Talk:Associação Académica de Coimbra - O.A.F.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
isnt Boavista the Fourth in number of supporters? - --Cyprus2k1 12:29, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- it isn't - outside the big games it's rare the Bessa has an attendance over 10k, but it's quite disputable that Académica claims the 4th spot. While it is indeed a very respected side nationwide, most of it's fanbase only has Académica as the "second team", after Benfica, Porto or Sporting (for academic reasons, as pointed in the article). V.Setúbal or V.Guimarães probably top Académica, but even that would be hard to prove.
I'll try to NPOV the article a bit and correct some info when I'm in better shape. Added to "watch" for now. WolfenSilva 12:34, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Current Squad nationalities at WikiProject Football
I have raised the nationality listings of the Current Squad section at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Nationality of players in Current Squad sections. AecisBrievenbus 23:12, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Requested move
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was No consensus for a move. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 11:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Associação Académica de Coimbra - O.A.F. → Académica de Coimbra → Académica de Coimbra OAF per WP:Common name. Sebisthlm (talk) 14:10, 16 February 2008 (UTC).
[edit] Amendment
The request has been amended. Naming the football club Académica de Coimbra may infringe on the other articles on the University of Coimbra student organization and its sports departments. Personally I think the football club would be best suited changing name according to the first move request with Associação Académica de Coimbra moving to Coimbra's Academic Association (there is no reason why that article's name should be in portuguese on English Wikipedia (see for example Uppsala Student Union). However, a mass move operation involving all articles linked to Associação Académica de Coimbra is probably unrealistic, hence the amendment of the move request. Sebisthlm (talk) 08:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] New Survey
- Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with
*'''Support'''
or*'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with~~~~
. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
- Oppose if this is an Encyclopedia, whe should try to use / create the information correct, so if it doesn't make sense to change it...Aritajustino (talk) 12:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Comment: Again, please read WP:Common name. Article names should basically be the name by wich the subject is most commonly known, not necessarily the full official or scientific name. In this case the title is too long. Also, remember that this is the English Wikipedia. Sebisthlm (talk) 12:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
-
[edit] Old Survey
- Support per nom. Sebisthlm (talk) 14:10, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose. There are dozens of sports departments in different sports with this name, including the Associação Académica de Coimbra - Secção de Futebol (also a football team). Besides that, the Associação Académica de Coimbra also known as Académica (which is the parent institution for all the others using the name), is a students' union of the University of Coimbra. Yodaki (talk) 00:17, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose, Académica de Coimbra (professional football) may make sense. Matthew_hk tc 15:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose, is the official name...Aritajustino (talk) 01:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- Comment: Please read WP:Common name. Article names should basically be the name by wich the subject is most commonly known, not necessarily the full official or scientific name. In this case the title is too long. Sebisthlm (talk) 08:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- This survey is closed since the move request has been amended.
[edit] Discussion
- Any additional comments: