This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | → | Archive 15 |
Could someone do a section on Rangers current season? If not I dont mind doing it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.107.96.86 Gcoombe ( talk) 01:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)( talk) 01:45, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
List of the men who have been chairman of the board of directors at Rangers Football Club. Any help getting this list complete would be great, it is needed for the List of Rangers F.C. seasons. Johnelwaq ( talk) 19:01, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
2009-
Can you please make this a separate article?
It shouldn't be on the main page of Rangers.
Jodie kennedy ( talk) 11:43, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
You do not own the article, I also feel this section should be removed to it's own location. SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 05:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
hippo, you made the point that consensus evolved, why should it not continue to evolve ? I am glad we appear to moving towards our own consensus that this section needs to be addressed. I too support your idea of a lighter section and a more detailed page, where the issues can be discussed\addressed in depth. That is the very point which has drew me into this debate. By trying to condense a very emotive and thorny issue into a page which should be primarily about a football club, we are doing a disservice to both subjects.
SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 13:32, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps so, but sectarianism existed in Scotland long before either club was founded, and Rangers are about more than sectarianism and not all fans are sectarian, yet there was nothing good said of the club or the supporters before I edited this section. You say Rangers are notable for it;s context in Scottish society, yet you removed a large section on how they are addressing the issue. Please remember, sectarianism was not caused by a football club, nor is it Rangers problem alone, it is society's problem too. We can not hope to explain how this cancer grew amongst us, without exposing the roots, that involves an enormous amount of debate. You say "sectarianism and a football club cannot be easily separated, then why does the Celtic and sectarianism section run to only 12 lines?
As for attracting more opinion, good. Let folks come to this page to find out about Rangers Football Club, give them the option to find out more with related articles on whatever related subjects. Singling out one club page on WiKi for the behaviour of a minority of fans must surely go against any kind of natural justice.
SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 14:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Suggest editing the following:
The 2008–09 season saw Rangers make a below-par start to their UEFA Champions League campaign as they drew 0–0 at home to the Lithuanian club FBK Kaunas. The away leg ended in a 2–1 defeat, having taken the lead through Kevin Thomson Rangers were beaten by a free-kick from Nerijus Radžius and a late header from Linas Pilibaitis.
reason: Undue Weight/Recentism: How important is this in light of a successful season ? How important an event was this in the clubs history ? How important are 2 foreign goal scorers to the history of the club ?
Suggested The 2008–09 season saw Rangers make a below-par start to their UEFA Champions League campaign, losing out in the knock-out stage to FC Kaunas of Lithuania.
comments ?
SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 06:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thank you sir.
SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 11:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok i kne wi had seen it.
it in the gussiness book of record 2005 page 214
the wording wil have ot be fixed though
it says Most domestic league titles
The most domestic league titles won by a football club is 50 by rangers fc (uk) between 1891 and 2003
and once again we see editors personal agendas being pursued. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SeekerAfterTruth ( talk • contribs) 04:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Meaning that their are editors here who indulge their own agendas, what is cryptic about that? As a result we have non nuetral pov'sand an article littered with recentism, inaccuracy and a section in breach of undue weight.
I suggest you dig a little deeper into editors histories. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SeekerAfterTruth ( talk • contribs) 06:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
The preceding argument shows it quite clearly. Rangers have won 110 of the 3 top Scottish Football honours(League, League Cup, Scottish Cup)their nearest rivals trail them 20 trophies !! But they cannot be called the most successful club in Scotland ? at the very least, they should be called the most successful club in domestic Scottish football. As for "the what is success" drivel, it;s simple, football clubs' in Scotland primary focus is to compete for major trophies, the club that wins the most major trophies is most successful. In this case, Rangers are demonstrably the most successful Scottish club. To that end it should be included. SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 10:41, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
That is the most preposterous statement I have seen from you yet hippoy, If I can get consensus that black is white, does that make it true ? The figures above are the truth, available to anyone from a myriad of sources, and they show quite clearly that Rangers have won more major domestic trophies than any other Scottish club, 20 more than the nearest rival mind you, not one or two, but 20!. You are seriously telling me that the truth of the statistics of Scottish football is not fit for encyclopaedic purposes ?
