This section is not suitable for an encyclopaedia article on a club. In order to avoid recentism if 2008's transfers are included, then all of a club's transfer activity through history would have to be included, which is clearly silly. If this information should be included anywhere then it should be in a separate article on a club's season - see Arsenal F.C. season 2008-09 for a relevant example. Dancarney (talk) 21:42, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
The "notable players" section is divided into three parts: "The Stars of Red Star", "The 1991 European Champions Generation" and "Other notable players". The notability of the players in the first two sections is undoubtful and repeating their names in the third section is plain redundancy. Also, if a Yugoslav player has played in Red Star while it was a Yugoslav club, he was a home player. Therefore, it's ridiculous to put flags of the countries that were established after a player has played for the club. I'll revert all such changes until someone provides useful counterarguments on these matters.--Vitriden (talk) 15:16, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
There should be record of season 1991-1992, because that year Red Star was between 4 clubs in European Champions League. Red Star was second in one of two groups, and only winners were at finals. That is success in rank of semifinal.
Can someone make .svg version of Red Star Belgrade logo? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SV 84 (talk • contribs) 02:43, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
I don't get the revert war over the logo. What is the official logo, can someone give a source, so that we can end this mess?--Vitriden (talk) 01:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Question: why don't we put the RS logo with blue side and red-white stripes? It's much more cool. This current one on the article page is old, used in the 1990's and before (Verbatimdat (talk) 16:47, 12 February 2010 (UTC))
Using Red Star Belgrade as a page for polideportivo
I think it would be great if we used Red Star Belgrade as a redirection to a page about Red Star Sport Society (Sportsko društvo Crvena zvezda), which would have all the basic information (history, list of clubs, management info and so on) and the list of articles about sport society member clubs (like what somebody did in Crvena zvezda, only more complex). This football club article should then be moved to FK Crvena zvezda (following the template used for KK Crvena zvezda, RK Crvena zvezda, KHK Crvena zvezda, and OK Crvena zvezda - the one which I'll start soon). I know that you've discussed similar proposals already, but this one is a bit different, since it's totally logical and sustainable. Olympiacos already works this way. So, what do you think about this? - OxymoronNBG (talk) 11:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
name should be changed
The name of this page should be changed. There are numerous "Red Star Belgrade" clubs that are part of the sports society. How will we differentiate between the red star soccer, basketball, hockey, or a whole host of other clubs? Red Star Belgrade should redirect to SD Crvena Zvezda. This page should be renamed as FK Crvena Zvezda. (LAz17 (talk) 23:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)). It appears that discussions have taken place on this. No wonder. Well, one of the main arguments is that the Club's English Website calls it red star...NOT ANYMORE< HAHAH! http://www.crvenazvezdafk.com/en/index.php Cheers. So, I will proceed to move it. (LAz17 (talk) 23:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)).
You can't just change name, after dozens of people have said their reasons for the English name. I think the name should be FK Crvena zvezda as well, but there is a way to make that change (propose the move again, and then wait for the results of the discussion), and this isn't that way, so I am reverting it back to Red Star Belgrade.--Vitriden (talk) 12:27, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
OK, do this once again, and I will ask your account to be blocked.--Vitriden (talk) 09:26, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Ask whatever you want. I don't care. I can ask you the same for your abusive language on my talk page. (LAz17 (talk) 13:18, 12 May 2010 (UTC)).
Red Star Belgrade is the name of a sports organization, therefore it is not fair to redirect it to this site. The official english name of the club - as we see on the official website - is indeed how I have moved it here. (LAz17 (talk) 13:19, 12 May 2010 (UTC)).
You've been reported, I hope you'll be blocked soon, so that I can revert your vandalism. Bye.--Vitriden (talk) 14:26, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
The worst that can happen is that you and me get blocked for edit warring. Cheers. (LAz17 (talk) 14:28, 12 May 2010 (UTC)).
Also, please learn what vandalism means. (LAz17 (talk) 14:28, 12 May 2010 (UTC)).
