Template:Did you know nominations/Early grounds of Manchester City F.C.

The following discussion 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 Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 22:24, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Early grounds of Manchester City F.C.

(

)

... that of the five early grounds of Manchester City F.C., four were originally unused wasteland, most had no stands or facilities, and none served for more than two seasons?

Reviewed: New York City FC
Comment: ALT1: ... that of the five early grounds of Manchester City F.C., four were originally unused wasteland and none served for more than two seasons?

Created by Falastur2 (talk). Self nominated at 01:03, 26 May 2013 (UTC).

Support ALT1 - I believe the first hook may be a little too long, but the second is great. Falastur has done a great job creating this article, especially since the info on the individual subjects of the article as a whole is relatively limited, and I believe that should be recognised by passing this DYK nomination. – Pee Jay 23:25, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Needs a reviewer to do a full review based on DYK criteria; this process doesn't work using supports or opposes. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:35, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

A decent article, well written and on an interesting topic. I agree that ALT1 is a better hook. The sources are a bit thin but seem reliable enough. However, there are some gaps in the referencing; there are no refs at all in the 1st, 4th and 5th paras of "Near Clowes Street" (1880–81)"; only 1 ref in the whole of "Kirkmanshulme Cricket Club (1881–82)"; none in the 4th para of "Queens Road/"Clemington Park" (1882–84)"; and none in the 2nd para of "The Bull's Head Hotel (1885–87)". This needs to be resolved before the article can be accepted. Prioryman (talk) 12:11, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I've added 14 more references, addressing all of these gaps. Please note that the sources may be "a bit thin" (I did manage to add one reference from a new book at least) but as PeeJay says above, there is virtually no written evidence of the exact nature of football in the 1800s and so it is really quite hard to adequately reference this stuff. Frankly, I think Gary James and Paul Toovey (the authors I've cited) are miracle-workers for managing to publish books in spite of how little they've had to work with. Falastur2 ^Talk 14:52, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate that - I think you've done a nice job of it given the limitations of the sourcing. This is good to go now. Prioryman (talk) 20:09, 8 June 2013‎ (UTC)