Talk:2024 Men's T20 World Cup final

GA Review

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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:2024 ICC Men's T20 World Cup final/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Vestrian24Bio (talk · contribs) 10:31, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Magentic Manifestations (talk · contribs) 13:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this, will share the comments shortly! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 13:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Images

• One relevant image with a questionable license and nominated for deletion. This is itself one of the candidate for quick failure as per WP:GAFAIL.

@Vestrian24Bio I have proceeded with the entire review and given elaborate comments, so that it can be addressed before further re-nomination. There are quite a few basic issues, which could be addressed quickly, but could have been addressed before nomination. I think it would have been better if it had gone through a WP:Peer review, as these could have been eliminated there. You can also refer to other similar GAs for reference on certain aspects.

These can be addressed if the user is willing, in a short period of time. I can understand the effort you had put in for this and maintaining it (I can see that there are quite a lot of people who have edited the page, that have not been constructive!) Also, given some time, the article should stabilize as well as the recentness means more ongoing edits. Please feel free to ask me to re-review the article whenever the mentioned issues are duly dealt with! Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 13:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Citations

• Earwig 1 picks up nothing suspect. Pass.
• Ref layout requires corrections:

1. Move citations to articles from the lead as it is a good practice as per WP:LEAD
2. Caps need to be removed as per MOS:SMALLCAPS; E.g. #9, #48, #83
3. Author needs to be specified only where there is a real author. Remove others say e.g. #58, #45
4. Use standard templates of cite news for news articles and others for appropriate heads
5. Provide links to newspapers, sources wherever applicable.
6. It should be "The Times of India", "The Hindu", "The Hindustan Times" wherever applicable
7. Use common notation, if the source is ICC, either use publisher with ICC or icc-cricket.com; Same with Sportstar which is a news
8. language parameter is a given and not required if the source is in English

• Reliability:

1. Do not use twitter as a source as per WP:RS
2. A few #41, #56 seem suspect, but if there are no alternate sources, it is fine

• Random ref check:

1. Most sources pass e.g. #2, #11, #20, #54, #60
2. Please change links of scorecards to the scorecard for the entire match. For e.g. #50 is widely referenced, but it goes to live score page with a summary

Misc

• It is broad and covers in detail
• Some areas needs to be worked on the focus perspective; comments below
• MoS and Prose: Needs addressing; comments below

Comments

General

• All single digit numbers should be spelled in words as per MOS:NUMBER. Almost all of these are specified as numbers across the sections, right from the lead
• Re-arrangement of sections. There are quite a few sections that need to be axed as it is generally a WP:CFORK

1. Background is fine
2. "Route to the final" is better, though it is just a suggestion
3. Match section just needs summary and scorecard;

a. Match details is a repetition of what is stated in prose and summary of scorecard (if any details are missing, can be added in the background/build-up). It is not required.

b. Toss and match result can be single sentence representations at the top of the scorecard and match officials at the bottom. No need of separate sections for 1-2 lines.

• Link first mentions of cricket specific terms such as overs, boundaries, run-out etc. as a neutral reader might be able to get a better hold of it

Lead

• Lead is too short and needs to be expanded to cover significant events such as toss, brief of scores, major contributions from both the teams (SA is not to be seen currently!)
• The final was also the last T20I match played by Kohli, Indian captain Rohit Sharma, and Ravindra Jadeja As of now, this was the last T20I for everybody who played. It is better to re-word it to a, b and c retired to set the context correctly.

Background

• On 22 September 2023, the ICC released the venues that would host matches across the tournament,[8] with the Kensington Oval in Barbados being named as the venue for the final.

1. First mention of ICC - expand with abbreviation
2. "being" not required

• On 5 January 2024, the ICC announced the tournament's schedule, with the final taking place on 29 June. to On 5 January 2024, the ICC announced the tournament's schedule, with the final scheduled on 29 June.
• This was the second T20 World Cup final played at Barbados, after the 2010 final. As the same stadium was used, "at the stadium" should suffice as Barbados might give two different meanings (as if played in another stadium in the country)
• South Africa played their maiden T20 World Cup final,[11] while India reached their third final, having been champions in 2007 and runners-up in 2014

1. Change to This was South Africa's maiden T20 World Cup final, while it was India's third final, having been champions in 2007 and runners-up in 2014.
2. Link the teams at the first reference

• Both teams qualified for the final unbeaten, with neither of them losing a Group Stage or a Super 8 game

1. Group stage need not be caps
2. Missing semi-finals Both teams qualified for the final unbeaten, with neither of them losing a game in the group stage or thereafter

Road to the final

• The text section is like a sea of blue with no other additional information other than the stadia where the matches were played. This could have been a data point in the table and would not require an elaborate section. It has to be reworked to give a summary.
• Do not re-link articles such as Nassau.., Kensington Oval etc. which are already linked

Match Summary

• Officials need to be scrapped to a single line. The same information is repeated three times in text, bullet points, scorecard summary.
• Toss also needs to move as a single line above scorecard
• Scorecard

1. Please maintain uniformity, uniqueness and give a key or a tooltip to expand c, b, wk. "c" is used for both captain and caught. Wicket-keeper is designated both by wk and †.
2. Do not use flags and link teams in the scorecard as it gives no additional meaning here and is ornamental + over linking; Use a table title rather than a merged column on top to specify the innings
3. Innings 1 and 2 sub-headings are not required in my suggestion as it introduces more branching
4. Align number columns such as scores etc. to the center

• Then Rohit Sharma and Rishabh Pant were dismissed early in the next over, bowled by Keshav Maharaj. They were dismissed in the second part of the over and not early; Also comma is not required
• Soon Suryakumar Yadav was dismissed by Kagiso Rabada in the fourth over, leaving India at 34 runs off 3 wickets. with the score at 34 runs for the loss of three wickets
• Virat Kohli and Axar Patel tried to stabilize the innings and the partnership managed to score 72 runs leaving India on 106 runs off 4 wickets.

