Template:Did you know nominations/England women's national football team
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by 97198 (talk) 03:02, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
England women's national football team edit
( )
- ... that in 1972, the England women's national team played its first official association football match, 100 years after the men's team's first match?
ALT1:... that England have yet to win against Germany?- Reviewed: List of women's international cricket hat-tricks
- Comment: ALT1 is intentionally obscure - see England–Germany football rivalry
5x expanded by Fuebaey (talk). Self nominated at 21:47, 21 March 2015 (UTC).
Meets 5x expansion and timely nomination. Neutral, cited, and no paraphrasing issues. However, QPQ is still outstanding. Also, the article states that the first match was "almost 100 years after the first men's international", while the BBC citation says it was "coincidentally exactly 100 years after the first men's international which was played in Glasgow."[1]. Which one is accurate? If it was in fact, exactly 100 years, it's interesting enough to add to the hook as well.—Bagumba (talk) 20:33, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review. QPQ is sandwiched up between ALT1 and the Comment above. The statement I sort of paraphrased; if you compare the dates of the two matches, 30 November 1872 and 18 November 1972, it is almost two weeks out. The source states 100 years because it's a good rough estimate if you round it. Personally, I don't think people are going to quibble over those 12 days but if you feel strongly about either way you could remove the almost (or add it to the hook). Fuebaey (talk) 21:00, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
@Fuebaey: Absent-minded of me to miss the QPQ. Thanks for the patience. As far as the hook, the problem IMO was the source saying it was "exactly" 100 years, which I would have expected to mean it was on the same day but 100 years later. I just added a citation to the article which has the exact date of the men's. Good to go for the main hook.—Bagumba (talk) 21:51, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
