Talk:Manchester United F.C.: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 01:58, 26 October 2011 editMalleus Fatuorum (talk \| contribs)145,401 edits →Is or are?: I will not have my postings altered← Previous edit		Revision as of 02:02, 26 October 2011 edit undoMalleus Fatuorum (talk \| contribs)145,401 edits →Is or are?: my interprerationNext edit →
Line 183:		Line 183:

	*WP:PLURALS seems to suggest that "Manchester United are" would be the proper form, unless I am misreading it. Am I? --] (]) 01:56, 26 October 2011 (UTC)		*WP:PLURALS seems to suggest that "Manchester United are" would be the proper form, unless I am misreading it. Am I? --] (]) 01:56, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

			*:No, you're not. At least that's my interpretation as well: "Manchester United" plural, "the club", or "the team" singular. ] ] 02:02, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:02, 26 October 2011

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Manchester United F.C. article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16Auto-archiving period: 2 months

Manchester United F.C. is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 30, 2011.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 11, 2006	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
March 20, 2007	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
June 8, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
August 12, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
September 24, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
April 16, 2008	Featured topic candidate	Not promoted
December 20, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
October 23, 2009	Good article reassessment	Delisted
April 4, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed
April 4, 2010	Peer review	Reviewed
April 5, 2010	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
April 10, 2010	Peer review	Reviewed
June 23, 2010	Peer review	Reviewed
June 26, 2010	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
July 14, 2010	Peer review	Reviewed
July 27, 2010	Featured article candidate	Promoted
Current status: Featured article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Football: England / Manchester United High‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	English football portal This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by the Manchester United task force (assessed as High-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

England High‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Greater Manchester Top‑importance

	Greater Manchester portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greater Manchester, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greater Manchester on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Greater ManchesterWikipedia:WikiProject Greater ManchesterTemplate:WikiProject Greater ManchesterGreater Manchester
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

There is a request, submitted by Darkson - BANG!, for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Misplaced Pages.

The rationale behind the request is: "Important English football team".

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Manchester United F.C. article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16Auto-archiving period: 2 months

Kit/Sponsors

Worth adding a list of kit manufactures/sponsors as per the list at Peterborough_United_F.C.#Kit_sponsors_and_manufacturers?109.155.249.27 (talk) 13:29, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

It's already exists, in Sponsorship tab, under Global brand.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 13:50, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

D'oh! Wonder how I missed that! 109.155.249.27 (talk) 20:10, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 26xbing, 6 September 2011

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

European Cup and UEFA Champions League winners

European Cup era, 1955–1992
1950s	1955–56: Real Madrid 1956–57: Real Madrid 1957–58: Real Madrid 1958–59: Real Madrid 1959–60: Real Madrid
1960s	1960–61: Benfica 1961–62: Benfica 1962–63: AC Milan 1963–64: Inter Milan 1964–65: Inter Milan 1965–66: Real Madrid 1966–67: Celtic 1967–68: Manchester United 1968–69: AC Milan 1969–70: Feyenoord
1970s	1970–71: Ajax 1971–72: Ajax 1972–73: Ajax 1973–74: Bayern Munich 1974–75: Bayern Munich 1975–76: Bayern Munich 1976–77: Liverpool 1977–78: Liverpool 1978–79: Nottingham Forest 1979–80: Nottingham Forest
1980s	1980–81: Liverpool 1981–82: Aston Villa 1982–83: Hamburger SV 1983–84: Liverpool 1984–85: Juventus 1985–86: Steaua București 1986–87: Porto 1987–88: PSV 1988–89: AC Milan 1989–90: AC Milan
1990s	1990–91: Red Star Belgrade 1991–92: Barcelona

UEFA Champions League era, 1992–present
1990s	1992–93: Marseille 1993–94: AC Milan 1994–95: Ajax 1995–96: Juventus 1996–97: Borussia Dortmund 1997–98: Real Madrid 1998–99: Manchester United 1999–2000: Real Madrid
2000s	2000–01: Bayern Munich 2001–02: Real Madrid 2002–03: AC Milan 2003–04: Porto 2004–05: Liverpool 2005–06: Barcelona 2006–07: AC Milan 2007–08: Manchester United 2008–09: Barcelona 2009–10: Inter Milan
2010s	2010–11: Barcelona 2011–12: Chelsea 2012–13: Bayern Munich 2013–14: Real Madrid 2014–15: Barcelona 2015–16: Real Madrid 2016–17: Real Madrid 2017–18: Real Madrid 2018–19: Liverpool 2019–20: Bayern Munich
2020s	2020–21: Chelsea 2021–22: Real Madrid 2022–23: Manchester City 2023–24: Real Madrid

