Wikipedia:Peer review/List of Oldham Athletic A.F.C. managers/archive1

List of Oldham Athletic A.F.C. managers

• 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 have recently created the article and have greatly expanded it since it's original draft. I was wondering what more I should do to possibly make a push for Featured List. :) Thanks, Ɔrassic ^(talk) 21:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: My initial impression is that the list itself looks pretty good, but at present is let down by rather poor lead and History sections. If you look at other football manager lists on WP:FL you will see that some don’t have a History section, merely a short lead followed by the list. Aston Villa F.C. managers and List of Oxford United F.C. managers are examples of this. On the other hand, the managerial lists for both Manchester clubs have History sections. It is for you to decide what strategy to follow. There are many problems with the History section as it stands, and if you decide to keep it the question you should ask yourself is: what information are you giving in the section that is not in the table already?

• Lead: WP:Lead requires a lead section to summarise the contents of the article/list. Yours does not do this. It gives unreferenced opinion on two of the managers, and very little else. I would expect the lead to say something like: "Oldham AFC has had 30 managers since the first was appointed in 1904. The longest serving was ABC, who held the job for xy years xy months, while the shortest tenure was that of XYZ whose term last only yz months. The most successful in terms of results was…..etc", you get the idea
  • Please note that these manages "led" the club (you use "lead" throughout the article).

• History
  • Another example of a prose error which you repeat continually occurs in the first sentence: "In 1904 Oldham Athletic would gain their first manager…" Apart from the fact that "gain" is the wrong word here, the tense is wrong, too. There is no would about it: "In 1904 Oldham Athletic appointed their first manager…" Also:-

"Two years later Ashworth once again would lead the club to victory…"

"as the club would win the Lancashire cup…"

"Oldham would finish in second place…"

"Charlie (n.b. spelling) Roberts would take over the club for the 1921-22 season, but would only serve as manager…"

- there are many more of these

• • "led" not "lead", throughout
  • "3rd" should be written as "third", "1st" as "first", "2nd" as "second", etc
  • "top-half finishes" is football-speak. Explain what you mean.
  • What does this mean? "Though a four year absence due to the Second World War, Bamlett returned…." Wrong grammar, wrong war as well.
  • "Many of Oldham’s original players were killed…" Apart from your use of the weasel word "many", this sentence relates to the history of the club, not to the list of managers.
  • Grammar: "…led the club to promotion in 1952-53 by winning the league, but were relegated once more…"
  • No apostrophe in 1950s
  • "..went through two managers…including Ted Goodier and Norman Dodgin" Apart from the inelegance of "went through", what’s the "including" for?
  • "…entered Oldham Athletic"? Is this the best phrase?
  • Sudden unexplained use of nickname Latics
  • Grammar: "…the Latics would remain in Division Two and little FA Cup and Football League Cup success"
  • Too much club history in the para beginning "During the mid-1980s…
  • "businessman" spelling
  • Five years, not 5
  • Grammar in last sentence.

Please note that above are by no means the only prose faults in the History section which, if it is to be retained, ought to have a complete rewrite.

• List
  • There should not be empty cells. I think you’ll find that Gordon Hurst is English (see List of Charlton Athletic F.C. players) As for Billy Ursom, a phone call to the PR officer at Oldham AFC should suffice.
  • It would be good to add a column showing the percentage wins of each manager, as a means of comparing performances (other manager lists show this)
  • The Honours column should show the years in which these honours were won. Also, if promotions were won by finishing second or third, these could fairly be counted as honours.
  • Soccerbase is your main source – all but 6 citations are to here. It should not be listed as an External source.

In view of the multiple prose problems, I personally think you would be wise to take the lead only option. Take a look at some of the manager lists where this has been done, to give you some ideas. I hope you have found this review helpful; if you would like me to look at it again after you have responded, leave a message. Brianboulton (talk) 21:14, 22 July 2008 (UTC)