Jump to content

Talk:Leeds United F.C.

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Bryn231 (talk | contribs) at 22:35, 31 July 2010 (→Edit request from Bryn231, 31 July 2010: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Club Suffix

Are they correctly Leeds United F.C. or (as it says on the outside of Elland Road) Leeds United A.F.C.?--L.E./12.144.5.2/le@put.com

UEFA say AFC as well, and it gets a fair proportion of Google hits. sjorford 10:15, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I do trust UEFA, but I think it's worth noting that the official site displays the club crest inscribed LUFC. However, there is an alternative Leeds United AFC crest which I have found here
SimonMayer 10:50, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
"Leeds United FC" the "A" was taken out when Gerald Krasner took over. Dee4leeds 12:36, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a reference?--Vindicta 22:20, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The A in AFC was NOT removed when Krasner's lot took over, It came away from the badge when it changed to the shield back in 1998 (Ridsdale's Term) as they wanted it to use the 70's LUFC style in a new badge. The club has always and will always be an Association Football Club whether they choose to put it in the badge or not. As you can see here, between 1979 and 2000 the badge had AFC on (Krasner took over in 2003/4) and between 1960 and 1971 there was no wording whatsoever on the badge. The Original badge states "Leeds United A.F.C." below the original club crest. UEFA and the stadium are correct, Leeds ARE an AFC whether they choose to use the A in their badge is surely up to them. --Chappy84 22:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well I was going to comment on this, but I like to do a bit of research before diving in with both feet, and I am suprised to find that yes they are AFC as this page on the Football Association's site confirms. Jooler 17:45, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I little revival then: Is it "AFC" (as on the old club crest) or "A.F.C." (as used in the article name)? --Hestemand 21:05, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
AFC or A.F.C. is simply a case of correct abbreviation, technically it should be A.F.C. but the norm nowadays seems be not to use the full stops in abbreviations, it should still however contain the full stops. Chappy TC 17:38, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


"Leeds United AFC" is still in Liquidation according to the Companies House website. The current team is "Leeds United FC". Legally that means that "Leeds United FC" is not liable for the debts of "Leeds United AFC".

The O'Leary Period - "Living the Dream"

There seems to be a lot of non-NPOV in here which needs eliminating. Bornintheguz 18:25, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC) i think its okay


It was a turbulent period with the court case and the murders. I believe it's relative to this day and era, which should be fine.--Vindicta 00:39, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Why is the subtitle now "The O'Leary Period: Nearly Men"? Should it not be "Living the Dream"? Discussions? --Vindicta 23:12, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

O'Leary Living the Dream

The chronology is out of order and needs editing. Reference is made to the UEFA semi-final campaign, then the Champions League campaign, then in a later paragraph returns to the UEFA semi-final campaign.


Andrew Johnson (Scottish footballer)

To my knowledge there is no player at Leeds by the name. And even on the off chance there is a new youth academy member of that name the info on that page: "He dropped his surname in favour of 'Johnson' when he learned of his father's evil ways of murdering innocent Iraqi civilians", "He is nicknamed "The Mole" because he has a large growth on the side of his face" is probably wrong :)

Mark Judge

Someone's added Mark Judge as a notable Leeds player. I've never heard of him, and can't find a mention on google. Can someone confirm if this is real or not, and revert if not? Thanks

Never heard of him, i think delete him


Simply, this article is not a link directory or a place to advertise fansites and forums - see WP:NOT, When to link externally and WP:EL.

This is particularly pertinent here, as the content of forums and fansites is almost by definition unencyclopaedic - it is unsourced, unvetted, uncited and by nature non-neutral.

Instead, I have linked to the dmoz.org page on Leeds United - this is an open directory of weblinks which contains most of the sites previously listed. This way the sites are still only two clicks away, but we are not claiming to use the sites as sources, nor are we providing free advertising.

