Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2022–23 Notts County F.C. season/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) 4 February 2024 [1].

2022–23 Notts County F.C. season[edit]

Nominator(s): Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 10:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a fairly remarkable club season in English football history. In 2022–23, Notts County achieved one of the highest points tallies ever accumulated in the English professional game, lost just three league matches all season, yet not only failed win the league title but also missed automatic promotion. Notts did eventually win promotion via the play-offs, but only after a 96th minute equaliser and 120th minute winner in the semi-final and a penalty shootout win in the final. Phew! I'm a Notts County supporter, but I hope I've been able to treat the subject comprehensively and fairly enough. All comments and feedback gratefully received. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 10:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Placeholder[edit]

  • I'm a bit tied up this evening getting read to take my son back to university and tomorrow actually taking him, but I will definitely review this one in the next few days -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:43, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by Chris[edit]

  • "following their relegation in 2019" - wikilink relegation and say what they were relegated from
Done
  • "the Magpies (as Notts County are nicknamed)" - I think this is excessive for the lead. Just refer to them by their proper name in the lead and leave the nicknames (and explanation thereof) for the body
Sentence amended and nickname/explanation moved to background.
  • "featured in season two of Welcome to Wrexham" => "featured in season two of the television programme Welcome to Wrexham"
Done
  • "The season was affected by tragedy" - while this was obviously a sad event, "tragedy" seems like a POV word to me
Sentence amended
  • "A founding member of the EFL in 1888" - write name in full and link on first use in body
Done
  • "Notts County were relegated to non-League" => "Notts County were relegated to non-League football"
Done
  • "The 2022–23 season was the club's fourth consecutive season in the National League" - link NL on first use in body
Done
  • "the fifth tier of the English football league system" - same with league system
Done
  • "against Grimsby Town at Meadow Lane, Nottingham" - make clear that this is Notts' own ground
Done
  • "However, Grimsby would find an equalising goal" => "However, Grimsby found an equalising goal "
Done
  • "Burchnall was replaced as head coach by former Swindon Town manager Luke Williams" - link Williams
Done
  • "all of whom featured in National League North's 2021–22 team of the season" = > "all of whom featured in the National League North's 2021–22 team of the season"
Done
  • "Notts paid undisclosed fees for Gateshead duo Macaulay Langstaff " - link Langstaff
Done
  • "winning National League North's player of the year award" => "winning the National League North's player of the year award"
Done
  • "Connor Lemonheigh-Evans, who joined on loan from Stockport in February" - write the club's name in full and link it
Stockport is already linked earlier in the section when mentioning Kyle Wootton's transfer, do I still need to do this?
No, that's OK, I clearly just missed the earlier link -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:06, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "ollowing a 1–1 draw at Boston United" - link Boston
Similar to above, Boston are linked in the section above when mentioning Tiernan Brooks' loan.
  • "Notts hosted Chesterfield in their second home match of the season" - link Chesterfield
Done
  • "with a 4–1 win at Halifax Town " => "with a 4–1 win at FC Halifax Town"
Done
  • "caused firstly by Notts County's participation in the FA Trophy" - link FA Trophy
Done
  • "and David Richardson of Sky Sports" - link Sky Sports
Done
  • "Luke Williams told Rory Smith of The New York Times" - link NYT
Done
  • "25-yards from their own goal" - no reason for that hyphen
Removed
  • "Ben Foster was forced into a fine save" - POV?
Amended
  • "as champions or at Wembley" - link Wembley
Done
  • "Notts faced Boreham Wood in the play-off semi-final, the latter having beaten Barnet 2–1 in the quarter-final" - might be worth a few words explaning why BW had to play a quarter-final and Notts did not
Good idea! Explanation added.
  • "when Lee Ndlouv pounced " - his surname is spelt incorrectly
Great spot! Corrected.
  • "Discussing the immediate aftermath of his goal, Jones told Ben Fisher of The Guardian " - link Guardian
Done
  • "The match was 1–1 at full time" => "The score was 1–1 at full time"
Done
  • "but the Spireites lead 2–1 at half time" => "but the Spireites led 2–1 at half time"
Done
  • " included youth team members Madou Cisse and Charlie Gill on bench" => " included youth team members Madou Cisse and Charlie Gill on the bench"
Done
  • What's the basis of the order of players in the table? It seems completely random.....
It took me a few moments to remember why I'd ordered it like that myself, which is probably not a good sign. I think the order is by total starts, is there a guideline on how best to order tables like this?
I don't think there is. In the past I have used squad number order for seasons where those were used and simple alphabetical order otherwise -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:06, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I think I'll reorder alphabetically, likely tomorrow evening now. I will let you know once done. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 21:11, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @ChrisTheDude: - table now reordered in alphabetical order. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 13:49, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Notts County's season was affected by tragedy" - as above
Amended
  • "Notts County's season-long rivalry with Wrexham was the focus of several episodes of season two of Welcome to Wrexham" - wikilink the show
Done
  • That's what I got. It may seem like a lot but they are all little things which should be quick fixes. Overall the quality of the article id fabulous and it's nice to see another team season article at FAC which isn't about bloody Gillingham ;-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:00, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ChrisTheDude: - thanks for the kind words and taking the time to go through this. I've now been through and made changes in line with most of the feedback. I just had a couple of queries about a handful before I take any action on those. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 21:02, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SC[edit]

