Talk:Manchester City F.C.: Difference between revisions
→Edit request: Reply |
→Man City 4 in a row: new section |
||
(47 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown) | |||
Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
}} |
}} |
||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=FA|blpo=yes|1= |
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=FA|blpo=yes|1= |
||
{{WikiProject England |
{{WikiProject England|importance=Mid}} |
||
{{WikiProject Football |
{{WikiProject Football|importance=high|England=yes}} |
||
{{WikiProject Greater Manchester |
{{WikiProject Greater Manchester|importance=top}} |
||
{{ |
{{WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia}} |
||
}} |
}} |
||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
||
Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
{{Archives |bot=MiszaBot I |age=90 }} |
{{Archives |bot=MiszaBot I |age=90 }} |
||
{{Broken anchors|links= |
{{Broken anchors|links= |
||
* <nowiki>[[List of association football teams to have won four or more trophies in one season#Four titles in a season|quadruple]]</nowiki> |
* <nowiki>[[List of association football teams to have won four or more trophies in one season#Four titles in a season|quadruple]]</nowiki> |
||
* <nowiki>[[Symbols of Manchester#Coat of arms|City of Manchester coat of arms]]</nowiki> Anchor [[Symbols of Manchester#Coat of arms]] links to a specific web page: [[Coat of arms]]. |
|||
}} |
}} |
||
== City are owned by a "British-based company"? == |
|||
⚫ | |||
Single-purpose editors on this page have repeatedly inserted misleading, deceptive and unsourced text that claims that City are owned by a "British-based company". This should not be in the article. City are owned by the [[Abu Dhabi United Group]], which in turn is owned by [[Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan]]. Inserting "British-based company" into the article appears to be intended to mislead readers and obscure that City are owned by a senior figure in the UAE government. [[User:Thenightaway|Thenightaway]] ([[User talk:Thenightaway|talk]]) 16:11, 30 January 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{edit semi-protected|Manchester City F.C.|answered=yes}} |
|||
: The single-purpose editor Monerals has now on multiple occasions restored text claiming that City are owned by a British-based company without participating on the talk page. [[User:Thenightaway|Thenightaway]] ([[User talk:Thenightaway|talk]]) 23:42, 3 February 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Change the captain of the team from Ilkay Gundogan to Kevin De Bruyne on the google page when I search for man city. [[Special:Contributions/2400:4153:8A40:3F00:C07B:A34B:990D:A6D1|2400:4153:8A40:3F00:C07B:A34B:990D:A6D1]] ([[User talk:2400:4153:8A40:3F00:C07B:A34B:990D:A6D1|talk]]) 10:32, 19 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
⚫ | ::The company referred to is City Football Group, they are a British-based company and that is neither controversial, misleading or unsourced. They have their offices in Britain, their employees are in Britain, they are owned by other companies (which is described in the same sentence), the majority owner is Abu Dhabi United Group, and they also have a significant ownership stake from Silver Lake Capital an American company. Stop edit warring. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Pbradbury|<font style="color:#7EBFFF;background:#fff;">'''Paul '''</font>]][[User talk:Pbradbury|<font style="color:#fff;background:#7EBFFF;">''' Bradbury'''</font>]]</span></small> 09:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC) |
||
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:'''<!-- Template:ESp --> this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the English Wikipedia article [[Manchester City F.C.]]. Please make your request to Google Support directly instead. '''<span style="color:#f535aa">—</span> [[User:Paper9oll|<span style="background:#f535aa;color:#fff;padding:2px;border-radius:5px">Paper9oll</span>]] <span style="color:#f535aa">([[User talk:Paper9oll|🔔]] • [[Special:Contributions/Paper9oll|📝]])</span>''' 10:41, 19 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::: Which reliable sources describe City Football Group as "British-based"? More importantly, which reliable sources emphasize that Manchester City are owned by a "British-based" company rather than, say, Abu Dhabi? [[User:Thenightaway|Thenightaway]] ([[User talk:Thenightaway|talk]]) 13:56, 6 February 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::The sentance you keep editing, states that city football group is majority owned by the UAE. City Football group is a British-based company, the UK government is a reliable source and companies house shows the registration as a British company. The employees are British employees, the offices are primarily in the UK. The ultimate ownership is spelt out in the same sentence. It is unclear other than a bias on your part why this is contoversial. