Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Watford F.C. players/archive2

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 17:45, 24 April 2011 [1].

---

List of Watford F.C. players

List of Watford F.C. players (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured list candidates/List of Watford F.C. players/archive1
• Featured list candidates/List of Watford F.C. players/archive2
• Featured list candidates/List of Watford F.C. players/archive3

Nominator(s): —WFC— 13:50, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Want to know who Watford's all-time top appearance maker is? Oldest and youngest players? Or are you simply hankering to see the flag of Saint Lucia in a football article? For all that and more, read on...

There were outstanding issues from the previous FLC a year ago. In terms of redlinks, over 50 articles have been created in the last year, while four (bluelinked) players have joined the list. To keep myself sane while I did the cross-checking yesterday, I did a complete count. As of this morning, the tally was 265 bluelinks, 51 redlinks, and 22 players who don't meet our notability guidelines; more than 5 in 6 notable players have articles, and that tally is rising. I've taken the other comments from last year's FLC on board too, as well as experience gained from a subsequent FLC and FLRC save, and subsequent reviews of other lists. In my view, the result is more useful, comprehensive and easily verifiable. —WFC— 13:50, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:47, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Comments Someone's going to ask, so I'll do it first, hoping you understand I have no agenda at all...! Why isn't this list called "List of Watford F.C. players with 50 or more appearances"? For consistency with corresponding related featured lists, such as List of Gillingham F.C. players. I'm happy for this to be moved if consensus is reached that these lists should be renamed, but it would need to be universal. PAOK F.C. and {{football squad start2}} (discussion was held elsewhere) are examples of where consensus to deviate from previous convention has been established, yet reverted anyway. Can you explicitly cite the two captions where you say these guys were captains? Done for Mariappa. Removed for Hess: I gather that ChrisTheDude has tried and failed in the past to cite that very fact. "present name of Watford Football Club" - could you not just go to "Watford F.C." here? Done. "matches at Vicarage Road stadium." reads odd to me. Either "matches at their Vicarage Road stadium" or "matches at Vicarage Road, their current stadium" or something...! Changed to "matches at their Vicarage Road stadium". "placing of 2nd in 1982–83" why not "second in the 1982–83 season"? Done. Do non-experts know what a "centre forward" is (in the lead)? Wikilinked. Perhaps state that this also includes substitute appearances (if, indeed, it does...?) I assume we were still on Blissett here? If so, done. For more information, see Formation (association football) this looks odd and out of place. Perhaps put a footnote next to the Positions caption and then add your link. Done. Top scorer caption, reference? Done. "Watford player in the 2010–11 season." no need for the full stop. Done Remove spaces between heading titles and the notes. Done. Would tentatively suggest the Notes col becomes Notes/Ref(s) Done. Years col is wide enough for you to perhaps make it "Years at Watford" or "Years at the club"... Changed to "Years at Watford" Why is Aston linked when Badenoch isn't? Their playing time overlaps so is there a reason why Badenoch is non-notable? I'm not saying that I agree with it. But my understanding of NSPORTS is that if you played in a fully professional or top-level amateur league, you are assumed notable unless shown otherwise. Conversely, if you didn't (and the Southern League was not fully professional: check out Finnish football debates if you think that 90% should be considered enough), you are assumed non-notable unless proven to meet the GNG. In this instance, Aston's Villa days are the difference. However, as a result of this I checked through the delinked players, and three of them appear to have played in the Football League, so have been redlinked. It's possible that one or two more of the remainder have, but that's not documented in the Who's Who Bert Badger. Brilliant. I'm sure Jock Strain concurs. Would think that England youth should sort ahead of England under-20 but above England schoolboys... I agree. Will do this tomorrow, when I'll hopefully be a little more up for a tedious job. Believe this is all done now. Have tested in Firefox and Safari. —WFC— 11:54, 11 March 2011 (UTC) Mummery's notes col seems two rows deep to me, why? Hangover from how records were previously denoted. Fixed. " as they won their first league title," is this referenced? That was a sloppy statement, as we had previously won the second division. Removed. "mid 1990s" should be hyphenated. Caption rephrased due to lack of captain reference. Spell out RSSSF for our non-experts. Already done, in ref 52. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:49, 10 March 2011 (UTC) —WFC— 22:07, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Comments –

• In the table, Refs in Notes / Refs should be decapitalized. Also, I'm unsure if this should have the spaces or not; I don't work much with slashes myself, so I wouldn't know what the MoS prescribes.
  • Done.
• Bibliography should be in alphabetical order, I believe.
  • I've done this, but could you point me in the direction of the MoS for it for future reference?
• Spell out RSSSF as the publisher in references 59–60 and 62. I can live with FIFA being in abbreviated form, but RSSSF is something that many people aren't likely to recognize at first glance. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:29, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Done, as you're the second person to raise it. —WFC— 16:53, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
    • Support – Meets FL criteria. Incidentally, I looked in WP:FOOT and it doesn't mention anything on alphabetizing bibliography sections. I may have been wrong on that one; if so, it wouldn't be the first time. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:09, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
• Comments

"Since moving from a ground in Cassio Road in 1922, Watford have played home matches at their Vicarage Road stadium." Common knowledge to any fan of the club? Who knows. Needs a source.

Flabby language-"On its resumption" Its? The First World War or the Southern League? (Yeah, yeah... I know. But consider this a request to generally tighten the prose.)

"At the start of 1920–21, Watford joined the Football League Third Division, and transferred to the Third Division South when the league was reorganised the following season. They have played in the Football League ever since, with the exception of 1939–1946, when competitive football was suspended due to the Second World War, and the 1999–2000 and 2006–07 seasons, when they competed in the Premier League." Sources for any of that?

"His corresponding totals for Watford in the Football League (416 appearances and 148 goals) are also unsurpassed." Again, tighten up the prose, this reads as if his numbers were achieved at Watford, and are the highest in League history, which is not supported by the source.

Jackett: The source confirms his cap number... but not that he was a one-club man, as claimed.

Scope row and scope col markup is needed.

Why are there pictures in the refs and not with the table? I'm not sure pics in refs like this complies with MOS.

Courcelles 09:35, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

• Anyone here? Courcelles 02:00, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I've addressed the prose and referencing issues, but have left the table markup and the pictures: not particularly keen on working on those! Harrias ^talk 12:57, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I've moved the images to the right of the table looks much better now. I would to the scope col and row markup but I have no idea what they are. NapHit (talk) 16:55, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

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