Jump to content

Talk:Fulham F.C.

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleFulham F.C. was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 2, 2007Good article nomineeListed
June 6, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Article biased

[edit]

This article is horribly biased and needs significant editing throughout. The article should be flagged as such at the top.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:45, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

USA Connections

[edit]

Fulham has a decent following in the US because in recent times they have had a number of American national players. There is also a Fulham USA website and fan community. This connection should be mentioned in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.69.198.242 (talk) 14:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2007/8 Squad Numbers

[edit]

Squad numbers have not been officially announced for this season yet. The numbers worn by players in pre-season friendlies may not be the actual squad numbers that will be assigned to them for this season. So, until squad numbers are confirmed on the club's official website, can people please stop changing them? IlRomano 11:49, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2007/8 Season Transfers

[edit]

Another transfer section has been added to the article by someone. I did something similar last week but some said that there is no need to include a transfer section as their is a main article dedicated to all 2007/8 season transfers in the Premier League. I think that having a transfer section in the Fulham FC article is beneficial as it provides useful information. IlRomano 21:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mocking in Rivalries section must be removed

[edit]

I'm tryiung to remove it but it keeps being reverted. the mocking nature suggests Fulham fans are quiet by stating the 'noise level is known to exceed 2 decibels' in the riverside stand. Unnacceptable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.107.233 (talk) 21:26, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FFC LFC

[edit]

Can anyone who regularly visits here look at the Fulham LFC page, and help me in my quest to get a network of articles for ladies teams which can be as good as the mens pages?

Any help much appreciated.

A.K.A.47

Away Kit

[edit]

Thank you to the anon who updated the away kit. however, are the sleeves predominantly black? i'm not sure, take a look at these pictures and decide for yourself. at any case, the away shorts are white, not blue. i'll try and find out how to alter these but could someone else do it if i haven't got round to it. A.K.A.47 17:44, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

To me, the away kit appears as black and grey stripes. Is this just my rubbish computer or are other people having this problem? I am not colourblind (lol), and I meant on Wikipedia. It appears a different colour because my computer is rubbish. I have the same problem with the Bristol City Home Kit.

do you mean the one on this page, or from the ffc website? the kit used here is entitled "Image:Kit body threebluestripes.png" but they look black, not grey or blue, to me. 86.135.151.243 13:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
sorry i just read your question again. are you sure you are not colour blind, 'cos its definetly red to me.86.135.151.243 13:03, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kits

[edit]

Could you please get a proper image of the kits. Perhaps you should get rid of the shorts and do something like they do here [1] where they have the top home, away, 3rd kit and sponsor. --iceman 19:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

REVERT!

[edit]

This has got to go back to Fulham F.C. in order to fall in titular line with every other standardised football club's page on wikipedia.

To fall in line with the team's official website, however, it should be Fulham FC (no periods). If the periods are kept, correct English demands a space between the "F." and the "C." (the no-space is a common shortcut, but it's technically wrong). RadioKirk (u|t|c) 16:16, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Famous Fans

[edit]

THat list looks a bit suspect to me. The Georgie Thompson article says she is a fan but are the others? CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 16:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The list will probably disappear soon. From the Manchester United discussion page : "I've deleted it. We've had this discussion before, both on this page and at WikiProject Football. All the major English club pages got rid of them - most people agreed it was unencyclopaedic and a waste of space. CTOAGN (talk) 16:55, 17 April 2006 (UTC)" - fchd 18:42, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The list was re-added and rightly reverted, but I thought I'd dump it here if only to keep the Pope John Paul II/Fulham connection, because, true or not, it's priceless:

West London derby

[edit]

I've just created a West London derby article. If any Fulham fans around here can more add to it, then they are more than welcome. SteveO 13:06, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fulham, Hammersmith?!

[edit]

So as to get rid of any potential edit war, i've got a few words to say.

Fulham FC is not based in "Fulham, Hammersmith" - they two are different places within the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham!