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Pbradbury|<font style="color:#7EBFFF;background:#fff;">'''Paul '''</font>]][[User talk:Pbradbury|<font style="color:#fff;background:#7EBFFF;">''' Bradbury'''</font>]]</span></small> 16:54, 9 February 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::: This source[https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/08355862] is a primary source, not a secondary reliable source. Your interpretation of the source in question falls under [[WP:OR]]. If this is all so uncontroversial, why are you unable to find a single reliable source to substantiate your interpretation? [[User:Thenightaway|Thenightaway]] ([[User talk:Thenightaway|talk]]) 17:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::There is no restriction on using a primary source in this way, please explain what policy you think this is violating. There is no Original Research here, no analysis or synthesis is being done. Please don't just quote WP guidelines without understanding them and explaining specifically what part of that guideline is being violated and specifically how. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Pbradbury|<font style="color:#7EBFFF;background:#fff;">'''Paul '''</font>]][[User talk:Pbradbury|<font style="color:#fff;background:#7EBFFF;">''' Bradbury'''</font>]]</span></small> 17:42, 9 February 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::: You're using your interpretation of a primary source (a government company registry) to substantiate the claim that the City Football Group is a "British-based company". The source at no point says that the company is "British-based". This is textbook [[WP:OR]]. Again, if your interpretation is so uncontroversial, why are you unable to find a single reliable source that substantiates it? [[User:Thenightaway|Thenightaway]] ([[User talk:Thenightaway|talk]]) 18:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::Because information about companies is boring and not reported on much, it's not very noteworthy, if it was controversial I might be able to find a source. Is your contention that a company is not based where it is registered and pays taxes? And that an assertion that it is, is WP:OR rather than a simple statement of fact? What is it that you consider qualifies for being based? Also on what basis do you think the sentence is deceptive? It says that city are owned by a British based holding company that is owned by Abu Dhabi United. Where is the deception. I don't think "British-based" adds much to the article as a whole but I don't understand your reasons for removing it other than what seems like an agenda with bias against the subject in question. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Pbradbury|<font style="color:#7EBFFF;background:#fff;">'''Paul '''</font>]][[User talk:Pbradbury|<font style="color:#fff;background:#7EBFFF;">''' Bradbury'''</font>]]</span></small> 18:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::: I do not buy that the ownership of one the most successful clubs in world team is being ignored by reliable sources because it's "boring". In fact, reliable sources have covered City's ownership intensely and none of them characterize the owners as a "British-based" company. Even if it's accurate that the "British-based" nature of City's owners is "not very noteworthy", then it obviously does not merit mention in the lead to the Wikipedia article for the club. In conclusion, the text in question cannot be substantiated by reliable sources and is in your words "not very noteworthy". It should obviously not be in the article then. [[User:Thenightaway|Thenightaway]] ([[User talk:Thenightaway|talk]]) 18:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::So I think you have a complete misunderstanding of the sentence and what it is referring to or you are deliberately mischaracterising it. Let me try to break it down for you. Manchester City Football Club is a British football club and company based in Manchester, it is owned by another company (as are several other football clubs around the world) City Football Group, also a British company based in Manchester. That company in turn is owned by