Wikipedia:Peer review/Malmö FF/archive1

Malmö FF

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because to improve it would need an extra pair of eyes and I believe the article could reach "Good article" status or even "Featured article" status with some improvements and I would very much appreciate any opinions on how to reach these goals for this article. The section which needs most attention is the "Notable players" section, I'm having a hard time specifying the list criteria within this section, any suggestions will be appreciated. I will also happily accept any suggestions on new sections in the article or removing a section. I can also add that this article can be compared to related article IFK Göteborg, also a swedish football club with simular status as Malmö FF, an article which has reached FA status. I believe this article (Malmö FF) is equally as good as the IFK Göteborg article or even better.

Thanks, Reckless182 (talk) 17:41, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This sounds like a very good team that would be fun to follow. To reach GA with this article, you will at least need to improve the prose, add sources for the unsourced parts of the article, improve the layout, and make sure the image-description pages are complete and correct. I don't know enough about football to say whether or not the article is sufficiently broad in coverage, but it looks at least close. Here are my suggestions and comments.

LayoutY

• The Manual of Style suggests keeping images completely inside of the sections they illustrate. File:Malmoffplayers1962.jpg overlaps two sections and displaces a section head. It should be moved up into the "First years in Allsvenskan and early glory" section. Done
  • Moved into "First years in Allsvenskan and early glory" section.--Reckless182 (talk) 06:39, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

• File:Nya Malmö Stadion.jpg also overlaps two sections. Perhaps one of the three stadium images could go into another section, or perhaps one of the images could be deleted. Done
  • I moved one of the pictures into a section in the history section and kept the other two in the stadium section with one to the left and one to right.--Reckless182 (talk) 06:39, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

SourcingY

• Quite a few paragraphs in the article are without sources, and parts of other paragraphs are unsourced. In the "Early years" section, for example, the second and third paragraphs need sources. A good rule of thumb is to provide a source for every paragraph as well as every set of statistics, every direct quotation, and every claim that is unusual. If one source supports a whole paragraph, the inline citation should go at the very end of the paragraph. Typically, many paragraphs have multiple citations here and there inside them, as needed, as well as one at the end that covers at least the final sentence or sentences. If you look again at IFK Göteborg, you will see the pattern I am talking about.  Done
  • Will look into it and add more sources.--Reckless182 (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I have now put down a couple of hours to provide a source for every paragraph. Hopefully it is OK to satisfy GA criteria.--Reckless182 (talk) 21:34, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Subject-verb agreementY

• In the first sentence of the lead, "club" is matched with "is", a singular verb, but in the second sentence it is matched with a singular verb "has" and a plural pronoun "them". In a U.S.-centric article, the singular forms would be the norm, and in U.K.-centric articles the plural would be the norm. Thus in a U.S.-centric article the second sentence would read, "Formed in 1910, the club has won 16 national championship titles and 14 national cup titles, making it one of the most successful clubs in Sweden". In a U.K.-centric article, it would read, "Formed in 1910, the club have won 16 national championship titles and 14 national cup titles, making them one of the most successful clubs in Sweden". You can see the U.K. pattern in History of Bradford City A.F.C., for example. IFK Göteborg, which you mention above, begins like a U.S.-centric article, matching "club" with "it", but later in the lead matching "club" with "they". I see this as a flaw in the IFK Göteborg article, which is a good but not perfect model. Would a Swedish newspaper say "Malmö FF is" or "Malmö FF are"? Would it say "the club have won", or would it say, "the club has won"? My suggestion would be to choose one (club as a plural noun) or the other (club as a singular noun) and stick with it throughout the article. Done
  • I decided to use the UK format since it is the most used in Sweden, thus I've changed all singular form regarding the club to plural instead throughout the entire article.--Reckless182 (talk) 11:02, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

