# Talk:India national football team at the Olympics

This following article is well written piece, thoroughly researched and presented without neglecting any important information. 
By FA Criteria, I hope it meets all 5 points, that is 
(a) well written as summarised as prose and hope of professional standard 
(b) comprehensive as it does not neglect any vital or important information as the article leans to history, it accounts all sphere of events, 
(c)well researched, almost every part is provided with consistent citation with high quality reliable sources 
(d) neutral and a stable article as no edit wars or conflicts or vandalism or any such things happened till date. 
With that, it is well structured with a good lead and summary along with photographs of events and is not lengthy and but covers all historical events happened. I hope the article is well maintained and  deserves a FA status. Please do review and assess the article status. 
Thanks Dey subrata (talk) 20:17, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:India national football team at the Olympics/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Kosack (talk · contribs) 14:09, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

I'll pick this one up. Review to follow. Kosack (talk) 14:09, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments
@Kosack: I want to bring to your notice that I have taken the article to the peer review once for "FA" status, and I have mentioned all the reasoning there how the article was cosntructed keeping in view, all the needed criteria for FA status. Though waiting for 1 month I got no comment or suggestions. But some editors did reviwed and notified me but no comments were put or any kind of suggestions. So for this reason, I thought let the article be nominated for "GA" status if not "FA" status. But I think it could have been nominated for FA, if you think that its well enough to nominate for FA status, please let me know, what more can be done to proceed towards that. But before that let make it better or if there is any mistakes or errors, lets rectify that first. Thank you. Dey subrata (talk) 14:42, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Review


### 1948 Olympics
"the 1948 Games", link the first mention of the games here to the relevant year.
Coach doesn't need the capital letter.
"from easy wins", easy is slightly subjective language.
Don't disguise external links as wiki links, as you have done with Pinner FC.
"trooped out", "sailed over", "forever etching his name", "was splashed in the newspapers", some rather journalistic language is used here.
Why are you using foreign language wiki links for French players such as Guy Rouxel and René Courbin when we have pages here for them?
Stay consistent with how you use numbers. For example, we have both 11 and eleven used in concurrent paragraphs when referring to the starting line-up.
@Kosack: Done, all the above issues are resolved. the foreign language wiki link were used as when I created the article, there were no English wiki article on those players, still you can see Gunnar Dahlner article is not there, so only Gunnar Dahlner name is linked to the French wiki. Rest all other issues are done according to your concern.Dey subrata (talk) 21:02, 18 September 2019 (UTC)


### 1964–present
"was played by senior national teams.[1] and between these years", you've got a full stop here but the sentence carries on anyway. There are several more instances of this in the first paragraph here.
"by the Senior national team", no need to capitalise senior.
@Kosack: Above to issues are done accordingly. Dey subrata (talk) 21:05, 18 September 2019 (UTC)


### Records
Is there some sort of summary reference that can be included to support the table?
@Kosack: Added a summary for the records section. please let me know it need to be curtailed or not. Dey subrata (talk) 22:05, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
A summary section is good, try not to repeat too much info already used in the article. But what I meant was is there a reference that can be added to the table as it appears unsourced in its current form. Kosack (talk) 12:22, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
@Kosack: Sorry I missed your comment earlier, ok I will try to keep it simple. Already added the references as you asked, but the lines that I added for records are not repeated as most is about qualification round, the lines I added on match summary is looking little repetitive, So I changed keeping just one line. And added a line at the records of number of match played and win loss count. See if its ok now. Dey subrata (talk) 14:34, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
The line I added at the summary is about the biggest win and biggest defeat. Dey subrata (talk) 14:48, 21 September 2019 (UTC)


### Goal Scorers
Goalscorers is one word.
@Kosack: If you are mentioning about the image, then its corrected, I think its the only one. Dey subrata (talk) 22:16, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
The heading itself is what I was referring to. On a similar note, headings are not used in title case, so capital letters are only need for the first word. So, for example, Match Summary > Match summary and Team Squads > Team squads. Kosack (talk) 12:25, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
@Kosack: Missed this comment too. Ya now i think its done. Dey subrata (talk) 14:35, 21 September 2019 (UTC)


