Wikipedia:Peer review/Real Madrid C.F./archive9

Real Madrid C.F.
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I know that it has some issues, and I want to work at it and improve it.
 * Previous peer review

Thanks,  AdrianRO   talk 17:04, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I do not think that I have ever seen an article which has had 9 peer reviews before (and I have seen a lot of PRs). I would go through them and see the suggestions made - some of them are very helpful. Here are some suggestions for improvement with an eye to FAC. Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 12:10, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow - there are many FAs on football teams, including FC Barcelona (though there is an edit war there right now)
 * The PR toolbox on this page show several dead ELs here
 * There is also one dab link that the dab finder shows
 * The lead does not follow WP:LEAD as well as it could. The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself. However the information on the other "royal" yeams seems to only be in the lead.
 * My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way but in History headers I see no mention of Santiago Bernabéu Yeste and Los Galácticos
 * Watch WP:OVERLINKing - Spanish Super Cup is linked twice in just the lead
 * I also wonder if the list of all the cups they won belongs in the lead - I would definitely list the ones that are records and a few of the more important cups but I also think the lead needs to summarize and save detail for the body of the article.
 * A FA requirement is comprehansiveness but I see History has a big gap with no istory (1932 to 1945). SInce this was the Spanish Civil War and the club is by name identified with the royalty, I think this is worth mentioning. Make sure there are major no gaps in history or coverage
 * I also worry about WP:RECENT issues. The History section is divided into four subsections, each very roughly the same length. The first covers 42 years, the second 33 years, the third 20 years, and the last 11 years. This is also a WP:WEIGHT issue
 * Nicknames like The Whites need to be defined before use - so In 1998, under manager Jupp Heynckes, The Whites defeated Juventus 1–0 in the final thanks to a goal from Predrag Mijatović.[21] See WP:PCR
 * Needs a ref At the end of the 2009–10 season, the club board of directors of the clud stated that Real Madrid had a net debt of €244.6 million, 82.1 million lower than the previous fiscal year.
 * Lats two paragraphs of Popular culture have zero refs. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
 * Article uses very few books as refs, though some are in the Further reading - for FAC it needs to use the best sources available.
 * I have no idea what this ref refers to Ghemawat, Pankaj. p. 2
 * All refs will be checked at FAC
 * Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)