Wikipedia:Peer review/Santos FC/archive1

Santos FC
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because it is getting closer and closer towards becoming FA material I know there is still a bit more work to do but I would like imputs from other editors to see what everyone thinks. Plus, I think I have shown, with this page, that there are many things other editors could use to upgrade other football clubs' pages, new ways to do things. Strawberry on Vanilla (talk) 17:45, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Strawberry on Vanilla (talk) 17:45, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

It is a welcome sight to see a peer review request for an article about an important team from a country that is under-represented on Wikipedia in terms of well-developed articles. Unfortunately this article has a very long way to go before it is FA material. FA nominations are a daunting place for first-time nominators; reaching good article status is probably a better thing to aim for before heading to FAC.
 * Comments by Oldelpaso

Hope this helps. I haven't gone through the entirety of the article in depth; if you require further comments pleas ask on my talk page. Oldelpaso (talk) 19:53, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The lead is way over-referenced, ten references for a single fact is probably the most extreme I have ever seen.
 * The referencing for the rest of the article swings between over-zealous and and completely absent, depending on the section. Some of the sections look like they have been put through a machine translator, and make little sense: Santos tried to transform the twenty-first century in a time of galactic rain - what? Given the lack of sense in the sections from 1936 onward, they should either be improved immediately or removed until a time when such improvements can be made, as they are of next to no use to the reader at the moment.
 * Why does referencing It is also the only Brazilian club outside Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Belo Horizonte and Porto Alegre to win an international tournament. take nine sources?
 * The list of recent seasons is an example of recentism, and should be removed. A graph would probably be a better option, like the one at Ipswich_Town_F.C..
 * Why on earth is Pelé listed in the current squad?
 * Which of the works in the Further reading section are principally about Santos? Keep those, remove the others.
 * Escape to Victory may have featured Pelé, but this is an article about Santos, not Pelé.
 * Do a particular type of people follow Santos, just as Flamengo are seen as working class an Fluminense upper class? How does the level of support compare to other Brazilian teams?
 * My English-language book on Brazilian football introduces Santos by saying they are the only one of the state's big teams to come from outside Sao Paulo, this could do with being mentioned.
 * Am I right in thinking that there are a whole bunch of other clubs called Santos in South America who have named themselves after this one?