Also, it is not your article, I am free to edit as I see fit as long as I adhere to the rules, you of course can object to content, but please remember not to delete cited entries, you are not judge and jury. But to keep it civil, here's more citations for you to object to. Go on, surprise me ;-)
http://www.123football.com/clubs/scotland/rangers/index.htm
"Rangers Football Club is among the world's most successful football clubs and are the most succesful Scottish team."
http://www.free-football.tv/articles/Rangers.html
"Since sharing their first trophy Rangers have gone on to win a host of others and to this date remain the most honoured football team’s in the world, having amassed a total of 107 trophies and making their trophy room one of the most famous in the world. Along the way they have achieved many records including having achieved the most domestic League Championships which now totals 51, some of which helped the club to achieve a record 7 domestic trebles.
At the same time Rangers have also made their mark in Europe and hold the record of competing in European competitions 46 times so far, which is more than any other British club. They are also the first Scottish club to progress to the group stages of both the Champions League and the UEFA Cup."
SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 12:02, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
We are not talking about the most successful club in the world, which indeed has too many complex variables, we are talking about the most successful club in Scotland by virtue of who has won the most major domestic trophies !!
hibo, answer me these three questions: 1. Which team has had the most success in winning Scottish League championships ? 2. Which team has had the most success in winning the Scottish Cup ? 3. Which team has had the most success in winning major domestic Scottish Trophies ?
The answer is clear, so we can include it.
When I provide independent citations you describe them as garbage, when I provide citations from the clubs history, you imply they cannot be trusted. You appear to be using the rules not in the spirit that they were intended, but simply to block a view that does fit with your agenda. SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 13:14, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
"The independent citations you provided were not good quality"
Can you explain this and what makes you qualified to decide ?
Seems you are being a bit pedantic here and you never answered the questions above. (Or I may be thick)
SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 14:02, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Hipbhoy, You missed www.123goal.com, "Rangers Football Club is among the world's most successful football clubs and are the most succesful Scottish team."
what is your problem with them, not based in the East End ?
As for referencing the official Rangers site, I believe it is acceptable under the rules in certain circumstances, ie: there is no reasonable doubt as to it's authenticity.
Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:
1. the material is not unduly self-serving; 2. it does not involve claims about third parties; 3. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject; 4. there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; 5. the article is not based primarily on such source
SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 18:53, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I do not agree, but I would like another neutral opinion, as I am prepared to accept go with consensus. Can other editors please check this ?The site is here:
http://www.123football.com/clubs/scotland/rangers/index.htm
have a look and see if think it is a mirror of this article, leave your opinion here. cheers ;-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by SeekerAfterTruth ( talk • contribs) 23:40, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I prepose that the sub headings for the history section on the main page be the same as those sub headings on the History of Rangers F.C. page. The sections should clearly be more succinct than those of the main history page however. Johnelwaq ( talk) 17:22, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Why does it say 150 thousand fans travelled to manchester for the uefa cup final when there was actually over 200 thousand rangers fans there? no matter what they say we have the greatest fans in the world so let the rest know about it now! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.81.2 ( talk) 11:08, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
There has been a little bit of a revert war going on concerning the Famine song. An editor believes it should be called "the so called famine song". If it is so called that then it is called that, isn't it? If not then I suggest the wiki article Famine song be changed to So called famine song. Jack forbes ( talk) 13:58, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
It also seems there is a very vocal minority of editors who, in pursuing their own agenda, are preventing a balanced, accurate article. How important will this chant be in 10yrs time ? Not very. then this is recentism. How important is this chant in relation to the clubs 138 history ? Not very, then this is undue weight. I also agree that sectarianism must be rooted out, but it will not be achieved without balance. simply perpetuating myths does not help the cause. SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 06:52, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
SeekerAfterTruth (
talk •
contribs)
04:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I do not believe it will, other unacceptable chants have come and gone from football grounds, this one is no different, however repugnant. (Aberdeen fans singing of the Ibrox Disaster, Man Utd rivals singing of the Munich Aircrash etc..)
