Wikipedia:Peer review/List of English Football League managers by date of appointment/archive1

List of English Football League managers by date of appointment
I spent a while creating this page and posted it earlier this month. In my opinion it's comphrensive on what it intends to list, and could soon be ready for FLC. There are a few concerns:
 * The date for Ronnie Jepson's permanent appointment is not as comphrensive as others are. However consultation with other editors and big Internet searches conclude that there was never any official announcement.
 * Peter Grant (footballer)'s appointment was announced by the Norwich website earlier than said date (before a weekend game as I recall), but wasn't officially done until a press conference the following Monday. What should be done?
 * Improve footnotes with website/date citations
 * Create some re-directs (where from?)
 * Find birthdays for Les Reed and Paul Fairclough.

Other than that, though, what could be done to bring it up to FLC standard? HornetMike 04:36, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * As you say, the citations should be improved. Most are incorrectly using cite web rather than cite news. You must supply the news item date – write this in wikilinked YYYY-MM-DD format. Instead of "work=BBC", use "publisher=BBC News". You should supply the author if possible (not usually given on BBC News). The longer citations probably require you to drop to 2 columns for the references.
 * Dates can be written in a shorter form than separate "day month" and "year" wikilinks: as a YYYY-MM-DD wikilink. The separate accessmonth/accessyear can similarly be shortened to accessdate. Obviously, there is no visible change but it makes the source text shorter – up to you.
 * Your "References" contain comments (usually regarding temporary appointments) that would be better in a separate "Notes" section. I suggest you use the Footnote3 system with letter labels for these footnotes and place them in a "Notes" section above the References. This has been done on other lists and will also help you properly format the (currently anonymous) sources for those comments.
 * Although the list is chronological by date of appointment, there is no reason why you couldn't split the table into sections by division. You would then lose a column and I think it makes the info more navigable and easier to edit. The current sole "Managers" section is a little pointless and would then be replaced by "Premiership", "League One", etc.
 * The lead could be expanded a bit. Perhaps you could briefly explain the leagues and divisions? The language in the second paragraph is a little clumsy. I suggest you just add those teams to the bottom of the table(s) with empty cells for the manager info. You should then add a ref for the news item that mentions this status (e.g. previous manager sacked, no successor appointed).
 * Re: Peter Grant. My opinion is to go with the official date but put a footnote in (as described above).
 * The Tony Mowbray and Peter Grant refs seem to be swapped.
 * One drawback to your excellent reference list is that it only tells you that the appointment facts are correct, not that they haven't been replaced. As mentioned on the talk page, the League Managers site could serve as a general reference (a bullet-point at the end) for readers to confirm that the list is up-to-date.
 * Colin°Talk 14:03, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Hello, right.


 * I've implemented the note thing, although I'm not sure I've done it correctly. Someone may need to check. Should I change the links in the notes to references?
 * I've added a note about Grant's appointment
 * I fixed the mix-up between Grant and Mowbray
 * I fixed the messy bit in the Coleman citation
 * Someone else had added Fairclough's birthday
 * With regard to temporary appointments, because I think empty cells might look a bit confusing I've created a seperate section listing caretaker managers. I've removed the badly worded stuff from the lead.
 * As this is a new section (and another new notes section has been added) I've changed the "managers" heading to "permanent managers."
 * I've added the LMA reference you suggested.

As of yet I haven't improved the lead, as I'm still working out what to put, and done the proper citation format just because I haven't had time yet. Otherwise, I'm not sure about splitting the list by league. I feel it takes something away from the purpose of it. I don't think it's too hard to edit, as there's only ever going to be 92 entries. I could remove the League column entirely, I suppose, if people think it makes the table too big. Perhaps the club's box could be shaded to indicate their League as an alternative? I dunno. HornetMike 20:35, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I've filled out all the citations. Once you separated the notes, I saw how many of them there were. The caretaker bit was so common that I think it was better handled as a separate column, with its own reference. The remaining few notes, I've just tagged onto the end of the relevant reference. I've expanded the lead a little, but you can probably do better than me. The references are now so wide, that even two columns wasn't readable - so it is just one big one. I don't have a title for the Norwich City reference - could you find it? A quick look at the League Managers Association page shows that your list is more up-to-date! -- Colin°Talk 19:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, AZ t 19:10, 22 November 2006 (UTC)