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 Matthewedwards 22:39, 27 June 2009 [1].

List of Luton Town F.C. seasons[edit]

Nominator(s): Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 10:47, 16 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Featured list candidates/List of Luton Town F.C. seasons/archive1

Toolbox
Analysis Citation bot External links

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets the criteria. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 10:47, 16 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment

Key section should locate above the list; see recently promoted sports list

OK, done.

I have to say, this doesn't make any sense to me. Why should anyone have to scroll down past a key that may or may not be of use to them before they get to the list itself? It's just daft. I say move the key back below the list. – Pee Jay 16:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I, too, prefer the key below. However, I'm not that fussed and am happy to go with whatever the official line is on the matter. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 17:18, 18 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The lead is short considered that the team began playing in 1885

If people want to know about the history of the team, then they can see the other pages on the club, surely? I deliberately wrote the lead to this page in the summary style, so as to get right to the point of the list of seasons. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is soccerbase.com a reliable source?

It is backed by Racing Post, the British newspaper. I would say it is reliable. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

—Chris! _ct 20:07, 17 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments
- Instead of emdashes, use endashes with spaces on either side, as is more common in Britain.

OK. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

- "wasn't" should be "was not"

OK. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

- Some of the language in the lead paragraph seems quite awkward to me, but that's probably just my opinion.

I've re-written it, does it reach your satisfaction? Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

- Is it really necessary to indicate the top scorers' nationalities? Not in my opinion.

I thought it was of interest, and spent a great deal of time adding them. However, I've now removed them. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

- Why are competitions like the Kettering and Luton Charity Cups and the Southern Professional Floodlit Cup listed in the same table as the Football League Trophy, the Anglo-Italian Cup and the Full Members Cup? Even the Watney and Texaco Cups are pushing it a little.

I've cut it down to only those cups notable for inclusion on Wikipedia. (Majors + Watney, Texaco) Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Other than those comments, this is a very good list, comparable with any other list of football club seasons. – Pee Jay 00:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support - My comments above have been dealt with well. I do think that the Key should be below the list, but I'm not going to oppose on that basis. – Pee Jay 17:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments – Is "earnt" British English? Also, I'm not sure if "stormed to promotion" is formal enough for an FL. Otherwise, the page seems sound. Giants2008 (17-14) 21:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
~~Reference 17 is dead.~~ Giants2008 (17-14) 21:38, 19 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- No its not, that's just how it appears with the script, but the link is up and running correctly.

Resolved comments from Truco
Comments Lead I want something to be clarified, because I saw this in other lists, is the proper reference 'Luton' or 'Luton Town' or both? The club's official name is "Luton Town Football Club", however football teams in England are almost never referred to this way; the team is usually called "Luton Town", though you will often hear the shortened version "Luton" used as well. I've used the two different forms to try and create some variety. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] 'After becoming the first professional team in the south of England in 1891,[2] Luton joined the Football League in 1897 before leaving three years later.' --> After becoming the first professional team in the Southern England in 1891,[2] Luton joined the Football League in 1897 before leaving three years later. Fixed. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] 'The club rejoined the League in 1920,[4] and reached its top division for 1955–56.' -- The 'for' should either be in or by Ok. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] 'However, a swift revival saw that the club was back in Division Two by 1970' --> However, a swift revival saw the club was back in Division Two by 1970. Ok. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] Like Giants2008 said, is 'earn' British English? Because in American English the proper term is 'earned', but if it is then its fine as is. "earnt" is acceptable BrE. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] 'A couple of financial crises during the 1970s saw key players sold,[10][11] and it was not until David Pleat's appointment in 1978 that Luton started to recover.' -- 1)It would be best to replace 'key' with a different term like important, notable, etc. 2)Explain who Pleat was. Ok. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] 'Pleat's team stormed to promotion in 1981–82, and stayed in the top flight until 1992' -- Too wordy. --> Pleat's team stormed to promotion in 1981–82, and remained in Division One until 1992. Ok. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] 'Pleat's team stormed to promotion in 1981–82, and stayed in the top flight until 1992' -- Do you mean marked instead of 'masked'? No. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] Season/list Why are the seasons in bold? To be in line with similar FLCs. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] That list was promoted about 2 yrs ago, per MOS:BOLD, nothing other than the noted exceptions should be bolded and table entries are not an exception.--Tru co ₅₀₃ 15:05, 21 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] OK, sorted. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 15:56, 21 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] Footnotes Remove the period from notes B, K, N, O, Q, and U. Ok. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] There is an inconsistency with the linking of terms. Some footnotes link things in every instance, while others don't. I.e. The Football League and Southern Football League (which is inconsistently linked) Ok. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] References Ref 19, unlink the date. Ok, cheers Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] --Tru co ₅₀₃ 01:40, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments

Lead

I want something to be clarified, because I saw this in other lists, is the proper reference 'Luton' or 'Luton Town' or both?

The club's official name is "Luton Town Football Club", however football teams in England are almost never referred to this way; the team is usually called "Luton Town", though you will often hear the shortened version "Luton" used as well. I've used the two different forms to try and create some variety. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

'After becoming the first professional team in the south of England in 1891,[2] Luton joined the Football League in 1897 before leaving three years later.' --> After becoming the first professional team in the Southern England in 1891,[2] Luton joined the Football League in 1897 before leaving three years later.

Fixed. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

'The club rejoined the League in 1920,[4] and reached its top division for 1955–56.' -- The 'for' should either be in or by

Ok. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

'However, a swift revival saw that the club was back in Division Two by 1970' --> However, a swift revival saw the club was back in Division Two by 1970.

Ok. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Like Giants2008 said, is 'earn' British English? Because in American English the proper term is 'earned', but if it is then its fine as is.

"earnt" is acceptable BrE. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

'A couple of financial crises during the 1970s saw key players sold,[10][11] and it was not until David Pleat's appointment in 1978 that Luton started to recover.' -- 1)It would be best to replace 'key' with a different term like important, notable, etc. 2)Explain who Pleat was.

Ok. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

'Pleat's team stormed to promotion in 1981–82, and stayed in the top flight until 1992' -- Too wordy. --> Pleat's team stormed to promotion in 1981–82, and remained in Division One until 1992.

Ok. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

'Pleat's team stormed to promotion in 1981–82, and stayed in the top flight until 1992' -- Do you mean marked instead of 'masked'?

No. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Season/list

Why are the seasons in bold?

To be in line with similar FLCs. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That list was promoted about 2 yrs ago, per MOS:BOLD, nothing other than the noted exceptions should be bolded and table entries are not an exception.--Tru co ₅₀₃ 15:05, 21 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, sorted. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 15:56, 21 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Footnotes

Remove the period from notes B, K, N, O, Q, and U.

Ok. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is an inconsistency with the linking of terms. Some footnotes link things in every instance, while others don't. I.e. The Football League and Southern Football League (which is inconsistently linked)

Ok. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References

Ref 19, unlink the date.

Ok, cheers Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

--Tru co ₅₀₃ 01:40, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support -- Previous issues clarified/resolved; list meets WP:WIAFL.--Tru co ₅₀₃ 01:39, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:33, 28 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)
"This is a list of seasons played by Luton Town Football Club in English football, from 1885 (the year of the club's foundation) to the most recent completed season." Featured lists don't begin like this anymore, see recently promoted FLs for examples of more engaging starts. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] Better? Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 12:46, 16 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] Yes. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:15, 16 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "the Football League" Should it be "The Football League"? No. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] "However, a swift revival saw the club was back in Division Two by 1970." This is the second instance of "saw", a weak verb here, in quick succession. Can we rephrase? Yes. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] "Another promotion was earnt four years later, to see Luton back in Division One for the 1974–75 season"-->Luton earned another promotion four years later, returning to Division One for the 1974–75 season OK. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] "A couple of financial crises during the 1970s saw important players sold"-->A couple of financial crises during the 1970s led to the sale (reword as necessary) of important players OK. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] In general, the verb "to see" is used far too much in the lead. I see. Not no more. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] "yo-yo between the divisions" Not the best phrasing; maybe "constantly change divisions" or something similar? Fixed. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] The lead image caption should have a period (full stop) at the end. It used to, and I seem to remember being told that it shouldn't have one. Oh well, back it goes. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] "Top scorer shown in bold when he was also top scorer for the division."-->Top scorer and number of goals scored shown in bold when he was also top scorer for the division. Also, none of those fragments in the key should have full stops (periods) at their ends. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:43, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] OK, all fixed. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