another company Abu Dhabi United. All of that is explained in the article as company structure is relevant. It in no way obscures the ownership by Abu Dhabi, it simply lays out the structure in which they do that. Not all information in an article is noteworthy in and of itself. It is only the subject of the article that needs to be noteworthy. It could be argued that removing British based makes the article more deceptive because the assumption may be that City Football Group was based in Abu Dhabi (which it is not). I'll leave it there. You have not persuaded me of your case or reached consensus here, so please find consensus in another forum and leave the edit as is until you do so. There seems to be little point in me discussing with you on the topic further as it seems to me you are not acting with the intention of improving this article. I won't be engaging further in this forum unless other opinions are expressed by other editors. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Pbradbury|<font style="color:#7EBFFF;background:#fff;">'''Paul '''</font>]][[User talk:Pbradbury|<font style="color:#fff;background:#7EBFFF;">''' Bradbury'''</font>]]</span></small> 18:49, 9 February 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Roy Paul (Club captain) was Welsh, not English == |
|||
== Semi-protected edit request on 1 September 2023 == |
|||
Roy Paul (Club captain) was Welsh, not English [[User:JabiruvianJames|JabiruvianJames]] ([[User talk:JabiruvianJames|talk]]) 19:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{Edit semi-protected|Manchester City F.C.|answered=yes}} |
|||
⚫ | |||
:[[File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a [[WP:EDITXY|"change X to Y" format]] and provide a [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable source]] if appropriate.<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User:M.Bitton|M.Bitton]] ([[User talk:M.Bitton|talk]]) 23:15, 1 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:Fixed. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Pbradbury|<font style="color:#7EBFFF;background:#fff;">'''Paul '''</font>]][[User talk:Pbradbury|<font style="color:#fff;background:#7EBFFF;">''' Bradbury'''</font>]]</span></small> 20:09, 9 February 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Fan POV == |
|||
::good man [[User:JabiruvianJames|JabiruvianJames]] ([[User talk:JabiruvianJames|talk]]) 08:50, 10 February 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Top ‘flight’ == |
|||
There is a sickening amount of fan POV on this page, at least in the recent years of the history section. |
|||
What’s that mean? Top ‘tier’ pls [[Special:Contributions/148.252.147.120|148.252.147.120]] ([[User talk:148.252.147.120|talk]]) 17:44, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
"City '''produced another campaign to remember''' in [[2021–22 Manchester City F.C. season|2021–22]], retaining their [[2021–22 Premier League|league title]], following another close title race with Liverpool and making it four titles in five seasons. '''In another case of "typical City"''', needing four points from their last two fixtures, the Blues had fallen behind by two goals in both games, only to recover to a 2–2 draw at [[West Ham United F.C.|West Ham]], and to a 3–2 home win against [[Aston Villa F.C.|Aston Villa]] in the season finale. These last three goals were all scored in a five-minute blitz between the 76th and 81st minutes, '''in moments that would sit alongside the famous victories in the 1999 play-off final against Gillingham and the 2011–12 Premier League finale against QPR"'''. |
|||
:[[File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' "top flight" is the standard British term for the top division of a league system. This article is about a British club and therefore according to Wikipedia rules it uses British English with British phrases. <span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Falastur2|<b style="color:#000000;background:#AAD0FF;">Falastur2</b>]]</span> <sup><b>[[User talk:Falastur2|Talk]]</b></sup> 19:26, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== League Cup and FA Cup= double == |
|||
The source is ONE match statistics sheet for the Villa game. How does this justify any of the puffy claims? Wikipedia should be used for cold hard facts, not vague assumptions that only relate to the hardest of hardcore fans of the subject. This is not an annual or a season review DVD produced by the club, so it shouldn't sound like one. |
|||
⚫ | |||
