Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1873 FA Cup final/archive1

1873 FA Cup final

 * Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:00, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Here's another article on an early final of the FA Cup, the oldest association football competition in the world. This is the only final in the tournament's 150-year history to kick-off in the morning, because one of the teams involved was Oxford University and the students didn't want to miss the annual Oxford v Cambridge university boat race, which was scheduled for the same day!! One interesting thing I found out while expanding this article - based on one contemporary newspaper report which I found it is possible (not confirmed, but possible) that the attendance figure listed for this match in basically every modern football reference book is wrong by an absolutely massive degree........ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:00, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Pseud 14

 * with effect from the following season the holders -- comma after season
 * Changed
 * The match was scheduled for the same day -- should it be on the same day?
 * No, it's correct as is (at least for UK English)
 * I was thinking that was the case, should be good then.
 * scheduled to start at 11.00 am -- would it be worth adding a time zone? or saying local time or something along those lines.
 * I dunno, is that really necessary? Given that we are explicitly talking about something that happened in London, I don't think anyone would read that sentence and think "I wonder if that was 11am Los Angeles time....?"
 * Ideally if we're using time (per MOS:TIMEZONE), it may be warranted for events, or an enclosure i.e. 11:00 a.m. (local time) is more acceptable I think. Although it is the obvious assumption since it happened in London. But then I noticed an event like the 2020 Tokyo Opening Ceremony use (JST) even though we know it happened in Tokyo. Either way, it's very minor and not a major cause of concern with or without it.
 * The Wanderers team included Capt. William Kenyon-Slaney -- I think Wanderers here should be in the possessive form
 * Changed
 * Kinnaird made another strong but Frederick Maddison was able to dispossess him -- I could be wrong, but is strong a sports term? Or is there a missing word here.
 * Changed
 * Oxford decided, with what the reporter for The Sportsman deemed "questionable judgment" to dispense with the use -- I think there should be a comma after the quote
 * Changed
 * That's all from me. Another excellent work from this sports series. Pseud 14 (talk) 19:04, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
 * - thanks for your review, see responses above -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:25, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
 * all good on the above - although I think you may have missed to save your edits. Pseud 14 (talk) 20:37, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
 * - I made those changes again and actually saved this time LOL -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:39, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
 * There it is! Support. Pseud 14 (talk) 20:43, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Comments from Eem dik doun in toene
Support. Nice work. The only remark I have is about the caption under the photo in the infobox. Does the situation in 1878 ("is identical in design to the one awarded in 1878") also apply to 1873? Eem dik doun in toene (talk) 11:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * - many thanks for your review. I fixed the copy/paste error in the image caption -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Image review

 * The picture of Arthur Kinnaird needs a full stop at the end, as it is a sentence. Can't find any other issues; other images are appropriately licensed.  750h+ &#124;   Talk  12:46, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
 * - done. Can't believe I missed that, that's someone I am always nitpicking on other people's nominations so it came back to bite me LOL -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It's fine. Passing image review.  750h+ &#124;   Talk  00:07, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.

Gog the Mild (talk) 18:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It would be helpful if the Background section contained the word "England".
 * Done
 * Might it be worth mentioning where the Wanderers name came from?
 * Done
 * "Queen's, however, decided to withdraw from the competition". Is it known why?
 * Can't find any sources which say. I suspect they decided that in fact the cost of travel to southern England was too much but I can't confirm
 * Perhaps a paragraph break immediately before "The referee was ..."?
 * Done
 * "Both teams were missing key players". Is it known why?
 * Sources just say they were "unavailable". Presumably they had more pressing engagements at a time when football was still to some extent recreational for these toffs :-)
 * "Capt." In full please. And could it be linked.
 * Done
 * "The Wanderers lost the coin toss". Which meant what?
 * Done
 * It could, IMO, do with a bit of an "Aftermath". To mention the Wanderers third win etc and what happened to both clubs.
 * Done
 * - thanks for your review, all now addressed! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:11, 14 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Citation needed right at the end. :-)
 * Right at the end of where, sorry? Might be me being dumb but I can't work out where you mean..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I dunno if it is worth mentioning that after their third win the Wanderers had the right to keep the trophy but declined. What do you think? Gog the Mild (talk) 12:10, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Personally I think that might be excessive detail for this article..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)


 * It wasn't the very end, sorry; this version didn't have a cite after "... the only time the university team won the FA Cup." You have since added one. Supporting. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:17, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Comments from HAL
That's all I got. Nice work. ~ HAL  333  03:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * "the final kicked-off in the morning, to avoid" -- Is that comma necessary? (As usual, disregard if BrEng/AmEng issue.)
 * "Hon. Arthur Kinnaird (caricature published in 1912)" -- why not just say "(1912 caricature)"? Was the caricature published in 1912 but drawn in a different year? Does it depict Kinnaird in a year other than 1912?
 * The link for Sportsman reference leads to a disambiguation page.
 * - thanks for your review, all done! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:22, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Happy to support. ~ HAL  333  13:40, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Source review: passed and past
...working...
 * Perfectly formatted.
 * Newspapers are all national papers of record.
 * Headlines should use title case consistently (MOS:CT).
 * Bizarrely, I can't find anything on Upfront Publishing, but Philip Gibbons is respectable enough!
 * Capella... yeah.
 * CollinsWillow, yeah!
 * SOCCERDATA LIMITED seems OK?
 * Cheers, Chris.  ——Serial Number 54129  11:33, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * - many thanks for the source review. Not 100% sure whether there are any actions on me at this point - all headlines use title case as far as I can see but please let me know if there are any that don't look right -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:37, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * - can you advise if you need me to do anything else or if the source review is passed? Thanks! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:33, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
 * - sorry to chase, but can you confirm if this source review is passed or not? Thanks!! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:26, 24 April 2024 (UTC)


