Jump to content

Talk:Bradford City A.F.C.

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Cewbot (talk | contribs) at 02:26, 12 February 2024 (Maintain {{WPBS}}: 4 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "C" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 4 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject England}}, {{WikiProject Football}}, {{WikiProject Yorkshire}}, {{WikiProject Bradford}}.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Midwinter, 01:35, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Actually, it was the ill-fated deal with itv's digital sports package that did most of the damage. I didn't bother updating, though, because I can't remember its name. I did, however, update the nickname - they are in fact called the bantams, not the chickens.

Cheers.

--Midwinter

Players Who Have Recently Left The Club

[edit]

This sub-heading was created for pre-season for people to keep up with comings and goings.

Do people think it should remain throughout the season, or be removed at the start of the season? The problem with keeping it is how recent is recent in terms of staying on the list? The problem with removing it is that people may want to know what happened to certain players.

--  Adam J Hepton   Talk  08:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After having had no responses for over two months, unless I get any objection in the next seven days, it is my intention to remove this section.

--  Adam J Hepton   Talk  10:22, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A note on British English

[edit]

British English should be used for articles on Britain related topics. Likewise, American English should be used on articles pertaining to American topics. For a clearer example, please visit this sub-section on the differences between their usage. However, is" works better than "are" with the term club as it is a singular and not a plural noun. (Compare with the word team which is a plural noun) --Siva1979Talk to me 17:30, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I've slipped in a couple of additions to the External Links section. I've added the Claret and Banter discussion forum, simply because it has become the forum of choice for discerning City fans. Also the BK Bantams Asia for the information of ex-pat City fans.

Incidentally, the boy from Brazil site will soon be closing from what I've heard, so maybe this will need deleting at some point.

Cheers.

Bkpip 04:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bradford City Online Forums

[edit]

- I have removed this entire section, it is not appropriate content for an encyclopaedia. See WP:NOT#SOAPBOX, WP:NOT#OR and WP:POINT for reasons why it didn't belong here. Simon KHFC 22:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I think the forums have external links anyway GiantSnowman 09:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Colours

[edit]

Maybe memory is failing me but I think black trim was added to the colours following the fire disaster as a mark of respect. Let me know if I'm right and I'll amend the section (Be Dave 22:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Shouldn't the honours they won as a rugby league team be included in the honours section?Villafancd (talk) 18:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's never been any suggestion that Bradford City wear the civic colours of Bradford, they've always worn the colours of the West Yorkshire Regiment.I'm removing the whole section as it has no relevance in regards to Bradford City Football Club. If this section needs to be added anywhere, then it should be either added on the Bradford Bulls page or possibly the page on Bradford Park Avenue.BradfordPal1 (talk) 22:58, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please help expand West Yorkshire Derby?

[edit]

I am calling upon all users with knowledge on the West Yorkshire Derby(s) so that the article can be expanded. Any help or co-operation would be much appreciated. Regards IJA (talk) 14:51, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More on Colours

[edit]

As a fan of Motherwell (who also wear claret and amber as mentioned in the article), I should let you know that the racing colours of Lord Hamilton were never claret and amber. That's one of those urban legends that has come about and is almost universally accepted. But in fact the most likely theory is that Motherwell started using the colours because Bradford had won the FA Cup in 1911 and they were unique and therefore recognisable colours. This used to happen a lot, particularly in the UK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IMarc89 (talk • contribs) 23:12, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, i've read the history of Motherwell regarding their strip on their web page, Bradford City fc are mentioned as the reason for Motherewell choosing to change their colours to Claret and Amber. Motherwell fc using Lord Hamilton's racing colours is not correct. One other point, i tried to put in Bradford City's new strip design yesterday but failed, i also ruined the old strip. Thanks to 'whoever' for correcting my mistake.Bradford4life (talk) 23:21, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Honour ?

