Talk:Arsenal F.C./Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

→

Archive 10

Thierry Henry

Just wondering if you guys were going to leave the stuff on Thierry Henry in present tense for right now, or if you need to change it to past tense. I saw one example under goalscoring, but im not sure where else. Also, does anyone know if Gilberto will be captain next year, or when that will be released?

Yes past tense would probably be appropriate. As for the Gilberto information, let's just wait for the official word. Chensiyuan 06:49, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, even though he has left the club, he still is the top scorer and is the top league scorer so I think the present tense is correct. To say he was the top scorer implies someone has overtaken his record since, which is not the case. Qwghlm 12:09, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I tried to update his stats, but I'm not sure if I used the right numbers. Can someone check that? MSJapan 17:39, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Right for the overall total but you used the figure for all his league goals throughout his career rather than just Arsenal, so I've corrected it. Qwghlm 18:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Right, I agree completely with that, but, since its been a while since we have had a new captain, how will it be announced, through the website, tv (bbc, skysports), the papers, or will one player just walk onto the field with the armband and we assume thats that? Just so I can keep on the lookout.

It will be on the club website when it's announced, probably at the same time as the squad numbers for 2007-08 are released. Qwghlm 18:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

It has been confirmed that Gilberto Silva is the new Captain with Cesc Fabregas as his Deputy Captain. (Source: BBC Radio 5 Live )

What programme, time & date was it confirmed and who said it? Qwghlm 23:50, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Interesting, I thought that Toure would be the deputy captain. Anyways, the new squad numbers are up, and I would put in the numbers of Bendtner (26) and Fabianski (21), but I wanted your okay first. This can be confirmed via the Arsenal website.

Team Photo

There is a lot of space to the right of the team listing, is it possible to add a picture of the 1st team squad from the website when it is released later this summer/after transfer season?

Sorry, no, because it is unlikely that a photo with a suitable copyright status can be found. You cannot just take a photo off another website without the correct licence and add it here. Qwghlm 22:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Anyway, there's not a space when you use Firefox.  slυмgυм [ ←→ ] 20:49, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Baptista

Julio Baptista is still listed as a player on the Arsenal website, so I added him to the players list. Eminabe53 15:22, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Baptista himseld has confirmed that he has returned from his loan period (see here) and his old number has now been taken, so it's pretty clear he is no longer an Arsenal player. Qwghlm 18:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure actually. He doesn't actually say he's gone back yet in that article and Reyes doesn't go back to Arsenal until August I believe so it might be the same for Baptista. Arrowny 00:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

It's now been officially confirmed by the club as well as Baptista himself [1] Qwghlm 10:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Kits on Wikipedia

Recently a member of this website made some kits to go on the Arsenal page that look very much like the actual Arsenal kits. However, I have noticed that someone removed them because (in their words), "Kit template is for colours, not design details."

The same happened with the new Manchester United home shirt.

I can't see how there is nothing wrong with providing better detail to kits. How is this a bad thing? Surely the more realistic the shown kit template is to the actual kit, the more accurate Wikipedia is.

What are other members' views on this - should this anti-design member be allowed to keep reversing the detail added to kits?

Alexcavell 09:10, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree, it would be better if kits were more detailed but maybe there would be issues with advertising or copyright.

--Drummed 00:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Most Members in World

http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/arsenal-surpass-benfica-as-football-club-with-the-most-members.html

According to this source Arsenal have claimed a membership base of 175,000 more than the world record holder Benfica.

Bear in mind this is just a ticket membership scheme, Arsenal are not run like, say FC Barcelona and Bayern Munich are, where members have some say on the club's governance. Qwghlm 10:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

New Alternate Kit

I added the new alternate kit for this season, available august 9th Lumpy3 18:26, July 21, 2007 (UTC)

Squad Numbers

Armand Traoré has been wearing #30 in pre-season friendlies for Arsenal & Mark Randall has been wearing #35. Wikiisimo 17:32, 28 July 2007 (UTC) Wikiisimo July 28, 2007 1:32 US EDST

