Talk:1996–97 Arsenal F.C. season/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Meetthefeebles (talk · contribs) 10:02, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

I'll review. Give me a day or so to put something together... Meetthefeebles (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, work came along from nowhere and swamped me unexpectedly. I'll defintely get something put together in the next 36 hours or so. Meetthefeebles (talk) 18:16, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay, finally got a bit of time to get back to this. Let's get started: I'll work my way through the article and will make notes/comments below...

Disambiguation – one found. Can you redirect George Graham please?
Dead links – none found
Images – this one is easy; there aren't any to check.
Quick fail issues – can't see any clean-up templates, plenty of inline references, no obvious edit warring. Looks fine.


  • I'd expect to see a reference for the first sentence.
  • What is here is fine but I'd like to see more detail; per WP:LEAD there should be a summation of all important elements of the article. Some of the things I'd expect to see here include a more detailed summation of the league campaign – Arsenal led the table for spells and were right in title contention until a poor February cost them dearly – the signing of very important players Anelka and Viera and the departure of Hartson for a substantial fee, and also perhaps who was club captain (Adams, presumably?).


  • Worth blue linking league cup final in the first sentence?
  • "Under his stewardship, the club for a short period, broke the English transfer record by paying Internazionale £7.5million for Dutch striker Dennis Bergkamp, and the new signing formed an impressive partnership with Ian Wright" This is a complex sentence and doesn;t quite read right – suggest removing 'for a short period,' and the comma after 'Bergkamp'?
  • I'd like to see a reference for the last sentence of this paragraph, particular one which supports the claim that 'there was hope for an eventual title challenge'
  • It might be worth being more specific that 'parted company with Rioch'. Was he dismissed or did he resign? Was it a mutual breakup?
  • Can you attribute the claim that Rioch's relationship with Dean was "no longer cordial"? Who said this? (I do not have access to the source so do not know).
An insider, which is made discreet.
  • Do you 'identify' your next manager? I wonder if perhaps 'selected' would be better?
  • Again, I'm not sure what is meant by a contract being 'compromised'. Can you be a little more specific – did it come to a natural end, was it terminated by mutual consent or perhaps consent was refused and compensation paid?
  • Is there a reason why some of the players in the transfer tables are missing squad numbers?
Numbers were not officially given to those players/unknown.

Premier League

August – October

  • Were Arsenal strictly speaking 'managerless' for the first game or was Houston caretaker manager?
  • Suggest a comma after "designated penalty taker Ian Wright"
  • Unlink Ian Wright per WP:OVERLINK
  • "Arsenal lost their first match of the league season" – that reads wrong to me and seems to indicate that they lost their first game of the season. Suggest "Arsenal suffered their first loss of the league season two days later away to Liverpool" or similar?
  • I'm not sure the commas in "The team responded with a 2–0 win at Leicester City, in a game where Wright started as a substitute, but scored the decisive goal" – suggest removal?
  • Ditto the commas in the next sentence.
  • Is it "on the first week of September" or "in the first week of September"?
  • Should it be "given the manner in which the team came back..."? Actually, on reflection I think a general reword might be better here as the sentence is a little needlessly complex – perhaps "...outstanding by Houston after the team had recovered from a two goal half time deficit"?
  • Was Viera 'introduced' or did he make his debut in his game against Sheff Wed? If the latter, I think it important enough to be specific and state precisely as such in light of his importance over subsequent years.
  • Suggest a dash after Sunderland F.C. to match the lead-in dash.
  • "Two goals, scored by Wright in either interval" – did Wright really score in each break? Suggest rewrite.
  • If Arsenal were second top, level on points with Liverpool, after beating Sunderland, how did winning their next game "help them move into second place"? Perhaps better to say they consolidated their position or similar?
  • Suggest removing the comma after 'Ogrizovic"?
  • Did Graham makes his managerial return "at Highbury" or "to Highbury"?
  • Suggest adding a sentence to the end of this section stating Arsenal's league position at the end of October?

November – February

  • Is "played in Wright" encyclopedic?
  • How long was the barren run of goalless games at Old Trafford? Might be worth noting?
  • "Wenger rued the goal conceded after the match, but was not despondent..." I'm not sure about this sentence; perhaps it might be better to simply say something like "After the match, Wenger told the press..."?
  • Genuine question; is it "attentions" or "attention"? I'd have thought the latter?
  • "With Arsenal having not beaten their neighbours in over three years, the significance of the match also had ramifications in the league" – these two statements are mutually exclusive I think and the second statement doesn't really make sense so perhaps a slight rewrite is needed. Suggest adding the first part to the end of the previous sentence and then starting a new sentence with "The match also had ramifications in the league..."?
  • The dash in the next sentence seems a little out of place; suggest removal and replace with "and the ball fell to Andy Sinton, whose shot..."
  • "having played three-quarters of the match down to ten men" – suggest slight change to "of the match with ten men" to improve prose.
  • How does a team "move(d) three points clear of the league"? Suggest rewrite?
  • The next sentence could be improved by the removal of either the second comma or even perhaps both of them.
  • Should it be "marked Stuart Pearce's managerial debut"?
  • " On New Year's Day, Wright scored his 200th league goal in England in Arsenal's" – to avoid repetition of 'in', suggest "Wright scored his 200th English league goal in..."
  • Suggest adding date of the defeat to Sunderland.
  • Suggest removing the comma after 'kept up with Man Utd and Liverpool'
  • Is there a reason why the Wenger quote at the end of this section is in the note and not the main body of the article? I'd perhaps include it in the main body or not at all (probably the former). I'd also again like to see a note of Arsenal's league position (and perhaps points difference to Man Utd) at this stage – this might give context to the Wenger giving in quote.
Hmmm, not sure why it was like that. Added the quote and included a league table summary like you say.

