Template:Did you know nominations/Kingstonian F.C.
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by -PAPAJECKLOY (hearthrob! kiss me! <3) (talk) 01:18, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Kingstonian F.C.
[edit]- ... that Kingstonian F.C. have had six different names?
Improved to Good Article status by Matty.007 (talk). Self nominated at 12:06, 20 July 2014 (UTC).
- Do you have any images that won't inadvertently arouse spanking fetishists? EEng (talk) 02:38, 21 July 2014 (UTC) I don't know what's got into me lately.
- Yes, but it's well known that Brits have a special love for spanking -- all those boarding schools and so on. Orgiastic breaches of the peace could be the result, threatening the very fabric of the social order, especially at tea-time. As a precautionary measure perhaps we should post a link to the Riot Act for ready reference by public officials. EEng (talk) 17:58, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
- I think I get what EEng means: it's not such a great picture for the subject because of the hands because at first glance, you've got a guy swinging back to give the other player a hit; you expect an article about an incident of a player being hit. If you can't get a different image, you might consider uploading a crop of just the Kingstonian F.C. player. It would also obviate the "in red and white" (though you'd probably still have to say "player pictured" or something). It's also not such a great photo because all the detail of the Kingstonian F.C. player's face is lost because of the exposure. DYK images should look good, and give detail, at 100x100... this image, with this composition, is an image of a soccer player about to hit another soccer player. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 04:58, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- In fact, I just looked at it in Photoshop: it's a bit more serious than I had initially thought. While cropping is definitely possible, the backlighting makes it really hard (if impossible) to boost the foreground brightness without completely blowing out the background. And looking at this image at 100px, you have to realize something: his kit isn't red and white in this image at 100px, it's blue-grey and almost black. You can't distinguish that it's red without the text. Without cropping, I would say this image is not about Kingstonian F.C., but about the other team's player. Sorry, I don't think you should run this DYK with this image. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 05:29, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- I think I get what EEng means: it's not such a great picture for the subject because of the hands because at first glance, you've got a guy swinging back to give the other player a hit; you expect an article about an incident of a player being hit. If you can't get a different image, you might consider uploading a crop of just the Kingstonian F.C. player. It would also obviate the "in red and white" (though you'd probably still have to say "player pictured" or something). It's also not such a great photo because all the detail of the Kingstonian F.C. player's face is lost because of the exposure. DYK images should look good, and give detail, at 100x100... this image, with this composition, is an image of a soccer player about to hit another soccer player. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 04:58, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, but it's well known that Brits have a special love for spanking -- all those boarding schools and so on. Orgiastic breaches of the peace could be the result, threatening the very fabric of the social order, especially at tea-time. As a precautionary measure perhaps we should post a link to the Riot Act for ready reference by public officials. EEng (talk) 17:58, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Full review needed. Based on the above comments, I have removed the image from consideration. Note to Matty.007: something is wrong with the table in the Current squad section, and it needs to be fixed before this can gain final approval. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm putting off the call for further review because not only is there something wrong in the Current squad section, but a QPQ review has not been done yet even after a month. According to the user's talk page, Matty.007 won't be editing before August 28 at the very earliest. If this turns out to be a longer absence, the nomination will ultimately have to be closed due to lack of a QPQ, and I'd rather have a reviewer spend time on a nomination that might be able to pass if the QPQ here remains undone. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:18, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
- BlueMoonset, I am donating one of my own reviews as a QPQ. It was never used as a QPQ elsewhere. Can't help with the review questions, since this subject matter is outside my knowledge base. — Maile (talk) 22:10, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- Full review needed, now that a QPQ has been supplied and the Current squad section's table has been fixed. Thanks for the QPQ donation, Maile. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:24, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Hook is sourced, no plagiarism found in spotcheck, meets requirements. Too bad about there not being an image. —innotata 22:35, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