You can clearly see here that it is based in Fulham, not Hammersmith! (Craven Cottage towards the south of the image, the red borderline in the middle of the page separating Fulham to the south and Hammersmith to the north.

Even then, shouldn't the club be listed as situated where its motspur park offices?

Steve Earle

[edit]

I've amended Steve Earle's link in the top scorers section as it was linking to a different Steve Earle, the American singer.

Nov 29 Arsenal

[edit]

Since I'll be put down as a vandal, could someone add on the Arsenal match? The american scored first, a yellow card for Arsenal, the Canadian scored, two yellow cards and a read card, then arsenal scored, followed by another 5 yellows.

Fixture List

[edit]

I have removed the fixture list since it is copyrighted by the Premier League. Besides, Wikipedia is not a news service. Oldelpaso 10:35, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll agree for its removal for your second point about it being a news service... but your first point is pure rubbish... you can't copyright a schedule. Jazznutuva 09:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Past results are not copyrightable, but unfortunately fixtures are; the FA Premier League (in the guise of their licensee Football DataCo Ltd) charge a fee for publication of £266 +VAT per club per season and vigorously enforce it. Oldelpaso 19:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sigurður Þór Arason (Current Squad)

[edit]

He's been added twice now, but I've not found any evidence he plays for the club? I'm probably completely wrong. A google search of that name comes up with an Icelandic blog about Fulham written by someone with that name. I had removed it from the page thinking it was vandalism, as the user who added him had also Vandalised the Montella page, but user Archibald99 re-added him, citing a google search page as evidence, despite the fact the page again shows no evidence of him at Fulham. There is no evidence on the Fulham website about the player. Can anyone confirm this? Eastlygod 21:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, bit of a hasty revert. I took the fact that it was in the article and mentioned on Google as a sign it was real. Should have checked the official Fulham website. Archibald99 21:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed that he does not play for Fulham and remove then? Eastlygod 18:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fulhamish

[edit]

Be aware of inappropriate use of the adjective 'Fulhamish' in this article. Fulhamish is not a general adjective to refer to Fulham (in the same way as 'English', for example), but has a more complex definition. Those taken from the club messageboard include:

  • The art of building youself up for a fall.
  • The science of putting yourself down for a reason to get up.
  • The absolute commitment to unrealistic expectation.

It has been suggested by DaveNearDC on one messageboard that 'Fulhamish' involves pulling off unlikely wins in adverse circumstances.

It was also the club's early telegraph address, according to this messageboard. However, the most popular definition seems to be a fluctuation in results which defies expectations and predictions.

Another messageboard see Alan C suggesting that:"One day you can beat the best, the next day you loose with out a fight to the dross and all of your loyal followers actually expect it to happen!"

americanrefugee suggests here that Fulhamish entails a particularly poor result being juxtaposed with a particularly good one.

Of course, messageboards are fallible, but in lieu of all these things I think a section 'Fulhamish' should be added to this page. It should not be misused, it should also not be considered a false or made-up term, as there also are two FFC fansites called 'Fulhamish' so it is clearly a popular enough term.

86.135.205.215 00:08, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fulhamish should be fully incorporated into the article, as it is a word used a lot be fans, sometimes club website and programme too and something the fans identify with.

Honours

[edit]

Fulham have won several friendly, pre-season and exhibition trophies. Should they be included? They have also been 'awarded' on several occasion Best Fairplay Team and Fans. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.4.145.187 (talk) 19:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dates & dashes

[edit]

En dashes should be used in scorelines and only full dates and dates with a day and month should be wikilinked, including in the footnotes. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dashes) and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). Epbr123 20:54, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lawrie Sanchez is English

[edit]

