Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Arsenal F.C. managers/archive1

• "He joined Arsenal in June 1925, and laid the foundations for the club's first period of success": unsourced.
• ""WM" system": is there a wikilink for this, and wouldn't it be better phrased as ""WM" formation"?
• "though finished no higher as the twenties drew to a close" -> "though they finished no higher as the 1920s drew to a close"?
• "passed away": should be rephrased per
  WP:EUPHEMISM
  .
• I think decades should be written in full, e.g. "thirties" -> "1930s".
• Considering Allison's spell "yielded much success", did nothing noteworthy happen between 1938 and 1947?
• "played Ian McPherson either side, instead of a defender": this doesn't make sense to me.
• "Bertie Mee as successor" -> "Bertie Mee as his successor".
• "He arrived off the back of guiding Tottenham Hotspur" -> "He arrived after guiding Tottenham Hotspur".
• In what way was the 1989 title win "unprecedented"?
• "Graham's Arsenal struggled to put together a title challenge in the newly-formed Premier League, but were cup specialists in the early half of the nineties": unsourced.
• "The Arsenal board, in the meantime, agreed a deal with Frenchman Arsène Wenger to become the club's next manager": unsourced.
• "Wenger has been credited with promoting the importance of diet and nutrition in football and advocating the principle that the sport ought to be entertaining on the pitch": unsourced.
• "Manager dates and statistics are sourced from The Arsenal History for Mitchell to Wenger,[88] and Soccerbase thereafter for Wenger's results": do these sources cite the nationalities and dates, or are they cited elsewhere?

• Cited the nationalities to another book.

• "full competitive matches" -> "first-team competitive matches"?
• I'm presuming matches from the abandoned 1939–40 Football League season are also excluded?
• I think the text above the key would read better bullet pointed.
• I don't think "Unknown" should be denoted as a caretaker manager, and I'd write it in italics.

• The source used to list the managers suggests he was a caretaker appointment, hence the denotation. But I've italicised the names of caretaker appointments.

• Note 5 is unsourced.

Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 22:13, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for taking a look at this Matty. Think I've now covered all your comments. Lemonade51 (talk) 01:37, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Shouldn't there be a space in "Win%"?
• I'd mention caretakers being in italics in the key.
• We tend not to wikilink countries these days, so I'd unlink them using Template:flagu. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:32, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks again, addressed your points. Lemonade51 (talk) 18:37, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• "They became the first southern member..." this might be confusing to those who aren't familiar with English geography and the history of football league, I'd try and make it clearer if possible. Perhaps the first team from the south of England? Something like that?

• I've added a note which should help clear things up.

• "it was not until 1897 did the club..." sentence does not make sense
• There is a bit of
  WP:PEACOCK
  in a places, phrases such as "freshening up" and "masterminded" could be deemed POV, I'd just go through and check these
• Did Chapman have an illness or did he simply just pass away?

• He died suddenly of pneumonia.

• "he led Arsenal to a seventh-place finish in 1962–63 which ensured qualification..." comma after 63?
• "even though Arsenal sat in 14th position in the league table." -> even though Arsenal were 14th in the league table
• "when they lost on penalties..." -> which they lost in a penalty-shootout
• "he was responsible for giving debuts to several players..." I would list one or two for clarity
• "having beaten title rivals..." defeating title rivals
• "as a stopgap measure..." I would just say caretaker, may confuse some readers
• This is just a suggestion, but maybe consider making columns for trophies won, so the reader can sort by this. As is done here. I feel would this be more useful to readers than the current layout.

• I prefer the honours written, that way the key doesn't get all discombobulated and the reader can work out who has won more instead of (lazily) sorting. ;)

NapHit (talk) 16:59, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Cheers NapHit for your suggestions. Addressed them all and responded to certain points. Lemonade51 (talk) 19:37, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]