I am happy to see you had to admit I was right and follow the guidelines. If you are in Belgrade, we can meet to discuss this, but otherwise I consider this the end of a beautiful friendship. Bye.--Vitriden (talk) 15:35, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I do not admit anything. I think you're a messed up... hm, don't know how to say it in english... hajvan... that would be thug or something like that. Sometimes using one's brain may be a useful thing. I guess it's not so in your case. Hitler had some rules about jews... it does not mean that the rule was right, that it was useful, or that one should follow it. (LAz17 (talk) 15:49, 12 May 2010 (UTC)).
And your anti-vandalism shit was really pathetic. You are supposed to bring it up to the administrator board - and I dare you to do so. Both of us will get blocked for some time for edit warring. I do not fear it. (LAz17 (talk) 15:51, 12 May 2010 (UTC)).
Requested move 5
The following discussion is an archived discussion 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.
Strong Support The Sport Society Crvena Zvezda official website is here - . Click on Klubovi to get a list of all the clubs with this link,  - and then you see ФУДБАЛ/Soccer on the top, from which you can follow the link that says Званични сајт клуба/Official Site of the Club to get to http://www.crvenazvezdafk.com/ - from there you click on the english flag and get everything officially in english - and indeed it does not call itself Red Star Belgrade. Crvena Zvezda in English means Red Star. But, there are so many Red Star clubs in the sport society. Therefore it is not fair to redirect Red Star Belgrade to the soccer club by default. It should redirect to SD Crvena Zvezda. The content of this page should redirect to FK Crvena Zvezda. (LAz17 (talk) 15:03, 12 May 2010 (UTC)).
Support As I have said many times before, I think the original names should be used, since there is no consensus in the English-speaking media (google doesn't help either). But, like in the case of Novak Đoković, I believe the English-speaking majority will prevail.--Vitriden (talk) 15:26, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
"I believe the English-speaking majority will prevail.": as it surely should do, on en.wiki. Knepflerle (talk) 19:26, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Support. Title should be the club’s name, not a translation of it (especially not a translation + additional word). – MTC (talk) 18:41, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Sorry everybody, but I really think that en.wikipedia is mainly made for English speaking world, and I seriously doubt that many people know "Crvena zvezda" but they all know "Red Star Belgrade". The issue regarding the "translation+another word", being the another word, in this case, Belgrade, is because there are other "Red Stars", so it helps to differenciate them. But, I must admit that even I had doubts about it, and used "Crvena Zvezda", as name of the club, but for some time now, I definitelly adopted the "Red Star Belgrade" version. Remember, this is a wiki for English speaking world, not us (Serbian speakers). FkpCascais (talk) 22:30, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Well, as far as I can see, MTC is from England, and he supports the move. And the fact people are ignorant of the original name is irrelevant. They come here to learn something, don't they? And they wil find the article either way, redirect is not a complicated thing...--Vitriden (talk) 22:38, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
But, exemple, FC Dynamo Moscow is not written "FK Dinamo Moskva", or FC Bayern Munich, and not "FC Bayern München... I only deffend this for major clubs and the ones that have an English language version, as in this case, but I completely oppose the translation of other club names, as I seen, for exemple, in the text people writting "FC Bor", I do oppose that. Also, note that in RS/CZ case, the vast majority of articles in other language wikipedias use a translated version: Estrella Roja de Belgrado, Röda Stjärnan, Steaua Roşie Belgrad, Belgradin Punainen tähti, FK Roter Stern Belgrad, FK Étoile rouge de Belgrade, even, Sao Đỏ Beograd, or, Kızılyıldız (takım)... :) FkpCascais (talk) 23:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You never had anything to do with these kind of articles. You only vote here because I would not support you on some issue involving your feud with Direktor.
English usage can be seen on the official crvena zvezda belgrade website. Take a look would you,  - and furthermore the english sources often displace this club as crvena zvezda rather than red star. Belgrade added on does not make any difference whatsoever. It does not in any way differentiate between the clubs of the organization - it only helps in differentiating clubs in different countries.
Russian teams eh, howabout the soviet wings of samara... oh whoops FC Krylia Sovetov Samara. As for bayern - it is spelled the same in English and German, so I don't get you bring that up. (LAz17 (talk) 03:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)).
