Talk:History of Arsenal F.C. (1886–1966)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Featured article star History of Arsenal F.C. (1886–1966) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
WikiProject on Football The article on History of Arsenal F.C. (1886–1966) is supported by the WikiProject on Football, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of Association football related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page; if you have any questions about the project or the article ratings below, please consult the FAQ.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by the England task force.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a group devoted to the the study, and improvement of Wikipedia articles on the subject, of History. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
"The Albert Memorial" - the London Portal's current "Showcase Picture" This article is part of WikiProject London, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to London. If you would like to participate, you can improve the article attached to this page or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

[edit] FAC Comments

Rather than jamming up the FAC page, I've placed comments here. Please note that I don't insist I'm correct on any given comment - I'm as happy to have an explanation of why I'm wrong as to have it changed.

  • “after Arsenal played Derby County in an FA Cup tie in 1891, two of Arsenal's players were offered contracts with the Rams.[4]” Changing "Rams" to "opposition" might prevent possible confusion – I know the nickname, but not everyone will.
  • “Woolwich Arsenal played in the Second Division for eleven seasons, and generally occupied mid-table before the appointment of Harry Bradshaw in 1899;” If, as I guess, he was appointed as manager, could you make that clear?
  • “Despite some strong performances in the FA Cup — the club reached the semi-finals in both 1905–06 and 1906–07[8] — they soon faded.” I’m not actually convinced that sentence sums up the evidence from the reference. I see 10th, 12th, 7th, 14th, 6th, 18th to 1909/10. 18th is definitely “faded”, but the run is more complex than that – perhaps you would like to expand on it?
  • “Woolwich Arsenal moved there in the 1913 close season” – close season is a bit of jargon – wikilink it to explain?
  • “The club controversially rejoined the First Division in 1919…” – I think this paragraph needs an overall reference, to support details like the AGM, and why it was controversial. The current refs only support the final table positions quoted.
  • OK, it’s referenced in the next paragraph. Given that those 2 paragraphs deal with exactly the same issue (and the next one, in fact), ought they to be one paragraph? Or add the ref into the first as well, either would do.
  • “Although the move to Highbury brought about much larger crowds and finally warded off the spectre of financial ruin” – Does the later ref support this as well? If so, perhaps putting it at the end of the paragraph to indicate it supports the whole would be best.
  • Can you just tell me where exactly in the conservation plan ref I should be looking. It's rather long....
  • “Chapman's adeptness at picking the right man for the job proved vital” – could probably do with a reference to support this statement.
  • “after Arsenal's goalkeeper Dan Lewis let a harmless-looking shot slip through his arms and into the net” – why the double reference? The first ref supports the statement perfectly.
  • “Arsenal bounced back the following year, winning their second League title in 1932–33; after another weak start Arsenal went on a long winning run to catch up, culminating in a 5-0 win over second-placed Aston Villa at Highbury in April to clinch the title.” – This rather jarred me on reading it. I think perhaps something more like “Arsenal bounced back the following year, when after another weak start they went on a long winning run, culminating in a 5-0 win over second-placed Aston Villa at Highbury in April to clinch their second League title in 1932–33.”
  • “By this time Chapman's first set of signings had started to show their age” – the sort of statement that could do with a reference?
  • “Despite Chapman's sudden departure” – you’ve just said he died – is this wording a little redundant?
  • “George Allison (who had formerly been a director of the club) took over the job full-time” – how about “took over as manager” to make it clear. The mention of “full-time” is tantalising – was he acting as part-time manager or assistant or something?
  • “a hat-trick of League titles” – wikilink hat-trick, make it “successive League titles” to be clearer that is was the 4th title, but third in a row?
  • “replaced with modern Art Deco stands, parts of which remain to this day” – with inevitable demolition, it might be worth “future proofing” this statement.
  • “In November 1945 Arsenal played one of the most extraordinary and controversial matches in their history” – could you confirm if the references back up that statement?
  • Just confirm the source backs up "one of the most controversial matches", if you would, please.
  • “by the end of the match they had only seven fit players on the pitch;[52] Newcastle took full advantage and won 1-0.” – I’m being rather picky here, but is 1-0 “full advantage”?
  • “Apart from finishing third in 1958–59, Arsenal usually finished in mid-table” – there’s a couple of not-too-shoddy 5ths in there. I think you may be generalising a little too much.

Overall I enjoyed the article. J.Winklethorpe talk 20:49, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I think I have made edits to answer most of these points - nearly all of which I agreed with, with the exception of the following:
  • I have retained the two links to the 1927 Cup Final, as one is text and the other video.
  • The 1932-33 season sentence I have tweaked, but not to your suggested version as I thought it was just as awkward.
Thank you for your comments, I'm glad you enjoyed reading the article! Qwghlm 20:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Just a couple of remaining queries J.Winklethorpe talk 20:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Page numbers now cited.
  • Excellent, that ref now supports the sentence.
  • Hmm. The exact quote, Spurling p.67, says "Arsenal's match against Dynamo proved to be the club's last real tango with controversy for 15 years" Admittedly, it's not very clear from that reference alone that it is one of the most controversial incidents, however, though it is popularly regarded as so. What would you suggest changing it too if this is not satisfactory? Qwghlm 21:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Hmm, the most that quote supports is "one of the most controversial matches in that period of their history" or something similar. If it's popularly regarded to be more than that, I'm sure there'll be a reference to it somewhere. J.Winklethorpe talk 08:13, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Well Spurling's book devotes an entire chapter to the one match, but the official history glosses over it and only mentions it in passing (perhaps due to its nature). What I have done is strike it out for now entirely, and when I get some time to read up, I'll replace it with a direct quote from a contemporary player or observer to better reflect the mood. Qwghlm 09:28, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Sounds like a good plan. J.Winklethorpe talk 08:30, 9 June 2007 (UTC)