Aquilina 18:18, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


For inclusion

If this article heads towards FA status one day, they might want to include this - http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/leeds_united/5332286.stm source as to players being paid after leaving the club. HornetMike 20:03, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This page is infact included as a note in the article in reference to the diminishing debt of the club. Chappy84 11:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jon Newsome

Hi - a while ago I created an article for Jon Newsome. Do any LUFC Wikipedians have any info about his early career at Leeds that they could add to it? If so, feel free.....thanks! User:Demonicanglian 19:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS to move page, per discussion below. I also went ahead and moved the Sunderland and Workington articles to "AFC" titles. -GTBacchus(talk) 01:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

Leeds United AFC → Leeds United A.F.C. – I have no opinion on this move, but I found it at WP:RM without any discussion indicating what to do, so I've relisted it, and I'm setting up this discussion to obtain some consensus. -GTBacchus(talk) 02:59, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

Discussion

Add any additional comments

I would like to note that this article was moved from the "A.F.C." title in August, but it was a copy/paste move. I've gone ahead and merged the histories, keeping the entire GFDL history at this location. If it's decided that this page needs to move again, please do so with administrative assistance, so we can avoid the problems associated with copy/paste moves. Cheers. -GTBacchus(talk) 02:59, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid if you look in to the depths of the archives on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football the subject of whether it should be A.F.C. / F.C. or AFC/FC for all clubs was addressed and a consensus was to use AFC / FC . See Here for its most recent mention. --Chappy84 09:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Look at Sunderland A.F.C. and Workington A.F.C. and others. Dots are used. Everton 10:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I know dots are used, the wikiproject are talking about creating a bot to move all of the pages across to the versions without dots. The version without dots is the general consensus that the wikiproject came to, they will all eventually be moved I presume, they just haven't yet, as I said, look through the archives of the wikiproject talk. --Chappy84 11:26, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

A note on British English

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. --Siva1979Talk to me 03:12, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tidy up/revision

No disrespect to anyone, but there are several grammatical errors+typos on the page. In addition, certain areas e.g. the Clough-Armfield-Adamson-Clarke eras need expanding in the History.

I've tried adding/revising, but my changes are being rolled back. Is there a forum where you have to agree/approve changes? Coopuk 17:21, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rivalries

Describing Sheffield Wednesday and United and Barnsley as West Riding of Yorkshire Derbies is entirely wrong, they are South Yorkshire clubs. NQuin 09:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the history of Yorkshire, before the parliament act in 1974 that created Humberside and South Yorkshire, Yorkshire had three ridings, these being North, East and West. This is the reason they are traditional West Riding of Yorkshire rivalries. Chappy84 20:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The original article also mentions that 'some may argue liverpool is now considered the main rival of manchester united' (paraphrased). I would like to point out the City of Manchester Football Club that is more prominently considered the main rival of manchester united and pretty much always has been. There is also a distinction between hated rivalries (such as ManU Liverpool) and significant rivalries (like ManU Chelsea), the difference being that a liverpool fan instinctively hates a Man U fan and all their players and vice versa whereas in the significant rivalry there is respect for the opposition.--Comparingmeerkats (talk) 09:13, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last rollback

With regards to the last roll-back; I agree that the page should be a brief summary. However, I think you will find that my edited version is shorter and more concise that what you have rolled back to! Can you please justify the rollback? Coopuk 16:40, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See here, your version is on the left the reverted version on the right. Yours clearly just from a scan, without actually reading, has more info. As I have said before this should be a brief summary and extra info added should be added to Leeds United A.F.C. History. Plus as I said we were knocked out of the Champions league by Valencia who LOST the final to Bayern Munich on penalties, the version before revert had been changed to say we were knocked out by the eventual winners Valencia, which is obviously untrue, see here. Chappy84 22:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree entirely with your correction on Bayern Munich; however, the purpose of any summary is to avoid any specific references to players or scorelines, or else we should start putting references to all significant players and finals in the summary. My changes have done that, but you have reverted them entirely. In addition, the previous version was subjctive ("poisonous" - "hated rivals" - "hated Ridsdale") which again was corrected. Finally, the section I did expand was done so to explain the significance of why Leeds had to qualify for the Champions League, something which is not implict in the original article - which assumes that the reader knows the background.

May I point out that I am making the changes here because this is the first page that comes up when anyone searches for "Wikipedia" and "Leeds United". Because of this, it needs to be as generic as possible - hence my concern at you reverting all of the player and score references, as well as the subjective statements.

By all means make corrections where I have made mistakes, but to roll back changes whole scale is not in the spirit of Wikipedia.

Coopuk 22:28, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ground Ownership

The most recent documents available from the UK Land Registry show Elland Road as having passed into the hands of a British Virgin Islands company Teak Trading Limited. How do we advance discussion of this significant change in ownership?Barbaraville 17:13, 20 December 2006 (UTC) Barbara Ville[reply]

Get proof, i.e. an internet link. Chappy84 22:49, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

crest images

The background to the crest images needs to be changed so it's the same colour as the template it's on.