I didn´t even knew that you wan´t support me on DM... Really? :P You loose...
Vitriden is right, please listen to more experienced wikipedians and don´t move articles without discussion. I was around here (Serbian footy pages) since the beggining (saw my page?), I only wanted to hear Vitriden´s opinion on this (I knew he would give his opinion), and after, I expressed myself. My opinion on this doesn´t really have nothing to do with you neither anyones opinion... FkpCascais (talk) 03:28, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Ah!, and please don´t compare Red Star (World and Euro Champ) with some medium size Russian club, Krilya obviously doesn´t have a "English version name" because it´s not famous enough, and not so covered by the media. FkpCascais (talk) 03:31, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
WTF do you mean by saying "so". What I stated does not need a "so". Would on translate Real Madrid into Royal Madrid?! That is what we are dealing with. Real sets the president to keep it in the original language, and not butcher it by translating it into Royal. (LAz17 (talk) 01:06, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
"WTF"? Do you know where you are? Also, I just noteced, from your previous comment, that you don´t even know that unrelated Red Stars exist in other countries, and it was them I was refering to. You allways get things so vulgarly wrong... FkpCascais (talk) 10:09, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Comment My opinion has somewhat changed on this issue over the years. I think one thing is certain though, and it's that Belgrade should not be in the title. This article should either be named FK Crvena Zvezda or FK Red Star --Tocino 23:54, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
The problem is that if Red Star is decided, the word Belgrade needs to be added for differencieting it from Red Star Saint-Ouen, a great French club in the past. I already had a case of a player from the 1950s or 60s that played in both... But, the trouth is that the complete version "Red Star Belgrade" is the most common version of the "Red Star" variant. Personally, I defend the inclusion of "Belgrade" because beside the already explained, helps a lot to give an instant idea from where the club is, to the less informed (unfortunatelly, a majority, in this world...), so by that is directly beneficial to Belgrade/Serbia. P.S.:I already find a ignorant guy that told me:"Red Star Bishkek, right?", and I really don´t want to go trouth that drama no more. FkpCascais (talk) 03:10, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
There is a redirect, so whatever is chosen, the other title would redirect to the article (like now).--Vitriden (talk) 18:16, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Leave redirects for non English readers and keep the title for English readers, thanks. The "en" before the dot should stand for a language.. I don't remember which one.. Theirrulez (talk) 04:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Redirecting to the common name of FK Crvena Zvezda is more appropriate. It will be just as easy to find, thanks in advance. (LAz17 (talk) 15:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)). Emphasis added in this message on the stupid "boldness and thanks" that Theirrulez seems to like to use. (LAz17 (talk) 15:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
Oppose: the current title is still in very wide use in English language publications, and I don't see any evidence that "Crvena Zvezda" has become the predominant term (even if it is more used than previously). Knepflerle (talk) 19:28, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
You are wrong. The club is not mentioned a whole lot, in the first place and when it is it is mentioned as Crvena Zvezda - at least as of late. UEFA, probably the best source to use, shows that  (LAz17 (talk) 14:17, 18 May 2010 (UTC)).
Wrong? Hardly. You're extrapolating from UEFA and the club's website (which is patchily translated at best) to make a judgment about English usage in general. You go and search Google Books for "Red Star Belgrade", and then come back here and tell me with a straight face that the club is "not mentioned a whole lot" in English under that name. Then perhaps some newspapers: what language was the Sydney Morning Herald using last week? Or the New York Times last year? Or the BBC last week? Or The Globe and Mail two weeks ago? Or the Times of London, two months ago? That's a lot of recent non-trivial mentions in the major English speaking news outlets, all happening not to use Crvena Zvezda. Knepflerle (talk) 20:33, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
None of those pages talk about the club. They barely mention the club. Any page that talks about this club WITH SUBSTANCE calls the club crvena zvezda. 
