Wikipedia:Peer review/IFK Göteborg/archive1

IFK Göteborg
I would appreciate any kind of comments, but first of all I'd like to get comments about grammar and the sentence structure. I'm not satisfied with how I use the language in some places, but as English isn't my mother tongue, I can't figure out other ways to write certain passages. I'd also like to get comments on how to handle the linking of years and other words. I've seen a lot of different styles, from linking every year mentioned, to not linking any at all. The guidelines propose linking only important years, but how to decide which years are important? Links to competitions, players and other clubs are given once in each chapter of the history. Too much? As said initially, comments and suggestions for improvements on any part of the article is appreciated! -- Elisson | Talk 22:17, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I did a little copy-editting in the first stages of the article, but more is needed by someone who understands soccer (football, sorry). The one consistent problem I noted was that the tense in the introduction was correctly past-tense, but later on it switched to a more fannish present-tense.  Someone needs to go through and fix the tenses, preferably someone who knows the sport well enough not to mess anything else up (regrettably, my own knowledge on the subject is severely limited, at best). --Scimitar 13:36, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the input! Your changes definitely made the article better and easier to read. I've changed the tense to past-tense in the rest of the history sections. I noticed that I changed back and forth between tenses a lot, the last section was in past-tense again. I shall think of that when I write other articles in the future. I'd be happy if you or any other native English speaker could read them (and the other sections) through again and edit sentences that could be written in a better way. -- Elisson | Talk 14:31, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I did some more minor copy-editting, but the database is apparently locked, so I couldn't do more. If you put this up for FA I think you'll be asked to trim it, so you might want to keep that in mind. The prose isn't bad, but in places it's a little clumsy, and I was confused about what you were trying to say. This is a good article, and what it really needs is just some minor refining in prose by someone more naturally comfortable with English.  Great job, though. --Scimitar 14:47, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, I'll think about trimming the history section and maybe move the current writing to History of IFK Göteborg (which has been done on a few other clubs). Yeah, I'm having trouble with getting the text to be smooth to read, I write somewhat "square", that's why I wanted this peer review. Hopefully someone with good understanding of football will show up and improve the writing a bit more. -- Elisson | Talk 15:07, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * There are a few links for other Swedish teams that contain characters that would not work due to Wikipedia technical limitations, but since those articles are yet to be created, this can be fixed. Phoenix2 01:43, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * What links? If you mean Østerbro BK (Danish club in fact ;) ), I don't see a problem with it, there are already articles starting with Ø. -- Elisson | Talk 11:36, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, there are a few articles, it seems to not be a problem. Phoenix2 17:10, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Indeed the article may need to be trimmed, as there is more than enough information. Phoenix2 01:50, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I'll do something about the history section in the following days. Probably move it to History of IFK Göteborg as mentioned above. -- Elisson | Talk 11:36, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I've performed the move and I now request a review on the rewritten and shortened history section on IFK Göteborg, as well as continued reviewing of the article History of IFK Göteborg which is almost completely unchanged since the move. -- Elisson | Talk 21:35, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Are the image copyright tags acceptable (a criteria for a FA)? The badge is under fair use as most logos, the two team pictures are under fair use and old, these images are from a book (the one in the references) and the writers of the book mentions that credits for the photos can't be given as the photographer is unknown. The stadium photo is released into pd (by whom, I don't know). -- Elisson | Talk 11:36, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)