Putting down a marker for now. - SchroCat (talk) 20:39, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overall
  • You need to add alts to the images
Done
  • In the four tables with "Goalscorers", I'd clarify that these are the Notts County scorers
Done
  • There's a few places where you need to sort your ellipses to meet WP:ELLIPSES, which include using "..." not "…" and adding non-breaking spaces
Done
Out
  • "Several Notts players, who would make first-team appearances for the Magpies": "for the club" would work a little better, I think, but your call
Changed per your suggestion
In
  • Image caption "the 2022–23 seasaon" – spelling mistake
Corrected
National League
  • "24 teams play 46 matches:" I'd add "46 matches each:", just for clarity and to stop the readers stumbling about that
Done

Done to the start of November–January – more to come. - SchroCat (talk) 13:33, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November–January
  • 'involved in a "thrilling encounter"' and "acrobatically": if there's an opinion quote, it needs to say in the text who thought so
Amended to include the journalist for the first quote, I've removed the second.
February–April
  • "fell 0–1 down, but twice they came back to win 3–1": They can't come back twice from 1-0 down. They can come back once, then score a second, but the second isn't "coming back" from anything.
Amended
10 April 2023 - Wrexham v Notts County
  • I have a problem with too much weight being put onto this single game, given it is only one of the 46 they played in the league. It wasn’t a final, so it didn't matter if they won, lost or drew this single game any more than any of the other 45.
    There are 551 words on this one league match, compared to 536 words on the 13 league matches in November–January, which isn't right.
Hi @SchroCat:, many thanks for taking the time to do this, it is very much appreciated. I just wanted to acknowledge that I've seen you're making your way through the article and that I'll begin addressing comments as soon as possible (likely to be Sunday). I was hoping for a bit more advice on the above point so that I can get my thinking cap on about how best to address. I completely understand the point you're making about the result not being more or less important than any other game in the context of a 46-match season, but with how close the teams were, how close it was to the conclusion of the regular season, the stakes and the publicity it got, my feeling is it needs more than a passing mention. With some thought I think I can get the most important points into one paragraph, would this address your concerns here? Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 19:31, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think one small to medium paragraph would be about right. It was obviously a big thing for the club in the season (no other match - either for the club or in non-league football - was received the same sort of publicity, and mention in the NYT for a British non-league club is extraordinary), so there has to be something extra mentioned, but maybe not as much as there is, and maybe not in its own separate section - it may be worth having Feb-March as one section, then a section for April, rather than trying to have it all in Feb-April. (I don't say it must be that way, but I think it's certainly worth considering at least). Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 13:44, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I've now amended this: I've kept Feb-April in place but it's now four paragraphs and has now no subsections. Let me know if there's any other changes you think are necessary here. I've also addressed your other comments except for the overall section which I shall endeavour to get done either later this evening or tomorrow. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 13:41, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comments in overall now addressed. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 18:46, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More to come - SchroCat (talk) 16:42, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That section looks and reads much better than it did, thanks. Just two more comments:

February–April
  • "Red Dragons were now tied on 100 points": Don't need "now"
Done
  • "won the title in any National League season before this one": "won the title in any previous National League season" may be smoother to read
Done

That's my lot. I made a few minor tweaks for LQ reasons, but that's all. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 09:39, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, these changes are now done. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 18:24, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Nice work - meets the FA criteria, to my eye at least. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 18:48, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Placeholder[edit]

From me. Will read soon Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:07, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • The first sentence is a tad too long -I'd change ... the fifth tier of the English football league system, their fourth season at this level following their relegation from EFL League Two in 2019. to, " the fifth tier of the English football league system; this was their fourth season at this level following their relegation from EFL League Two in 2019."
Done
  • The team's predicament of not winning automatic promotion despite accumulating 107 points prompted discussion - you don't need to re-state the 107 points, nor would I describe it as a predicament if they (eventually) were promoted. Maybe The issue (of a team having) such a high tally of points that did not result in automatic promotion prompted discussion... or something similar...?
Done