We can compare your articles and mine. Your articles do not even talk about the club. They barely mention it, mainly about players - and I have no problem with a player being listed as for playing for Red Star - but when one looks into the issue more it will without doubt redirect to FK Crvena Zvezda. The point is that any article that talks about the club itself with substance calls it FK Crvena Zvezda. Cheers! (LAz17 (talk) 00:51, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
What shocks me is how you compeletely reject that Crvena Zvezda is used at all! Here, from before,  (LAz17 (talk) 01:03, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
First as you say let's compare your articles and mine - that's an excellent idea. As opposed to examples from the English-language's major news sources you pick (1) an ESPN page that mentions the club even more fleetingly than any of mine (2) some computer generated text off a German betting website with no prose and no author listed (3) another betting website's odds page - about the basketball team! You're convincing no-one here with those.
"What shocks me is how you compeletely reject that Crvena Zvezda is used at all!" - I have never said any such thing. What I said is that Red Star Belgrade is used much more by the English-speaking media.
"None of those pages talk about the club" - this is so utterly bizarre a falsehood as to be barely worth countering, but I'm fairly sure anyone else reading who clicks the links will have no difficulty in finding the mentions on these pages.
Your complaint about the articles I presented being about players is completely spurious - do you honestly think that a journalist will write about player being a member of Red Star Belgrade, then when referring to the club in the next paragraph suddenly call it Crvena Zvezda?
Red Star Belgrade is common, standard, everyday use in genuine English-language media. Knepflerle (talk) 09:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
You ignore the other sources presented - that Crvena Zvezda is just as common - more common in fact when the article solely deals with the team. As we can see,  you ignore things on purpose. Your hypocrisy is thus revealed. (LAz17 (talk) 12:25, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
Those links show that Crvena Zvezda is used sometimes. They do not show that it is used more than Red Star Belgrade. You're entirely and repeatedly missing the point. Knepflerle (talk) 12:40, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Same back at you. UEFA is probably the group with the biggest credibility though. (LAz17 (talk) 12:54, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
Our naming conventions determine that we look at English-language usage in reliable sources as a whole; "official naming" is not given special status in our considerations, because it does not always mirror actual English-language usage. UEFA is just one reliable source, of many. Knepflerle (talk) 13:25, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Support The current club website (http://www.crvenazvezdafk.com/) calls itself Crvena zvezda even in the english site. On UEFA's english site, in the list of UEFA Europa league contenders, this club is mentioned as "Crvena Zvezda" (see for yourself here: http://www.uefa.com/uefaeuropaleague/index.html). I understand the argument of the potential inconvenience of the Crvena zvezda moniker over the Red Star Belgrade name, but it's useless to justify that if Bayern Munich is not called Bayern Munchen that this page should remain as Red Star Belgrade. It's a matter of identity rather than language protocol. Imagine people saying that they saw a game in which Rebel Split played. No one would ever guess that he or she would really be talking about Hajduk Split, which is what Hajduk means in Serbian/Croatian. Like I said, the name argument is not a conflict of language, but a conflict of identity. Red Star Belgrade was a popular name around the world in the 90s, but the team no longer has such a non-Serbian and non-Balkan fan base like they did when they won the European Cup Final back in '91. The identity, in today's case, is better known in the name Crvena zvezda. If the page gets moved, simply have Red Star Belgrade redirect to Crvena zvezda to prevent people getting lost. Good arguments on both sides though. Balkanskiredneck (talk) 00:54, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
comment: But, the club website is a English version of the Serbian website, not a English website (thus, not an argument), but I just want to be practical, and we have to be real: the word "Crvena Zvezda" is unpronounceble to an Englishmann, not saying, everyone that is not a Slav... That is what I mean when I say "lets be practical"... Ask a Englishman to pronounce it: "Krrbenya Zzz..." and he got lost... Sorry, but trouth. And it´s a too important club to allowed that to happend. That´s probably why the club has a translated version in first place... :) Neither the club, neither Serbia, would win anything by making a name of it´s famous brand complicated to foregn people. FkpCascais (talk) 18:44, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
comment: Oh!, and Balkanskiredneck, you said a very important thing: If the club was know as "Red Star Belgrade" during the 1990s, we should keep it, exactly not to break the continuity... It would be awfull to have people thinking that those are two different clubs!!! Hey, I´m Grobar, but even so, please don´t take Red Stars glory away, or let it be forgoten! FkpCascais (talk) 18:58, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
