Talk:Birmingham City F.C.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Birmingham City F.C. has been listed as one of the Everyday life good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment. | |||
|
||||
| This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Birmingham City F.C. is part of the random selection of content on Portal:Association football. An excerpt from this article regularly appears on the Portal's main page. |
Contents |
[edit] A joke!
Since the 'Football Drive' added their information the article has looked absoloutely terrible since. There is a lot of tedious uninteresting information that has been included namley in the section titled 'Blues' in Europe'. Also It has no kind of persepctive from a Birmingham City fans point of view which I think is rather dissapointing.
- The blues in Europe bit has been there for ages. The page hardly changed since before the football drive.
 |
Birmingham City F.C. was supported by the football article improvement drive, a weekly collaboration to improve association football-related articles to featured article status. |
This page keeps on being vandalised by Birmingham city fans, trying to make the team sound more impressive. Can someone lock it please? I have just deleted "BCFC BEST IN THE WORLD" from the opening paragraph A lot of this page is waffle. It goes on and on about their performance in the top division, and adds tiny details, such as the apparent Atari ST cup. Could someone who specialises in Football pages please sort this page out. Thom32
On the right it lists their position this season, wheras on other teams pages it says their position at the end of last season. I'm going to change it
Is there any agreement on what constitutes a football 'honour'? I always thought that you had to win for it to be an honour, but this entry lists being a finalist as an honour.
--Smallbone10 23:57, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Could this page be split up more, because it has a lot of information that crams the page up, while Arsenal F.C. and Manchester United have it on separate pages, like the "History" section and the "Past Players" section?--GingerM 18:19, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Listing the club as relegated from the Premiership in mid-April seemed a bit cheeky - reverted to previous edit --85.210.185.108 23:26, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Surely the demise of the 'Blue Nose' mascot to be replaced by some non-descript, generic model deserves a mention! Nicander 18:27, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Someone should remove the Derby reference near the endPliny 21:14, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry what demise of the 'Bluenose' mascot? The Blue's mascot has always been a dog there has never been such a demise that you mention. - Aff
For at least one season a few years ago Birmingham featured a mascot which was dubbed the 'Bluenose' and was designed to resemble a giant blue nose. One of the most memorable mascots certainly. Nicander 20:00, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm a Birmingham City fan, and I've never seen this mascot. The Mayor 19:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Precisley I imagine this guy is a WUM. 83.104.51.181 12:00, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
There was a blue nose, he just resembled (from what I can remember) a giant furry blue ball. Fragmaroom
[edit] HELP ME
Having just seen Blues vs. Norwich (2006), I have witnessed the worst Blues performance of my life. I went to the 0-7 vs. Liverpool, but this was worst, at least then one team played well! I thought we got rid of the pre-madonna's in the team, but after this performance, I am wondering where the passion has gone! As a typcal Blues fan, I don't ask for much, just players putting in a bit of effort. I need consolation, as I am beginning to lose what Blues are supposed to be doing in this division. Please give me the other side of the coin, because I seem to have lost it. Millm0w 07:55, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
'Prima donna'. Nicander 14:48, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
PRIMA DONNA? you cheeky b*****d. Millm0w 14:18, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] YouTube links
This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed or you would like to help spread this message contact us on this page. Thanks, ---J.S (t|c) 05:06, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Season-by-season positions
Sorry to remove these after a user tabled them, which must have taken some time. But they're fairly trivial and have no real place in the article. HornetMike 19:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Someone has put them back up. I'm going to take them down.
[edit] Crest and Blues in Europe sections
I've just reinstated these. Crest was vandalised but not restored when the vandalism was removed. Blues in Europe looks like it went by accident. Struway 14:28, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Most capped player?
in Honours section. Someone changed it to Forssell, with 40 caps - him it can't be, because he won a good half of them before joining Blues. Presumably it's supposed to show the number of caps won by the player while he's at the club - I was going to just change it back to what it said before, i.e Malcolm Page with 28, but it isn't any more.
For instance, this page shows Damien Johnson had 14 caps when he came to Blues, and this one says he has 46 now, so that's 32 won while at Blues. But there may be others - does anyone know how many Lazaridis won while at Blues? or any other suggestions (ideally with sources)? Struway (talk) 23:22, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
- According to this site, which has team lists for all recent Australia internationals, and distinguishes between 'A' and 'B' games, Lazaridis won 33 caps while at Blues, so I'm going to add that. Any verifiable advance on 33 gratefully received! Struway (talk) 15:52, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Aston Villa -- Unique???
I know that Aston Villa can make many claims about being 'special' but playing in two cities is not one of them. Aston has never been a city.
Also why ois there a reference towards the bottom of this. I cvan't see the relevance of Aston Manor or anything to do with Aston. I'm deleting it!
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Bcfclogo.png
Image:Bcfclogo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:38, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] St Andrews capacity
Well spotted the person who noticed the mistake! Whoever wrote this section in the first place (and the St Andrews (stadium) article) took their info pretty well straight from the 2000 official Encyclopedia of Birmingham City, which does say 43,204. Presumably(?) a typo for 53,204, as the official attendance for the Cup QF in 1972 was 52,470. I'll change the St Andrews article as well, which says the same. Struway2 | Talk 10:38, 2 August 2007 (UTC) I wasat that game and the claimed capacity then was 53,000 (I was alsthere when they played Cardiff City with 49,056 in the ground that year.--217.38.121.254 12:42, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
1905 surely there is an innaccuracy here as Aston Villa wer alreadyin the football league as founder members so Small Heath were not the only league team in Birmingham --217.38.121.254 12:42, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, if you click on the note by that sentence (note number 3, at the moment) it explains that. Obviously Aston Villa are an older club, but the point is that they were based in the borough of Aston Manor, which wasn't part of the City of Birmingham at the time. Hope that helps, cheers, Struway2 | Talk 13:48, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Some suggestions which will no doubt turn up at PR
For the benefit of Struway2 (talk ยท contribs), I've reviewed the article to pick up some points that will inevitably crop up at a peer review which precedes a FAC. Here they are:
- History section titles need work, see other club FA's.
- removed
- "Inspired by..." - POV.
- reworded (Womack captaincy one), though I've left in (and referenced) the "inspirational Christophe Dugarry"
- Not sure semifinal is a single word, thought it ought to be hyphenated (as it is in the reference).
- Chambers would disagree with you
- "...FA Cup semifinal and win promotion..." - no real need to italicise.
- reworded
- Citations look best in numerical order (so [42][1] would be preferable as [1][42]).
- done all I've spotted
- Shower curtain kit sounds interesting, any chance of creating it instead of, say, the current third choice kit?
- don't know how to. I'd photograph one but you don't see many about (can't imagine why).
- Penultimate para of Colours etc has no citation.
- done
- Stadium section ought to be Stadiums, starts awkwardly with bullet list of grounds, and has only a single subsection, that of St Andrews. Needs expansion.
- rewritten
- Also, the section on St Andrews needs work. No citations to speak of and sentences like "St Andrews was built on an old gypsy camp. The gypsies are reputed to have put a curse on the ground when they were evicted. Fans still blame this when the club has a string of bad results." really need citation, quotation, reliable sources etc.
- rewritten
- I know the Notable Managers section is an overview but it could do with some citation.
will have soonhas now
- I would be tempted to incorporate some discussion over the new stadium in the Stadium(s) section rather than as a See also bullet...
- done
- Use en-dash for page ranges in references.
- done all I've spotted
Hope that helps. The Rambling Man 17:16, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] GA review comments
Well, here they are, in no particular order of significance...!
- Some citations should be moved so they meet WP:CITE, so immediately after punctuation if at all possible (e.g. [61], [73], [76] and a later use of [11])
- WP:CITE#Where to place ref tags says Some words, phrases or facts must be referenced mid-sentence, while others are referenced at the end. Frequently, a reference tag will coincide with punctuation... Presumably that means sometimes a reference tag won't coincide with punctuation, if the word/phrase/fact being referenced hasn't got any?
- I've moved/shuffled/reworded the [61]s, the [76] (now 77), the [78] (now 79) and the [11].
- As to [73] (now 74), the sentence goes funded the purchase of players Brian Roberts in 1984[74] and Paul Peschisolido in 1992.[27]. I wouldn't have a problem to moving [74] to the end, but as it's clearly desirable for them to stay in logical order (to reflect the order in which the items referenced occur within the sentence, Roberts' [74] before Pesch's [27]) they'd be out of numerical order, which seems to bother some people; what would you advise?
-
- Aha, perhaps I need to revise my knowledge of WP:CITE! No, you're right, if that's the current wording then your article is absolutely fine. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Petty perhaps but I don't like the short opening paragraph of the history section and the placement of the image.
- rearranged
- "...make up for the lack of goals, Bradford excepted, the other end.[11] " - at the other end?
- don't know where the at went, it was there in the draft version
- "Harry Storer was appointed manager in 1945. In his first ..." flow together and where the semi-colon appears, make it a full-stop... would improve the flow in my opinion.
- reworded
- 16 paragraphs in the History section, I'd prefer to see half as many with better flow between them.
- rearranged to some extent. Before this goes for FA (if it ever does) I intend to have another go at structuring/cutting down the History section, but can't face it at the moment.
- "...he made them play..." I know what you mean, but some may not.
- reworded
- "...saw Birmingham make their highest ..." achieve rather than make?
- done
- "game best remembered for City's goalkeeper Bert Trautmann playing the last 20 minutes with a broken bone in his neck." citation required, especially for "best remembered" - that's WP:OR, perhaps "notable for"?
- reworded, added citation at end of paragraph which covers whole paragraph
- "...raised their game ..." not sure about this. Again, could be perceived as WP:OR.
- added to the quote from the source book in the footnote. It's a problem with book sources, where you can't reasonably go into huge amounts of detail in the body of the article, but if you don't it can look like OR or POV
- "...luring Stan Cullis out of retirement to manage the club." needs citation.
- covered by citation at end of next sentence, need it be repeated?
- "Saunders' team could not score goals ..." I bet they could, they just weren't particularly accomplished at doing so? Slight rephrase for those who don't know what you mean!
- reworded, though could not isn't much of an exaggeration :-(
- "The club was in turmoil on and off the field." too journalistic for my taste.
- changed to lacked stability
- "Then the ..." when exactly?
- done
- "...and allowed Cooper money for signings." citation required.
- covered by citation at end of next sentence, need it be repeated?
- "...unconvincing mid-table finish." WP:OR again.
- removed unconvincing for want of decent citation. I find it very difficult to discuss the period from around Christmas 2004 to October 2006 without lapsing into OR/POV.
- "a teenage boy died, crushed when a wall collapsed; this was on the same day as the Bradford fire, and the events at St Andrew's were included in the remit of Mr Justice Popplewell's report into the safety of sports grounds.[25]" not sure but that reads almost identically to the same part in the history section.
- so it did
- "with fans taking home a significant proportion as souvenirs" needs citation.
- rearranged
- Honours should have a citation.
- done. A list of Birmingham Senior Cup winners which used to be on the Birmingham County FA website seems to have disappeared, so I've had to resort to the fansite (though the late much-lamented bcfc-archive from which they source their information was reliable). Did you know, the only featured English football club articles which cite their honours section are Aston Villa, Leek Town, Margate and Norwich City?
-
- Ipswich does too, just not as obviously! (I should do better!) The Rambling Man (talk) 17:34, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Don't need a Current staff secion really.
- possibly not, but is it a problem? Featured articles Aston Villa F.C., Gillingham F.C. and Manchester City F.C. do have such a section.
- P.S. Just to clarify that all I'm implying when mentioning what other featured articles have/have not done, is that I looked at other featured articles when deciding what sections to include and where/how much citation was needed. I'm aware of WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS, and don't have a problem with changing stuff where it needs changing. Struway2 (talk) 16:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Other than that it's very very good and is a great base for heading to FA with some more work. I'll put the GA on hold for the moment so you can attend to the comments - let me know when you're after a re-review. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 10:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Cool. Promoting now. Well done, good work, and please, please consider FA as soon as you feel like it! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
