# Talk:1985 European Cup final

Was Massimo non-Italian during this match or did he actually had the Italian passport? Which does seems to be the case.

If you look at his article, you'll see that he played for San Marino at the highest international level, he is therefore affiliated with San Marino when it comes to football, even if he might have had other nationalties(?) — CHANDLER#10 — 06:19, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
This is a complicated case. At the time of this match, there was no such thing as a San Marino national team (first match 1986, UEFA membership 1988). Bonini represented Italy at under-21 level, his last cap coming in 1983. So in 1985 he would have been registered as Italian, though a case can be made for either. Oldelpaso (talk) 19:26, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
It should be coherent tho. And he is listed on Wikipedia as a player from San Marino for the 1983 final. 81.223.68.18 (talk) 14:43, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
Thanks, fixed. --BlameRuiner (talk) 06:44, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

"The foul was committed some two meters outside the area, but the referee awarded a penalty (at the other end, no penalty was awarded for a blatant foul by Bonnini on Whelan in the penalty area)" doesn't seem entirely neutral. Surely a citation should be required if you're accusing the referee of acting improperly?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.40.46.85 (talk) 11:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC) 

This review is transcluded from Talk:1985 European Cup Final/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: InTheAM (talk · contribs) 13:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
I will be reviewing the article shortly.  I read through it, and it looks like it should pass with a small amount of revision.  InTheAM 13:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
1. Well-written 

a)Prose 
The last two paragraphs of the lead repeat the same point.
"...banned from Europe."  Clarify—Which tournaments/competitions were they banned from? However, since this is in the lead, the ban should be summarized only.
"win the tie." This phrase is used a few times.  Is this common terminology?
The article has many run-ons and very little flow.  It is not very easy to read and understand.
In the "Route to the final" section, I do not think it is necessary to go over the scores of each match since they are in the table to the right.  Rather, I think it would be better to bring out notable events in the matches.
This sentence is troublesome: "This meant that they finished outside of the European qualification positions, in order to participate in European the competition, they needed to win the European Cup."
"At approximately 7pm..."  I would change this to a time in relation to the game, i.e. one hour before kickoff.
"Missiles began to be thrown between the two sets of fans, due to the fact that the stadium was crumbling so fans could pick stones up and throw them across the divide."  This sentence is a little wordy. Changing it to active voice would be beneficial.
Did the wall fall on other fans?  When/where did the casualties occur? (in the fall, crush, both?)
"Five minutes before half-time, Juventus were awarded a free-kick, after Boniek, who had beaten three Liverpool players with a run, was brought down outside the Liverpool penalty area by Wark who was shown a yellow card for the foul." This sentence is too long. Could be broken up to be made more clear.
"Liverpool created more chances near the end of the match, Tacconi saved from Whelan and both Wark and Steve Nicol saw headers go wide of the Juventus goal." This sentence is a run-on.
"English Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher put pressure on the The Football Association to withdraw English clubs from European competition and two days alter UEFA banned English clubs for "an indeterminate period of time." FIFA extended the ban to worldwide matches on 6 June, the ban was modified a week later to allow friendly matches to be played and did not affect the English national team." These sentences have multiple issues.  They do not make sense as written.  They are both run-ons.  The quote: "indeterminate period of time is nowhere to be found in the SI or ESPN articles referenced.  Thatcher is not mentioned in the SI article, either.
In the postmatch section, where is Anfield?
b)MOS 
The "References" section should be titled "Works" and should be placed before the "Footnotes" (which should be titled "Notes").
Lead is good, except for the repeated material mentioned above.
2. Factually accurate and verifiable 

Sources seem reliable.
No apparent copyright violation.
Links are all good.
Inline citations are good, except where mentioned above.
I think the Hale/Ponting book needs to be cited as Hale in the notes since he is listed first in the references.
3. Broad in its coverage 

Route to the finals should include more detail about noteworthy events in the matches rather than just rehashing the table.
Other issues are mentioned in the Prose section of this review.
4. Neutral 

Article is written from a neutral POV.
5. Stable  

The article appears stable.
6. Illustrated  

Images are appropriately tagged.
I wonder, though, if the picture of the remodeled stadium is appropriate to this article.
The article has a good start, but needs more than a little work to pass GA Review.  I think it would be best to fix the issues above and nominate the article again later.  I am not listing the article at this time.  InTheAM 16:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:1985 European Cup Final/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 16:52, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
I'll be reviewing the article shortly. I'll add points below as I come across them. Miyagawa (talk) 16:52, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Image: All images are suitably tagged and appropriate to the article.
References: All the citations used are suitable and are all from reliable sources.
Lead: I was going to ask for Post-Match to be covered in the lead in more detail, but after re-reading the lead a couple more times, I think its fine as it is at the moment. After all, the disaster is covered in further detail in a different article and that's where the more appropriate to cover those sorts of issues in greater detail.
Route to Final: The link to Juventus' first round opponents is going to the wrong article. It should be going to FC Ilves which were the team that played Juventus - they merged with another team to become Tampere United some 13 years after the match in question.
"In the second round, Juventus were drawn against Swiss team Grasshopper. They won the first leg 2–0 in Italy" - "They" needs to be changed to Juventus, as on first reading I thought Grasshopper had won the first leg. The use of Juventus later in the sentence can be changed to "they" as it'll be clear then what club its referring to.
The first two sentences of the Liverpool section would be more appropriately located in the background section, especially as one of those sentences is essentially duplicated there.
Disaster: The cite needed tag needs to be fixed.
Otherwise I think the recent edits have really fixed up the article. Once those points above are addressed, this will meet all the Good Article requirements. Miyagawa (talk) 17:25, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, i've addressed all your comments. NapHit (talk) 18:18, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

I did a minor copyedit where some text had been moved around, and otherwise I think that this article meets the criteria and is therefore promoted to a Good Article. Miyagawa (talk) 12:44, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on 1985 European Cup Final. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120203203735/http://www.uefa.com/uefaeuropaleague/season%3D1991/overview/index.html to http://www.uefa.com/uefaeuropaleague/season%3D1991/overview/index.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111206105405/http://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/season%3D1984/overview/index.html to http://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/season%3D1984/overview/index.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111206105405/http://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/season%3D1984/overview/index.html to http://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/season%3D1984/overview/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:24, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 1985 European Cup Final. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111111063012/http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/history/timeline/1970-1995/fagan-steps-down-after-heysel-tragedy to http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/history/timeline/1970-1995/fagan-steps-down-after-heysel-tragedy
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:49, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:1956 European Cup Final which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 21:34, 6 January 2023 (UTC)