Hey all :) Myself and a couple of other editors have worked really hard referencing and making this article as rigid as possible to WPF's MOS for clubs. I would greatly appreciate some comments on the prose quality - the article was just promoted to GA status, and I really think it could go all the way. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 23:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It looks good, but it is wordy and the sheer number of references is a little off-putting. I suggest reducing the sprinkling of footnotes throughout the text (eg, only one reference is needed for the "F3 Derby" jargon) and place the most important of the remaining references into a Further Reading section. Since an archive of media articles is available from the club's official site, it need not be comprehensively listed here.
- Further, I would move the History section down, after Supporters, and make 2006-07 Season a subheading of History. I know this is contrary to the style template for football clubs, but there are good reasons: History is the single largest section, and casual readers are more likely to want trivial information (stadium, colours and badge, supporters). Having a big heavy-reading section at the top of the article can also be off-putting. Finally, I may be wrong about this, but shouldn't footnote reference numbers come before punctuation and not after? Darcyj 12:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Pretty good, but some recommendations, based on a preliminary read:
- I see no good reason why History shouldn't stay at the top, and I don't see necessarily that casual readers won't be interested in the History too.
- Some spellchecking/punctuation checking required - e.g. "the clubs financial worries were eased"
- If anything the article is too referenced. Some claims, e.g. "the major motorway which joins the two clubs.[8][9]" and "domestic competition, the Hyundai A-League.[16][17]" - these don't need two references, one will do. If it is possible to reuse the same citation twice, then do so, as this would also trim down the (enormous) references section.
- Remove the current League table - WP:NOT a news service.
- Be consistent in subheadings in the History section - either have subsections for the club's formation and 2005-06 season or ditch subheadings entirely.
- Current season paragraph needs as of dates.
- Ditch the image of the current squad table - it is not necessary and to use an image to contain textual information makes the page less accessible to the visually-impaired. Also split the text squad table with ((fs mid)).
- Notable players and manager(s) list should be tables rather than bulleted lists. Qwghlm 11:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I second Qwghlm's comments, especially removal of the current league table. Would it be appropriate to have an image of the badge in the "Colours and badge" as well as the infobox? Punkmorten 15:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Firstly, thanks everyone for your comments. I'll go through you're points one-by-one here, to make things easier:
- Regarding History section, I'm going to leave it where it is; however, if this ever does make it to FAC, I'll raise the point again.
- I've removed the league table, and merged the information into one section. I changed the game wins count to be "as of", as suggested.
- Copyediting is an ongoing thing - I'm going to read over it tomorrow closely and adjust where needed.
- When I do this, it'll also be a chance to cut out any unneeded references. However, I suspect I'll still end up with 50+. WP:FN details where footnote annotations are placed - I've had a bot run through it, and everything seems to be good.
- Squad section has lost image and gained ((fs mid)).
- With the notable players and managers, I'll get the stats on them, so I end up with something like Arsenal F.C. does.