Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/England national football team managers


 * 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 00:09, 13 March 2008.

England national football team managers


Self-nomination. I'm nominating this article for featured article because User:The Rambling Man and I have worked to bring it up from its origins as a contender for FLC (hopefully) to FA standards. Along the way, there have been two useful Peer Reviews, as well as much useful input from the football WikiProject. Constructive criticism most welcome. Dweller (talk) 12:49, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

A very good article just few issues before I can support
 * Comments
 * "the manager's rôle expanded to take in all elements - from the selection of hotel and training camp venues!" an em dash should be used instead of a common dash
 * Done. Someone got there before me. Thanks Peanut. --Dweller (talk) 11:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * "For example, in 2008 Fabio Capello brought with him four Italians" this does not read very well in my opinion maybe use "appointed four Italians"
 * OK. I'll go with that. He did "bring them with him" but it's irrelevant and obscurist. --Dweller (talk) 11:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * "national significance in England" considering that the article is based on England mangers isn't "in England" redundant?
 * I don't think so, because of the confusion over "national" vs England or the wider UK --Dweller (talk) 11:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * "There is also repeated comment that the length of the English season" this reads uneasily I would change it to "There are repeated comments that the length..."
 * Changed with pleasure. --Dweller (talk) 20:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Wikilink Premier League in the national significance subsection
 * Agreed. Oversight. Nice one. --Dweller (talk) 20:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * "the England manager's job being described as the "impossible job". change to "an impossible job" as it currently implies that it is the hardest or only impossible job
 * Hmm. I believe it is called "the impossible job". I'll check. --Dweller (talk) 20:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yup, source 3 implies and source 10 confirms. --Dweller (talk) 20:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * "He managed England to win the..." this reads uneasily I would advise changing the wording
 * Ugh, yes, good spot. --Dweller (talk) 20:37, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * "David Beckham scoring a needed equaliser against Greece deep into injury time" needed doesn't read very well, I would change it to "crucial" or "vital"
 * I suspect something's been hacked by accident there. Should read OK now. --Dweller (talk) 20:37, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

That's all I could find wrong with the article, which considering its size and scope is impressive, so fix these minor issues and I'll support. NapHit (talk) 19:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, thanks very much for your time and analysis. The article's better for it. --Dweller (talk) 20:37, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Support A fantastic entry. The work on this has been nothing short of outstanding. Full marks to TRM and Dweller. All my issues were addressed at Peer Review, so I will give it the undoubted support it deserves. Peanut4 (talk) 20:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Support A wonderful article, and very well written. Dan the Man1983 (talk) 02:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment two minor things, but I know you'll fix them anyway :-D -
 * "In 2000, the Sun launched a The Sun campaign promoting a donkey as the new England manager." quick tweak needed there
 * Ooh! How embarrassing, thanks! --Dweller (talk) 20:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Combine refs 3 & 10 (they're actually different articles, I should have checked *curses the bbc and their unimaginative headlines*) and fix ref 104. Nanonic (talk) 22:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll do that now, too. --Dweller (talk) 20:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Support all issues addressed, engaging and well written article - good work from the both of you! Nanonic (talk) 09:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Update from Dweller: Thanks for the comments. I might be able to start responding today, but I rarely edit at weekends. Most probably, I'll get to them tomorrow. Thanks again - and keep them coming. --Dweller (talk) 10:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)'''


 * Support..I've created a monster with the circumflexes...oh well, looks good. Might have been nice to include any available information on the job's salary but that may not have been accessible. Nevermind as not a deal-breaker. Casliber (talk · contribs) 18:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Interesting one. IMHO, any comments about salary will be speculation by the media, so I'm loathe to include. I'll see if TRM has a different opinion, tomorrow. --Dweller (talk) 20:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm always dead against salary stuff (just as I usually tend to shy away from transfer fees) because anything that's been reported is, well, exactly that, reported. I'm certain we don't know the ins and outs of contracts, win bonuses, qualification bonuses, is there any source which definitely describes the remuneration of an England manager exactly?  I doubt it... I'll side with my co-author here, it's more likely to be speculation than fact...  The Rambling Man (talk) 16:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Support All my issues have been dealt with this is a fantastic article fully deserving of featured status. well done NapHit (talk) 20:50, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * What makes this a reliable source? http://www.squarefootball.net/ Likewise http://www.englandfootballonline.com/index.html
 * this citation is missing publisher information : http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/270753.stm (current footnote 72)
 * Same for http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/world_cup_2002/1575190.stm (current footnote 77)
 * It's probably my ignorance of football in the United Kingdom that makes me unsure about those two websites, so forgive my ignorance! Ealdgyth | Talk 21:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Excellent comments. Square football removed - not RS and not needed anyway. Englandfootball online also not RS - replaced with a FIFA source. I'll sort the citations too. Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 22:57, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Support Excellent work ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

All comments have been responded to. Anyone wishing to add any more is more than welcome! --Dweller (talk) 09:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Notes: the lead uses spaced endashes for punctuation, but the "Rôle" section uses unspaced emdashes. Check the spacing on WP:MOS.  Many of the citations are missing publication dates, example:  The impossible job. The BBC. Retrieved on February 18, 2008. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 01:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I've added  fields where possible, some of the newspaper articles don't have publication dates though so that's why not all of them have the field. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I've done the dashing and the ellipsising and have Georgia on my mind. --Dweller (talk) 10:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * A total of 15 men have occupied the post since its inception; three ... "A total of" is redundant.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 01:23, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Redundancy removed... The Rambling Man (talk) 07:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Support, I'm amazed with the detail, passion and good prose that I sometimes read in these football articles. I know v. little about football, but perhaps I should get out more and go to some matches. On a more prosaic note, I think the circumflex is not needed—but leave it for now.--Graham Colm Talk 23:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.