Wikipedia:Peer review/Hyde Road/archive1

Hyde Road

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for July 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article about a football stadium for peer review because I feel I have taken it as far as I can with the available sources, given that it was demolished 85 years ago. There probably isn't enough material to justify an FA nomination, but GA seems an attainable target. Oldelpaso (talk) 19:24, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Review by Jappalang (talk · contribs)

General

• Names or nicknames should not be in italics unless required per WP:ITALICS. By my reading of the guidelines, nicknames should be quoted instead.

  This means the following should be quoted instead of being in italics.

• Galloway End
• Stone Yard Stand
• Hotel End
• The Popular Side
• The Brewerymen

The following should not be quoted or in italics.

• Hyde Road Hotel
• Ardwick A.F.C.
• Manchester City F.C.
• Hyde Road
• Bennett Street
• The City Gates

• Does "Main Stand" require to be capitalized?

Most of my sources refer to it as a proper noun.

In that case, perhaps mention should be made to relate it to the "main grandstand" in the Layout and structure section?

• Images can be staggered per MOS:IMAGES.

Lead

• "It was home to Manchester City F.C. and its predecessors from its construction in 1887 until 1923, when the club moved to Maine Road."

  Watch the pronouns. Whose predecessors and construction are referred to by "it"? It would be better to split the sentence into two sentences dealing with distinct objects.

At risk of incurring the wrath of speakers of American English, if have introduced a discretionary plural to differentiate the two.

• "was an area of waste ground" -> "was a waste ground"

  The "area" was redundant. In any event, what is a "waste ground"? Would "dumping ground", "trash site", or "midden" have sufficed?

Your confusion makes me wonder whether the term "waste ground" is peculiar to British English. It does not mean a place where refuse is stored or dumped, but land which is disused, derelict or underused, that is, land which is "going to waste".

Perhaps it is, I usually hear the term for such land as simply "ununsed (disused) land". Mayhaps other editors can help to weigh in on this?

In terms of my sources, Ward and Inglis use "waste ground", James uses "wasteland". Oldelpaso (talk) 16:20, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

• "ground gained its own changing facilities"

  I do not think a non-entity is able to profit (as from "gain") from a changing facility built on it? The "but" is also contradictory to the mention of the ground having rudimentary facilities at the start.

• "The first stand was built in 1888, but it was not until 1896 that the ground gained its own changing facilities, with players instead getting changed in a nearby public house, the Hyde Road Hotel." -> "The first stand was built in 1888, and until 1896, the ground had no changing facilities; the players had to change in a nearby public house, the Hyde Road Hotel."

I think a contrastive term is necessary; one would expect changing rooms to be among the first developments. I've gone for a hybrid of the original wording and your suggestion.

• "by 1920 the club had outgrown the cramped venue." -> "by 1920 the venue could not accomodate the attendances."

Ease of access was more of an issue than capacity, so the alternative wording would only be partially true.

• "The last surviving part of the ground is a section of roofing, which forms part of a stand at The Shay, a stadium in Halifax."

  How can a stadium that was demolished have a "surviving part"? The "surviving" along with "form" seem to give an impression that the ground "survived" its demolition and "formed" into The Shay, which is in Halifax instead of Arwick. Quite an awkward impression. I sugges, "A section of roofing from the ground was used as part of a stand at The Shay, a stadium in Halifax."

History

• "continuing to play at Hyde Road."

  This clause is unnecessary as the context of the history follows City at Hyde Road.

• "Improvements costing £600 were made in 1890, and the ground finally gained its own changing rooms in 1896." -> "In 1890, £600 was spent to improve the ground, and changing rooms were finally installed in 1896."

I'm reluctant to change this as several sentences already start "In month or year", and I'm wary of introducing proseline.

No problem, it was a suggestion that is likely preference. (I, too, agree we should be wary of proselines...)

• "In the years around the turn of the century an extremely large amount of money by the standards of the period was spent on ground improvements. A new stand was purchased for £1,500 in 1898, and £2,000 of improvement were made in 1904, resulting in a capacity of 40,000 with stands on three sides." -> "An extremely large sum of money was spent on ground improvements around the turn of the century; a new stand was purchased for £1,500 in 1898, and £2,000 worth of improvements were made in 1904, resulting in a capacity of 40,000 with stands on three sides."
• "two prestigious matches, a inter-league match"

  Beware the serial comma. In this instance, it could mean four matches (two prestigious, one inter-league, and one FA Cup semi-final). Use a dash instead, "two prestigious matches—an inter-league match".

