Talk:Counter Logic Gaming

Pre-review

This article needs plenty of work before it's GA-ready.

1. It has a lot of information but little of it is reader-ready—the prose needs to explain jargon and simply exclude or rephrase large swaths of name lists of no benefit to the reader. Remember that this is an encyclopedia and the target is not to maintain records of games lost/won (there are other wikis for that) but of the notable events and summaries of the commentary that go along with it.
2. The lede paragraphs do not completely summarize the article's text.
3. File:Counter Logic Gaming Dota team at The International 2012.jpg should be removed—there is nothing in the text that requires a non-free image to portray their faces. Even if there will be no more photo ops for the team, photos of the players can be assembled separately as they are living people.

 czar 22:10, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

@Czar: Thanks for the swift reply. You haven't actually said what should be changed in regards to points one and two. I can't see what you might feel was jargon, nor what was not a notable event in regards to this team? I could easily trim quite a lot off the article, but I'm not sure which bits you would regard as not relevant. Fred BR (talk) 03:20, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Agree with Czar, the article reads like a gaming report. Here's some gems:

• team's first major accomplishment
• This victorious roster was not to last long however;
• Despite a strong semifinal performance against SK Gaming
• Despite having their most successful
• CLG.EU pulled out a slow and methodical victory in an extremely close showing

The page is written like a story by a fan. Can some of tournament results just be put in a table? WP:VAGUE really needs applying. The facebook sources are unlikely to be reliable.--Vaypertrail (talk) 13:38, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

@Vaypertrail: Hey have fixed the things you pointed out, apart from your fourth example, the season was numerically their most successful, they placed first as opposed to below first. Are major tournaments not relevant to the general history of the team, if they're not I can change that but I'm not sure that's the case. I'm not sure how the player's personal facebooks aren't reliable sources for announcements about them? Fred BR (talk) 13:59, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

@Vaypertrail: Wikipedia prefers summary style information, so unless there's very compelling reason not to keep to prose tram history, it should stay. I do agree it could use some POV work though.--Prisencolin (talk) 16:56, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Another thing, the achievements section can't just a listing of third place or higher finishes. First, its skews the information of the page to be overly positive thus is not in neutral point of view and second, the cut off of 3rd place is pretty arbitrary.--Prisencolin (talk) 01:44, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Counter Logic Gaming/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 19:44, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

I'll take this. JAGUAR  19:44, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Initial comments

• "is a North American eSports organization" - define North American? Is it associated with Canada and Mexico too? I note that its current roster has members from South Korea and the Philippines
• "as a League of Legends teams" - team (no plural needed)
• "CLG fields the oldest League of Legends (LoL)" - its abbreviation (LoL) should be included at its first mentioned, which is in the first paragraph in the lead

• Furthermore, the abbreviation isn't included anywhere else in the article so it may as well be removed here

• "going out in the group stage on both occasions" - 'going out' sounds vague, does this mean they were eliminated?
• "and Call of Duty (CoD) teams" - CoD abbreviation isn't included in the body either
• "The organisation" - organization
• "Located in Southern California" - the lead states it's located in Los Angeles
• "after the ruling regarding the poaching of William "Scarra" Li from Dignitas" - 'poaching'? What happened?
• "The team was heavily favoured to take" - favored
• "so not much was expected of CLG.CS as they progressed to the LAN stage of the tournament." - informal
• There's a dubious tag in the Super Smash Bros. section. Needs to be dealt with before this can pass
• The Notable Tournament Results section is unencyclopaedic and problematic. I would strongly recommend removing it as a whole

On hold

It's comprehensive, but a bit iffy with some minor prose errors, contradictions and numerous tags. I'll leave this on hold for the standard seven days, and if all of the above are addressed then I'll take another look at it. JAGUAR  20:00, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

@Jaguar:Have fixed the issues you raised, do let me know if anything else is wrong and I will fix it asap. Fred BR (talk) 07:12, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for addressing them, I've gone through the article again and I can conclude this meets the criteria. Well done JAGUAR  14:26, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments

One fact that seems to be overlooked during the GA assessment is that this article is almost completely reliant on non-reliable websites like HLTV and GosuGamers. Perhaps a reassessment is needed.--Prisencolin (talk) 18:54, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Split

Probably needs to be split at some point, sooner or later.--Prisencolin (talk) 05:12, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Only when warranted by reliable, secondary sources czar 22:07, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Community reassessment

Counter Logic Gaming

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:03, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

I came across several maintenance templates on this article just now, and would like for someone to further assess the matter. A good article cannot have these templates. Cognissonance (talk) 07:17, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

• Primary or unreliable sources up the wazoo. This is an easy delist. --Izno (talk) 14:10, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
• Delist: At no point should this article have been promoted. Pardon my soapbox, but we need higher standards than this, especially for the subject of esports. DARTHBOTTO _talk•cont 01:17, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
• Speedy Delist - Echoing others this shouldn't have been promoted. There are too many issues with this article and I believe this should be immediately demoted. GamerPro64 01:47, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
• I agree it should be delisted. Requesting that an uninvolved editor close the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure. –Cognissonance (talk) 06:03, 15 June 2017 (UTC)