CopyeditingY

• I see a lot of small problems with grammar, punctuation, prose flow, wordiness, and the like throughout the article. I did a bit of copyediting near the beginning, but the whole article would benefit from copyediting. You might be able to find a willing copyeditor via WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests.  Done
  • After I've finished everything else I will request for someone to do a copyedit.--Reckless182 (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Copyedit request sent. Waiting for reply from WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests.--Reckless182 (talk) 23:02, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
      • Copyediting is being done by Demiurge1000 and will most likely be finished within the next day or two.--Reckless182 (talk) 09:50, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
        • Copeyediting by Demiurge1000 is now finished.--Reckless182 (talk) 23:14, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

ReferencesY

• The citations to Swedish-language publications and web sites should include the |language=Swedish parameter in the citation templates. See IFK Göteborg for examples of how this is done.  Done

Image licensesY

• The description page for File:GamlaIP.jpg includes a link in the "source" line, but the link is circular; it simply links to the image. Instead, it should link to the source in such a way that image reviewers will be able to verify that the image has been correctly licensed. Done
  • Working on it.--Reckless182 (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I've added a clarification in the description in the permission field, I've also corrected the link so that it can be verified.--Reckless182 (talk) 12:41, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

• The description page for File:Malmoffplayers1962.jpg includes a link to a newspaper, but where is the image? Can reviewers use this link to verify the license claims? Done
  • Working on it.--Reckless182 (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I've added a clarification in the description in the permission field, there should be no problem with verifying the correctly put license.--Reckless182 (talk) 12:41, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

• File:Guldlaget1944.jpg. Does this one have a valid license? How can reviewers be sure? Done
  • Working on it.--Reckless182 (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I've added a clarification in the description in the permission field, there should be no problem with verifying the correctly put license.--Reckless182 (talk) 12:41, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

• File:Nya Malmö Stadion.jpg. I don't see how reviewers can verify the license for this one.
  • Working on it.--Reckless182 (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Noticed the problem here, the original uploader is most certainly not the author and therefore the license can't be trusted. I think I might have an idea of who actually took the picture, I will try to veryfy this in some way or otherwise use File:Swedbank stadion 29 june 2009.jpg as a replacement.--Reckless182 (talk) 12:41, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
      • I've notified the author of the picture and he confirmed to me that the image is not in the public domain and that he has copyright. I have nominated the file for speedy deletion and I will replace it in the article with the previous mentioned image which is in the free domain without a doubt.--Reckless182 (talk) 15:26, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

A few other commentsY

• In the lede: "For this, Malmö FF were awarded the Svenska Dagbladet Gold Medal, as of 2010 the only club to have been so." - Maybe "as of 2010 the only club so honored"?  Done

• In "Early years": "... the club was relegated... " - Link to Promotion and relegation for readers unfamiliar with football leagues? Done

• In "First years in Allsvenskan and early glory": "The club had paid their players a small sum of money for each game, something which was against the rules at the time but which was common to do by many clubs;" - Perhaps "... which many clubs commonly did"?  Done

• In "First years in Allsvenskan and early glory": "The unofficial version of the events tells the story that it was in fact local rival IFK Malmö who reported this to the Swedish Football Association." - Tighten to "The unofficial version of events suggests that local rival IFK Malmö reported the violation to the Swedish Football Association"? Done

• In "First years in Allsvenskan and early glory": "Many of Malmö FF fans, especially among the older ones, still think of IFK Malmö's way of acting as an act of treason." - Tighten to "Many Malmö FF fans, especially older ones, still think of IFK Malmö's actions as treason"? Done

• In "First years in Allsvenskan and early glory": "In the same year legendary chairman Eric Persson was elected after being secretary since 1929, he would go on to serve as chairman until 1974." - Delete "legendary"? If you choose to keep "legendary", you should provide a source.  Done
  • I chose to remove "legendary" as it is hard to support the statement and I believe that it may be too subjective for the article, even though I am a fan of the club I want a neautral point of view.--Reckless182 (talk) 09:47, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 02:36, 17 December 2010 (UTC)