Wikipedia:Peer review/Cardiff City F.C./archive1

Cardiff City F.C.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I hope to take it to FA status. I nominated the page in September 2017 but it was closed due to lack of attention. I've decided to try another run at it, so I've brought it here to hopefully get it up to scratch. Thanks, Kosack (talk) 05:33, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I was surprised it didn't get through then. Football-interested editors are scattered about. Maybe The Rambling Man and Dweller can offer some input. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:28, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the lead, "and joined the English football league system in 1910, competing in the Southern Football League before joining the Football League in 1920. " is a bit laboured - could be simplified to "and entered the Southern Football League in 1910, before joining the Football League in 1920. "

Comments from Dweller Super article. A few things from me to kick off:

"showdown talks" =?
Malky's dossier is pretty noteworthy, it brought a lot of media scrutiny on the club
nothing about supporter songs?
love the little kits - really minor point: is it possible to get the images to line up, perhaps with a consistent top line?
switch to red - first time not blue since 1910 or 1908? Compare the text and the kit images.

More to come, I'm pretty sure I'll be able to support this at some point though. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 22:16, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Further political divide was caused by the Welsh devolution referendum in 1997." - why? how? Unreferenced. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 16:17, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Alan Curtis, who played for both sides, commented "I think Cardiff has always been perceived [...] to receive whatever funding is going around. It seems to me that everything gets channelled in that direction."[55]" Is that connected to the previous sentence? Whether it is or isn't I don't understand the sentiment or why it's in the article --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 16:17, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Dweller: I've expanded in this section a little more to explain clearer and added an extra link to the relevant ref. Hopefully it makes more sense now. I was using the Curtis quote to try and emphasize the feeling of rivalry between the two cities brought on by the referendum . Kosack (talk) 18:57, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to weigh in here, as well as here and here. The nominators could help one another, me, and the community, by commenting on the other two pages. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 10:54, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks both for the comments, I've amended the article to fix the issues raised. Kosack (talk) 20:18, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Hzh The article looks good, but a brief comment - I would expect a featured article on a football club to have a section about the fanbase apart from club rivalries (see for example Manchester United F.C., Arsenal F.C., Liverpool F.C., etc.) perhaps add something on that? Also perhaps add a section on the ownership, although that is already covered to some extent in history, and not all featured articles have a separate section on that. Hzh (talk) 10:41, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments, I've had a go at adding a section on supporter culture other than simply rivalry so to hopefully provide a better insight there. Kosack (talk) 21:07, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]