Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1993 Football League First Division play-off Final/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 1 October 2020 [1].

1993 Football League First Division play-off Final

edit
Nominator(s): The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:05, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another classic play-off final. Swindon scored three goals in eleven minutes to go 3–0 up, just for Leicester to score three in twelve to make it three apiece. Then a penalty in the last few minutes decided it. Wonderful. As always, I'll work my rear end off to make sure I address any and all comments, thanks in advance for your time. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:05, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural

edit

Hmm, when I said feel free to open a new nom I wasn't expecting a co-om as well since with your open co-nom for Iwan Roberts that kinda adds up to two noms simultaneously. That said, I can see Roberts is pretty close to finishing so go ahead but let's leave it at these two for a bit... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 04:01, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if things weren't quite so glacial around here it would help. In actuality, the co-noms are simply me helping out the main contributors in each case, it would be very unfair to deny them a run at FAC through bureaucracy. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:23, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, it's best if you delete this nomination if it's going to prevent Kosack co-nominating 2010 Football League Championship play-off Final with me. It's not fair at all on them. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:37, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No need to cancel this on my account TRM, you were here first. I'm happy to wait until you have a free slot for a co-nom. Kosack (talk) 09:06, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Okeydokes. Perhaps you could have a look at it?! Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 09:47, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Will do, I'll take a look as soon as I can. Kosack (talk) 14:03, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by WA8MTWAYC

edit

Another great article, TRM. I've some points.

  • In the lead, "Premiership" is quickly followed by "Premier League". I would stick to either "Premiership" or to "PL" for consistency.
  • "...four minutes later, with goals from Steve Walsh and Steve Thompson, the..." reads a bit odd. Maybe "and with further goals from..." will do (or whatever you come up with).
  • "...remaining, the referee David Elleray awarded..." I think "the" can be dropped.
  • "...for the first time in their club's 73-year history." Surely the club's 73-year history in the English professional divisions?
  • "...having conceded a record-100 goals." > a record 100 goals.
  • Maybe it's better to link Header (association football) in "...Summerbee was headed past..." instead of "...from a George Lawrence header.".
  • "...which was played over two legs had ended 2–2." some words are missing here.
  • "...for the first time in the 73-year history..." see above.
  • "The Leicester City manager Brian Little was..." I think you mean Hoddle here.
  • "...as of 2019..." Maybe you can update this (if there's a reliable source available).
WA8MTWAYC all addressed except for "the" referee which I use to avoid attributing a false title. Cheers for the review, much appreciated! The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 18:11, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks TRM, I'll give the article my support. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 18:34, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Kosack

edit
  • There's some inconsistency in the making of the Premiership/Premier League throughout, the opening paragraph of the lead has both for example. I'm not sure it was ever known by both at the same time?
  • "while the teams placed from third to sixth place", a little repetitive with placed/place perhaps? Could simply do away with the second usage.
  • After the first paragraph of the lead, you drop Town for Swindon but maintain City for Leicester. Is there a reason for that?
  • Worth linking Kick-off (association football)?
  • "whose shot was curled past Kevin Poole", is the "was" necessary here?

A couple of minor points I picked out. I've omitted any duplicates that WA8MTWAYC also brought up. A great article. Kosack (talk) 15:54, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kosack many thanks, all addressed (hopefully to your satisfaction), cheers for the review, much appreciated. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 18:15, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Think that's it from me, nice work. Happy to support this one. Kosack (talk) 14:08, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by Dweller

edit

This is a very good article, FA quality. I see little to critique. The post-match section reads a little choppily, like it's facts stuck together (which it is of course, but could read smoother). You might pull out the reaction to the match so it's not buried in the 'what happened to the teams/managers'. Also, it seems odd for the background section to be larger than the match summary, but perhaps that's nitpicking. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 14:16, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've rejigged the post-match section per your recommendation. I agree that it's unfortunate that match reports are briefer than background, but I honestly can't find anything else anywhere. If you have anything that I could add, I'd be DELIGHTED. Thanks for taking a look dude. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 19:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Lee Vilenski

edit

I'll take a look at this article, and give some comments on how it meets the FA criteria in a little while. If you fancy doing some QPQ, I have a list of items that can be looked at here. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:36, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Vilenski thanks as always for your comments. I've addressed them all, let me know what you think? Cheers. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:49, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Lee Vilenski I can't find anything. The fact that they finished the season tied on points means there wasn't a clear favourite, but I can't find anything to reference. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 12:55, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Actually managed to dig out a couple of snapshots of people saying Swindon were most likely to win, but nothing more... The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 13:26, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I knew there would be something, thanks for adding. Happy now. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:46, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

