Talk:Cambridge United F.C./GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 10:47, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm going to review the article momentarily, I'll give it a read through now. Miyagawa  (talk)  10:47, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

✅ Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 07:46, 7 August 2012 (UTC) Having to head out unexpectedly, so will finish this review when I'm back in later on. Miyagawa  (talk)  10:50, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * References
 * Date formats need to all be the same, at the moment you appear to have three different ways of showing the dates - 2006-12-16, July 13, 2012 and 20 July 2007. Doesn't really matter which one you pick as it's editors preference, but there needs to only be one format across the entire article.
 * Citations 56, 58, 59, 60 and 61 are bare urls.
 * You've listed the BBC Sport website as both "BBC Sport" and "BBC Sport Online". Probably needs to just be reduced down to "BBC Sport".

Ok, back now, here's the rest of the review:

✅  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  12:17, 1 September 2012 (UTC) ✅  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  12:17, 1 September 2012 (UTC) ✅  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  12:17, 1 September 2012 (UTC) {{done}  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  12:17, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
 * References (part 2)
 * In some places the official website is listed as cambridgeunited.com, and some as www.cambridgeunited.com - just needs to choose which one to go with, or perhaps Cambridge United Official Website or something.
 * Cite #3 needs to have more formatting (access date, website etc)
 * Does #13 have a url?
 * #27 needs a website

article is written in British English where "football" means association football if there is no further disambiguation. See the version of the article Arsenal F.C. that was made a FA. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 19:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Lead
 * Should expand football to association football in the first line.
 * Even in British English there is more than one form of football. See Association football and Rugby football. The Arsenal F.C. article makes it clear that it is an English Premier League football club in the lead, and so it can only be one type of football. Give that, I think either a change to association football or to state the league that Cambridge United current sits in prior to saying football in the same manner as the Arsenal article would be appropriate. Miyagawa   (talk)  10:13, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Text of the Arsenal article reads "Arsenal Football Club (also known as Arsenal, The Arsenal or The Gunners) are a football club based in north London. They play in the FA Premier League " text of the Cambridge United article is "Cambridge United Football Club is a professional football club from Cambridge, England. They compete in the Conference National...". In both cases is states that it's a football club, then tells you what division they play in - the structure is identical. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 17:45, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, my eyes must have skipped over that - in that case it's fine to stay as it is. Miyagawa   (talk)  17:28, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

✅ Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 19:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC) ✅ Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 19:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC) ✅ Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 19:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Link English league system to English football league system
 * "missing out on being founding members of the Premier League" perhaps "missing out on being promoted to the first tier and becoming founding members of the Premier League"?
 * The bit about FA reserve team rules isn't mentioned in the main body of the article, so it needs to be copied into it. Then you can remove the citation from the lead as it'll be cited in the body.

✅  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  11:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC) ✅  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  11:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC) ✅  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  11:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC) ✅  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  12:27, 1 September 2012 (UTC) ✅  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  11:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC) ✅  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  11:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC) ✅ Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 22:18, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * History
 * Last couple of lines of the first paragraph are uncited.
 * Second and third paragraphs are missing citations too.
 * Colours and badge
 * Last two paragraphs are uncited.
 * Stadium
 * The last line of the last paragraph is uncited.
 * Supporters
 * The end of the first paragraph is uncited.
 * Players
 * Source needs to be as a citation rather than a piped external link, and if it's the source for all of those tables, it needs to be outside of the technical staff table.
 * Reserves
 * End of the last two paragraphs are uncited.
 * Notable managers
 * The MOS way of doing the years is to present them as 1974-76 rather than 1974-1976 unless of course it changes century, so 1999-2003 would be the way of doing it instead of 1999-03. So the dates need to be updated.
 * And the information in the table needs citations too.

✅  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  11:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Honours
 * Needs a source

Going to place this one on hold to see if this work can be done in a reasonable period of time. Once the citation/referencing is sorted, I'll do a proper review of the prose. Miyagawa  (talk)  15:42, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It has been two weeks since the most recent edit to this page, and the most recent edits to the article by the nominator were on August 13, when three refs were supplied for the Honours section. What is the current status of the review? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:34, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm going to close this one down, it can be renominated when the nominator has finished the comments above. Miyagawa   (talk)  09:10, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Before you close it, I'm willing to give it a go and help.  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  11:57, 1 September 2012 (UTC)