Talk:Liverpool F.C./Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Edit request from James Joslin, 15 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} Change Jonjo Shelvey's number to 10 as this has been announced by the club

James Joslin (talk) 17:25, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Celestra (talk) 17:47, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

There is no source, squad numbers are not announced until pre-season. This is common practice. Jamie (talk) 19:23, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Rafael Benitez sacked

Rafael Benitez has been sacked as Liverpools Manager

http://www.tribalfootball.com/benitez-sacked-liverpool-880751 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.18.30.48 (talk) 02:58, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 92.2.116.123, 30 June 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} Hodgson is spelt wrong in manager

92.2.116.123 (talk) 11:06, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Done, thank you very much. {{Sonia|ping|enlist}} 11:12, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Need 87, 2 July 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} I have a suggestion for the home and away kit. As third kit ain't released yet, it's only marked as a question mark (should it temporarily be removed?):

Need 87 (talk) 18:05, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Not done: It's a good idea, but when one does come along it's easier to already have the code instead of redoing it all. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 01:18, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

List of Liverpool FC chairmen

In your opinion, is it possible to have a complete list of Liverpool FC chairmen? See none of them browsing on the web. Greetings. --87.6.119.114 (talk) 11:16, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

World Cup winners

Roger Hunt, Pepe Reina and Fernando Torres are included, but the list should also include Gerry Byrne and Ian Callaghan, who were both in the 1966 England squad. Based on the fact that Reina is included, so should these two. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.83.167 (talk) 18:23, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.104.130.18 (talk) 16:45, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Suitable for a featured article...?

As Liverpool FC is the most successful team in English football, has been extensively covered in the press recently (due to its impending sale and recent troubles) and the article itself is concise and well written - This article seems to fit the guidelines for a featured article. Could someone who knows how to nominate articles nominate this one... please!86.181.53.40 (talk) 15:25, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

There's no way this article is at FA standards I'm afraid. They are very exacting about stuff! Ged UK 17:46, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

What does the FA have to do with it (presuming you are referring to the football association) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.180.82.245 (talk) 10:34, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

No, the Featured Article (FA) standards. Ged UK 10:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Edit Request: Rivalries

At the bottom of the rivalry section it states that Liverpool will play man utd on the 19th of September in one of the most anticipated matches of the season. How is this relevant to an encyclopedia? Wikipedia is not meant to be a tv guide —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.232.53.149 (talk) 12:59, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Agree, edit removed.Tmol42 (talk) 13:05, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Saying or suggesting there is no Religious Rivalries between Liverpool and Everton is frankly rediculious, as is the comment that both Clubs 'stemmed from a Methodist origin'. During the last Troubles in Ulster it was common to see the Flags of Loyalist Paramiliteries being waved in The Cop, and Loyalist Songs being sung. It was a very small minority of Liverpool fans, but it was none the less present.Johnwrd (talk) 04:05, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Current squad

Given that N'gog came on against Sunderland on the weekend, I can;t see why he's not listed in the Premier league squad section (or in the article at all). --77.98.171.189 (talk) 18:05, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from vicktah, 10 August 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} Change "Liverpool Football Club are a professional football club who play in the Premier League and are the joint most successful team in the history of English football, with no other club having won more trophies." to "Liverpool Football Club are a professional football club who play in the Premier League and are the joint most successful team in the history of English football, only Manchester United having won as many trophies." Vicktah (talk) 13:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

This is incorrect, Liverpool are the most successful football club in the history of English football, having won more major honours than any other English football club. http://www.england2018bid.com/hostcity/liverpool.aspx Liverpool have won a total of 40 major honours including 18 League Titles, 5 European Cups, 7 FA Cups, 7 League Cups and 3 UEFA Cups. http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/history/honours

Where as Mancester United have a total of 36 major honors including 18 League Titles, 3 European Cups, 11 FA Cups, 4 League Cups and 0 UEFA Cups. http://www.manutd.com/default.sps?pagegid={EE4D6083-FCB8-4FAB-A765-75E2B0F4B4E0} Manchester United however are the most successful club in the history of the Premier league, and there is a case that they could be referred to as the most successful club in the Premier League. http://www.premierleague.com/page/manchester-united —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattclayb (talk • contribs) 14:38, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

The article is incorrect and is edited by football politics

I am sure the topic of NPOV regarding Liverpool FC being England's most successful football club has been discussed before but this article not stating such means it’s incorrect to how the majority of global non-football readers would understand the facts. This situation is made worse by the politic of 'wiki editors' bizarrely creating some convoluted (and dull, dare I say) intro which is repeated near word for word on the Manchester United FC article.

It can be no coincidence that the same 'wiki editors' have a hand in both articles so its fair to question NPOV especially when England's own website promoting its 2018 World Cup Bid, hosted in 12 languages plainly and clearly states the opposite to this article - quote "Liverpool FC is England’s most successful football club, winning more major trophies than any other team – including not one but five European Cup’s lifted by all-time greats from Kevin Keegan and Kenny Dalglish to Steven Gerrard." source: http://www.england2018bid.com/hostcity/liverpool.aspx

I have no axe to grind on this issue except to question how a position of falsehood has now become acceptable on wiki? imho wiki has become a discredited source on the issue and reason why I have not seen wiki's alter-reality intro quoted by others as source material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prijs (talk • contribs) 02:15, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Mattclayb, 15 October 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} Change owners of club from Tom Hicks and George Gillett to New England Sports Ventures http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_England_Sports_Ventures headed by John W. Henry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_W._Henry http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/9094283.stm

Mattclayb (talk) 15:03, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Already done Celestra (talk) 14:01, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Lead and IFFHS

As there's a disagreement resulting in reverts on the article page around whether the IFFHS section should be included in the lead, I'm starting this thread to clarify consensus on this article. To avoid the article needing to be locked because of an edit war, can all editors avoid editing that section until consensus is clear. Please remember to be civil and avoid accusations of vandalism, as this issue appears to simply be a content dispute. Thanks. Ged UK 11:01, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

When news broke the Red Sox owners were buying Liverpool FC, one of the first things said about them (Liverpool) was they are one of the world's most successful teams. I clicked on the team page couple days ago and then checked out edit history, where a sole editor (rival fan) was removing this content, (content of which is in other teams of this stature), while every other user put it back in. Fan bias is the #1 reason i stay out of Red Sox (or rival team) issues. As with the content of other teams of comparable success to Liverpool, global recognition must be recognized in the lede of this page, that reflects its immense stature. Liverpool = England's best club of the 20th century, and today rank 3rd in Europe and 6th worldwide with number of international titles won recognized by UEFA/FIFA. The content is factual, and sums up neatly the teams stature.Bostonian Mike (talk) 13:03, 21 October 2010 (UTC) I agree that this content should be included (Thommo's perm) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thommo's perm (talk • contribs) 19:38, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

First off thanks Ged for the message on this. To echo previous comments, the cited material in question appears in similar club articles, infact thats actually where its from. Domestic standing as well as global standing is standard for such clubs who have amassed significant national and international honours. The content is accepted, what does need improved is the grammar. I initially used Liverpool "were" and then Liverpool "was", so the grammar side needs cleaned up by an English expert.--AaronRodgers27 (talk) 01:59, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Contrary to the above comments by Aaron and Mike, I am not against including the IFFS stuff, I just think it's too technical for the lead (and slightly repetitive after the preceding para). That's why I moved it to the Statistics and Records section where I still think it would be more appropriate. Haldraper (talk) 08:45, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

There shouldn't be anything in the lead that's not in the article itself. I think the IFFS stuff should be in the lead because it's a good indictor of the long-term success of the club, but it also needs to be included (and expanded as necessary) in the article, and the most logical place would be in the stats/records section. Ged UK 09:45, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

It definitely should be in the lead, and as well as that also detailed further down the article as the above contributor has stated, ie.In Europe only Real Madrid and AC Milan are ranked higher. Best in England in 20th Century alludes to the famous history of the club, and Euro and World comparison also very notable. This is lead, and then also written in more detail in the relevant section of the article.Oz1984 (talk) 22:32, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

The lede looks good now, and i agree that 'third in Europe' is sufficient in lede without adding the names of R.Madrid and Milan. The Milan page for example mentions R.Madrid in its lede as only team having won more, but it aint a necessity to name other clubs.Xavier 21 (talk) 13:11, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Why not specifies that this phrase, "[England's] best club of the 20th century", is accredited by IFFHS?--Dantetheperuvian (talk) 21:11, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Probably as its clear cut, therefore without need to elongate sentence, plus its condensed, referenced and tightened.Oz1984 (talk) 11:20, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Singular or plural verbs

Am I the only one confused by the verb usage here? In the first sentence "Liverpool is" but in the second they have. This alternating continues throughout the article ("Liverpool were England's best club" "Liverpool has long-standing rivalries"). DC T•C 15:08, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

It is a bit messy, and one of those British English weird varients. Usually, a football team in British English is treated as a plural, but part of the problem I think is a lack of consistency about usage around a 'club', as opposed to a team. We certainly need to agree one or the other (if we haven't already, I'll have a look in the archives). Ged UK 10:13, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

This is an issue that should be addressed in a bigger forum. Sunderland A.F.C. (an FA) has the same issue. But Man U (another FA) is written entirely with singular verbs (is/was/has etc). I'll post at WT:FOOTY DC T•C 15:22, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

It's a wider spread Wikipedia issue, Australian Rules football teams don't have uniform verb usage.Oz1984 (talk) 02:51, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Doubles and Trebles

Note 3 concerning Trebles ("Doubles won in conjunction with the treble such as a FA Cup and League Cup double in 2001, are not included in the Doubles section.") is no longer accurate.

Looking back in history, doubles (associated with trebles) were removed on 20 Aug 2010, and the note was added on 22 Aug 2010. Since then, however, the three doubles of 1983-84 have crept back into the doubles section. This suggests that casual contributors don't read the notes, or wish to consider doubles without consideration of further titles.