edit

Comment Support from Amakuru

edit
  • Obviously a well-written article as ever, TRM, we wouldn't expect anything else. But like Dweller I'd be concerned about the lack of coverage of the major events of the match, other than the goals. And in particular, comparing that coverage to other single-game FAs. Obviously it's much harder to source relevant info for pre-internet-revolution games like this one, but that doesn't mean the information doesn't exist. And FA criterion 1(b) is unforgiving - the article must "neglect no major facts". Possible sources that *might* have info include this book, although unfortunately it doesn't seem to be in the British Library and you probably don't want to spend 18 quid buying it. Copies of the Swindon Advertiser from the date in question might help too... I think they have that on the microfilm at the British Library, and I could take a look the week after next if it's still relevant then. Also another idea, and I don't know if this meets reliable source policy, but could you go through the ITV match footage at [2] and mention things that the commentators and/or Jimmy Greaves (in the half-time analysis) said about it at the time? That might allow things like missed chances and so on to be covered, and if they're what the commentator said. It would be a shame for this one not to go through after quite a long time in the nomination queue so far, but then again we want to make sure it fulfils the criteria. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 09:32, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Amakuru. Thanks for the comments. Of course I'd be very grateful if you could find anything at the BL, now you've made this comment, clearly the FAC won't pass so it's on hold for another three weeks. I'd be interested to hear if actually using a recording of the footage (if hosted reliably) would be a valid addition. I remember when doubt was cast on the reliability of the the "blow-by-blow" as it happened accounts, someone mentioned using the YouTube video of the actual match but it didn't seem to wash, IIRC. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:35, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, and I've ordered the book, I see we have about 12 match articles which feature Swindon, so I'll amortise the cost across those while getting them all featured...!! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:44, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Ha, that's dedication to the cause! I just hope they selected the play-off final as one of the matches to feature... I have no idea on the legitimacy of the match footage, but in my opinion it really should be valid, given that we accept "watching the movie" as an excuse for leaving Plot sections entirely uncited, e.g. here. I wasn't involved in the questioning of the blow-by-blow accounts though, so I don't know about them. Obvious incidents like shots on goal and yellow cards could not really be construed as original research, while subjective opinions such as a "brilliant tackle" or "superbly-struck shot" could surely be attributed to a commentator from the live footage in the same manner as the minute-by-minute account. Anyway, I will have a look for those newspaper articles when I get a chance. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 11:11, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The book has arrived, it has a sterling two pages on this match, so I will work to incorporate that into the match summary. I'm reluctant to go down the path of the match video at this time, purely from the perspective that it wasn't given much positive reaction in the previous discussion. If others think it's acceptable to provide my own commentary based on the match in the same manner as WP:PLOT allows, I'll do it, but that's something I've never seen before. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:38, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Right, the additional details in the book have been incorporated, and as that was the fifty greatest ever Swindon matches, it'd be fair to assume that's the major components of the match covered now. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 18:18, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Regarding the video you've linked, that's not hosted by the official Swindon website (looks like it's a fan-hosted site) so it wouldn't be considered RS, even though I know it looks very authentic. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 18:25, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    And while I'm keen to include as much as I can, even from that YouTube video, do you know what the copyright status of the video is? Has it been legally released by ITV for third parties to host it? I don't believe that to be the case, so we can't reference it at all. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 19:54, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, I missed these comments. Probably again a question for the reliable sources noticeboard or similar, but personally I would think that it *might* be OK to cite ITV's coverage directly as a source for the match, and viewing that footage shown on YouTube would be a proxy for that... not that you'd link to it or cite it, just that it seems like a faithful reproduction of the coverage that actually took place. Which you could possibly in theory purchase from ITV themselves if you really had the inclination. Perhaps not though, it's getting into murky waters. There are obviously various videos and suchlike around in the ether too, although perhaps not easily available. I've booked the microfiche for the Swindon Evening Advertiser at the BL next Tuesday, so will let you know if that turns up anything useful. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 15:11, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @The Rambling Man: What are your thoughts on the timeline of examining and introducing possible new material? I'm not keen on archiving this after all the work that's been done if it's likely to be a short turnaround. But if it will take longer that a couple of weeks, I'd rather archive and have you renominate after the work is done. --Laser brain (talk) 15:45, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll add anything Amakuru can find as soon as he lets me have it. Next Tuesday appears to be the day he plans on visiting the British Library and I anticipate being able to introduce anything pertinent by the end of the following day or so. I don't think archiving this nomination would be in the slightest bit reasonable. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:05, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Amakuru, Laser brain, I think I'm done now. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 13:20, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi all. As I have already mentioned to TRM offline, my trip to the library to view the Swindon Advertiser yielded a few tidbits on the post-match celebrations and Hoddle's departure to Chelsea, but a promised "16-page pullout" with all the details of the match itself failed to make it into the microfilm archives held by the British Library. Maybe it was nabbed by a fan before the paper could be scanned! In the absence of this, and with TRM having gone out of his way to locate other info on the match by buying a book, I'll withdraw my concerns above. What follows are a few minor points I've noted from the prose etc, after which I'll consider this good to promote:

Source review - pass

edit

Might be claimed for WikiCup points. Hog Farm Bacon 14:22, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Locations for Foster and Mattick?
  • Sources all look to meet the high-quality RS requirement of FAC.
  • No formatting issues detected.

Now to the spot checks:

  • My lack of detailed knowledge of association football may be the issue here. So the summary shows Walsh and Hoddle with yellow cards, right? But the source doesn't mention that, and the prose just mentions a Summerbee yellow card, which isn't noted. Am I interpreting the table wrong?
  • "In their following season, Swindon finished bottom of the Premiership and were relegated back to the second tier" - Good
  • "The referee for the match was David Elleray of Harrow on the Hill" - Good
  • "Leicester City ended the season level on points with Swindon but with an inferior goal difference" - Yep
  • "while the return fixture at the County Ground the following April ended in a 1–1 draw." - Good
  • "In 2009, Eurosport listed it as the 94th best association football match of all-time" - Good

All that's a major issue is the yellow card thing, which is probably just me being confused. Fix/explain to me why I'm wrong, and this is a pass. Hog Farm Bacon 14:55, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hog Farm thanks again, I've addressed the mix-up over the yellow cards. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 15:38, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, passing the source review. Hog Farm Bacon 16:45, 25 September 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/1993_Football_League_First_Division_play-off_Final/archive1&oldid=981383115"