Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Real Madrid C.F./archive5

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 00:59, 14 July 2008 [1].

---

Real Madrid C.F.

Nominator(s): Hadrianos1990

previous FAC

In my opinion, this is a perfect candidate for Featured Articles, and i'm sure you'll consider it the same.Hadrianos1990 (talk) 18:09, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

• Support - Some of those articles with no errors. 100% support! Good job! Hadrianos1990 (talk) 18:12, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

  Significant contributor (please see WP:FAC instructions). Were Saudi9999 (talk · contribs), Hierro (talk · contribs) and Raymond Cruise (talk · contribs) consulted about this nomination in advance? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:20, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

• Why are there still maintenance templates on the article if this is FA quality? Also, you're supporting your own FAC and making it sound like it's not yours... Gary King (talk) 19:03, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• I find that really odd too. Surely, you're not trying to fool anyone? It won't... --haha169 (talk) 03:41, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Oppose - First off, no viable FAC should have maintenance templates, which are a sign that an article needs substantial improvements. Here are some other issues I see.

• Why can't the Criticism section be moved into History or eliminated altogether? I'm not a big fan of controversy sections in general, and am not sure if this is more notable than any other transfer controversies in the club's history.
• Above that I saw this: "Under Bernd Schuster, the club won its 31 La Liga title in 2007-08 season." Not close to FA-quality prose. 31st title, in the 2007–08 season, with en dash and wikilink for the season.
• The lead is a little short for an article of this size. At least expand the third paragraph to the size of the first two.
• Do we need 21 fan sites in External links?
• A few prose tips from first paragraph of History: Comma after Institución Libre de Enseñanza. Colon after "This club split into two different clubs". Space between current reference 15 and next sentence.
• One-sentence stubby paragraph in Colours.
• Citations needed for last paragraph of Supporters and the entirety of Budget. Giants2008 (talk) 19:30, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment - Although its not a requirement, I suggest that it be sent through WP:GAN first, and then a peer review. It would be really helpful. --haha169 (talk) 03:36, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

• Unreferenced statements and sections - including the statement in "Supporters" saying "They are known for their right-wing politics" which definitely needs a very iron-clad source. That's just an example.
• Clean up banners.
• The following sources are iffy:
  • http://www.stadiumguide.com/index.htm
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_Clubs_of_the_20th_Century (It's a Wikipedia article)
  • http://www.madrid-tourist-guide.com/
  • http://www.free-football.tv/
  • http://www.realmadrid.pl/index.php
  • http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historia_del_uniforme_del_Real_Madrid_Club_de_Fútbol#Patrocinadores (Another Wikipedia article)
  • http://stadiums.football.co.uk/Spain/el_estadio_santiago_bernabeu.html
  • http://www.footballdatabase.com/index.php
  • http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070623024114AAoJcNM (User submitted data and uses Wikipedia as a source)
  • http://www.footballsquads.co.uk/index.html
• Some of your sources are in Spanish, but the references don't state that. Actually a lot of them are. Note I didn't even try to evaluate the Spanish language sources.
• Some of your sources are lacking bibliographical information, with three lacking publisher which is required. Some of the other sources actually give authors, which when known need to be listed.

As I said above, I didn't check the reliablity of the non-English sources. I strongly suggest at least a peer review, if not GAN. Ealdgyth - Talk 11:26, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment

• This is both a GAN and FAC at the same time. Should one of the two be dropped? Peanut4 (talk) 12:11, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

  This certainly is an ambitious article. Gary King (talk) 19:11, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Per FAC instructions, either the GAC or FAC needs to be dropped. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 19:28, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

• I've just noticed, the nominator for GAN was Saudi9999, who is the main contributor. Peanut4 (talk) 22:57, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment- How does Image:Real crest2.png meet WP:NFCC#8? Fasach Nua (talk) 13:13, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.