Talk:History of Cardiff City F.C. (1899–1962)
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Casliber in topic GA Review
 | History of Cardiff City F.C. (1899–1962) has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: January 21, 2020. (Reviewed version). |
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:History of Cardiff City F.C. (1899–1962)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:58, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
Okay - I'll make copyedits as I go (please revert if I inadvertently change the meaning) and jot queries below: Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:58, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
There might not be any sources but do we know anything else of Riverside Albion? Also what was the Bevan Shield?
- There's no real record of Albion I can find other than they were a similar local amateur team. I've expanded slightly on the Bevan Shield. Kosack (talk) 19:32, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
When they applied to become Cardiff City, had they become the pre-eminent club in Cardiff? Did that need to be a factor?
- No I don't believe so, in fact they were rejected the first time. It seems more like Bartley Wilson was trying to boost the club's reputation by carrying the name of the city more than anything. Kosack (talk) 19:32, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
- ...
Cardiff were forced to turn down the opportunity...- meaning they were denied...?- Reworded
Spiers would depart the club a second time in 1954, having believed to have fallen out with chairman Herbert Merrett again over the signing of Trevor Ford.- Spiers didn't want him and Merrett did....or the other way around?
- I've expanded on this to hopefully make the situation clearer. Kosack (talk) 19:32, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
All quibbles - looks pretty good otherwise. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:28, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Casliber: Thanks for the review apologies it took me a few days to address these. Let me know what you think. Kosack (talk) 19:32, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
1. Well written?:
- Prose quality:
- Manual of Style compliance:
2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:
- References to sources:
- Citations to reliable sources, where required:
- No original research:
3. Broad in coverage?:
- Major aspects:
- Focused:
4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:
- Fair representation without bias:
5. Reasonably stable?
- No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):
6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:
- Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
- Pass or Fail: - great, well done. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:22, 21 January 2020 (UTC)