1. off is used for balls and not for wickets
2. Standardization; If the second mentions are by second name, why Virat here?
3. "tried to" is not required, can simply be "stablised"
4. Use Indian English uniformly, stabilise not "ze"
5. Before Axar being run-out, how did the score become 106/4?

• But Axar Patel was run out thanks to a quick throw by wicket-keeper Quinton de Kock. same first name for Axar
• While attempting hit off Jansen, Kohli was caught by Rabada. a hit off or to hit Jansen
• Could add a line in the later acceleration by Kohli and Dube
• In the last over bowled by Anrich Nortje, India scored 9 runs, with Shivam Dube and Ravindra Jadeja dismissed and India scoring 176 runs off 7 wickets. Dube first name mention. It could be In the last over bowled by Anrich Nortje, India scored nine runs for the loss of two wickets, finishing with a total of 176 runs for the loss of seven wickets.
• Kohli was the highest run-scorer for India scoring 76 runs off 59 balls while Keshav Maharaj was the best bowler for South Africa as he picked up 2 wickets for 23 runs in 3 overs. to Kohli was the highest run-scorer for India with 76 runs off 59 balls while Keshav Maharaj and Nortje picked up two wickets each for South Africa.

• South Africa had a slow start with the early dismissals of Reeza Hendricks and Aiden Markram leaving South Africa on 12 runs off 2 wickets. same off issue
• Quinton de Kock and Tristan Stubbs managed to put a partnership of 58 runs off 38 balls before Stubbs was dismissed by Axar Patel. Patel first name, "to put" not required
• In the middle of the 13th over Quinton de Kock was dismissed by Arshdeep Singh leaving South Africa on 106 runs off 4 wickets. same as above (first name, off)
• Heinrich Klaasen's fiery innings of 52 runs from just 27 balls helped South Africa to go past 150, which included scoring 24 runs of an over from Axar Patel's bowling. First name for Patel, "fiery" is sugar-coating Heinrich Klaasen scored 52 runs from just 27 balls to help South Africa to go past 150 runs, including scoring 24 runs of a Patel over.
• With 26 needed from 24 balls, Klassen was dismissed by Hardik Pandya which was the turning point of the match and India got the breakthrough after a lengthy break between 15th and 16th over of the match.

1. Turning point is subjective, not required
2. Lengthy break of how long, why, what is the context?

• Arshdeep stepped up allowing only 4 runs to be scored of his over, with South Africa needing 16 from the last over. Stepped up is again not generic, rather it can be Arshdeep conceded only four runs in the next over, at the end of which South Africa required 16 from the last over.
• Suryakumar Yadav's catch was eventually hailed as "one of the catches of all time in cricket history" by cricketing fraternity and Ian Smith who was on air in the commentary panel also labelled it as "one of the greatest catches in cricket history".

1. First name issue
2. Cricketing fraternity, who? The source is a video and nothing to justify this
3. Ian Smith on commentary where. It is a repetition of the same statement, and there is a second line not linked to the first, which is but a mere repetition.

• Soon Rabada was also dismissed on the fifth ball. As South Africa required 9 runs from the last bowl, Pandya conceded only a single due to which India won the match by 7 runs. to Rabada was dismissed on the fifth ball of the over and South Africa required nine runs of the last ball. Pandya conceded only a single and India won by ...
• while Pandya was the best bowler for India as he took 3 wickets and conceded only 20 runs from his 3 overs. Bumrah and Arshdeep got 2 wickets each while Axar Patel took 1 wicket. Numerals MoS + Why special weight is given to Indian bowlers, mentioning all wicket takers, which was not the case of SA or batting?

Aftermath

This section requires series over-haul

• Mention India's second victory after first win in 2007 under Dhoni
• Follow it with ICC win
• India became the first Asian country to win two ICC Men's T20 World Cups (2007 and 2024) and the third ICC full member after West Indies and England ICC full member is not required. Has any non-member won it?
• The match was hailed as one of the closely fought finals in T20 World Cup history as the match swung in favour of both teams as key moments unfolded taking the match all down to wire with South Africa being asked to chase down 16 off the last 6 balls of the final over

1. Hailed by who?
2. How can it swing in favor of both teams (either team?)?
3. Repetition of 16 runs story

• Ravi Shastri statement. "on air" where? "summed up the emotions running high among the fans" - simply can be remarked (it leads to more questions: which fans? only fans and not players?)
• ICC win is repeated in the same paragraph again!
• SKY catch

1. Undue weight to the SKY catch and deviating focus.
2. It was already described in detail in the match summary. Another separate section in the aftermath is unwarranted as it is part of the match summary. If the catch is being described here, in the match summary, it was not required.
3. Repetition of the whole event again and again, same boundary rope, catch, close to boundary etc.! Combine the events and trim it to facts
4. Lots of sugar coating: "jaw-dropping" "scintillating" "raising eyebrows"

• Many former cricket players like Sachin Tendulkar, MS Dhoni, Yuvraj Singh and Sunil Gavaskar congratulated Team India and Rohit Sharma on their T20 World Cup victory. Major cities in India such as Mumbai, Delhi, Ahmedabad, Lucknow and Hyderabad celebrated the win late into the night. Indian supporters in New York, London, Barbados and various other countries also celebrated late night with hoisting Indian flags and setting off firecrackers.

1. Not required to name select few players, were these the only people to congratulate?
2. Same goes with cities, didn't the rest of India did not celebrate?
3. Same with cities abroad

• Last two lines unsourced

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed