Wikipedia:Peer review/List of Tranmere Rovers F.C. managers/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to get the article to GA standard (like its sister article History of Tranmere Rovers F.C.) I have no experience of writing lists, so would appreciate any pointers in the right direction.
Thanks! U+003F? 16:43, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
- Comments by Oldelpaso
- Articles with a list as their primary focus have a separate review process to the usual Good Article or Featured Article process. Instead they go to Featured list candidates, for which the criteria are here. Plenty of similar lists have gone through FLC (see Wikipedia:WPF#Featured_content), but try to look at the more recent ones as standards have gradually risen.
- The main difference between the older manager list FLs and the newer ones is the addition of a fuller History section, separated out from the lead. List of Liverpool F.C. managers and List of Birmingham City F.C. managers are both examples of this format.
- The article now at least has the right structure. But the history section is too short, would you say?
U+003F?23:50, 30 August 2011 (UTC)- Much fuller history section now.
U+003F?05:43, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
- Much fuller history section now.
- The article now at least has the right structure. But the history section is too short, would you say?
Soccerbase isn't all that reliable for older managers, so if possible an alternative source would be of benefit. If none is available, change the dates so that it just states "August 1912" etc. instead of the first of the month. Unless Tranmere really did only appoint managers on the first of the month over a period of six decades.
- The couple of Tranmere books I have don't go any further than giving mangers' years of service (though these years do agree with Soccerbase). Edited so it displays just months for the older managers.
U+003F?23:50, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
- The couple of Tranmere books I have don't go any further than giving mangers' years of service (though these years do agree with Soccerbase). Edited so it displays just months for the older managers.
- While I'm pretty terrible at table syntax, all the sorting and what have you looks to be fine.
Alas, the Honours type column used by other similar lists might not have so much utility for Tranmere, but listing things like promotions may be an appropriate alternative.
All in all, an expanded History section is the main thing required to get to FL standard, and the rest should be comparatively simple. I see you've asked TRM for feedback, he's an ideal person to spot anything I've missed, as he is one of the directors at FLC.
Hope this helps. Oldelpaso (talk) 20:51, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
- Comments from TRM
No need to bold Tranmere Rovers in the opening sentence, I believe we avoid bold links where possible."are an English association football club" would say "is a club" here."This chronological list comprises" avoid. It's difficult, I know, but I would talk about the club rather than "This list" here, and if necesary, add the "This list" (and following sentences) before the table...
Need to expand lead to summarize history.U+003F?11:00, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
"as well as those who have been in permanent charge." unnecessary. Perhaps "All full-time managers are listed, along with caretaker managers where known...""24 people have managed the club" -> "As of the ... the club has had 24 managers.""2011–12" is that an em-dash or an en-dash?In the history section, I don't see a real need to relink 1884, Tranmere or manager. Also, refer to Tranmere as Tranmere Rovers rather than simply Tranmere at this point."from Carr in 1936" perhaps "the following year"..."having no previous experience as player nor manager" not keen on this but having trouble suggesting an alternative."having won just six of 42"-> "winning just 6 of 42" (MOSNUM says be consistent within a sentence)."all time" -> all-time.Big gap from beginning of WWII and 1961..."two divisions higher than Tranmere" two divisions above.Could link England international to the England national team."playing regular home" he didn't play them did he? regularly arranging home fixtures on Friday evenings.. or something?En-dash needed for all scores.Link play-offs.Big gap from 1969 to 1987 as well...Consider a refs column so you can separate them from the notes.Don't have spaces between refs."former England international" link that England the first time round (as I suggested above).Maybe put present or similar in the blank cell for Parry."rec.sport.soccer" should be "Rec.Sport.Soccer"En-dashes in season ranges in the refs.Check web refs have accessdates.
The Rambling Man (talk) 09:01, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks a bunch, I'll work through these. On a general level, do you think it's up to WP:FLC?
U+003F?10:18, 15 September 2011 (UTC)- No worries. And yes, fix the above and it'll be right on track at FLC. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:30, 15 September 2011 (UTC)