Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Queens Park Rangers F.C. seasons/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
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 not promoted by The Rambling Man 20:50, 20 February 2012 [1].

List of Queens Park Rangers F.C. seasons edit

List of Queens Park Rangers F.C. seasons (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Miyagawa (talk) 20:31, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it is now complete and I believe it meets the FL criteria. I've based this article off the recently promoted List of Brighton & Hove Albion F.C. seasons, although since this is easily my largest table to date. Unusually for these types of season articles it includes the wartime results since I had the results and tables for them (results in the cited book, and tables via RSSSF). Miyagawa (talk) 20:31, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Lemonade51 (talk) 19:15, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • There are numerous incidents where the slash is used inbetween years (1907/08, 1975/76...) as opposed to a ' – ' dash. The slash is used several times as is the dash, which makes it inconsistent. Change all to dashes. '05/06' should be 2005–06.
  • I think I caught them all and swapped out with the ' – ' dashes. Miyagawa (talk) 19:32, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Jack Smith is a dab link.
  • "thier modern team strip of blue and white hoops" 'their' is misspelled.
  • Found a whole bunch more of those typos, spellcheck must have been broken on the day I wrote this. Miyagawa (talk) 19:32, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The team managed a mid-table placement", Is 'placement' the word you are looking for? How about "The team managed to finish mid-table..."
  • "and reached the playoff final in thier second season" Playoff → 'play-off'. Another misspelling.
  • "Future England manager Terry Venables was appointed as manager on 14 October, 1980.", I'm not sure if including that Venables being the future England manager is really that relevant. Don't need to put a comma between October and 1980.
  • Dropped the England part and fixed the comma. Miyagawa (talk) 19:32, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "old foes" → "London rivals" ?
  • 'courtosy' → courtesy
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 23:08, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • The semi-colon after "playing in the West London League" should be a comma instead.
  • "which are not counted against player's official statistics...". "player's" → "players'".
    • You removed the apostophe, when one should be at the end of the word (not before the s as before). Giants2008 (Talk) 23:06, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • History: "The team's name was suggested by E.D. Robertson as compromise between the two sides". Add "a" before "compromise"?
  • Remove the comma in "1 November, 1890". Do the same in other similar instances.
  • "However, eight placed Tottenham were elected instead". "eight placed" → "eighth placed"?
  • "The 1982–83 season saw QPR return once more to the First Division, and finished in fifth place with Venables leaving to join Barcelona." For the structure to be correct, "finished" should be "finish" here.
  • 03–04 should be 2003–04.
  • Surprised that their most recent promotion to the Premier League isn't included at the end of the section. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:31, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Made those edits as stated - although added the line about the Premier League which was an oversight. Miyagawa (talk) 23:05, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • One more while I'm here: In "but lost 1–0 in the reply courtesy of a penalty scored by Glenn Hoddle" from History, is "reply" meant to be "replay"? Giants2008 (Talk) 23:06, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yep, that was meant to be replay. Fixed as suggested. Miyagawa (talk) 15:19, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 08:51, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • "originated... originated..." reads poorly.
  • Changed the second occurance to "were founded". Miyagawa (talk) 13:39, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "They have won two divisional titles at the third tier of the English football league system, and two at the second" would rephrase, and surely give more prominence to the second tier titles?
  • Rephrased this and grave prominence to the second tier titles. Miyagawa (talk) 13:39, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Worth considering useful links to "replay" and "friendly" for our US readers.
  • "as a compromise between the two sides" what did St Judes get in that compromise?!
  • That's a darn good question. The source calls it a compromise - although I would have only thought it would have been a real compromise if "Rangers" was dropped too! I've removed part of that line including the compromise part as well... it just doesn't seem right. Miyagawa (talk) 13:39, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "was followed in 1908 by winning the Southern League" perhaps "was followed in 1908 by the club winning..."
  • "This put QPR in the unique position of playing in the first Charity Shield " not unique as Manchester United played in it too.
  • "They drew 1–1, only to lose...." who? last club mentioned was Manchester United.
  • a lot of noun -ing going on. In the past, it's been recommended to me for better prose to make it more active.
  • "The normal fixtures list for the club resumed" don't think the "list" resumed, the fixtures themselves may have done.
  • "when it was elected to join the Football League Third Division.[8] They finished third in their" from "it" to "they" in quick succession. This is always a sticky point, but that just reads too clumsily for me.
  • "They were quickly promoted once more in" not really "quickly", just "were promoted once again in..."
  • "only lasted for a single season" no need for "for" here.
  • "The following season saw them...." reiterate the club here, last person you mentioned was Terry Venables.
  • Is there a link for "away goals rule" you could use?
  • "runners up" or "runners-up"?
  • "managed to avoid relegation" just "avoided relegation" is fine, "managed to" is redundant.