Pre-season friendlies do not matter. There is a list of squad numbers on Arsenal.com. Until that list changes, neither should the numbers in the article. Hermiod 18:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

That list is not gospel, though - among other things it still lists Kerrea Gilbert and Matthew Connolly in the first-team squad. The players wore their real squad numbers (i.e. Sagna - 3, Fabregas - 4, etc.) during the Emirates Cup and I think that is sufficient evidence to list Traore's number as 30, Randall's as 35, etc. ugen64 06:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I did ammend the squad numbers on July 30, 2007 but when I browse to this web today, my changes has not been updated. Does anyone know why? Krraj 07:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

It's may be because you used incorrect numbers and someone has reverted your edits since. Watching an Arsenal match on TV, noting the squad numbers used and then adding them to Wikipedia is considered original research. You have to provide a source. Since the most reliable source for information on Arsenal Football Club is Arsenal.com, the club's own website, it is their squad list we should use. I have no doubt that when Traoré, for example, inevitably makes a competitive first team appearance this season he will wear the number 30, but until we have a source we can refer to, we shouldn't add it to Wikipedia. Hermiod 07:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Whether it is original research or not, the simple fact is, is that unless they're officially confirmed by the club or the Premier League that these are their numbers for competitive matches, not friendlies (where youth and reserve players are used more often and may be given numbers on an ad hoc basis), then they should not be included. The squad list on the official club website should be considered primary reference for this and as long as they're not listed there, they should not be listed here. Qwghlm 09:22, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Arseblog

The best football blog in the world should get a mention on this page, maybe in the supporters section. Its a brilliantly comprehensive daily review of all news Arsenal, and features a weekly podcast. - Arsebloggers no1. fan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.190.17.129 (talk • contribs) 08:39, August 3, 2007

Bruce Rioch

He in his 1 season in charge was remembered by Arsenal fans for 2 things.

1. Being a "rubbish" manager 2. Signing Denis Berkamp —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.84.54.127 (talk • contribs) 16:53, August 3, 2007

Peter Theo Vasiliou

Peter Theo Vasiliou appears to have been a former coach (and apparently signed-but-didn't-play player) for Arsenal. Are there any sources (club sites/newsletter etc.) which we could use to source exactly what he did do for Arsenal, and when? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 12:45, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Response given at Talk:Peter Theo Vasiliou. Qwghlm 13:56, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Players Loans & Squad Numbers

Joe O'Cearuill has joined Barnet FC on loan, not a big deal but its not there.

Squad numbers, it has interested me for ages about having the various squad numbers for every season and how they have changed, like merson was no.10 then when bergkamp arrived he took the no.10 and merson took the no.9 and recently fabregas, senderos & toure have all changed their numbers, is this possible to set up? ive got some info for most seasons and i think it would be an interesting thing to have

not sure how to end this not but im the german flower pot and its 6.36pm on 5th september 07 —Preceding unsigned comment added by The German Flower Pot (talk • contribs) 17:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

O'Cearuill has actually left the club, see this link. As for the history of squad numbers, I think it's far too obscure a thing to have on this page, or any other. I suppose you could create a page for each season but they tend to get deleted. PS You can sign your posts by typing four tildes, like this ~~~~ - see WP:SIGN for more. Qwghlm 18:11, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Thumbnail size

Arsenal captain Patrick Vieira lifts the 2003–04 Premier League trophy.(Shown at 200px)

At 300 pixels, the thumbnail images of the stadium etc are probably too large. Also, as a featured article, it is better to set no size for the thumbnails and to allow individual users to set thumbnail size in their personal preferences. This is because Wikipedia articles may be viewed at a range of screen resolutions. --♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 20:56, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Is there any official guideline on this about images in FAs? I don't mind reducing the size but to make them as small as the default thumbnail robs them of their impact in my view, especially for unregistered users unable to set the image size in preferences. Qwghlm 22:59, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I looked this up and could not find any official policy, but it has been recommended in the past that Featured Articles should use variable rather than fixed thumbnail size, as fixed size overrides any user preferences. The default Wikipedia thumbnail size can be rather small on modern screens (some widescreen monitors are 1440 X 900px) but 300px on a small screen can flood the surrounding text. Another point to bear in mind is that people who want to see the full size image can click on it. To see the size of the screen that you are using at the moment, there is a display checker at [2]. --♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:06, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