### References
Refs 5 and 15 are only bare urls, these need more information, publisher, dates, etc.
Avoid shouting in ref titles per WP:ALLCAPS.
The RSSSF refs all have available authors.
Some of the FIFA links appear to have expired, see if these can be recovered through archiving.
Unfortunately, I'm going to fail this one for now. There are serious grammar issues throughout that need to be addressed and fall short of the GA criteria. For example, the opening sentence "First time football played in Olympic Games", makes little sense. What I will say is that you have the starting point for a GA, content wise I think you're on the right track, you've got some good detail, but the article falls down on the grammar I'm afraid. I would suggest perhaps requesting a copyedit at the WP:GOCE for some assistance in finetuning the prose. If you can find a good copy editor willing to work on this then I think it would be worth another nomination along with the issues I noted above. Kosack (talk) 20:12, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@Kosack: Surely, I will work on the issues you have discussed above and will get back to you. By the way is that ok, if I further discuss about the matter with you from time to time?  Thank you. Dey subrata (talk) 20:41, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Yes of course, if you have any questions feel free to drop me a message. Kosack (talk) 20:44, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
@Kosack: for the reference section, I have removed all shouting, corrected those urls, added authors' names. And as you have mentioned section wise I corrected all that was listed above. But only thing I can't do is "archiving". I really don't know how to do that. Except this I think I have gone through and corrected all possible issues that you have mentioned. Please let me know if there is any other thing that to be corrected and please, that archiving I really can't do, it will be helpful if you can do it. Thank you. Dey subrata (talk) 22:51, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
I'm happy to do it for you but I'll be away this weekend so my editing will be pretty light. If you want to have a crack yourself Help:Using the Wayback Machine is a good place to start. Kosack (talk) 12:28, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Ok, let me try, if I can I will let you know. And I think you are right let me request a copy edit. That will be better to tune up the article more. Dey subrata (talk) 14:40, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
@Kosack: Hi, as you asked, added references to the Summary section and modified the article by adding few lines in summary and record sections. Please see if its satisfying. And tried for the archiving but failed so you please do it. Thank you in adv. Dey subrata (talk) 16:55, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild: Need few archiving here. Dey subrata (talk) 21:11, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
@Gog the Mild: Sorry again bringing you here, need 2 newly added reference archiving. Dey subrata (talk) 14:15, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

@Twofingered Typist: I am satisfied with your copyedit. But I would like to know from the @Kosack: who reviewed and worked with to make the article interesting. I will wait for his response. Dey subrata (talk) 14:55, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

The article is in much better shape now from a quick look. Twofingered Typist is a good copyeditor and the prose is much smoother. There are still some issues here and there but it could probably get through a GA nom now with a reviewer willing to work alongside you on it. My main concern in failing this the first time was the prose seemed to be written as if English was a second language which would have required a significant rewrite, too much for a GA review. This is not really a concern now given the extensive work you have done to the page. Kosack (talk) 18:32, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
@Kosack: Thank you again, going for nomination now. Would like to have your comment there, and also any suggestion once you find any thing. Dey subrata (talk) 19:19, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:India national football team at the Olympics/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: MWright96 (talk · contribs) 20:58, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Going to review this article. MWright96 (talk) 20:58, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  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 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): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 


### Lead
Wikilink Olympic sport to Olympic sports and Summer Olympics to Summer Olympic Games
"An Indian team last participated in the 1960 games." - The word "games" should be captalised in this instance
"India's best showing was at the 1956 Summer Olympics where its team reached the semi-finals." - try to use another more formal word other than "showing"
"the rules were changed so that only under-23 national teams are allowed to compete in the games." - same issue as the first query in this subsection
"has yet to qualify for the Olympics football competition." - Olympic


### Warm-up
"The Indian team decided to wear shoes if the conditions were wet (rainy) and if they had to play on soft grounds As conditions were dry," - you don't need to include the brackets and the word rainy
Also with regards to the sentence mentioned above, a full stop should be inserted after the word "ground" and before the word "As"
"Of the eleven players who took the field against France eight players were bootless, three wore boots." - barefooted would be better


### The match
Wikilink penalty kick to the appropriate article
"Vajravelu (a substitute)" - better; substitute B.N. Vajravelu
" was saved by the French goalkeeper Rouxel." - full names please; Gaston Rouxel
 Fixed all above from Lead. Dey subrata (talk) 18:58, 17 February 2020 (UTC)


### Media and appreciation
"earned them no less a fan than" - more formal; admiration
" the younger sister of Queen Elizabeth II." - don't think that this is relevant on the whole. Also, Elizabeth was not the queen in 1948.
"telling him it was just to check if the Indian" - the text in bold here is unencyclopedia. he or the latter would suffice instead
"the AIFF decided to extend the tour" - spell out the full meaning of the AIFF in full
 Fixed, except second point, need to add that info. cause there are multiple Princess Margaret.Dey subrata (talk) 18:58, 17 February 2020 (UTC)


