Talk:Umbro sponsorships
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So I think this page should not exist. It is entirely devoid of documentation, and there is no way to verify or check whether the information is current. Moreover, it offers no particular value, and gives no information of interest other than puffing up the image of Umbro. It seems quite contrary to the spirit of WP:SOAP, WP:NOTCATALOG, and WP:NOT#STATS. Tb (talk) 17:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- I think it should.
- The reason I created this page, was because
- a) The information shoudn't be at the Umbro-page: it would give too much weight to it, compared to the other information about Umbro. Thus I created a new item.
- b) There is also a similar page about Nike sponsorships. I do not see why Nike sponsorships should have such a page, while Umbro shouldn't.
- c) When you watch the Wikipedia-page of a sponsored club (for example, Randers FC) you can see the link to the homepage at the External links-chapter. There you can verify or check whether the information is current.
- d) If you watch the history-pages of the Nike sponsorships and the Adidas sponsorships, you can see that a lot of people like to maintain those pages. In other words: to a lot of people these pages have a lot of value. And if it has to them, I guess there are readers who are interested in these pages as well. Jeff5102 (talk) 20:37, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- Some responses:
- (a) I agree completely. Having a separate page is far better than having the list inside Umbro.
- (b) Not relevant. I think the Nike sponsorships page is a bad idea. But regardless, WP:WAX applies here.
- (c) Of course there are mechanisms of checking the information and keeping it up to date. But that doesn't mean it's happening, or is feasible to expect.
- (d) Lots of people add entries. I don't see them deleted when not there. And that is not an indication that they think the list is important, but rather, an indication that they want their favorite team listed--it's a vote of loyalty for their team, not the idea of sponsorship list pages.
- An example of the problem associated with (d)--which is indeed a problem, and the root of why I am suggesting deletion here. We had a problem with, for example, Psalm 23 which had a translation. That prompted people to start adding translations in every language and version they could find. But that's totally not the point of Wikipedia. Moreover, these folks were not thinking "oh, a list of texts is very important"--indeed, there wasn't any objection to the proposal to stop having the text at all. Rather, they saw the existence of a list as a good reason to add to it. That's human nature here. But it doesn't mean the list is a good idea. So the question is, what value does this list give, beyond the observation that Umbro has a jillion sponsorships? Tb (talk) 20:48, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