I haven't read the whole article to pass judgement yet, but maybe this needs a Featured Article review. This was passed as a Featured Article in 2006, when the article looked like this: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Manchester_City_F.C.&oldid=46309987]. It had 16 references, of which three were notes and several others from unofficial fan sites, and many unsourced paragraphs. The page, and the club, have changed beyond recognition since even the last FAR in 2009. [[User:Unknown Temptation|Unknown Temptation]] ([[User talk:Unknown Temptation|talk]]) 12:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
⚫ | |||
:Came across this issue today on the WT:FOOTY board. The article, in it's current state, will almost certainly be demoted from its featured article status as it's become a fan page per the article tag. A pillar of the site, NPOV, has been eroded, which is a pity for those who made it a featured article in the first place. A quick scan over the article's history it was actually in decent shape until this summer. [[User:Tub st|Tub st]] ([[User talk:Tub st|talk]]) 11:48, 25 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::I've performed an emergency rewrite of the last few seasons' info, including straight-up deleting several paragraphs. I've long held the opinion that these history sections are far too affected by [[WP:RECENT|recency bias]] anyway, so it badly needed a trim. I obviously have not been able to fix every issue, because it's gone 1:30am and I need to sleep. I'll try to do some more clean-up tomorrow, but hopefully I've gotten rid of the worst excesses. <span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Falastur2|<b style="color:#000000;background:#AAD0FF;">Falastur2</b>]]</span> <sup><b>[[User talk:Falastur2|Talk]]</b></sup> 00:42, 26 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::That's an excellent cleanup of the history section. The fan point of view edits only really started in the summer (from looking at the article before and after this period) as the article was in decent shape prior to that. Hopefully its featured article status can be salvaged as there's nothing worse on this site than seeing the good work of those who made it a featured article in the first place come undone. [[User:Tub st|Tub st]] ([[User talk:Tub st|talk]]) 08:35, 26 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::Thanks. I haven't had a chance to have a second go at it yet but I'm off all of this week so I should find an opportunity at some point. In the meantime, it's been a long time since I was what could be described in any way as an active or involved editor so if there's any work which needs to be done to present a challenge to the FA delisting then I would appreciate the help on that count. <span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Falastur2|<b style="color:#000000;background:#AAD0FF;">Falastur2</b>]]</span> <sup><b>[[User talk:Falastur2|Talk]]</b></sup> 19:21, 26 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
: "Sickening" amount of fan POV is rather hyperbolic if I may say so myself. The article suffers more from recency bias and people seem to add more and more stuff to the introduction when it should be brief and succinct (same can be said for the introduction of other football club articles). [[User:Stevo1000|Stevo1000]] ([[User talk:Stevo1000|talk]]) 20:24, 26 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::"Sickening" was possibly not the correct word, but Unknown Temptation has a point about the POV nature of what has been put in recently. These articles are supposed to be written as encyclopaedic reference material, in a neutral and low-key way which doesn't dramatise or excite the topic. Instead - and I have been guilty of this in the past, and probably will in the future too, as it can be hard to avoid - many people instead write like they are writing news articles, where it is encouraged to use hyperbole. For instance, a news article might say "In a thrilling end to the contest, Haaland rose to score a majestic header to put the crown on City's dominance". An encyclopaedia should summarise it instead as "The final goal was scored by Haaland" - no adjectives, no subjective discussion of which was the dominant team, etc, just the facts, and only the most relevant facts at that. That stuff may not be "sickening" (though it probably would be sickening to a rival fan, just as I hate to read puff pieces about United, Liverpool, Arsenal etc) but it definitely is filled with purple prose which injects bias or opinion in where it shouldn't be. <span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Falastur2|<b style="color:#000000;background:#AAD0FF;">Falastur2</b>]]</span> <sup><b>[[User talk:Falastur2|Talk]]</b></sup> 09:13, 27 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::This—"neutral and low-key way which doesn't dramatise or excite the topic"—is spot on. I'm a fan of Celtic F.C. (being Irish many of us are) and in six months I've never edited a Celtic article. Not saying a fan shouldn't edit an article of the club they support, but that it can be harder to adhere to NPOV when doing so. [[User:Tub st|Tub st]] ([[User talk:Tub st|talk]]) 18:02, 28 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
