Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2002 Football League First Division play-off Final/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 15 November 2020 [1].

2002 Football League First Division play-off Final

Nominator(s): The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 17:29, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well as an Tractor Boy, this was easy to write because the Budgies lost in the most dramatic way. I mean, they lost a match worth around £30 million on a penalty shootout. Once again, another article on the world's most singularly valuable football match, already a good article courtesy of a detailed review from Harrias. As with every submission I make here, I will work tirelessly to address any comment or concern raised as fast as I can. Thanks in advance for your time and energy should you decide to review. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 17:29, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Ceoil

Have made some light c/es; its very well written and fittingly pacey; one of my more enjoyable recent wiki reads. More in-depth comments to follow. Ceoil (talk) 23:57, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine now on prose, have been through it all, so leaning support if the following are sorted:
Do these websites have editorial oversight: Soccerway, fchd.info, Soccerbase, The Pink 'Un, 11v11.com. I realise this may be well trodden ground, but am not a sports person so linking to earlier discussions would be enough. Ceoil (talk) 01:06, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Pink 'Un is published by Archant and 11v11.com is published by the Association of Football Statisticians, so those are the easy ones. The other three have been considered RS for some years, I'll need to dig through the WP:FOOTBALL project archives for those. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:09, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Soccerway takes its data direct from Opta Sports and Soccerbase is owned by the publishers of the Racing Post, a nationally-published sports newspaper..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:17, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Grand. Ceoil (talk) 16:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As for FCHD, I don't know if this answers the question, but it was accepted as reliable at FLC back in 2008 based on the widespread use of its data by the official sites of football clubs and leagues...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:06, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"File:Steve Bruce pre-season Germany 2004.jpg" is free, not sure about "File:Principality Stadium May 3, 2016.jpg" which is ex flicker, but cant see a cc tag. Ceoil (talk) 07:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Are we suggesting that User:FlickreviewR 2 is somehow compromised? If it can't be trusted I guess it should be shut down? I can't accredit this image, it's used all over the place but if it needs to go then I'll just remove it. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:09, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not saying remove, will leave this one to the img people. Ceoil (talk) 16:43, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On the flickr page for the image, it confirms it is CC-by-2.0. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 16:56, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks Harrias. Ceoil (talk) 17:30, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A general point: in the Post-match section; the formulation was a bit repetitive, too much "and x said y". Have tried to temper this, but rather than "said", maybe vary with "admitted, claimed, expressed, described, etc". Ceoil (talk)
I'll get to that. Ceoil thanks for your quick comments. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:09, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There are (now) only four instances of "said" in that section, is that repetitive? I thought it wasn't too bad myself. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:54, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
But also bear WP:SAID in mind! Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 16:56, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, this was more of a general thing for TRM for future articles; I removed a few, with replacements souch as Carter himself admitted: "I won't sleep for days & The club chairman, David Gold, was grateful for the monetary prize, but warned: "We are leaving behind some serious trouble in the lower division.. Ceoil (talk) 17:44, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Appreciated. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 18:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spot-checked refs 7, 19a&b, 24, 29 and 31 from this article version, no issues. Ceoil (talk) 17:37, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support: A bit technical and stats heavy in places (early on, and not sure its avoidable), but a gripping read. Had only intended a drive by look at the lead and not commenting, but became absorbed and ended up going through it all. Ceoil (talk) 17:39, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Very kind of you to say that Ceoil. Your review and support are very much appreciated. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 18:41, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:26, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:57, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cas Liber looking now....and Support

Alright then....

Okay, I think it's all good on comprehensiveness and prose. I might word a couple of things slightly differently but they'd not be dealbreakers by any means. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:34, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cas, thanks. Happy discuss any possible rewords. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:09, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Kosack

"gained automatic promotion to the Premier League", there's two uses of Premiership either side of this, which I believe is the correct name for the time. Probably best to stay consistent to avoid any confusion.
Agreed. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 20:47, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"fifth place in Football League First Division" > the Football League...
Disagree. I certainly would never say in "the" football league division one, perhaps an ENGVAR thing? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 20:47, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The article does use "Norwich had played in the Football League First Division" further on as well? Unless I'm reading those differently? Kosack (talk) 08:59, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I see what you mean. They both read fine to me but I'll be consistent. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 10:22, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Might be worth linking leg to Leg (sport).
Agreed. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 20:47, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"the previous three consecutive seasons", is consecutive needed here?
It absolutely is not needed, and I feel foul for having written such redundant text. Gone, with my apologies. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 20:47, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The lead lasted twelve minutes", the previous mention in the lead mentioned eleven minutes. One of these is out of sync.
Fixed. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 20:49, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of minor points to look at, nothing much. Kosack (talk) 09:08, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kosack thanks very much for your comments, I've addressed them all above. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 20:49, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My very minor points have been addressed, I'm happy to support. Kosack (talk) 11:18, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by No Great Shaker

Just seen the notice for this FAC and letting you know I will be pleased to read the article and provide any comments arising. Hope to be back soon. No Great Shaker (talk) 14:15, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest a link to Cross (association football) for first instances in lead and narrative.
Done so, thanks. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:05, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was momentarily confused about the police operation for the Brentford v Stoke match because it looks at first as if it was played the same day. Might be best to add that it was played the previous day.
Yes, good catch. Thanks, re-phrased to clarify the timing of the B v S match. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:05, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In the same sentence, needing a link to Brentford F.C.
Done so. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:05, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article is certainly informative and well-written. I'm happy with the sources and images. As Casliber says above, there are some minor pieces of wording that I would probably write differently but without saying anything different. This is, of course, down to regional differences in the good old English language. So, no problem.

I'll wait for your response to the three bulleted points but this is over the line and no VAR needed. Well done. No Great Shaker (talk) 20:18, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No Great Shaker thanks for your comments, I hope I've addressed them, but do let me know if there's anything else you'd like to see actioned. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:05, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TRM. Sorry, I've been unavailable today but this is absolutely fine and I'm happy to support its promotion to FA. Very well done. All the best and keep safe. No Great Shaker (talk) 20:42, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No Great Shaker no need to apologise at all. Thanks for you interest. I'll back to you re:FA Cup final. I have access to a few resources which might help! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 21:27, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review – pass

Formatting and consistency

Ref #10, either use "Sport: Football: Hornets sting the Blues", or cut it down to "Hornets sting the Blues" (I would favour the latter). Either way, it isn't "Sport: Hornets sting the Blues".
Why not use "Football Club History Database" rather than "fchd.info"?
Why list a publisher for Soccerbase and 11v11.com, but not Soccerway?
Ref #26, there doesn't seem to be an apostrophe in "The Pink Un", per their website.

Quality and coverage

All sources appear to be to high-quality, reliable sources.
No major source appear to be omitted.

Nothing major wrong here; just a few things to be tidied. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 12:00, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Harrias thanks, all addressed I think. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:07, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All good here, nice work. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 18:16, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@FAC coordinators: think this one is "oven-ready". Cheers. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 21:40, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, thought I smelt something good wafting from the kitchen... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:29, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Rose would anyone object if I nominated another article while I wait for this one to be closed? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 11:10, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all, go ahead. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:46, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:59, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.