And also, and sorry Balkanskiredneck, but you just gave good exemples, just same way as you say that if someone says "Rebel Split" nobody would know we were talking about Hajduk Split, as they know it, same way (but oposite here), not many will know that "Crvena Zvezda", that we are talking, is what they allways knew as "Red Star Belgrade". It has to do whit what people are used to call, and try not to confuse them... FkpCascais (talk) 10:31, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
You have got to be joking. That is the english website, not an english version of a serbian site. It is clearly the english website. So, do not discriminate against it. It is how the club wants to be called in english. It is like saying lets still call Serbia Yugoslavia... well no, it is not Yugoslavia, it is Serbia. Names change. The continuity does not exist, because Crvena Zvezda is the common name. Now what is this that you are saying about zzz... z.. what? Anyone can pronounce Zvezda easily. The C is the only thing that might have an issue, but that is beside the point. (LAz17 (talk) 00:36, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
Back to your totally irrelevent stuff... where do you get "K-RBENYA" from "C-RVENA". What kind of lame reasoning are you trying to you? ZZZZ?Z?Z??Z??Z? That really shows how you are not serious. Just go back to sleep - as you said on another talk page, you do not think that this is important at all. It really saddens me that you think that the readers on wikipedia are illiterates. (LAz17 (talk) 00:57, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
comment: We should write "FK Crvena Zvezda", also known simply as "Zvezda" or "FC Red Star",... that it how the article should start. (LAz17 (talk) 00:51, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
comment: Well, "FC Red Star" is certainly how is NOT known... Anyway, Laz, do you know any Englishman at all? Because, as you said, "I´ve been from Slovenia to Serbia, man of the world", world... yeah, yeah... Also, why you defend that there is no continuity? Because you wasn´t born back then? About your comment, I honestly can´t remember reading such a nonsence comment on wiki, as this yours was. You really wanna keep it?
P.S.:Laz, is it possible for you to stop to be rude and uneducated with people disagreing with you? Also, don´t comment on participants. FkpCascais (talk) 08:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
I will continue to be rude with pests like you... ZZZ ZZZ ZZ zZZZ OUT WITH IT DUMMY, Z WHAT? Got a speaking problem? Don't bother us with it, with your irrelevant spam. (LAz17 (talk) 12:25, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
Oppose I could see the name change causing search issues for one and the other being accessibility (for example visibility impaired reader) given the proposed title is not pronounceable in English. I had through the English version of the website and Red Star is widely used so I am seeing that as preferable over the official name. This being said, I think I'd prefer FC Red Star Belgrade over Red Star Belgrade.--Labattblueboy (talk) 01:08, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
The "pronounceability" argument (used both here and above) is a total red-herring - even if we had some way of measuring "pronounceability", plenty of articles are at correct but difficult-to-pronounce names. Where else should Zzyzx, Chkhorotsqu, Ervin Nyíregyházi or Włodzimierz Krzyżanowski go? What actually matters is whether English writers use it, not whether they can pronounce it. In this case however, Red Star Belgrade is still far more commonly used, and that's why we use it too. Knepflerle (talk) 09:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Knepferle, I said that was "another practical reason" (as complementary), far from being the main one... FkpCascais (talk) 09:57, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
It's not a practical reason though. Look at WP:AT; there's nothing there about "pronounceability" for very good reason. I didn't comment at all about your other arguments, however! Knepflerle (talk) 10:03, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
I know, I know... But, we agree. I already said that Red Star is more used in English speaking world, and you just provided proof (perfect). So, I just continued giving some other argumentations, more concentrated to the internal Serbian debate... FkpCascais (talk) 10:17, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Sure! I just want it to be totally clear to anyone who reads the archived discussion in the future that the right decision was made for the right reason. Best, Knepflerle (talk) 10:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
WP:ACCESS simply requires Latin-1 text so either option meets that criteria. comment sticken. Labattblueboy (talk) 11:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Move to FC Red Star Belgrade as per various pages on the English version of the club's official website, starting with the main page. – PeeJay 11:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Comment: But all other Serbian clubs have "FK". Having only RS using FC wouldn´t make sence... FkpCascais (talk) 11:34, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Response to Comment - use some logic - the page 'already is' unlike all other Serbian soccer team pages - in other words who gives a damn? (LAz17 (talk) 12:56, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