It's not a question of seeing the images full-size, but of maintaining their impact within the article, and the default rendering of 120px is too small IMO. I've reduced the image sizes to 200px - is this an acceptable compromise? Qwghlm 08:48, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Despite what wp:mos#images say I think there's some flexibility and things have to be decided on a case by case basis. Here, my view is 200 is fine. Chensiyuan 09:04, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I think 200px is fine, as a balance needs to be struck between smaller and larger screen resolutions for fixed image size. --♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:08, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

lead

i know this article is FA status, but the lead does seem rather short. does anyone agree? Chensiyuan 13:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

e.g., Wenger is Arsenal's most (if not, one of the most) successful manager ever but is not mentioned. or maybe something like the unbeaten run in 2003-04. yes the lead is meant to provide a summary, but given there's stuff like first ever UCL final in there, why not put in other big milestones as well? Chensiyuan 13:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

while i'm on the topic of UCL the last paragraph of the history section is not referenced at all. would it be better to provide references? Chensiyuan 13:21, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Expanding the intro is a good idea - when the article became an FA the rules on intros were more lax and didn't mandate on length but I see no harm in making it 3-4 paras. And additional references in the final paragraph of the History section is a good idea too - I'll add one in now and fill with more over the next few days. Qwghlm 14:28, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Having done a bit more now, I would be interested in others' thoughts on the intro as it is now. Qwghlm 21:37, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

In my view it's improved significantly, it covers more of the body now, but just a comment: "post-war" may not be universally understood. I mean to say it may mean different things to different people. And people unfamiliar with the history of England may not understand it either. Chensiyuan 01:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Another comment, but not regarding the lead. In the "History" section, I think it might be helpful to have some inline refs in some parts. E.g., the titles won in the 1930s, 47-48/49-50/52-53. That's two paragraphs of claims that, in my view, will be improved with a ref(s) so that people can see it's verifiable. They are not small claims after all. Chensiyuan 01:09, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Before that let me caveat my statements -- if the lack of refs is to avoid duplicity of refs that can be found in the two forked history articles, is there a specific Wikipedia policy which states that? Chensiyuan 01:13, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Nothing wrong with duplicating refs from the history articles. As this article already has loads of references in other sections it might be a good idea to use a single authoritative ref (e.g. [3]) rather than lots of different ones to avoid making it too long. Qwghlm 08:43, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Gavin Hoyte

Theres a link to him. According to the actual gavin hoyte page, the links should be removed. Dont bother adding the link again, because the page is deleted. And a new one can only be made by admins or somethin... cheers Alborzb 16:47, 27 September 2007 (GMT)

Not too sure about the point you're making. Chensiyuan 01:00, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that, many moons ago, the page about Gavin was nominated for deletion, as he was (then) a youth player with no first-team experience. But he was on the bench for the Carling Cup match and given a first-team squad number. [4] As both Lansbury and Mannone already have articles about them and have not played first team matches for Arsenal, I am inclined to be for creating Hoyte's now as well - it is currently protected from recreation but that can be undone. Qwghlm 08:58, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Fan Site

I have found a new fan site, along the lines of those already displayed in the external links section, and wish to add it. If those already displayed are allowed, I see no real reason why this one can not be added also.

http://www.goonersworld.co.uk/

Fairly much the same content as the others, but from a different viewpoint, as those already displayed are.

29/09/07

SE13Gooner 11:01, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by SE13Gooner (talk • contribs) 10:45, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't see what's that great about the site - there's nothing about the history, or the stadium, or the squad, that could not be found on other Arsenal sites already listed. The news section is just being pulled off other sites such as the BBC or Sky. Nothing much of value in that site at all, to be honest. Qwghlm 12:49, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Can I presume that not much notice was actually taken, as the stated are listed, and in a similar or better order, and that there is nothing better or more up to date than those listed on the site I presented. Sorry, but if they are listed, and others can not be, then there must be something baltently unfair, which must breach the rules as specified by yourselves.