[edit]

There be no Honour in coming second - you are a LOSER - simples ! To show such nonsense under that heading only serves to convolute this article. Only WINNERS matter - get used to it, get over it, and, while you still have one - get a life ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.105.0.218 (talk) 09:52, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Second place honours as to why you are wrong. GiantSnowman 10:20, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not GOSPEL ! See other AFC articles - Liverpool / Manchester United... to see what counts as an Honour - coming second = LOSER = DIS Honour - simples ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.104.247.210 (talk) 13:15, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, Wikipedia isn't gospel. If you look at record books and club sites, you'll find that runners-up and finalist spots generally are included. However, this is Wikipedia. Please see the style guide for football club articles. We are advised to include "Achievements of the club including wins and second places. For clubs with a large number of major trophies, it may be appropriate to omit second places." The second sentence explains the difference between the treatment of clubs like Manchester United and clubs such as Bradford City with fewer honours. hope this helps, Struway2 (talk) 13:25, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, not really ! Where be the honour in being a loser ? So Wiki says this... So what ? As a fan of one would only be concerned with ACTUAL Silverware - any thing else be worthless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.115.200.33 (talk) 19:04, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Bradford City A.F.C.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. 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 10:06, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Bradford City A.F.C./Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

.
  1. Requires addition of inline references using one of the {{Cite}} templates
  2. Requires copy edit for WP:MOS
Keith D (talk) 10:54, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 10:54, 29 February 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 10:09, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Bradford City A.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, 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:02, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 31 external links on Bradford City A.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) 11:42, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Former Players

[edit]

Suggested Addition

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Kelly_(English_footballer)

Nedley101 (talk) 02:04, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nedley101: he is already listed at a subpage as he does not meet the inclusion criteria for the main page. GiantSnowman 10:46, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

[edit]

I think Manningham F.C. should be mergered with Bradford City A.F.C.. This is as the Manningham article is relatively small and all of it's information could easily be present on the Bradford City page without much tweaking as the Bradford City page currently explains well that it used to be a rugby league club. Mn1548 (talk) 13:48, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They are separately notable. GiantSnowman 14:39, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Updating Infobox Format

[edit]

Information Box updated to be consistent with the most recent approved version of the template. Adding additional information including the company that owns this football club, etc... Other fields can be filled out as information is obtained without editing the template on this page making it easier to add information without elaborate edits. --dashiellx (talk) 12:22, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The current form is well established, thanks. If you want to change it, please explain every changed proposed here. Also read WP:BRD and do not edit again. GiantSnowman 12:54, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have read WP:BRD. You seem to be reverting my edits simply because you don't like them or you don't understand the reason for it, which is referenced in WP:BRD-NOT and WP:BRDR which perhaps you should read. Nor did you start a conversation here, which is also part of the WP:BRD but went directly to my talk page. Then when I attempted to satisfy your request by adding additional information to my edit summary you went to my talk page again with an attitude. Your reverting of my edits has removed the ownership information that I added. I have no desire to start an edit war, but I have been making these changes in good faith to all EFL clubs and I simply do not understand why you are against standardization with the Football project's current approved template? --dashiellx (talk) 13:11, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The only difference see I can see between the established version and 'your' version is the inclusion of co-ordinates - which I have also now included. GiantSnowman 13:22, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"My Version" as you call it is a copy and paste from template, so it is not "My version" and is very different than the version on this page or any of the pages I have made edits. Also, I have pointed out, repeatedly, you deleted the ownership information I added. You are reverting my edits on multiple pages simply because you don't think it is necessary. --dashiellx (talk) 13:32, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted your mass changes to articles, yes, because you have not explained what or why you are doing. GiantSnowman 13:34, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
They are not mass changes. I only updated the information box and reviewed each edit individually. I do not believe you are reviewing my edits in good faith. --dashiellx (talk) 13:55, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You made four near identical changes to four similar articles - including one to a FA! - with inadequate explanation. GiantSnowman 15:02, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bradford_City_A.F.C.&oldid=1206408894"