I'd also like to request someone upload an image of there old logo with the white rose Buc 17:05, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uh Ah Cantona

No mention in the main body of the article about 'Le Eric' (and his problems with the racist fan) and later sale to Man. U? Seems like a big ommision to me.Don Rev up the motor and take me somewhere warm 01:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

good example to follow.

Check out the main page for Sheffield Wednesday F.C.. I think we need to moldel this article on it.Buc 21:48, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

deletion

There is absolutely no need to mention the club is well supported by the emo community. Even if the club is well supported by all the jimmy hendrix fans in the world, it would still not make a difference for this page.--Vindicta 21:25, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff added at the bottom about hooliganism

Someone has added an unsourced and badly spelled hatchet job on LUFC supporters at the bottom of the article. Unless someone can come up with some good reasons to keep it I will delete it later today.--Spanker LUFC 15:13, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page protected

The page has been protected until 4 March, 2007 due to the persistent vandalism from multiple anonymous IP addresses over the last few days. EliminatorJR 22:10, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just removed "josh is ace" from start of history section.....blatant vandalism

To those who are watching this page, keep up the good work. Having Leeds essentially go down is bad enough, but to see the wiki page being vandalized by a bunch of losers with nothing better to do makes today very frustrating. Thank you!Wolfp10

"...Jonathan Woodgate whom Ridsdale had promised Venables would not be sold."

I am not native english speaker, but dont you think that this phrase: "...Jonathan Woodgate whom Ridsdale had promised Venables would not be sold." mean that Ridsdale told Woodgate that Venables would not be sold?

nope, it means ridsdale promised venables woodgate would not be sold. Chappy84 15:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


It should be: "...Jonathan Woodgate whom Ridsdale promised Venables would not be sold." 82.10.113.81 22:07, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the word had isn't what confused them. Chappy TC 11:25, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Usage of Leet?

"This season (2006/2007) Leeds fortune has turned for the worst and are likely to go into the last game against Derby County needing points, sadly they will get pwned at Pride Park and Leeds will lose another 10000 fans and have trips to Walsall and Yeovil next season." How is the usage of Leet encyclopaedic? 81.76.111.153 23:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's not. First off, you don't spell PWND with an 'e', and second, it should say something about Leeds getting their sorry asses handed to them. Hahaha. Lugnuts 19:10, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay then, it might not be Leet, but the spelling was incorrect, and it was unencyclopaedic.81.79.111.181 12:18, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They are a small club who think they are big and can't beat the mighty terriers!!

relegation/ administration

It's being reported that Leeds are going into administration and are going to be relegated. 134.226.1.229 15:46, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When were they relegated? The article says may 5th, but the news that they would get deducted ten points were out on the 4th. Dr bab 11:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They were relegated as soon as the league decided the 10 points would be deducted this season after the club entered administration (both of which happened on the 4th). Chappy84 14:07, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Right Honourable The Earl of Harewood

According to the section on Personnel, the club president is "The Right Honourable The Earl of Harewood KBE LLD." But Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies)#Honorific prefixes states: "Styles and honorifics which are derived from noble title, including The Most Noble, The Most Honourable, The Right Honourable, and The Honourable, should not be included in the text inline but may be legitimately discussed in the article proper." The most likely alternative for the club president's name would be to call him George Lascelles, 7th Earl of Harewood, which is the title of his article anyway. Any thoughts? AecisBrievenbus 23:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction

Chappy84: why have you reverted my introduction to this article again? I understand the points you made after my first edit, but cannot see the point of the second reversion? Why is the club's relegation more important than its three titles? I had *both points in my version and propose to restore it unless you or others can give me a good reason why one is more impt than the other? Thanks, bigpad 11:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As my edit summary said, you're adding information already available in the article and intro and legthening a section which doesn't need to be lengthened. Chappy • T • C • 11:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but you're not answering my point about the into. being balanced. Leeds' current plight is only part of their story bigpad 11:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am, if you check every club that's just been relegated it states the division they've just been relegated from and where they will be playing next season. See Sheffield United F.C.. The intro states what leeds are most famous for (Revie period) and when they last won the title, hence contains all required by a short intro. Chappy • T • C • 11:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is where it all gets confusing - not actually in any league at the moment...

