Wikipedia:Peer review/Everton F.C./archive1

Everton F.C.

Basically the whole article needs reviewing by a neutral source. I have been improving it over a long period of time and need guidance as to where it needs attention. Thankyou SenorKristobbal 14:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Probably more points than you hoped for, but here goes:

• The biggest problem facing this article is a lack of references, with the only ones referring to recent signings. For information on what sort of thing should be referenced, see WP:CITE. Looking at Arsenal F.C. or Manchester City F.C. may also help with getting an idea of what to reference.
• Merge the facts in the Trivia section elsewhere, or get rid of them.
• The supporters section is biased. More or less all sets of fans would view themselves as "a passionate bunch". If it is so hard for visiting teams to score why was Everton's home defensive record worse than 13 teams (including relegated Birmingham) last season? Again some of this could be helped by references.
• The transfer ins and outs are not needed, as Wikipedia is not a news service.
• There are many one sentence paragraphs, which breaks up the flow of the prose.
• The staff list is unnecessarily long. Do we really need to know who coaches 6-12 year olds?
• Consider moving the club records to Everton F.C. records, and leaving only major ones,(i.e. record overall goalscorer, record victory in any competition).
• The prose could do with a thorough copyedit, and is a little too informal at times.
• It is not necessary to list the reserve team or any player not issued with a squad number. In fact, some of those reserve players with articles may be candidates for deletion, if the guideline Wikipedia:Notability (people) is used.

Hope this helps. Oldelpaso 20:41, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with all of Oldelpaso's points, especially the ones on the trivia section, transfer in & outs, the reserve squad and staff lists and a need to improve the tone. Some additional issues:

• Intro could be a little longer, summarising main points of article.
• History section is a little jumpy and disjointed; as there is a History of Everton F.C. article, this section should be a bit shorter and written in summary style. At the moment, each of the three recent seasons is given a whole paragraph while some decades barely merit a single sentence - this should be more evenly balanced.
• Avoid weasel words, such as:
  • The stress of an under-performing team was said to be a factor in Harry Catterick's poor health...
  • Fans contend that the 1980s Everton team would have gone on to win even more European silverware...
  • It was feared that the club's half-century stay...
• Remove the "Recent News" section - Wikipedia is not a news service. Consider setting up an Everton F.C. category in Wikinews and link to it in external links instead.
• Split colours and badge sections, as they are more or less separate. 2006 badge April Fool mention should also be cut out.
• Nickname could be put in a section of its own.
• a fierce rivalry has existed between Everton and Liverpool, albeit one that is generally perceived as being more respectful - citation needed.
• Everton fans are a very passionate bunch and have a reputation for being hard to face. - needs clarification (there is the implication, though I am sure it is not intended, that Everton fans are violent) and citation.
• It might be worth cutting out the abridged table of managers and just have a link to the main List of Everton F.C. managers page.
• List of shirt sponsors should either be moved into the colours section, and reformatted as a table.
• What references there are should be properly formatted - see Template:Cite web
• There should be book references as well as web ones. Qwghlm 00:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Cheers guys I knew a few of those points anyway but a lot I wouldn't have thought of, cheers. SenorKristobbal 13:58, 18 August 2006 (UTC)