Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/Jimmy Forrest (footballer)/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like other editors to review the article to see if it can be rated higher than "start class".


Thanks, Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 19:29, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Peanut4 (talk · contribs)
  • "easy victories" may be true but it's POV without any reference.
    •  Done Scores added
  • "Ironically, Scotland faced Wales in their last match in the 1884 British Home Championship on the day of the cup final and were forced to field a reserve eleven." I don't think this is relevant to Jimmy Forrest.
    •  Done Moved to footnote as interesting "aside"
  • "excellent pass" as easy victories, it's POV without a reference.
    •  Done Reference added
  • "brace" I know what it means, but it needs explaining, linking (note the previous page for brace has been deleted) or re-wording.
  • "England were disappointing". POV / needs reference.
    •  Done Reference added
  • "Queen's Park were hoping to gain revenge for their defeat" I think this is a gimme, and doesn't really add anything.
    •  Done Re-worded
  • I think some of the capitals need changing, e.g. Fifth Round, the Cup, the Cup Final.
    •  Done I've removed most of the offending capitals - if I've missed any, let me know.
  • "exciting encounter with Accrington." It probably was but needs reference.
    •  Done Re-worded and reference added
  • Page ranges for the references need endashes.
    •  Done Done
  • Online references need accessdates.
    •  Done Done
  • It needs a few more references generally.
    •  Done I've added some extra references e.g. relating to the foundation of the Football League. I'll give it a rest for now, and come back in a few days with a fresh look.

Think that's all for now, but it's a good start. Peanut4 (talk) 13:39, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the semi-automated peer review (SAPR) because it should not be included here for the following reasons: 1) when the SAPR is included here, this peer review request does not show up at WP:PR for others to see it and make comments; 2) this saves space at WP:PR; and 3) this follows the directions above, i.e. "Please do not include any images, such as done/not done templates with tick/cross graphics, and do not paste in semi-automated peer reviews below: link to them instead." Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 17:41, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]