• "resulting in covered accommodation for 35,000 of the 40,000 capacity." -> "offering shelter for 35,000 out of the full capacity."
• "However, even after these improvements the ground struggled to cope with large crowds. A 1913 cup tie against Sunderland drew a crowd officially recorded as 41,709, but believed to be significantly higher." -> "However, the improved capacity could not accomodate the large attendances; a 1913 cup tie against Sunderland drew a crowd officially recorded as 41,709, but it was believed to be significantly higher."

It is only the crowd for the Sunderland match which could not be accommodated. The crowd were accommodated in other matches, just not particularly safely :) .

Okay, ignore the linking of the two sentences with the semi-colon. What I was more concerned with was the "struggled to cope" part; prescribing a sense of actitivity ("struggle") with a non-entity seems a bit informal to me.

• "The crowd was so large that once the match kicked off the crowd began to spill onto the pitch, a problem which became worse as the game progressed." -> "The large crowd began to encroach onto the pitch on kick off, and the problem worsened as the game progressed."
• "A Sunderland goal in the 58th minute caused further encroachment, forcing the referee to abandon the match." -> "Sunderland's goal in the 58th minute incited the crowd to move further into the field and the referee was forced to abandon the match."
• "An FA inquiry into the events on the terraces gave rise to debate on the issue of crowd control at sporting events. Use of mounted police was a particularly contentious issue," -> "The subsequent FA inquiry debated on crow control at sporting events. Suggestions (The suggestion) to use mounted police were (was) particularly contentious,"
• "When competitive football ceased during the First World War," -> "During the cessation of competitive football in the First World War,"
• "During the wartime period the club became the sole leaseholders of the ground, and were no longer dependent upon support from Chesters brewery. At this point the annual rent was £500." -> "Manchester City F.C. became the sole leaseholders of the ground in wartime and no longer depended upon Chesters Brewery's support, paying £500 annual rent to Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire."

I don't know if its just me, but I think "wartime" with no other wording would make it sound like the lease was only valid during times of war.

Yes, my suggestion does render that idea. Replacing "in wartime" with "during the wartime" in my suggestion could solve it. How does that sound? One reason I suggested the sentence change is to eliminate "during" at the start of two successive sentences.

• "to be visited by a reigning monarch, when George V watched a match between Manchester City and Liverpool." -> "to be visited by a reigning monarch; King George V attended the ground to watch a match between Manchester City and Liverpool."
• "In November of the same year a fire caused by a cigarette end destroyed the Main Stand,"

  I think it would be better to join this paragraph with the end of the previous paragraph to have "In November, a (discarded?) cigarette end sparked a fire which destroyed the Main Stand,".

This should be part of the same paragraph. The markup for the image is causing a new paragraph, and I can't work out why.

I solved that for you (moved the image markups to the top of paragraphs and staggered them). Wikipedia treats its image markup as a separator. Hence, images are not allowed to be set mid-paragraph as is possible for HTML or in Word documents.

• "Initial discussions raised the possibility of sharing Old Trafford with neighbours Manchester United, but this was rebuked by United, so repair work was undertaken and Manchester City continued to play at Hyde Road." -> "Discussions initially raised the possibility of sharing Old Trafford with neighbours Manchester United. United, however, rebuked this suggestion, and Manchester City continued playing at Hyde Road while it was under repairs."
• "Plans for the club to move to a new ground in Moss Side were announced in 1922." -> "In 1922, the club announced their plans to move to a new ground—Maine Road—in Moss Side."
• "Manchester City began the 1923–24 season at the newly built Maine Road, which had an 80,000 capacity." -> "Manchester City began their 1923–24 season at Maine Road, which had an 80,000 capacity."
• "the roof of the Main Stand was sold to Halifax Town, and erected at The Shay, where even in the 21st century, part of Hyde Road roof is still in place." -> "the roof of the Main Stand was sold to Halifax Town, and erected at The Shay. Part of the roof remained in place in the 21st century."
• "In the present day," -> "In the 2000s,"

  ... or something elese, since who knows what the site is going to be used for in 2028, 2040, or 2100. Better rephrase or delete this sentence.

Good old as of sorts this out.

Layout and structure

• "For certain areas of the ground few photographs survive,"

  This clause is not needed. Furthermore, it is not guaranteed that these photographs would exist 30 years in the future.

The intention is not so much to comment on the photographs, but to explain that a detailed description is not possible.

I see. Again, it is more of what I perceive as an informal tone of inanimate objects "surviving" (I know, the dictionary's definitions list a "to continue to function", but...). How about "Few photographs of Hyde Road remained to show the ground's complete design; however, a 1894 map of the stadium showed that most of the terracing was of an uneven shape. Furthermore, a section of railway line leading to a neighbouring boilerworks was between the terrace and the pitch at one corner of the ground." I advise to at least follow the below suggestion (integrated in the suggestion here) as "bizarrely" can be construed as a "point-of-view" (unless you put it up as a quote and sourced it).

