Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1998–99 Gillingham F.C. season/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 Hog Farm via FACBot (talk) 13 November 2021 [1].

1998–99 Gillingham F.C. season

edit
Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:03, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Following on from four successful promotions, here's another season from the history of English football/soccer club Gillingham. This is one which brings back some very good memories but also some very bad memories of a day at Wembley at the end of the season which ended with me literally crying, which is never a good look for a grown man. Oh well, such is life and football. Feedback as ever gratefully received..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:03, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

image review

Pass. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:32, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support from TRM

edit
  • "the play-offs for " could link play-offs in general here, and then the specific year article for "semi-finals" perhaps.
  • "conceded two late goals, and Manchester City won the subsequent" did we skip over extra time?
  • "was 10,400 for the visit of Manchester City" in the league or in the play-offs?
  • "amid allegations of gross misconduct" probably not a great idea to leave this hanging, did anything ever get proven?
  • "The 1998–99 season" put season inside the link.
  • "67th season playing in" probably don't need "season playing" here.
  • "the 1997–98 season, Gillingham" I would pipe to something more contextual like "the previous season".
  • "but missing out due to having scored" -> "but missed out having scored..."?
  • "of £525,000" etc could inflate these values.
  • "won promotion in that" overlinked.
  • "were red and black" stripes.
  • "the FA Premier League in " no need for FA?
  • "game against Walsall and" overlinked.
  • "next game away to Blackpool, having" no result mentioned?
  • Minor: Wrexham is A.F.C. Oldham too. And Swansea City.
  • ("preceded by the arrival by helicopter of the club's new mascot, Tommy T. Trewblu" I mean, wow)
  • "former champions of English football, who" but Preston were former champions too??
  • "tier of the English football league system for the first" overlinked.
  • "Gillingham's 16th consecutive league game without defeat" that's not in the 11v11 source which is just a league table snapshot, you need the 11v11 Gills results for the season link there too.
  • "defeating Blackpool 1–0 to " overlinked.
  • "fifth in the table" mildly repetitive albeit in a previous section, still the previous sentence.
  • "away to Walsall.[24][30]" overlinked.
  • "by the Football Association, the" the is part of their name.
  • "contenders Preston North End.[36][37]" overlinked.
  • "but rebounded with a 4–0 win over Lincoln City" rebounded is a little journalese.
  • "on loan" I would have "on" in the link too. Same in caption.
  • "to AFC Bournemouth with" no need for AFC.
  • " away to Notts County, Asaba " overlinked, and I would say "over" or "against", not "to".
  • "finishers Preston North End. In" overlinked.
  • "Bartram dived" first mention so full name and link.
  • "played Manchester City, who" overlinked.
  • (As if there weren't already enough reasons to dislike Dickov.....)
  • Final is linked in table but not semis?
  • "team Oldham Athletic." overlinked.
  • "at the earliest stage" welllllll.... "proper" stage...
  • "played Colchester United Goals from Asaba, Adrian Pennock and" Col U and Pennock.
  • "opponents were Millwall. In " overlinked.
  • "the highest number of appearances" -> the most appearances.
  • Again, did the accusations against Pulis come to anything?
  • "enter the play-offs" you previously linked to the relevant league section of the play-off article.
  • "defeating Stoke City in the semi-finals, Gillingham beat Wigan Athletic" stoke/wigan overlinked.
  • ref 2 is BBC News.
  • ref 12, pp.
  • ref 22 looks like Grauniad, not Times and has author missing. And page.
  • ref 27 page missing.
  • general: check the Gale refs, many seem to be missing page numbers which can be found in the citation at the bottom of each linked article.
  • ref 34 The Sunday Times.
  • ref 39 needs en-dash, not spaced hyphen.
  • ref 54, pp.
  • ref 66 is BBC News.

That's it from me. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 10:12, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport from Grapple X

edit

As a lifelong Manchester City supporter there's no way I'm passing this one up.