  • Thats one of those annoying writing habits I have. I found another example of it in the paragraph prior to have, and removed both. Miyagawa (talk) 19:22, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • What happened in 57/58 when they were "promoted" to division 2? Then subsequently relegated... This doesn't appear to be noted in the lead...
  • Oops, they wern't promoted - that was a typo in the table. Miyagawa (talk) 13:28, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Page ranges, be consistent with year ranges and use unspaced en-dashes.
  • Finally got ahold of the dash app and ran it through the article. Miyagawa (talk) 13:28, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 13:06, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • "in 2000–01" vs "In 2003–2004 " be consistent throughout with how you format these seasons.
  • Ok, I think it should all be full years i.e. 2003-2004 now. Miyagawa (talk) 19:22, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps you changed your mind, they all seem to be 2003-04 now, apart from in the references etc... In fact, maybe check again. Image caption is full year-full year for Taraabt, but prose is full year-year without century in general... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:19, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yep, I switched it around following the comment by Struway2 below. Fixed the image caption. Miyagawa (talk) 23:01, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggest the round sorts by prominence, i.e. from earliest qualifying round to final. Right now, QF (quarterfinal) sorts before QRs (qualifying rounds)...
  • I'm not even sure how the Result column is currently sorting, should be similar to my previous comment though.
  • As it has multiple cups for some years, do you think the column should be sorted by the most prominent cup or by the highest round out of the multiple cups for that year? Miyagawa (talk) 13:28, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Highest round in my opinion. Not for us to decide prominence of cups at a given moment in time... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:19, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "they set a record low score for the Division with only 21 points" odd turn of phrase, we don't tend to describe the number of points as a score.
  • Changed to "when they scored only 21 points, a record for the division" Miyagawa (talk) 23:01, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry to be picky but I still don't like that! Perhaps "when they ended the season on 21 points, a record low for the division"? I'm just trying to avoid the concept of "scoring points" which I simply think we don't normally say in UK football... The Rambling Man (talk) 11:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Changed as suggested. Thinking about it really - in UK football you score goals, not points! Miyagawa (talk) 20:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Resolved comments from Struway2 (talk) 09:01, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
*History. Who's E.D. Robertson? if he's important, add his status (club captain? secretary? whatever) or replace the name with his status, or if not, just say "the team's name was suggested"
  • wikilink "strip"
  • Think there's a bit too much detail about the recent money men: mention the club being bought out by Formula 1 owners Briatore and Ecclestone and steel magnate Mittal, but who joined/left the board and when is too much.
  • Not sure that WP:YEAR would encourage seasons having the closing year written in full, where there's no change of century. Though it does encourage sports seasons, as periods of twelve months or less, to be written with a slash and not an endash, which is a new one on me and contrary to general practice in football articles (I'm not suggesting you adopt that style).
  • Changed to the closing year in two digits - I realised that I'd used that format in the table anyway, so I should make the way I was doing it in the article a standard approach. As for the slashes... if I get a consensus to make the change, I'll go do it - but its the first I've heard of that too. Miyagawa (talk) 17:54, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Key to divisions. "principle" should be "principal".
  • Key to colours. Probably, Rangers's should be just Rangers', on the basis that if you don't say it as Rangersis, you don't spell it like that either. Might be easier to change to QPR's.
  • In the positions column, some of the wartime league positions sort wrong (3rd after 23rd).
  • In all the columns containing dashes, some dashes sort high and some low.
  • 1899–00 should be 1899–1900
  • Could you use the non-sponsored name for the ZDS Cup/Simod Cup. Don't think the Mercantile Credit thingy ever had a non-sponsored name, so that one's OK.
  • In the divisions column, where there's an arrow symbol, could you be consistent about whether you have a space before the arrow or not.
  • Changed so that they all have a space before the arrow. Miyagawa (talk) 17:46, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1958/59 should be Div 3, not 2. You may want to re-check the count of seasons in each division in the lead.
  • Fixed, and thanks for reminding me to check those numbers - they were off because of the typo. Miyagawa (talk) 17:46, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Notes. What are the sources for notes f and h?
  • In note k, wikilink goal average (or define it)
  • References. Page ranges should have an unspaced dash: see WP:DASH.
  • In Ref#4, lose the excess dot in Queens Park Rangers F.C..
  • External links. Official Website shouldn't be capitalised.
  • What are the sources for seasons after 2009?
  • Added sources for the league and the two cups. Miyagawa (talk) 17:46, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Where "Other competitions" have a season article (UEFA Cup, some Full Members Cup and FL Trophy seasons) could you consider linking the result to the season article, as with FA/League Cup seasons.
  • I've implemented the change for the Charity Shield, UEFA Cup, Full Members Cup and FL Trophy. Miyagawa (talk) 17:46, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Think I probably meant linking the entry in the result column to the appropriate season article, and leaving the entry in the competition column linked to the main article for that competition. Struway2 (talk) 09:18, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could you add publication dates (dates of last update) to the RSSSF references. Those pages do change from time to time, when new info comes to light.
