Talk:List of Ipswich Town F.C. seasons
![]() | List of Ipswich Town F.C. seasons is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||
![]() | List of Ipswich Town F.C. seasons is part of the Ipswich Town F.C. series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Featured list |
![]() | This article is rated FL-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Charity Shield
editAs this is a fairly innocuous competition rarely competed for by ITFC, I suggest it's removed from the main list and added either as footnotes or as a separate section (or both). --Dweller 11:01, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- (As done for Texaco Trophy) --Dweller 11:09, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- Wellllllll, is this because Norwich have never had a chance to win it? Twice? No, I'm going to leave it so it remains consistent with other season featured lists. 193.82.16.50 09:43, 18 September 2007 (UTC) (easyRambler)
- Fairy snuff. --Dweller 12:07, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Wellllllll, is this because Norwich have never had a chance to win it? Twice? No, I'm going to leave it so it remains consistent with other season featured lists. 193.82.16.50 09:43, 18 September 2007 (UTC) (easyRambler)
Blanks
editI think people would expect to find no unexplained blanks in the professional era list. How about shading for ineligibility or (in the case of the League Cup) not applicable? On the same theme, I'd expect to see top scorer for every pro season completed and a "not known" or similar for the amateur seasons. --Dweller 11:06, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- I did add a note to the footnote to the effect that if no scorer was mentioned, none was known. Would you prefer I explicitly added not known to each empty row? 193.82.16.50 09:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC) (easyCafe Rambler)
- Introduce a shading for it? The footnote's pretty buried. --Dweller 12:08, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Fair play
editNeeds a little further explanation, or (better) a wikilink. --Dweller 11:09, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- I've now wikilinked to the appropriate article and expanded the phrasing a touch. 193.82.16.50 09:31, 18 September 2007 (UTC) (easyCafe Rambler)
- Lurvely. --Dweller 12:09, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Footnote 7
editI noticed this was positioned inconsistently with footnote 8. Then I read 7, and it struck me that if all results were annulled, they shouldn't be included in the list. I'd replace with n/a (as with footnote 8) and place the annulled stats in the footnote. --Dweller 11:14, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- Done this I think. 193.82.16.50 09:42, 18 September 2007 (UTC) (easyRambler)
- Admirably. --Dweller 12:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
His achievement (league top scorer) needs its own citation. It also brings to light a pedantic problem - to date, ITFC have only once had a league top scorer (it seems) so the wording in the lead (pluralised) needs some attention. It may also be overcooking it to have a specific legend annotation for something that happened once. Better just to specifically refer to the instance in the lead text (as it's so notable) or just footnote it, and not bother with the bolding unless and until it happens again. Let's hope that's a very very long wait, lol. --Dweller 11:20, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- Okay. Despite the fact I'm editing from my spiritual home (The apple store on Regent Street), I'll play along..! I'll footnote it, or better still, you can do it for me. I trust you, despite the woeful happenings of the past footballing weekend....! More soon. The Rambling Man 19:47, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, and at least it happened once...! The Rambling Man 19:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- Through gritted teeth I've removed the sentence in the lead, removed the bolding and added a footnote. Hopefully you think that's enough..! 193.82.16.50 09:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC) (easyRambler)
- More than enough. I think it's worth including in Lead or footnote (or both) with an RS, but in its absence... --Dweller 12:18, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, I'll seek out an RS... The Rambling Man on tour 15:31, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- More than enough. I think it's worth including in Lead or footnote (or both) with an RS, but in its absence... --Dweller 12:18, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Through gritted teeth I've removed the sentence in the lead, removed the bolding and added a footnote. Hopefully you think that's enough..! 193.82.16.50 09:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC) (easyRambler)
League Cup 1962/3
editUnexplained blank. :-) --Dweller 12:20, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Explained (sort of...) The Rambling Man on tour 15:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Image
editNeeds alt text Sandman888 (talk) 15:38, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of Ipswich Town F.C. seasons. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120722052838/http://www.itfc.co.uk/page/ClubHistory/0%2C%2C10272~347323%2C00.html to http://www.itfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/ClubHistory/0%2C%2C10272~347323%2C00.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:23, 10 May 2017 (UTC)