Wikipedia:Peer review/History of Tranmere Rovers F.C./archive2
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I'd like to get this article up to FA level. It was listed as GA earlier this year. However, it just scraped over the line, and I suspect needs a good deal of work before being of the required standard. I'd appreciate advice as to any changes needed. Thanks! U+003F? 14:16, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Brianboulton comments:-
I am afraid that because of pressures of time, this will be a fairly swift review. If it is your intention to take this to FAC, a fair amount of work is necessary:-
- The lead will need to be expanded, to become a concise summary of the whole article.
- There should be a general beefing up of the content, parts of which are rather skimpy. For example, we are told "Rovers continued to play throughout the First World War, although their players were criticised for avoiding military service, despite being employed in the local shipyards." What kind of games did they play, against whom, in what competitions, etc? And why did Barnes's managership last only five months? These are just examples; I found the whole article written in a rather anecdotal, episodic fashion.
- The general prose is reasonably good, though there is some carelessness. For example, grammatical glitches in "...in 1912 they showed their ambition by moving to the present Prenton Park site, with 800-seater stand"; and "King's first task was to avoid finishing bottom of Division Four and be relegated". A copyedit from a noninvolved editor would be an advantage.
- It's OK to say "Tranmere Rovers are..." But the plural doesn't really work when you say: "The football club were formed..." Also, "The football club were formed as Belmont Football Club..." is awkwardly repetitous. Something like "The club was formed as Belmont Football Club..." would resolve this.
- You should avoid using "today" or "to this day" as indicators of time, since these are inspecific. Give a year, e.g. "as of 2011"
- Statements of editorial opinion should be avoided. For example: "The 1999–2000 season was momentous in the club's history", and "Tranmere Rovers went one better in the 1990–91 season..." Use of terms such as "just" (as in "aged just 16 years" and "winning just six matches") also deviate from neutrality.
- There are a few (not too many) lapses into footballspeak, e.g. ""Such glories were short-lived", "first piece of silverware", etc. These, too should be avoided.
- As to sources, there appears to be a club history: Tranmere Rovers: The Complete Record by Gilbert Upton, Steve Wilson and Peter Bishop. Why is this not used as a source for this article?
I hope that these points give you useful indicators of the areas on which work is needed, and that you will be able to develop the article accordingly. Brianboulton (talk) 23:31, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks a bunch for taking the time to review the article. As you say, the main issue seems to be a lack of depth to the article. I have access to some other sources not referenced here, which will help to beef up detail. However, I've found the new source you mention - The Complete Record - very difficult to get hold of. A couple of specific questions
- - I can address the specific issues you mention, but do you have any advice for going about getting "a copyedit from a noninvolved editor"?
- - Are you sure about your comment on use of the discretionary plural? Whilst I don't think either form (singular or plural) is more correct, I have tended to prefer Tranmere/the club/the team were...
- Thanks again.
U+003F?14:37, 10 October 2011 (UTC)