Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of York City F.C. statistics and records
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 05:44, 25 February 2008.
List of York City F.C. statistics and records[edit]
I have been improving this list over the last week or so, making it fit the model of List of Ipswich Town F.C. statistics and records, which recently passed WP:FL. I believe it meets the featured list criteria, but I await the community to decide that for themselves. It recently had a peer review, which came up with lots of useful comment. Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 17:48, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - all my comments were addressed either before or at the recently closed peer review. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:56, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support assuming the few things mentioned below are addressed. This is a well referenced list which follows the format of a recently-promoted list. Nominator has dealt with everything I raised at peer review. Couple of things I failed to raise:
- In honours and achievements, you could clarify that York were the first team to break 100 points in any division of the football league.
- Your Third Division promotions is a little misleading, with 1973-74 being at level 3 and the 1992-93 one at level 4 after the divisions were renamed. You could have a look see how a similar list clarified the matter.
- Done Organised. Think I've done it right. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:47, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You may want to add the division or competition in which your oldest and youngest first-team appearances were made.
- Done Divisions added. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:47, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good work, well done. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Made one minor change. Otherwise spot on. Great work. Peanut4 (talk) 20:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.