It is not about removing the section, but rather trimming it. Again it can be discussed on a specific article. SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 13:56, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | → | Archive 15 |
Could someone do a section on Rangers current season? If not I dont mind doing it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.107.96.86 Gcoombe ( talk) 01:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)( talk) 01:45, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
List of the men who have been chairman of the board of directors at Rangers Football Club. Any help getting this list complete would be great, it is needed for the List of Rangers F.C. seasons. Johnelwaq ( talk) 19:01, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
2009-
Can you please make this a separate article?
It shouldn't be on the main page of Rangers.
Jodie kennedy ( talk) 11:43, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
You do not own the article, I also feel this section should be removed to it's own location. SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 05:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
hippo, you made the point that consensus evolved, why should it not continue to evolve ? I am glad we appear to moving towards our own consensus that this section needs to be addressed. I too support your idea of a lighter section and a more detailed page, where the issues can be discussed\addressed in depth. That is the very point which has drew me into this debate. By trying to condense a very emotive and thorny issue into a page which should be primarily about a football club, we are doing a disservice to both subjects.
SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 13:32, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps so, but sectarianism existed in Scotland long before either club was founded, and Rangers are about more than sectarianism and not all fans are sectarian, yet there was nothing good said of the club or the supporters before I edited this section. You say Rangers are notable for it;s context in Scottish society, yet you removed a large section on how they are addressing the issue. Please remember, sectarianism was not caused by a football club, nor is it Rangers problem alone, it is society's problem too. We can not hope to explain how this cancer grew amongst us, without exposing the roots, that involves an enormous amount of debate. You say "sectarianism and a football club cannot be easily separated, then why does the Celtic and sectarianism section run to only 12 lines?
As for attracting more opinion, good. Let folks come to this page to find out about Rangers Football Club, give them the option to find out more with related articles on whatever related subjects. Singling out one club page on WiKi for the behaviour of a minority of fans must surely go against any kind of natural justice.
SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 14:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Suggest editing the following:
The 2008–09 season saw Rangers make a below-par start to their UEFA Champions League campaign as they drew 0–0 at home to the Lithuanian club FBK Kaunas. The away leg ended in a 2–1 defeat, having taken the lead through Kevin Thomson Rangers were beaten by a free-kick from Nerijus Radžius and a late header from Linas Pilibaitis.
reason: Undue Weight/Recentism: How important is this in light of a successful season ? How important an event was this in the clubs history ? How important are 2 foreign goal scorers to the history of the club ?
Suggested The 2008–09 season saw Rangers make a below-par start to their UEFA Champions League campaign, losing out in the knock-out stage to FC Kaunas of Lithuania.
comments ?
SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 06:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thank you sir.
SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 11:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok i kne wi had seen it.
it in the gussiness book of record 2005 page 214
the wording wil have ot be fixed though
it says Most domestic league titles
The most domestic league titles won by a football club is 50 by rangers fc (uk) between 1891 and 2003
and once again we see editors personal agendas being pursued. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SeekerAfterTruth ( talk • contribs) 04:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Meaning that their are editors here who indulge their own agendas, what is cryptic about that? As a result we have non nuetral pov'sand an article littered with recentism, inaccuracy and a section in breach of undue weight.
I suggest you dig a little deeper into editors histories. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SeekerAfterTruth ( talk • contribs) 06:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
The preceding argument shows it quite clearly. Rangers have won 110 of the 3 top Scottish Football honours(League, League Cup, Scottish Cup)their nearest rivals trail them 20 trophies !! But they cannot be called the most successful club in Scotland ? at the very least, they should be called the most successful club in domestic Scottish football. As for "the what is success" drivel, it;s simple, football clubs' in Scotland primary focus is to compete for major trophies, the club that wins the most major trophies is most successful. In this case, Rangers are demonstrably the most successful Scottish club. To that end it should be included. SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 10:41, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
That is the most preposterous statement I have seen from you yet hippoy, If I can get consensus that black is white, does that make it true ? The figures above are the truth, available to anyone from a myriad of sources, and they show quite clearly that Rangers have won more major domestic trophies than any other Scottish club, 20 more than the nearest rival mind you, not one or two, but 20!. You are seriously telling me that the truth of the statistics of Scottish football is not fit for encyclopaedic purposes ?
