This peer review discussion has been closed.
It is my aim to get this article to Featured List standard, and I would like some constructive comments about the content of the page and the amount of referencing on it. Anything about columns I should add to or remove from the table, or how I could expand the Lead section would be much appreciated.
Thanks, TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 18:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Many of my comments are based on what has been done on existing list of players WP:FLs.
- Lead needs expanding.
- Maybe "List of players" could be renamed "Notable players".
- I would include the whole position of a player in the "Position" column, rather than use a key.
- Can the "Name" column needs be resized? It's pretty big.
- I would mention the club record of a club record holder in a footnote in a "Notes" column.
- What does "Players who have achieved notability through a major contribution to the club" mean? Seems very subjective.
- Maybe the internationally capped players could be shown through the "Nationality" column being highlighted.
- A column under the name of "Captaincy" could be added to the main table, which would allow the "Club captains" table to be merged into the main table.
Another thing - list like these have become disputed for the cut-off point of 100 appearances, like at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of Arsenal F.C. players/archive1. Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 20:41, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I've checked all the links to each player article, including redlinks. I can't guarantee I've caught all the linking errors, but the following jumped out at me as being wrong: In the main section - Mark Jones, Tony Jones, Dave Roberts, Jim Smith, Andy Thomas, Alan Willey. In the club captain section - Dave Roberts, Martin Thomas. Hopefully it will be obvious in each case why the link is wrong but if not give me a shout. --Jameboy (talk) 18:41, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Your basic problem with this list is going to be sourcing. If you're including appearances in all competitions, as appears to be the case, although it doesn't say so anywhere, where is the information coming from once your book runs out? Rage Online won't be accepted as a reliable source at FLC, as was proved with List of Oxford United F.C. managers. If it was me, I'd stick to domestic league appearances, Southern League, Football League, whatever it was, and then source from book till 1989, then Neil Brown's site for the rest of the Football League period, and Soccerbase thereafter.
- Matty mentioned the Arsenal debate above. As I understood the discussions, there shouldn't be a problem with a 100-game cutoff, but a problem might arise with any extras (record holders, international players, captains) added apparently subjectively. But that's only the way I read it; don't think anyone's submitted a football player list since mine in January, and even then I had to write a footnote justifying each player with <100 apps! Though in light of the Arsenal debate, the Gillingham list has been converted to a complete list of Gillingham players in the Football League.
- Spend a bit of time creating articles for those notable players in the list who haven't got them, where notable is defined by WP:ATHLETE, which says having played in a fully-pro league (either for Oxford or for another club). The new FL criteria allow for "a minimal proportion of red links". Any players in your list who don't pass WP:ATHLETE, presumably some of the pre-Football League ones won't, should appear in ordinary black print, not redlinked.
- For the lead, don't start with "This is a list of...", and don't mention the word "notable"; standards have changed. Talk about what Headington Utd was, what time period you cover (and why), mention records held by players. I'd say have a look at the more recently promoted such lists, but there's only been one this year and that was under the old system. Try and make it interesting. Also, the For a list of all... bit should appear as hatnotes above the lead, as per here. Move Mr Basham's picture up into the lead.
- Colour coding in the key. Per WP:COLOR, anything colour-coded should also have another way of distinguishing it, such as italics/bolding, asterisk/dagger/caret markings, or footnote labels, so that people who can't for whatever reason use the colour-coding can still access the information.
- Playing positions. If it was me, I'd put the position in the table rather than an abbreviation, it's easier for the reader. Make sure the positions link to the right things, for instance there are articles for wing half and inside forward. Only the first word of each position should be capitalised. Presumably your book will tell you what position the early players occupied?
- Career dates. What do they mean, start/end of Oxford contract, first/last first-team appearance, ...?
- Referencing. The more the better. The basic theory goes, the reader shouldn't have to guess where information comes from. For example, those players with international appearances while at the club, notes about record transfers, etc, should be cited.
hope some of this helps. Maybe think about some of the above and put it up for another review when/if you think it's getting close to FL quality. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]