The team Ole had when he first came in to the job finished 6th and one place behind Arsenal. Ole then took a sledgehammer to that team and sold plenty from it. He then added 8 players over the next 2 summers to that squad (not going to include Amad and Pellistri as they have barely/not played, but will include Ighalo) and has us higher in the table. Arsenal, lest we forget, have bought in more players during that time (13 by my count) all of whom were bought for the first team. They already had a £250m attack. They then added a £50m Partey, and a £27m Gabriel to that team. Arteta had had plenty of opportunities to bring in players, it's his fault that he spent poorly. After all, it was his grand plan of Champions League dominance in three years that persuaded Willian to sign
I'm not sure what you're arguing about relating to Ole, I said he's clearly done a much better job, there's no argument from me on that. Regarding the numbers you've posted here, if we compare the financial opportunities of both teams there is a large gap. Under Ole Manchester United have spent about 260m*, Arteta has spent 73m*. That's a massive difference and it's hindered the calibre and options of the players that Arteta can go for. The 6th place position is a little misleading, Ole took over in December of that season, where Mourinho had his meltdown. Solskjaer did a brilliant job that season and he deserves a lot of credit for the job he did reinvigorating the squad and dusting off the damage Jose had done. The team wasn't an innately bad team though, the prior season they had finished 2nd, 18 points ahead of Arsenal. Willian hasn't worked out, but he was a free and showed glimpses of form towards the end of his time with Chelsea.
None of this is to say that Arteta has done as well as Solskjaer, he's clearly struggled a lot more and has been unable to shift the tide the way Ole has managed to. Neither is the spending argument an indictment of Ole, he has spent very well and has much more hits than misses, the success of his transfers is a massive reason as to why he has done a better job than his successors. But he has had funds to mould the squad in a way that Arteta hasn't, and when assessing Arteta that should be taken into account. 260m is a much more significant amount than 73m, and while Ole should be lauded for spending the money wisely, it should be noted that Arteta has had to rely on relatively little in the way of transfer funds,
*I've took the numbers from transfermarket. If someone has a more accurate source feel free to tally it up for me.
Arteta came in at a similar time and in similar circumstances to what Ole came in to, just a year removed. Ole has been widely derided as a joke among the media and opposition, and Arteta has been seen as the big talent on the rise. If we're going to follow Ole's trajectory (and Ole being the poor manager that he's been made out to be) then it should not be an issue for Arteta to replicate what Ole did, considering his reputation. At this time last year, we went supernova and Bruno played a major role. If Arteta is the manager people say he is, why isn't Odegaard, for example, doing something similar? Where Ole brought through the kids, Arteta had to almost be forced into playing them outside of the EL. Instead, he was trying to force the likes of Willian in to the team, and it was only when injuries and suspensions forced him in to playing them against Chelsea in December that their results started to turn. He's also sidelined players like Martinelli and Saliba, who could and should have done a job for him and he was the genius who thought it would be worthwhile loaning in Soares and Mari in January 2020, not play them for 6 months and then give them each a 4 year contract. He also decided that Luiz was worth persisting with despite him letting the team down time and time again.
When Arteta came in, Arsenal were 10th. In their last 9 league games, they had lost 4, drawn 4, and won 1. It was a pretty terrible situation and the club was in freefall. Yes, Ole came in under difficult circumstances too and had much more of an immediate impact. What Ole did with his squad isn't particularly relevant when I'm assessing Arteta though.
A large part of this paragraph is that you are pissed the media was antagonistic to Ole, and it was pretty lenient to Arteta. And I think that's an understandable reaction, the media has been at times very disrespectful to Ole and it took a lot longer than it should for many of them to start giving him the credit he deserved, and the acknowledgement that he was doing a good job and heading in the right direction. Some of the comments from pundits or media personnel were not only overly antagonistic, they also highlighted a lack of understanding when it came to the coaching side of football. I've argued for him, that it takes time to turn things round and that we have to acknowledge the restraints managers are under. The Cardiff stint worked against him, but that was a cursed role that many managers would have struggled with (though his work in the championship was poor, the squad had basically switched off). You mentioned United going supernova with the addition of Fernandes, and that is very true. Sometimes the club isn't as far away as initially envisioned. Ole noted what the team was lacking, and Fernandes was a brilliant buy that took the team up a level.
Like I said before, the least I expect from any manager at any level is to at least be resourceful with what he has. I've seen absolutely nothing of the sort from him and unlike what the media's gaslighting tries to tell us, I'm not seeing anything resembling a plan from Arteta either.
I disagree about the lack of a plan, people can argue as to whether it's been implemented well enough, but from watching Arsenal it's pretty straightforward as to what he is attempting. The comparisons with Pep are way off, he's clearly a much more pragmatic manager and is far more willing to cede possession and implement a deep defensive line in an attempt to stifle the opposition. He's had a few good wins against good opposition and his overall record against the "top sides" is pretty decent. Consistency is a massive issue though and while there was a good spell at the turn of the year, the football has reverted a bit and it's not a great watch. He's also very committed to playing out of the back, as most teams are these days. It's not been super smooth but it's a clear a part of his ideology that he wants his team to be comfortable in doing so.
Do I think he's gone a good job? Not really. I think it was a tough job to come into, he's moved on a fair bit of deadweight now, but the football is still very inconsistent and he needs to start getting a tune out of some of his big players. The FA cup win has bought him time though, and if he wins the Europa (possible but definitely not the favourite) the CL money will help and it'll further boost his credit.
Do I think he should have another season? Yes.
Why am I framing the end of this post by asking myself questions? I don't know, same as I don't know why I've just written a long post on a pretty insignificant issue.