⚫ | : |
||
::Prior to the final international break of the season, the Blues displayed an offensive masterclass against Burnley, recording a 6–0 home win in the FA Cup quarter-finals with another Haaland hat-trick.[42] City would face Sheffield United in the semi-finals at Wembley. |
|||
::well the terms "offensive masterclass" in my opinion should just count as fan [[User:CKon8|CKon8]] ([[User talk:CKon8|talk]]) 18:18, 1 October 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::I think it's about OK now, I haven't read the entire history but I doubt fans are clamouring to glorify the past of the club. One thing that has to be looked at is the supporters' section. For everyone who wants to update the most recent history and even the changes in backroom staff, this is outdated and almost identical to how this page was when it passed FA in 2006, during a period in which the club won one of their last 10 games of the season and finished 15th: |
|||
*"Since moving to the City of Manchester Stadium, the club's average attendances have been in the top six in England,[106] usually in excess of 40,000." - This is a 2005 source predating the Emirates Stadium, new Spurs stadium, Olympic Stadium... |
|||
*"Research carried out by Manchester City in 2005 estimated a fanbase of 886,000 in the United Kingdom and a total in excess of 2 million worldwide, although since the purchase of the club by Sheikh Mansour, and City's recent achievements, that figure has since ballooned to many times that size.[108]" - This source is also from 2005 so it naturally makes no mention at all to Sheikh Mansour, so half of this statement is (admittedly very likely) conjecture. Surely other studies exist in the last 18 years and with the club's much larger profile? |
|||
*"City supporters tend to believe that unpredictability is an inherent trait of their team, and label unexpected results "typical City".[110][111]" - Sourced to an ESPN source from 2007 and an unofficial supporters' website in 2006. While historically true, there are people who work and pay tax now who can never remember Manchester City the underdog. We have no basis to present this information in the present tense any more. Apologies for Sun source, but it's simple arithmetic, City is the most successful club of the last 15 years. [https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/22915901/chelsea-pochettino-man-city-utd-liverpool-arsenal-tottenham-trophies/] They're as unpredictable as Bayern Munich or PSG in recent memory. This is like using sources from the 1980s to say in the 2010s that Chelsea fans see themselves as inconsistent underdogs. [[User:Unknown Temptation|Unknown Temptation]] ([[User talk:Unknown Temptation|talk]]) 15:27, 30 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*:Removed template in the light of the above discussion and disappearance of the original proposer[[User:Horatius At The Bridge|Horatius At The Bridge]] ([[User talk:Horatius At The Bridge|talk]]) 14:01, 8 December 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Rivarly with Liverpool == |
|||
I propose to remove the paragraph for the reasons explained by the user Falastur2 [[User:14 novembre|14 novembre]] ([[User talk:14 novembre|talk]]) 11:50, 29 November 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Semi Protected Edit Request on 23 Dec 2023 == |
|||
City now have 34 major honours and are tied with chelsea after winning the club world cup [[User:CKon8|CKon8]] ([[User talk:CKon8|talk]]) 21:04, 22 December 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Semi-protected edit request on 23 December 2023 == |
|||
{{Edit semi-protected|Manchester City F.C.|answered=yes}} |
{{Edit semi-protected|Manchester City F.C.|answered=yes}} |
||
Change name from Man city to 115 Charges FC [[Special:Contributions/2A04:4A43:52DF:D9B7:0:0:21A:5A64|2A04:4A43:52DF:D9B7:0:0:21A:5A64]] ([[User talk:2A04:4A43:52DF:D9B7:0:0:21A:5A64|talk]]) 17:44, 21 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
