Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Scotland national football team 1872–1914 results/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 22:25, 14 March 2011 [1].

Scotland national football team 1872–1914 results[edit]

Scotland national football team 1872–1914 results (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:19, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the format of existing FL List of Montserrat national football team results, I hope that this historical list meets the requirements. All the best everyone :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:19, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Quick question, any reason for the cut-off at 1899? Are you planning (suggesting?) a 1900 to 1949 list, a 1950 to 1999 list, a 2000 onwards list or something else? I only asked because I'm sure someone else will, in due course...! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:22, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See Scotland national football team results, many of these lists already exist, though none until now have graced FL's door. Courcelles 21:25, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I found that afterwards. Seems a little odd on the current split (for me) I suppose. The next 1900-1919 list has just 36 games in and stops in 1914 because of the First World War. Consider the fact we have some Medal of Honor lists or Knights Cross lists (or Prem League hat-tricks...!) with well over 100 entries. I guess it's fine, I just wondered if we really needed so many lists... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:28, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm quite happy/prepared to merge this one with the 1900-1919 list if it's deemed necessary. That would give a list with just over 100 entries, which seems to be about as many as we'd want to have on one list, and encompass all pre-WW1 matches, which seems a natural split. To clarify, I didn't create any of these articles, so I can't say on what basis the split was originally worked out..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:32, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I understand. Let's see how it goes. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:07, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • much better now that it is merged
  • lead should talk about some of the huge attendances (five games had over 100k spectators!)
  • since essentially most of these games were played in the British championship, there should be a table with the statistics on the placing Scotland got in these editions (how many times it finished 1st, 1-2, 2nd, 1-3, 2-3, 4th, etc.
  • I still think the article should clearly point out that Scotland was the best rated team then (officially or not, it WAS)
    • My point, though, is that at the time Scotland was not rated the best team in the world, because the ratings did not exist and such things simply were not discussed back then. Only well over 100 years later did someone decide that they had been the best rated team in this era. I'll see what other people think, but personally I don't believe it belongs in the article....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:22, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nergaal (talk) 17:41, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 11:08, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
*A couple of things:
    • I strongly support merging al the way to 1914/1919. The 1872 could be dropped from the title anyways
    • I remember seeing at [2] (unfortunately seems to be down now) that Scotland spent a huge amount of these decades on #1. That should be mentioned in the article! Nergaal (talk) 17:36, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Those ratings did not exist in this era, plus personally I think it would be pretty meaningless to discuss how Scotland were (over a hundred years later) retrospectively rated the best team in the world at a time when only four teams were playing international football....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:02, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Yes, consider merging, at least, the "next list in the series".
  • Why not link Scotland national football team in the opening sentence?
  • The other para in the lead is up for debate if there's a consensus suggesting a merger of the "next" list here.
  • You have John Campbell born in 1872, our article has him born in 1871. Even if your ref backs you up, this is a little odd, perhaps worth a footnote or a page move?
    • The SFA archive states he was born in 1872, so the problem appears to be with our article on him. His article might need further investigating but I don't think a footnote on this article is required (apologies if I have misunderstood what you were suggesting there......) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:07, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 21:56, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • As there seems to be a growing consensus that this list should be merged with the 1900-1919 one, I will make a start on that later today........ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:07, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • OK, the merge has now been completed. Presumably somebody needs to move this FLC page as well........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:26, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Perhaps say "association" out loud so our US friends understand what-on-earth you're talking about.
  • I suspect "joint oldest" should be hyphenated.
  • "by The Football Association sending a " perhaps "... who sent a " to make it less passive.
  • "disaster in which 25 spectators died." fair enough wikilink but perhaps you could say "at Ibrox" or something?
  • "Of the 31 editions of the tournament staged " wow, USEng-tastic. I thought Brits would say "Of the 31 tournaments staged..."?
  • "biggest win in England" you and I know this is relevant, but why would anyone else?
  • Consider linking the individual Home Championships rather than just the general page on every line.
  • How do you expect the score col to sort? I have thoughts, but right now it sorts 11 and 10 below 1 which isn't good in any circumstance.
  • 1902 Grosvenor Park is a dab.
  • Acton Park redirects to simply Acton, which isn't really a venue.

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:42, 2 March 2011 (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_list_candidates/Scotland_national_football_team_1872–1914_results/archive1&oldid=1089076156"