This set of articles relating to
York City F.C. has been worked on considerably over the period of the last year, and so I now nominate it for featured topic. I believe it satisfies the criteria at
WP:FT and so I wait to see what everyone thinks! One article, Fulfordgate, has been audited for quality through a peer review, but failed a GA nomination. Nonetheless, I feel this doesn't harm its meeting of the set criteria. Thanks,
Mattythewhite (
talk) 16:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)reply
OpposeSupport - I am pretty sure that the check mark is for articles of a very limited scope or something that is relatively new, such as a new province not having had enough elections to be a featured list. The stadium article, however, was built at least 70 years ago, so I think it has to be brought up to GA status first.
Judgesurreal777 (
talk) 17:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Well, the stadium did only last for 10 years, so subject matter is only very small. And I don't really see how this makes it not pass the criteria given at
Wikipedia:Featured topic criteria.
Mattythewhite (
talk) 17:49, 28 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Comment I do not think that
Fulfordgate is needed for a complete topic as it is a former stadium. The article should not be in a featured topic as it is expandable (otherwise there would not be section stub tags). I will support if that is removed.
Zginder (
talk) (
Contrib) 18:21, 28 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Agreed, it should be added later as a supplement, but is not crucial for this nomination, so bring it back when it's GA :) If you remove it, I'll support.
Judgesurreal777 (
talk) 19:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Okay, I've removed Fulfordgate from the topic. Hopefully it will get to GA eventually, so it shall return then. Thanks,
Mattythewhite (
talk) 20:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Support - fantastic for a relatively small club like York City to receive this treatment. I've been privileged to work with other members of
WP:FOOTBALL and Matty on helping get some of these articles promoted and it's great to see the topic here. Well done.
The Rambling Man (
talk) 16:15, 29 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Support topic with removal of the old stadium. It could possibly be included in a supplementary nom in the future though. Fantastic work on these articles, I know what it is like and I agree with TRM's sentiments completely.
Woody (
talk) 16:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Support - Very well done. Per TRM mostly.
Rudget. 17:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Support Fantastic collection of articles, a lot of work has gone into them, and they are worthy of featured topic status.
NapHit (
talk) 15:08, 1 March 2008 (UTC)reply