Talk:2012 Football League Two play-off final

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good article2012 Football League Two play-off final has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 1, 2021Good article nomineeListed
September 14, 2021Good topic candidatePromoted
January 24, 2024Good topic removal candidateDemoted
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 6, 2021.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Cheltenham Town lost the 2012 Football League Two play-off Final, their first defeat in nine play-off matches?
Current status: Good article

Did you know nomination[edit]

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 Edge3 (talk) 21:35, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

5x expanded by The Rambling Man (talk). Self-nominated at 11:42, 5 February 2021 (UTC).[reply]

  • This article is a fivefold expansion and is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline and either hook could be used, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues (although a somewhat garbled version of the article seems to be being used as coursework!). A QPQ has been done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:26, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi there. I reviewed this for promotion, and I have a question about the sourcing. The article states, "The defeat was Cheltenham's first in the play-offs, having won five and drawn three of their previous post-season matches." However, I couldn't figure out where the cited source states that Cheltenham had won five and drawn three of the previous matches. Could you please point me towards the right information? I'm not familiar at all with this topic area, so it's very likely that I misread the source. Thanks in advance! Edge3 (talk) 16:44, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure what that has to do with the DYK, but the source says This was Cheltenham's first ever defeat in a play-off game, they had won five and drew three of their previous extra-season games, winning promotion in 2002 and 2006. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 18:33, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's relevant to DYK because it supports the info in hook ALT0. Thanks for clarifying! I overlooked the box in the article. Edge3 (talk) 21:33, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:2012 Football League Two play-off Final/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MWright96 (talk · contribs) 08:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Going to review this for the GAN March 2021 Backlog Drive. MWright96 (talk) 08:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Lead[edit]

Route to the final[edit]

Summary[edit]

Post-match[edit]

Will be putting the review on hold to allow the nominator to address or query the points raised above. MWright96 (talk) 15:49, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MWright96 all done I think, bar the one which had no additional information in the source. Let me know if there's anything else and thanks for the review! The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 16:18, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@The Rambling Man: Now promoting to GA class MWright96 (talk) 19:06, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]