Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of Ipswich Town F.C. players/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal 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 kept by Dabomb87 02:55, 25 March 2010.

List of Ipswich Town F.C. players
Notified: User:The Rambling Man, WP:FOOTBALL

I am nominating this for featured list removal because: Cheerio!
 * None of the sources show any of the stats listed, which include games, goals, records etc.
 * Stats for players up to 2006 are from the first reference, the book. Stats for all the players are found in the Pride of Anglia link, the 3rd reference.  The Rambling Man (talk) 16:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * There's no alt text for images.
 * Just one image. Now has alt text. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * per WP:COLOR, colouring alone is not enough.
 * Fixed. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Captaincy needs emdashes
 * No, doesn't "need" it. It can have it though. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Sandman888 (talk) 16:16, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Nice pointed review, and nice to see that our exacting requirements on player lists is being upheld so stringently by you. I'll see what I can do.  The Rambling Man (talk) 16:40, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

While we're here...: BencherliteTalk 17:32, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Can we have a 2010-style opening sentence rather than "This is a list of notable footballers who have played for Ipswich Town from when the club turned professional in 1936 to the present"?
 * Amazingly, both the nominator and I have overlooked that nonsense! Starting to fix.  The Rambling Man (talk) 17:42, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I would have expected to see dashes in empty captaincy cells, for completeness, but I'm not sure whether there's any particular guidance or rule about this; can anyone help? I'm not insisting on it in the absence of such backing, although I'd guess that most FLCs with blank cells tend to have dashes these days, so maybe it is now an expectation at FLs.
 * Yah. em-ed.  The Rambling Man (talk) 17:42, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I would have expected statistics for each player to be sourced by reference to a particular page within a website, even if only a pay-per-view website, rather than by reference to the front page of a website where the last access date recorded is October 2007. I'm not so sure that having a general reference for all this information is quite the 2010 way, even though it was clearly the 2007 way.
 * Actually, I've just visited the site again, and there's a single page which is sourced from a database, which includes the professional appearance records of all 481 Ipswich players. There's a single URL that deals with it all, albeit a subscription one.  And as I said, the book is a handy x-ref.  The Rambling Man (talk) 17:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Are the stats still only right as at end of Aug 2009? I know this only affects a handful in the list who are current players, but even so, it might be nice to get it as up-to-date as possible while eyes are upon it.
 * No, checking the current players for updates now. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Updated, four new international players and about five current players stats updated. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:19, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note 3 has one date in a different date format to all the others in the notes
 * Hopefully all dates same format now. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:44, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Notes often end with a full stop even when not a complete sentence
 * Tried to fix these, but eenglish was neverr my stroung pointe. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:59, 10 March 2010 (UTC)


 * While I'm here, links checked, dabs checked, additional images added (all with alt text). Marvellous.  The Rambling Man (talk) 19:03, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Marvellous. Keep, all issues resolved as far as I'm concerned. BencherliteTalk 19:59, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review and the fix on the old alt= bizniz. Typical of me to get it 90% correct.  The Rambling Man (talk) 20:08, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - can't see any outstanding issues. Nom definitely has a whiff of pointiness about it..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:43, 10 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment I'd probably still like to see a bit more about the players in the lead, but I don't really know what's expected prose-wise from an FL these days. Thanks for dealing with my other concerns so promptly and graciously. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 18:43, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm grateful for your detailed and exacting comments Struway. I've expanded a touch but if there's anything more specific you'd like that you think is missing right now, feel free to suggest it.  The Rambling Man (talk) 23:04, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * No, it's fine. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:27, 14 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - every 5,000 bit of improvement has helped. Sandman888 (talk) 00:35, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what that means but yeah, it's improved, especially thanks to those reviewers who have participated. Cheers!  The Rambling Man (talk) 00:39, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep – Don't see how the original issues justified an FLRC by themselves, but that's only one editor's opinion. It's good to see that the process has resulted in updates that have brought the older aspects of this list up to modern standards, and I see no issues that are worth commenting on.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 22:39, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.