City made history after winning the Club World Cup in 2023, becoming the first English side ever to simultaneously hold the Premier League, FA Cup, Champions league, Super Cup and Club World Cup in the same calendar year. They also became the first English side to win the Club World Cup at the first try. [[Special:Contributions/84.71.184.246|84.71.184.246]] ([[User talk:84.71.184.246|talk]]) 15:55, 23 December 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:'''<!-- Template:ESp --> There's no reason to change the title. [[User:Annh07|Annh07]] ([[User talk:Annh07|talk]]) 17:55, 21 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:The 2022–23 season saw Manchester City win their maiden European Cup and complete the continental treble in the process, becoming the second English club to do so. City made history after winning the Club World Cup in 2023, becoming the first English side ever to simultaneously hold the Premier League, FA Cup, Champions League, Super Cup and Club World Cup in the same calendar year. They also became the first English side to win the Club World Cup at the first try. The club is ranked first in the UEFA coefficient standings as of 2023. [[Special:Contributions/84.71.184.246|84.71.184.246]] ([[User talk:84.71.184.246|talk]]) 16:02, 23 December 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:[[File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a [[WP:EDITXY|"change X to Y" format]] and provide a [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable source]] if appropriate.<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User:Jonathan Deamer|Jonathan Deamer]] ([[User talk:Jonathan Deamer|talk]]) 17:30, 23 December 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::The 2022–23 season saw Manchester City win their maiden European Cup and complete the continental treble in the process, becoming the second English club to do so. (Insert the following) City made history after winning the Club World Cup in 2023, becoming the first English side ever to simultaneously hold the Premier League, FA Cup, Champions League, Super Cup and Club World Cup in the same calendar year. They also became the first English side to win the Club World Cup at the first try. [[Special:Contributions/84.71.184.246|84.71.184.246]] ([[User talk:84.71.184.246|talk]]) 18:22, 23 December 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Source: https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/guardiola-man-city-club-world-cup-final-2023-b1128806.html [[Special:Contributions/84.71.184.246|84.71.184.246]] ([[User talk:84.71.184.246|talk]]) 18:24, 23 December 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Edit request == |
|||
The 2022–23 season saw Manchester City win their maiden European Cup and complete the continental treble in the process, becoming the second English club to do so. (Insert the following) City made history after winning the Club World Cup in 2023, becoming the first English side ever to simultaneously hold the Premier League, FA Cup, Champions League, Super Cup and Club World Cup in the same calendar year. They also became the first English side to win the Club World Cup at the first try. |
|||
== Man City 4 in a row == |
|||
(Source) https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/guardiola-man-city-club-world-cup-final-2023-b1128806.html [[Special:Contributions/84.71.184.246|84.71.184.246]] ([[User talk:84.71.184.246|talk]]) 19:53, 23 December 2023 (UTC) |
|||
Change season dates for easier read “having won four of them consecutively from 2021 to 2024” [[Special:Contributions/81.78.159.204|81.78.159.204]] ([[User talk:81.78.159.204|talk]]) 15:18, 22 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::They are also the first English team to win the Super Cup at the first try, so it should read something like this and inserted as shown above: |
|||
::” City made history after winning the Club World Cup in 2023, becoming the first English side ever to simultaneously hold the Premier League, FA Cup, Champions League, Super Cup and Club World Cup in the same calendar year. They also became the first English side to win the Super Cup and Club World Cup at the first try. “ [[Special:Contributions/84.71.184.246|84.71.184.246]] ([[User talk:84.71.184.246|talk]]) 09:24, 24 December 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:18, 22 May 2024
![]() | Manchester City F.C. is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 11, 2006. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
|
|||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
City are owned by a "British-based company"?
