Wikipedia:Peer review/Great Britain Olympic football team/archive1

Great Britain Olympic football team

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it's covering a relatively new topic, which will have significant amounts of info to add to it in the Summer of 2012. I'd really like to get it shipshape before that time. In particular I'm interested in what people think of the current history section, and the overall structure. I'm concerned that the article could end up being overly weighted towards the 2012 tournament, and would be interested in any tips on how to avoid this. Overall, as well, I think this could just benefit from a new pair of eyes. Oh, and it would be interesting if someone who isn't from the UK or into football (soccer) could look at it, to test how well the content is described.

Many Thanks, Pretty Green (talk) 10:17, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Comments by Sarastro1: I read up to the end of the "Pre-1972" section, and my main concern is a lack of referencing. Many paragraphs and chunks of other sections are not referenced at all; I have not checked the quality or accurate representation of the other references. Such an article should be carefully referenced as it will probably get increasingly high traffic. There are also several prose issues. As it stands, the article is some way short of GA, even before any rapid changing which may arise from the Olympics is taken into account. I think the history section should be fully sorted out first, as the current team information will probably evolve rapidly and it would be good to have a stable base to work from. --Sarastro1 (talk) 14:53, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

• I think the distinction between GB, GB&I, and UK needs to be cleared up. It is not clear where Ireland/Northern Ireland fits into this, and bear in mind that some readers may not appreciate the GB/UK distinction. And the lead states that the team is/was known as Great Britain and Northern Ireland/Great Britain and Ireland. The main body omits this completely. And why was the team never known as The United Kingdom? (I suspect this is an Olympic issue rather than to do with this article) This should be made clear somewhere: was Ireland/N Ireland a part of this or not?
• There should be no spaces before references. I corrected a couple, but there are many other instances.
• "represents Great Britain and Northern Ireland in international football competitions in the Olympic Games": Maybe just "…at the Olympic Games" as a football team is unlikely to compete in any other competition!
• "The selection is limited to players under the age of 23…": Maybe "Selection for the team is limited to players under the age of 23, although three older players are allowed [in the team? in the squad?]".
• Maybe stress when this age limit came in, as it presumably did not exist in the amateur days? A reader may think it applied throughout.
• "The team first competed at the 1908 Summer Olympics, controlled by the English Football Association (FA)": Was the team, the competition or the Olympics controlled by the FA? But see the next point
• "The team was controlled by the FA": We don't need both this AND the previous fact that the FA controlled the first team. Maybe cut the first mention of the FA and leave this one?
• "as an off-shoot of the English national amateur football team for this period" Most readers of this article will be unaware that such a team existed. Rather than just link, maybe add a sentence to explain what this was? And "for this period" is redundant.
• "occasionally players from the rest of the UK competed for the team": Maybe "represented the team" as competed for suggests they took part in a competition to play for the team.
• "After the FA abolished the distinction between amateur and professional players, and thus abolished the amateur team": When? And possibly why?
• "in the UK": I think everyone will know where London is.
• "The national football associations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all oppose their players being selected for the team.": Why, and how will this work if they won't let him pick their players.
• "When the world's first football association, The Football Association (FA), was formed in 1863, its geographical remit was not clear: there was no specification of whether it covered just England, the UK as a whole or even the entire world." A little too wordy? Maybe "The geographical remit of The Football Association (FA), which formed in 1863 as the world's first such association, was originally unclear; it may have covered just England, the whole United Kingdom [not UK here as it is the first mention] or even the whole world". Although I think strong referencing is needed to show that such suggestions were ever seriously considered. And see below on referencing.
• "The question was answered…" Too dramatic? And no question has actually been asked here.
• Did the national teams arise from the creation of FAs or FAs come from the creation of national teams?
• "Football therefore developed with separate national teams representing separate associations for each of the countries of the United Kingdom and no 'United Kingdom football association' was ever formed.": Wordy. Maybe "Subsequently, each country of the United Kingdom was represented by a separate national team and a separate football association. No association ever formed for the whole United Kingdom."
• The first paragraph of Origins and composition is unreferenced. This really needs some good references.
• "When football was held as a demonstration sport at the 1900 Olympic Games, club teams entered with Upton Park representing the UK": Maybe "When football was held as a demonstration sport at the 1900 Olympic Games, club teams entered; Upton Park represented the UK".
• "Upton Park won the gold medal, which has since been retroactively awarded by the International Olympic Committee as a full gold." Close repetition of "Upton Park" which could be replaced with "the team". And I don't follow the "retroactively awarded" gold. Were they given a gold or not? (Or was it something like a "half-Gold"?) And "retrospectively" is the word needed here, not "retroactively".
• Up to the mention of the 1908 Olympics: this all seems to be unreferenced.
• "An arrangement was reached with the other Home Nations' FAs, under which a Great Britain team consisting of amateur players organised by the FA would enter future tournaments.": Unreferenced; also, a very short paragraph follows which could be combined with this one.
• How did the other "home" FAs react to this "Great Britain" team and how great a proportion of non-English players were included? Again, how did the other FAs react to their selection?
• Scores should use ndashes: i.e. 2–0, not 2-0.
• "The team withdrew from the 1924 and 1928 Games over disputes surrounding professionalism, which eventually led to the withdrawal of the Home Nations from FIFA, and the creation of the FIFA World Cup.[17]" This should be explained in far more detail. What disputes surrounding professionalism? What happened to FIFA? In fact, how does FIFA fit into this story regarding the Olympics? How was the dispute resolved as the team played in the Olympics again?
• The team failed to qualify: What form did qualification take? How did the team perform in this qualification?
• How did the composition of the GB side compare to the countries against which they competed? Presumably they were all amateur, but were the teams more representative or of a similar standard? Where did the GB players come from? Amateurs playing for league teams? Or just amateurs playing for clubs?
• From scanning the next section, it is not clear why there was a break after 1972; why did the ending of amateurism mean that a team could not be entered? Why could players not be found from somewhere other than the amateur England side?
• I have not checked sources or performed spot checks.

I do not watch peer reviews; any questions or comments should be made at my talk page. --Sarastro1 (talk) 14:53, 29 January 2012 (UTC)