Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Anfield/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted 23:25, 7 March 2008.

Anfield
Self-nomination After a thorough peer review, I feel the article meets all the criteria necessary to be a Featured Article, this article is based on Portman Road and Priestfield Stadium, which are both Featured, so hopefully this article can join them. Thanks in advance for your time NapHit (talk) 21:16, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments


 * I don't think that really matters to be honest, if I changed them to be the same, it would make the article bland NapHit (talk) 22:50, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * consistency if important. Buc (talk) 07:19, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * alterd NapHit (talk) 23:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Referenced NapHit (talk) 17:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * "in 1994 after the Taylor Report" wasn't the Taylor Report in 1989?
 * yes, but this is referring to the development of the stadium finishing after the Taylor report
 * Needs to be explained
 * done NapHit (talk) 23:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * "The gates are a tribute to former Liverpool manager Bob Paisley" how are they?
 * this really does not need to be expanded,the gates being built in his honour is enough of a tribute
 * How are they a tribute to him?
 * Corrected NapHit (talk) 23:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Buc (talk) 19:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Just out of interest why have you changed the section in the lead relating to the new stadium there was no consensus in the peer review to replace it, and you removed it without discussing it. Also they are plans at the moment, construction has not begun yet NapHit (talk) 21:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose
 * All dates in the history section are month first, yet in the other sections date first. Can you revert to one style.
 * done NapHit (talk) 16:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Doesn't seem referenced enough for me, particularly large chunks of the history.
 * This is mainly because most of the history section comes from one source, so the whole paragraph is referenced at the end NapHit (talk) 16:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * News sources need the dates of the report, and book sources should cite the pages used.
 * cited the pages used, and added dates NapHit (talk) 17:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Does the Outline of Anfield image, need to be so detailed to included numbers? It looks like a copy off the back of the ticket, and the numbers don't mean anything to me.
 * I can see where you're coming from but as I don't have a image editing programme on my pc, or a free alternative there is not much I can do about it NapHit (talk) 16:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * visitor's centre. Is this right? One visitor?
 * I'm not sure what you mean by this NapHit (talk) 17:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I think it should be visitors' centre. Or maybe no apostrophe at all. But I'm sure visitor's centre is wrong - it implies there is only one man who goes to it. Peanut4 (talk) 23:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Some poor or clumsy uses of English. I've corrected some but sure there are loads more, including
 * "Original plans for a new stadium were initiated by Liverpool to replace Anfield in May 2002."
 * "Original plans for a huge double decker stand were forced to be scaled down, due to financial constraints."
 * "Bolton Wanderers and Huddersfield Town met in 1929, with Bolton winning, they went on to win the final, becoming the first club to win a semi-final at Anfield and go on to win the FA Cup."
 * "They also won all their home games during the 1893–94 season. From January 1971 to January 1981, Liverpool did not lose a match, this encompasses 85 games, in which Liverpool scored 212 goals and conceded 35."
 * done I think NapHit (talk) 23:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The commemorative gates are mentioned in more than one section. Is this necessary?
 * Well the mentioning in the structure anfd facilities is just a sentence or so, i think it is alright.


 * Was Anfield used during the 1966 World Cup?
 * Surprisingly it was not NapHit (talk) 17:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * No worries. Peanut4 (talk) 23:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Aggregate attendance in the 2000-01 season was more than 1,328,482. I suspect it was 1,328,482 rather than more than, because this seems an exact figure. But if it was more than that what exactly was it?
 * removed more than as it was 1,328,482 NapHit (talk) 16:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The whole records section seems very dry to me. It reads like the list.
 * I'm not sure if I can make it less dry to be honest, it's pretty similar to the same section in Portman Road, which passed FA NapHit (talk) 17:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Indeed you're correct. Ignore that comment then. If I can think of a way of making it more engaging, I'll either get back to you later or try change it myself. Peanut4 (talk) 23:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Overall I think the article needs a very good copy edit and much better referencing. Peanut4 (talk) 23:59, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Couple more problems.
 * "From January 1971 to January 1981, Liverpool did not lose a match at Anfield, encompassing 85 games, in which Liverpool scored 212 goals and conceded 35." Liverpool must have played more than 85 home games in ten years. It should be at least double this number.
 * you're right after re-checking it was from January 1978 to January 1981 NapHit (talk) 16:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * While I agree with Buc, the scores aren't necessary for other uses, these sentences have become terrible. "Anfield has hosted five FA Cup semi-finals, the first was in 1888 when the ground was still being used by Everton. The next semi-final was 20 years later in 1908, followed by another semi-final in 1912. The semi-final in 1921, was watched by the King and Queen. The last FA Cup semi-final at Anfield was in 1929, Bolton Wanderers won that particular match, and went on to win the FA Cup, becoming the only club to win a semi-final at Anfield and the FA Cup." Peanut4 (talk) 03:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok I think I've fixed this particular problem by turning it into a sentence instead of a long-winded paragraph NapHit (talk) 16:07, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Still oppose
 * Most of my points have been addressed, but I would still rather see the history section better referenced (though I do appreciate your reply above Naphit).
 * Perhaps send it for a good copy-edit from either the League of Copy Editors or from an independent editor (maybe one from WP:FOOTY). It's good, I just think it could be tweaked and made better.
 * One other point. The future section doesn't explain why Liverpool want to move away from Anfield. Peanut4 (talk) 20:25, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.