Talk:Lewandowski signs contract extension with Bayern Munich
German edit
Depending on the details it may be possible to carefully handle a source in German. However, this is one of only two sources here and I suspect it will require advanced knowledge of German. Such little German as I had (never sufficient for review) has decayed. I'm not sure we have anybody capable of reviewing this. BRS (Talk) (Contribs) 18:59, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Blood Red Sandman: in the sports articles related to transfer, I generally list the article in its native language, here, being German. But, I also add the link to the English version of the same article which is the exact translation of the German version. The reason why I do this is for the {{translated quote}}.
Agastya Chandrakant ⚽️ 🏆 🎾 🎬 🎤 📰 20:34, 14 December 2016 (UTC)- @AGastya: BRS's reaction may demonstrate a good reason to separately list both the English and German versions. --Pi zero (talk) 23:12, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Review of revision 4270051 [Not ready] edit
 |
Revision 4270051 of this article has been reviewed by Blood Red Sandman (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 15:44, 15 December 2016 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: Adding and removing sources is pushing it for a reviewer, but here it essentially involved rearranging links already supplied. Thus, while I could have failed right off the bat, I wanted to take a shot at least at fixing it. Now we have a mess; the translated quote is wrong, I'm not readily convinced it is in fact translated all that accurately, and as reviewer I'm not entirely comfortable with declaring a source no longer used and ditching it. (This may be easiest, although not satisfying, in terms of a quick fix and resubmitting.) Incidentally... Two articles in the queue about football is a lot for this project. It clogs the queue because these tend to use technical language, tend to be of little interest to reviewers, and tend to have been widely covered to any audience who cares. They therefore represent high effort and low reward to review. While they moulder on the review queue, the writing of hard news is discouraged to avoid adding further to the queue. A challenging review of an under-reported story, often major events in Africa or Asia, can be genuinely rewarding to review because any obstacles you face are worth it. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews. |
Revision 4270051 of this article has been reviewed by Blood Red Sandman (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 15:44, 15 December 2016 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: Adding and removing sources is pushing it for a reviewer, but here it essentially involved rearranging links already supplied. Thus, while I could have failed right off the bat, I wanted to take a shot at least at fixing it. Now we have a mess; the translated quote is wrong, I'm not readily convinced it is in fact translated all that accurately, and as reviewer I'm not entirely comfortable with declaring a source no longer used and ditching it. (This may be easiest, although not satisfying, in terms of a quick fix and resubmitting.) Incidentally... Two articles in the queue about football is a lot for this project. It clogs the queue because these tend to use technical language, tend to be of little interest to reviewers, and tend to have been widely covered to any audience who cares. They therefore represent high effort and low reward to review. While they moulder on the review queue, the writing of hard news is discouraged to avoid adding further to the queue. A challenging review of an under-reported story, often major events in Africa or Asia, can be genuinely rewarding to review because any obstacles you face are worth it. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews. |
Review of revision 4270101 [Passed] edit
 |
Revision 4270101 of this article has been reviewed by Blood Red Sandman (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 17:46, 15 December 2016 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: I'm pleased this proved to be a quick fix. On very careful examination, my concerns about the source's translation of its own quote appear unjustified. As far as my limited knowledge allows, it looks correct. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer. |
Revision 4270101 of this article has been reviewed by Blood Red Sandman (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 17:46, 15 December 2016 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: I'm pleased this proved to be a quick fix. On very careful examination, my concerns about the source's translation of its own quote appear unjustified. As far as my limited knowledge allows, it looks correct. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer. |