• "however, a map dating from 1894 indicates that most of the terracing was of uneven shape, and that bizarrely, a section of railway line leading to a neighbouring boilerworks was situated between the terrace and the pitch at one corner of the ground." -> "A 1894 map of the stadium showed that most of the terracing was of an uneven shape. Furthermore, a section of railway line leading to a neighbouring boilerworks was between the terrace and the pitch at one corner of the ground."
• "The main grandstand was situated at the north of the ground. This structure was built in 1899 for £1,500, replacing a stand with a capacity of 1,000. It comprised an upper tier of seating and a lower paddock. Most contemporary sources listed the capacity as 4,000, though it is unclear whether this refers to the seating capacity or the total capacity. The wooden stand was gutted by fire in 1920, causing the loss of both the stand and the club records, which were stored within." -> "The main grandstand was at the north of the ground. Originally it had a capacity of a thousand. In 1899, it was replaced with a two-tier wooden structure for £1,500. The upper tier was entirely seated and most contemporary sources listed the structure's or the upper tier's capacity as 4,000. The main stand was destroyed by a fire in 1920, which also destroyed the club records stored within the stand."

To describe it as a two-tier wooden structure would be incorrect, making it sound more grandiose than it was - it was a grandstand with a standing area in front of it, at a slightly lower level.

Ah... okay. It was just that the thought of "This structure was built in 1899 for £1,500, replacing a stand with a capacity of 1,000." seems to imply the 1,000 capacity stand was nothing and came out of nowhere... I would have thought that the stand was the former main grandstand. Is there something that can be done?

• "Intersected by a railway loop leading to the Galloway boilerworks, one part of the terracing was known as the Boys Stand, though it was contiguous with the rest of the terrace and not a separate structure."

  I am not sure what this means. Could this be clarified?

  • A comma where a full stop should be, coupled with awkward wording. Rephrased.

    I see it now as "The north-eastern end of the ground was known as the "Galloway End". It was intersected by a railway loop leading to the Galloway boilerworks. One part of the terracing was known as the "Boys Stand". which despite its name was not a separate structure, and was instead contiguous with the rest of the terrace." I suggest "The north-eastern end of the ground was known as the "Galloway End" and was intersected by a railway loop leading to the Galloway boilerworks. One part of the terracing was known as the "Boys Stand"; however, it was not a separate structure and was contiguous with the rest of the terrace." Getting the idea now, I point out that the first two sentences are better joined together and the subsequent sentences have issues (a period connecting the "which" instead of a comma and the redundant use of "despite" with "instead"), which I tried to address with my suggestion.

• A picture of the map or a drawing from it would help this section greatly.

Unfortunately I loaned the book with the map in from the library, back when I first started the article. I have not been able to locate a copy of the (out of print) book since, despite enquiring at the library I loaned it from.

• "The terrace backed onto a row of houses on Bennett Street"

  Is it possible to explain this sentence? I am uncertain what a terrace "backing" onto a row of houses mean.

The terrace stood back-to back with a row of houses; the back of one was adjacent to the back of the other, and they touched. I'm not sure how else I can put it.

I think the "stood back-to-back" is an excellent substitute for "backed onto". It certainly makes the image clearer to me on the geography of the houses with the terrace.

Hyde Road Hotel

• "It served as the venue for several important events in the club's history, including the first meeting of Ardwick A.F.C. on 30 August 1887, and the venue when in 1894 the fans of Ardwick A.F.C. decided to form Manchester City F.C. and register Manchester City Football Club Limited as a company." -> "It served as the venue for several important events in the club's history, such as the first meeting of Ardwick A.F.C. on 30 August 1887, and the making of the 1894 decision to form Manchester City F.C. and register it as a company."
• "Attempts to save the building were made by Manchester City supporters, but made little progress." -> "Attempts to save the building were made by Manchester City supporters without much progress."
• "The building was demolished in a period from April to May 2001." -> "By May 2001, the building was demolished."
• "Two keystones from the Hyde Road Hotel are now in the memorial garden at the City of Manchester Stadium." -> "Two keystones from the Hyde Road Hotel are in the memorial garden at the City of Manchester Stadium."

Three of these done, for the demolition I will have to consult a source which I will not have access to until the weekend.

The general language is fine for a GA, but I think a copyedit is required if FA is aimed for. Jappalang (talk) 07:40, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. The majority of those points without responses have been implemented, I just prefer not to use those "done" ticks :) Oldelpaso (talk) 13:18, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

No problems. I am glad to be of help. Jappalang (talk) 14:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)