Talk:2006–07 FA Cup

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Football (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the English football task force.
 

Location of the Final[edit]

As regards to the information on the Celtic Crusaders website, I don't think this has much bearing on the location of the final. Because it's still possible that the final will be in Cardiff, many many officials will have booked hotel rooms and the FA will have booked the Millenium Stadium, just in case. It would be a hell of an embarrassment if it turned out that they had to abandon the Wembley plans, but Cardiff was already booked for FA Cup final day. (Last year's announcement wasn't made until the 21st February btw) - aheyfromhome 14:13, 7 January 2007

Too much?[edit]

Last season's FA Cup article starts from round one. Do we need an extra six rounds before it, concerning non-notable amateur clubs? I think just having the top 124 clubs is enough.  Slumgum T. C.   21:11, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

The preliminary and qualifying rounds are genuine parts of the FA Cup - it's the not recording of them in the past that has made the research of the history of the Cup take so long. Virtually of the clubs pass the notability "bar" of being at least at Level 10, it's just the 11 South Western League clubs that fall one level below that. I will try to keep the page up-to-date. - fchd 21:57, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay. I'm not very familiar with the official "bar of notability" (just my own opinion). If you (or anyone else) is willing to make sure the early results are present and correct, I don't think there's a problem (apart from perhaps the article size). It's gonna get big.  Slumgum T. C.   22:28, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I am more than happy to work towards making this year's FA CUP article the most accurate and detailed on Wiki ! The above poster is right - the FA Cup starts with the lower leagues, and if Wiki can become the first point of contact for info on every round, then let us try it.
On the size issue, maybe "FA Cup 2006-07 Qualifying Rounds" can be split from here when the First Road Proper begins? doktorb wordsdeeds 06:07, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
That's a good threshold. I recommend waiting until the round 1 draw before exporting the qualifying rounds to a second article.  Slumgum T. C.   22:37, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Qualifying Article[edit]

When the First Round proper starts, the qualyfing information will be moved to FA Cup 2006-07 Qualifying Rounds doktorb wordsdeeds 11:28, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

BigSoccer Boards[edit]

If an urge for discussion emerge; please visit BigSoccer Boards/England: Cups & Competitions [1]. Sarnath 12:02, 18 September 2006 (UTC)Sarnath


Byes/Exemption[edit]

Something is wrong with the byes/exemption column in the first chart, I think its one row 'off'. 70.24.95.4 22:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Semi-final[edit]

I know something wrong but the version is to prepare for edit KyleRGiggs 20:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Sixth round[edit]

Why has the formatting suddenly changed to resemble the World Cup pages....? ChrisTheDude 07:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I too am baffled. What do you think - revert? HornetMike 12:01, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
But as it's using a template and is easier on the eye, would it not be better to keep this format? It's perhaps unsuitable for the lengthy earlier rounds but from a certain round onwards it adds more to the article, imo. Fedgin | Talk 13:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I think changing from one format to another this far down the competition makes the page look very disjointed. I'd be in favour of changing the 6th round matches to look like rounds 1-5. - fchd 13:40, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I concur with Richard, it looks very strange and jarring for the format to change two-thirds of the way down the page. I also find it harder to read..... ChrisTheDude 13:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I disagree, the reason it is like this is because, there are less matches, otherwise the whole article would have been made like this Chaza93 19:55, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

The semis[edit]

Venues have already been added, but the BBC article on the draw says they have not been decided....... ChrisTheDude 13:49, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm guessing they're guessing. It's normally Villa Park and Old Trafford, and United can't play at Old Trafford so... HornetMike 14:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Although those venues will probably be correct, they're not confirmed, so shouldn't be there.  Sʟυмgυм • т  c  22:48, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Also the dates aren't confrimed as yet. The Blackburn v Chelsea or Tottenham game was listed as being 14 April but if Spurs win the replay they will be in the Uefa Cup quarter finals and playing the 2nd leg on 12 April so their semi will be on the 15th rather than the 14th so it can't be confirmed as yet.Statto74 09:06, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Watford vs Manchester, 14th April.[edit]

If today's match doesn't finish on time and Doctor Who is delayed, both teams will have lost. I hope the chart will reflect this fact in this circumstance. Thanks. --Billpg 17:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Erm, what on earth were you talking about? ChrisTheDude 21:19, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
    • If the game had over-run, Doctor Who would have been postponed. (It didn't happen, so no worries.) --Billpg 21:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

For the record, (I doubt anyone else cares) when I started this section, I titled it Watford vs Manchester, 14th April. I only point this out as the modification was not signed and the new title looks like it was my original choice of words. According to the history, this change was made by User:Chivista. Thank you. --Billpg 23:41, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:FACUP.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:FACUP.jpg 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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 07:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)