Strong oppose - tables are a mess, they are not sortable, the content is not in the best format it can be in, such as the years. Also, the lead needs to be expanded per WP:LEDE and 4 references are not verifying the entire list, needs more reliable sources. I will not review the list in depth because after a quick glance, it should have been peer reviewed. --SRX 16:32, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
I don't mean to be respectless but I'm not quite sure what you mean. Please compare the article to similar articles. The tables are not sortable because they are not supposed to be sortable as there is not meaningful way to sort them (imho at least). If you say the tables are a mess then *wow* a lot of features list seem to be perfectly messy. I copied the table from English football champions, adapting it where it made sense in the context. Same for the lead: It is actually about as comprehensive as the leads of comparable articles (see Danish champs and English champs). Regarding the references: The external links are perfectly accepted references for the article. Everything is on rsssf, r-archiv or fussballdaten. Probably they should be put under references. I will move them if that is preferred.
I still don't mean to be rude or anything but I like to bring this article to FL and am perfectly willing to improve the article where possible, therefore a little more constuctive criticism would be appreciated. OdinFK (talk) 20:16, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Much better. I would like to preface my comments with the intention I had when reworking this list in the way I did. Optimally all lists of national football champions should be coherent in appearance while having some identity of their own. At the moment national football champions FAs are Danish champs, English champs, Italian football champions. As all of these were accepted as FAs things accepted there should be accepted here, too. If wikipedia standards improved since those lists became FA, then they should be improved in points analogous to points where this list failed your review.
Is it really called the "German football championship?"
The German name is a word-by-word translation if I am not mislead by what the DFB site says.
Teams in bold won the DFB-Pokal in the same sesaon thereby completing the double. The football champions from the GDR (1949–91) are also included in the list. - this should be in near the tables explaining that not in the lead.
Copied that from England. I found it pointless to include that in the front of every single table as the lead should describe the content of the table briefly. If this is in the introduction everybody can understand all information in the tables without reading any further text.
Since 1903 there have been 141 tournaments held which decided 138 champions. - how about, Since 1903, 138 champions have been decided by 141 tournaments.
From 1949 until 1991 two German champions were decided each year, one for Eastern Germany and one for Western Germany. - how about, Between 1949 and 1991, two champions were decided each year, one each from Eastern and Western Germany, respectively.
40 clubs have since won a German football championship with Bayern Munich holding the most titles (21). - how about, 40 clubs have since won a German football championship with Bayern Munich holding the most titles, 21.
Lead needs to be expanded per WP:LEDE: State who was the first champion, who is the most recent champion. State any other relevant information to the records themselves. State how the title was formed, etc.
When the competiton was incepted in 1903 no nationwide league existed in Germany yet. The tournament instead featured several regional champions which competed in the single elimination to decide the German football champion. - Okay, how about stating that the competition, which has a spelling error in the original sentence, was incepted in 1903 by whoever. Something like The championship was incepted in 1903 by (whoever) in (where ever). During this time, no national league existed in Germany, instead the tournament featured regional champions competing in single elimination matches to decide the German football champion. Also, source for this statement?
The 'Bundesliga - History' source is the source. Added a ref tag to that sentence to make it more clear.
After the competition had been halted due to World War I for several years until it continued in 1920. - bad wording. It's also weird how you never say when the national league was established. Anyways, this sentence should be, Due to World War I, the competition was halted from (state the actual years), until it resumed in 1920.
The mode was changed by the Nazis in 1933 and from then on several times until the competition came again to halt due to World War II in 1945. - first of all, what does "mode" mean in this context?
That's an in-paragraph reference to the description of the mode two sentences before. It is pretty obvious, but I added "of the competition" anyway to make it more clear.
From 1946 on championships were played out in the occupied territories of Germany and in 1948 the champions form the four western territories decided the first post-war German football champion. - wow, I don't even know how to reword this because the original one makes no sense, please revise.
It's form but from. Should make sense then.
While the competition was continued in the West, Eastern Germany incepted its own competition, the first nationwide football league in Germany, named Fußball-Oberliga. - While the competition continued in the West, Eastern Germany started it's own competition, named (w/e it's called). Notice how I didn't include "the first nationwide football league in Germany" because how is it nationwide if it's only in the East?
