This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
List of FA Cup finals article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
List of FA Cup finals is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured list on May 7, 2012. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Featured list |
This article is rated FL-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
From p17 of The Essential History of West Bromwich Albion by Gavin McOwan: "With no extra-time being played, the replay [of the 1886 FA Cup Final] was arranged at Derby a week later." Currently the article shows that extra time was played. What was the source used to determine which matches went to extra time? Please can this be re-checked. -- Jameboy ( talk) 22:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
The result shown is incorrect - should be 1-0 and not 10-0!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.155.251.102 ( talk) 15:59, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Why are Arsenal in bold three times? They have only won the double once! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
92.12.22.5 (
talk)
17:50, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Do we really need this distinction noted in the table? Most stadia have now been rebuilt since their original construction and we even have the Millenium Stadium period separating the old and new "eras". Thoughts? Britmax ( talk) 10:50, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
It makes sense to a degree, but since the underlying piped links direct to the correct version of the stadium is it really necessary? It looks untidy and for how long is it correct to refer to the current stadium as the "new" one? Realistically, how many people are going to want to sort this by stadium? And if for some reason that genuinely evades me they do, is it unreasonable to assume that they could refer to the year or click on the link to ascertain which generation of the stadium it is? It's been three and a half years since the FLC so it's not a unreasonable time to reassess some of the decisions made then. danno 19:14, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Wimbledon no longer exist? They either exist as MK Dons or as AFC Wimbledon, depending on your point of view... 90.204.56.152 ( talk) 18:30, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Why is this article locked to all editors until May 7th?
Greenman (
talk)
18:27, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
I would echo the same question. Was trying to add the 2011-12 result as it's just been played but can't get in
Aion707 (
talk)
18:32, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
!scope=row|
Real Madrid C.F.
|9
|3
|1956, 1957 etc
|1981
while this table looks like this !scope=row|
Manchester United F.C.||11||5||2004 etc||2007
If that's the case then having all info on the same line is casing the problem and it needs to be on separate lines like in the Champions League list, if that makes any sense, as it rather hard to explain without sounding confusing.( The edit has put the real madrid info after each other not list it like I intended, but if you go to edit the champions league table you should understand what I'm trying to explain.)
NapHit (
talk)
19:06, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of Football League Cup winners which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 21:30, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
On 7 September 2012, it was proposed that this article be moved to List of FA Cup finals. The result of the discussion was page moved.. |
Hi editors. Visitor experience issue I noticed: when sorting the table by other parameters (in my case it was attendance), the (R) in the Season column becomes non-functional and confusing as it is not next to the season to which it is related. I propose that these are changed to display the season and the (R), for instance '1874–75 (R)'. Thoughts? Andre666 ( talk) 23:12, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
Many clubs have changed their names as times moved on. An example is Blackburn Olympic who are now Blackburn Rovers, another is Leicester Fosse who are now Leicester City. Should only the current name of a club be used or the name of the club when in the FA Cup final? Or have the old and the new names? This has to be resolved. 94.194.22.70 ( talk) 22:39, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
The Wednesday is the same club as Sheffield Wednesday - just a name change. They are listed separately and The Wednesday is not even in the Results by team table. There are clear inconsistencies in this article. The Wednesday is the same club as Sheffield Wednesday, but listed separately. This need needs either:
* use only the current club name or * state the old name with new name after in column.