Also, it is not your article, I am free to edit as I see fit as long as I adhere to the rules, you of course can object to content, but please remember not to delete cited entries, you are not judge and jury. But to keep it civil, here's more citations for you to object to. Go on, surprise me ;-)
http://www.123football.com/clubs/scotland/rangers/index.htm
"Rangers Football Club is among the world's most successful football clubs and are the most succesful Scottish team."
http://www.free-football.tv/articles/Rangers.html
"Since sharing their first trophy Rangers have gone on to win a host of others and to this date remain the most honoured football team’s in the world, having amassed a total of 107 trophies and making their trophy room one of the most famous in the world. Along the way they have achieved many records including having achieved the most domestic League Championships which now totals 51, some of which helped the club to achieve a record 7 domestic trebles.
At the same time Rangers have also made their mark in Europe and hold the record of competing in European competitions 46 times so far, which is more than any other British club. They are also the first Scottish club to progress to the group stages of both the Champions League and the UEFA Cup."
SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 12:02, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
We are not talking about the most successful club in the world, which indeed has too many complex variables, we are talking about the most successful club in Scotland by virtue of who has won the most major domestic trophies !!
hibo, answer me these three questions: 1. Which team has had the most success in winning Scottish League championships ? 2. Which team has had the most success in winning the Scottish Cup ? 3. Which team has had the most success in winning major domestic Scottish Trophies ?
The answer is clear, so we can include it.
When I provide independent citations you describe them as garbage, when I provide citations from the clubs history, you imply they cannot be trusted. You appear to be using the rules not in the spirit that they were intended, but simply to block a view that does fit with your agenda. SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 13:14, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
"The independent citations you provided were not good quality"
Can you explain this and what makes you qualified to decide ?
Seems you are being a bit pedantic here and you never answered the questions above. (Or I may be thick)
SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 14:02, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Hipbhoy, You missed www.123goal.com, "Rangers Football Club is among the world's most successful football clubs and are the most succesful Scottish team."
what is your problem with them, not based in the East End ?
As for referencing the official Rangers site, I believe it is acceptable under the rules in certain circumstances, ie: there is no reasonable doubt as to it's authenticity.
Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:
1. the material is not unduly self-serving; 2. it does not involve claims about third parties; 3. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject; 4. there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; 5. the article is not based primarily on such source
SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 18:53, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I do not agree, but I would like another neutral opinion, as I am prepared to accept go with consensus. Can other editors please check this ?The site is here:
http://www.123football.com/clubs/scotland/rangers/index.htm
have a look and see if think it is a mirror of this article, leave your opinion here. cheers ;-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by SeekerAfterTruth ( talk • contribs) 23:40, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I prepose that the sub headings for the history section on the main page be the same as those sub headings on the History of Rangers F.C. page. The sections should clearly be more succinct than those of the main history page however. Johnelwaq ( talk) 17:22, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Why does it say 150 thousand fans travelled to manchester for the uefa cup final when there was actually over 200 thousand rangers fans there? no matter what they say we have the greatest fans in the world so let the rest know about it now! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.81.2 ( talk) 11:08, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
There has been a little bit of a revert war going on concerning the Famine song. An editor believes it should be called "the so called famine song". If it is so called that then it is called that, isn't it? If not then I suggest the wiki article Famine song be changed to So called famine song. Jack forbes ( talk) 13:58, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
It also seems there is a very vocal minority of editors who, in pursuing their own agenda, are preventing a balanced, accurate article. How important will this chant be in 10yrs time ? Not very. then this is recentism. How important is this chant in relation to the clubs 138 history ? Not very, then this is undue weight. I also agree that sectarianism must be rooted out, but it will not be achieved without balance. simply perpetuating myths does not help the cause. SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 06:52, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
SeekerAfterTruth (
talk •
contribs)
04:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I do not believe it will, other unacceptable chants have come and gone from football grounds, this one is no different, however repugnant. (Aberdeen fans singing of the Ibrox Disaster, Man Utd rivals singing of the Munich Aircrash etc..)
It is not about removing the section, but rather trimming it. Again it can be discussed on a specific article. SeekerAfterTruth ( talk) 13:56, 4 June 2009 (UTC)