Talk:Manchester City F.C.

Fan POV

There is a sickening amount of fan POV on this page, at least in the recent years of the history section.

"City produced another campaign to remember in 2021–22, retaining their 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, and to a 3–2 home win against 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".

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: [1]. 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. 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. 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 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. Falastur2 ^Talk 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. 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. Falastur2 ^Talk 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). 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. Falastur2 ^Talk 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. Tub st (talk) 18:02, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

@Unknown Temptation Do you believe the edits that have been made so far address your concerns sufficiently or do you believe there is more work to be done, if so do you have any suggestions and/or examples of what could be improved? Thanks Paul  Bradbury 08:58, 29 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 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. [2] 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. Unknown Temptation (talk) 15:27, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

  Removed template in the light of the above discussion and disappearance of the original proposerHoratius 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 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 CKon8 (talk) 21:04, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 December 2023

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. 84.71.184.246 (talk) 15:55, 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. 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. 84.71.184.246 (talk) 16:02, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. 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. 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 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.

(Source) https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/guardiola-man-city-club-world-cup-final-2023-b1128806.html 84.71.184.246 (talk) 19:53, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Even though City aren’t the first English club to win 5 (Liverpool did in 2001) they are the first to win the top 5 majors in a calendar year, which should be included as stated above because it’s a unique achievement. 84.71.184.246 (talk) 06:28, 24 December 2023 (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. “ 84.71.184.246 (talk) 09:24, 24 December 2023 (UTC)