The Football League said yesterday it has received further details from the administrator, KPMG, about the sale of Leeds United to a new company, Leeds United 2007 Ltd, owned by the Cayman Islands-registered Forward Sports Fund and chaired by Ken Bates.

The League has so far refused to sign over its "golden share" of membership to this new company, which was not bought via a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) agreement of creditors. In all, 41 other Football League clubs have collapsed into insolvency since the Premier League was formed in 1992, and in every previous case, the League has insisted on a CVA being agreed as a condition of transferring its golden share to the new owners.

Ken Bates is now asking the League to treat his company as an exception. Leeds United is at an impasse, with KPMG having sold the assets to the new company,'' but the League insisting that the players' registrations are still held by the old company until the golden share is transferred to a new owner.

from http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/sport/2007/07/27/leeds_united_the_unanswered_qu.html

So as far as I can work out - the new company owns the name and all the physical assets of the club *but* for the purposes of the FA currently is not permitted to play in the league or possess the registeration of any players until they possess this "golden share". not sure how we would put that in the article --Fredrick day 14:48, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's in one sentence on both this and the history page stating that the club won't be allowed to start their league one campaign. All that needs to be added is an extra bit "as the league require the club to have gone through a CVA." with the guardian link you've provided as a reference. All this information won't be highly relevant unless the club ceases to exist so restricting it to one sentence to reduce recentism is probably the best policy. Chappy TC 21:08, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've done this now. Chappy TC 21:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Second Shirt Sponsor

Empire direct aren't our second shirt sponsor anymore, see here and here. Chappy God's Own Country TC 18:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's now OHS, see here. Chappy God's Own Country TC 10:41, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit list of leeds united a.f.c players page

Should this page not be like Talk:List of Liverpool F.C. players and similar pages. The page will be a list of notable Leeds United players. Those players will either made over 100 appearances, be included in the 100 greatest players or have made a major contribution to the club in otherways.y8c 21:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's not just a list that title isn't descriptive of the article, it contains more than just a list of players, hence the title is descriptive of its contents. I wouldn't say removing the Club Captains information, Player of the year information, or greatest ever team was removing un-notable information, I feel this information is notable. However I am open to removing the full list at the bottom and replacing it with a list of purely notable players. ChappyTC 20:14, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

el:Λιντς Γιουνάιτεντ

Add the Greek article el:Λιντς Γιουνάιτεντ. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.73.90.220 (talk) 19:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you do it yourself? It's not that hard...--andreasegde (talk) 20:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Derrr..!! They can't do it because the article is blocked to anonymous editors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.166.69.94 (talk) 09:01, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the wilderness

Is it possible to go up? It's looking like a hopeless case...--andreasegde (talk) 20:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History of Leeds United

Leeds played Coventry City in the 1987 FA Cup Semi Final, and not Watford (I should know, I was there). Cheers 1919Moose (talk) 09:09, 19 March 2008 (UTC)Moose1919[reply]

Minutes silence for Christopher Loftus and Kevin Speight.

I believe (from an email) that this is no longer observed at the request of the families. I do not know when it ended.

Yorkshireexile (talk) 17:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Famous fans

No mention of celebrities that support Leeds United.

These links give the names of our famous fans

http://www.leedsutd-mad.co.uk/news/loadnews.asp?cid=TMNW&id=113145

http://www.mehstg.com/leeds.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhinostillidie (talk • contribs) 23:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Grella's squad number

Mike Grella was give No. 13 as noted on the squad list found here. http://www.leedsunited.com/page/PlayerProfileIndex —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eminabe53 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Elland road capacity

Please note the new capacity - 39,460 - after recent changes at Elland Road - http://www.leedsunited.com/page/Records/0,,10273,00.html. I have updated most pages that had the old number on, but someone went and changed it back to the old number recently (living in the past!). The reference for the previous capcity is a web archive page of the old Leeds Utd website - a useless reference when put in comparison with the current official club website! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.25.181.123 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was changed back because the reference that was used for the capacity indicated the old figure. If you wish to change the figure then you also need to change the reference for that figure. Keith D (talk) 22:29, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless, the figure quoted in the main Leeds article is wrong. Since the page is locked, someone with access needs to update it using the aforementioned reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.5.43.39 (talk • contribs) 22:33, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed in line with the reference and added the reference. The existing reference was to an archive version of a page and was not accessible in any case. Keith D (talk) 23:26, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stadium and Supporters section, 3rd paragraph: "The stadium is currently the 10th largest football stadium in England" is unsourced and also glaringly contradicts: "The stadium is the 12th largest football stadium in England" in 5th paragraph. I guess one of these ought to go... :) LyUK (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:53, 12 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]

F.C. or A.F.C.