Support, per UEFA use. There is no hard or fast rule with English/Non-English, and in my view the Serbian use is well known enough in English. UEFA is as official a body as you'll get and they use Crvena Zvezda; and whilst Google should not control our decisions, but there are more google results in English for Crvena Zvezda than for Red Star Belgrade (compare th and this).--Pretty Green (talk) 11:52, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Where can I read about uefa-use policy in Wikipedia? I suggest you to read WP:UE. Theirrulez (talk) 12:10, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
You mean "The choice between anglicized and local spellings should follow English-language usage"? Yes, I read it. Evidence suggests that English language use is mixed. In that case, with no clear winner, I think the name used by the governing body makes most sense. But heck, I have a different opinion to you so I obviously couldn't be bothered reading the rules? --Pretty Green (talk) 15:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Well as for the UEFA argument, there is the longstanding essay WP:OFFICIALNAMES which points out that "official" naming is secondary to common usage.
As for the Google search: there are a large number of false hits in other languages in the search for "Crvena Zvezda", and a large number of automated text hits for betting sites. This sort of evidence is nowhere near as useful as that taken from prose from English-language reliable sources. Knepflerle (talk) 12:46, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Dude, are you aware that there are false hits for Red Star too? You are using arguments that go both ways. Please get serious. (LAz17 (talk) 12:54, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
What other languages call the club "Red Star Belgrade"? Can't think of another off the top of my head... Which languages would these false hits be in? Either way it doesn't matter - it just shows that Google searches are an unreliable measure of usage in general. Knepflerle (talk) 13:02, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Why don't you bother to look at the English page before you say anything?!  I mean heck, the second you look at it you see "FK CRVENA ZVEZDA" yelling at you - as well as at other pages as this one here shows. (LAz17 (talk) 12:50, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
(1) Scroll down and look at the news section for the results: "VOJVODINA - RED STAR 0:3", "RED STAR - ČUKARIČKI 4:0", etc. I wouldn't put too much store on this "English" website given that the vast majority of the pages aren't translated at all, but it shows that even on their own site they are prepared to use Red Star.
(2) Why did you take it upon yourself to change another editor's comments in this edit? Knepflerle (talk) 12:58, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
1) Just look at the page, and see how it SCREAMS "FK Crvena Zvezda" when you open it up. Did you bother to look at it? It shows both red star and crvena zvezda, but crvena zvezda screams out at you. You see it at the top of the page and at the bottom. Case closed.
2) Seeing how retarded it is to write "strong" I decided to change mine to strong. I also decided to change it of a fellow who has strong opinions too. Nothing wrong here. If one person does something dumb, why don't we all put strong on ours? (LAz17 (talk) 13:08, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
(1) I never said Crvena Zvezda wasn't used, it obviously is, but nobody can deny that Red Star is obviously used too. The usage is mixed.
Oppose, the common name in English is "Red Star" and/or "Red Star Belgrade". chandler 14:55, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
As has been demonstrated, that is not the common name. On top of that, there are plenty of other Red Star Belgrade organizations, meaning that whatever language is used, there must be FC or FK in front. Here, SD Crvena Zvezda might be of some usefulness to look at. (LAz17 (talk) 15:07, 19 May 2010 (UTC))
I think you do not get this issue. We have two issues. Now you are dealing with the second one. The second one is that Red Star Belgrade and Crvena Zvezda should BOTH redirect to SD Crvena Zvezda. There are very many Red Star clubs in the Red Star organization. Automatically redirecting to the soccer club is unfair to the others. The soccer page must have FC or FK in front of it, regardless of what follows it, be it FK Crvena Zvezda, or be it FC Red Star Belgrade. (LAz17 (talk) 16:31, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
But you already have "Crvena Zvezda" linking to the Sports Society, and Red Star Belgrade, with its proper redirect (FK CZ), to the football club, where the English version is mostly used. FkpCascais (talk) 16:46, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Are you trying to make these dumb statements, or do they just come naturally? What the current state is not relevant to anything. We are having this discussion to solve the problems of where what should redirect. The bottom line is that the page with the soccer club must have FK or FC in front of it.
