Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Premier League hat-tricks/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 06:02, 31 July 2009.

List of Premier League hat-tricks

 * Nominator(s): The Rambling Man (talk), 03md (talk) 08:51, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Lots of work sourcing this list, huge number of references. Illustrated and factually accurate. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:51, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Okay, the only thing I can't/haven't checked is that it is comprehensive and has every hatrick. Assuming it does, I support this candidacy. Rambo's Revenge (talk)  18:06, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - Would it be possible to note the time between the first and last goals in each hat-trick? Being able to sort the table by "fastest hat-trick" would be a good feature. – PeeJay 23:44, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It's possible but I'm not sure what we'd note for those who scored four or five goals. And it'd be a hellavualotta more work... I'm not really sure where you'd draw the line.  Would you also note how many were penalties, how many headers, how many "perfect" hat-tricks... We've noted the fastest, I think that's enough.  The Rambling Man (talk) 07:56, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Question if promoted, how soon is this list going to require the template update? Also, anybody against adding another column with for "#" ? Nergaal (talk) 01:46, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It won't need an update template because it will be updated when a hat-trick is scored. It only happens a few times a year right now.  And no, I wouldn't have a problem with a # col but is it really needed?  Sorting by date gets you the chronological order.  Is it just to have a count of the number?  The Rambling Man (talk) 10:16, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Comment There have been occasional instances where a hat-trick was initially credited to a player, but the records were later changed following recommendations by the Dubious Goals Panel. These (or at least the concept) might be worth mentioning. Examples: . Oldelpaso (talk) 09:12, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I found one in the list which was indeed dubious so it was removed.  I'll have a think and add some stuff to the lead re dubious goals.  The Rambling Man (talk) 10:16, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Dubious goals para added. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:35, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Resolved all issues I could find, Support. --Jpeeling (talk) 16:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Support -- Looks like all my comments or issues are noted in the above reviews, which are now resolved. I can't find any further problems, good work: meets WP:WIAFL.-- T ru  c o   503 22:13, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Dabs and external links check out fine.-- T ru  c o   503 22:13, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Comment - I don't think that the home team should be bolded (due to WP:MOSBOLD). Is there some other way of indicating this? - perhaps a superscript H or something like that. Boissière (talk) 20:05, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, a fair point. I'll get on to it tomorrow, thanks! The Rambling Man (talk) 20:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually wasn't as bad as I thought. Fixed with asterisks, updated key.  Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:39, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * That was quick work! Asterisks are fine - Support Boissière (talk) 20:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:48, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:48, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm ignorant about football sources, but what make Sky Sports and Sporting Life reliable? Dabomb87 (talk) 14:54, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Sky Sports is the main sponsor of the Premier League (since its inception), broadcasts scores of Premier League matches around the world every year, is run by British Sky Broadcasting. It is the pre-eminent European sports network (i.e. think ESPN).  Sporting Life is, through a media group, also wholly owned by Sky.  You can read about them here.  The Rambling Man (talk) 15:22, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Support – Another nice list by TRM, well-formatted and written as usual. The one sticking point preventing me from supporting before was the "other players" bit in the hidden comments, and the word cut took care of that.  Giants2008  ( 17–14 ) 22:20, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * "that have resulted from goals' being incorrectly..." - pretty sure the apostrophe needs to go as the goals are in the passive and there is nothing belonging to goals.
 * Though quaint, this is actually grammatically correct. See this. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:21, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * neither of the navboxes at the bottom include this list. I would remove them and add Template:Premier League instead (or Template:Premier League teamlist if you don't want to include seasons).
 * Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Though I'm definitely not one for overdoing the lead in a list, I think certain basic introductory information is required. In this case I think it is worth just quickly defining what the Premier League is, i.e. the top division of English football since 1992.
 * Note added, although I think the linking of Premier League, and the statement of 1992 already in the lead should be sufficient. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I was expecting the scores to be written hat-trick scorer's team first, rather than home team first. The way you have done it is OK though and is internally consistent, but could a footnote be added to the "Result" column header to say that the home team's score is listed first? It was obvious to me once I started reading the table, but it may be worth clarifying with a footnote, particularly as there are a few instances where both teams score 3 or more, and also for those who follow American sports where the away team's score is usually listed first. --Jameboy (talk) 23:02, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The note is already there, at the top of the table, under Key. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments Jameboy. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'd missed that note - I really shouldn't review articles so late at night! --Jameboy (talk) 11:17, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close.  Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the FLC template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.