26xbing (talk) 04:16, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Done --Jnorton7558 (talk) 11:52, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Third kit

The 2011/12 Premier League handbook confirms this year's third kit is last season's away kit. Link (check page 33). I have no idea how to do the illustrations, so is there any chance someone could add it? Decorativeedison (talk) 22:46, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Done, thank you.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 22:51, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Reserves vs. First Team

The Carling Cup game last night seemed to throw up a few points of contention about the squad. There needs to be some sort of clarification about who qualifies as a member of the first team and who doesn't. - --Des2501 (talk) 09:18, 21 September 2011 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Faisalyaqob, 25 September 2011

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I am Faisal and recently joined your portal but have been using wikipedia from a long time. Keeping in mind the online popularity of Manchester United Shirts, i want to add my website link in this article's part independent sites as i could not find any site link's in this article fully devoted to Manchester United shirts to serve the viewers looking for MU Shirts source on wikipedia.

Faisalyaqob (talk) 11:12, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

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. Dynamic|cimanyD contact me ⁞ my edits 17:02, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Most Successful Club?

I think there should be further debate about what constitutes success in terms of trophies. At the moment the club which is considered the most successful according to wikipedia is Manchester United because they have won a few more trophies than liverpool; according to the article 'Football records in England' they have won 60 trophies compared to Liverpool's 58. Yes they have won more trophies than Liverpool - However not all trophies are of equal value and the fact that Liverpool has won two more champions leagues than Man U (easily the most prestigious trophy in club football) should be recognised when talking about the clubs in terms of success. Every football fan knows that one champions league is worth ten FA cups or a few league titles, so shouldn't this factor be taken into account when deciding which club is the most successful. Under the current system a club could win the league cup 61 times and be the most successful club in England according to the current system and that is frankly indicative of a flawed system.

I will be posting this on the Liverpool fc disscussion page as well so that some discourse on this subject can finally happen. 86.6.106.166 (talk) 12:01, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree that certain trophies are more prestigious than others, but it would be very dificult to quantify them. How do you know if one Champions League equals ten FA cups, why not nine, or eight. And the fact the trophies have been won over such a long period of time, the competition formats have changed considerably a la Champions League/European Cup and First Division/Premier League. Eddie6705 (talk) 14:17, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

I've edited this and the Liverpool F.C. articles to remove the "most successful" claim, and these edits reflect the change in wording in Football records in England. There's no singular accepted metric for "most successful", even if there's general agreement on the most successful English club, and simply listing the number of titles seems enough to convey this information without resorting to WP:OR or WP:PEACOCK. --Mosmof (talk) 19:12, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Is or are?

Normally in British English groups like football clubs and bands are referred to as plurals. Why is this one singular? --John (talk) 01:13, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

It's complicated: "Manchester United are" vs. "the club is". Malleus Fatuorum 01:24, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

It is not complicated. WP:PLURALS is clear. I tried this but somebody told me that it was a FAC stuff. Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 01:41, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

You simply display your ignorance. Malleus Fatuorum 01:48, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I'm an ignorant and I'm glad to not be Mr. Know it all. Anyway, can I start to WP:POINT coldplay, The Beatles, Burnley F.C. or Crystal Palace F.C.? Those ignorant people need to know how ignorants they are and that you are a knowledge God. Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 01:52, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Please carry on, so everyone can see what an ignorant arse you are. Malleus Fatuorum 01:54, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

WP:PLURALS seems to suggest that "Manchester United are" would be the proper form, unless I am misreading it. Am I? --John (talk) 01:56, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

No, you're not. At least that's my interpretation as well: "Manchester United" plural, "the club", or "the team" singular. Malleus Fatuorum 02:02, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Categories: