Talk:History of Tottenham Hotspur F.C.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:History of Tottenham Hotspur F.C./GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:31, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi - I'll make copyedits as I go (please revert if I inadvertently change the meaning) and jot queries below: Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:31, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

The club was formed as Hotspur F.C. by a group of schoolboys, and it was renamed Tottenham Hotspur F.C. in 1884. - the run on "and" is a bit jarring here....

NB: Don't use bold outside the lead section.

What suburbs are Willoughby Lane and Northumberland Road in? Not made clear..

@Casliber:,suburbs? I guess you are referring to the London Borough now, which is London Borough of Haringey. But, back then it was Municipal Borough of Tottenham part of Middlesex. Govvy (talk) 09:31, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Err, no, suburb, like "Walthamstow", "Ealing" or whatever. I assume they are all in Tottenham? I have not been to this part of North London....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:35, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

They are both in Tottenham. Northumberland Park is to the north of White Hart Lane, and Willoughby Lane joins Northumberland Park on its east. Hzh (talk) 12:36, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Tottenham now mentioned. Hzh (talk) 00:18, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

He also found new premises for the club after the boys were evicted from Percy House in 1884 for misdemeanours, first at 1 Dorset Villa on Northumberland Road where they stayed for two years, then to the Red House on High Road after they were again asked to leave, this time for playing cards in church - should there be a colon after misdemeanours?

Done. Hzh (talk) 12:43, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Any idea when "spurs" became a popular nickname? (obvious I know but...)

No idea, but I can add it if I find any source for that. However, we do know that a spur (the metal thing on boots rather than on cockerel) was used as an emblem for Tottenham Hotspur in 1900. (Spur is incidentally used in the logo for San Antonio Spurs). Hzh (talk) 12:24, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

The publicity also brought on board two individuals who would later run the club, Charles Roberts and a local businessman John Oliver who helped fund the club - reword so the word "club" is used only once.

Done. Hzh (talk) 12:59, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

In late 1912, Peter McWilliam was appointed manager and he would be manager for Spurs in two separate periods, both interrupted by world wars - avoid two "managers" in the one sentence and run on "and" not great...

Reworded and rearranged. Hzh (talk) 13:17, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

The rivalry begun six years earlier, when Arsenal's relocated from Plumstead to Highbury, a move opposed by Tottenham, Clapton Orient as well as Chelsea. - why "Arsenal's"?

I took the 's off the end of Arsenal there. Govvy (talk) 09:40, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

The White Hart Lane site, actually located behind Tottenham High Road, was a nursery owned by the brewery chain Charringtons. - why "actually" here?

It's because White Hart Lane is not located on White Hart Lane. White Hart Lane (the road) is I think about 200 yards from White Hart Lane (the old stadium). No one is quite sure why White Hart Lane (the stadium) is so named. Hzh (talk) 11:23, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

ok. Yeah that makes sense on a re-read Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:56, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

The club initially leased the ground from Charringtons, later in 1905, after issuing shares towards the cost of purchase, it bought the freehold for £8,900 and a further £2,600 for a piece of land at the northern end so that the club may develop the ground - this sentence needs splitting.

Reworded. Hzh (talk) 00:18, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

and he left as manager a year later on 20 July 1908.[ - the "as manager" is redundant and can be removed...

Done. Hzh (talk) 00:18, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Overall a good read - not too much to fix, a few tags etc. Well balanced. Am trying to give it a big as shove as possible towards FAC....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:25, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

NB: Free of copyvio  Done

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, a nice comprehensive read. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:36, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Featured nomination

Hi, this article appeared at Featured Article Review but that's only for pages that are already Featured Articles, and someone believes they should lose their Featured status. If you want to nominate for Featured status, you should go to Featured Article Candidates (FAC) and check the instructions there. I'd like to offer some advice before that, however. Firstly, everything in a Feature Article needs to be cited to a reliable source, and there are several paragraphs in this article that don't end in citations -- that needs to be rectified before FAC. Also it's a good idea to take articles to Peer Review before attempting FAC, so they can get some commentary outside the pressure of the FAC assessment process. Feel free to ask me any questions on the process. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:09, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

er? I don't know what I am doing, I am confused now... I feel like giving up, why is this so complicated. Govvy (talk) 10:12, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

@Ian Rose:, I am going back to my normal work, rental reviews and lease contracts are easier to understand than this process... Govvy (talk) 10:18, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Some of the processes may seem a bit complicated at first glance, that's why I'm trying to help by pointing you to the correct venue for what I think you're trying to achieve. Unfortunately there is an added block to you nominating this article for Featured status at WP:FAC, which is that you seem to have only a couple of edits to the page. Nominees of Featured Article Candidates are expected to be major contributors to the article, so that they're familiar with the prose and sources, and can field questions and criticism of the article during the FAC process. The next step would be to discuss such a nomination with the main editors, here on the talk page. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:21, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm not surprised I haven't done much editing on this one, because I mainly did the edits on Tottenham Hotspur F.C. it got copied over to this article at one point for being too large. Govvy (talk) 10:41, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

