Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/KitKat Crescent/archive2

< Wikipedia:Peer review

KitKat Crescent edit

Previous peer review
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

This article has already had a peer review and is currently at GA status. I'm hoping to see whether people think WP:FAC would be worth a shot with some work, and what the main problems are. I think the prose and a couple of quite stubbish sections could be the main stumbling blocks and would I would like to see how these can be dealt with appropriately. Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk)

Comments from Ealdgyth (talk · contribs)

  • You said you wanted to know what to work on before taking to FAC, so I looked at the sourcing and referencing with that in mind. I reviewed the article's sources as I would at FAC.
Hope this helps. Please note that I don't watchlist Peer Reviews I've done. If you have a question about something, you'll have to drop a note on my talk page to get my attention. (My watchlist is already WAY too long, adding peer reviews would make things much worse.) 22:38, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments from NapHit (talk · contribs) edit

  • "when York was relegated to the Conference National." I think were should be used instead of was
  • "The ground was equipped to be suitable for football, which saw the Main Stand and Popular Stands be erected." a better word than equipped should be used I tink, maybe "renovated", "improved" something along those lines
  • "in September 1989 it was announced that the capacity of the ground has been increased to 14,628." had instead of has, I suspect that was a typo ;)
  • "Despite being shorter than the original floodlights, these are twice as bright and meet the requirements for Division One football." shouldn't this sentence be in past tense seeing as it's in the history section
  • I think the transport and future sections could do with being bigger, but I appreciate that this will be hard as information is probably limited
    • Indeed, I agree, and I'm on the lookout for some extra content to add to these sections. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:47, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've had a go at expanding the "Future" section with content from the main York City article. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Overall it looks great NapHit (talk) 16:26, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from Keith D (talk · contribs) - Minor comment would be on the Footnotes to enable a return to where you came from in the text. You can either make the letter the final parameter to the {{Note label}} template or use a ^ as the return character if the superscripted letter does not look right. Keith D (talk) 20:41, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Peanut4 (talk · contribs) edit

Lead
  • "KitKat Crescent (formerly Bootham Crescent)" I'd prefer to swap commas for brackets, i.e. "KitKat Crescent, formerly Bootham Crescent," To me, it looks far better, particularly in the lead.
  • "It has been the home of York City since 1932, when the club moved there from Fulfordgate following its purchase from York Cricket Club." It might just be me but it's not totally obvious what "its" refers to, i.e. whether Bootham Crescent or Fulfordgate was bought from York CC.
  • I think the lead could be perhaps be extended by maybe even just a sentence or two.
History
  • "York City F.C.'s original stadium Fulfordgate had been relatively inaccessible, with the tram service only having a single track to the ground, and concern about the poor support there had been raised, and director Mr G.W. Halliday was convinced that the only solution to this was to move to a new ground." It might just be me, but I think this sentence has basically three main clauses in "..., and ..., and ..." I would re-word it to something like "..., resulting in concern ..., and so ..." or maybe split into more than one sentence.
  • "but the they decided to move to a new headquarters at Wigginton Road," I think "the" shouldn't be there.
    •   Done Indeed, that's me not being careful. Removed. Mattythewhite (talk) 10:42, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "which saw the Main Stand and Popular Stands be erected." Not sure you need "be".
  • "During the 1954–55 season, York reached the semi-final of the FA Cup, of which two matches were played at Bootham Crescent.[9] The first round game against Scarborough, which was won 3–2, and the fifth round game against Tottenham Hotspur, which was won 3–1 in front of a crowd of 21,000, were both held at Bootham Crescent." I'd combine these two sentences in order to avoid repeating "were played at Bootham crescent". Possibly "During the 1954–55 season, York reached the semi-final of the FA Cup, of which two matches were played at Bootham Crescent[9]—the first round game against Scarborough, which was won 3–2, and the fifth round game against Tottenham Hotspur, which was won 3–1 in front of a crowd of 21,000."
Facilities
  • "After half of the £1500,00 cost was paid for by the Football Trust," I presume this should be £150,000? I would change it but I didn't want to insert an error.
Future
  • It may well be crystal ball. But what would happen to Bootham Crescent once York City move to the new stadium? (Aside - it'll be a shame to see another old ground close).
    • Well, the whole needing to move to a new ground is because Persimmon want to knock it down and build housing on the site. That will all need adding to the article in the history section, which should be quite simple to do with the new Complete Record book. Mattythewhite (talk) 10:50, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sort of covered this with an expansion to the history section. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:28, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Other uses
  • "Schoolboy International" I'd say this should be "schoolboy international".
  • "It held its first Schoolboy International in May 1952, when England, who were captained by Wilf McGuinness, who later became York manager, beat Ireland 5–0 with a crowd of 16,000." Again it might just be me, but I think two "who clauses" in the same sentence is difficult to read.
Transport
  • You've already said you were unsure about the size of this section. Other FAs do have short transport sections, but when I got Valley Parade promoted recently to FA, concern was raised about the size of the transport section until I fleshed it out.
  • With that in mind, what other transport details are available? Buses? Park and ride? Perhaps, even mention something mentioned above about the difficult of transport at Fulfordgate and why Bootham Crescent was deemed better at the time? Is this still the case?
    • Had a little search for details but can't find much. Would walking be relevant to this section do you think? Mattythewhite (talk) 11:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
General
  • Numerals and units need to be broken by non-breaking spaces, e.g. 115 votes, per WP:MOSNUM.
    •   Done Done I think. Am I right with 115 x 74 yards? Mattythewhite (talk) 11:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dates should be unlinked if you want to go to FAC, per new policy at WP:DATE.

Hope this all helps. Any questions or if you want any assistance, just let me know. Peanut4 (talk) 21:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/KitKat_Crescent/archive2&oldid=238115763"