Talk:LA Galaxy/GA1

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

Reviewer: NapHit (talk) 13:08, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

This article has numerous problems and is nowhere near Good Article standard I'm afraid I will list some of the problems below. I suggest you look at other Football club articles such as Arsenal F.C., Manchester United F.C. and other club articles at FA and GA standard to get an idea of what is needed to reach their level.


 * The lead is terribly short, the three paragraphs are not sufficient and should mention all aspects of the article, also not sure the signing of David Beckham should be a solitary paragraph
 * History section is very recentist, much of it focuses on 2006 onwards which should not be the case it should be balanced towards the whole history of the club. As it has only been existence for a relatively short time this should not be too hard to accomplish.
 * The first two section of the history are also under referenced
 * Rivalries section is essentially just a list, the rivalry should have their own paragraphs which detail the rivalry with the other clubs a quick look at the articles I mentioned above will show you what I mean
 * Really don't think there should be a whole section on the mascot, this is certainly not the most important aspect of the football club, I would incorporate it into another section.
 * Likewise the television and radio section, I'm not convinced this needs to be in the article at all
 * Honours section has no references
 * List of notable former players is POV, what makes a player notable? this section should be removed
 * Managers section could do with some prose, and the managers being put into a table
 * Again team records needs prose, all the important records should be in prose, then their is no need for the bullet points
 * Stadium section needs to be expanded, a three sentence paragraph is not enough for a section about two stadiums
 * References need properly formatting, for instance refs 22 to 32 just have the link, no accessdate, publisher etc

There is a lot of work to be done here, hopefully what I have detailed above should give you a few pointers about how to improve the article, at the moment it is a long way from being a Good Article, but with some hard work you can get it there.