Due to the fact that two nations existed on the territory formerly and afterwards known as Germany, the GDR and the FRG. Each nation had its own nationwide competition. Certainly it is not necessary to make an in-depth analysis of the political situation here. It's probably a balancing act how to phrase that. In your sentence you ignore the very notable fact that the first leagues, perceived as nationwide, were actually seperate leagues in the east and the west.
In 1963 the DFB created the Bundesliga, the nationwide league in West Germany. - 1)Spell out the entire name of the DFB and place the acronym in parenthesis. 2) It's not nationwide if it's in one half of the country.
1) done. 2) see above
After the German Reunification in 1990 the Oberliga was dissolved in 1991. Hansa Rostock and Dynamo Dresden were admitted to the Bundesliga the follwoing season, thereby forming the first German football league covering all German states. - merge: After the German Reunification in 1990, the Oberliga was dissolved a year later; this followed with Hansa Rostock and Dynamo Dresden's admission into the Bundesliga the following season, therefore forming the first German nationwide football league.
The last team to win the Viktoria was Dresdner SC who defeated the air force club Luftwaffen SV Hamburg in Berlin's Olympic Stadium 4 – 0 at the end of the 1943–44 competition. ---> The final team to win the Viktoria was Dresdner SC, who defeated Luftwaffen SV Hamburg 4-0 at Berlin's Olympic Stadium in the final game of the 1943-1944 tournament.
In the confusion at the end of World War II, the trophy disappeared. It was re-discovered decades later in an East German bank safe-deposit box where it had been placed by a Dresden supporter for safekeeping. - Sounds like POV, should be reworded to something like After World Ward II, the trophy was unable to be located until (specific date) when it was found in a safe-deposit box, which is where it had been placed by a Dresden supported for safekeeping. Also needs a source.
A specific date is unknown. Actually it is rather unclear what is fact about this and what myth. The DFB states they received the trophy after the reunification. The Wikipedia general consensus seems to be that the trophy was hidden by a Dresden supporter. I also read somewhere that the trophy was hidden beneath a pile of coals. Maybe the DFB even knew. Unfortunately I was not able to (re-)locate an article about that outside the Wikipedia. So I changed that to a rather unspecific but citable version.
It has since been returned to the German football association. In the meantime, a new championship trophy, the Meisterschale ("Championship Plate"), was created in 1949. 1. FC Nuremberg, the first post-war champions had to make do with a pennant. - How about, During the time without the trophy, the (name of new trophy) was created in 1949, however, the first post-war champions were unable to receive trophy and instead got a pennant because ....(elaborate).
Changed my version a little. Should be more clear know.
The competition was a single elimination tournament with each match held on a neutral ground. - what does "neutral ground" mean?
Aren't you a little picky here?
In 1933 the Naziregime changed the German league structure drastically. At first 16 Gauligas were incepted. The champions of each Gauliga competed in the national championship. The championship itself had a group stage which qualified for the final single elimination stage. - very confusing, should be reworded to make more clear as I myself do not understand.
Beginning in 1939 the mode of the competition was often changed in its last years. This was owed to the war leading to material shortcoming and difficulties in transportation. Also several new Gauligas, partly from the occupied territories, had to be included. - same thing with this one.
Basing it off previous FLC's that were promoted before the tightening up of the FL criteria, the year section should be made sortable.
The winner should also be made sortable.
I got mixed feelings on that (see below), but done.
Sortable winners and runner-ups okay, but isn't this a little silly? Including a sorting feature just because we can? Sorting by result is not really meaningful. I actually did it. It is more work to make it unsortable anyway, but I disagree that this is a good table this way.
VfB Leipzig would have faced Berliner TuFC Britannia 1889 but no final was held. - Is Berlin TuFC Britannia 1889 their name? also comma before "but"
It's not their name any more. It was then.
Every table should be sortable.
Disagree. The one-rowed table should not be sortable. The rest is sortable now.
Also, more sources need to be referenced to verify this information, 4 sources are not citing all this information.
There are more sources now. The tables were completely verifiable with the external links anyway. If you have any suggestions how to place these to be more obviously references I would appreciate that. Added DFB and Abseits for good measure as external links/sources.