March – May

  • Suggest removing the comma from the first sentence of this section.
  • Also suggest removing the comma after 24 March 1997.
  • "The player himself "stood and mouthed: 'No penalty!'" given Seaman made no contact in the penalty box, though the referee was adamant of his decision; Fowler's spotkick was later saved, but it ricocheted off Seaman and put in the net by Jason McAteer for the opening goal." This is a very complex sentence. Suggest breaking up into two sentences, the removal of the colons and perhaps a slight rewrite as the current wording makes the penalty sound a little like pinball when what actually happened was a weak penalty was saved but the rebound was knocked in.
  • Perhaps worth adding 'again' to Wenger ruling out title hopes – he did the same thing a month ago.
  • Remove comma in "A further draw, against Coventry City"
  • The 'league' in "stay another league season" is probably redundant and can be removed I think. Also suggest adding a comma after 'top flight'.
  • Suggest adding 'had' before "however played two games more..." and removing the semi-colon to replace with 'and'.
  • I can't read the source but did Elliot's winner at Highbury really move Newcastle 'into pole position' for the second champions league spot? As I recall, Liverpool had a two point lead over both NUFC and AFC going into the last day of the season?
Newcastle following the win had two games in hand over Arsenal and Liverpool. It was implausible that they would win the title by that stage, but it reinvigorated their chances of finishing second. Have attached the match report if you need to double check.
  • The tables all look sound and are well presented

FA Cup

  • This section is well written and perfectly fine as is with one exception: suggest adding 'premier' to "defeat to fellow league side Leeds Utd..."

League Cup

  • Suggest removing the first comma
  • Otherwise this section is also good


  • Did Arsenal qualify "by virtue of..." or "in virtue of..."?
  • Also, remove the comma after "qualified for".
  • Did Effenberg "follow through" or perhaps "follow up"?
  • Is it possible to "half the scoreline"? Suggest "half the deficit" or similar?
  • Remove the comma after "Monchengladbach's advantage"
  • Suggest slight rewrite of next statement to "he headed the ball unchallenged past Seaman".


  • I've checked all of the available weblinks and there are no problems with paraphrasing or WP:COPYVIO that I can see. I cannot check the non web links but that has no bearing on this review.

Overall comments
This is a well written, detailed and enjoyable article and is quite close at this point to GA status. However, there are one or two things that could be added to broaden the article suitably and there are several minor prose issues (including a lot of commas) which can be ironed out to bring the article up to standard. Having said that, most of the above are quite minor and there looks more than there is in reality, so I am happy to place on hold to allow improvements to be made. Meetthefeebles (talk) 13:24, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your through review, Meetthefeebles. I have been meaning to reply much earlier, but given unforeseeable circumstances, have only been able to do the corrections bit-by-bit. Think I have done them all now and replied to specific points. Lemonade51 (talk) 13:53, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in responding; I've just moved house and am currently sans internet at home. I'll look this one over again this afternoon... Meetthefeebles (talk) 09:38, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Can we get an update on this review, please? It has been open for over two months. Adabow (talk) 05:21, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Meetthefeebles has been inactive the last month or so. Could anyone step in to check if I have done what was required of me, and/or possibly add some suggestions of their own? I intend to have a indefinite wikibreak in late Autumn, so the sooner this article passes/fails, the better. Lemonade51 (talk) 11:12, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Second review I'll jump in and check that the original reviewers comments has been adressed. I believe the original review was in-depth enough, so I wont read through everything, but if I see anything that needs to be fixed I'll write those aswell. Mentoz86 (talk) 12:07, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

  • It is mentioned twice in the lead that Arsenal lost the spot for the Champions League on goal difference. Suggesting to remove "via goal difference" in the first paragraph, if you want to have this information twice in the lead.
Removed it
  • Where are the statistics from all the matches in the article, goalscorers and attendance etc, including the friendlies that was recently added, sourced from?
Arseweb '1996–97 calendar', cited under the reference section for convenience.
  • Remove one duplicate word in " was described as "outstanding" outstanding by Houston"
Have done.
  • I suggest changing "Together with the other clubs playing in European football" to "Together with the other clubs playing in European competitions"
  • I believe you need a citation for the "Appearance and goals" and "Top scorers" sections.
Removed the topscorers section, not sure why it was added. Cited the statistics underneath the table.

But overall, this looks very good, and everything mentioned in the above review has been taken care of. Mentoz86 (talk) 12:31, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Cheers for taking this on. Lemonade51 (talk) 13:42, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Since we're at two completed reviews now, I'm going to go ahead and pass this article. Wizardman 21:33, 26 September 2013 (UTC)