Trust me, if I didn't need to I would not have even bothered asking to move this stuff. But for something more controversial such as this, it appears that one must have this dumb discussion first. *rolls eyes* (LAz17 (talk) 16:55, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
"'As has been demonstrated, that is not the common name." - no, this has not been demonstrated. Tocino's list that you keep linking to only demonstrates Crvena Zvezda is sometimes used. It does not show that it is used more than Red Star Belgrade, and claiming it does again and again and again doesn't make it true. In addition, Labattblueboy's evidence below clearly seems to indicate the opposite is true. Knepflerle (talk) 19:56, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Comment I noticed no one has brought up the naming convention for sports teams: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sports). "In cases where there is no ambiguity as to the official spelling of a club's name in English, the official name should be used. No ambiguity means that; (1) The name is used on the English-language section of the club's official website (2) The name has been adopted at least by a significant section of the English-language media and it is recognizable (3) The name is not easily confused with other clubs' names. In cases where there is some ambiguity as to the official spelling of a club's name in English, the name most commonly used by the English-language media should be used." --Labattblueboy (talk) 17:03, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Then the issue is solved, official name it is, FK Crvena Zvezda. (LAz17 (talk) 17:33, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
I think it's fair to said, as seen with the debate thus far, that there is certaimy ambiguity as to the name in English. In particular #2 and possibly #1.--Labattblueboy (talk) 19:40, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Do pay attention to this thing here,  - as we see there are plenty of good english sources that use it. It is not good though to just look for things online because news-places often re-report one another. Usage of Crvena Zvzeda plenty of times has been established in previous discussions. That is not an issue. As has been seen, both Crvena Zvezda and Red Star are used. UEFA, or a site that actually talks about the club, should set the precedent though. (LAz17 (talk) 17:33, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
I have no doubt that Crvena Zvezda is used in English media but the search makes it rather clear that it's in fact not the primary usage. To verify, I also conducted a search in the google News Archives. 1,470 hits for "fk crvena zvezda" and 6430 hits for "Red Star Belgrade". When "fk crvena zvezda" is limited to English, it produces a total of 291 hits or which 195 are UEFA.com. In short, almost no journalistic media hits. When "Red Star Belgrade" is limited to English it produces 6,250 hits with a wide range of sources. The search results clearly demonstrate Red Star Belgrade is more commonly used in independent media than FK Crvena Zvezda. Whether or not that is important is for everyone else to decide.--Labattblueboy (talk) 19:24, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Red Star Belgrade is the most common usage in English, which makes it the best title for the article. Digirami (talk) 17:31, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you but we already have heard this statement. As is known, it is not the most common. But all facts aside - do bother to read what has been stated. This is NOT A VOTE, nor are things like this EVER a vote. (LAz17 (talk) 17:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
Laz, please be polite with other fellow wikipedians! FkpCascais (talk) 17:39, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm merely stating my opinion on the matter to build consensus on the matter. I don't have to cite new evidence to state my opinion. If I agree with what has already been said, then I'll state that (like I did). And yes, I did read it all. Digirami (talk) 17:46, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Correct me if I am wrong, but concensus is not built by Beating a dead horse, is it? Concensus is not supposed to be "built up", as this is not a vote. (LAz17 (talk) 19:05, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
"As is known, it is not the most common", I think it would be nice if we stopped lying to advance ones argument. Red Star Belgrade is very obviously the common name. chandler 19:53, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
(ec) "As is known, it is not the most common.": Tocino's list does not prove this, and that's not what Labattblueboy's evidence indicates either. Knepflerle (talk) 19:56, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
I simply reply in the same manner that was presented. If one can completely disregard another name, then I can bloody well do the same thing right back to them, no? Doesn't get us far, but hopefully it gives them something to think about. (LAz17 (talk) 20:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
If someone says "oppose" because I do not like it - wait, is that really a reason? No, it's not a reason. Such things should be discarded. (LAz17 (talk) 20:31, 19 May 2010 (UTC)).