  • Done, although I haven't been able to do it for one of the RSSSF references as there isn't a date listed on the page. Miyagawa (talk) 17:46, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The 1917/18 one's wrong (shouldn't be the same as the other three). Struway2 (talk) 09:18, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note n is wrong (you've copypasted without changing all the bits that needed changing).
  • Would it be helpful if the sources for the various columns were placed in the column headings, rather than as a string of links below the table?
  • Moved the references into the table except for the general ref that covers most of the table. Miyagawa (talk) 15:19, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Table. Why does it only start in 1899? According to the history, they played their first competitive match in 1890 and entered the FA Cup in 1895.
  • Because they only turned professional in 1899. Miyagawa (talk) 13:28, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further note: The official QPR history doesn't even have details of those earlier amateur leagues, and the stats only start when they turn professional. Miyagawa (talk) 17:46, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not even the names of the leagues they played in? if they're really not available, then obviously they can't go in. But results in the FA Cup certainly are available. For completeness, as per criterion 3a, or as close to completeness as we can get in the absence of league information, don't you think those should be included? Struway2 (talk) 09:18, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've searched and searched and added what I can find so far. I'll keep looking, but I have a feeling I might have to make a trip to the British Library to look at the computerised archives of the West London Observer which should contain the results from the earlier period (the newspaper created the cup and the league). Miyagawa (talk) 15:19, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please don't feel obliged to go to that much trouble, and thank you for making as much effort as you already have. It was the absence of the readily-available-online FA Cup results that particularly bothered me. As to the Amateur Cup, did QPR enter in seasons other than the one you've added? because User:ChrisTheDude, who created the FL List of FA Amateur Cup winners, used to have access to a book with results from (I think) the first round proper onwards. I don't know if he owns the book or had it from a library, but if he still has access to it, he might be able to complete any other Amateur Cup performances for you if you asked him. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:17, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would imagine they are in it in other seasons, I only included the cups where I could find them in the Times online archive. Unfortunately the whole Queens/Queen's thing tends to throw the search engine, and searching for "park rangers" alone is well... lets say it's hard pressed to find the football related stories. :) And searching for Queen's Park brings up the Scottish team as well. I've been meaning to head down to the library anyway, but I'll have to ask the wife which night the reading rooms are open late (she works there). I know the search engines in the library are a lot better as I pretty much sourced most of List of FA Community Shield matches through them (which also reminds me that I really ought to bring that up to FL at some point when I've improved the history section!). I've dropped ChrisTheDude a message on his talk page, but thanks to that FL I should be able to reserve the book used as a source to refer to at the library too if he doesn't still have it. Miyagawa (talk) 17:04, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hope some of this helps. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 22:28, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for your comments and apologies for the delay in responding to the remaining ones as I've been laid low with a virus for the last couple of days so my edits have dropped off considerably. I'm feeling a lot better today and so I'll be aiming to resolve these remaining issues over the weekend - particularly trying to find information on QPR's league results prior to going professional. Someone somewhere must have written about the West London League, as I know Fulham was the most successful club from that division. Miyagawa (talk) 20:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorting. The goals for and against columns have entries >99, which don't sort in the correct order.


  • Comments. Glad to see that others are reviewing the prose, so I haven't looked at it in detail. Apologies if I'm repeating points already made by others.
  • For competitions that don't have a WP article, might it be worth a footnote saying what each competition was?
  • And the Other competition Results column still sorts alphabetically rather than by Winner/Final/SF etc.
  • Your bright green F* unfinished finals entries are begging for a note explaining why they were unfinished. Struway2 (talk) 08:46, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hoping to go and access the newspaper archives at the BL tomorrow, which should add a few listings to the other competitions - so I'll sort out the sorting after I've added those. Also hoping to create some stub articles for the competitions that don't have an article currently (created one for the West London League this morning). Miyagawa (talk) 17:06, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So I took a trip to the British Library today and unfortunately the West London Observer isn't one of the papers they've current digitised. So I did some searches on what else they had and turned up one more year's results for the Amateur Cup, which I've added to the table. Also discovered that QPR were in a league called the Southern Football Combination during the same season they first entered the Southern League. Irritatingly though I've just discovered that I copied down the league table from the week before the end of the season and not the final standings. Also typically is that someone uploaded the final standings to the internet in 2010 and unfortunately its gone offline. I think there's a difference between an incomplete table and not knowing a table is incomplete. I know that there is information missing from this table now, especially the West London League results over several years. Therefore I would like to elect to close this nomination. I'll keep working on it and hopefully re-nominate it in a few months once I've tracked down the additional information that I know is out there. Miyagawa (talk) 20:43, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Queens_Park_Rangers_F.C._seasons/archive1&oldid=1080031893"