### 1952, 1956, and 1960 Olympics
The second paragraph should be split into two with the new one beginning with the mention of India failing to reach the final of the 1956 Olympics
"But four years later, at the 1956 Olympics at Melbourne, India had its best outing at the games - better; Four years later at the 1956 Olympics in Melbourne, India attained its best outing at the Games
"The team was led by Samar Banerjee and India's most successful coach Syed Abdul Rahim" - a comma is required at the end of this portion of text
"who coached the team at both the 1952 and 1960 Olympics." - Rahim coaching at the 1952 Olympics is not mentioned by the goal.com source attached to it but it does for the 1960 Olympics. Please find another source that verifies it
"They got a walkover as Hungary did not participate." - better to avoid WP:LIMITED; The team received a walkover because Hungary did not play.
Wikilink walkover for those unfamiliar with sports
"Then in the 33rd minute D'Souza converted a cross from P.K.Banerjee" - it should be P.K. Banerjee
"D'souza scored the opening goal in the match for India" - D'Souza
"from a melee between Indian striker Kannayan and Australian goalkeeper Lord." - should be Ron Lord.
"At 1960 Olympics at Rome," - At the 1960 Olympics in Rome,
"The team was led by P.K Banerjee" - same issue as the fourth issue in this section
"In the second match Banerjee's goal at 71st minute" - in the
"one each in the matches against Hungary and Peru both of which India lost." - add a comma between the words "Peru" and "both"
"Thanks to two losses and a draw," - more formal With two losses and a draw,
"This was the last time India qualified for the Olympics in football." - This sentence requires a reliable source to allow the user to independently verify the information


### 1964–present
"the qualifying matches of the 1992 Olympics to the 2012 Olympics" - better; every qualifying match from the 1992 to 2012 Olympic Games
"India has yet to qualify for the AFC U-23 Championship and thus for the Olympics since then." - This sentence will require a reliable source to be placed at the end of it so that it can be verified independently
 Fixed all above from 1952.... to present. Dey subrata (talk) 18:59, 17 February 2020 (UTC)


### Records
The paragraph should be divided into two with the new paragraph beginning at the mention of India's participation in the 1960 Olympics
"and managed one win, one draw, and lost in six other matches" - six of them to avoid reptition of the word "matches" in the same sentence
"in eight matches by six different teams." - better; six games by six squads.
Wikilink bye to Bye (sports)
"as Republic of China and Philippines withdrew from the qualification round." - as the Republic of China and the Philippines teams
"which India failed to qualify till date, thus failed to qualify for the Olympics too." - more concise; which India failed to progress from.
 Fixed all but except six games by six squads, it will change the meaning and info. as match/games played are eight. Actually I think it should be conceded against. Dey subrata (talk) 19:04, 17 February 2020 (UTC)


### Match summary
"their biggest win in the Olympics' history."- Olympic
"The most goals were conceded in a 1–10 loss" - better; The most goals the team conceeded were in a 1–10 loss
"their biggest defeat to date." - can be largest for variety


### Reference
References 5, 6, 7, 38 should include the authors of the respective sources
Reference 11 should include the page numbers that the information it cites is located and the name of its publisher
The title in Reference 26 is incomplete
Reference 43 would benefit if Asian News International was mentioned as the news agency who provided the story to Business Story
Reference 44 should mention the Press Trust of India is the agency who provided the story to India Today
All of the newspaper sources, such as The Times of India, The Hindu, Business Standard, The Morung Express, The Economist and India Today, should use the Template:Cite news template instead of the Template:Cite web template
 Fixed all from Match summary. Dey subrata (talk) 19:04, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Overall there are issues with the grammar and there are a lack of wikilinks of football specific terms that the general audience may not understand. There is also one piece of unverified information and some missing parameters in some of the sources. On hold. MWright96 (talk) 14:44, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

MWright96, I have fixed all concerns, except two of the issues which I have highlighted, one in Media & appreciation and another in Records. The rest looks fine to me. Dey subrata (talk) 19:07, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
@Dey subrata: Now promoting to GA class. MWright96 (talk) 20:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you MWright96. Dey subrata (talk) 20:15, 17 February 2020 (UTC)