Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Preston North End F.C./archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Preston North End F.C.[edit]

I feel that Preston North End F.C. now deserves featured article status because it contains a rather thorough club history of one of the most influential clubs in English football. This is a self-nomination, as the page was in a poor state beforehand, factually inaccurate and badly written. I feel as though I have remedied that, and this page is without doubt favourably comparable to other football club histories, some of which have attained featured article status already. Self nomination - Dannypne7

  • Some quick points:
Why are level 1 headers used? The standard is generally level 2.
There isn't a single reference
There are too many red links
The images are untagged.

Object at the moment, but keep working on it. --Majorly (Talk) 13:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty new to this, so thanks for your advice. I have changed the headings to level 2, and will work on referencing and tagging the images. - Dannypne7
That's OK. Good luck with it, and welcome to Wikipedia! --Majorly (Talk) 13:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object Really not ready yet. The history section needs to be moved into a history article then summarised in the main article. The managers section needs to be converted into a table with statistics added. Sections needs to be added on statistics, colours, crests, fans, grounds. You need off-shoot articles on seasons and players. And references, obviously. See Arsenal F.C. for a good example of how to do things. HornetMike 13:59, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object Uncited, very listy, refer to peer review. Sandy (Talk) 14:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object for now, suggest that you attempt a peer review first. Some other things to work on: it needs footnotes. Sentences like However, no football club in the world can claim to be steeped in history and tradition to a greater degree than Preston North End are POV and contain weasel terms. Many people will object based upon the long lists at the end; try converting some to prose. Other things: note WP:MSH, needs image copyright tags and sources (ex: Image:1954.jpg, add {{Book cover}} w/ a fair use rationale), and try getting rid of some of the redlinks. AZ t 14:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object. This article, I'm afraid, is of a very poor quality. This single sentence captures everything what is wrong with it:
Known as a team of hard men on the pitch, they played just as rough off it, wrecking both a railway station bar and a hotel in London in the process!
It's weasel worded, uncited, fails to give specifics and is written in an unencyclopaedic tone - there is absolutely no need for that exclamation mark.
On top of that, there are many more problems with this article. Too many images have unclear copyright licensing information. Wikilinking is of a very poor quality - too many red links and misdirected blue links - e.g. links go to Sunderland not Sunderland A.F.C.. The paragraphs are too short and should be reaggregated. No criteria are given for what makes "notable former players" notable. There is little to no information about the club's colours, crest, stadium or supporters. The list of managers can and should be more detailed.
In short this article needs a merciless re-edit to correct the tone and fix the redlinks (perhaps nominate it at the WikiProject Football Article Improvement Drive). It then needs to go through peer review. And after that it can be resubmitted to FAC and stand a decent chance of confirmation. My advice is look at some existing featured football articles, in particular club articles such as IFK Goteborg, Arsenal, Manchester City, Everton and Sheffield Wednesday and the associated PR and FAC pages with those articles. Finally, don't be afraid to ask for the advice of the people who helped pushed them through (I'm one of them) for assistance Qwghlm 15:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's no worse referenced than most other football club pages. I think some of the comments placed on here are downright rude, when some simple advice would have sufficed. As a consequence, my article has been practically vandalised and now looks awful. Some of you lot should show a little bit more manners in my humble view. - Dannypne7

Danny – take these people's advice, they know what they're talking about. Address the issues with the article, then get a Peer review for it. Remember to assume good faith. --Majorly (Talk) 17:24, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Danny, I know a lot of football articles don't have any references, but the featured ones do. Currently Preston North End doesn't have any, and thus fails the most basic FA criteria. And it's not your article, the edits made to have been made in order to improve it. HornetMike 19:09, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was the one who "vandalised" the article by adding the cleanup notices to the page and I stand by that decision. I'm sorry if my review of the article is taken as rude, but I was just trying to be honest, which is the best policy in reviews such as this. If you would like to improve the article then you'll need to take the advice of others, and definitely not resent them for editing "your" article. Having helped other football club articles reach FA status I am more than happy to help, as I have said, if you wish. Qwghlm 00:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As a goodwill gesture I have led by example and cleaned up the first part of the History section. I've fixed the tone, repaired some of the wikilinks, and removed or added references to most of the uncited claims. Hopefully this will serve as a demonstration of how to improve the article. Qwghlm 10:15, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Preston_North_End_F.C./archive1&oldid=1062126472"