Support Otherwise looks on track Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:16, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the help, changes are now done. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 19:06, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Eem dik doun in toene[edit]

  • Even though the information is correct, I think note a needs to be sourced as well.
Citation added
  • The following words could be wikilinked: hat-trick (in "seven-minute hat-trick from Langstaff"), free kick ("with a long-range free kick"), The Athletic ("Paul Taylor of The Athletic"), penalties ("on penalties in"), penalties ("Rodrigues penalties")
Done
  • "putting the Magpies 1–0 after" - missing "ahead" here
Done
  • In ref. 136: per MOS:ALLCAPS, "NATIONAL LEAGUE" should be "National League"
Done, there were a few other all caps headlines which I've amended too.
I've left this one for the moment given SchroCat's comments below.
  • "played at Wembley Stadium the following Saturday." - the sentence needs a reference. Also, I would replace "Saturday" with the date of the final, or indicate at which day the semi-final took place (which is currently missing).
Reference added and sentence changed to date (also a slight edit to the second paragraph of the final so the date isn't repeated.
  • Overall, a very nice article! Eem dik doun in toene (talk) 09:43, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you for doing this, just to want to acknowledge I've seen your comments and will be able to get through them by Monday at the latest. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 14:02, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've had a bit more time tonight than I was expecting, so comments are now addressed. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 19:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • (poking my nose in): "told Ben Fisher of The Guardian: "I": the colon (or comma) before a quote is an Americanism that is best avoided - it's is absolutely fine without any punctuation. - SchroCat (talk) 10:54, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Eem dik doun in toene (talk) 20:34, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image and source review[edit]

Are the kits sourced anywhere? Why is File:Macaulay Langstaff 2018-10-27 1.jpg in that section? File:Macaulay Langstaff 2018-10-27 1.jpg is apparently no longer on Flickr; was it archived somewhere? I wonder why File:Notts County 3 Boreham Wood 2 postmatch pitch invasion.jpg by Eric Idle's Cat lacks an EXIF; did you reprocess the image? File:Notts County world's oldest professional football club sign.jpg needs a tag about the licence of the plate. I guess the ALT text is OK. I believe that newspaper names such as Nottingham Post, The Times, The Guardian and The York Press are usually italicized, I don't recall for sure if things like BBC Sport and The Athletic also need to. "The Non-League Paper" might as well but there I wonder what makes it a reliable source. I don't think we usually put the domain in the website parameter, especially since footballwebpages.co.uk, youtube.com and soccerway.com have the names "Football Web Pages", "YouTube" and "Soccerway". Is The National League a reliable source? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:45, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for doing this. I'll be able to read through properly and respond to comments on Sunday. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 11:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sources
  • Newspapers names have now been italicized. I've checked a couple of articles with FA status and BBC Sport/Sky Sports etc. isn't italicized there so I've left these.
  • I've replaced domain names with the website names as requested.
  • Regarding the reliability of The Non-League Paper, this is a published weekly print and online newspaper hiring professional journalists to cover non-League football. It is one of the most detailed resources available for information about non-League matches.
  • The National League website is the official website of the league Notts County played during this season.
Images to come later today. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 09:08, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Short paragraph regarding kits with references added to Pre-season section where they were warn for the first time (the cited articles both have photographs of the kits being worn).
  • The image of Macaulay Langstaff is included where it is as the section includes a paragraph discussing his season to that point including information taken from interviews with him.
  • I've checked Flickr and it appears the account the image is taken from has been deleted. I can't find an archived version unfortunately, so I've replaced the image in the article with one I took myself at yesterday's match.
  • Regarding File:Notts County 3 Boreham Wood 2 postmatch pitch invasion.jpg, I uploaded this directly from my device, I'm unsure why the EXIF is missing here when it appears on my other direct-from-device uploads. I think I originally took this image to upload to my social media on the day of the game, is this possibly a reason?
  • Regarding File:Notts County world's oldest professional football club sign.jpg, I've switched this for an earlier version of the file I uploaded (File:Oldest professional football club.jpg, I didn't realise you could crop within Commons and the original file has more information on origin etc.). Does this still require the necessary additional information? If so, is there some guidance on what needs including and where it needs to go? Thanks. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 19:28, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Going by commons:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United Kingdom#Freedom of panorama it seems like we need to know when the plaque was made, and by who. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, information added. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 12:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid that in this case, the sign and thus the photo might be copyrighted. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:24, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, I will try to find to find a suitable replacement later on today and let you know once I have. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 12:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Image replaced. 13:21, 29 January 2024 (UTC) Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 13:21, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
File:Nottingham Council House from the square.jpg? It seems OK but is also really foggy. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:11, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is a fair point, and not one I had really appreciated. It looks like there are other photos of Old Market Square/the Council House available but before I go through them, could I check whether File:Notts County civic reception 2010.jpg would be okay? This is the civic reception following Notts County's previous promotion in 2010, the event which couldn't go ahead in 2023 and is discussed in that section of the article. I've downloaded this from my social media - unfortunately I no longer have the device I took the image with. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 19:26, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would work if you clearly mark in the caption that it's about an earlier Notts County thing and not the 2022-2023 one. Yes, that file lacks an EXIF, but I don't see any other version online. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:33, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, image switched and appropriately labelled. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 08:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Renamed the new file to a clearer filename (File:Chesterfield vs. Notts County, 11 February 2023.jpg). Otherwise, it seems like this passes, with my caveats about source unfamiliarity and lack of spotcheck. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:48, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jo-Jo, this is a first time nominationer situation, so any chance that you could do the spot check and plagiarism review bits? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, spot-checking this version.
  • 2 I am not sure I can see this definition anywhere.
  • 4 I don't see the league explanation in the source.
  • 18 Are there other players that were loaned out?
  • 22 OK
  • 23 OK
  • 37 Which other players?
  • 48 OK
  • 53 Which are the other three draws?
  • 57 Don't see either brace or the Moors thing.
  • 65 OK
  • 69 OK
  • 71 Need a copy of this article.
  • 99 Where does it mention Chesterfield?
  • 104 OK
  • 121 OK
  • 149 Where are the seven appearances mentioned?
  • 160 OK
  • 177 Need a copy of this article.
  • 179 Where does it say third division south?
  • 185 Is this one unitary quote?

