Wikipedia:Peer review/Margate F.C./archive1

Margate F.C.

I thought it would be interesting to see if I could get a non-league football club article up to featured status (I realise that York City F.C. is a FA, but I don't count them as a "true" non-league club as they were in the Football League until three years ago, Margate on the other hand have never been in the FL), so have been working hard on this one for the last fortnight or so, and would now like to get feedback on what further improvements need to be made. Many thanks in advance for your time! ChrisTheDude 23:29, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Structurally everything is sound. The same source is used for a large proportion of the references, but as non-league clubs garner less media attention than more illustrious counterparts this is difficult to avoid without access to a professional newspaper archive. No major issues, these points are fairly picky minor things.

It appears that the club were initially refused promotion in 1998-99 due to ground standards, this merits a mention.
in 1923 the club was suspended from the league due to financial irregularities and promptly folded. A year later the club was reformed as Margate Town and returned to the Kent League, still playing at Dreamland, but folded again due to heavy debts. This could do with referencing.
this policy had to be abandoned when the team were relegated back to Division One in 1965–66 This could do with rewording, unless it was mandatory to be non-professional in Division One.
Avoid colloquialisms and tabloid terms such as "bounced back" and "star-studded".

Hope this helps. Oldelpaso 17:44, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for the comments, I've addressed points 2 and 3 and will look at the others tomorrow but right now my wife wants to go on the computer ;-) ChrisTheDude 21:24, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Point 1 has been addressed, and I think I've amended every point where I wrote like a red top journo ;-) ChrisTheDude 12:16, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man

Hey, good stuff and a nice idea to see a non-league club to FA. My comments:

...have reached the third round proper of the FA Cup on two occasions, including a match against Tottenham Hotspur in 1973. - I know why this is significant, but would the non-football savvy reader? Presumably you could just add something about them being in the top league of English football here. I'm also not 100% keen on the words ...including a match against... - but can't think of an alternative yet!
Move ref [3] to end of sentence.
(Very) personal preference, I prefer First World War and Second World War to World War I and II, it looks more elegant and helps with the prose flow, such as prior to the First World War instead of prior to World War I. But feel free to ignore that one!
The unusual Dutch signing - was it unusual to Margate alone or to English football at that time?
Could make a brief explanation of nursery side for the non-expert reader.
3rd round - I'd prefer third round, especially as you have First qualifying round later instead of 1st...
I'm not keen on the three seasons in parentheses, perhaps something like home attendances from 2001 to 2004 were 1,233, 684 and 562 respectively?
Move ref [32] to in front of ref [33], after the end of the sentence.
Are the tbcs in the manager list really to be confirmed or are they simply unknown?
Consistent use of & in Honours section (i.e. between the penultimate and ultimate seasons of a given honour).
Space before refs [73] & [74] should be removed.

None of these points are in any way major and I can't see a big problem with taking this to WP:FAC sooner rather than later! All the best, The Rambling Man 17:04, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Many thanks for the feedback Rambling, and I'll address all those points ASAP. As for the TBCs in the manager info, well, they're unknown/unconfirmable via all the sources I've found thus far, but that doesn't mean a source might not be found by me or someone else at some point (there might be a book about the club of which I'm not aware, for instance) so I chose to put TBC rather than "unknown" as the latter seems (to me at any rate) to suggest that the info will never be found. What do you reckon.........? ChrisTheDude 20:33, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mattythewhite

Not much I can recommend really! Great work with the article so far, I'm sure it'll get to FA status soon. But I would recommend..

Moving some of the sections around, so its structured a bit more like Ipswich Town F.C. or York City F.C. for example.
Putting the honours into a table.
Having a reference after each of the members of the Current Staff looks a bit dodgy.. perhaps one could be added for the last one or 'As of 14 June 2007.' with the ref could be added?

Not very major things I've got to bring up, this article is in a very healthy state at the moment. Mattythewhite 10:22, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]