Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Birmingham City F.C. seasons

Birmingham City F.C. seasons

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: 11 days, 4 support, 0 oppose. Promote. Raime 23:03, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(self nom) I hope I've learnt from previous FLC's for similar football club seasons lists, and would welcome comments on what needs to be done for this list of Birmingham City F.C. seasons to gain featured status. Thanks in advance for your time. Struway2 | Talk 09:46, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
- "For the first thirteen years of their existence there was no league football..." should have a comma between "existence" and "there". Same goes for "During the 1880s, they...", "In 1888, the club...", "However, the Combination...", "In 1889-90, Small Heath...", "During the 1990s, they won..." and "As at the end of the 2006–07 season, the club...".

Done Use of the comma after introductory phrases is the one area where I tend to disagree with a lot of grammar books, though you're probably right about the need for most of these ;-) However, I'm not convinced the "existence, there" or "In 1888, the club" ones add much to the readability.

- I would suggest changing "no goalscorer" in 1884-85 to "n/a".

Done

- You should probably create articles for Jack Price, Walter Dixon and Austin Smith, even if they are just stubs for the time being.

Not done Couldn't argue notability for any of them. Smith played one season for the club then emigrated aged 23. Dixon played for a few months, got a job somewhere up north and never played league football. Price likewise, though he was only 25/26 when the Football League/Football Alliance started.

- Remove the full stops from the Key items.

Done

Hope that helps. Other than those minor details, this is a very good article and will definitely get my support once the minor things are cleared up. - PeeJay 10:15, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for your suggestions and (potential) support, Struway2 | Talk 11:37, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support - all my gripes have been dealt with adequately. - PeeJay 13:03, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support, follows the trend of WP:FOOTY articles. I couldn't find any problems with it although the minor competitions seem a bit pointless. It would probably be a bit bare otherwise though. <chuckle> ;);) Woodym555 10:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

small time comps for small time Small Heath, eh? thank you for your unequivocal support ;) Struway2 | Talk 10:53, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)

Very good, and in the same style as other FL's about football seasons. However, a couple of comments before I can offer full support.

"..they have played a total of 4892 competitive games..." - this is a rod for your back, it'll need to be updated every game. I'd avoid it altogether.
- that went with the "As at the end of season ...", I've turned it round for clarity.
"...arguably..." - bit PoV really. Find a source to back up that it was the most successful season, or regarded as such, e.g. a quotation or similar.
- sourced to history section on club website - "The club's official history rates 1955–56 as their best season to date."
Not sure Anglo-Italian cup is worth mentioning. Or, at least, when I did the Ipswich seasons, I avoided it. It wasn't particularly notable...!
- not sure it was particularly notable (apart from the Battle of Ancona), but it was a first-team competition, so it'd be POV to leave it out.

All the best. The Rambling Man 17:34, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for the small edit you made and for your comments, which I hope I've dealt with adequately, Struway2 | Talk 18:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, fair play on the Anglo-Italian matches, I may choose to re-insert that info into Ipswich seasons... Glad to be of help. So, now, it's unqualified support. Well done. The Rambling Man 18:48, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]