Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Welsh Premier League clubs/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 Hahc21 10:01, 17 December 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of Welsh Premier League clubs edit

Featured list candidates/List of Welsh Premier League clubs/archive1

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:21, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Loosely modelled on existing FL List of former Football League clubs (except that it in this case it features every club to have played in the league), I feel this meets all the requirements.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:21, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 23:03, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

Bold links like the one in the intro are discouraged by the MoS. I suggest simply dropping the bolding.
Redundant "league"s exist in "Since the league's formation, 38 clubs have competed in the league."
First two words of the List of clubs section heading are unneeded and could safely be dropped.
The Times champions column is currently sorting by fewest championships won, not most. Some sort templates would probably fix this. Giants2008 (Talk) 16:19, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All sorted now I think -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:07, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Zia Khan 10:53, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

"......a name it retained until 2002, it was the first national football league in the country." This needs inline citation.
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:45, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
...currently only has 12 member clubs. → No need of only
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think there is a need of punctuation after ...professional clubs.
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:40, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Add a statement that explains the sorting of the table
- Not sure what you mean here - are you saying that it should point out that people can re-sort the table by clicking on the arrows? Or are you saying that I should put in a statement that the initial sorting is based on alphabetical order of club name? I would have thought that was pretty self-evident without readers needing it to be pointed out...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:21, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - In which way is the list initially sorted? Zia Khan 12:23, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Surely that's obvious without needing to be explicitly stated? IMO, putting "the list is sorted in alphabetical order" at the top would just look stupid. Is there a guideline that covers this....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:10, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - I don't know the guidelines. You may add a sentence at the end of the text like this one. Zia Khan 20:46, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        Not 100% convinced, but have added it in anyway........ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:48, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ground name should be mentioned in the alt text. Zia Khan 12:33, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:10, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Zia Khan 22:48, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support – meets the standards! Zia Khan 10:53, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from GRAPPLE X 16:41, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

*Comments

The New Saints should sort under "New" rather than "The", meaning it should slot between Neath and Newton. Use the {{sort}} template to keep it in place ({{sort|New Saints, The|[[The New Saints]]}})
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Mostly an aesthetic change—and an entirely optional one—but you'd save a lot of scrolling/white space if the reflist was set to two or three columns rather than one.
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure you need "WPL" in the column headings; shorter headings tend to look better and between the article title and the overall table header there's certainly no ambiguity there.
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to consider alt text for the lead image.
- Image already has alt text -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Might just be me but I feel the lead is very comma-heavy, as you seem to be using commas for parenthetical statements quite often. For example, "Although it is the highest level of the Welsh football league system, the Welsh Premier League has never included the country's professional clubs, Cardiff City, Swansea City, Wrexham and Newport County, all of whom play within the English league system" might be better off using dashes or brackets between "clubs" and "Cardiff" and "County" and "all" to create that aside.
- Done - broke it up into two sentences and re-jigged it a bit -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:04, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Seems fine to me otherwise. GRAPPLE X 23:00, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Looks grand to me now. GRAPPLE X 16:41, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 21:08, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

"league based in Wales, although one member club plays its home games in England" not sure you need the caveat. A league can be "based" anywhere, and presumably have "foreign" input. Maybe you could leave the caveat until later when you explain which current club plays in England rather than hit us with the potential confusion in the opening sentence?
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:35, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"currently has" I think we've be trained to avoid "currently" in favour of {{as of}}....
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:41, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Since its formation, 38 clubs have taken part in the competition" ->" Since its formation, 38 clubs have taken part in the Welsh Premier League".
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:36, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not a major issue but you have several redirects for bad A.F.C./F.C. combos.
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 22:00, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"most recent completed season" is there an article for this?
- Linked -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Avoid spaces between text and footnotes.
- Sorted, I think -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:35, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Are all the notes satisfactorily referenced?
- The notes are all derived from the FCHD sources, which are included on the relevant row of the table. Do I need to include them again in the notes themselves? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ideally....! The Rambling Man (talk) 22:15, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:20, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- - - Then 'tis done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:18, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.