Wikipedia:Peer review/Scottish football champions/archive1

Scottish football champions

This peer review discussion has been closed.
The bare bones of this list was already present, but I've hacked it about into what I think is a potential FL, but I'd be grateful if some extra pairs of eyes could tell me if there's anything else I might need to work on.......... ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)

Resolved stuff from The Rambling Man (talk) 14:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey Chris, let's see...

• "who have to date" - perhaps safer to say As of...
  • done
• "and the two clubs between them won 27 consecutive titles between 1904 and 1931." - previous part of the sentence was "has", so I think a verb is missing here (like "have won 27...")
  • "...the clubs have won 27 titles between 1904 and 1931"? That doesn't sound grammatically correct to me.......
    • Never mind, completely rewritten it now anyway.........
• "This feat could potentially be repeated in 2012, as the clubs have won the title for 22 consecutive seasons as of the 2006–07 season." - not sure this is necessary, it's a little WP:CRYSTAL for me.
  • junked it
• Force columns in tables to be the same width in each section so the tables don't snake. I'm using Safari and I think IE7 makes it worse (not sure), there is a trick you can play, but I'll need to dig around to find it!
  • I have absolutely no idea how to do that, but I will have a look around......
    • Cracked this now I think.......
• You've got repeated wikilinking throughout but the tables aren't sortable. Either make 'em sortable (preferred by me) or ditch the repetitive linking. If you make the sortable you'll probably need to ditch the colspan going on in the hdgs though and have a separate column for number of goals scored by the top scorer...
  • OK, I'll decide which way I want to proceed with this and put it into place.....
    • All tables are now sortable (although I still need to put the "sortname"s in place for some of the goalscorers.......
• This may be onerous (and isn't essential) but consider relieving Wikipedia of those top scorer red links...
  • Yes, I plan to do that over the next couple of days
• Not 100% keen on the incrementing number of titles in parentheses... just a summary would be fine (for me).
  • OK, I'll bin it
• Worth noting in the lead that the league was suspended in the second world war (and interestingly, not the first)
  • done, and for reference I have no idea why the situation was different between the two world wars..........
• There seem to be a number of specific SPL season articles. Is it better to link to those instead of the more generic "x-y in Scottish football" articles?
  • OK, will do that
    • done - there don't seem to be specific "Scottish Football League 19xx-xx" articles for the seasons prior to 1998, so I've left them as the generic "....in Scottish football" links
• (including one shared) - in the summary table - make it a footnote.
  • done
• Doubles, Trebles.... section, merge the text here, three really brief paras don't work for me.
  • done
• Since you've taken it upon yourself to define these terms in the context of Scottish football (!) I think you could do with referencing your beliefs!
  • done
• The Doubles, Trebles... table, on my screen the seasons are forced onto two lines because the table is allowed full freedom of the page. It may be against some people's ideas but I'd force the widths myself, ensuring that the seasons only occupy one line.
  • Again, I'll see how to go about doing this
    • Struggling with this one at the moment. I can force the colums to % widths of the whole table and thereby ensure that the seasons appear on one line, but I have yet to find how to fix the table at a width narrower than the entire page. I'll keep on looking..... :-)
      • Got it sorted now, I think.......
• Is Foot.dk. a reliable source? (question, not accusatory jab!)
  • It seems alright to me, it looks like the Danish version of Soccerbase.

That's it for me. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:39, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

• That's plenty to be going on with, thanks for your comments! :-) ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:56, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Think I've addressed everything now apart from potentially creating articles on the redlinked players....... ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:19, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Comment, looks great now, passes with flying colours in IE7, I'll try Safari later... The Rambling Man (talk) 14:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

• Looks fine in Safari too. Awesome! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:26, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Quickie comments from Struway2 (talk · contribs)

• Personally, I think lists of names look tidier left-aligned, as is the default for text items, rather than centred.
  • do you think the columns with the club names need to be left-aligned, or just the scorers......?
    • if it was me, club names as well, but it's a personal viewpoint. some people like flags with everything, I wouldn't mind if flags were banned from football articles, that sort of thing.
• The Scottish First Division table still doesn't sort properly, because of the colspan= for the war years.
  • I can't figure out how to fix that, any ideas............?
    • Four possibilities that I can think of, none of which are particularly satisfactory.
  1. Messy, un-pretty. Keep the columns, put some wording in the middle column ("Second World War" and a footnote to expand on it, say), then put non-displaying high-values "ZZZ" or whatever in all the columns apart from the year, so that row always sorted to top or bottom, that'd work. Sorting on the year column would bring it back to its proper place. But it would look horrible when that row gets sorted to the top.
  2. Less messy. Keep columns with wording in middle, as per #1, no need for high-values, put class="sortbottom" on that row. That will always sort the row to the bottom. The problem is the always: sorting on date column also sorts it to the bottom.
  3. Leave that row out and put a footnote on the previous season to explain the missing years. Loses a bit of clarity doing that.
  4. Scrap the sortable tables.
• Are you sure the third place column is relevant? I know the English version has it, but it didn't when featured, and looking at the talk page, it appears to have been specifically excluded when the list was being prepared for FLC. Going back through the history, it seems to have been added by an anon without discussion or edit summary.
  • The NotW Annual, which I used as a source, certainly lists first/second/third for each season, I have no preference either way. I'll see what people think at the FLC, I'm happy to go with the majority view..
    • fair enough

Rest of it looks fine. If you have time to spare and fancy some prose to pull apart, List of Birmingham City F.C. managers is available for peer review. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:08, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

• Cheers for your comments, I'll have a look at the Blues gaffers PR tomorrow when I have a bit more time available...... ChrisTheDude (talk) 22:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
  • very kind, cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:50, 8 March 2008 (UTC)