# Talk:David Johnson (footballer, born 1976)

i am not familiar with this player -- so when in his career did he turn out for man utd, since he's categorised as such —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chensiyuan (talk • contribs) 

Hi, I don't think he ever actually played for the team so I'm not sure if the categorisation is valid.  He was definitely signed to the club - plenty of resources back this up [1], [2], [3].  I suppose the addition of the category depends on whether you consider that a zero appearance record is sufficient to be a club player.  Hope this helps! Budgiekiller 18:57, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thanks for the info - im not sure myself what constitutes a club player. but i do suppose having been signed is fair enough. Chensiyuan 01:37, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Looking at his retirement announcement on www.nottinghamforest.co.uk, the story refers to "the 30 year old striker"
Is the date of birth in this article incorrect?

This review is transcluded from Talk:David Johnson (footballer born 1976)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 23:30, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Nominator: – PeeJay
Hi! My review for this article will be here shortly.  --Seabuckthorn ♥ 23:30, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

1: Well-written

a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors: 
b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists: 

2: Verifiable with no original research

a. Has an appropriate reference section:  Yes
b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:  excellent (Thorough check on Google.)

c. No original research:   Done

3: Broad in its coverage

4: Neutral

5: Stable: No edit wars, etc:  Yes
6: Images  Done (Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license)

Tom, I'm glad to see your work here. As per the above checklist, I do have some insights that I think will be useful in improving the article: 

I think the layout needs to be fixed.

Besides that, I think the article looks excellent. All the best,  --Seabuckthorn ♥ 01:27, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Seabuckthorn, thanks for your review. I'm glad you had so few concerns over the article. I've split the "Early career" section into two paragraphs as per your suggestions above, but I'm not sure what to do about the "Personal life" section/paragraph. I've found some more info that could possibly be incorporated into the section, but it would be as a separate paragraph, which wouldn't really solve the problem of that paragraph being too short. I'll make the changes and then you can review as you see fit. Either way, hopefully this one issue won't stop you from promoting the article. – PeeJay 02:50, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks, Tom, very much for your diligence, care and precision in writing such great articles. No worries!  --Seabuckthorn ♥ 03:09, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Promoting the article to GA status.  --Seabuckthorn ♥ 03:09, 24 February 2014 (UTC)