Template:Did you know nominations/Fergie Aitken
- 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:14, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Fergie Aitken
[edit]- ... that the £2,000 fee from footballer Fergie Aitken's transfer to Blackburn Rovers from Bury in 1921 was the record amount the club had ever received for a player? Source: profile at Port Online
- ALT1:... that footballer Fergie Aitken also competed in the annual Powederhall Sprint race? Source: Same as above
- Reviewed: 2002 Delphi Indy 300
5x expanded by Kosack (talk). Self-nominated at 14:14, 5 September 2018 (UTC).
Overall I think this is a quality article with good sourcing. It meets the expansion and length requirements. It is neutral and generally free of content problems with one small exception: I think "the record fee that Bury had received for a player" should be rephrased. It is the same phrasing as the source and I don't think the WP:LIMITED exception applies. Otherwise, the article content is good.- The hook is good but I think it could be made punchier if it included the actual amount of the fee. Also, if there's room, could it include the team he was transferred to? (No big if it can't but it might be of interest). Nominator's QPQ is handled.
- Kosack, ping me when you've had a chance to have a look at this and I'll come back :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 17:18, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Premeditated Chaos: Thanks for the review, I've added the fee and other team involved and tweaked the wording. Let me know what you think. Kosack (talk) 17:28, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- The hook is good but the article itself still has that phrasing. Could you change it, and then we'll be good to go? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:47, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Premeditated Chaos: Done. Kosack (talk) 15:12, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
- The hook is good but the article itself still has that phrasing. Could you change it, and then we'll be good to go? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:47, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