188.222.175.211 ( talk) 13:48, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
The full title of this football match is..The Football Association Challenge Cup Final Tie. It has been shortened to The FA Cup Final, adding an acronym and omitting the word Tie. 188.222.175.211 ( talk) 14:47, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
188.222.175.211 ( talk) 15:05, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
This level of detail is not required in the lead, the lead is to summarise the key aspects of the article, not to list what's in the list. The Rambling Man ( talk) 14:54, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
“ | The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview. It should define the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points—including any prominent controversies. The notability of the article's subject is usually established in the first few sentences. The emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic, according to reliable, published sources. Apart from trivial basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article. | ” |
The Millenium stadium is not the home of an English League club ground. It is none league club ground. Rambing Man thinks it is. 188.222.175.211 ( talk) 15:31, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
And yet you kept inserting false information. Why? The Rambling Man ( talk) 13:51, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
I have asked at WT:FOOTY that a consensus be established on how to treat these teams, and ask that all continued debate take place in this section from now on rather than scattered across the talk page -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 13:29, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Why is it in italics? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.240.225.120 ( talk) 05:03, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
With Arsenal successfully defending the FA Cup in 2015, it means that the cup has been won by the same team in two or more consecutive years on ten occasions, rather than the stated eight, with The Wanderers, Blackburn Rovers, Tottenham and Arsenal doing it twice, and Newcastle United (1951 and 1952) and Chelsea (2009 and 2010) doing it once. 115.70.169.15 ( talk) 09:42, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
User:PeeJay2K3 made [ this change]. Not sure why he decided that attendance, venue, season and score should be singular, and winners and runners-up plural (his edit summary was "shouldn't be"), but it's obviously inconsistent. There is one attendance, one winner, one score etc. in each cell, so needs to be changed to singular. Greenman ( talk) 09:56, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm not convinced Cardiff should have the Welsh flag beside their entries, yes they're from Wales, but they play in the English football pyramid, why should the Welsh flag be there? I propose removing it, any thoughts? Zarcadia ( talk) 20:13, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Results by city?
Alexandre M. B. Berwanger ( talk) 13:08, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
I can understand why the removal of this note would be thought of as whitewashing but is this sort of detail really the concern of this article? Britmax ( talk) 19:07, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
216.0.106.10 ( talk) 23:24, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
I noticed that this name is seen for the likes of the Taiwan FA Cup and Senegal FA Cup, as there isn't just one FA Cup. Thoughts on this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nabulowa ( talk • contribs) 19:17, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi. In my opinion it would be better delete the "Final No." coulumn beacuse it don't need. Dr Salvus ( talk) 18:16, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) -- Calidum 01:30, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
List of FA Cup Finals → List of FA Cup finals – A lot of lists of the finals have the F for "finals" with a lowercase letter. DrSalvus ( talk) 18:31, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
I'm confused as to why the note is necessary. A club being moved renamed and rebranded makes it a new club. If a club joined with other clubs to make a new one I.e ospreys being formed as an amalgamation of neath rfc and Swansea rfc then every achievement neath or Swansea had wouldn't be replaced by the ospreys or a note that a new club didn't claim to be an old club or claim their achievements. The fact that Wimbledon FC moved to MK and were renamed is entirely irrelevant on an article documenting fa cup victories including the victory of an old club.
Equally if the note is necessary this AFC wimbledon does as the supporters continuation of Wimbledon FC and does lay claim to the titles won by them. MK are utterly irrelevant here so if any comment is necessary it should be about AFC wimbledon not MK RyouBakura13 ( talk) 22:55, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
I mean we do the trophies won by Wimbledon FC are displayed at Merton council or in AFC Wimbledon's trophy cases. Besides this my point is Wimbledon FC won this award and any addendum about a later switch is irrelevant. This is about which clubs won the FA cup not which ones lay claim to the honours. Wimbledon FC won the FA cup and that's all that needs to be mentioned here. RyouBakura13 ( talk) 20:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
The Article states that Tottenham Hotspur were the only non league club to win the FA Cup yet in 1901 the Southern League was one of the Top Divisions in Football and therefore shouldnt be described as non-league. The Article on Non League Football clearly states that its Football outside the top professional leagues e.g. Nowadays the National league and below. 80.215.140.78 ( talk) 18:13, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
Do we have anywhere that shows which pairs of opponents have met multiple times in the cup final (excluding replays)? (I believe three times is the record, held jointly) If not, would it be worth adding? -- Jameboy ( talk) 18:55, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
List of FA Cup finals article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
List of FA Cup finals is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured list on May 7, 2012. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Featured list |
This article is rated FL-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
From p17 of The Essential History of West Bromwich Albion by Gavin McOwan: "With no extra-time being played, the replay [of the 1886 FA Cup Final] was arranged at Derby a week later." Currently the article shows that extra time was played. What was the source used to determine which matches went to extra time? Please can this be re-checked. -- Jameboy ( talk) 22:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
The result shown is incorrect - should be 1-0 and not 10-0!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.155.251.102 ( talk) 15:59, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Why are Arsenal in bold three times? They have only won the double once! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
92.12.22.5 (
talk)
17:50, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Do we really need this distinction noted in the table? Most stadia have now been rebuilt since their original construction and we even have the Millenium Stadium period separating the old and new "eras". Thoughts? Britmax ( talk) 10:50, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
It makes sense to a degree, but since the underlying piped links direct to the correct version of the stadium is it really necessary? It looks untidy and for how long is it correct to refer to the current stadium as the "new" one? Realistically, how many people are going to want to sort this by stadium? And if for some reason that genuinely evades me they do, is it unreasonable to assume that they could refer to the year or click on the link to ascertain which generation of the stadium it is? It's been three and a half years since the FLC so it's not a unreasonable time to reassess some of the decisions made then. danno 19:14, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Wimbledon no longer exist? They either exist as MK Dons or as AFC Wimbledon, depending on your point of view... 90.204.56.152 ( talk) 18:30, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Why is this article locked to all editors until May 7th?
Greenman (
talk)
18:27, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
I would echo the same question. Was trying to add the 2011-12 result as it's just been played but can't get in
Aion707 (
talk)
18:32, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
!scope=row|
Real Madrid C.F.
|9
|3
|1956, 1957 etc
|1981
while this table looks like this !scope=row|
Manchester United F.C.||11||5||2004 etc||2007
If that's the case then having all info on the same line is casing the problem and it needs to be on separate lines like in the Champions League list, if that makes any sense, as it rather hard to explain without sounding confusing.( The edit has put the real madrid info after each other not list it like I intended, but if you go to edit the champions league table you should understand what I'm trying to explain.)
NapHit (
talk)
19:06, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of Football League Cup winners which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 21:30, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
On 7 September 2012, it was proposed that this article be moved to List of FA Cup finals. The result of the discussion was page moved.. |
Hi editors. Visitor experience issue I noticed: when sorting the table by other parameters (in my case it was attendance), the (R) in the Season column becomes non-functional and confusing as it is not next to the season to which it is related. I propose that these are changed to display the season and the (R), for instance '1874–75 (R)'. Thoughts? Andre666 ( talk) 23:12, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
Many clubs have changed their names as times moved on. An example is Blackburn Olympic who are now Blackburn Rovers, another is Leicester Fosse who are now Leicester City. Should only the current name of a club be used or the name of the club when in the FA Cup final? Or have the old and the new names? This has to be resolved. 94.194.22.70 ( talk) 22:39, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
The Wednesday is the same club as Sheffield Wednesday - just a name change. They are listed separately and The Wednesday is not even in the Results by team table. There are clear inconsistencies in this article. The Wednesday is the same club as Sheffield Wednesday, but listed separately. This need needs either:
* use only the current club name or * state the old name with new name after in column.
