Talk:Motherwell F.C.

is there any mention on Wikipedia of the fact that Motherwell and the rest of the Scottish premier league is on EA sports FIFA 2005?--BUF4Life 03:00, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

All this ratings garbage...

This discussion I'm about to start probably has a much wider remit than just this article... but why has a self-appointed Wikiproject deemed itself responsible to sit and grade articles that come under a general subject header as it sees fit? Do you think editors appreciate being told their work is essentially second-rate? Erath 21:42, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

The article quality rating is not necessarily (i think) a measure of how good the work of the editors is, but it helps the project members establish a general status of the entries related to the project, by which they know what articles need the most work, etc. B-class is pretty good (considering the tons of other important articles that are just stubs), if you are talking about this article in particular. However, please feel free to modify and/or add ratings at your criterion. Regards, ChaChaFut 04:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm far too close to the issue to be subjective about it. But surely it is more constructive to discuss possible improvements to the article - or for that matter, simply make the improvements - than stamp its talk-page with an all-encompassing 'grade' sans raison. I'm sure editors from WikiProject Football have made contributions to the article, but there are plenty who haven't too... I just feel that carte blanche is being invoked by people who haven't necessary had a lot to do with the article's content in the first place. Erath 07:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

As the editor who assessed the article, a little explanation. Yes, the ratings system is subjective, but it gives some indication of how far down the path an article is to becoming a featured article. It is meant as a quick guide, not a decree. No, I haven't worked on this article, but I've worked on a great many similar to it. I agree that discussing improvements is always helpful, but unfortunately the backlog of unassessed articles is huge, so a lot of articles don't get the attention they perhaps deserve.

This article is by no means second rate. Its pretty good - it gives a balanced account of the history, and has some references. The next step up from B is "good article" which has more definite criteria - the only one where this article is lacking in that respect is that significant parts of it have no references. Other things I'd suggest:

• A section about Fir Park would be beneficial.
• For fairly well-developed article like this one, the lead should be two or three paragraphs, see WP:LEAD.
• The tone of the Past Strips section is geared a little too much towards fan viewpoints. Why is the 1996-98 kit regarded so badly? Why is "Come on Ye Well" infamous? The section does not explicitly state that the club play in amber and claret.
• Discretionary plural - there is some inconsistency in whether or not the club is referred to in the plural (Motherwell is a Scottish football club... their home stadium is Fir Park) . Either is acceptable, but the same one should be used throughout.

For additional ideas for how the article can improve, looking at existing featured football club articles may be of benefit. Oldelpaso 09:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, a useful forum for collecting ideas and suggestions for improvement is Wikipedia:Peer review were you can add Motherwell F.C. If you want to then notify the Wikiproject that the article is up for peer review then you'll doubtless get some helpful and constructive criticism. Please don't take the rating thing personally, as many other editors have said, the article is in good shape and with a few prods and pokes could easily attain good article status, should this be something you're interested in pursuing. Regardless, keep up the good work and don't hesitate to contact me or anyone else at the Football Wikiproject should you need any further words of advice. All the best The Rambling Man 09:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Alrighty, thanks for some much more constuctive criticsm. Erath 17:16, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

The answers the editors gave were not criticism, they were merely responding to your question in good faith. I see you've now asked the same question at Talk:Ball tampering [1]. What is the purpose of these questions Erath? —Moondyne 07:31, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Retiring number 10

There seems to be something of an edit war brewing wrt the retirement/non-retirement of Phil O'Donnell's number 10, I know there's a well-established precedent but has it actually been confirmed by the club yet, and can it be sourced? DrFishcake (talk) 23:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Adding citation needed to that section. Let's keep it for now. RIP Phil --n1yaNt 23:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Death of Phil O'Donnell

The death of Phil O'Donnell IS now a rather big thing in the history of Motherwell FC, yes he may have just been a man, and indeed he does have his own section. The addition of a section to the history entitled Phil O'Donnell was meant to reflect the effect that it had on the club, the fans and the local community. You can't deny it isn't a significant part in the history... —Preceding unsigned comment added by RobertsonG (talk • contribs) 21:13, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Could be re-worded, it sounds like we signed him and then he died, sounds almost offensive and it doesn't have to be.