"This is a list of seasons played by Luton Town Football Club in English football, from 1885 (the year of the club's foundation) to the most recent completed season." Featured lists don't begin like this anymore, see recently promoted FLs for examples of more engaging starts. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Better? Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 12:46, 16 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:15, 16 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

"the Football League" Should it be "The Football League"?

No. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"However, a swift revival saw the club was back in Division Two by 1970." This is the second instance of "saw", a weak verb here, in quick succession. Can we rephrase?

Yes. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Another promotion was earnt four years later, to see Luton back in Division One for the 1974–75 season"-->Luton earned another promotion four years later, returning to Division One for the 1974–75 season

OK. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"A couple of financial crises during the 1970s saw important players sold"-->A couple of financial crises during the 1970s led to the sale (reword as necessary) of important players

OK. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In general, the verb "to see" is used far too much in the lead.

I see. Not no more. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"yo-yo between the divisions" Not the best phrasing; maybe "constantly change divisions" or something similar?

Fixed. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The lead image caption should have a period (full stop) at the end.

It used to, and I seem to remember being told that it shouldn't have one. Oh well, back it goes. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Top scorer shown in bold when he was also top scorer for the division."-->Top scorer and number of goals scored shown in bold when he was also top scorer for the division. Also, none of those fragments in the key should have full stops (periods) at their ends. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:43, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, all fixed. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 05:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:43, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

~~Another thing I saw: the lead is one long paragraph. Would it be possible to split it in two?~~ Giants2008 (17-14) 21:49, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, it is. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 06:12, 23 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments from Struway2 (talk · contribs)

Lead. LTFC is a football club, not team.
Link first promotion. And relegated, although it's the same wikilink.
Key. (Rant alert!!!) There is no official line on where the key should go. The argument for having it at the top is presumably so the reader will see it before they get to the table, so won't have to keep scrolling down to it, to find out what things mean. If it's small, it's helpful to have it at the top, and there's a possibility the reader will remember what was in it so they really won't have to keep referring to it. If it's a screenful, as in this case, then the reader skips over it, or even if they do look at it, they'll be hard pushed to learn it by heart, so they'll have to keep flicking back up to it anyway. Which is no different from flicking down to it.
I think perhaps reviewers of lists see things differently from readers of lists. If I'm reading a list-type article, only if a key-type item that I don't understand appears on a line I'm interested in do I even consider looking at the key. As a reader of a list, I don't need the key to be at the top. Rant over :-) ... but there really isn't a rule about where the key must go, so I'm not telling you where you should put it.

I don't personally mind, I just followed the comment above. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 12:06, 23 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Table. Personally, I think lists of names (e.g. goalscorers) look better left-aligned, but that's a matter of taste.
Those unlinked goalscorers notable enough for WP articles should be linked.
The wording in the wartime gaps would be more accurate as "The Football League and FA Cup were suspended until after the xxx World War".
Footnotes. Letter M needs a source. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:43, 23 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, all fixed. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 12:06, 23 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just on the linking of goalscorers, WP:REDLINK says that we shouldn't link to subjects which wouldn't pass the relevant notability guidelines, either WP:GNG or WP:ATHLETE where footballers are concerned. Also, is your Fred Allen (1893/4) linked to the right bloke? if it is, please could you add his Luton details to the article, because I had no info as to what he did after he left Small Heath. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:19, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd think if they top-scored for the club, then they're probably notable... on the subject of Allen, there's nothing about him playing for Luton before 1892, so it seems likely to me that it's the same guy; he first played for Luton in the FA Cup in 1892 and left in 1895 after making six Southern League appearances. I'll add all this to his article. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 09:27, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Obviously the FL players are notable, but one goal in the 1886 FA Cup does not notability make, nor does doing anything at all outside a fully-pro league, unless there was an awful lot of press coverage, but I'm only pointing out the guideline in case you weren't aware. As to Allen, presumably your book has birth/death dates and places, previous club, something to confirm them as the same person? as Fred Allen's not exactly an unusual name? cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:37, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll unlink a few then. On Allen, Bailey only gives these for FL players, while Collings gives only to players he deems "notable". He does, however mention in his prose that Allen was a "Birmingham native" and a "forward" – is this enough for you? Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 10:09, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, why not, Birmingham's only a little place... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There's no need to be sarky my man – sod it, I'll unlink it for now and take his info off the player page until we can find some more info on it. Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 10:33, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, I really wasn't intending to be sarky, but I can see how it might have come across like that :-( I'd have thought his being a forward called Fred Allen from Birmingham having joined one club soon after leaving another is sufficient circumstantial evidence for their being the same man. Honest. I'll put the info back myself...

