Template:Did you know nominations/Sefton Park Cricket Club


 * 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 Allen3 talk 13:48, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Sefton Park Cricket Club

 * ... that Sefton Park Cricket Club nurtured the talent of such players as Edward Roper and Chris Whelan?
 * ALT1 ... that Sefton Park Cricket Club was founded over 150 years ago?
 * Reviewed: Pig Goat Banana Cricket

Created by Stueylum99 (talk), 92.237.226.165 (talk). Nominated by Cwmhiraeth (talk) at 06:28, 24 November 2014 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg Size, date check out. QPQ not needed as this isn't a self nomination. Hook is not present in the article. Also references need to be properly formatted before this gets into the main page. &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 19:35, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
 * All DYK nominations now need a QPQ review (change of rules). The rules do not demand any particular format for the references. I have already run Reflinks over the article, but I see 2 bare urls have appeared since then and I will reformat those ones. The club was founded in 1860 and that is cited. Simple arithmetic gives us over 150 years. I think the inline citations for the original hook are sufficient. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:07, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, I didn't see the QPQ being done already. Thanks for notifying about the change of rule. As for the hook, it's a rule that it must be stated in the article followed by an inline citation. Although, there is no definition of a particular format, the references in this article are almost totally incomplete. You use only the title parameter that too is duplicated in some references. A clean up is definitely needed before this nom gets approved. &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 17:11, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Vensatry and I are interpreting the DYK rules differently. Please could you adjudicate, and tell me what, if anything, I need to do to this hook/article. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:24, 29 November 2014 (UTC)


 * References can be min filled with Reflinks (title and url) as per D3, but I've always preferred at least a title, url and publisher so I've fixed that. I prefer ALT1 over the original hook, which is stated and cited via WP:CALC. The first hook sounds a bit too promotional for my liking. The players did play for the club but I wouldn't go as far as to say they were 'nurtured'. I'll leave this for Vensatry though, if they'd care to finish this review. Fuebaey (talk) 23:26, 12 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to finish the review; previous reviewer has not returned after over a month. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:52, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Guess I'll finish this. Moved to mainspace on the 22 November, long enough and cited. Seems neutral with no copyvio. QPQ is done. I'll withdraw my original objection and let the promoter decide which hook to choose. Fuebaey (talk) 19:03, 4 January 2015 (UTC)