The article did start out as the history section of the main article, so Govvy is correct. I have made some additions to this article, and I would be happy to address any question or criticism on the article, so I'm fine with any nomination should Govvy want to do it. There are however a few issues that need addressing first (sourcing, a little rewriting, and general tidying up), and it may take a few weeks. Hzh (talk) 10:54, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

@Govvy: don't sweat it - I'll be happy to help out too. I will keep an eye for when Hzh reckons he's happy with the page to be sent to the snake pit. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:17, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

cheers, Would it be better if Hzh put the article forward then to FA? He has done a lot of work on it!! :) Govvy (talk) 11:38, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

There's no problem with two or more editors co-nominating an article at FAC -- only one of the editors can physically do the nominating, but the co-nom can put their name to the nomination page afterwards. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:49, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

That sounds good to me. Cas Liber can start the process off if he is happy to do it. As Govvy found out, it takes time to work out the procedure, if someone is willing to do it, then I'm more than OK with it. Hzh (talk) 11:53, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Yeah happy to do and list everyone as a nominator. The more the merrier as responding to issues raised quickly generally makes for a good FAC. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:30, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

@Hzh: are you happy with it? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:19, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

@Casliber: Could you give me until the end of the week? I'll try to finish it by then. Sorry that I haven't been giving it my full attention as I was preoccupied with something else. Hzh (talk) 09:33, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

No dramas, take all the time you need :) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:04, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

@Casliber: I think it is mostly done now. Although there are many parts in there that could still be improved, and there are always players, games and other events that can be mentioned, but tinkering with it could take ages, so it might be best to leave it for others to judge. It could do with a bit of copy-editing because I don't always notice the mistakes I make, and if you notice anything that needs fixing let me know. Hzh (talk) 01:22, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

I have been watching over your wiki-shoulder as we go. Nice work. I think it is good to go prose-wise - as there are three of us keeping an eye on the FAC we will be fine I think. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:19, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Nominated now (wolf-whistles) hey @Govvy:! check my contribs and you can see how it is done! In for a penny, in for a pound, this should go ok. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:26, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

@Casliber: Many thanks. I will keep an eye on it to see what response we get, and try to deal with any issues raised. Hzh (talk) 02:31, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Very cool, @Casliber:, @Hzh: Hopefully all goes well, cheers. Govvy (talk) 10:10, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Mourinho

@Yourlocallordandsavior, please stop adding content on Mourinho, it is excessive for someone who managed only one and a half seasons and did not win anything. It is WP:Recentism and does not reflect his significance in the club history. He at best warrants only a few sentences, and most of what you added will be deleted. Hzh (talk) 07:02, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Earnt

An uncommon, but valid UK English word for the past tense of earn.

• https://www.lexico.com/definition/earnt
• https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/earnt
• https://www.yourdictionary.com/earnt

--Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 19:07, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

• whichenglish.com Govvy (talk) 19:19, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
• I can find recent examples of earnt by the BBC, Times, Telegraph and Independent (the Guardian uses earned). —  Jts1882 | talk  08:35, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it is still common usage in British English (like "dreamt" or "learnt"), you can find in everywhere, from government and official organisations to newspaper - [1][2][3]. Using a website that says it is archaic would tell you something about that website, i.e. it is unreliable as far as British English is concerned. It is not archaic by any stretch of imagination, the most you can say is that it is less used nowadays. I don't really care one way or another and it is not an important issue, although WP:ENGVAR would permit it. Hzh (talk) 09:14, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

The whichenglish.com article appears to be the work of one person. His opinion is of interest, but certainly not authoritative. Yes, "earnt", along with "learnt", "leapt" and "dreamt" (but not, for some reason, "meant") , are becoming less common, as often happens with irregular verbs. But that's not a reason for removing it, and you can find frequent use of it,for instance, in discussions about footballers salaries. I'm not that bothered, but don't care for perfectly good words being erased from Wikipedia for bad reasons. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 09:34, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

I changed it back to earned from earnt, as earnt has a redline on my computer dictionary as a spelling mistake. But do as you wish. Govvy (talk) 09:41, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

The spelling of ‘earned’ as ‘earnt’ is non-standard in all languages, there is nothing 'perfectly good' about it. You won’t find it listed in the major dictionaries and any that do will flag it as non-standard (British or otherwise). Many people think of it as valid owing to their mispronunciation of the correct spelling, ‘earned’. We should not be using non-standard spelling in the general text of a Wikipedia article. Neils51 (talk) 05:06, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

How many surviving team members of the 60-61 double squad are still around today?

Aside from Cliff Jones. Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 21:37, 9 April 2022 (UTC)