A fact from 1961–62 Ipswich Town F.C. season appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 January 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
I have just modified one external link on
1961–62 Ipswich Town F.C. season. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
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
SL93 (
talk) 20:20, 22 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Hi
The Rambling Man, review follows: 5x expansion in character count confirmed 6 to 11 January; article is well written and cited inline throughout; I am no expert on reliable sources for football articles but those used appear to pass the mark (I trust this editor who has put many football articles through GAN, FAC, FLC etc.); I don't have access to some of the newspaper articles but I did a spot check on a random samples of sources and found no concerns with overly close paraphrasing; hook is interesting (something could be made of the fact that they were the first to do so since Preston in 1889 but that would lengthen the hook and I am happy to go with the nominator's preference) and mentioned in the article; AGF as I don't have access access to Bowler (2013) but the hook fact is readily verifiable elsewhere; a QPQ has been carried out. Looks good to me -
Dumelow (
talk) 06:56, 15 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Thanks
Dumelow - the "Preston" thing is all very well but they won it on the first time of asking because it was the first season ever, so it's not quite the same thing. I prefer, especially in the context of the modern game and the huge gulf between Premier League and Championship, to recognise that "back in the day" teams coming up from the second division were competitive, to the point of being champions. Cheers for the review, much appreciated.
The Rambling Man (
Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 08:21, 15 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Ah yes, I missed the "inaugural" part in the article. We could perhaps says that Ipswich were the first to achieve this but, as previous, I have no issues with how it is currently written -
Dumelow (
talk) 08:24, 15 January 2021 (UTC)reply
I do enjoy a season article and they're extremely underused, so I'm glad to pick this one up. Review coming as soon as possible.
Kosack (
talk) 12:29, 5 March 2021 (UTC)reply
One of the many perils of falling out of the Football League it seems. Here's my review:
Lead
The 73rd season part doesn't appear to be sourced anywhere, might be worth adding to the background section maybe?
Well that's off to a good start! I don't think I can find an explicit reference for it, it's just the running total from Ipswich's first competitive season in 1878. 84 seasons but 11 totally abandoned/annulled because of war. Happy to reword I guess.
The Rambling Man (
Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 21:51, 5 March 2021 (UTC)reply
I don't think a reword is necessary, I've used the format myself so I wouldn't want to see that. Even a basic founding date ref would probably suffice, ref 1 from
History of Ipswich Town F.C. would likely work. It has the founding date and briefly explains the breaks for the war, I think a bit of basic maths is generally allowed after that.
Kosack (
talk) 22:09, 5 March 2021 (UTC)reply
"where they faced a Nottingham Forest who had", should that be Forest side? It doesn't seem to read quite right to me at the moment.
"The team who were the first", is the "who" necessary here, it doesn't seem to fit with the rest of the sentence?
League Cup
If a link is added for Roy Bailey as noted above, the one here can be dropped.
Same as above with Aston Villa.
Players
I may be wrong, but would the table here not require scope rows/cols?
Post-season
"the club's first foray into European football. The club defeated Maltese champions Floriana 14–1 in the preliminary round, with Ray Crawford scoring seven across the two ties. The Suffolk club", three uses of club in quick succession, perhaps swap one out for slightly less repitition?
Last sentence needs a ref adding.
References
Might be worth linking
RSSSF to maintain the link style of the other refs.
Other than that, the refs here are very well formatted and a quick spot check on a few comes back fine.
Great stuff, nothing much to complain about. Placed on hold while these are addressed.
Kosack (
talk) 20:01, 5 March 2021 (UTC)reply