Talk:F.C. Copenhagen
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
F.C. Copenhagen falls within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a project to create and improve Denmark-related Wikipedia articles. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, all interested editors are welcome! |
|
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (FAQ). (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. | |
 |
The article on F.C. Copenhagen is supported by the WikiProject on Football, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of football (soccer) 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. |
|---|---|
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
F.C. Copenhagen was a good article candidate, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. Once the objections listed below are addressed, the article can be renominated. You may also seek a review of the decision if you feel there was a mistake.
Date of review: 4 October 2006 |
|
|
F.C. Copenhagen was a good article candidate, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. Once the objections listed below are addressed, the article can be renominated. You may also seek a review of the decision if you feel there was a mistake.
Date of review: 4 March 2007 |
[edit] Move?
Should this article be moved to either F.C. Copenhagen or FC Copenhagen? Crvana Zvezda's article is also placed at Red Star Belgrade, so this could also be moved, when København is Copenhagen in English, and when this is the English Wikipedia, the name of the article should be in English. On the French, Japanese, Polish and Swedish Wikipedias the article name is also on that language. kalaha 20:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
- I think you are right that it needs to be moved, and I think it should go to F.C. Copenhagen as that is what is used on the English part of their website. Poulsen 06:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- I'm always in two minds about this sort of thing. We don't change abbreviations in club names to English when they're in another language - ND Gorica, HNK Hajduk Split, K.S.K. Beveren, for example, so why change the placename? Crvena Zvezda/Red Star may be a special case since the Serbian looks intimidating to English-speakers! Note that the Dutch and German versions are at "FC København", as is the Norwegian - but I don't know that the Norwegian name for the city isn't København anyway! -- Arwel (talk) 20:27, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- The Norwegian name for Copehagen is indeed no:København. Poulsen 06:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Why has this article been moved further to the current name?? It doesn't make sence. kalaha 07:15, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- The article was moved by User:Koavf on basis of "naming regulations". However all other football club articles use the abbreviations of F.C., A.C., and so on without any spacing, so I think we should move it back to F.C. Copenhagen. Poulsen 07:36, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] GA failed
As of 4 October 2006, per WP:WIAGA, this article has failed for Good Article status. The reasons are given as follows
- Prose is not compelling and does not flow smoothly. Sometime a sentence is too long to explain many things. Somebody needs also to check the grammar. criterion 1.(a)
- The lead section should follow WP:LS. It currently does not summarize the article and too thin to stand as its own. criterion 1.(b)
- Reorganization is needed, as now there are many sections/subsections with only a single paragraph. The history section is badly needed to be reorganized. Subsection headlines in the History section do not divide the section into a meaningful structure. criterion 1.(b)
- The article is a list-like. Try to put into more descriptive text in a summary style. criterion 1.(c)
- The article is not broad enough. Missing major aspects that should be given for a sport team: home base stadium, fans club and management. criterion 3.(a)
- The logo image Image:FC_København.png, Image:Linderoth jensen rl draw 06.jpg andImage:Fck-shirt.jpg, have copyrighted tag and its fair use rationale is not given. criterion 6.(a)
- References are not given according to WP:CITE. The list is unreadable where it came from. What is the meaning of This is updated at 1 October 2006 in one of the reference list? criterion 2.(a)
- Avoid ongoing and future events, only states facts from the past. This will make the article unstable. criterion 5
- Other sister projects or WP articles cannot be used as a reference, per WP:RS, because they are not reliable. criterion 2.(c)
As overall, please read again Manual of Style, as the article is hard to understand. Try to make a full story, rather than fragmented information. You can always ask other reviewer if you disagree with my review, or improve the article based on my comments above and re-nominated again. You may want to compare this article with other sport teams listed in WP:GA. Cheers. — Indon (reply) — 10:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
- Here 4 months later, the previous reasons are made better, and so is the article in general also. If you see this revision as of 4 October 2006 and compere to the current revision (diff), you will see the big difference, and because of that I, Kalaha, is re-nominating this article for GA. kalaha 21:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] GA failed again
- It is well written.
- a (prose):
b (structure): 
c (MoS): d (jargon):
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (inline citations): c (reliable): d (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
- a (fair representation):
- It is stable.
- It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
- a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
- a (tagged and captioned):
- Overall:
- a Pass/Fail:
- a Pass/Fail:
I'm going to fail this article. First of all, there are too many lists and too little prose. I would try and move most of it to a sub article. "Honours" should at least be in the same area as the other lists. If you have trouble with the structure, then have a look at Arsenal F.C., which is a FA and a good model for how it should be done. The biggest issue is references. Most of the history section lacks inline citations. The article also fails to have a fair use rationale for the clubs logo. --Maitch 20:47, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Will you please insert {{fact}} to help me know where exactly you want references? kalaha 12:51, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
To start with, you need at least one per paragraph. --Maitch 22:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
