Template:Did you know nominations/Stanley Matthews

Stanley Matthews

 * ... that when 38 year old Stanley Matthews won the 1953 FA Cup Final with Blackpool he fulfilled a promise he made to his father on his deathbed some 13 years earlier?
 * ALT1:... that in 1975 Sir Stanley Matthews defied apartheid in South Africa to take a team of black footballers on a tour of Brazil?
 * ALT2:... that Stanley Matthews was the inaugural winner of the Ballon d'Or?
 * ALT3:... that Stanley Matthews played his final Football League game at the age of 50?
 * ALT4:... that Stanley Matthews was never booked or sent-off in 783 domestic or 54 international games?

Created/expanded by EchetusXe (talk). Self nom at 00:18, 9 September 2011 (UTC)




 * Comment: This page was created on September 9th but seems to have just been added to T:TDYK today. Not sure what this calls for. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:30, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Symbol delete vote.svg Only 2x expansion from 6 September until now (17k to 39k). BabelStone (talk) 23:12, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Ineligible. This was recently anointed a good article. Does the nominator think that DYK has implemented that "GAs in DYK" proposal? --Orlady (talk) 03:51, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The rules don't say that they cannot already be GAs when they appear at DYK, so long as they fulfill the requirements (when they are reviewed quickly, some of our DYKs are actually GAs when they reach the MP). This nomination page was actually created on September 9th, but it appears that the editor neglected to copy it over to T:TDYK until a couple days ago. As a side note, it does indeed appear that the article has never been 5x expanded, so it is ineligible. Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:16, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * My point is that it's ineligible because it is not new and it was not recently 5x expanded, but I am guessing that it might have been nominated because somebody heard a rumor that newly promoted Good Articles were going to be featured at DYK. That is a proposal that was discussed, but not adopted. --Orlady (talk) 15:56, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm aware that that was your point ("... it does indeed appear that the article has never been 5x expanded, so it is ineligible.") Shall we just close the nomination as failed? Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:24, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I suggest leaving it open for a little while, as a courtesy. It's just a few hours since I notified the nominator that there is a problem here; the nominator has not edited since I posted on the user talk page, so s/he probably has not seen the message. --Orlady (talk) 23:59, 4 October 2011 (UTC)