Wikipedia:Peer review/List of NK Maribor seasons/archive1

List of NK Maribor seasons

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… it is completed and I am wondering what need to be done for this article to become a GA or FA. If it meets all of the criteria for at least a GA it will be put to a GA nomination process. This is the first peer review of the article.

Thanks, Ratipok (talk) 01:14, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: This should be of considrable interest to football fans. Here are some suggestions for improvement:-

Prose

The opening sentence needs some attention. It is hard to make sense of it at the moment.
As this is a list, it would make sense to merge the brief lead and the Background sections. This would avoid some repetition in the prose.
I have copyedited the first paragraph of the Background section, but further work is necessary on the remainder of the prose. Examples:-
- "the team competes" → "the team has competed"
- "from top division" → "from the top division"
- "a feat repeated six times to date" → "a feat it has repeated six times to date"
- "first built in 1962" → "built in 1962"

Tables

These are generally good. A couple of points:-

The keys to column headings and colours should precede, not follow, the tables to which they relate.
Column headings should be defined in the keys, not by links (e.g. "SC" in second table.

General

It is not necessary to specify language when sources are in English.

As I cannot watch individual PR pages, please contact me on my talkpage if you have questions arising from this review or if you want me to look again. Brianboulton (talk) 15:14, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from PeeJay

The most glaring thing I can see is the infobox. I think you should delete it and increase the font size in the tables back to 100%. The infobox really adds little to the list, in my opinion, and the list would benefit from having full sized text, as some users may have trouble reading text when it is smaller than normal. – Pee Jay 10:16, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm wondering if it would be better to merge the background info up into the lead. Right now the lead is quite short, and modifying that all into 4 paragraphs or so would make it a solid, potentially FLC-ready list. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 23:13, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]