Talk:History of Brentford F.C./GA1

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:12, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Taking a look now.....will make straightforward copyedits as I go and drop queries below...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:12, 21 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Any reason why the history articles are divided at 1954 and 1986?
 * No as far as I can see. REDMAN 2019  ( talk ) 13:02, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah I think it was pre-decided somewhere....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Any commentary on why McLintock couldn't deliver? ✅ added some info


 *  Brentford flirted with the playoff positions during the 1987–88 season and in 1988–89,[4] a late run almost took the club into the playoffs - try not to use "playoffs" twice in the one sentence ✅


 *  but an unbeaten run in the second half of the season... - traditional here to say how many matches... ✅


 *  Perryman resigned on the eve of the 1990–91 season... - do we know why? ✅


 *  and captain Terry Evans suffered a long-term injury on the opening day of the season. - may as well say what the injury was ✅


 *  Just two defeats in 11 matches put the Bees up to 10th by the end of 1992 - am I missing something here? You didn't mention a poor start just before this...? ✅


 * '' The Bees were easily defeated 3–1 in the fifth round by Charlton Athletic, but too many draws late in the season dropped the club to a 3rd-place finish..' ' - "but" is odd here as they are both bad things so I can't see the contrast...? {[done}}


 * Finally - the trick is to avoid these articles turning into a chronological sequence of factoids - any analysis on why any manager did well or poorly, or any other bits on particularly good players would be good to add if you can find them.

A promising article with alot of heart in it...needs some polishing but eminently doable Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:20, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I have addressed all of your concerns. Would you be able to take a look over the article and seem what the situation is now? REDMAN 2019  ( talk ) 13:13, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

1. Well written?:
 * Prose quality:
 * Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:
 * References to sources:
 * Citations to reliable sources, where required:
 * No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:
 * Major aspects:
 * Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:
 * Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?
 * No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:
 * Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:31, 30 March 2021 (UTC)