Talk:History of Brentford F.C./GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:12, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Taking a look now.....will make straightforward copyedits as I go and drop queries below...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:12, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Any reason why the history articles are divided at 1954 and 1986?
- No as far as I can see. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:02, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah I think it was pre-decided somewhere....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Any commentary on why McLintock couldn't deliver?Done added some info
Brentford flirted with the playoff positions during the 1987–88 season and in 1988–89,[4] a late run almost took the club into the playoffs- try not to use "playoffs" twice in the one sentenceDone
but an unbeaten run in the second half of the season...- traditional here to say how many matches...Done
Perryman resigned on the eve of the 1990–91 season...- do we know why?Done
and captain Terry Evans suffered a long-term injury on the opening day of the season.- may as well say what the injury wasDone
Just two defeats in 11 matches put the Bees up to 10th by the end of 1992- am I missing something here? You didn't mention a poor start just before this...?Done
The Bees were easily defeated 3–1 in the fifth round by Charlton Athletic, but too many draws late in the season dropped the club to a 3rd-place finish..'' - "but" is odd here as they are both bad things so I can't see the contrast...? {[done}}
- Finally - the trick is to avoid these articles turning into a chronological sequence of factoids - any analysis on why any manager did well or poorly, or any other bits on particularly good players would be good to add if you can find them.
A promising article with alot of heart in it...needs some polishing but eminently doable Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:20, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Casliber: I have addressed all of your concerns. Would you be able to take a look over the article and seem what the situation is now? REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:13, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
1. Well written?:
- Prose quality:
- Manual of Style compliance:
2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:
- References to sources:
- Citations to reliable sources, where required:
- No original research:
3. Broad in coverage?:
- Major aspects:
- Focused:
4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:
- Fair representation without bias:
5. Reasonably stable?
- No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):
6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:
- Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:31, 30 March 2021 (UTC)