Talk:Bears FC

A clarifying note about past players

Per WP:BLP and WP:NLIST (especially the latter, please take a look), all living people on lists like this require either their own wikipage or a valid reference. That reference must verify 1) that the person actually played for Bears FC, and 2) that the person is important enough to be discussed in prose in the text. That is, we can't just list all past players--only those who had a significant, important role in Bears FC history, and only if we can verify that with a reliable source. Qwyrxian (talk) 15:04, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the help. What would you consider a valid reference other than a Wikipedia article? I will be trying to make pages for notable past players that had a significance in the clubs history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.78.218.90 (talk) 21:00, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

A valid reference could be any of a variety of things. The most obvious would be a newspaper article that reported on the particular player, or a game in which they played, that had their name. That would at least cover point 1. Point 2 is a matter of editorial consensus. A newspaper article could again work (say, it did an in depth analysis of someone who was particularly important for the team's success); alternatives would be official team histories (things published by the club itself, not a fan organization), or more general books on FC history. Note that the source does not have to be available online; it does, however, have to generally meet the reliable source guidelines. If you're unsure, the best thing is to discuss it here first, then all interested editors can comment on it. Qwyrxian (talk) 21:18, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I created a page for a player who has contributed to the club. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Bennett_Coughlin

Would this meet the criteria?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bcoughlin (talk • contribs)

I'm not actually sure if that article can be created. The problem is, I'm not sure if Bennett Coughlin is himself notable enough for a stand-alone article. Any player who has played at least a full game in a fully professional league is automatically presumed notable, but I am guessing that this league isn't actually "fully professional". However, I've asked for guidance on this issue; I'll let you know more once I receive it. Absent that, you'll need to provide reliable sources that discuss Coughlin in detail; otherwise, that article can't actually be created.

Ugh, when I went to add your signature, I noticed a problem: I'm concerned that you either are or are closely related to the subject of that article, given that your username is very close to his real name. You can technically work on this page and Coughlin's page if you are closely linked, but please read WP:COI, which provides some guidelines for how to edit when you have a conflict of interest. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:38, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the help. So you are saying there has to be a source from another website in order for it to work? Also my username will make it so the page will be deleted? Should I just create the page under a different username? 74.78.218.90 (talk) 01:17, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

It's not so much having "a source from another website", it's more about having enough sources to demonstrate that the person is notable. Usually, this is done by showing that the person has been the subject of detailed coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources. As for a different username...it doesn't really make much difference at this point. You just need to be extra careful when editing anything you may have a conflict of interest in; most people find it nearly impossible to remain neutral on subjects that they are personally involved with, which can make editing per policy difficult. If the subject is notable, an article should be made about him, so long as it's verified and neutral. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:23, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok I understand, but the article will probably be deleted dispite the username? Jdst10 (talk) 01:38, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

... and another about style

There is a manual of style for Wikipedia. Within it are guidelines for how to treat numbers in articles. Numbers less than ten should usually be spelled out, not written as digits. Although, hopefully obviously, not if you are noting a scoreline.

There are also policies and guidelines in place for things such as peacock terms and weasel words. These may also be worth reading before adding content to this article.

Furthermore, Wikipedia is is not quite a few things, including a news website. Listing the latest match result & details, then changing it after the next match etc, is bad form. - Sitush (talk) 15:15, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

So would having a list of the seasons games be proper? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.78.218.90 (talk) 21:02, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

No. Articles on most sports teams do not have a list of the most recent season's fixtures or results. If there were more notable players on the squad, the current roster might be appropriate to include; other articles on top-grade football do include rosters, but the ones I've seen have been populated more by notable players than non-notable. —C.Fred (talk) 21:08, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

So then a page would need to be created for each individual player? -Bcoughlin10

I dont understand you what kind conflict of interest?

I dont understand you what kind conflict of interest? Why our view is not neutral?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bears1996 (talk • contribs) 06:59, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

When an editor has a connection to a subject, that editor is said to have a conflict of interest. The editor may be able to write text and maintain neutral point of view, but the maintenance template alerts other editors to the situation and invites them to review. If some independent editors look at the article and feel it's okay, then the tag may be removed. —C.Fred (talk) 14:22, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bears FC. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140815043436/http://bearssoccerclub.com/leadership.html to http://www.bearssoccerclub.com/leadership.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 10:20, 29 October 2016 (UTC)