Wikipedia:Peer review/France national football team/archive1

France national football team

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I feel that it is capable of becoming a good article and I need an outside source to verify that it is. The Representing multi-ethnic France section; I really haven't delve into yet and it has been questionable edited numerous times, so feel free to review that section once over.

Thanks, Joao10Siamun (talk) 23:48, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Comments by Oldelpaso

• There is one featured article about a national team, Scotland national football team. It may be of use for guidance on structure and layout.
• Get rid of the section with results and fixtures, per WP:NOTNEWS
• The list of coaching staff seems excessive. As a rule of thumb, individuals who are not notable enough to have their own articles should not be included in such as section.
• Years should not generally be linked unless there is particular reason to do so.
• Lots more referencing is required to reach GA. Generally speaking, any statement which might reasonably be challenged should have a reference. Looking at the Scotland article might help you get a feel for type of statement should be referenced.
• Before nomination it would be worth getting a native speaker to run through the text to eliminate idiosyncrasies. To choose an example at random France have brandished the colors since their first official international match - brandishing implies menace, and is a word usually associated with things like guns or knives.
• There are quite a few easter egg links. Space in the history section may be at a premium, but things like Battiston/Schumacher and the Zidane headbutt are iconic moments. They should not be hidden behind links that simply say "in controversial circumstances" without giving the reader any inkling of what happened.
• It is jarring to have "UEFA Euro (year)" and "(year) FIFA World Cup" appearing so often in the text. This is a situation where link piping is useful. It reads more naturally to have them referred to as the 1986 World Cup or 1992 European Championships without rigidly conforming to the article title - its not like anyone will think World Cup means the Rugby World Cup in this context.
• The amount of lists gets a bit overwhelming in the latter half of the article. A prose section about records would be better than a series of top ten lists. Those lists can be pointed to with hatnotes saying "for more details on this topic..."

Hope this helps. Oldelpaso (talk) 15:01, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll make some immediate edits pertaining to your responses, but GA status will have to wait. — Joao10Siamun (talk) 16:12, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Comment by H1nkles

• All I'll say regarding this is that prior to nominating at WP:GAC you may want to add a bit about the French performance at this year's world cup. Given the international media attention that the team has garnered a summary of the events should be put in the article to satisfy the comprehensive criterian of the GA requirements. It may take a couple weeks for all of the dust to settle so to speak. I see a paragraph in the history section about it. I would wait to nominate at GAC until the situation plays itself out a little bit more. At least until the world cup is over and we hear more from the French regarding the status of players like Evra and Henry. That's just my opinion though. H1nkles (talk) _{citius altius fortius} 18:20, 23 June 2010 (UTC)