I've always been a bit confused with some wiki football club articles because some have F.C. and some have A.F.C.. I'm not confused about what they stand for, but that it isn't always too clear which should be used for a particular team. I just noticed this one, for example, has A.F.C. when I'm sure I've always been familiarised with just the F.C. for Leeds. The club badge has LUFC, not LUAFC, so should the "association" be put infront of it? And if it is, shouldn't all teams' articles say A.F.C.? Just a bit of clarification needed really, I feel.
Ը२ձւե๓ձռ17 10:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LUFC is now just printed on the crest, however I believe the official name is still A.F.C. I would say this should remain the page title, with the obvious redirects from similar titles. Mtaylor848 (talk) 21:35, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New Home Kit

Just to confirm incase anyone has any issues, it states here at the official club website that we will be wearing the new home kit from tomorrow onwards (Northampton Town match at Elland Road), therefore I added the new kit.

I have tried to best to get the kit on the wikipedia page as close to the actual new kit design as I can; but if anyone can get any closer, feel free to edit away and improve it! Many thanks.
t1v37rtalk 11:01, 1 May 2009 (BST)

Manager Tables

It's amusing as article has a disproportionate number of honors tables for minor awards like Football League 100 Legends or Goal of the Year.

But there isn't a table for club managers, their years in charge and their win/lose %s.

Which, if this article is meant to be an encyclopedia entry, is what would be more appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.166.69.94 (talk) 09:08, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is; it's on a separate page: List of Leeds United A.F.C. managers Kaboooz LUFC TC 16:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

controversially

"However, he controversially quit as manager on 28 January to take up a position in Kevin Keegan's new set-up at Newcastle United.[29]"

Might I suggest the wording be changed to "he surprisingly quit as manager", or that an alternative reference is used. I'm not suggesting that either club was happy about it, but at no point in that reference does the word "controversial", or any phrase to that effect, appear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.13.161.114 (talk) 17:43, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Former crest

(For the record just writing after arriving home to the pub seeing Leeds draw (and lose on aggregate to Millwall)) The chinese page has a better former crest then the one we've borrowed from Leeds City Council. Not being chinese (and the chinese page being incredibly slow) I can not deduce the licencing. What is the feasabilty of using this crest on the English page, alternatively would it be OK to remove the 'Leeds City Council' text from the crest. The Leeds City crest may be better but I'm not sure of its accuracy in regards to Leeds United. Any ideas? Mtaylor848 (talk) 21:33, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Paris '75

Surely there should be some mention of the controversial circumstances? At the moment, it just says they were defeated - why is the goal that was disallowed for no apparent reason not mentioned, as well as the penalty appeals?

I believe this should really be included - it is widely accepted that Leeds were the true champions that year - it led to the We are Champions, Champions Of Europe chant, and it also added to the belief that UEFA have an anti English teams bias.

Thoughts?

Cheeseklaxons (talk) 11:55, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Peacocks

I would not say this name was at all obsolete. If no one objects in one of two days, I'll change it. Mtaylor848 (talk) 18:59, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

joe - promotion, and davide somma

if we keep hold of beckford, snodgrass, becchio and our central midfield players then we will go up. ive got a season ticket, and i tink weve got the quality to compete in the championship. can someone please add davide somma to the squad list, he signed a 1 year deal. he is the ex trailist south african forward/winger. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.173.81.193 (talk) 14:11, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Leigh Bromby

Leigh Bromby has signed for Leeds United, can somebody please add him to the squad? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.209.204.141 (talk) 01:56, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request to add url

Hi, I would like to request the following change to the "external links" section:

Could we add:

A Leeds United Bibliography: A definitive list of all the books published on Leeds United Football Club. Featuring a complete listing of every book written about Leeds United, and every book by and/or about the personalities related to the club. The url is: http://www.lufctalk.com/resources/leeds-united-books/

Currently listing almost 260 books on the club. I wrote most of the content.

Please email me of you would like more information...

Sam Gibbard sgibbard@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deebo-leeds (talk • contribs) 10:11, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request to add URL

Hi I am an administrator on www.lufctalk.com - would it be possible to add our forum to the links please.

As Sam Gibbard has pointed out we have a massive database of Leeds United books, websites and other features soon to be added.

Regards Graham Ambler - Sheepy74 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheepy74 (talk • contribs) 22:35, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

galatasaray

Leeds united do not have a "rivalry with Turkish club Galatasaray". Galatasaray are utterly detested by the fans of L.U.A.F.C. due to the murders of C.Loftus and K.Speight and the actions of both the club Galatasaray who e.g. refused to have a minutes silence before the match (which was played the night after the murders) or wear black armbands tp show respect for the victims and later even had the cheek to demand the return leg being played at a neutral venue after L.U.A.F.C. didn´t allow Turkish fans to watch said match at Elland Road (following the advice of West Yorkshire Police) and then even accused the club of racism, as well as Galatasary´s "support" who, on the day of the first leg (again: the night after the murders) taunted Leeds fans and the team with throat slitting gestures, songs mocking the death of the two murdered fans, pelted Leeds players, fans and officials with missiles of all kinds etc. pp.. For all this there´s hate and contempt but that doesn´t make "a rivalry". Integral part of a rivalry is to have some sort of respect for the opposition (even if only grudgingly) like Leeds fans have for e.g. Manchester United. You have to earn your right to become a rival. There is nothing like that for Galatasaray and their "fans" who are considered animals and not worth being mentioned in the same breath as the Whites, and most certainly not as "rivals". Rant over. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Berlinwhite (talk • contribs) 12:15, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rivalrys

Hey, you mention chelsea as a rival twice in the same paragraph and state the reason twice also. I went to edit the page but saw it was locked. could a mod or admin or whoever it is fix it plz —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.168.210.123 (talk • contribs) 04:16, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note, I have re-jigged the text to remove the duplication. Keith D (talk) 12:40, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
&Please fix the space there... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.194.120.60 (talk) 17:58, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed - it was a change yesterday that caused he problem. Keith D (talk) 22:12, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another part on "Rivalries"

One paragraph near to the end finishes with " but however are the most hated club in English football as of the start of the 2008–09 season", a rather vindictive statement that otherwise does have a source - from a tabloid, no less. I sincerely hope that this extension hasn't actually pertained in the article since 2008. --86.178.253.210 (talk) 01:06, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Andreas Moutta

Andreas moutta is a 20 year old man, some have said he is harder than chuck norris.

He was born on the 14th of febuary 1990, he is of greek heritage with an English mother calld Deborah, his height has been recorded at 6 foot and his weight is 85Kg's.

All in all it has been said he is a legend.

Edit request from Zulewz00, 28 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} Hey users, I'm requesting that Jermaine Beckford be removed from the Leeds United wikipedia page.

There are many media sources saying Jermaine has completed a move to Everton on a 4 year contract and i'm sure they got this from Everton Official sources who will add the news to their homepage later today.

Thank you.

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Transfer-news-Everton-complete-deal-for-Leeds-strike-star-Jermaine-Beckford-article440521.html

Zulewz00 (talk) 01:47, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Spitfire19 (Talk) 02:23, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from 212.50.177.101, 11 June 2010

{{editsemiprotected}}

Rabbit Revolution

Spanish dictator Franco often had his troops round up hundreds of rabbits. The reason for this, was to play rabbit football. This consisted of tying several animals legs together to create a furry ball. This was ideal for the troops to have a leisurely kick-about, in between slaughtering innocent Spaniards. The practice was outlawed after his death and the re-introduction of the monarch. The Monarchy stated their preference for a cheeky game of squirrel hockey.

S.Hook (2010).

212.50.177.101 (talk) 13:39, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. SpigotMap 13:46, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please help expand West Yorkshire Derby?

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]

Edit request from Bryn231, 31 July 2010

|- class="vcard agent" | style="text-align: center" | 4 | style="text-align: center" | DF | style="padding-right:15px;" | Ireland EIR | style="padding-right:15px;" | Alex Bruce

Bryn231 (talk) 22:35, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Leeds_United_F.C.&oldid=376496161"