Done -- iMatthew T.C. 00:48, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    Missing the ECW feud, and to see the amount of info that is in the Double murder suicide article, this article should contain some of that, as this was the week of that event and is what makes it notable.
    As LAX said above, there was no real ECW feud. The was, but there was no background to it. Also, it might not be a good idea to talk about it, because readers will jump articles, from this to the double-murder suicide article. -- iMatthew T.C. 11:10, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    The poster has a summary but not a fair-use rationale.
    Look again. –LAX 01:00, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    This article has many problems and does not meet the GA criteria and qualifies for quick-fail. This article should be improved with the suggestions listed in this GAN. Before nominating it in the future, please make sure it complies to the GA criteria. SRX 00:14, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Considering you gave things to work on, can I have two days with this article on hold? -- iMatthew T.C. 00:21, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Max 2 days.SRX 00:28, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why would there be a maximum time limit? The purpose of GAN is to improve articles, so setting such a short timeframe goes against the whole intent of the process. The standard amount of time is seven days, with an extension being granted if the nominator is doing his or her best to address the concerns. Would it hurt anything to go with that? GaryColemanFan (talk) 00:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was coming here to mention the same thing. Seven days is standard, and reviewers often allow much longer (sometimes up to a month). Nikki311 00:46, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Matt suggested it since the article was on the verge of quick fail. Fine the article has up to a week.--SRX 01:22, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The entire GA review has been completed (in one day) -- iMatthew T.C. 00:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meets the criteria well, though, another feud should be outlined to give a more overview of the event, it doesn't make sense to have an aftermath for many of the matches on the card when only 2 feuds are explained.--SRX 01:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. –LAX 16:40, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good, though, that feud should say when/how the match for Vengeance was announced and WWE is misspelled in ref [14].SRX 17:14, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good question. I just checked the archives, and I couldn't find any mention of that match being announced. –LAX 17:40, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Have you checked WrestleView? They usually have it, if not, just say an advertisement or promo announced it. If that can be addressed, I will pass it.SRX 18:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I have, as well as WWE.com and Slam! Sports. I haven't found a thing. –LAX 18:46, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Pass--SRX 21:58, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vengeance:_Night_of_Champions/GA1&oldid=1091995166"