I keep changing the flag icons next to Lawrie Sanchez to the cross of St. George because he is English. He was born in England and only played for Northern Ireland due to his grandmother. Playing football for a different nation does not change your nationality on your passport. Please keep the flags English. 212.159.120.207 16:03, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The nationality on his passport isn't "English" either. His notability is derived from football, and for football purposes he represented Northern Ireland. Therefore, he is shown with the flag of Northern Ireland. This has come up several times before for other people whose birth nationality has been different from the international site they represented, and in all cases consensus has been, once they have declared for an international side, to use that flag. - fchd 16:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Was just about to mention this myself. Being Northern Irish myself i assumed that as Sanchez was born in England he would have an English flag beside his name not an Ulster flag. Mabuska 14:51, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Managers section

[edit]

I was thinking it could do with a revamp. Make the list into two coulombs to save on the length on the page. Govvy 12:00, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA

[edit]

Yep, good and interesting. Covers a lot, well cited. Coule use a few more citations in the rivalries section, but sufficient for GA. SGGH speak! 23:59, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Away Socks

[edit]

Fulham's away socks are red as depcited here: [2]. OKTerrific —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.18.23 (talk) 03:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Titles

[edit]

The titles are a bit dramatic sounding, but I don't want to change them without running it by people first. Things like Sanchez's struggle make it sound like a soap opera Ianbeany1989 (talk) 15:56, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great Escape

[edit]

Hello, just checking to see about adding some more details under the Great Escape section. Listing the goal scorers against Man City and Birmingham maybe and a few other modifications.

KMac279 (talk) 18:42, 20 May 2008 (UTC)KMac279[reply]

There is already information about this on the Fulham F.C. season 2007-08 article if this is helpful. 03md (talk) 10:09, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Players

[edit]

Is Zesh Rehman really that notable a player? Semi-regular for a season or so, and that's it? Beyond the cultural stuff (first Pakistani international to play in the PL), he really didn't make much impact. I get that the section is slightly subjective, but he seems a weird addition, largely due to being a recent player and his nationality.

Tom Prankerd (talk) 13:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Away kit

[edit]

The current away kit is incorrect, as can be seen on their official website: http://www.justsport-group.com/shop.fulhamfc.com/acatalog/replicakit.html.

Can somebody change it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.26.181.140 (talk) 17:45, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Robbie Herrera

[edit]

Is listed as being not only Uruguayan, but also a full international. You'd have thought that would be mentioned on his own wikipedia page if it were true. 90.192.120.14 (talk) 13:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The image Image:Fulham arms.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --21:19, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gareth Bale

[edit]

When did Fulham sign him.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.253.22 (talk) 20:22, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted vandalism which also included Tom Huddlestone as wellTmol42 (talk) 20:35, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

[edit]

This article has unfortunate use of prose that be changed to keep it in an encyclopedic fashion (see the Al-Fayed era especially). Thanks, TheFireTones 18:18, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

[edit]
This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Fulham F.C./GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

*It is reasonably well written.

  • a (prose): b (MoS):
a. Throughout most of the article, the quality of the prose appears to be fine and is not a major issue. However, the "Club mascot controversy" section has some grammatically incorrect sentences. For example, "The Fulham FC club official mascot is Billy the Badger[8] who was the winning design sent..." and "...Billy walked across the goal during a match although..." need rewriting.
b. Phrases like "one of the most gifted players of his generation" and "In addition to being a springboard for many blossoming futures" appear far too often. The "History" section contains very few wikilnks, which means it could be difficult for the reader to understand what terms relating to divisions and rules actually mean.
  • It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
a. Most of the references are correctly formatted, but refs [5], [6], [7] and [10] are either bare or have parameters that need filling.
b. There is little referencing done in this article. 10 references says it all I'm afraid.
c. The vast majority of this article is original research. There are whole sections that are without citations, which implies to me that their content has been originally researched.
  • It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
a. Most of the important aspects of the subject are included in the article. However, there are other aspects of football clubs that I'm sure could be added into this article. For example, it could detail the colours, crests, statistics and records etc.
b. Sentences like "And to this day it can still be claimed that England have never won the World Cup without the contribution of a Fulham player." make me think this article is prone to drifting away from the topic.
Not really, no. Words like "renowned", "star-studded" and "desperately" certainly convey a biased viewpoint.
  • It is stable.
  • It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
    a (tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (relevant and captioned):
Although, there is only one image in the article. It would certainly be more well-demonstrated if some could be included.
  • Overall:
    a Pass/Fail:

