Jump to content

Talk:History of Crystal Palace F.C.

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

Fair use rationale for Image:Palace060805.jpg

[edit]

Image:Palace060805.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:17, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Palace1970sbadge.jpg

[edit]

Image:Palace1970sbadge.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The image Image:Crystal Palace FC.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sub-headers

[edit]

Are you going for the record for most sub-headers in an article??? --Jameboy (talk) 21:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing material

[edit]

Have no real issue with the fact that this article needs sourcing, but whole-sale removal of information is not the best way to go about it when it leaves the article in a very poor state, and removing material with no post on the talk page is very unhelpful. Would editors please join the discussion rather than use the article page as a battleground, thanks, Hiding T 18:00, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus Christ, this is far more than mere unsourced material. Not only almost entirely unreferenced, but also full of POV and bias. We need to build up from the bottom, better to start from scratch. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 78#Now that's what I call a TOC........... GiantSnowman 18:05, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you're feeling frustrated, try a WP:BREAK, but please don;t take your frustration out on me or the article. Please try and help reference the article and feel free to remove sentences you feel are biased or POV. Gutting the whole article does no-one any favours, and please assume good faith and respect the spirit of WP:EDITWAR rather than the letter. Hiding T 18:08, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've not taken it out on the article and I have certainly not taken any 'frustration' out on you. There was a discussion (at the WikiProject this article falls under the remit of) where it was decided this article was in desperate need of a massive overhaul. Gutting the article does the entire encyclopedia a massive favour, as we have tonnes less unreferenced material and tonnes less POV-laden material. How is your restoration of unreferenced and POV-laden material help the encyclopedia in any way whatsoever?! GiantSnowman 18:12, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I can't work out if we're discussing it here or at my talk page, but if all we're arguing about is approaches to problems, and my approach is actually adding sourced information to wikipedia, point out the flaw in my approach or let me carry on. Once I've finished for the night I'll remove the inuse and you can feel free to have a go with your approach. That sounds collaborative wiki fun! Hiding T 18:32, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Where have I prevented you from "carrying on"? GiantSnowman 18:33, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you understood me fully. I was asking you to trust me and let me get on with it to the benefit of the article as opposed to discussing the issue in a circular argument on the talk page. I apologise for not communicating myself clearer. Hiding T 09:32, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:History of Crystal Palace F.C./GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:14, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

*When a league re-organisation occurred in 1920 and a new Football League Division was formed featuring the majority of the Southern League Division One the club became founder members and inaugural champions of the Football League Third Division. - I'd reword this, a bit hard to follow....

*If you can think of another verb to use instead of "relegate", it'd be good for the prose to slot it in occasionally....

*The first 1.5 paras predate 1905 in the first section (titled 1905-20). It leaves me curious as to why there is no link to the former club (only 40 odd years, so surely folks involved in the latter talked to folks from the former....) given the identical name. Is there more discussion in the source? Maybe move the first 1.5 paras into a section called Background and formation or somesuch...

    • There's no discussion in the source, there are very little records on the original club and no evidence of a link between that club and the Crystal Palace itself beyond the name has been established in written records. I've rewritten the text to better reflect the sources, a lot of the text was originally merged from the 1861 club's article. See this edit. Hiding T 10:40, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The idea of a club at Crystal Palace was first proposed in 1904 by the Crystal Palace Company. - err, no it wasn't as one existed 40 years before. I'd remove the "first" here..
  • Double check that you link to other articles once at first instance - also check that unusual things are linked to (e.g. other clubs etc.)
  • Who is Conner? link or explain.....
  • on 'gardening leave' - link or explain.....
  • Actually I just realised the playoff vs play-off has both spellings about the place....and just realised the official site likes the hyphenated form (facepalm...) - do you have a preference?
  • Might be prudent to use "second tier" or "third tier" etc. when talking post 1992 and before the renaming to Championship, League 1 etc. to less confuse unfamiliar readers....

1. Well written?:

Prose quality:
Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:
Citations to reliable sources, where required:
No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:
Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: not hugely convinced about the need for an image of di Stefano, but I appreciate it can be hard adorning some of these articles with enough appropriate images.
Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:


Overall:

Pass or Fail: - looks all in order now. Maybe get another lookover and have a crack at FAC. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:02, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 68 external links on History of Crystal Palace F.C.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:00, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicting Founding Date

[edit]

The current Crystal Palace Football Club was founded in 1905, and the connection to the previous club are widely disputed, but there is no mention of this in this article. 2A02:C7C:6CFC:E800:1D9:6ACE:A24D:72D1 (talk) 01:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_Crystal_Palace_F.C.&oldid=1217976198"