![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Old Firm and liquidation of Rangers
Think the article should now be updated to say Celtic 'had' a fierce rivalry with Rangers and not has as Rangers FC where liquidated and as of yet no rivalry with Charles Green's 'The Rangers' has been established and its still debatable whether the fans of Celtic will view the new club as rivals, they certainly dont regard them as the same club. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.113.64.100 (talk) 10:24, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Lead sentence
User:Haldraper performed a bit of a tidy on the lead sentence, which was reverted. I am in agreement with what was done. Specifically;
- "based in the Parkhead area of Glasgow". The district of Parkhead means absolutely nothing to most readers, so telling them this in the lead leave them any the wiser. Nor is it particularly relevant that Celtic are based here, rather than in any other part of Glasgow. But mention of it in the lead implies that it is. What is far, far more significant and informative is that they are based in Glasgow. So the detail about Parkhead is largely irrelevant, distracting and should be removed.
- "currently plays in the Scottish Premier League". "currently" here is completely superfluous verbiage that doesn't tell the reader anything useful. Time relative references should be avoided in Wikipedia. The reader does not know when "currently" was written, so does not know if this is still accurate. It could also be inferred that this status is in a state of change, or liable to. It would be better if this simply said "plays in the Scottish Premier League". Should this fact ever change I'm sure it will promptly be updated.
--Escape Orbit (Talk) 15:12, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
- Its the based in Parkhead bit which i specifically object to being removed. Its informative Glasgow is fairly big and it identifies the clubs location. Whether it means anything isn't the point we are an encyclopaedia its easily referenced and it links to the article to tell people where parkhead is. Edinburgh Wanderer 15:47, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
- There's a difference between telling the reader everything, and telling them detail up front before other far more important information. Frankly I doubt most readers give two hoots which part of Glasgow Celtic are based in and will skip over this in search of something more informative. It's simply not that important and could easily be left to later. But if it must be there, then can it not be abbreviated to "Parkhead, Glasgow"? --Escape Orbit (Talk) 16:13, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
- "Together with their Glasgow rivals Rangers, they form the Old Firm, one of the most famous and fierce rivalries in sport. The club's traditional playing colours are green and white hooped shirts with white shorts and white socks."
- The first part of the section above is both unsourced and not required in the lead. Why not just state "Celtic have a fierce rivalry with their cross-city opponents Celtic; the two are collectively known as the Old Firm" The old firm article and other areas of the Celtic article have the details.
- The second part is dubious because it shows the clubs colours in the info box with further details in the article.
- "were all born within a 30-mile radius of Parkhead." Extra information stated in detail in the main body of the article.
- "An estimated 80,000 Celtic supporters travelled to Seville for the occasion. Celtic fans received awards from UEFA and FIFA for their behaviour at the match. In April 2003 the club was estimated to have a fan base of nine million people, including one million in North America."
- First part of above is undue for the lead to include how many fans travelled to a one off game. Explained in extensive detail in main body and the celtic fc supporters article. Same with award, what relevance does this have above others, suitable for match article, main body and supporters article. Second part about the nine million fans is seriously outdated and questionable to its factuality. Suitable for the main body as a statement of that time period and supporters article. Monkeymanman (talk) 16:43, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
- {editconflict)Celtic is (should it not be are?) a Scottish football club based in Parkhead, Glasgow. They compete at the highest level of football in Scotland, the Scottish Premier League, and have done so since top level football was established in 1890.
- My proposal for a better introductory segment. I personally think the whole lead needs a re-write, it reads sort of like an advertisement and does not comply with MOS:LEAD. Adam4267 (talk) 16:48, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
- Im really not bothered in which way or form Parkhead is mentioned but it should be there.Edinburgh Wanderer 18:17, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
- Adam4267's proposal above is good, can we do this?
- The whole is/are thing is complex, but usually hangs on whether you are talking about the club (singular "is") or the team (plural "are"). In this case it's singular because it goes on to say "football club". In the article you link to it uses 'are' because Lawwell is including himself in "We". If he had talked about "Celtic football club" he would have said "is in decent shape". He wouldn't say "Celtic football club are in decent shape". A commentator, however, may say "Celtic are in decent shape" when talking about the team during a game. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:25, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Edit request on 2 July 2012
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
no mention of child abuse scandal Theceltictruth (talk) 14:56, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Not done: Please provide reliable sources for your example and an edit request needs to state exactly what should be changed, you are welcome to draft a section yourself. Ryan Vesey Review me! 15:10, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Confusion about the sectarian/republican association
Other than the name is there a reason why republicans are fans of a Scottish football club? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.142.99 (talk) 03:58, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Change of Club crest image to 125th Anniversary from current crest.
Just a suggestion to change the club crest used on the page to the specially designed 125th anniversary crest for this season.
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4756/celtic125th.png
That is the .png image available there.
ChrisBhoy67 (talk) 11:32, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Edit request on 2 August 2012
Morten Rasmussen needs to be removed from the squad list.
- Thanks, i have removed him from the list. In future if you create a new section, please put it at the bottom of the talk page as it makes it easier for people to notice. Also you may want to use the Edit Request template explained on this page which will ensure more people notice your request. Thanks BritishWatcher (talk) 08:55, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Edit request on 20 August 2012
![]() | It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at Celtic F.C.. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)
This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".
The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |
There are two issues with the section entitled "Irish republicanism".
- 1:
"Some groups of Celtic fans express their support for Irish republicanism and the Irish Republican Army by singing or chanting about them at matches.[54][55] Although offensive..." Edit request: remove "Although offensive"
Reason: "Although offensive" with neither the implied consensus, nor reference to any group that it is claimed are offended, remains a unfounded opinion. The term as phrased is applied equally to Irish Republicanism and the Irish Republican Army. I am sure the vast majority of the world do not find the existence of Ireland as an independant state "offensive", which was down to Irish Republicanism, which in turn would not have happened without the Irish Republican Army. From the historic perspective of those songs, they are no more offensive than a song sung or tale told by a British Jewish or Indian citizen about their recent ancestors struggle for freedom from colonialism. Non factual and frankly, worrying.
- 2:
Celtic fans have also been known to chant in support of the Provosional IRA [62][63] and prominent republican figures and prisoners.[64] Edit request: change "Provosional" to "Provisional"
Reason: Conflates the nickname "Provos" with "Provisional"... non factual.
- I agree with the first bit and have amended it to IRA chanting has been described as being offensive but not sectarian by various people and journalists. OBviously various people and journalists isn't a very good descriptor but that's a technical issue.
- As for the second part it really shouldn't be in the article at all. Adam4267 (talk) 23:37, 20 August 2012 (UTC)