 * , I'm so sorry to leave you hanging like that. My only query, about headlines, was why the online ones weren't in title case? It's not a major issue, though; we have some leeway, and although I don't think they could be called chapters or journal articles, that's still leeway.  ——Serial Number 54129  12:04, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * - I am reasonably sure that all ref titles are in correct title case. Refs 11 and 15 have capitals on every word of "[Football/The] Association Challenge Cup" because it is the formal title of the competition in question.  Same with ref 25 and "The University Boat Race".  Hope that helps! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:12, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Great stuff, I see what you mean. We're definitely getting somewhere, and I'll bear this in mind for next time. How about 22, 28, 29 and 30?  ——Serial Number 54129  13:08, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * - in each of those, only the first word is capitalised (other than where proper names are used). Is that not right........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:28, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I admit to... never having heard that before; it also means I've wasted half my time here capitalising titles when I didn't need to. All in the name of consistency! I'm sure you're right. Summoning the Lords of Light from the beatitudes (i.e., ) for their judgment. No problem either way, Chris. Once again, sorry this has taken so long. I missed a trick here; won't happen again.  ——Serial Number 54129  13:40, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * - no need to apologise, I really appreciate the time you have taken to look at this article -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:58, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Lords of Light? Most flattering, I thought it might be Angels of Death...! Anyway my understanding from MOS is that book titles are title case but newspaper article headings (online or not) are generally sentence case. Now I don't recall title case for newspaper headlines being disallowed, so your efforts there might not be in vain, but sentence case is more common... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:41, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * See, I guess that's me; if I see evidence for something but not for another, I'll go with the thing there's evidence for, even if it's only adjacent to the next thing. So, in a case like this, I know the title case is codified, but I haven't seen Ian's MOS thing about headlines, etc, so I go with the closest thing to which I have seen something written. See what I mean... anyway, enough of this banter; we've been here long enough and apologies again, Chris, for holding you up over what, in hindsight, has to be some of the most trivial trivia ever *facepalm* All apart from that: another great article in an important series. I mean, what next, metal crates with petroleum engines... who needs em  :D  Cheers!   ——Serial Number 54129  17:25, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Which, of course, means that now the criterion for your next nom has been fulfilled, you've got yourself that permission :)   ——Serial Number 54129  17:27, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Be not afraid, even though thy edit in the shadow of the valley of death. This is something and I discussed off-Wiki a few weeks ago. We concluded that the MoS pretty much, if unclearly, requires title case for all titles. (Surprise!) With leeway for already established and consistent sentence case. Somehow it ended on my round-to-it to open a discussion to get this clarified in the MoS, but I haven't yet. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:29, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * If there's one thing worse than being right, it's finding out too blooming late. Cheers ... and the best of luck with getting anything in the MOS clarified; I'm sure it only exists to obfuscate things further than they generally already are :)  ——Serial Number 54129  17:36, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I think some of this back-and-forth may have been caused by the fact that (upon checking) I was apparently wrong in my understanding of what title case actually is! Humblest apologies :-S ...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:54, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Co-ord query
- wondering if I can nominate another article at this point? Got one more ready to go and then not really working on anything at the moment so will leave you in peace for a bit :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:05, 23 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Sure as soon as SN passes the source review. FrB.TG (talk) 05:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

PCN02WPS
Comments to follow. PCN02WPS ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 00:23, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Nice work as always - what little I found is above. PCN02WPS ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 00:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Full stop missing at the end of the second paragraph of the lead.
 * "represented the Wanderers in the previous year's final" → link to 1872 FA Cup final would fit in here
 * I suspect there isn't an easily-found reason why Queen's Park withdrew but if one could be found that'd be an excellent addition.
 * Not that I have found, sorry -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * "The match was scheduled to start at 11.00 am" → use colon rather than full stop per MOS:TIME
 * Kirke-Smith's article does not have a hyphen in his surname - do contemporary sources include it?
 * "only for the umpires to disallow the goal" → picky, but wouldn't this be "umpire" since only one AR would flag offside?
 * That's not how it worked in 1873. If there was an appeal for a goal, the two umpires would consult with each other before deciding whether there had been any infringement and then either allow or disallow it immediately if they agreed or refer the matter to the referee to make the call if they didn't (which is why a referee is called a referee to this day....) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * How delightfully tedious. I suppose it was a little naive of me to assume that anything about the sport worked exactly the same then as it does now, so thank you for the clarification. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 01:45, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * - for an extra level of complication, note that I said "if there was an appeal for a goal". At that time, the players had to appeal for a goal, as they do for a wicket in cricket, and if for some reason the players neglected to appeal, no goal could be given even if the ball crossed the line! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Wow. It's a wonder anybody wanted to referee/umpire those games (granted, it's not like there's any shortage of players appealing for everything in today's game). PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 17:51, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * "the day of the match, but later in the year" → remove comma
 * - thanks for your review. Actioned other than as noted above! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Awesome, support. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 01:47, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 18:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)