Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2009 Football League Two play-off Final/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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) 9 July 2021 [1].

2009 Football League Two play-off Final[edit]

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:42, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Having successfully promoted the article on the first play-off final won by the team I support, I now present the second (and, to date, most recent). Once again, despite it involving my team, I feel I have managed to write the article in a neutral fashion and without excessive jargon. I eagerly await feedback, which will be actioned as soon as humanly possible. Fun fact: at this particular play-off final, the dignitary who had the job of presenting the trophy to the victorious captain at the end was someone who had been in my class at school....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:42, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Images appear to be freely licensed (t · c) buidhe 11:57, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - just a quick note to say that I will now be off-WP till Tuesday evening. If there's any fresh comments in that time, I will pick them up on my return..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:33, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support from TRM[edit]

  • ".... the semi-finals; the semi-final between ..." repetitive.
  • "as the scores finished level" ah, over two legs, on aggregate and after extra time??
  • Link ref in the lead.
  • "until the last minute. In the 90th minute" kind of saying the same thing...
  • "would spend only" why not "only spent"?
  • "would spend three" similar...
  • "In the 2008–09 Football League season, the teams finishing..." I know the league table is there, but I usually give a passing mention to the promoted clubs and the distance behind the two play-off finalists ended, to put some context sometimes into how far off automatic they were but yet still had a chance/got promoted.
  • "in fifth place in... two places..." could switch one of these for "position"?
  • "The "Shrews" had" dislike nicknames, especially if not adequately introduced.
  • Link "lobbed".
  • Link cross.
  • Link foul.
  • Extra time, sending off?
  • 1996 Football League Trophy Final has an article.
  • "Shortly before kick-off" the kick-off of the final, not the preceding match you just described which was a regular league game.
  • Odds can be linked to fixed-odds betting.
  • "final who had" parses badly, it should be "same as" somehow, not "same who"
  • "Stimson opted not to make any changes to his starting XI and Miller was named" you already said he made no changes, so maybe jusut cut to "Stimson named him as a sub" or similar.
  • 2005 FA Trophy Final doesn't have an article but it should, so I would link it.
  • Link "sent off".
  • "Shrewsbury kicked off the match" what time?
  • ""looked unsettled" according to whom?
  • Link penalty area.
  • Link header.
  • "the key men " bit POV.
  • "the 15-minute mark ... the 15-minute mark" repeat.
  • "first serious goalscoring" bit POV.
  • "to receive attention"" perhaps be clear it was medical attention.
  • "Following the foul on Chadwick..." feels odd to have the sentence before this one interjected between the natural chronological flow.
  • "defeated, BBC Sport's interactive" overlinked.
  • Ref 15 scoreline needs en-dash.
  • Ref 16, needs pp. for multiple pages.
  • Curiously the match isn't linked to in the "2008–09 in English football" template so that shouldn't be there (or the play-off finals should be added to the template!)

That's all I have on my first pass. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 20:36, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: All done I think, apart from the one about ref 16, which I don't understand because it doesn't list multiple pages...? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:14, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Quite right, it doesn't. Odd coincidental line break! I'll re-check over the weekend. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 21:54, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Happy with this and the modifications made following my suggestions, so I support. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 10:03, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Edwininlondon[edit]

Having reviewed the other Gillingham play-off final, it seems inevitable I end up having a look at this one too. Not too much to say actually, the article looks in good shape. Just these comments:

  • was philosophical about the fact --> not sure this is the right tone for an encyclopedia
  • The teams finishing between fourth and seventh inclusive competed in the play-offs for the fourth and final promotion place. Brentford, Exeter City and Wycombe Wanderers were promoted automatically. --> might be just a personal style preference, but I would swap the order of these 2 sentences. And perhaps say something like "Champions Brentford". Just something to at least consider.
  • Shrewsbury Town finished two places and six points lower. --> I'm not sure a team can finish 6 points lower.
  • in which BBC Sport commented --> to my foreign eyes that "in" looks a bit odd. It's probably ok, but just checking
  • Shrewsbury's Chris Humphrey (pictured in 2016) --> link Chris Humphrey
  • Shrewsbury had previously played at the new Wembley in the 2007 League Two play-off final --> should that not be a capital F in final? I never quite understood why all the article titles of play-off finals have a capital F for Final, but okay, they all seem to have it, I suspect because they are proper names for events. But then I think we should be consistent and have an F here too. Not sure if the same rule applies a bit further on, where it reads "higher than the 35,715 registered at the previous year's League Two play-off final". That one doesn't look like a proper name to me, so maybe the f is fine here, but I'm just guessing now.
  • leading scorer among all League Two players with 20 goals in the league --> I had to read this twice to figure out what is going on. Would be good to try and get the number 28 in first, so that it contrasts better with Jackson's 20
  • and 7 in the Football League Trophy --> link Football League Trophy
  • Defender Graham Coughlan played a prominent role for his team in the first half. --> add for which team he played
  • Simeon Jackson scored the only goal of the game --> add Gillingham's
  • ref #48 (The Independent). Why is London here? The other newspapers don't seem to get a location.

That's all I could find. Edwininlondon (talk) 10:42, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Edwininlondon: - all done I think -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:16, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Great. I see you have changed the "philosophical" bit into the rather neutral "chose not to dwell" which is okay, but perhaps something along the lines of "did not blame the referee for their defeat" is a bit closer to the essence of his statement. I hope to be able to do a spot check soon. Edwininlondon (talk) 08:31, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Slight adjustment made -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:14, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I like it. Edwininlondon (talk) 20:40, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sources spot check:

  • #4 ok
  • #5 all fine except for the BBC says the game was played at Oteley Road. It doesn't mention New Meadow
    • @Edwininlondon: This is an odd one. At the time, the stadium was officially called the Prostar Stadium due to a sponsorship deal, but it seems that BBC policy was to use unsponsored names for stadia (as is WP:FOOTY policy). However, because the stadium was newly built and had acquired a sponsored name basically straight away, there wasn't 100% confirmation of what its unsponsored name actually was. Our own article at the time was called "New Meadow", but the BBC seem to have decided to use the name of the road it's on. This Guardian article from 2008 calls it New Meadow, as in fact does this BBC article which uses it in the context of the very game being described here. Not sure what to do there - use "New Meadow (also known as Oteley Road)".....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Odd indeed. But I'd be happy with simply adding a source that puts New Meadow on Oteley Road. For example this BBC article. No need to change the text I think. Edwininlondon (talk) 10:05, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Edwininlondon: Done, and for good measure I also added the BBC Sport article I linked above which specifically references the Shrewsbury-Gillingham match earlier in the season as having taken place at New Meadow, hope that's OK -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:23, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Even better. Edwininlondon (talk) 06:19, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • #8 ok
  • #13 (all first half occurrences): all ok
  • #17 ok
  • #49 ok
  • #52 ok
  • #53 ok
  • #54 ok
  • #56 ok

That should do it. Edwininlondon (talk) 20:40, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All fine. Support from me. Nice work. Edwininlondon (talk) 06:19, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Cas Liber[edit]

Takin' a butcher's now then....

  • Post-match analysis showed that referee Oliver had erroneously awarded the corner kick... - why not just "wrongly"?
  • Gillingham finished the season in fifth place [in League Two] with 75 points... - bracketed bit redundant?

Otherwise no prose-clangers stick out really (and above are really minor quibbles) - comprehensive ++ Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:19, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Casliber: - done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:10, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
alright then. looking good Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:13, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Query for the coordinators[edit]

@FAC coordinators: - hi co-ordinators, this nom now has three supports, and I was wondering if that meant I could start another nom? I normally hang out at FLC, where three supports on an existing nom would be sufficient to allow for second one, but I'm not so sure what the etiquette is here at FAC and don't want to do anything I shouldn't. Thanks! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:04, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You also need image and source review passes. Edwininlondon, just checking whether your review was intended to include a source review pass? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:15, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like a source review to me, so on a Duck Test basis, sure, you may nominate another. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:58, 3 July 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/2009_Football_League_Two_play-off_Final/archive1&oldid=1032837430"