Talk:Watford F.C.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Luton Town
Reading through the article the only comment I have to make is that 'generally good-natured' is definitely NOT a term I would use to describe our rivalry with Luton Town - 2002 was mild in comparison with some of the problems I have known Watford fans to have experienced in the past, including rock-throwing by some Luton fans at a League tie in the 80s and vandalism to vehicles parked in Luton bearing any signs of a Watford-supporting owner. From participation in message boards in recent years I would suggest that rather than 'good-natured' the rivalry continues to be bitter and fairly vicious at times, particularly from the Luton fans.
- Well maybe it's a bit subjective - never felt myself that it was vicious or bitter. Perhaps we can think of a more neutral wording here. Worldtraveller
[edit] Sansom/Moralee
Whilst Kenny Samson is a former Watford player and is a famous player, I feel that that section should only include Watford players who are team "heroes," so to speak. After all, players like Kenny Jackett are hardly "famous," but are included. The "famous" definition applies to within the Watford fanbase, and thus Samsom shouldn't be there.
I've removed Moralee, as he isn't famous in either sense of the definition. (This was written by me before I was familiar with Wikipedia I've re-arranged it to the point chronologically where it should be, and to tidy up the talk page.) HornetMike 18:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Celebrity Fans
Whilst our one was sparse, a lot of club pages do have it. It doesn't exactly do any harm, does it?
- I removed it because it's not verifiable information, and really not relevant to the club or of interest to the general reader, so inappropriate for an encyclopaedia. If other club pages have it, they shouldn't have. Worldtraveller 19:04, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Records etc.
Why on earth has someone edited out the records section? And all the catergories stuff and half the managers? I don't know how to get this back, I hope someone else does because I really don't want to have to write it all out again.
Re: other changes. I know the new squad list is now in the official football squad fromat, but it actually now displays less information! What's the point in changing it?
Regarding the Heroes/Famous players section. I agree that if you call them "heroes" you're going POV. But I do feel the way we've got it now ignores huge amounts of notable Watford players just because they're not particularly famous. Maybe if the "heroes" list was restored under a header of "notable Watford players" Bit ambigous though, thoughts?
- No idea why the records section was removed, but don't worry - every previous revision of an article is stored and anything can be retrieved. To revert back to a previous version of an article, you just need to click on the 'history' tab, click on the version you want to restore, then edit it and save it.
- As for the heroes/famous players/notables, I think maybe a list is not that useful anyway - what would be much more informative would be a list that includes a note explaining why each player was significant. I think 'Notable former players' or something similar would be a good title for the section. Worldtraveller 00:16, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Players Section
Whilst I understand that the squad has now been in an official Wiki template, I do feel the old chart (with a little bit of re-organisation) would be far better. Admittedly it's slightly larger, but it contains more information (birthdays - although I'm not researching them unless the consensus on here is good, date of arrival, previous club etc. The positions are slightly less generic as well.) Personally I think it looks better as well.
I thought this would be good:
Thoughts? The only problem I can see is that there's no way of showing Richard Lee's on loan without messing it up a bit. HornetMike 19:12, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I have been investigating the Wiki - template for football squads. There are some interesting arguments for both formats:
Conventional format's main points
- Creates a standard template across the football league
- Is small and concise
However the chart format (originally borrowed from now removed chat on Liverpool site) provides more information. This is more important with lower league teams, I feel. Whilst Premiership clubs can justifiably create articles for each of their players, containing information on join dates and so forth, it would be ridiculous for players such as Ben Gill to have their own article. Thus the information should be contained. The information in the above chart gives an indication of the average age of the Watford squad, as well as the general source of it's players (i.e. academy and signings from other clubs of our level) and how established the side is (i.e. Lewington's squad would had a series of joined dates quite far in the past. The Boothroyd squad chart shows it to be a recently assembeled squad.)