Yeah. It fails your review, but now I know why and I could do something about it. I was probably a little overconfident about the article making it to FL instantly. So apologies if the nomination was premature and I should have let it peer-reviewed before. Anyway there should not be too much left to do now. I hope for some more constuctive criticism and then the article should be there. OdinFK (talk)
In the chapter Bundesliga (BRD) and Oberliga (GDR) 1964–1991, you name the West German champion, the runner-up and the league´s topscorer. But you only name the East German champion. How about naming the East German runner-up and league top scorer, too? --Hullu poro (talk) 15:39, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
I thought about that myself. Now that it comes up I think either champ (west) - RU (west) - champ (east) - RU (east) or champ (west) - scorer (west) - champ (east) - scorer (east) should be inclued. If all of six categories would be included the table will look absolutely terrible at most resolutions. Opinions on what to include? OdinFK (talk) 17:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
I would make two seperate lists. First a list for FRG and then the GDR. --Hullu poro (talk) 10:30, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
I dont' find that very appealing because it disturbs the chronoligical order of the article. But it is certainly a solution to the problem. OdinFK (talk) 10:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Another possibility would be to kick the top scorers out. Then you´d have enough space to name the East German runners-up. --Hullu poro (talk) 18:59, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
I would suggest losing the top scorer. It's an interesting tidbit to be sure, but as this is a list of the champions, individual achievement should have a lower priority than the East German RU.
You should also be aware that there was no championship awarded for the winner of the 1955 season in East Germany. This was just a half-championship placed between the summer-winter 1954-55 and summer 1956 seasons for purely technical reasons. DDR-Oberliga 1955 needs to be corrected accordingly. Madcynic (talk) 16:09, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
See also sections usually come before the references.
Otherwise sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Note I did not evaluate the non-English sources. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Moved see also section and also changed some things to reflect Madcynic's comments. OdinFK (talk) 10:31, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
The sortability has not been resolved, whilst you have added class="wikitable sortable" the colspan feature of the entries 1904, 1992 and WWI and II, meant sortability function doesn't work for runners-up or the scores.
I see, but I have no idea how to solve this right now.
Ref 2 & 6 need language tags i.e. and (in German).
Why? These references refer to the english site of the DFB. While reference 6 does not really utilize any language other than names it is still the English page.
Don't assume someone knows what (a.e.t.) means
No, I don't, but I suppose somebody interested in finding out will click the link. I can add those links at the first occurrence in each table, though.
From 1959-1991, the linked years go to the Bundesliga (or equivalent), so clicking on it is completely useless for someone expecting to find out more info on the Oberliga.
There are no articles about the Oberliga. Everything you can find out in the English Wikipedia you will find out when you check out the link at the top.
Why are Oberliga runners-up not listed pre-1963, but are listed post-1964
I don't know to be honest. Probably space seemed to be an issue, but it is really not. It will be up shortly.
"Champions of the occupation zones 1946–48" appears to be completely unreferenced
Same for "German football championship 1948".
In fact note that alot of these sections appear to be referenced. NB. External links do not count as references.
As far as I can see all your issues have been resolved. It would be great if you could check that this is really the case. If it is not or you have some other suggestions I won't tire. Cheers, OdinFK (talk) 10:07, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
All my issues have not been resolved and the list is far from featurable quality. So I still oppose.
"Check out the fourth external link" is not a valid response to a lack of reference. They are external links (notreferences)
It was kind of an informal explanation. I've given that specific fact a ref, didn't I?
The lead is too short.
In ==German football championship (BRD) and Fußball-Oberliga (GDR) 1949–1963==, should be "BRD champions" or something equivalent not "winners" as that could be confused with the Oberliga champions.
[OL 2] No championship was awarded ths season. Why? Had it been awarded in the previous seasons.
It was a transitionary round, played in between two other championships. It's the only time that happened. I have no source going into detail about that, therefore I didn't go into detail either. Take a look at the references given now. I'm not perfectly happy with the source because it is tables only, but it is the best I could find out there.
Is it not? Nobody complained when I used fussballdaten.de as a source for a GA so I supposed it should be okay.
Image is of questionable copyright.
Prose issues e.g.
"After the competition had been halted due to World War I from 1915, until it was resumed in 1920.", makes no sense as a sentence
Football scores shouldn't use Spaced endashs, they should be unspaced.
I wonder where you found that. I've been looking for that guideline more than once, but could never find it. In the article you link to I cannot find it either. Thanks, OdinFK (talk) 16:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
I have expanded the [OL 2] reference to include an explanation. I have also fixed some of the prose in the history section. I have removed the spacing from the result dashes. As for the WP:RS issue, fussballdaten.de is widely used in WP:FOOTY and is generally regarded as reliable within the project.Madcynic (talk) 16:40, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.