Single-purpose editors on this page have repeatedly inserted misleading, deceptive and unsourced text that claims that City are owned by a "British-based company". This should not be in the article. City are owned by the Abu Dhabi United Group, which in turn is owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan. Inserting "British-based company" into the article appears to be intended to mislead readers and obscure that City are owned by a senior figure in the UAE government. Thenightaway (talk) 16:11, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- The single-purpose editor Monerals has now on multiple occasions restored text claiming that City are owned by a British-based company without participating on the talk page. Thenightaway (talk) 23:42, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- The company referred to is City Football Group, they are a British-based company and that is neither controversial, misleading or unsourced. They have their offices in Britain, their employees are in Britain, they are owned by other companies (which is described in the same sentence), the majority owner is Abu Dhabi United Group, and they also have a significant ownership stake from Silver Lake Capital an American company. Stop edit warring. Paul Bradbury 09:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Which reliable sources describe City Football Group as "British-based"? More importantly, which reliable sources emphasize that Manchester City are owned by a "British-based" company rather than, say, Abu Dhabi? Thenightaway (talk) 13:56, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- The sentance you keep editing, states that city football group is majority owned by the UAE. City Football group is a British-based company, the UK government is a reliable source and companies house shows the registration as a British company. The employees are British employees, the offices are primarily in the UK. The ultimate ownership is spelt out in the same sentence. It is unclear other than a bias on your part why this is contoversial. Paul Bradbury 16:54, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- This source[1] is a primary source, not a secondary reliable source. Your interpretation of the source in question falls under WP:OR. If this is all so uncontroversial, why are you unable to find a single reliable source to substantiate your interpretation? Thenightaway (talk) 17:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- There is no restriction on using a primary source in this way, please explain what policy you think this is violating. There is no Original Research here, no analysis or synthesis is being done. Please don't just quote WP guidelines without understanding them and explaining specifically what part of that guideline is being violated and specifically how. Paul Bradbury 17:42, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- You're using your interpretation of a primary source (a government company registry) to substantiate the claim that the City Football Group is a "British-based company". The source at no point says that the company is "British-based". This is textbook WP:OR. Again, if your interpretation is so uncontroversial, why are you unable to find a single reliable source that substantiates it? Thenightaway (talk) 18:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Because information about companies is boring and not reported on much, it's not very noteworthy, if it was controversial I might be able to find a source. Is your contention that a company is not based where it is registered and pays taxes? And that an assertion that it is, is WP:OR rather than a simple statement of fact? What is it that you consider qualifies for being based? Also on what basis do you think the sentence is deceptive? It says that city are owned by a British based holding company that is owned by Abu Dhabi United. Where is the deception. I don't think "British-based" adds much to the article as a whole but I don't understand your reasons for removing it other than what seems like an agenda with bias against the subject in question. Paul Bradbury 18:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- I do not buy that the ownership of one the most successful clubs in world team is being ignored by reliable sources because it's "boring". In fact, reliable sources have covered City's ownership intensely and none of them characterize the owners as a "British-based" company. Even if it's accurate that the "British-based" nature of City's owners is "not very noteworthy", then it obviously does not merit mention in the lead to the Wikipedia article for the club. In conclusion, the text in question cannot be substantiated by reliable sources and is in your words "not very noteworthy". It should obviously not be in the article then. Thenightaway (talk) 18:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- So I think you have a complete misunderstanding of the sentence and what it is referring to or you are deliberately mischaracterising it. Let me try to break it down for you. Manchester City Football Club is a British football club and company based in Manchester, it is owned by another company (as are several other football clubs around the world) City Football Group, also a British company based in Manchester. That company in turn is owned by another company Abu Dhabi United. All of that is explained in the article as company structure is relevant. It in no way obscures the ownership by Abu Dhabi, it simply lays out the structure in which they do that. Not all information in an article is noteworthy in and of itself. It is only the subject of the article that needs to be noteworthy. It could be argued that removing British based makes the article more deceptive because the assumption may be that City Football Group was based in Abu Dhabi (which it is not). I'll leave it there. You have not persuaded me of your case or reached consensus here, so please find consensus in another forum and leave the edit as is until you do so. There seems to be little point in me discussing with you on the topic further as it seems to me you are not acting with the intention of improving this article. I