Talk:History of Bradford City A.F.C.

GA review

I'll skip the introductions, as you already know me. I'll be reviewing the article shortly (after my sandbox is freed up of the other review). Noble Story (talk) 10:26, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

The review is now posted at my here. Noble Story (talk) 10:50, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

After taking the liberty of making a few small changes, there are a few more small things to clean up:

In "Lower divisions (1946–1981)" the sentence "In 1960, eight years after the ground's Midland Road stand had been half-closed following examinations of the foundations ordered as a result of the 1946 Burnden Park disaster, the entire stand was closed, leaving the ground with just three stands," I'm not really sure what you mean by stands. A little clarification might be helpful.

In "Bantam progressivism (1981–1990)", the last sentence of the first paragraph says, "Despite not recording their first for more than two months the pair guided City to 12th position." The first what? The next sentence also says "In June 1983, Martin called in the receivers and the club was put up for sale." Who or what were the receivers? Noble Story (talk) 02:26, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Stands are the different areas of the ground. It's fully explained what the stands are at Valley Parade itself. I'm not sure I can add a concise explanation to be honest, which would be suited to a history article.

I've fixed the other two. Peanut4 (talk) 02:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Review of History of Bradford City A.F.C.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   The article does not have images, but I'm fine with that, as it's not required for GA status.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

After reviewing this article to the best of my ability, I deem this a Good Article. Noble Story (talk) 04:00, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Games?

"Games" sounds like an Americanism, and "matches" is almost never used here. Is this correct, or should we switch most uses of "game" to "match"? Nyttend (talk) 00:03, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

They're interchangeable as far as I am concerned. GiantSnowman 13:20, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

How is this today's FA?

Originally reviewed for FA in 2008 and it has not been substantially updated since 2010 - how on earth is this an FA in 2015? GiantSnowman 13:29, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Bantam progressivism

Is there a reason why it was called that? Brutannica (talk) 17:06, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

I'll have a look in my copy of the Terry Frost book when I am next home (maybe tonight) to see if it's mentioned there. GiantSnowman 17:42, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Lovely Article but...

Once again, and though I may be a lone voice in the pursuit of this, I will state that Bradford City IS a football club. I have not edited lest the inevitable flame war starts. The majority rules on Wikipedia, but it is not always correct. 94.14.54.88 (talk) 12:12, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Um who is saying it is not...? GiantSnowman 12:48, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

He(?)'s referring to the opening sentence, that reads

Bradford City Association Football Club—also known informally as Bradford City—are an English football club founded in...

He's right, as well. Bradford City the football club is a single entity so should take a singular verb, Bradford City the football team takes the discretionary plural. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 14:17, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on History of Bradford City A.F.C.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080117214756/http://www.bradfordcityfc.premiumtv.co.uk:80/page/History/0,,10266~91540,00.html to http://www.bradfordcityfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/History/0,,10266~91540,00.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080414205627/http://www.brentfordfc.premiumtv.co.uk:80/page/LatestNews/0,,10421~1286943,00.html to http://www.brentfordfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/LatestNews/0,,10421~1286943,00.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080302231122/http://football.guardian.co.uk:80/Match_Report/0,,-17801,00.html to http://football.guardian.co.uk/Match_Report/0,,-17801,00.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081026093613/http://archive.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk:80/1999/12/15/158501.html to http://archive.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/1999/12/15/158501.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090111163249/http://archive.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk:80/2004/6/17/99852.html to http://archive.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/2004/6/17/99852.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100211102631/http://www.bradfordcityfc.co.uk:80/page/News/0,,10266~1958761,00.html to http://www.bradfordcityfc.co.uk/page/News/0,,10266~1958761,00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:47, 23 February 2016 (UTC)