SE13Gooner 19:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but your website is pretty close to worthless. The news section is ripped off from Sky Sports. The squad lists and league table can be found on many other websites, including Wikipedia. The fixture list is just a link to Arsenal.com. All that remains is a forum, and Wikipedia's linking policy forbids linking to forums if that is all they are. There is nothing on that website worth reading that you couldn't find already on the other websites listed - and they have a great deal more to offer besides. For that reason, it should not be linked to. Qwghlm 20:40, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Chappy84

User:Chappy84 says that all the information on all the pages should be merged to this one like Arsenal TV, Emirates Stadium, Arsenal F.C. Reserves, Arsenal L.F.C., Arsenal F.C. records etc I feel this "POINTLESS" but he wants to do it shall we? He has done it on otheer articles so I thought why ot this one what do you thik?mattypc 23:07, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

No merit in the merge idea. Chensiyuan 01:38, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Roosterrulez is misrepresenting what User:Chappy84 says here (which is about another set of articles entirely, to do with Leeds City Vixens), so the above ought to be ignored. Qwghlm 13:59, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Qwghlm is correct. I simply stated that Leeds City Vixens were not notable enough to require all of the articles to which User:Roosterrulez had created and that they should be merged into one. I partly suggested this as the history page for Leeds City Vixens is a copy of the history on the main Leeds City Vixens page. Chappy ^T_C 20:42, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

el: Άρσεναλ

You can add the greek article: el: Άρσεναλ. A Greek Arsenal friend. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.203.133.74 (talk) 20:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Done. Qwghlm 20:27, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Footnotes

I thought the scrollbar is discouraged because it affects printing? Chensiyuan (talk) 01:38, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not massively keen myself, feel free to remove it if it contravenes agreed standards. Qwghlm (talk) 15:47, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Arsenal is a football club not arsenal are an football club!!

Guys just beucase arsenal is made up of several entities like manangers and players doesn't mean its a plural thing! it's singular

Let's say you are going camping you don't say here are my equipment. you say Here is my equipment even though your equipment would entail sleeping bags, clothes, and other sorts of things —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosskey711 (talk • contribs) 03:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Check out archive number 4. Chensiyuan (talk) 03:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Archive 4 talks about Wenger... Well Arsenal might be located in Britain, but it is not entirely British. They have fans all over the world so we should use the most common form of english Am-eng becuase more people use that than Br-eng —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosskey711 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC) Rosskey711 (talk) 17:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

See English plural#Discretionary_plurals and the guideline on national varieties of English. Oldelpaso (talk) 18:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Based in the British capital, British owned and with matches attended by predominantly British fans. Pretty British if you ask me :) Given that WP:ENGVAR states that a book by a British author such as The Lord of the Rings should be in British regardless of international recognition or following, then a football club based in Great Britain should be treated the same way. Qwghlm (talk) 21:45, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. American English has no proprietary rights as some universal version of the language. Not only does such a claim appear as pompous, the fact of the matter is that regardless of who plays for the club, or how many supporters there are outside the UK, it is a British entity, and the article, therefore, warrants the use of the Kings English. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 01:45, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Har har i just have to make one comment first.... arsenal "pretty british" you make me laugh Tell me this how many BRITISH players actually have a chance in playing in a match? I count Theo Walcott. Predominatly British fans is FALSE. The Big Four clubs have bigger following WORLD WIDE then they do in their home country.. Arsenal won't be British owned for long so therefore your arguments have been succesfully rebuttalled. I'm telling you look at the Man Utd article it says "is" P.S. Man utd is the bigger club so the gooners should follow suit --Rosskey711 (talk) 02:17, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Clearly defective logic requires no further rejoinders. Chensiyuan (talk) 02:53, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

On behalf of all American Gooners, I apologize for my countryman's shocking lack of football knowledge (and poor English). howcheng {chat} 07:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Ironically, said American fan is a self proclaimed United supporter (look at his user page!), and doesn't like the term 'soccer' being used as a name for the sport. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 01:29, 18 December 2007 (UTC)