Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of York City F.C. (1980–present)/archive1


 * 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 by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 13:19, 11 March 2016.

History of York City F.C. (1980–present)

 * Nominator(s): Mattythewhite (talk) 21:03, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

This article details the history of York City Football Club, an association football club based in York, England, from 1980 to the present time. The article follows on from History of York City F.C. (1908–80), which has been a featured article since November 2015. Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 21:03, 1 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comments I passed this article at GAN and thought it was on track for a crack at FAC. Will offer some more thoughts below: Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:25, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * The history of the club from 1980 to the present time covers the period from the 1980–81 season, through their fluctuating fortunes in the 1980s and 1990s and relegation from and return into the Football League, to the current season. - this strikes me as a bit repetitive and laboured, why not something like, "This page covers the period from the 1980–81 season, through their fluctuating fortunes in the 1980s and 1990s and relegation from and return into the Football League, to the current season."
 * Reworded as suggested. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:40, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ' 'winning promotion into the newly renamed Second Division, now called this upon the formation of the Premier League.'' - why not "winning promotion back to the third tier of English football, now renamed as the Second Division."
 * Reworded to "winning promotion back into the third tier of English football, now renamed as the Second Division." Mattythewhite (talk) 16:40, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Looks ok-more later. RL beckons.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:58, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * In sum, tentative support though I concede as an enthusiast I might miss some prose tweaks. So consider this pending further supports, though this is a given anyway. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:09, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments NapHit (talk) 13:32, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * "the goal coming from a late penalty scored..." -> courtesy of a late penalty
 * Reworded as suggested. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * "After being unbeaten in the last nine matches..." should be a comma after matches
 * Comma added. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * "again drawing 1–1 at home to Liverpool..." comma after Liverpool
 * Comma added. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I would move ref 36 to the end of the sentence, so it comes after punctuation
 * Per MOS:PUNCTFOOT, "The ref tags should immediately follow the text to which the footnote applies, with no intervening space". Therefore, I've placed references after the text they cite, rather than the nearest punctutation. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * comma before ref 43
 * Comma added. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * "Ward's assistant Alan Little..." commas after assistant and Little
 * I feel commas there would break up the flow a little bit. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * "They lost only..." I would switch this so it says only lost
 * Reworded as suggested. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * comma before ref 58
 * Comma added. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * "For the second consecutive season..." needs to be a comma after season
 * Comma added. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I know you're trying to reference specific items when you have a ref without punctuation, but I would just move it to the end of the sentence, so it complies with the MOS
 * Per above. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * In mid-December 1997 &By mid-October 1998 need commas after the months. This should apply to other instances as well
 * Commas added. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * comma before ref 82
 * I feel this sentence flows better without a comma. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * According to our wikipedia page, the Walkers Stadium wasn't opened until 2001. Does that mean the FA Cup tie, would have been at Filbert Street instead?
 * Good spot, that was me being daft. Added an additional reference for the ground. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * "being beaten 2–0 at home..." -> losing 2–0 at home to
 * Reworded as suggsted. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * comma before ref 103
 * Comma added. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * "They won none of twenty consecutive matches, gained five more points[115] and finished bottom of the Third Division." I know what you're saying in this sentence, but it's a bit clunky, I would try and make it flow a bit better
 * Reworded to "They won none of their final twenty fixtures, garnering only five more points as they finished bottom of the Third Division". Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * comma before ref 129
 * Comma added. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * "being beaten 2–1 on aggregate..." -> losing 2–1 on aggregate
 * Reworded as suggested. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * You have a problem throughout the article with introductory statements not having a comma. An example is At the start of 2008-09. I would go through the article and check that similar sentences structured like this, all have commas after the introductory part
 * I think I've addressed this. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm slightly confused by the Evening Press and York Evening Press refs. They go to the same site, so does that not mean they are one and the same?
 * It's the same newspaper, but it has changed name numerous times. I've gone with what the newspaper was called at the time the articles were published, for historical accuracy. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Happy to support the article now my issues have been addressed. Great work! NapHit (talk) 20:22, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments, given this has stagnated, some very minor queries... Will have another look at some point this weekend. Lemonade51 (talk) 16:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "Former York player and club director Barry Swallow took over as caretaker manager in March 1982[7] and the team finished in seventeenth place," out of? Not necessarily clear to the reader if Swallow did a good job to keep them up in the division. There's very little context over the promotion/relegation system, which isn't exactly meant to be a critique of these history articles.
 * There was no relegation from Div 4 at that time, instead it was a re-election system in which the bottom four clubs had to apply to stay in the FL. This is alluded to earlier in the article, and a wikilink is provided to Re-election (Football League). Mattythewhite (talk) 17:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "They lost 7–0 in the replay at Anfield—the club's record cup defeat," the citation says "York went on to draw 1-1 with Liverpool at Bootham Crescent in the fifth round, but lost 7-0 in the replay at Anfield four days later in what was the club's record cup defeat," given how this has been worded, there's always a chance the reader may think the record has since been broken. The other issue is if York play a team who beat them 8-0 in a cup competition, that BBC article isn't going to update itself. Best to cite a stats website like Statto for club records.
 * Good point, replaced with the recommended ref. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "A week later they returned to Wembley for the play-off final, when they beat Luton Town 2–1", should that not be 'where'?
 * Reworded as suggested. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Source review - Apologies for the delay! Support, on comprehensiveness and sourcing, nice work. Lemonade51 (talk) 21:03, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * References are formatted accordingly and consistently.
 * No dead links.
 * I've crosschecked some sources (12, 13, 18, 19, 26, 31, 46, 47, 49, 67, 72, 106, 132, 133), no real signs of close paraphrasing or misleading info.
 * Was concerned about the differing titles of the York Evening Press, but your reasoning above is fine.

Ian Rose (talk) 13:19, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.