  • "Shortly after the end of the 1997–98 season, highly rated teenage forward Jimmy Corbett moved to Premier League club Blackburn Rovers for an initial fee of £525,000; clauses in the contract meant that the fee had the potential to rise to £1 million if Corbett played more than a specified number of games at the higher level, but a succession of injuries limited his playing time at Blackburn and Gillingham received no further money."—Quite a long run-on sentence here, I'd split this at the semi-colon.
  • The "Match details" tables throughout should use a table caption for screenreaders. It would be simple to move the "Results" title and ref into a caption field but you might wish to leave the reference as a byline above the table and just add a title
  • "Brian Statham was restricted to one game in the 1998–99 season although he had been a semi-regular in the team the season before."—Not sold on "semi-regular" here, might be preferable to give a number of games played instead if the source permits this
  • "He scored 20 goals in the Second Division during the regular season, 1 in the play-offs, and 1 in the League Trophy for a total of 22 in all competitions"—Elsewhere we seem to have smaller numbers as words ("Two players" and "one game" just a few sentences prior) so this seems inconsistent
  • Re: Pulis' sacking—I can understand not going into a lot of detail here but it does seem remiss to not mention he won a settlement for unpaid monies relating to it. (BBC story on it, Grauniad).
  • All I have at present. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 17:53, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Grapple X: - just checking to see if I have addressed everything to your satisfaction.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:23, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Already stated my support above, all good by me. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 09:41, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    You did, I apologise. It was early :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:46, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - pass

edit
  • ISBNs all check out.
  • For News of the World Football Annual 1998–99, wouldn't we say that Brown was the editor, not the author? - done
  • For The History of English Football Clubs, both Amazon gives the publication year as 2015, while Google Books says 2013. It it a reprint?
  • I don't have access to the books and none appear to be available online so AGF with this experienced nominator on those offline sources.
  • Ref 2 checks out and verifies the information in the article.
  • Refs 14 and 15, just a minor issue, I've never seen "versus" represented with a capital V, normally either v or vs? - done
  • Ref 29, this 11v11 ref is okay other than the fact it's the wrong year, it should be the table for 1999, right? - done
  • Check refs 41 and 42 here too for the same reason. - done
  • Ref 46 is dead for me, but would recommend you use 11v11 over Soccerbase anyway. - done
  • General: You've used Gale a couple of times for Guardian sources, I've sometimes been asked that since I have Newspapers.com access (as you do too by the looks of it) to find the same article there and clip it out so it's free access rather than subscription only? Not mandatory at all, just a thought to make that "free" encyclopedia even freer!
  • Ref 67 appears to be BBC News in the same way as ref 66 etc. - done
  • Could run IABot over it to add archive links for more consistency. - done

That's all I have. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 14:33, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: - all of the above addressed I think -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:56, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me, so the source review passes. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 12:57, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Amakuru

edit
Background and preseason
  • There are 13 usages of "the club" in this section, and it begins to feel a little repetitive. Could reword a few of those for variety?
  • "highly rated teenage forward Jimmy Corbett" - there should be hyphen in "highly-rated"; but also, this feels a little POV. Who described him as highly-rated?
  • "equivalent to £968,252 in 2019" - not sure what the MOS says about this, but that sounds a somewhat over-precise figure for a rough inflation estimate. You also said "2.32 million" in the previous sentence, which is far fewer significant figures than this one.
  • "Gillingham also broke the record for the highest fee paid by the club" - I think we can omit the "also" here, given that we already mentioned further up that this record had been broken too - so the reader is expecting it.
August to December
January to May
Play-offs
  • "Preston dominated the game in the second half" - is this someone's opinion, or is it a statistical fact based on possession or shots or something? Worth clarifying
  • "in the fifth minute of injury time, Paul Dickov scored an equaliser to make the score 2–2" - good grief, this must have been a bitter pill for you guys to swallow! And to think where Man City ended up now... 😃
Cup matches
  • No realy comments, except that the prose here is very short. Perhaps that's OK though, since the run in the two main cups was so limited...
Players
  • For cleanness and future-proofing (if someone tinkers with the layout), I'd stick a reference on the end of the second paragraph - even if it's just the same one as is used for the table below.
Aftermath

That's about it. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 10:45, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Amakuru: - all done, I think. Many thanks for your review! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:13, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nice one, I'm happy with that, thanks. Good work and support.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:32, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@FAC coordinators: - requesting permission to open another FAC......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have at it! Hog Farm Talk 20:24, 11 November 2021 (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/1998–99_Gillingham_F.C._season/archive1&oldid=1055117113"