Talk:Melbourne City FC (A-League Women)

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 7, 2016	Templates for discussion	Merged

Australia: Soccer Low‑importance

	Australia portal Melbourne City FC (A-League Women) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Australian soccer task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Football: Australia / Women's football Mid‑importance

	Association football portal 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.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Australian soccer task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Women's association football portal This article is supported by the women's football task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Women's sport: WOSO Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's sport (and women in sports), a WikiProject which aims to improve coverage of women in sports on Wikipedia. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Women's sportWikipedia:WikiProject Women's sportTemplate:WikiProject Women's sportWomen's sport articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Women's association football portal This article is supported by the Women's football / soccer task force.

It is requested that a logo be included in this article to improve its quality.
For more information, refer to discussion on this page and/or the listing at Wikipedia:Requested images. The Free Image Search Tool may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Non-free use of File:Melbourne City FC.svg[edit]

A separate, specific non-free usage rationale is required for the use of this file in this article per WP:NFCC#10c, otherwise the image can be removed per WP:NFCCE. All that really needs to be done is to add an appropriate non-free a rationale which complies with all 10 of the non-free use criteria specified in WP:NFCCP to the file's summary. This can be easily done and I'm happy to do so, but I'm not sure if this logo satisfies No. 17 of WP:NFC#UUI. Can anyone clarify whether this is the official logo of the Melbourne City FC W-League team and provide a link to a website which shows this? If it is not the official logo, it cannot be used in this article and a replacement will have to be found and used instead. Thanks in advance. - Marchjuly (talk) 00:41, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marchjuly , feel free to delete the image. I think the original logo without the W-League banner is better actually. That's what the players wear on their shirts. Omegodriver (talk) 09:58, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response Omegodriver, but I'm not which image you are referring to. The one currently being used in the infobox is the one the team uses for identification purposes on their official Twitter account so it seems to be OK. It was added by Jono52795 a few days ago. The one used before that (the one I was referring to in my original post) probably should not be used here because of No. 17 of WP:NFC#UUI. - Marchjuly (talk) 11:31, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Brisbane Roar FC W-League which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. Hack (talk) 02:53, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notable former players[edit]

I would like to start a discussion about the "notable former players" section. Currently, it lists three criteria for a former player to be included:

those who have played 50 or more first-class matches for the club;
those who have at least one senior international cap; and
those who have made significant contributions to the club's history.

Criterion 1 seems arbitrary without further justification (why 50?), and criterion 3 is vague (what counts as "significant contributions" and who gets to decide?). Mightytotems (talk) 13:24, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't agree there should be a criteria; I trust fellow Wiki editors to thoughtfully consider what notable constitutes, if people disagree then talking about it here should resolve it. This calls for calm and cool thoughts. Not every former City player should be listed, in my view it should be those who made notable contributions to the club beyond just playing an average amount of games. Global-Cityzen (talk) 11:39, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree there should be criteria. Regarding criterion 1, it is an arbitrary number, but I think we do need it. A certain amount of games shows notability and in W-League there are less games than A-League. I think most average leagues/clubs in men's football have an 100-game club usually. Criterion 3 includes I think people with something beyond games. Like, for example, Tim Cahill contributed to clubs and country a lot more than just his playing, but was a leader off-pitch and an ambassador etc. It should be stuff that is well referenced in media IMO. Also, while we're discussing this, I'd say it's a good idea to include in the list current players as well - no need to wait until they leave the club to add them. --SuperJew (talk) 17:35, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Want to clarify: I didn't come up with the current criteria; I merely tried to follow them as best as I could while editing, but it's getting difficult to keep track, hence me starting this discussion. Mightytotems (talk) 11:18, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]