Talk:Millwall F.C./GA2

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Brad78 (talk) 10:27, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment

I'm afraid I'm going to have to fail this article again. I've spent a fair time reviewing it and making some changes, but I feel there's still a lot of work to do. There is an awful lot good with the article, but there's some not so good things. I've given you a full peer review below, which should help with a lot of stuff. It's possible that I could have kept it on hold, but I feel that it would be easier for you to get a full peer review or other help to get it passed properly without putting the pressure of it being on hold. And secondly, I just feel there's a bit too much to do or think about to put it on hold.

I would seriously suggest three options or all three.

Get a peer review at WP:PR and find editors who may help out on this type of article. NB, I've given my own peer review below.
Seek help at WP:FOOTY.
Read over some other similar articles, which are either featured or good.

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
There's a lot good with the prose, but I've given a review below. Particular problems are WP:MOS issues, some items in the lead not elsewhere and a few grammar issues. Also the history section does not flow well in places and I think needs at least a fresh pair of eyes.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
There's a lot of POV in the article. Some of it comes across as very pro-Millwall. There's also some terms and sentences which need referencing. The references also need cleaning up to give full publisher and/or newspaper details, even simply The Yorkshire Post, rather than yorkshirepost.co.uk. Freelibrary is not the publisher either - if you look at that article, it was original in The Journal, in Newcastle. Nor am I sure about how reliable some sources are such as millwallprints, millwall-history, gonedigging, comedians, ruinedendings, etc are.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Just about fine here. Though I've got concerns about the recentism of the history section. E.g. The last section covers three years yet is six paragraphs long and goes into individual signings. The first section covers 34 years and is only five paragraphs long naming just one person. It needs some balance across the entire article.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
As I've mentioned above, it comes out overly-biased in a pro-Millwall account.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Millwall_vs_Burnley_125_year_anniversary.JPG is copyright of the Football League since taken at a league game. LutonMillwallriot13March1985.png is maybe alright - but I'm not au fait with fair use policy. VictoryoverHuddersfield.jpg poor quality and I suspect may be copyright of the Football League. File:Crystal Palace 0 Millwall 1.ogv copyright Football League. File:MillwallvCharltonAthletic2010.JPG copyright Football League.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Review

Lead

I know this is the use of British plural for football clubs, but I'm not sure about the first two pars. It starts off with "Millwall Football Club is an English professional football club ..." Then the second paragraph starts "They are"; both plural. They as a pronoun doesn't have any frame of reference when you use Millwall FC as a singular noun in the first sentence. I realise club is sounds better, but football clubs tend to use British plural, as you do in the second sentence. As a result, I'd say that all uses should be in the plural.

"They currently play..." Try not use "currently" per WP:DATE. This sentence suggests Millwall are playing right now. I would re-word to something such as "They play in the ..." or if you want put the season in they sentence.

"2009-10 League One Play-off Final" contains three links, one of which is hidden, i.e. 2009–10 is not clear what you link to until you click on it. I'd say since it's best just to link to the play-off final, with one single link.

"Millwall have reached the FA Cup semi-finals on three separate occasions," Strictly this is incorrect as Millwall have reached four semi-finals. I'd reword this to put the 2004 final first up and then say "Millwall have reached another three FA Cup semi-finals".

"1988–89 First Division" As above, just use one link.

"Based on all results during their 83 seasons in the Football League from 1920-21 to 2009-10, Millwall are ranked as the all-time 41st most successful English football club domestically." I can't find this in the main body of the article. Per WP:LEAD, all info in the lead needs to be in the main body.

History

"J.T. Morton was first founded ... They opened ..." Similar to above, though companies are normally a singular noun, so either use "It opened ..." or "The company opened.." and your problem is solved.

"Jasper John Sexton (pictured left)". How come the picture caption doesn't say it's Jasper John Sexton?

"The newly formed team was well beaten 5–0." Was/were?

"The match finished 2–2 and the teams shared the cup for six months each." Could do with a reference.

"In those days, The Football League was in its infancy and consisted mostly of northern clubs. In the south, the Southern League was not only seen as a rival league, but on equal par." Probably true, but again needs a reference.

"They are most famous for The Den at New Cross, London, which they moved to in 1910." Again possibly true, but I don't think you need to say "Millwall are most famous". Simply say Millwall moved to The Den in 1910. Why did they move there?

"They had previously occupied no fewer than four separate grounds..." No fewer than four = four. It's superfluous.

"who spoiled the celebrations by winning 0–1." 0–1 looks wrong, should really be 1–0.

"Millwall's first Football League match at The Den was on 28 August 1920." How come they were promoted/elected to the league? Who did they replace? Why did they decide to enter this time now?

