Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Manchester United F.C. seasons
Manchester United F.C. seasons edit
- 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. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: 12 days, 8 support, 1 oppose. Opposition appears to have been addressed. Promote. Scorpion0422 21:39, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I believe this list complies with the Featured List criteria as well as possible. It comprehensively covers every season that Manchester United F.C. (Newton Heath F.C. before 1902) has played in a major tournament, and is factually accurate. It is also useful to football fans. - PeeJay 01:21, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Man City's seasons failed because like this list it had no links to individual season articles. Buc 06:20, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- This list does have links to two individual seasons articles (1998-99 and 2006-07), but as you can imagine creating individual season articles is a long and laborious process. However, rest assured that season articles will be created in due course. Everything else, however, is fully linked, apart from FA Charity Shield/Community Shield matches. - PeeJay 09:30, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Great idea - lets get more depth than the Scousers :D - — Preceding unsigned comment added by JPMJPMJPMJPM (talk • contribs) 15:12, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose No season articles. Also, the division links are misleading: one expects division season articles. Circeus 02:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply - Division links have been removed and replaced with a key at the bottom of the article. There are season articles for Manchester United seasons, but only for 2001-02, 2005-06 and 2006-07 at the moment. More articles are forthcoming, but it is a long and meticulous process. - PeeJay 16:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- P.S. There are also division season articles for each Premier League season, which can be accessed by clicking on the club's final position for that season. - PeeJay 17:39, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Division links at the first occurrence are just fine. It's the overlinking that's troublesome (because of the other convention mentioned). As for the placement of these links in the "position" column, that is incredibly counter intuitive. I had not even *noticed* there were links there! Circeus 21:07, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not every season for every club is notable enough to have its own article. In my opinion an article shouldn't be failed due to the fact that there are 100 "missing" stubs.
I agree that there currently aren't enough season articles, but equally it's clear that appropriate articles can, are, and will be created. As for the remainder I would suggest linking to that period in the club's history, as this will be more relevant to Manchester United in particular. I think that apart from this point the article's fine, so I'm going to look at similar articles that are featured before deciding whether to support or remain neutral. BeL1EveR 16:55, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support There are some season articles, and more are being created. I would add that if this was to fail then those opposing should consider nominating Frölunda HC seasons (and presumably others) for a FL review, as it would fail based on the same criteria. BeL1EveR 17:03, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support The lack of season articles is not ideal but the English football season articles all provide information on Manchester United. If stubs were created for every season they would contain the same information as the English season articles, so I would be happy to pass the list as it is currently. Dave101→talk 19:41, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support I would like to echo earlier sentiments by saying that i don't think English football season articles are always appropriate for every season. In a season where a major trophy has been won then it would be appropriate, in my opinion, and i do think these articles will be created in the future. For other non-eventful seasons it will be a duplication of history sections and the XXXX in English football articles.
I think this is a good example of how to structure English football club season articles in the future. Woodym555 14:11, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice layout and well sourced. I do not think that individual season articles are a demand for a featured list.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Krm500 (talk • contribs)
Support, per criteria 1(a)2 and 1(a)3, this is a timeline and the criteria also state that the "members of the set are not sufficiently notable to have individual articles" is allowed. T Rex | talk 22:54, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good article. I think people are too concerned about having team season articles. It would be great to have them. But having 100 stubs with almost 0 information somehow makes this article better? Better have quality than just create stubs. And the articles, sooner or later, are going to be created. This one collects all the informations it needs, is a timeline, nicely done. Good job.--Serte [ Talk · Contrib ] 14:32, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Why isn't the color key in the Key section? Why is the Key section below the table? I think it needs to be above the table, so that readers could use it. List of Manchester United F.C. players has it above the table and it looks better. If you have strong reasons to keep that section below the table, then you need to have a level 2 headline for the table. That way, there will be a table of contents where the Key section can be seen. --Crzycheetah 00:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Personally, I think it's more appropriate to have the key at the bottom of the page, after the important content. I've moved the colour key into the main key, and added a section title to the seasons table. I also added __FORCETOC__ to force the table of contents to appear. - PeeJay 08:11, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per T Rex and others. One little quibble, the wording against season 1886-87 "Did not enter The Combination until 1888" implies it was there to be entered - perhaps change to something like "There was no League football until 1888", or leave blank as the point is covered in the lead anyway. Struway2 | Talk 12:27, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]