Support seems to meet criteria now, after a fair bit of work. Well done (that's not meant to be sarky, either). cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:53, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cheers. :) Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 10:55, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:37, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
;Oppose from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) "Luton Town celebrate winning the Football League Trophy in 2008–09." well, they won it in 2009, but it was the 2008-09 season. I'd choose one of those. Accessibility - usually colour-only fields in a table need another indication for those readers who cannot discern the colours on their own, e.g. asterisks, daggers etc. "A couple of..." too colloquial for me. "important players" is that your phrase or a quote? "himself a former player" -> "a former Luton Town player". "won a famous " famous - is this your opinion or is it backed up with citation? "through the divisions constantly" not keen on constantly - maybe from season to season. Refs 16 & 18 should be BBC Sport as publisher to be consistent with 20 and 21. Check others please. Specific refs 1 to 8 don't (as far as I'm concerned) need the title of the book to be repeated each time as you have clearly stated what reference is being used in the General ref section. Is "Nat = Nationality " actually used anywhere? Perhaps covered before but why some top scorers red linked and some not linked? Some "more" notable than others? Ref 19 - is that a hyphen I see separating those pages?! The Rambling Man (talk) 13:53, 24 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] All sorted, though I've left some top scorers not linked if we don't know their full names (e.g. Dimmock). I've gone along with all of your comments except for the comment you've marked "Accessibility" – I feel that plenty of indication is shown other than the colours as to what is going on (for example the text, and the fact that the division is in bold whenever Luton change division). Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 15:43, 24 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:37, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

;Oppose from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)

"Luton Town celebrate winning the Football League Trophy in 2008–09." well, they won it in 2009, but it was the 2008-09 season. I'd choose one of those.
Accessibility - usually colour-only fields in a table need another indication for those readers who cannot discern the colours on their own, e.g. asterisks, daggers etc.
"A couple of..." too colloquial for me.
"important players" is that your phrase or a quote?
"himself a former player" -> "a former Luton Town player".
"won a famous " famous - is this your opinion or is it backed up with citation?
"through the divisions constantly" not keen on constantly - maybe from season to season.
Refs 16 & 18 should be BBC Sport as publisher to be consistent with 20 and 21. Check others please.
Specific refs 1 to 8 don't (as far as I'm concerned) need the title of the book to be repeated each time as you have clearly stated what reference is being used in the General ref section.
Is "Nat = Nationality " actually used anywhere?
Perhaps covered before but why some top scorers red linked and some not linked? Some "more" notable than others?
Ref 19 - is that a hyphen I see separating those pages?!

The Rambling Man (talk) 13:53, 24 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

All sorted, though I've left some top scorers not linked if we don't know their full names (e.g. Dimmock). I've gone along with all of your comments except for the comment you've marked "Accessibility" – I feel that plenty of indication is shown other than the colours as to what is going on (for example the text, and the fact that the division is in bold whenever Luton change division). Cliftonian (Talk • Contibs) 15:43, 24 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support my concerns addressed. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:37, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support – Nice seasons list; my only further suggestion is to consider placing dashes in blank columns. Giants2008 (17-14) 21:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- Done the em dashes. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:55, 28 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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