"notably defeating three-time league winners (and reigning champions)" doesn't really need the brackets.

"The 1937 FA Cup game against Derby still stands as Millwall's record attendance." What was the attendance?

"Mighty Newcastle United" is a WP:PEACOCK term.

"Millwall were the tenth best supported team in England in the pre-war years, despite being a Third, then Second Division side." Being a third then second doesn't make sense, either use Third or Second, or specify some years.

"Many thought they would go on to become" Who does many refer to?

"that is until the Second World War cruelly robbed them of their chance." cruelly is POV.

"The club accepted offers from neighbours Charlton, Crystal Palace and West Ham to stage games." Use clubs' full names, e.g. Charlton Athletic, West Ham United, at least on their first reference.

"Their form during the 1950s was poor, and they suffered relegation on a regular basis." Can you be more specific? To me, regular would suggest three or four relegations which would take them at least to non-league. So I'm not even sure regular is the right word.

"One highlight during this period was on 5 October 1953, when Millwall played Manchester United to mark the opening of their floodlights." Can new floodlights really be a highlight? And you can't open floodlights.

"Later in the decade, Millwall established an incredible record of 59 home games without defeat from, 22 August 1964 to 14 January 1967." Incredible is POV. See WP:POV or WP:NPOV. Also needs a reference.

"The entire record stands as: Won 43, Drawn 16, Lost 0. Goals for 112, against 33." try and turn into prose.

"In the early 1970s Millwall boasted a truly impressive side, now remembered by Lions fans as "The Class of '71"." Again this is POV. Needs a reference.

inspirational is another WP:PEACOCK term.

"This was a team that boasted the inspirational Harry Cripps, Dennis Burnett, Derek Possee, Barry Kitchener, Eamon Dunphy, Keith Weller, Doug Allder, Bryan King, and more." Why just these players? Especially when you say "and more".

"In 1974 Millwall hosted the first game to be played on a Sunday against Fulham." Why was this held on a Sunday?

"Millwall surprised observers" Which observers? Why were they surprised? Needs a reference.

"Millwall had a good start to the 1984–85 First Division campaign, topping the League on 1 October 1988" These dates don't coroborate.

"Also, Terry Hurlock and team Captain Les Briley who dominated the Millwall midfield." needs a reference for "dominated".

"They also briefly led the league for one night in September 1989 after beating Coventry City 4–1," I would make this obvious it's the following season.

"Striker Teddy Sheringham, who later played for the England team and was the highest scoring player throughout the Football League in 1990–91,[46] was sold to Nottingham Forest for £2,000,000 after Millwall's 6–2 defeat to Brighton in the Second Division play-offs." Again flicks between seasons without it being obvious where or when - particularly with the change in manager.

"The new ground was the first new football stadium to be built in London since the Second World War." Needs a reference.

"beating them 0–2 at Highbury." I'd prefer 2–0. All scorelines look better with either the winners score first or Millwall's score first; preferably the former.

"(mainly due to a horrendous series of injuries)," horrendous is POV. Needs a reference.

"Bonds was sacked and replaced by Keith "Rhino" Stevens, with Alan McLeary as his assistant. McLeary was promoted to joint manager." I don't understand this. Is McLeary manager or assistant?

"Stevens and McLeary led Millwall to their first ever official Wembley appearance." Why official?

"The Lions reached the final with a Golden Goal win against Gillingham in the Semi-Finals," Needs either a link or explanation of golden goal.

"2004–05 UEFA Cup" Link to the specific UEFA Cup article not two different less specific pages.

"Surprisingly, whilst Millwall were seeded, Ferencvaros were not." Why surprising? Needs a reference.

"Millwall could have had an easier draw against Chechnyan minnows Terek Grozny" Is this just supposition looking at the weakest non-seeds? Or did Ferencvaros beat Terek Grozny. Either way this and the following sentence are a little redundant. Simply say Ferencvaros won and progressed to the group stage.

"In March 2007 Chestnut Hill Ventures, led by American John Berylson, who have interests in ..." Is "who have" referring to Chestnut Hill Ventures or John Berylson? If Chestnut Hill Ventures, it should be "whish has" if Berylson it should be "who has".

"The continued investment of Berylson, who has since become the club's major shareholder and chairman,[9] have provided a successful time on and off the pitch for The Lions." Investment is singular noun therefore should be "has provided". Secondly successful is POV. Needs a reference.

"Over the course of the last two seasons Jackett has led Millwall to two top 6 finishes in League One," Changes tense from the rest of the history section. Maintain your previous prose e.g. "Over the course of the next two season, Jackett led Millwall ..."

"After play-off final heartbreak" heartbreak is POV. Use defeat.

