Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1978 FA Cup Final/archive1

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 Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 20 April 2020 [1].


1978 FA Cup Final[edit]

Nominator(s): The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:32, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

One of the finest FA Cup finals ever, serious underdogs and league-lame Ipswich took on the mighty Gooners at old Wembley and beat them. The goalscorer collapsed after scoring, assuring his place in ITFC history. This is a fresh GA but it's fully comprehensive so I can't see a reason why FAC shouldn't be considered. I look forward to receiving the comments of the community. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:32, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support on comprehensiveness and prose - I reviewed this at GAN and tried to give it as big a shove as possible to here...and found little to complain about. I don't have the best eye for detail so may have missed stuff but I can't tell as I missed it (if I did). Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:31, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you Cas, I appreciated the review then and your comments here. It's a bit of a test case, but I'd be more than happy to discover any gaps and fill them in if there are any...! Cheers. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 11:51, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments from JennyOz[edit]

Hi TRM, great read. Congrats on the win! There was only a little football jargon I was unsure of so have suggested wlinks. Here are my comments...

That is it for now. Let me know if you need any clarifications. Regards, JennyOz (talk) 13:21, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JennyOz thanks, as ever, for your comments. I've addressed as many as I can, and there are a couple of "Really"s? in there which might need a bit more discussion. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 13:57, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
JennyOz just wondered if you had a chance to get back to me about the comments I addressed? Cheers. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 07:11, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi TRM, yes, I have been mulling over this and have revisited it often hoping the penny would drop but am still (embarrassingly) confused. I have tried to explain my confusion (maybe confused my explanation!) above re Robson/tie. As for my apostrophe suggestions - maybe not "really". All else seems perfectly fine to me and am happy with the tweaks. JennyOz (talk) 12:02, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
JennyOz I think I created confusion. I've added notes above and made a change to the prose which hopefully clears it up? Thanks again for your time and comments. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 12:54, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
All clear! This article is a fine telling of the journey and match. I am very happy to add my support. JennyOz (talk) 13:40, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image review[edit]

Referee[edit]

  • Not sure, but I don't like the idea of having a red-linked article name for a FA article. Would it be better to de-link? Govvy (talk) 14:54, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I delinked it (it was already in the infobox without linking) as it's unlikely that he will soon attract any interest in an article. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 16:06, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some source comments[edit]

  • Sources look reliable.
  • Curious about external links 1 and 2 - are either of those reliable sources?
    First link expunged, but Soccerbase is usually consider RS. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 07:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Spot check 1 using source 4: quote checks out.
  • Spot check 2 using source 8a/b: first quote checks out for 8a; second claim is stated explicitly and looks good.
  • Spot check 3 using source 14a: Seems to be summarized from the available records there, so looks fine to me.
  • Spot check 4 using source 19: names listed match source.
  • Spot check 5 using source 25: Not sure the first sentence is supported by the source explicitly.
    Explicitly supported by new ref now. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 07:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So looks good besides external links 1/2 and then my concern about spot check 5/source 25 material. Prose looks great. ceranthor 22:43, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


A limitation of my review to note would be that I only did spot checks for freely available sources, which are in the minority for this article unless you have access to newspaper archives. ceranthor 22:43, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ceranthor thanks for taking a look at the sources, I've addressed them where appropriate and responded above. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 07:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@The Rambling Man: Looks good now. Nice work. ceranthor 12:49, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Ceranthor. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 13:01, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Kaiser matias[edit]

  • "Ipswich had needed a replay in the fifth round to proceed past Bristol Rovers but Arsenal won all of their ties at the first time of asking. They went into the final as clear favourites." Couple things here: this may be my Canadian English showing, but I gather "tie" to be a variant of "match" or "game" and not the outcome (eg. 0-0)? The wording just comes across as odd to me, but if it is proper British English, I'll leave it. And I don't know if "but" is the right word here; I'd be more inclined to go with "while Arsenal won..." I'm also thinking if it wouldn't be better to drop the period after "first time of asking" and make it one sentence, which would further highlight Arsenal was the clear favourite. Something like "Arsenal won all of their ties at the first time of asking, and went into the final as clear favourites."?
Yes, these confused JennyOz above too, not helped by my bad linking... It's a "tie" in the sense that the two teams are drawn out and "tied" together to play their game. It can, as you note, mean you could have a tied tie. Tweaked the bit you suggested, hopefully that works/flows better? The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 18:36, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
All good. I'll also blame discrepancies between English variations here, but I'm happy with it now.
  • "Clubs ... are drawn randomly out of a hat..." Is it literally a hat? I say this more out of curiosity than anything, but I suppose if not then could be just "drawn randomly".
Well it was. It's a little more clinical these days (balls out of a bowl, each ball having a number which represents each team still in the contest", but yes, that's how it happened. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 18:36, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting, neat that they literally did that.
  • "Alan Sunderland's header from a Macdonald cross..." I'd add a link to Cross (association football) here. While it's clear it is a pass, it isn't clear what type of pass.
Done. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 18:36, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "...25 minutes in, Macdonald tapped home..." That comma seems out of place, and could probably be removed.
Not sure I agree with that one, a natural pause for me, i.e. suitable for a comma. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 18:36, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Again I'll note English variations, which of course isn't anything to be hung up on.
Done. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 18:36, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "They had won the cup on four other occasions..." Shouldn' cup, as a proper noun, be capitalized here? I can see an argument either way, so more curious on the conventional usage (I know that when referring to the Stanley Cup, for example, "Cup" is always capitalized). But if that's not the style, then all good.
No, I don't think so. If I said "they had won the FA Cup on four other occasions" then I'd agree, but this isn't the case. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 18:36, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good enough for me. Just want to make sure that's the case.

Other than that seems like a solid article. Kaiser matias (talk) 17:17, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review Kaiser matias, I've responded inline to each of your comments. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 18:36, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, looks good to me. Kaiser matias (talk) 18:00, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Kosack[edit]

Nothing much I would pick out really, a handful of minor points above to consider. Kosack (talk) 19:06, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kosack thanks very much for taking a look. I've addressed your comments above. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 19:58, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, happy to support. Nice work. Kosack (talk) 06:16, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Harrias[edit]

Overall a nice article, with just a few nit-picks. (Fancy taking a look at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2009 Women's Cricket World Cup Final/archive2 some time?) Harrias talk 19:55, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Harrias thanks very much, I think I've addressed every one of your comments. Do let me know if anything else is needed. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:20, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support nice work. I need to point out that I will claim WikiCup points for this review. Harrias talk 13:13, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FAC delegates, are we done here? Source review, image review, heavy consensus to promote? Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:29, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was wondering about referencing for the Details section. I can see a fair bit of it is supported by the match report link but I couldn't see where, for instance, that included the players' positions and flags of origin or allegiance or whatever. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:21, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Added another link in (teams) next to (Reports) which has their positions/nationalities. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 09:34, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ian Rose that's addressed, anything else? The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 09:42, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Looks okay, tks. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:13, 20 April 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.