I believe the article currently fails the GA criteria, and if improvements are not made, it will be delisted. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:50, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i looked at the original version of article when it was promoted with which it had 28 refs it may be a good idea if you look at that revison and see if you cannot see if that version is ok with the GA criteria and then save this version on the mainspace. I have not looked at that version but it may be worth a go to see if it has just got worse over time and it was previously alot better. 02blythed (talk) 21:57, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have readded the original history section, and I feel it is only fair to re-review the article.

  • It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
a. Most of the prose seems fine, but there seems to be a few sentences throughout that are gramatically inaccurate. "Healy opened his Fulham account taking advantage", "The Fulham FC club official mascot is Billy the Badger[8] who was the winning design sent..." and "...Billy walked across the goal during a match although..." to list a few. Jargon should be wikilinked, as this allows readers that are not familiar with football to understand the meanings of the various terms.
b. With regards to words to avoid, it is not clear to every reader what the "Northern Ireland set-up" is.
  • It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
a. References [5], [6], [7], [16], [17], [18], [19], [27] and [28] all need correctly formatting. Reference [13] doesn't really seem to be a reference at all.
b. Very little citation to sources in this article. This is a major issue and 32 references won't suffice.
c. A fair bit of original research appears to be present here. For example, the most recent sections of the history section appear to have just been updated after the events occurred, and have not been attributed to any sources.
  • It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
a. Most of the important aspects of the subject are included in the article. However, there are other aspects of football clubs that I'm sure could be added into this article. For example, it could detail the colours, crests, statistics and records etc.
b. Suffers from a bad case of recentism. The history section is hardly a history section.
Phrases like "stop the rot" and "snatched a dramatic draw" sound weasely. The article's tone needs to sound factual; this kind of wording hampers that.
  • It is stable.
  • It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
    a (tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (relevant and captioned):
  • Overall:
    a Pass/Fail:

This article shouldn't really have been passed in the first place; it was nominated by a user who was on Wikipedia for one day and for some reason decided to nominate most of the Premier League club articles for GA. So, I still feel this article is unable to meet the GA criteria and will be delisted if some vast improvements are not made. Mattythewhite (talk) 10:15, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have now delisted the article. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:10, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tube station

[edit]

whats the nearest tube station to their ground? The C of E (talk) 10:25, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

putney bridge —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.132.48.111 (talk) 11:45, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan Payne Nationality

[edit]

It says that he's Algerian. From his time at Sutton United, I always understood him to be English. Where is any information to the contrary? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Half price0 (talk • contribs) 18:45, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since no one has given such evidence I have altered his nationality. --Half Price (talk) 12:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Typo?

[edit]

In the section on the current season, it is claimed that Fulham won one of their matches by the inconceivably unlikely scoreline of 56 goals to nil. I'm not sure what the correct scoreline is but I'm assuming either five or six. Can someone who knows (or can be bothered to check) change this?


London wiki

[edit]

Can someone develop the Fulham FC page on London wiki [www.london.wikia.com]] as there are two links to the as yet non-existent page. Jackiespeel (talk) 22:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Haynes in front of the Riverside.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Haynes in front of the Riverside.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Haynes in front of the Riverside.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:30, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New Fulham 3rd kit 12/13 season

[edit]

Who can create the new Fulham third kit for Fulham and the 12/13 season page? New shirt JMHamo (talk) 13:54, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Fulham F.C.. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:50, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fulham F.C.. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:06, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Fulham F.C.. 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:14, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Fulham F.C.. 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:35, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reserve squad

[edit]

Can we have that back? If not, can it be put on the Academy page? Steam n Whistle (talk) 16:30, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:22, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fulham_F.C.&oldid=1207325923"