"His signings of Steve Morison, Jimmy Abdou and Darren Ward have given Millwall a strong backbone to the team. Also, utlilising the loan market, his shrewd signings of James Henry, Liam Trotter and Shaun Batt (all who he has now signed permanently), helped propel Millwall toward the play-offs, and eventual promotion." Serious POV. And no reference.

"The game had been much hyped due to City's signing of then England goalkeeper David James." Not sure this is relevant to Millwall.

"Only days after the humbling defeat, Steve Coppell resigned as City manager." Humbling is POV. To be honest, it's not needed. In fact, again is this relevant again?

The entire history section suffers from too much recentism for the latter sections. Ironically this is the parts which includes the better prose, which flows easier. I would try get rid of the less relevant information and keep this in the expanded History of Millwall F.C. page.

Colours

"they played in a dark Dundee blue for their shirts and socks, with white shorts." Why Dundee? This isn't an accepted colour. Needs more explanation what this means.

"In 1936 Millwall changed to a lighter Navy blue and have played in this colour for the best part of 74 years," Similar to above, this changes tense. Probably simply just get rid of "have".

"The Red Lion was a popular pub name and the red leaping lion often displayed outside pubs is remarkably similar to the first Millwall badge." Is this the reason why or is this guesswork? It looks like the latter without a better explanation.

"In recent years the club has started to once again recognise its unique link with London's docks by introducing Docker Days," Again changes tense. Say "In XXXX, the club started to ... "

This section looks a little untidy with the text forced in between opposite images and then the table of kit sponsors, etc. See WP:MOSIMAGE for help on how to align images.

Home attendances

I feel this list isn't needed in the article. Perhaps a synopsis of the attendances, but this information would be better demonstrated with a graph. The information could also be included at the as yet unstarted List of Millwall F.C. seasons article.

Supporters

"Millwall are a well supported club, for their comparative size and status." POV. Needs a reference.

"The club and fans have a long unwanted history" long unwanted (while I admit is correct) is POV. Needs a reference.

"On five occasions The Den has been closed by The Football Association, with the club receiving numerous fines for crowd disorder." Again incorrect tense. The Den is a former ground so this should be "On five occasions, The Den was closed..." anyway.

"windows were put in" put in is probably slang.

"minnows" WP:PEACOCK

"As a result, along with arrests from Millwall's hooligans, Luton's own firm the MIGs, 37 fans arrested after the violence were identified as being from rival hooligan firms, Chelsea (Headhunters) and West Ham United (Inter City Firm)." This sentence needs rewording. I've tried to read it four or five times and don't understand it.

"Former Chairman of the club Reg Burr, once commented; "Millwall are a convenient coat peg for football to hang its social ills on",[106] an example being the reporting of convicted murderer Gavin Grant. Although he had played for eight different football clubs, playing his fewest (only four games) for Millwall and was currently signed to Bradford City at the time, BBC News used the headline 'Former Millwall striker Gavin Grant guilty of murder'.[107]" Did Burr link the reporting of "former Millwall striker"? I can't see a reference to say such. Or is this your own supposition?

"After recent trouble" recent doesn't mean anything. In ten years time this will be redundant.

Rivalries

"The Lions fiercest rival is West Ham United, one of the most passionately contested local derbies in football." run-on sentence.

"The South East London derby was a franetic affair" POV.

"After being promoted to The Championship for the 2010–11 season, Millwall re-ignited their South London derby with Crystal Palace, playing each other for the first time in four years on 16 October 2010 at Selhurst Park. The Lions made it six games without defeat against The Eagles, winning 1–0." Seems recentist to me. See WP:RECENTISM.

Players, Managers and Records

All three sections are little more than lists. See WP:EMBED on how to handle lists in prose articles. Some of the info could be turned into prose, some of the info looks redundant in a prose article.

Club officials

As above. Not all these positions should be in the article though. See WP:NOTDIR

External links

Trim. Severely. I'd almost be tempted to say only include the official site. But for more information see WP:EL.

MOS and grammar

All seasons and results should use an endash not a dash, i.e. – or simply a – from the tools below, rather than a -. E.g. 2009–10.

Apart from a couple of exceptions, numbers above ten are usually in numerals, e.g. 17, or below ten written out, e.g. seven. See WP:MOSNUM for more details.

You should not use contractions, e.g. can't, wasn't, won't, don't.

Be careful about proper nouns. I've changed captain and defender. There may be more.

Watch out for over and repeated linking.

Lots of incorrect use of apostrophes. I've tried to catch most of them, but there may be some still in there.

Images

Several images were taken at league games and are therefore copyrighted to the Football League.

Others

There's a link to disambig page Upton Park.

Hope this all helps. If you need any further advice, please don't hesitate to ask. Brad78 (talk) 20:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]