Talk:List of GNK Dinamo Zagreb seasons

General tips

I'm sorry that this has taken so long. I was busy last week, and then the final push for Wikipedia:Today's featured list came up. I'll give some general pointers first, and will be happy to do things like copyediting, alt text, technical fixes etc when it's all up and running:

• First up, leave sorting until you're very confident that everything else has been finalised. It's a nightmare to re-arrange a table with sort keys in it.
• There are two ways to go with the lead. The first way is the Watford approach: telling the history of the club in ~4 paragraphs, picking out the highlights and low seasons as you go. The second is to outline the club's history in one fairly big paragraph, and use a second paragraph to highlight the records. Both appear to be valid approaches, so it very much depends on what you think would be easier.
• The bolding should be moved from the table, per MOS:BOLD. For wins, the gold background is sufficient. For top scorers in the division, consider an approach similar to that used in List of Watford F.C. seasons (feel free to pick a colour more relevant to Dinnamo Zagreb though).
• No need to link 1. JSL in the table, as it's already linked in the key.
• Whenever you change information, as you did in late May, you need to update the corresponding accessdates. Not all of them, just the ones for sources that reference the updated information.

Hope that helps for now. Let me know when you want a bit more. —WFC— 10:29, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for comments, I appreciate it and find them helpful. Sorry for taking a few days to reply but I've unexpectedly been busy recently in other Wiki areas. This list is very much a work in progress and I'm aware that it still has some way to go so I wanted some feedback from someone who has experience in this kind of content to get some sense of direction where I should focus on next (btw the TFL is a great idea, looking forward to seeing it implemented). Anyway, I think I'll devote more time to this in the following week. From what you said the lead section should be taken care of first and I'll play with it in the sandbox a bit to see if I can come up with a good summary of club's history. This will probably be the most difficult part - finding a good balance between concise and informative vs. overly short/long and overly detailed will need some work. As for the table itself - smaller fixes like de-bolding can be done quickly but I was hoping to establish an ideal table layout first and then take it from there. I'm OK with re-compiling the table from scratch if need be but this is the second or third table I've done already and I want to be sure that the next format will be final. There are also minor issues as to how to present some data:

• In 1946, immediately following WWII, a one-off Zagreb municipal championship was held, which acted as a qualifier for the short SR Croatia league, which in turn was a qualifier for the first post-war nationwide league edition. Should I list all these competitions in the table or not? Most sources do not consider them as a separate season and talk about them in prose.
• In the 1. HNL from 1992 onwards the club also participated in several edition of the Croatian Super Cup. I left that out of the table because some of the seasons seemed unnecessarily stretched too much vertically if the Super Cup was added to the "Europe/other" section. Maybe making separate columns for "Europe" and "Other" would fix this?
• Should every other row be shaded? :) I really don't know which version looks better so I need some fresh input on this.
• Should it be broken up into two tables at all? I mean, it does make sense as the league thoroughly changed amid political circumstances of the early 1990s, but I've also seen some tables which ignored any changes to the football system and simply listed everything in continuity.
• One of the sources I intend to rely on is a yearbook published by the club issued in 1985. However, it does not have an ISBN. Is this a problem?

Well, that's all I can think of for now. Thanks for your help and feel free to comment further. I'll start with trying to compile some decent lead section in my sandbox. Cheers. Timbouctou (talk) 15:56, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

• • My understanding from what you have said is that the statistics were considered unofficial, but the results did matter to an extent. I would therefore suggest a span in the table (such as the one Watford uses for 1915–1917), with a more comprehensive explanation in a footnote.
  • I'd recommend going all the way, and giving the Super Cup its own column. Dinamo are a dominant team in Croatia, and it can reasonably be assumed that they will continue to participate more often than not.
  • I don't think it really matters: I've seen FLs with and without. If it suddenly becomes an issue, it's easily removed.
  • Personally I'd keep it as two, for ease of comparison. The Super Cup adds another reason to keep them separate.
  • The lack of an ISBN wouldn't automatically be a problem, but it depends on what other information you have. It's analogous to using an offline newspaper archive, or using a reputable television or radio news broadcast as a source. My best suggestion would be to start a thread at WP:RSN, giving as much information about the book as possible, and see where that leads.

Hope that helps —WFC— 19:35, 10 June 2011 (UTC)