Wikipedia:Peer review/Bradford City A.F.C. seasons/archive1

Bradford City A.F.C. seasons

I've listed this article for peer review because I've been putting the list together over the last few days and would like to know what else might need doing to get it towards WP:FLC particularly if more references are needed.

Thanks,

Peanut4 02:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)

Hi, good start, my comments:

• I'd start with writing some articles, even stubs, for the top scorers which are either unlinked or red-linked, without them the list looks somewhat incomplete.
  • I'll get on with this asap. I should have the info easily at hand to at least start most of them, if not all, as stubs. Peanut4 20:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
• World War I/II should be First/Second World War - British English please!
  • Totally agree. Done with haste. Peanut4 20:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
• References need full stops after them.
  • Done. Peanut4 20:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
• Some refs can be expanded and cited, e.g. lost to "X F.C." in the playoff semifinals...
  • Done. Unless you can think of any more need expanding. Peanut4 20:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
• No need for repeated wikilinking of cup competitions, the list isn't sortable so link the first instance of each and remove the others.
  • Done. Though would you add a new link when a competition changes its name or just put the generic name instead? Peanut4 20:37, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Another question about the links or moreover repeated ones. Would you add repeated links of top scorers? Other X F.C. seasons do but it doesn't really follow that you ought to do. Peanut4 23:40, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
• Did BCAFC never have a league top-scorer? If so, show in bold. If not, I apologise!
  • Bolded scorers who set or equalled club's record number of goals in a season. Peanut4 23:50, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
• It's often requested (by Struway2 mainly) that league changes are shown in bold to assist those who have difficulty in dealing with the colour scheme, so I'd suggest that as well.
  • Done. Peanut4 20:37, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

That's about all I have for the moment. The Rambling Man 13:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

• • A quick note regarding ongoing top-scorer. In some ways I think it's a good idea, but it is possible for a new player to become the club's overall top scorer but not be that season's top scorer, so will hold off until then. Any suggestions if this happens? Peanut4 20:38, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
    • In fact said situation has happened. John Forrest was the club's top scorer in 1904-05, but he jointly held the club's overall top scorer with John McMillan, who had been the top scorer in 1903-04. Peanut4 20:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

• Apart from the ongoing work to create entries for the club's top scorers, I've just got the above questions regarding the use of repeated links (see above). Otherwise all these points have now been addressed. Peanut4 23:51, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for minor issues of grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 02:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Comments from Struway2 (talk · contribs)

Lead section

• …in English football - English and European football, surely, if you've got it, flaunt it!
  • Lol. Done it. Peanut4 13:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
• commas. …in English and European football from 1903, when the club was formed and elected to the Football League Second Division, to… (I'd lose the 'immediately', it doesn't add anything).
  • I've changed immediately to 'before it had played any fixture'. I want to make the point that City - along with Chelsea - are the only team to have been elected to the league on spec. I'll have a look when I've got a bit more time and probably try expand this a bit better. Peanut4 13:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
• … to the present day. If you actually mean that, someone's going to have to update the list every game. You may want to go with the approach adopted in other featured lists, which go up to the end of the last completed season.
  • Changed and hidden current season on the chart. Peanut4 13:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
• 3rd para - I'd split into 2 sentences. 1st something simple like The club has been promoted eight times and relegated on ten occasions. (the reader doesn't want to start going through the prev para adding up promotions). The second half needs to get rid of the 'current' bias. Something like Three relegations in seven seasons made 2007-08 the club's first season in the fourth tier of English football for over 25 years.
  • Good point. Done. Peanut4 13:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
• have a look at the lead sections of other featured season lists, see if you get any ideas about anything else you might want to mention

sorry if that lot makes you feel you're back at school :-(

• • No need to apologise. I didn't expect quite this many points but it's all very good constructive critcism. And very much appreciated. Peanut4 13:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
• you have the PL and FL season articles linked to the League positions column. Man Utd seasons originally did the same, but they were moved to the Division column following opposition at FLC. Subsequent featured seasons lists have linked to the Division column. (You already link the division abbreviations from your key, so it wouldn't cause a conflict if you lost them from the column. Also, you're absolutely right to believe that just because it's been done a certain way before, doesn't mean you have to blindly follow, just so long as you can defend your way if it becomes necessary.)
• I'd use the generic rather than the sponsored name for all the little cups, on the basis the reader won't know whether the Simod, ZDS and LDV are 1, 2 or 3 different comps or which comps they are.
  • I tend to agree and changed it. Peanut4 18:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Top scorer

• If more than one top scorer in a season, have them on new lines rather than with &s for ease of reading
  • Yeah I agree. I nearly did this when I set up the list but decided against it. Changed it. Peanut4 13:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
• you asked above about repeated linking, this has been discussed at several FLCs and consensus is they should be linked every time, as it isn't user-friendly to find a name and then have to scroll up trying to find where he's linked.
• If you're using Soccerbase for goals totals after your book runs out, make sure it actually includes all you want to include, they are gradually making it more complete but there are still some omissions and anomalies, especially with early rounds of minor cups.
• Your footnote doesn't mention goals scored in the Premier League (neither did mine until yesterday ;-)) or in the Intertoto.
  • Changed it to include Premier League. I've already got European competitions in there. Unless you think I need to change that to Intertoto. Peanut4 13:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

    Not at all, i just didn't spot the European competition bit :-)

• Footnotes - wikilink things like play-offs, two-legged match the first time they're mentioned. I'd note things like your last-day escape from relegation 2000(?) (but then I actively enjoy footnotes, some people think they're a waste of time, there's probably a sensible approach somewhere in the middle). Actually, rather than a note no-one will read, that could sit very comfortably in the middle of the 3rd para of the lead, if you're looking for a bit more to go in there.

sorry I've gone on so long, hope some of it helps, Struway2 11:41, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• • Done that. And will tie in the other bit into the lead. Hopefully will get a better lead written sometime fairly soon. Peanut4 18:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
• also, according to UEFA site, your lot got to the SF of the Intertoto, not R3. Struway2 11:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• • I will get on with the other points when I get a bit more time. You might be right about the Intertoto. It was the third round but maybe I didn't realise we were that close to the UEFA Cup!! Peanut4 13:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

    it was your third round, but you came in at the second round stage. And there's no rush to do stuff - writing stubs is a pain and fiddling with table layout is a pain, but if you can alternate the two at least you get a bit of variety. glad to be of help, Struway2 13:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)