Talk:Carlton Town F.C.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Carlton Town F.C./GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: No Great Shaker (talk · contribs) 14:59, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Review

1. Well written: the prose is clear and concise.
2. Well written: the spelling and grammar are correct.
3. Contains a short description which complies with recommendations.
4. Complies with the MOS guidelines for lead sections.
5. Complies with the MOS guidelines for article structure and layout.
6. Complies with the MOS guidelines for words to watch.
7. Complies with the MOS guidelines for writing about fiction – not applicable.
8. Complies with the MOS guidelines for list incorporation.
9. Complies with the MOS guidelines for use of quotations.
10. All statements are verifiable with inline citations provided.
11. All inline citations are from reliable sources, etc.
12. Contains a list of all references in accordance with the layout style guideline.
13. No original research.
14. No copyright violations or plagiarism.
15. Broad in its coverage but within scope and in summary style.
16. Neutral.
17. Stable.
18. Illustrated, if possible.
19. Images are at least fair use and do not breach copyright.

I'll be happy to do this review. Hope to provide some feedback soon. No Great Shaker (talk) 14:59, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

This is well written on the whole and an interesting read. I'm a lifelong footy fan and I have heard of both Sneinton and Carlton but would never have known they were the same club. Anyway, this ticks all the boxes so I'm passing it as a GA.

There are just a few minor points if you intend to go for FAC. Some of the prose is a touch flowery – e.g., Sneinton's 1920–21 League campaign awarded them third place, perceived as encouraging granting widespread injuries and the emergence of young talent. You could say, more simply put, Despite team rebuilding and widespread injuries, Sneinton finished an encouraging third in their 1920–21 league campaign.

I think you should replace all instances of side with team because the word could confuse some readers. In a similar vein, please make sure you use team and not club when talking about match performances and the like. For example, County and Forest paid for the club's travel to Stockton, where it was defeated 7–2. It was the team that travelled and was defeated, not the club. Again, some readers might be confused. Vice-versa, although I haven't noticed one, don't use team when you mean club.

I've taken many of the sources on trust and I've assumed the images are okay because I can't see or envisage any issues but, if you go to FAC, you should double check them all first.

Anyway, it's a good article. Well done. No Great Shaker (talk) 05:30, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

• Thanks very much for your review, No Great Shaker. I'll be sure to follow up on all of your good suggestions. Furthermore, here's hoping that Bury are back on their feet in time for next season and that my beloved Notts County have made a return to the EFL! Curlymanjaro (talk) 15:05, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Curlymanjaro. No problem doing the review. A very good piece of work. Thanks for your kind words about Bury – we hope to have something in place soon for bringing football back to Gigg Lane in August. I certainly would like to see County back in the EFL because you were always the oldest club taking part and it's where you should be. One day, fingers crossed, Bury and County will meet again in the league. All the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 15:14, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 22:27, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Carlton Town F.C., now competing at the eighth tier of the English football pyramid, was once denied promotion by a hat-trick scored by future England international Jamie Vardy? Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20201007225517/https://www.thenpl.co.uk/archive7720-club-info/519810

Improved to Good Article status by Curlymanjaro (talk). Self-nominated at 15:47, 6 April 2022 (UTC).

• @Curlymanjaro: New enough GA. QPQ needed. No textual errors or other issues, and the hook fact checks out. A tick will come when QPQ is supplied. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:00, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Apologies for the delay, @Sammi Brie: I've reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/1917 Odessa City Duma election just now. Curlymanjaro (talk) 10:32, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

• • QPQ supplied. This article can pass. A tip, @Curlymanjaro: Your ping won't trigger a notification if it's added beforehand or without a timestamp. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:22, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

To T:DYK/P7

Amateur?

Could the lede, and the TFA blurb, make clear whether the club currently is professional or amateur? DePiep (talk) 07:02, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• Good point, @DePiep: should be fixed now. Curlymanjaro (talk) 17:41, 27 August 2022 (UTC)