Furthermore, I don't really understand the need to have a smallish chart. This isn't much bigger and there are bits of the article that are larger anyway. What's the problem? As for keeping the same format across the league, I find this a faintly ridiculous argument. Each football article is entirely different, depending on the amount of work that has been invested in it by fans. Why insist on unifromity for one tiny section but not the rest?
Another interesting point made in favour of the Wiki-format is that "a lot of people invested time in it" So? Just because they invested time in it doesn't mean it's necessarily the right format to use in the circumstances.
I await correspondence from some people before I change it back, of course. HornetMike 18:37, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I think that this table is brilliant. It is much more informative than the current one, and who cares about the size? This really should be the standard table, for Squads and Managers. As for Richard Lee, add a note at the bottom or something, maybe put it in the last column. As I say, I feel it is much better and more informative, and I support putting it in the article.Kingfisherswift 08:59, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] New Update
I've just started the first part of a new revamp - the Luton rivalry section. Over the next few months I plan to add sections on the club's colours and crests, boost the history section, revamp the notable players section and add more statistics. HornetMike 13:57, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I've added the notable players section. I've made it as non-POV as possible, focusing on the players achievements with the club. If anyone knows anything about Dennis Uphill, Dennis Bond, Mo Johnston, Steve Terry or Keith Eddy could they please add sections. Also, I know Callaghan had two spells at Watford, and I think the official site lumps them all together as 1980-91. I've put this date in, but if anyone knows the two spells, could you please include them. I also can't find the debut year for Tom Walley.
I'm debating over which players to include from the play-off side. I think Richard Johnson, perhaps, but who else? Kennedy? Smart? Wright? Hyde? Rosenthal (from 97/98, obv)? Are Helguson and Robinson worthy of mention?
In terms of players who didn't make a huge contribution at Watford but did at other clubs, I've included David James and Pat Jennings, but omitted Kevin Phillips, as he only really had one good season with us.
Not sure about Gerry Armstrong - thoughts? HornetMike 03:08, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Managers
I've noticed that the managers table has half the months in and half out. Using soccerbase.com (Link at base of page) can somebody assist me in cleaning up the managers for good? Thanks.Kingfisherswift 19:04, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Done, although Soccerbase looks like it has a few errors in that department. I double-check it against Trefor Jones when I get home.HornetMike 19:53, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "Not a news service"
HornetMike - while I agree Wikipedia ain't a news service, it might have been productive to edit the changes to be more of a description of what went on in the first leg of the semi. It's unavoidably relevant what happened in it, after all!
Just a thought, as they say. Nmg20 21:24, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, sorry for not replying sooner, my IP's been blocked because some idiot at the University was vandalising. I removed the reference because I didn't want 2005/06 to revert back what it had previously been - lots of itty-bitty statements about favourite players/good matches all stuck together. I was going to add something after the completion of the tie, but obviously some people are ahead of me! Cheers, HornetMike 18:35, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
No problem - I think it looks pretty good right now - but we'll review in ten days time, eh? :-) Nmg20 22:25, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
O-ho-ho, certainly! HornetMike 23:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Promotion
Gained promotion to FA Premier League against Leeds - come on.
[edit] Grammar question?
"Watford Football Club are an English professional football club based in Watford, Hertfordshire." wouldn't "Watford FC is" be more grammatically correct?
[edit] Stock Exchange
Is Watford F.C. a publically traded company and if so what is thier ticker symbol. Thank you. John R G 17:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Watford's a PLC, yeah. No idea what the ticker symbol is, sorry. I don't know much about shares, unfortunately. One place to look is any portfolio of Michael Ashcroft, if they're available. HornetMike 20:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
I found the ticker symbol and added it to the main page. John R G 07:00, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Les Ferdinand
Is he still a Watford player I thought he retired at the end of last (05-06) season. Kingjamie 15:21, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] elton John bought for a pound??
I think I remember hearing that Elton John bought a football club for a pound. I know know that he was owner of Watford, but did he pay a pound for them as I remember??