188.222.175.211 ( talk) 13:48, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
The full title of this football match is..The Football Association Challenge Cup Final Tie. It has been shortened to The FA Cup Final, adding an acronym and omitting the word Tie. 188.222.175.211 ( talk) 14:47, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
188.222.175.211 ( talk) 15:05, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
This level of detail is not required in the lead, the lead is to summarise the key aspects of the article, not to list what's in the list. The Rambling Man ( talk) 14:54, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
“ | The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview. It should define the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points—including any prominent controversies. The notability of the article's subject is usually established in the first few sentences. The emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic, according to reliable, published sources. Apart from trivial basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article. | ” |
The Millenium stadium is not the home of an English League club ground. It is none league club ground. Rambing Man thinks it is. 188.222.175.211 ( talk) 15:31, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
And yet you kept inserting false information. Why? The Rambling Man ( talk) 13:51, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
I have asked at WT:FOOTY that a consensus be established on how to treat these teams, and ask that all continued debate take place in this section from now on rather than scattered across the talk page -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 13:29, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Why is it in italics? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.240.225.120 ( talk) 05:03, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
With Arsenal successfully defending the FA Cup in 2015, it means that the cup has been won by the same team in two or more consecutive years on ten occasions, rather than the stated eight, with The Wanderers, Blackburn Rovers, Tottenham and Arsenal doing it twice, and Newcastle United (1951 and 1952) and Chelsea (2009 and 2010) doing it once. 115.70.169.15 ( talk) 09:42, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
User:PeeJay2K3 made [ this change]. Not sure why he decided that attendance, venue, season and score should be singular, and winners and runners-up plural (his edit summary was "shouldn't be"), but it's obviously inconsistent. There is one attendance, one winner, one score etc. in each cell, so needs to be changed to singular. Greenman ( talk) 09:56, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm not convinced Cardiff should have the Welsh flag beside their entries, yes they're from Wales, but they play in the English football pyramid, why should the Welsh flag be there? I propose removing it, any thoughts? Zarcadia ( talk) 20:13, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Results by city?
Alexandre M. B. Berwanger ( talk) 13:08, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
I can understand why the removal of this note would be thought of as whitewashing but is this sort of detail really the concern of this article? Britmax ( talk) 19:07, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
216.0.106.10 ( talk) 23:24, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
I noticed that this name is seen for the likes of the Taiwan FA Cup and Senegal FA Cup, as there isn't just one FA Cup. Thoughts on this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nabulowa ( talk • contribs) 19:17, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi. In my opinion it would be better delete the "Final No." coulumn beacuse it don't need. Dr Salvus ( talk) 18:16, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) -- Calidum 01:30, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
List of FA Cup Finals → List of FA Cup finals – A lot of lists of the finals have the F for "finals" with a lowercase letter. DrSalvus ( talk) 18:31, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
I'm confused as to why the note is necessary. A club being moved renamed and rebranded makes it a new club. If a club joined with other clubs to make a new one I.e ospreys being formed as an amalgamation of neath rfc and Swansea rfc then every achievement neath or Swansea had wouldn't be replaced by the ospreys or a note that a new club didn't claim to be an old club or claim their achievements. The fact that Wimbledon FC moved to MK and were renamed is entirely irrelevant on an article documenting fa cup victories including the victory of an old club.
Equally if the note is necessary this AFC wimbledon does as the supporters continuation of Wimbledon FC and does lay claim to the titles won by them. MK are utterly irrelevant here so if any comment is necessary it should be about AFC wimbledon not MK RyouBakura13 ( talk) 22:55, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
I mean we do the trophies won by Wimbledon FC are displayed at Merton council or in AFC Wimbledon's trophy cases. Besides this my point is Wimbledon FC won this award and any addendum about a later switch is irrelevant. This is about which clubs won the FA cup not which ones lay claim to the honours. Wimbledon FC won the FA cup and that's all that needs to be mentioned here. RyouBakura13 ( talk) 20:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
The Article states that Tottenham Hotspur were the only non league club to win the FA Cup yet in 1901 the Southern League was one of the Top Divisions in Football and therefore shouldnt be described as non-league. The Article on Non League Football clearly states that its Football outside the top professional leagues e.g. Nowadays the National league and below. 80.215.140.78 ( talk) 18:13, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
Do we have anywhere that shows which pairs of opponents have met multiple times in the cup final (excluding replays)? (I believe three times is the record, held jointly) If not, would it be worth adding? -- Jameboy ( talk) 18:55, 20 April 2024 (UTC)