I suppose consensus is like beating a dead horse, but that's how things get done on this site. Building consensus varies from simple to complex. This is rather simple to the point where it blurs the line with voting (unfortunately). But anyone can have their say on the matter... that's the beauty of consensus. Digirami (talk) 22:38, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you captain obvious (or not). I never said this is voting. I said that sometimes building consensus can blur the line between voting and not voting. I've been here long enough to realize that. When you realize that when an issue essentially comes down two points of contention, the possibility that voting can occur exists (although it shouldn't happen).
Back on topic, I support the side of the discussion that favors not changing the name of the article from it's common English usage because it is the common English name of the club. FIFA recognizes this by stating that the Serbian name is how the club is known by... in Serbia. The official website of the club uses Red Star Belgrade prominently and often on their English version. Am I beating a dead horse because others have already stated an opinion very similar to mine? Yes, but consensus is formed that way. Digirami (talk) 23:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
The official site uses "Crvena Zvezda" just as much as Red Star, if not more. This is the problem - that people seem to not understand that Crvena Zvezda is just as used in english. (LAz17 (talk) 05:29, 20 May 2010 (UTC)).
NO, consensus is not formed by repeating what has already been said. A third party that has power is supposed to intervene and make the decision on what happens. Some five hundred people can say that they want this page to be written in chinese characters... ain't gonna happen. So why should we bother opinions that get repeated? This is not a vote. (LAz17 (talk) 05:29, 20 May 2010 (UTC)).
You sound like a broken stating this is not a vote when I've repeatedly said it isn't. Read the context of my message better. Consensus is also built by having other editors express their view. Right now there are only two points of contention on the issue (with barely any wiggle room): English title or Serbian title. A third option has been thrown into the mix, but that third option is still largely in opposition to changing the article name to the Serbian spelling (the third option being to change the title to another English variant). Now, you've opened this up for discussion, and because of that, anyone can support or oppose the change (or comment). We are not counting vote because this is not voting. But, if it is obviously clear that you lack the support the change the title because there is an clearly obvious larger opposition to it, then it won't get change for consensus on opposing or lack of consensus on changing it. Viola.
Again, you don't seem to get the substance of everyone else's argument for opposing the change. Nowhere has anyone ever said that "Crvena Zvezda" is not used in English. What we are saying is that "Red Star Belgrade" is used more often in English language text. And that's that really all that matters. Digirami (talk) 10:02, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Question before I comment I would like to know what "Crvena Zvezda" means in English? Does it mean simply "Red Star"? Is it a suburb of Belgrade or something random? Thanks in advance! Cls14 (talk) 00:14, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes, "Crvena Zvezda" means "Red Star" in Serbian. Knepflerle (talk) 00:17, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Nice one Kenpflerle. I myself oppose the move on the grounds that this is an English Wiki so we should use the English name unless there is an overwhelming reason not to, which I don't think there is. If we do change it we'd have to go through all the teams like FC Dynamo Moscow and change them to Dynamo Moskva. Cls14 (talk) 00:32, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Red Star was named after red star, a symbol of communism, since it was formed a little before the end of WW2, by newly established communist government. The same goes for Steaua, for example.--Vitriden (talk) 04:31, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
There is not even the FK/FC in front here. How on earth are we supposed to differentiate between this team and one of many others in the sports society? (LAz17 (talk) 05:29, 20 May 2010 (UTC)).
Because only the football club is using the English language version. (and nobody had ever had any difficulties on finding the other sports clubs when wanted). FkpCascais (talk) 10:16, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
The only other sports team that comes close in terms of naming is FC Red Star Zürich. I could see myself supporting the prefix FC in the event if the other SD Crvena Zvezda teams had English names. At current they don't, so it appears to be a non-issue.--Labattblueboy (talk) 20:08, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.