Jump to content

Talk:Manjappada

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

Primary page for supporters

[edit]

Given its history this page should be considered as the primary page for the supporters of Kerela Blasters FC. If and when this get converted to an article that is the time the a page rename/move can be discussed. Attempts other than to use this name without discussion will likely be seen as attempts to circumvent various XfD and DRV discussions and will likely be treated as disruptive. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 10:49, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting proposal

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I am closing this discussion at the behest of another user due to my extended confirmed status. Though I am not familiar with the subject it seems to me that there exists a strong consensus that the Manjappada fan club are deserving of their own article. I have copied the 'Support' section over to Manjappada. Beaneater (talk) 11:38, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that section Support Section be split into a separate page called Manjappada due to the following reasons :

1.The support section contains contents based on the fan club Manjappada that is independent of Kerala Blasters.

2. Continuous attempts were made by some users back in 2016-18 period to create the article called Manjappada. But the fan club was not notable at that time and failed WP:GNG. There were no reliable sources also. The Kerala Blasters article were also too short at that time.Thus Manjappada was redirected into the support section of Kerala Blasters.

3. But the scenario has changed now. Three more years has passed and the Kerala Blasters article is now around 103,000 bytes and the fan club has more than enough coverage and multiple reliable independent sources are present which includes sources from 1.[[1]] 2.[[2]] 3.[[3]] 4.[[4]] ..etc which makes it pass WP:GNG. So the support section must be splitted out from the main article under the title Manjappada. WhiteFalcon1 (talk) 09:41, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong Support: As per the sources in the support section, its evident that the fan club meets notability criteria. Also the content in the support section seems off the topic that covers almost entirely about the fan club and its importance. The Kerala Blasters article is also large enough now to consider splitting. Shahoodu (talk) 10:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: The fan club meets notability criteria, the sources back this up, this fan group is quite significant. TheEpicGhosty (talk) 13:04, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support : As per the nom, the contents in the support section covers mainly about the supporters group. Also the plenty of sources in the support section shows that they are an independently notable supporters group. Indianfootball98 (talk) 02:21, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Yes the support does meet the notability criteria however the support section is not currently WP:UNDUE with the improvements made recently to the overall article. If the article had not been improved and the Support section was UNDUE within the context of the overall article I would have been in favour of a split. The 100,00 byte reasoning is somewhat obsolete in the context of the context of typically improved internet speeds and the efficiency of the mobile browser, xtools also show the prose is currently just under 23kb. Would not object to Manjappada being bolded within the Supporters section as there is already a redirect there from Manjappada. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 03:20, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: There are more than enough sources available on the internet to make this page similar to Emerald City Supporters which is an independent supporters group. Its important that beyond just their engagement with Kerala Blasters, the fan group is involved in a lot more activities not just as a fan group, but as a organisation. Like the nominator said, Manjappada was redirected earlier due lack of reliable sources and size. So considering its current size and notability, I strongly suggest this page should exist as a seperate article. Thankyou Shahoodu (talk) 05:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support:The 100,00 byte reasoning is surely a factor to consider. Internet speed is not same as everywhere. As this club comes from India, the majority readers will be also Indians. As an Indian, let me tell the situation in my country. As per the report from a study, India ranks 131st in internet speed among the 138 countries included in the survey. 1.[[5]] 2.[[6]]. These reports just came yesterday. I would like to stress one point in the report here In some locations, you may get good speeds while in others you cant even refresh facebook. This is the case in the rural areas. Lot of places are there in the country where there is not even sufficient speed to browse the things such as wikipedia. Its also evident from the sources that the fan club is independent from the club which they support in many ways . So by considering the eminent size of this article also,I support the splitting. Sullyboywiki (talk) 06:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Plenty of in depth coverage in multiple sources including Major national newspaper which is green on Perennial source. The supporters group is independent from the Kerala Blasters in many ways considering their support for the Indian national football team and engagement in other social activities. Iamfarzan (talk) 02:39, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as per nom:The supporters group is independent from the club from the club and have more contents and enough coverage to exist as a seperate article.TWFcode (talk) 19:24, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: ArnabSaha (talk · contribs) 07:55, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]


GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Comments

[edit]
I don't see any other issues.  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  16:07, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI

[edit]

 DonePoppified (talk) 11:02, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Lee Vilenski (in WP:Discord)

[edit]
  • During the 2018–19 season, the Blasters were winless in 14 games and fans became dissatisfied with the management's indifference towards them. Although Manjappada boycotted a December 2018 game against Jamshedpur FC,[19] "We don’t intend to boycott our club’s matches, since our motto is 'Nammalk Nammalund' ('We have us')" stated the group. - not really sure what this means  DoneShahoodu (talk) 14:20, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "Manjappada stand" originated in 2014, during the Blasters' first season.[ - what is this? :Clarified  DoneShahoodu (talk) 14:20, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Id argue that culture section needs a rewrite - most of it is obvious, or pointless.  Done Shahoodu (talk) 14:20, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's a few refs that have weird |work parameters, such as Sportskeeda APP is the No 1 Personalised Sports APP available today. Just select your fav teams & players and you are done.  Done. Iamfarzan (talk) 13:54, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 16:41, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Manjappada displaying a tifo
Manjappada displaying a tifo

Improved to Good Article status by Iamfarzan (talk) and Poppified (talk). Nominated by Iamfarzan and Poppified.


General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: No - the citation doesn't say this.
  • Interesting: No - self-promotional.

Image eligibility:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: the same issue was pointed out in the GA review, regarding the use of the word "largest". (Another thing, this is my first DYK review. If there's any issue/mistake in the review, please inform)  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  06:41, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • ArnabSaha, from the source "The fan group ( that is manjappada) was able to coordinate and bring fans to the venue in 41 buses, a feat none of the other fan clubs in ISL have been able to manage so far." that means it's valid I think.Iamfarzan (talk) 11:32, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good now. Needs some minor changes. Maybe this...  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  14:46, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done ALT5.  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  15:13, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Manjappada roadshow
Manjappada roadshow
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Manjappada&oldid=1208767620"