Wikipedia:Peer review/West Midlands (Regional) League/archive1
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I'm not sure there's enough "meat" to the content to go for Featured Article (although feel free to tell me if you disagree), but Good Article should be achievable. Let me know what might need tweaking first......
Thanks, ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm not spotting much to take issue with as I read through, only minor things:
- began to drop out in favour of playing in more local leagues - could be construed as teams joining more than one local league, but I'm unsure how to reword it. "localised" would sound odd, "geographically compact" forced and awkward.
- In one year alone Bangor City, Worcester City, Wellington Town and the reserve teams of Cardiff City and Wrexham all resigned from the league - presumably 1938?
- Although the league lost further clubs to the Combination which, unlike the League, recommenced play in the 1945–46 season - though the context is obvious, the suspension of competition during wartime isn't stated anywhere.
- A year later, 13 of the Combination's 14 remaining clubs left to join the League, which effectively absorbed its former rival. - who was the 14th?
- A question that springs to mind, but that probably isn't answerable, is why the league has a superfluous (Regional) in its title, seeing as the West Midlands is itself a region. Oldelpaso (talk) 09:33, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
- I have had a good look through all my sources and can find no explanation for the league's odd name. I will address the other points shortly....... ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:49, 6 July 2008 (UTC)