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • 2: Reading back, the sentence "Below this structure [the Premier League and EFL] there are dozens of regional leagues, comprising over 600 teams. These leagues and clubs make up the semiprofessional, or nonleague, game." is a bit confusing as the National League obviously isn't a regional league. Let me see if I can find something better.
New reference added (sentence of note also changed to make it fit better). Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 19:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 4: Very good spot, thanks! I've added a reference for league finishing position earlier in the sentence.
  • 18 (now 19): Yes, the remaining loans are covered in the remainder of the paragraph and cited in notes 21 to 25.
  • 37 (now 38): Similar to above: the remaining loan signings are discussed in the remainder of the paragraph and cited in notes 39 to 43.
  • 53: I've moved this citation [now 54] to make it clear it is the reference for the 2–2 draw with Boreham Wood and not for it being the first of three draws: the second and third draws were the games with Gateshead and Chesterfield mentioned afterwards and referenced separately.
  • 57 (now 58): I've re-jigged the language here. The reference does mention Langstaff scoring a brace but not that it's his third for the season (his previous two are mentioned previously in the paragraph). The result of the Solihull game is in reference 59 immediately following 58 at the end of the same sentence.
  • 71 (now 72): I'm able to read this article by accessing the archived rather than direct link. Does this work for you?
  • 99 (now 100): The Chesterfield postponement is referenced in what's now reference 99, directly before at the end of the same sentence.
  • 149 (now 150): Re-jigged the language here. Although it being Notts County's seventh appearance at Wembley is correct, I can't find a reliable source that specifies as such. I could incorporate citations that Notts played in these games if necessary, but this can also be confirmed from clicking into the relevant article link, so I'm not sure if I need to do this?
  • 177 (now 178): This is a book rather than an article and I'm not sure if it's available online. I can send a screenshot of the relevant change if needed, but I'm not sure how to do this?
  • 179 (now 180): The article says won promotion from Third Division South so I've amended the language here.
  • 185 (now 186): The full sentence is "In context it's enormous, it's a massive moment in the history of the club," Notts County boss Luke Williams told BBC Sport. "We have shut the door on the worst times the club has experienced since its beginning. I'd edited out the first couple of words and "it's a" prior to massive. Is this okay?
Many thanks for taking time to do this and your patience with a first-timer! Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 18:47, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A copy of the pertinent page(s) via the Wikipedia email should suffice. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:11, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, will get this to you tomorrow at the latest. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 17:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Email sent. I've included this in the email but am copying here too for clarity: The note you’ve queried is now 179. Just a quick word about the way I’ve referenced that paragraph – note 179 is the reference for the previous record; that a new record was set in 2022/23 (and what the new record was) is referenced in the article mentioned in note 177 – I’ve tried to make this clear in 177 but if you feel there’s a better way of doing it let me know. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 18:47, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's OK for 178 neé 177. I can't access 72 neé 71 even with an archive. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:02, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've forwarded screenshots of the article for you. Eric Idle's Cat (talk) 07:56, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, so 72 neé 71 checks out. Looks like this passes, then. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:07, 4 February 2024 (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/2022–23_Notts_County_F.C._season/archive1&oldid=1208326999"