Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Wales national football team results 1876–99/archive1

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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 14 September 2020 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Wales national football team results 1876–99

Featured list candidates/Wales national football team results 1876–99/archive1

Nominator(s): Kosack (talk) 21:29, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The first of a possible series of Wales international football results lists. I've used the format for the one promoted Scottish list as a template and brought this list up to a level I believe is worthy of FL status. I look forward to any comments. Kosack (talk) 21:29, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

"Wales player their first home fixture " - spot the typo ;-)
Ahh, I actually saw that and forgot to change it, done now. Kosack (talk) 14:17, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"played 62 fixtures, winning 11, drawing 8 and losing the remaining 44" - that doesn't add up to 62
First three general refs (statistics) need access dates
Thunk that's it from me - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:06, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ChrisTheDude: Thanks for the review Chris, I've addressed the points above. Kosack (talk) 14:35, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:16, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Harrias

Per MOS:OVERLINK, delink well-known places; certainly London, Cardiff, Glasgow, Edinburgh and Belfast. Honestly, given that the location will be linked from the ground page, there is an argument for removing them all. - Removed
I assume match #12 should be in 1882? - Fixed
In light of the recent RFC on table captions (closed back in May) and how FLCs have to follow MOS:ACCESS, a table captions should be included in all tables. This quote by PresN might apply to this list: "In the case that the table is the first thing in a section where the section header is essentially the same as what the caption would be, and therefore looks duplicative visually, you can make the caption screen reader-only with the {{sronly}} template, e.g. "|+ {{sronly|Example table caption}}" instead of "
I added a hidden caption to the "Head to head records" table. Harrias ^talk 18:50, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The "Head to head records" table also needs row and column scopes adding.
Add a WP:Short description.
"..losing 4–0 at Hamilton Crescent in Partick." The table says "Hamilton Crescent, Glasgow": be consistent. (I know Partick is in Glasgow, but the article should pick one or the other.)
"The match makes the Welsh side the third oldest international football team" I'm not keen on this phrasing: maybe rephrase the whole thing to: "The team are the third oldest in international football, behind only Scotland and England. They played their first match on 18 March 1876 against Scotland, losing 4–0 at Hamilton Crescent in Glasgow." (or Partick, whichever you're going with.) It might just be me: don't feel obligated to change if you don't think it is an improvement.
"..with Scotland winning.." Avoid noun plus -ing.
"..with the British Home Championship, a round-robin tournament, holding.." Same again.
"..with Jack Doughty scoring.." And again.
"..higher than third in the British Home Championship.." As it is clear what competition you are talking about, I think you could optionally shorten this to "..higher than third in the Championship.."

That's it from me: a nice list, I look forward to the rest of the series! Harrias ^talk 12:15, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Harrias: Thanks Harrias, I've amended all of the points above. Let me know what you think. Kosack (talk) 14:35, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support, I made a couple of copy-edits to the article you might want to check, but I'm happy it now meets the FL criteria, great work. I'll keep an eye out for any more in the series, but feel free to ping me if you want a review and I've missed it. Harrias ^talk 18:50, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NB: Will claim WikiCup points etc. Harrias ^talk 18:50, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from ~ HAL333 21:11, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

;Comments

The team are --> Shouldn't that be "The team is"?
- It's a British English thing, we refer to sports teams in the plural. Harrias ^talk 20:43, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In note c, Reports vary over the exact attendance due to poor weather conditions. Some reports estimate as few as 100 attended, although most sources estimate around 200. You could change the second "estimate" to "approximate" to make it sound less repetitive.

Everything else looks great! ~ HAL333 19:52, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HAL333: Thanks for taking a look, I've addressed the second point here and I think Harrias has explained the first. Kosack (talk) 21:05, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nice work. ~ HAL333 21:11, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from TRM

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 19:00, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup points will be claimed etc etc

I think the title should comply with MOS, i.e. full years in the date range.

This is always an odd one as football, and sport in general, articles seem to generally not follow this. For example all of the pages listed in Category:National association football team results by team stick with the same format used here (when the ranges don't cross centuries of course). Kosack (talk) 12:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked for guidance at WT:MOSNUM as I don't think there's a strong argument against compliance with the MOS date range guidelines. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:00, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Year ranges in sporting article titles is worth a read. Looks like a lot of pages need to be moved!! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:45, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"The team are t... The team played... " repetitive, short sentences, can be merged as they are inter-related.
" the same opponents " why not just "them".
" into a competition with the British Home Championship" can't quite put my finger on it but this reads a little odd to me.
"which held its" bit anthropomorphic for me. The first edition was held, it didn't really "hold itself"
Match No. -> Match no.
I may be bold to suggest that you siphon off the H/A (N soon?) into its own column so people can sort on that too.
No h in Bramall Lane.
I'm a bit of a pedant for using consistent numbers of decimal places (e.g. in the % win cells).

The template is already rounding to two places, but seems to ignore zeroes. I've tried to force it, but it doesn't seem to be working. Any idea how to do so? Kosack (talk) 12:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps as these results will never change, you could just hard code the answers? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 15:53, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oliver has full stops, Stead has commas. Consistent publication formatting please.

That's my lot. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 10:09, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: Thanks for the review, I've addressed all of the points above and left comments on two of them. Kosack (talk) 12:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: I've moved the article (and the others ready for the future) inline with the MOS now and fixed the percentage issue also. Kosack (talk) 18:27, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support nice work. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 19:00, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - Pass

~~I'm not sure if this is actually a guideline but I almost always see the specific refs above the general ones, you may want to do so here – I'm fine with either way though.~~

~~Amazon says that the Guinness publisher is officially "Guinness World Records Ltd"~~

~~The ISBN for the Oliver book should also be ISBN 13 not ISBN 10 (use the converter)~~
Everything else looks good, these are such minor things that I'm just going to do them. Pass for source review, cheers! Aza24 (talk) 07:26, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:13, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.