won't be engaging further in this forum unless other opinions are expressed by other editors. Paul Bradbury 18:49, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- I do not buy that the ownership of one the most successful clubs in world team is being ignored by reliable sources because it's "boring". In fact, reliable sources have covered City's ownership intensely and none of them characterize the owners as a "British-based" company. Even if it's accurate that the "British-based" nature of City's owners is "not very noteworthy", then it obviously does not merit mention in the lead to the Wikipedia article for the club. In conclusion, the text in question cannot be substantiated by reliable sources and is in your words "not very noteworthy". It should obviously not be in the article then. Thenightaway (talk) 18:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Because information about companies is boring and not reported on much, it's not very noteworthy, if it was controversial I might be able to find a source. Is your contention that a company is not based where it is registered and pays taxes? And that an assertion that it is, is WP:OR rather than a simple statement of fact? What is it that you consider qualifies for being based? Also on what basis do you think the sentence is deceptive? It says that city are owned by a British based holding company that is owned by Abu Dhabi United. Where is the deception. I don't think "British-based" adds much to the article as a whole but I don't understand your reasons for removing it other than what seems like an agenda with bias against the subject in question. Paul Bradbury 18:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- You're using your interpretation of a primary source (a government company registry) to substantiate the claim that the City Football Group is a "British-based company". The source at no point says that the company is "British-based". This is textbook WP:OR. Again, if your interpretation is so uncontroversial, why are you unable to find a single reliable source that substantiates it? Thenightaway (talk) 18:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- There is no restriction on using a primary source in this way, please explain what policy you think this is violating. There is no Original Research here, no analysis or synthesis is being done. Please don't just quote WP guidelines without understanding them and explaining specifically what part of that guideline is being violated and specifically how. Paul Bradbury 17:42, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- This source[1] is a primary source, not a secondary reliable source. Your interpretation of the source in question falls under WP:OR. If this is all so uncontroversial, why are you unable to find a single reliable source to substantiate your interpretation? Thenightaway (talk) 17:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- The sentance you keep editing, states that city football group is majority owned by the UAE. City Football group is a British-based company, the UK government is a reliable source and companies house shows the registration as a British company. The employees are British employees, the offices are primarily in the UK. The ultimate ownership is spelt out in the same sentence. It is unclear other than a bias on your part why this is contoversial. Paul Bradbury 16:54, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Which reliable sources describe City Football Group as "British-based"? More importantly, which reliable sources emphasize that Manchester City are owned by a "British-based" company rather than, say, Abu Dhabi? Thenightaway (talk) 13:56, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- The company referred to is City Football Group, they are a British-based company and that is neither controversial, misleading or unsourced. They have their offices in Britain, their employees are in Britain, they are owned by other companies (which is described in the same sentence), the majority owner is Abu Dhabi United Group, and they also have a significant ownership stake from Silver Lake Capital an American company. Stop edit warring. Paul Bradbury 09:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Roy Paul (Club captain) was Welsh, not English
Roy Paul (Club captain) was Welsh, not English JabiruvianJames (talk) 19:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed. Paul Bradbury 20:09, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- good man JabiruvianJames (talk) 08:50, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Top ‘flight’
What’s that mean? Top ‘tier’ pls 148.252.147.120 (talk) 17:44, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Not done: "top flight" is the standard British term for the top division of a league system. This article is about a British club and therefore according to Wikipedia rules it uses British English with British phrases. Falastur2 Talk 19:26, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
League Cup and FA Cup= double
Not put down 2018-19 League Cup and FA Cup double 31.94.0.147 (talk) 20:01, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 21 May 2024
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change name from Man city to 115 Charges FC 2A04:4A43:52DF:D9B7:0:0:21A:5A64 (talk) 17:44, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Not done: There's no reason to change the title. Annh07 (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Man City 4 in a row
Change season dates for easier read “having won four of them consecutively from 2021 to 2024” 81.78.159.204 (talk) 15:18, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia featured articles
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
- Old requests for peer review
- FA-Class England-related articles
- Mid-importance England-related articles
- WikiProject England pages
- FA-Class football articles
- High-importance football articles
- FA-Class football in England articles
- High-importance football in England articles
- Football in England task force articles
- WikiProject Football articles
- FA-Class Greater Manchester articles
- Top-importance Greater Manchester articles