One solution would be to relocate note 3 as a disclaimer just beneath the "Doubles and Trebles" heading, and remove the 1983-84 items from the Doubles section. This seems to be most consistent with the 20 Aug change.

However, one could equally well reinstate the parenthetical comments (present prior to 20 Aug) after the 1983-84 items in Doubles, that they were part of a treble, with appropriate adjustment to Note 3. To be fully consistent though, one might wish to restore the 3 doubles of 2000-01, which would make the Doubles section a little unwieldy, as none of those 3 combinations currently exist in that section.

I leave it to more experienced editors to choose, or to find a further alternative. --LijeBailey (talk) 23:25, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Foundation date

Today Liverpool FC have the company number: 35668.

By tracing this number in the Company House directive you can see that the club was founded on January 26 - 1892 as "Everton Football Club- and Athletic Grounds Company, Limited."

The English Football Association refused to affiliate the new club since there already were a club named Everton Football Club.

On May 30 - 1892 a letter was sent on behalf of EFCAGCL to the Company House telling them that the Board of Trade had accepted the name change from EFCAGCL to "Liverpool Football Club- and Athletic Grounds Company, Limited.". The certificate with the seal from Company House is dated June 3 - 1892. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.104.212.242 (talk) 09:46, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Club colours and nicknames

Liverpool played in blue and white until the conclusion of the 1895/1896 season. When the 1896/1897 season started Liverpool's new shirt colour was described as "Scarlet", and local journalists quickly gave the club a new nickname; "Scarlet runners"

Nicknames: 1892 - 1896: Blue and whites, Dicky Sams and Mudlarkers 1896 - 1897: Scarlet runners 1897 onwards: Liver, Reds

Re: Mudlarkers. For some reason the weather was very poor most of the days when the new Liverpool club played their home matches the first season (1892/1893). Because of all the rain and the heavy and muddy pitch the Liverpool team still managed to carve out victories against more famous clubs. The local newspaper Liverpool Mercury frequently used the term "Mudlarkers" when writing about the club. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.104.212.242 (talk) 10:00, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

The first Liverpool FC team

When the 1891/1892 football season came to a close on April 30 - 1892, the committee of the new Liverpool Football Club immediately started securing players for their first season as a football club.

In the first week of May 1892 LFC signed the following players: Tommy Wyllie (from Everton), John "Jock" Smith (from Sunderland), Jno. Cameron and James Kelso (from Renton). Wyllie was the first professional player signed by LFC. James Kelso was the younger brother of Bob Kelso who at the same time played for Everton FC.

In June 1892 more new players signed: Andrew Boyd Hannah and James "Jim" McBride (from Renton), John Miller (from Dumbarton), A. W. Kelvin (from Kilmarnock) and Sydney Henderson Ross (from Cambuslang). Boyd Hannah became LFC first captain.

In July 1892 more signings in terms of: Duncan McLean (from Everton) and Malcolm McVean (from Third Lanark). In late August the club signed Billy McOwen (from Darwen) and Joe McQue (from Celtic).

Also signed during the summer were reserve team players Pearson (West Derby) and Richardson (King's 1st Regiment). The latter became one of 3 trainers for the Liverpool FC team the first season.

my contact details: kjellhanssen@hotmail.com if needed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.104.212.242 (talk) 10:11, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

List of most successful teams

It is said in the article that Liverpool are ranked third most successful in europe, however they are ranked fourth. Also it should be mentioned they are ranked joint sixth on the inter-confederation list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.127.77.143 (talk) 22:20, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

In fact, if you have a close look at both the list of the UEFA and the article, you will notice that they're joint third alongside with Juventus in the UEFA competitions with 11 trophies each and that their position in inter-confederation cups is already mentioned here. Vulpes Scabiosa (talk) 13:37, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Vulpes Scabiosa, 18 December 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} weblink edited by Zanoni on 16 December misses a "t"

That was my 10th edit, so I was able to handle the request by myself. Vulpes Scabiosa (talk) 11:34, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 174.61.188.208, 8 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Please change "Liverpool Football Club is the scum bag of English professional football club from Liverpool, England that plays in the Premier League" to "Liverpool Football Club is an English professional football club from Liverpool, Englahd that plays in the Premier League" because of the perjorative, and ridiculous, nature of the current statement.

174.61.188.208 (talk) 15:22, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Already done by EJBH (talk · contribs). Thanks for spotting that bit of vandalism! Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 15:44, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 86.8.223.68, 8 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} kenny dalgish kenny dalglish is manager of liverpool fc and all the fans love him hope he wins his first match against manchester united 86.8.223.68 (talk) 21:22, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

No... read Wikipedia:POV and try again. CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 21:28, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 79.140.207.129, 9 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Change 'Manager' from 'Kenny Dalglish' to 'Kenny Dalglish (Interim)'

79.140.207.129 (talk) 11:27, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Why is this addition necessary? He is the manager now, even though it's only official until the end of the season. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:39, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Not done As above. →♠Gƒoley↔Four♣← 22:21, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from RkrkS3d, 9 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} |Top Goal scorer = Ian Rush (346) RkrkS3d (talk) 12:25, 9 January 2011 (UTC) Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Without a reliable source, this cannot be done. If you do have a source, please make a new request with that info. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:40, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Transfers 2011

In 2011 Liverpool's new manager Kenny Dalglish signed players:

Luis Suarez

On 31 January 2011 Luis Suarez joined from Ajax after he completed his medical and signed a 5 and a half year deal for £23m.

Andy Carroll

On 31 January 2011 Liverpool made a £30m bid for Carroll, witch was rejected. Shortly after Liverpool made an increase £35m offer, Newcastle still rejected but moments later Carroll handed in a transfer request witch was accepted. Carroll then flew down in a helicopter and passed his medical and signed a five and a half year contract for £35m. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.149.204.24 (talk) 18:37, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Qwertyuiop99ablesG, 6 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} i would like to add that since the boot room was removed liverpool have not won the league since

Qwertyuiop99ablesG (talk) 17:45, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Not done: Seems a bit post hoc, ergo propter hoc to me. Do you have sources that show causation between the removal and the record? —C45207 | Talk 01:30, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Mullina, 9 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Please change the last sentence of the 'Colours and Crest' paragraph to; "The twin flames at either side are symbolic of the Heysel and Hillsborough memorials outside Anfield, where eternal flames burn in memory of those who died in these disasters."

Mullina (talk) 14:52, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a reference to that? A book or newspaper/magazine article which talks about the two flames? Banaticus (talk) 12:50, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Even a good website (not a blog) would work just fine as a reference. Please remove the "tlf" from the "edit semi-protected" so that the template comes back onto the page when you have a reference for that. If you'd like any further help, contact me on my user talk page. You might instead want to put a {{help me}} template up on your own user talk, or put the {{edit semi-protected}} template back up on this page and either way someone will be along to help you. :) Banaticus (talk) 06:11, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Liverpool F.C. should be a featured article!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think that, the most successful football club of England should be a featured page at Wikipedia,one of the most dominating clubs of all time which has shown a huge containment to be the best club and has been motivating the society for so long is deserved to be a featured page............ Wat do you think about this,i don't know how to nominate a page for featured article but do know that if this gets a large attention, the editors will surely give it a look a will be forced to make it a featured page.So please the fans of the club support me and L.F.C. make comments and someone who knows how to nominate a page for featured article feel free to do so. YNWA--Manujya (talk) 11:03, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit : Make this page a featured article

Since,everybody knows how great is this club's history and fan following is it should be made a featured article seeing that how good the article's quality is and how potential and importance it has at Wikipedia and the fans shouldn't also be hurt.So my humble request is to make this page a featured article.--Manujya (talk) 11:07, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Please see WP:FAC. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:23, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 90.229.230.124, 28 March 2011

(content deleted)

90.229.230.124 (talk) 10:35, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

The original request copy/pasted the whole article here including the requested update, which was to change "New England Sports Ventures" to "Fenway Sports Group". Since this is the new name for the group I made the change and deleted the 99K of unnecessary info from this page. This is the original diff for this page. rpeh •T•C•E• 11:52, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Singular vs. plural

The club should be referred to in the plural i.e. Liverpool FC have won... etc. because they're British so we should use UK English! 81.97.73.236 (talk) 20:15, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Mistake in history

'Liverpool was involved in the closest finish to a league season during the 1989–90, the club lost the title on goals scored and in the last minute of the season in a home defeat to eventual winners Arsenal.'

It was actually in 1988-1989 season. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.103.49.131 (talk) 13:19, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Fernandez Saez

Please can we leave the nickname after Jesus Fernandez Saez? There was a spate of edits changing his main name back and forth between JFS and Suso, and the compromise of "Jesus Fernandez Saez (Suso)" seems to work best. I prefer that way of presenting it instead of "Jesús Fernández Sáez, aka Suso" from his club page. rpeh •T•C•E• 16:11, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Finman, 3 June 2011

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please replace Ian Silvester in Management area with Zoe Ward because Ian has left the company and Zoe has replaced him.

Finman (talk) 15:33, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. GaneshBhakt (talk) 16:01, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Squad Changes

David Ngog has been used in a cash-plus player swap for Jordan Henderson of Sunderland ^[1] ^[2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.152.93.180 (talk) 10:50, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Well a) the clubs have agreed a fee b) it MAY include N'Gog and c) there's still personal terms and medical to get through before it's a done deal. Ged UK 12:32, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Current technical staff adjustments

As of 24 May 2011.[123]

This is incorrect as if you go to reference 123 you will see ^ "First Team". Liverpool F.C. Retrieved 13 September 2010.

Also the information furnished on the main Liverpool FC wiki page is incomplete...

Damien Comolli Director of Football
Kenny Dalglish Manager
Kevin Keen 1st team coach
Steve Clarke First-team Coach
John Achterberg Reserves Goalkeeping Coach
^Frank McParland Director of Academy and Player Development
^Rodolfo Borrell Reserve Team Head Coach
^(Jose) Pep Segura Academy Technical Manager
Peter Brukner Head of Sports Medicine and Sports Science
Zaf Iqbal First Team Doctor
Darren Burgess Head of Fitness and Conditioning
Phil Coles Head of Physical Therapies
Rob Price Senior Physiotherapist
Andrew Nealon Senior Physiotherapist
Matt Konopinski Physiotherapist
Chris Morgan Physiotherapist
Jordan Milsom Rehab Fitness Coach
Alan McCall Sports Scientist
Ivan Ortega Sports Therapist
Paul Small Masseur
Sylvan Richardson Masseur
Graham Carter Kit Manager
Lee Radcliffe First Team Kit-Man
Barry Drust Sports Science Consultant
James Morton Consultant Nutritionist
Andy Scoulding Head of Technical Analysis
Billy Parry Video Analyst
Alec Scott Match Analysis Assistant
James Malone Sports Science Graduate

This information is all correct as of 28 June 2011 reference http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/team/first-team ^ reference http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/team/academy — Preceding unsigned comment added by SeanDylanP (talk • contribs) 12:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Ongoing demand for Justice for the 96

I feel that the sentence quoted below does not accurately portray the efforts of those involved in the search for Justice for the 96.

"Many organisations were set up as a result of the disaster, such as the Hillsborough Justice Campaign, which represents bereaved families, survivors and supporters in their efforts to secure justice.[66]"

The Hillsborough Family Support Group ( http://www.hfsg.net/ ) is the original group set up by the families themselves, it doesn't just represent them. Taken from the Hillsborough Family Support Group's website: "As our logo implies, the bereaved families came together to help and support each other throughout the aftermath. It became very clear at an early stage that a strong group was needed if a campaign to bring out the truth and ensure justice was to succeed. These pages will help you realise the amount of work the HFSG has done in their search for justice and how hard we had to fight against insurmountable odds. We are the original Hillsborough group and would like to thank Liverpool Football Club for all their support over the years."

The Hillsborough Justice Campaign ( http://www.contrast.org/hillsborough/index.shtml )

"The first meetings of the Hillsborough Justice Campaign took place in February 1998 when some families decided to join up with 'Survivors and Supporters of Justice For All.'"

Taken from the Aims and Objectives page of the Hillsborough Justice Campaign (http://www.contrast.org/hillsborough/whoweare.shtm) "The Hillsborough Justice Campaign includes bereaved and survivors of the Hillsborough Disaster as well as supporters of the continued fight for justice. The campaign continues to go from strength to strength in direct correlation with the demand for justice for those who died at Hillsborough and those survivors who continue to suffer."

I point this out because Liverpool FC, all the support groups, the manager Kenny Dalglish (and his Wife Marina Dalglish), ex-manager Rafa Benitez, current and past players, fan's that attend home games with Massive flags, fan's that travel the length and breadth of the UK and Europe with Massive flags, every single website that has anything to do with Liverpool FC has a dedicated Hillsborough section which are frequented daily, Facebook and other social Media are alight with the words Justice for the 96... All of these people and groups of people all active want Justice for the 96. To have the death of 96 innocent people declared a merely unavoidable accident (see the Taylor report) is ludicrous and unacceptable.

I am obviously a lifelong Liverpool FC fan so if it were up to me I would insert page upon page under this heading and I know that is clearly not going to happen, however, the single sentence that you have attributed to the 22 years of hard work done by good people who just want justice for their 96 friends, family and loved ones hardly seems to do them any Justice. It sort of adds insult to injury in my view.

I'm not asking for "page upon page" to be added, but maybe a paragraph? Perhaps 2? From the information furnished in this note, which is clearly referenced, I hope it will be possible.

Also the last 5 words of your sentence "their efforts to secure justice" does not carry the wait of how hard people are pushing for justice, it's still ongoing and until the 96 receive their due justice and those that are accountable are held responsible for their actions the fight will continue. It's something of an insult to just say "their efforts to secure justice".

Many thanks for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.243.9.17 (talk) 07:50, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from DylanSaints2203, 7 July 2011

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Baseball Watcher 21:25, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Already done -happy 5214 08:06, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from DylanSaints2203, 7 July 2011

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Already done -happy 5214 08:06, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

CLUB OFFICIALS

Please remove Damien Comolli from Liverpool Football Club and Anfield Atheltics because he is not a company director and put him under the Liverpool Football Club header. Please add the new commerical director to the Liverpool Football Club Header — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.153.251.235 (talk) 18:45, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

GOCE copyedit

I'll raise any issues I encounter as and when. For simplicity, please treat each bullet as starting a new thread.

Singular/plural: Referring to clubs and the like in the plural isn't actually required by British English. It's just that it's more common over here than in the US. It's easier to accept when writing about the club as a group of individual people ("The club were proud of the away win."), but it comes over very strange when written about as a unit (try "The club were bought by Mr. Tycoon" for size). So we need the singular sometimes. To avoid accusations of inconsistency, I've started putting the singular everywhere. I hope that's OK. --Stfg (talk) 07:30, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Stadia (right at the end): preparation of the site started in June 2008 but construction of the stadium was halted in May 2008? Seems inconsistent. I can't find this in the references, and how could references dated November 2007 and February 2008 know those dates anyway? --Stfg (talk) 10:21, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I've amended the issues, the new reference confirms the date construction was halted. NapHit (talk) 13:57, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Ownership...: claims that John McKenna was chairman of the F.A., in contradiction to the list at The_Football_Association#Principals. I could only tag it, as I don't have access to the Liversedge book and it's no-preview on Google Books. --Stfg (talk) 13:19, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I've got the Liversedge and checked it again and it says that he held presidential offices at bothe the football league and football association, whether that means he was president I'm not sure, but it seems to imply he was. I'll do a bit more digging around and see if I can clear the issue up. NapHit (talk) 13:28, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

this indicates that he was not president of the FA, I think I'll leave it out, as its not mentioned on his profile on the official site either. NapHit (talk) 17:50, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Ownership..., the lawsuits: On a quick reading I think references 81 and 82 have been misinterpreted. Ref 81 does not seem to me to say that Hicks and Gillett were threatened with being held in contempt of the High Court, but that they were trying to have the Liverpool board held in contempt of the Texas district court. Ref 82 certainly mentions lawyer Harper saying Hicks "would still bring a $1.6 billion damage claim against Liverpool's board of directors", but also, higher up says "Later Friday, Hicks attorneys said they also would withdraw Hicks' entire suit that asks for $1.6 billion in damages." That's why I've tagged these statements with {{verify source}}. --Stfg (talk) 16:28, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

1984 Treble: the wikilink in the Honours section is to Treble (association football)#Other trebles. That section was renamed (without placing an anchor) as "Alternative trebles" on 27/12/2010 and then deleted in its entirety on 27/1/2011. I haven't altered the link, in case anyone wants to do anything with the target article. In any case, the claim of uniqueness needs substantiating. --Stfg (talk) 10:07, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

The article itself states that a treble is any three competitions won in the same season, I think that alone substantiates it. NapHit (talk) 13:28, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

There's no question that the three wins count as a treble. The problems are: (a) the wikilink goes nowhere (because someone deleted the section, I think inappropriately in that an {{Unreferenced section}} tag would have been enough; the last version of the section in question is here); (b) the statement that this particular treble was "unique" needs clarifying: in what sense what it unlike any other treble? The reference only substantiates the treble, not the epithet of "unique". --Stfg (talk) 19:31, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Nickname

Shouldn't there be reference to the common derogatory nickname of "The Bin Dippers", while this is used by fans of rival clubs especially those from the North East and Yorkshire. This is of course reference to the common belief of Liverpudlian thievery at its lowest form. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Mercenary 73 (talk • contribs) 22:08, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Not really. It's not all that common. In 30 years of following LFC, I've only come across the term a handful of times.Angry Mustelid (talk) 22:19, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Jamesmooneyshrooms, 12 August 2011

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Aquilani had been given a number in the 90's because no one was sure of his future, however now, it has been confirmed on lfc.tv that he is now going to be number 15 for the upcoming season so this should be changed on the squad list.

Jamesmooneyshrooms (talk) 15:08, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Done by User:Dvyuk. — Bility (talk) 19:52, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Featured article

Just wanted to say well done and thanks to all the editors who worked so hard getting this to FA! Sorry I didn't help more! Ged UK 18:27, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 26xbing, 6 September 2011

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

26xbing (talk) 04:42, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Done --Jnorton7558 (talk) 11:51, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Brianflynn59, 26 September 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Ownership & Finances Please replace 'David Moores, whose family had owned the club for more than 50 years, became Chairman after Smith's resignation' with 'His successor was Noel White, who had joined the Board four years earlier.During his Chairmanship,he was one of the five founding architects of The F.A. Premier League. Following a share rights issue in August 1991, David Moores, whose family had owned the club for more than 50 years, became Chairman.

Reference:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-2011239/Charles-Sale-20th-birthday-bash-Premier-Leagues-big-five.html Reference:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/6103882.stm I am in the process of updating Noel White's Wikipedia profile & he has advised that his Chairmanship of Liverpool F.C. is not recorded in the section 'Ownership & Finances' of the Liverpool F.C. Wikipedia page.He therefore wishes his tenure as Chairman of Liverpool F.C. to be reported.

Brianflynn59 (talk) 16:27, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to need a reference that is reliable otherwise it can't go in. NapHit (talk) 16:45, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia can't be a reference for itself, read the link I provided about reliable sources. I'm confused you say White has advised you that he wishes his chairmanship not be mentioned in the article, yet the request indicates you want to include it. NapHit (talk) 17:39, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Second Most Successful Club?

86.6.106.166 (talk) 11:59, 29 September 2011 (UTC)I think there should be further debate about what constitutes success in terms of trophies. At the moment the club which is considered the most successful according to wikipedia is Manchester United because they have won a few more trophies than liverpool; according to the article 'Football records in England' they have won 60 trophies compared to Liverpool's 58. Yes they have won more trophies than Liverpool - However not all trophies are of equal value and the fact that Liverpool has won two more champions leagues than Man U (easily the most prestigious trophy in club football) should be recognised when talking about the clubs in terms of success. Every football fan knows that one champions league is worth ten FA cups or a few league titles, so shouldn't this factor be taken into account when deciding which club is the most successful. Under the current system a club could win the league cup 61 times and be the most successful club in England according to the current system and that is frankly indicative of a flawed system.

I will be posting this on the Manchester United discussion page as well so that some discourse on this subject can finally happen. 86.6.106.166 (talk) 11:59, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

A European Cup is not worth ten FA Cups. Even if you remove the charity shield and those trophies, United are still the most successful English team unfortunately. So its correct the way it is. NapHit (talk) 15:09, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Maybe Wikipedia articles shouldn't be using somewhat subjective superlatives like "most successful" in the first place? Mosmof (talk) 17:54, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

I would agree. Unless third-party source are verifying this it should be down to bare facts, i.e. who has won more trophies. And it should be explained as such, i.e. "LFC have won x trophies, behind MUFC with y trophies" kind of thing. Who knows how significant a particular FA Cup/League Cup/European Cup is? Not our decision. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:14, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

"One of the most successful" would probably cover it. Provided we NEVER EVER use 'winningest'. Ged UK 19:37, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

History

There is a wrong date in the 6th paragraph. Should read 1988-89 not 1989-90. We won the league in 1989-90. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.40.85 (talk) 10:43, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

fixed NapHit (talk) 10:48, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

edit request by nicholor

Ownership:

In April of 2011 LeBron James teamed up with Fenway Sports Marketing (Liverpool Owner). This agreement allowed for FSM to become sole marketer of his rights globally. As a result of this deal James, along with his manager, also received a minority stake in LFC. The specifics of the deal in terms of how much stake James owns was not made public. James also visited Anfield for the first time on 15 October 2011 to watch Liverpool F.C. vs. Manchester United. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicholor (talk • contribs) 17:48, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 24 October 2011

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I am submitting the following statement to be added to the ownership topic on the Liverpool F.C. wikipedia page. I am submitting because I feel it was an important development for Lebron James to become a minority owner of the club. I have put what I would like added in quotes below:

"In April of 2011 LeBron James teamed up with Fenway Sports Marketing (Liverpool Owner). This agreement allowed for FSM to become sole marketer of his rights globally. As a result of this deal James, along with his manager, also received a minority stake in LFC. The specifics of the deal in terms of how much stake James owns was not made public. James also visited Anfield for the first time on 15 October 2011 to watch Liverpool F.C. vs. Manchester United."

Nicholor (talk) 17:53, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

This is an extremely unotable occurrence in the history of Liverpool F.C., he is a minority shareholder, not the owner, I don't think it needs to be mentioned, certainly not to the extent you're advocating. NapHit (talk) 19:16, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Inclined to agree with NapHit; do we plan on listing every shareholder? If it is to be listed, should be sourced (perhaps [1] would suffice). – Luna Santin (talk) 21:47, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 21 November 2011

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The section 'Ownership & Finances' does not include any reference to Noel White, who was Chairman of Liverpool F.C. in 1990-1991, between John Smith & David Moores.In the first paragraph on line 4 (Section 75), please insert the following:- His successor was Noel White, who had joined the board four years earlier.During his Chairmanship, he was one of the five founding architects of the F.A. Premier League.Following a Share Rights Issue in August 1991, David Moores,whose family had owned the club for more than 50 years, became Chairman. His uncle John Moores was also a shareholder at Liverpool and was chairman of Everton from 1961 to 1973. Moores owned 51 percent of the club, and in 2004 expressed his willingness to consider a bid for his shares in Liverpool F.C.[76]. Noel White's Chairmanship of Liverpool F.C. is referred to in the following BBC article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/6103882.stm " Brianflynn (talk) 15:40, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

that reference doesn't say when he was chairman, doesn't mention that he was one of the architects of the premier league. You've requested this before and I told you the same thing, if you provide a reference that clearly states what you want to be included, it will be included, until then it can't be put in. NapHit (talk) 22:24, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 05:20, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit Request 28 November

Players out on loan - 43. Nathan Eccleston (to Rochdale)

Nathan Eccleston has returned from loan and played in a 5-1 win reserve match over Sunderland A.F.C reserves and scoring two goals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.127.50 (talk) 03:26, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Liverpool FC.svg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Liverpool FC.svg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:43, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from User:Dani818e, 7 December 2011

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

please make jonjp shelvey of liverpool to be loaned out to blackpool — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dani818e (talk • contribs) 16:24, 7 December 2011‎

N Not done and not likely to be done No, because Shelvey returned from loan last week. --Mosmof (talk) 17:00, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Twsf (talk) 01:29, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Out on loan - Daniel Pacheco is at Rayo Vallecano not Ath. Madrid.

He was loaned to Atletico Madrid who loaned him to Rayo Vallecano so technically its correct. NapHit (talk) 10:43, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Squad table format

A discussion is being held here on the possibility of rolling out a new squad template. The new template, named {{football squad player2}}, differs from the standard squad layout in several ways:

It features a sort function
Comes in a single column format that can be understood by screen readers.
- Single column format ensures that low resolution browsers, including mobile devices, do not get part or all of the second column cut off.
- Single column format ensures less clutter, particularly at lower resolutions, for wide sections such as the Arsenal loan section.
It gives nationality its own column; at present flags are featured in a blank, untitled column
It complies with Wikipedia's guidance on flag usage.
It leaves enough space to add images of current players, an example of which can be seen at Watford F.C#Current squad.

It is proposed that the new template be added to some of Wikipedia's most high-profile club articles, which might include Liverpool F.C.. To give your thoughts, please read and contribute to the discussion at WikiProject Football.

Regards, —WFC— 00:47, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Luis Suarez's 8 match ban

I think that the decision to ban Suarez for that number of matches is an insensible and a biased one. Suarez himself is of mixed racial origins and it's not fair how John Terry got away with a slap on the wrist for his racial row. — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.alshanabla (talk • contribs) 16:51, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

WP:FORUM Achowat (talk) 16:53, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Whatever your opinion or those of other who may have a different point of view to your own the article is about reflecting in a neutral way verifiable material which meets with the concensus of editors. Sorry this sounds awfully patronising but its not meant to be a dig just a polite reminder that this is the place for discussing the article.Tmol42 (talk) 17:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 1 February 2012

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

liverpool goalkeeper is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Manuel_Reina not the goalkeeper stated under current players 72.19.66.239 (talk) 23:22, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I see no problems, Reina is listed below. He is commonly known as Pepe Reina, hence why that is the link in the current players section. NapHit (talk) 23:25, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Not done: Per above. Celestra (talk) 06:24, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 7 February 2012

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

they are missing a couple of player's names.

Pathvindersachdev (talk) 17:39, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Not done: far too little information to be actionable: need the name of the players and how they should be added.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 17:51, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request: Most successful team in English football history

I would propose adding a paragraph in either the article heading or in the honours section, as follows:

Liverpool F.C. is the most successful club in the history of English football on the basis of major trophies won. With 41 total major trophies, comprising 18 League titles, 7 FA Cups, 8 League Cups, 5 European Cups/UEFA Champions League, and 3 UEFA Cups, the next best-placed team is Manchester United F.C. with 41.

There is a reputable link for this, from the website Sporting Intelligence:

http://www.sportingintelligence.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/All-time-trophies-incl.26.2.12.jpg

What constitutes a "major trophy" is open to question, but the Wikipedia entry on Super Cups (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Cup), where it reads "Super Cups are not considered as important, more as prestige matches", implies that both the FA Community Shield and UEFA Super Cup victories should be discounted in this area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thecheesehead (talk • contribs) 15:56, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Its too POV to be added, what is in the lead now is a fair reflection of the club's standing. You also state United have the same amount of trophies so how does that make Liverpool more successful? Plus that link does not work and I doubt sporting intelligence is a reliable source. NapHit (talk) 15:59, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)The problem is that there are just too many 'Value Statements' in the sentence "Liverpool is the most successful English team, winning the most Major Trophies". First, "successful" then "major". This is especially tricky given that, depending on what you count and when, ManUtd and Liverpool switch back and forth between #1 and #2. It's far better to do what we have done. (List the Second most Leagues, Most League Cups, Most UEFA Cups, and most European Cups, of English teams.) If people want to know who the "Most Successful English Club" is, we can't exactly tell them, because there's no 1 correct answer. Achowat (talk) 16:01, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Apologies. The total number of "major" trophies should have read "44", not "41", which is the correct calculation. Second, Sporting Intelligence is a reputable website. Nick Harris (Editor) has won the Sports Journalists' Association Internet Sports Writer of the Year, and the site features the work of many print journalists and professional sports people. See http://www.sportingintelligence.com/columnists/ The correct link is as follows: http://www.sportingintelligence.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/All-time-trophies-incl-26.2.12.jpg Finally, and appreciating what has been said about value statements, it goes without saying then that it is inappropriate in the Manchester United entry for it to read: "Manchester United has won the most trophies in English football" What constitutes a trophy? A Liverpool Senior Cup? Lower league titles? It's also a value statement and should be discarded accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thecheesehead (talk • contribs) 16:22, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

If I was an active editor over there, I would remove it (as You can) and I would oppose its inclusion on WP:NPOV grounds, just like I oppose the inclusiong here. Achowat (talk) 16:25, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I have done just that. --Thecheesehead (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Superleague Formula?

I see that this article has a category and a wikiproject for a motorsport that it is involved in. However, this article mentions nothing about it. Should this be rectified? Chris857 (talk) 19:31, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

The Superleague Formula team has it's own page; I'll remove the Cats now. Achowat (talk) 19:35, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Suggestion

In the lede it states that "the team has played in an all-red home strip since 1964." As someone who doesn't follow football (soccer), I have no idea what a home strip is, so I don't understand the significance of this (other than the team colours being red) but I gather that it is important since it's in the lede. Any way to fix this or explain this? freshacconci talktalk 12:11, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

strip meaning jersey or uniform. Not difficult to see they are equivalent given the adjectives "home" and "all-red", but perhaps the word "uniform" would be a better, less colloquial choice --24.98.211.69 (talk) 21:01, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I would remove the "home" qualifier, since distinction between "home" and "away" kits would be lost to someone who doesn't follow the sport, and it's a trivial one, since all-red is worn for most away matches as well. So a simple, "the team has played in an all-red uniform since 1964" would work? --Mosmof (talk) 21:30, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

To answer two questions in one hit: in Europe (and possibly most other "soccer" playing areas), the clothing worn is referred to as "kit" or "strip". I can't claim to be some kind of omniglot but the only country I'm aware of that describes sportswear as a uniform is the US, ergo "uniform" would not be a good choice. I don't imagine that US users would be happy to have us replace "cleats" with "boots" or "sneakers" with "trainers" in their domestic sports articles. Similarly, the concept of "home" and "away" kits (and to a degree third strips) are firmly established in association football. If that's a difficult concept for non soccer readers then it's a shortcoming that I think might be best addressed with an expansion of the Home (sports) article which I've now linked to. It already has some stuff about home baseball teams wearing lighter kits so an expansion shouldn't be too onerous. danno 22:26, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

It's been a while since I've lived in the UK, but I remember "uniform" being a perfectly fine alternative to "strip" or "kit" (and my very rough search of UK media outlet confirms as much). "Uniform" is a pretty universal term for when a group of people wear identical outfits, and certainly moreso than "kit" or "strip". As for the point about "home" and "away", linking to the article is fine, but the concept of home and away isn't central to the point we're trying to make - that LFC has worn all red in its primary uniform since the 1960s. --Mosmof (talk) 22:37, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

There is a link to Kit (association football) which I'll put in, should help readers unfamiliar with the sport. NapHit (talk) 22:42, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Mosmof I've little desire to get into a protracted debate over such a minor issue but I have to say that as a native resident of the UK for nearly 40 years I can honestly say that I've definitely never heard and cannot recall ever seeing in a UK publication a football kit being described as a "uniform". In my experience it's a term used for military dress, the emergency services and company supplied workwear. As a result I'm intrigued as to which UK media outlets describe them as such. danno 22:56, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, here's one example where "uniform" is used interchangeably with the kit, from the local paper: [2]. But like you, I don't want to get into a long argument about this, and I think the current edit is fine. --Mosmof (talk) 23:15, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, everyone. It's not just the US that would say uniform; that's standard in Canada as well. But since this article is on a UK team, the British term is obviously the preferred choice. I do have to say, I would not have guessed, even remotely, that a strip is a uniform. My best guest was that it was something to do with the field or stadium: I clicked on Anfield and saw the photo with the red seats, and thought, ok, so the seats are the home strip? Then I just gave up and went ahead and asked. freshacconci talktalk 03:36, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I can see where you're coming from on that. I think that NapHit's Kit link is an elegant solution as everything you need to explain the whole uniform/kit/strip thing is right there in one paragraph. Mosmof, interesting, thanks. Seeing it used there makes me wonder how many times I've read articles like that in the past and the usage has simply slid by me.... danno 15:26, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Why not just use a piped link to Kit (association football)? Achowat (talk) 16:22, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Great minds think alike! But NapHit got there first (I'm not including myself in the great minds thing, for the record). danno 22:34, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Brenden Rodgers Manager??? Evidence is nowhere!! Please Change

Where is the factual evidence about Brendan Rodgers taking over liverpool fc as manager. There is no confirmation about the situation at hand. He is in talks with liverpool fc which has been confirmed. Evidence is not the BBC, Sky sports, or other media. The only place which is official evidence is a live unedited press statement by the club or the man himself. So could someone please stop putting assumed and unfactual writings on here. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cookieboy1221 (talk • contribs) 19:48, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

If a reliable secondary source (like the BBC) indicates that he's the new manager, that's what we go by. In fact, generally speaking, we'd always prefer and independent, reliable source over a self-published statement (if we only needed to pick one). Achowat (talk) 19:51, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

The BBC[3] States he has agreed not signed and also says compensation has still to be agreed. This seems premature although likely to be the correct case.Edinburgh Wanderer 20:10, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

If that's the case, I agree wholeheartedly. Silly me for just reading the headline of the Ref. Achowat (talk) 20:13, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

It's confirmed so long ago it really should be there already, but I couldn't edit it (haven't posted enough, I guess)... Segis84 (talk) 08:43, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

New Kits

Can we get that "Warrior" logo off the new shirts. It's a copyrighted logo, and as such, would not be fair use in that forum. Achowat (talk) 14:27, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

And the third strip is now purple rather than the grey it is currently showing (on my PC at least). danno_uk 22:09, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 June 2012

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Would like to request an edit on behalf of some changes on the colours and kit changes as they are out of date.

JiMJiMMyLaa (talk) 11:10, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 June 2012

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

"The current kits are designed by Adidas,[40]" - **The current kits are designed by Warrior who over took recent designers Adidas after 12 years.

JiMJiMMyLaa (talk) 11:14, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Ryan Vesey Review me! 22:19, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Reuse the references noted on the Warrior Sports wikipedia page. Changes are valid. Jamie (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:25, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 4 September 2012

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I work for Liverpool FC's Press Office and have been contacted by Noel White regarding an edit to the Ownership and Finances section:

Afer the following on the current Liverpool FC page: As the owner of Anfield and founder of Liverpool, John Houlding was the club's first chairman, a position he held from its founding in 1892 until 1904. John McKenna took over as chairman after Houlding's departure.[79] McKenna subsequently became President of the Football League.[80] The chairmanship changed hands many times before John Smith, whose father was a shareholder of the club, took up the role in 1973. He oversaw the most successful period in Liverpool's history before stepping down in 1990.

Please add: His successor was Noel White who had joined the board four years earlier. During his Chairmanship he was one of the five founding architects of the F.A. Premier League. Following a Share Rights Issue in August 1991 David Moores, whose family had owned the Club for more than 50 years became Chairman.

Sastall (talk) 08:22, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:13, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

This has been mentioned before and unless a reliable source is provided that explicitly states what you claim then it will be not added. NapHit (talk) 11:34, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The above suggested paragraph on Noel White is consistent with his own page on Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noel_White Do you need another source on top of this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sastall (talk • contribs) 12:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC) Sastall (talk) 13:02, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

That is not referenced it could have been added by anyone. Wikipedia is not a soapbox so I'm not entirely comfortable with Mr White constantly asserting that he be included in the article for the only reason of trumpeting his own horn. NapHit (talk) 13:10, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

It could've been added by anyone, but it's worth noting that in this case, that particular language was inserted by Brianflynn (talk · contribs), who made a nearly identical edit request on this talk page. Since I can't find the "five founding architects" language anywhere other than Wikipedia and its mirrors, it should be removed from the Noel White article. --Mosmof (talk) 17:20, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Rather than going back and to on this talk page can you please provide contact details (mobile/telephone) so we can discuss this better. Considering you are being asked by Liverpool FC's Press Office I would have expected to see the changes made - coming from a representative of the club that this page is about should be good enough. You have clearly been contacted about this in the past so it should come as no surprise that we'd like the change made. Sastall (talk) 13:20, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd think that someone who works in the LFC press office would have the adequate resources to dig up third party sources which we can verify this information with. Please remember that two of Wikipedia's most important and fundamental policies are WP:V and WP:NPOV - it's problematic when you say, "I am from this organisation. Make this change because I said so", which is essentially what you're doing here. Mosmof (talk) 13:28, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I understand where you're coming from and the parameters you have to work within. We will seek to provide reliable sources in order to make the changes. I have had no prior experience of attempting to edit Wikipedia so I appreciate your time and feedback.

Sastall (talk) 13:33, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Can you assist on one last matter? From your point of view, what constitutes a third party source? Do you mean written testimony from then Premier League CEO Rick Parry for example or press/documented articles from the time? I don't want to waste any time finding third party sources if you don't deem them adequate.

Sastall (talk) 13:39, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Press articles would be fine. WP:V and WP:RS are probably good places to start if you need more help. What we need though, are sources where we can verify your specific claims, not just ones that simply mention White's chairmanship.--Mosmof (talk) 13:46, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Sastall - please read WP:RS, WP:V and WP:COI to get an idea of how we operate. Do you have links to newspaper articles? Giant Snowman 15:24, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

White was only chairman for a matter of months, so the proposed change over-eggs it somewhat. A great many people have been part of the history of Liverpool Football Club; this article cannot mention them all and sometimes editorial judgement has to be exercised. But the existing text does have an issue - it implies Moores was the chairman directly after Smith when he was not. Perhaps simply changing it to something along the lines of "The following year David Moores, whose family had owned the club for more than 50 years, became chairman." would do the job. Oldelpaso (talk) 17:46, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Bias

Nothing against everyone's hard work, but if you look at the article, it does seem slanted.... is there any general ideas someone has to fix this? COmNOm

The article is featured if it was biased in any way it would have passed the candidacy. Would you be able to provide examples of this bias? In what direction it is biased towards? Instead of just making non-descript statements. NapHit (talk) 11:34, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 January 2013

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Liverpool have now signed a new number 10 called Phillipe Coutinho

Hendominator (talk) 16:17, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Factual error?

A former chairman of the club has written to Wikimedia, pointing out an error in the article.

I'm not familiar with the background, so will not make the change myself, but will copy below the proposed wording and references to support it. I trust that editors will sort out whether and how any changes should occur.

Proposed deletion

David Moores, whose family had owned the Club for more than 50 years, became the Chairman after Smith's resignation.

Proposed addition

His successor was Noel White whom had joined the Board four years earlier. During his Chairmanship he was one of the five Founding Architects of The F.A. Premier League. Following a rights issue in August 1991, David Moores, whose family had owned the club for more than 50 years, became Chairman.

Note that this appears to be consistent with this template: Template:Liverpool_F.C._chairpersons

For support: Kenny quits as Liverpool manager --SPhilbrick (Talk) 14:13, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

we've had this discussion many times before, Noel White is keen to blow his own trumpet. Although that source does state he was chairman at that time, it does not support the rest of the proposed sentence. There is nothing to substantiate that he joined the board four years earlier, or that Moores became chairman in 1991. The bit about him being a founder of the Premier League is pure trumpet blowing and has no relevance to an article about the club. If a reliable source can be provided that explicitly states his years of chairmanship then by all means it should be added, but we have asked for this previously and it's not been forthcoming. Until it does I don't think the sentence should be revised. NapHit (talk) 05:14, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough. I received the impression that it might be a simple oversight, but that does not appear to be the case. I concur with waiting for reliable sources to support the claim.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 20:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Cite error

Several cites have a "Missing or empty |title= (help)" error message against them.122.167.168.194 (talk) 03:13, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Looks like {{cite book}} doesn't show up promperly without the |title= parameter. That's been fixed. Thanks for pointing that out. Mosmof (talk) 17:28, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Club kits

Hi guys

The front page currently has the kits from 2012/13 season, whereas the 2013/14 page (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013%E2%80%9314_Liverpool_F.C._season) has the newly updated kits on. Should they be migrated to the main page as well?

The only difference between the 2 is that the 2013/14 kits don't have the 3rd kit.

Any thoughts? & can anyone do it on my behalf?? I'm not very good at editing stuff!

Kris — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krisbuddies (talk • contribs) 08:58, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

History of Liverpool F.C.

In the last two sentences in Liverpool FC's History article it should be:

After finishing in 8th position in the 2011-12 season, the worst league finish in 18 years, and despite winning the League Cup, Dalglish was sacked. He was replaced by Brendan Rodgers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.39.244.218 (talk) 00:24, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Affiliated Clubs

Should we insert any affiliated clubs on the page?

such as Melbourne Victory — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crelache (talk • contribs) 10:08, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't think Melbourne are 'affiliated'; I'm not sure any teams are. LFC just played a pre-season there, I don't think there's any corporate link between them. Ged UK 12:56, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

There is a corporate link between them, Kevin Muscat of Melbourne victory did work under Brendan Rogers for Development of Melbourne and are planning to play many friendlies, in both England and Australia, but if we won't note them, its fine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crelache (talk • contribs) 02:40, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

That's not really a corporate link; there's undoubtedly friendship between the two clubs, but not affiliation. Ged UK 11:54, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Luis Suárez racial abuse incident

This page was linked to in the Liverpool F.C. template at the bottom of the page and I removed it. However another user has put it back in. What do people think? My logic for removing it is that it is one incident involving one player in a major world famous club that is 121 years old. I have looked at similar incidents (Cantona's Kung-Fu, DiCanio's pushing of the referee) and they do not make the Manchester United or West Ham templates. Any comments? Cls14 (talk) 19:29, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Your logic is flawed because those two incidents don't have Wikipedia pages. RealDealBillMcNeal (talk) 07:18, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Good point that. Still don't think that it's a worthwhile enough event though. Cls14 (talk) 10:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

most trophies = most successful

If you win more trophies than any other team that makes you the most successful. It does in any other sport, so should be the same here. You win more = you are the most successful. All the liverpool fans that had LFC listed as the best for many years and argued all the time that it was true can not now say that their own arguments are now void because MUFC are now top. Read the archives, if it was correct then, it must still be correct now? There are pages and pages of claims that they were the most successful when they had the most trophies, but now they say that it doesnt make you the best if you have won more!!!! Wigan Warriors and Brasil national team are just 2 examples of teams being written as the most successful ever because they have won more trophies on wiki.(Dave006 (talk) 09:45, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

"Success" is an undefined value term. We should aim for the most precise language we can, which in this case is "most trophies". Achowat (talk) 21:37, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Moster

Moster Is company that has copied monster because on there hats it says moster instead of monster — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kylehamm (talk • contribs) 21:49, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

What are you talking about? JMHamo (talk) 21:53, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 June 2014

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Delete the references to Liverpool's 2010-11 wage bill in relation to Bayern Munich and Borussia Dortmund. There's no evident reason for that context, and Bundesliga teams are under different rules regarding spending and debt holding than English clubs. It really feels like that entire passage was put in by a rival fan to slag off Liverpool, to be honest. 2601:2:5200:A75:D535:7D64:DFF9:43C2 (talk) 03:46, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Sam Sailor ^Sing 04:05, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Staff

Hi guys

I've amended the titles of some of the staff based on an announcement from LFC today (http://www.liverpoolfc.com/news/latest-news/168132-reds-confirm-new-inglethorpe-role), which got me looking at the staff list as a whole. There are a lot of missing people here, when compared to the staff sections on the LFC website (www.liverpoolfc.com/team/first-team & www.liverpoolfc.com/team/academy) but I wanted your opinion on whether all should / need to be named or updated?

We also have a couple of 'positions' currently filled in as 'vacant' ("Director of Player Development/Academy Manager: vacant" & "Head of Academy Coaching: vacant"). I don't believe that this is actually the case. We've got Tim Jenkins heading up the development analysis team, and I'm sure that Phil Roscoe / Alex Inglethorpe will be in charge of the coaching...

Can I have your opinion on this please?Kris (talk) 15:13, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 August 2014

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I have noticed under the 'Support' section the following statement - 'Liverpool is one of the best supported clubs in the world.' The link it refers to (61) actually just lists the 25 largest capacity grounds in Europe and is even titled 'Manchester United top of the 25 best supported clubs in Europe'. To suggest the best support in the WORLD when the article clearly is only about EUROPE is misleading. The statement is clearly incorrect and could do with an edit or an alternative link to back up the statement. Wikipedia articles should be verifiable and this statement is not as it is currently worded. 86.143.213.176 (talk) 10:10, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Done --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 21:12, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Kit and logo history.

Page needs kit and logo history and development. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.201.176.249 (talk) 13:00, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

List of Liverpool Captains

Someone create the list of Liverpool captains from the beginning of the club till present. --Sammanhumagain (talk) 07:55, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

http://www.lfchistory.net/Stats/Article/24 SG73 (talk) 10:52, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Liverpool First Team Captains

Steven Gerrard is the Captain and Jordan Henderson is the vice-Captain.

There are no appointed 3rd and 4th captains, please remove this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.14.183.92 (talk) 03:59, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Done After a search for any mention of a Liverpool 3rd Captain came up empty. Achowat (talk) 05:12, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 October 2014

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please let me edit this freaking thing Grasshooper (talk) 08:19, 29 October 2014 (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. Cannolis (talk) 08:23, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Staff

Guys

My previous talk point was archived with no comments - can someone offer an opinion here? There is a big discrepancy between reality and what's on Wikipedia currently, but I'm not sure how relevant the changes are. I'm happy to make them if people think it's the right thing to do, but I wondered whether the format of the staff section is dictated by a standardisation across all EPL teams (or something similar)? Your comments please - below is my original post:

"Hi guys

I've amended the titles of some of the staff based on an announcement from LFC today (http://www.liverpoolfc.com/news/latest-news/168132-reds-confirm-new-inglethorpe-role), which got me looking at the staff list as a whole. There are a lot of missing people here, when compared to the staff sections on the LFC website (www.liverpoolfc.com/team/first-team & www.liverpoolfc.com/team/academy) but I wanted your opinion on whether all should / need to be named or updated?

We also have a couple of 'positions' currently filled in as 'vacant' ("Director of Player Development/Academy Manager: vacant" & "Head of Academy Coaching: vacant"). I don't believe that this is actually the case. We've got Tim Jenkins heading up the development analysis team, and I'm sure that Phil Roscoe / Alex Inglethorpe will be in charge of the coaching...

Can I have your opinion on this please?"

Kris (talk) 15:46, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

I believe if you can source it, you can change it. Ged UK 17:11, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Great, thanks Ged - I'll get cracking then! Kris (talk) 13:26, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

I've reverted your edit as the level of detail is not needed per consensus at WT:FOOTY. Please contact me if you want further details. Thanks, JMHamo (talk) 15:38, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2015

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Hi, great info but I find it very hard to ignore the fact you put that only 94 fans died in the tragic Hillsborough disaster, when actually 96 died thanks 86.172.131.13 (talk) 19:34, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 19:52, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Is this the sentence in question: Ninety-four fans died that day; the 95th victim died in hospital from his injuries four days later and the 96th died nearly four years later, without regaining consciousness.? Mosmof (talk) 20:40, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Add hyperlink

Consider adding a hyperlink to "Liverpool F.C. is one of the most successful clubs in England"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_records_in_England#Total_titles_won_.281871.E2.80.93present.29 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.204.49 (talk) 12:14, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

You mean wikilink to Football records in England#Total titles won (1871–present), right? Makes sense, though I"m not a huge fan of the "most successful" verbiage - we know it means "most titles won", so it's redundant and borderline WP:PEACOCKy. Mosmof (talk) 12:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Club logos, sponsors and club kits

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/fr/0/0d/Liverpool_FC_Ancien_2.gif: Club Logo

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/Kit_left_arm_redline.png: Club Kit

Can someone please add this to the English wikipedia page. The detail is from French and Spanish Liverpool F.C. wikipedia page.

Club Sponsors

Period	Kit manufacturer	Shirt sponsor
1973–1979	70px Umbro	none
1979–1982		Hitachi
1982–1985		Crown Paints
1985–1988	70px Adidas	Crown Paints
1988–1992		Candy
1992–1996		Carlsberg
1996–2006	70px\|Reebok's logo Reebok
2006–2010	70px Adidas
2010-2012	70px Adidas	Standard Chartered
2012-2015	50px Warrior Sports
2015-	50px New Balance

--Sammanhumagain (talk) 04:13, 15 February 2015 (UTC) Done I adjusted some of the links for English Wikipedia. Thank you for your contribution. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:04, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 May 2015

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

i would like to change raheem sterlings national flag in liverpool squad to jamaican as he was born in jamaica and is not english 81.170.42.129 (talk) 00:04, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Not done: His article describes him as being English. Stickee (talk) 00:54, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Also, Sterling is cap-tied to England and national team affiliation is what matters in football articles. Mosmof (talk) 14:52, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 June 2015

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

i want to edit squad team please Pumpsd (talk) 15:55, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Not done Please specify what edits you'd like to make. Please note that if you're trying to add Clyne or Firmino, neither transfer is complete. Both players are subject to medicals before joining the squad. Plus, neither can actually play for Liverpool until July, when new contracts officially kick in (this goes for Milner, Ings, Gomez and Bogdan as well). Mosmof (talk) 16:20, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Player of the Season

Why don't we make a page for player of the season as the list looks too long in the main page. Sammanhumagain^t@lk 06:04, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Done, I've moved it. If somebody is up for making a dedicated LFC Players' Awards page (there are twelve of them now) and move the whole thing there, that would be great. --OxymoronNBG (talk) 10:51, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

@OxymoronNBG: It looks like it's still on the main page. Did you move it? I was thinking of making a new awards page, but don't want to start if you already have. Also was wondering if it would be better to place it on records and statistics instead.--Shreerajtheauthor (talk) 06:33, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

It got moved back from where Oxtmoron placed it, as it had no place being on List of Liverpool F.C. players. We don't need a separate page for all the awards the club others. A separate page for the player of the season award is reasonable as there is precedent for them. NapHit (talk) 10:50, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Regarding club symbols and sponsors

Hello, I wanted to add the above category in this page but wanted to know is it possible or not. According to the french and Spanish article of Liverpool F.c. they have the category of symbols, club sponsors, Uniform evolution etc etc. For the present moment I will work in my sandbox and hope that I can put it sooner on this page rather than later.NextGenSam619^t@lk 02:33, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

I wouldn't waste your time, as there is not much point including it in the article. This is a featured article, which means it meets the highest standards of Wikipedia. Adding symbols and sponsors is WP:CRUFT and WP:TRIVIA, it's not exactly encyclopaedic. This a page for an overview of the club's history, not a gallery for previous shirts and sponsors. NapHit (talk) 11:06, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate your opinion. But many clubs including Manchester United and Chelsea have the sponsors and kit manufacturers on their page. Why not here??? Anywhere if not here the template can be added??? NextGenSam619^t@lk 14:06, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

It's not important information, don't worry about adding it to the article. We already have a paragraph detailing the club's kit and sponsors that is enough a table is unnecessary. NapHit (talk) 14:19, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Regarding Players : Club Captains

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please change

"Initially Alex Raisbeck was the longest-serving captain, who was club captain from 1899 to 1909 before being overtaken by Steven Gerrard who became captain since 2003-04 season and served 12 seasons as Liverpool captain.[117] The present captain is Jordan Henderson, who replaced Gerrard.[118]

to

"Initially Alex Raisbeck, who was club captain from 1899 to 1909, was the longest serving captain before being overtaken by Steven Gerrard who served 12 seasons as Liverpool captain starting from the 2003-04 season.[117] The present captain is Jordan Henderson, who replaced Gerrard in the 2015-16 season following Gerrard's move to LA Galaxy.[118] [4]

Caustic Gundalf (talk) 11:20, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Done Inomyabcs (talk) 06:31, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 October 2015

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

They do have a new manger

Ratwood121 (talk) 20:20, 4 October 2015 (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. --Stabila711 (talk) 20:33, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 October 2015

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Manager News: Brendan Rodgers to Jürgen Klopp KLOPPFORKOP (talk) 14:30, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Nothing is official and completed, so no change will be made. Qed237 (talk) 14:47, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 8 October 2015

‹ The template below (Edit fully-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Hello, I would like to add add Jürgen Klopp as the club's manager. I have proof that he has joined, Liverpool: Jurgen Klopp agrees three-year deal as manager Thank you for reading, Fishface232 FishFace232 (talk) 17:10, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Please wait for the club to confirm tomorrow. JMHamo (talk) 17:26, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

It's just been confirmed Liverpool FC confirm Jürgen Klopp appointment KDLarsen (talk) 20:06, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

MusikAnimal, there is now no need for the protection as there won't be any warring due the official announcement as stated above. Bald Boris 20:12, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Done — MusikAnimal ^talk 20:20, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 January 2016

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I was reading the opening paragraph and I recommend adding an additional anchor to: "The second was the Hillsborough disaster in 1989, where 96 Liverpool supporters lost their lives in a crush against perimeter fencing." Adding an anchor to "crush" as crush Jay Hastings1066 (talk) 19:16, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

@Jay Hastings1066:

Done JMHamo (talk) 19:37, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Recentism and poor English

This article suffers from far too much "recentism" and poor English. The opeing para is poor with poor structure. 94.3.125.209 (talk) 09:54, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

All red strip

Liverpool first played in all red, that is red shirts, shorts 'and' socks in December 1964 against Anderlecht in the European Cup at the Heysel stadium in Brussels. They played with red shirts, red shorts and white socks with red tops, against Anderlecht in Nov 1964 at Anfield - which was not 'all red'. The 'all red' strip was reserved for 'some' FA cup and European Cup games. The first European games were against Reykjavik with white shorts. The first FA Cup game in 1965 against WBA in the 3rd round was with white shorts. The next was against Stockport at home and they wore white shorts. At the replay in Stockport they wore the all red strip for the second time. The first time at Anfield wearing the full all red strip was against Leicester City in an FA Cup quarter final replay.

The League games were played with red shirts and whites short until the end of the 1964/1965 season. The club adopted the all red strip permanently at the start of the 1965-66 season with the first game in the strip at Leicester City. The game in the Charity Shield against Man U at Old Trafford was in a changed away strip.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/david-prentice-just-liverpool-fc-8189411 94.3.125.209 (talk) 10:21, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2016

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Update the list of current squad.

66.203.207.66 (talk) 15:57, 30 August 2016 (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. Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 16:41, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 September 2016

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please consider adding the following page to the independant sites section of the liverpool page:

http://www.footyfeed.co.uk/liverpool

The page is constantly updated with news from the main liverpool sites (including the official website) as well as verified twitter accounts and videos.

83.244.238.97 (talk) 16:11, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

It's not considered a reliable source per our guidelines. NapHit (talk) 21:51, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Not done: As per NapHit Varun FEB2003 08:19, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Liverpool F.C.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:03, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liverpool F.C.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090210193006/http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/0500liverpoolfc/0100news/tm_objectid%3D17610578%26method%3Dfull%26siteid%3D50061%26headline%3Dhow-kop-tuned-in-to-glory-days-name_page.html to http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/0500liverpoolfc/0100news/tm_objectid%3D17610578%26method%3Dfull%26siteid%3D50061%26headline%3Dhow-kop-tuned-in-to-glory-days-name_page.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:51, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2017

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change CEO of LIverpool F.C from 'Ian Ayre' to 'Peter Moore' which came into effect on the 1st of June 2017 2A00:23C4:AA08:1200:3828:4881:4E3A:15AA (talk) 15:45, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Note: You need to provide a source to support the statement. regards, DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 06:01, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: per DRAGON BOOSTER. —MRD2014 talk contribs 14:33, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 July 2017

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the sections on Hillsborough please add that a jury determined on 26th April, 2016 that the 96 Liverpool fans who died were unlawfully killed <https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/26/hillsborough-inquests-jury-says-96-victims-were-unlawfully-killed> and that on 28th June, 2017 the Crown Prosecution Service determined that six people will be charged criminally as a result <http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40432671> Justineclare (talk) 20:40, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Not done: The Hillsborough disaster article is linked from this one and covers the succeeding criminal developments. The article on the football club does not need to be continually updated with information better placed there. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 01:57, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

3rd choice captain

Hi,

Just wondering if a reference to Phillipe Coutinho being third choice captain should be added in the squad list, as it was for Lucas Leiva, Agger and Reina beforehand and on similar pages? Klopp confirms the coutinho as de-facto third captain here (see 16:15), but this was from a televised interview and I can't find a more credible online reference for it. Rstallard2 (talk) 23:32, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2017

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add "Furthermore, Liverpool FC has been even the topic of Online Slot made by Realistic Games, featuring famous players of current squad (2017-2018)^[3] Fares57 (talk) 11:03, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 14:56, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 August 2017

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Vanbessas (talk) 11:31, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Please change ENG to WAL for Harry Wilson at First-team squad because he is from Wales. Also please change Sheyi Ojo's position from DF to MF. Thank you.

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 18:55, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Second this. Why do you need sources? Look at his wikipedia page. Sources are there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.154.96.23 (talk) 10:10, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Request to make both Jamie Carragher and Steven Gerrard Player of the Season for 2004/05

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Jamie Carragher was the writers' player of the year and Steven Gerrard was the fans' player of the year. Since there didn't seem to be an official award at the time and since the following seasons have mostly been based on fans' and players' votes, I guess it's safe to mention both Carragher and Gerrard as Player of the Season for 2004-05.

Link - https://web.archive.org/web/20150714195500/http://www.liverpoolfc.com/news/latest-news/carra-wins-tv-player-of-the-season

To be changed - Under 'Player of the Season', in the row '2004/05', Jamie Carragher and Steven Gerrard.

Done I've added the note that Gerrard was voted by the fans instead. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 15:45, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liverpool F.C.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100712112221/http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/history/timeline/1892-1917/liverpool-football-club-is-formed to http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/history/timeline/1892-1917/liverpool-football-club-is-formed

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:07, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Liverpool F.C.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:38, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

First Team Players

There has been a new Liverpool FC signing that should be added to the first team player section of this article: number 8 Naby Keïta. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allez LFC (talk • contribs) 07:55, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Kit history

No kit suppliers and historical kits in that section. We need a kit history on a seperate page. TNMPChannel (talk) 06:17, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 August 2018

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I would like to add the fact that they recently reached the champions league final in the history part. Jjthebeaat383 (talk) 18:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Not done - you haven't provided a reliable source for your request to make this change. Thanks, Iggy (Swan) 19:20, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Alisson Becker or just Alisson

I have no idea why User:OxymoronNBG continues to insist Alisson is listed as Alisson Becker in the current squad section when his more commonly used name is Alisson. Again, the player's Wikipedia article is titled Alisson and he is listed as Alisson on the Brazil national team's website - Coradia175 (talk) 14:16, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

The club refers to him as Alisson Becker on the official first team page, and this is the LFC Wiki article, not the Brazil national football team one. British media outlets mostly refer to him as Alisson Becker, which suggests a clear English-speaking preference, and this is the English language Wiki article. Also, strictly speaking there are three Alissons (hence the brackets part of the Wiki article title), but only one Alisson Becker. Your constant reverting to Alisson only is like trying to make someone write only Cristiano instead of Cristiano Ronaldo. OxymoronNBG (talk) 06:24, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

A quick look at match reports from this weekend - the BBC calls him Alisson [5], as does the Guardian [6] and the Telegraph [7]. The Liverpool Echo refers to him as both Alisson and Alisson Becker.[8] Suggests that Alisson is probably the preference in English language reliable sources. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 08:12, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

It seems to be the consensus here that he should be listed as Alisson and not Alisson Becker - Coradia175 (talk) 15:30, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 October 2018

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I believe that next to Virgil Van Dijk's name on the list of squad players should have "3rd Captain" added to it as this is a fact and is just as important James Milner having "Vice-Captain" next to his. I would like this request to be under your consideration. Before you question why, I am not trying to terrorise your website in any shape or form, I think that it will improve your site to those who are interested who are interested in Virgil Van Dijk or Liverpool Football Club. Thank You. DANSANDYS (talk) 14:08, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 14:19, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 November 2018

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I would like to state the fact that John Houlding established the club Knowledgend9 (talk) 16:24, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

This information is already in the article. His picture is right at the top of the History section, and he's mentioned throughout the History, Stadium, and Ownership and finances sections as founder and chairman. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 16:32, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 December 2018

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

i wish to add Box V4 and Box V3 UCL18champ (talk) 19:46, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

No idea what they are, and I don't think they need to be added. Article is fine as it is. NapHit (talk) 19:54, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Not done:, based on your other edits, your edits are either vandalism at worst or nonsensical at best. Nthep (talk) 19:55, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

List of staff is not up to date (I.e. physiotherapists not matching with information on LFC webpage)

List of staff is not up to date (I.e. physiotherapists not matching with information on LFC webpage) JanaLoh (talk) 14:30, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Club Legends

Liverpool fans hail many former players and managers as legends given their rich history. Notably, Ron Yeats, Ray Clemence, Alan Hanson, Phil Thompson, Kenny Dalglish, Robbie Fowler, Jamie Carragher, Steven Gerrard, Bill Shankly, Bob Paisley and Joe Fagan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jon won ton (talk • contribs) 05:32, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

No need for this section to be included. How do you define a legend? Who decides the criteria? It's not necessary, the history page ie enough. NapHit (talk) 13:31, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Mention they have never won the premier league

"The club has won 5 European Cups..." This statement and onwards not only lists acheivements but boasts "more than any other English club"

Surely if the article is to boast about the clubs success it should also point out it's failures.

I suggest including "although very successful over the clubs existence it has never won englands top division of football, the premier league, since it's inception" Dcantoni5 (talk) 23:52, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

They won the league 18 times. Also, its, not it's. Suden13 (talk) 17:41, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Quite. Patthedog (talk) 19:15, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

MFM(Mohamed,Firmino,Manè

We've got Salah do do do do and Mane-Mane do do do do and Bobby Firmino and we sold Couthino — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheGreenGamer (talk • contribs) 17:33, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 August 2019

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Liverpool after their UEFA Super Cup win, has become the most sucessful club in Enlglish Top flight history. Elronjr (talk) 13:38, 15 August 2019 (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. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 13:52, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 September 2019

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the third paragraph of the intro change the valuation from $2,183 billion to $2.183 billion as is shown on the source. Likely a misunderstanding of the representation of a decimal point in English. Sparticus515 (talk) 23:45, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Done NapHit (talk) 14:56, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Cringey

"...before adding a sixth crown under Jürgen Klopp in 2019" is cringe. Maybe someone should establish a new sentence properly describing Klopp's success without "crown". 9XY (talk) 11:47, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 October 2019

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Remove the 'UEFA club coefficient ranking' section entirely. The ranking is biased and not neutral, and it is not notable along with being insignificant. There is no need to include every trivial list put out by a football organization. 9XY (talk) 06:50, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Not done: The club coefficient is notable and significant, as it determines the seeding for teams in European competition. Sceptre (talk) 10:06, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

No, it's not and doesn't. Stop bluffing. 9XY (talk) 10:27, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

I don't see anything biased about it. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 17:06, 3 October 2019 (GMT)

User:REDMAN 2019 Champions League winners and runners up for the English Premier League but all they get is 8th in the ranking? That is very biased. And they left out Robertson and Alexander-Arnold from the World XI by putting in average players like Marcelo and Ramos. If that is not biased I don't know what is. 9XY (talk) 09:42, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

[9] Govvy (talk) 10:09, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

The UEFA club coefficient is the current standard method for determining seedings in European Competition, and has been for almost two decades. It is absolutely notable enough to be placed in this article. However, there is an inconsistency across club articles about where best to place coefficient rankings within articles that is probably best addressed on WikiProject Football. Rstallard2 (talk) 10:44, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

I think someone made me a admin because I can now edit this article myself (I couldn't previously). Do you or anyone have an issue with removing that section? 9XY (talk) 11:33, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Kit Deals Table

Regarding the 'Kit Deals' table, is such a table really necessary for this article? My reasoning being is that most of the information regarding financial value of the contracts is superfluous, oversimplified (especially when put into context of the upcoming Nike deal), is incomplete for kit deals before 2012, and is not present in most other club pages anyway. Information about the duration of kit deals is also already covered in the "kit suppliers and sponsors" table situated just above it? Rstallard2 (talk) 23:22, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

The tables are not necessary at all. The article is supposed to serve as an overview of the club. A sentence or two detailing what kit supplier and sponsor the club has now is relevant. A table detailing all past kit suppliers and sponsors is superfluous and unnecessary. It's best not to be included in the article in my opinion. The article is featured, when it was promoted, none of these tables were included. As neither of them are referenced, they shouldn't be in the article as everything needs to be clearly referenced and verified. NapHit (talk) 15:58, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

It's does seem common place to have these tables on a lot of club articles, I would of asked for a bit more of a response from editors before removing. Govvy (talk) 21:11, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

I agree with both points of view here to an extent. The kit suppliers/sponsors table does seem to be common place across a wide range of club articles (with varying degrees of referencing), albeit usually embedded within a "finances" section rather than as a separate subsection itself. I personally don't particularly disagree with the relevance and principle of a table summarising the club's primary sponsors and kit suppliers embedded within another section, but as NapHit correctly eludes to, this needs to be adequately referenced, which it isn't at the moment. Rstallard2 (talk) 13:24, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

They're significant value deals, but I would rather see them in sourced prose in the main body of the section rather than a standalone table. Fenix down (talk) 13:38, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

The main issue with the kit deals table is that you're unlikely to find sources which states how much all of the club's kit deals paid a year. At present, the table is incomplete, as it only lists the two most recent kit deals. I do think this table should be removed. I'm not a fan of the other one, but if consensus decrees it is to remain then I have no issue with it, but it will need to be referenced. NapHit (talk) 17:46, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Ownership and finances

{editsemiprotected} Change "On 16 April 2010 Martin Broughton was appointed Chairman of the Club in order to oversee the sale of the club by the owners, Tom Hicks and George Gillett.[75] In May, accounts were released showing the club to be £350 million in debt with losses of £55m, causing auditor KPMG to qualify its audit opinion.[76] The club's creditors, including Royal Bank of Scotland, took Gillet and Hicks to court to allow for the resale of the club. A Liverpool High Court[clarification needed] Judge, Justice Floyd, eventually ruled in favour of the creditors and paved the way for a sale of the club to New England Sports Ventures, although Gillet and Hicks still had the option to appeal the verdict.[77] However Gillet and Hicks got an 11th hour reprieve from a Texas district court just before the interim bank-appointed board were about to consider the $477.2 million sale. The Texas court issues a restraining order after the the two owners said the board were responsible for an "epic swindle" by selling the club for less than its supposed value. The club then issued a statement saying: "The independent directors consider the restraining order to be unwarranted and damaging and will move as swiftly as possible to seek to have it removed." The Financial Times said the board may ask a British court to decide whether the Texas court had jurisdiction in the case. Pending the decision, however, Liverpool's debt is due on 15 October 2010; if not paid in time it is possible that the club go into administration and consequently be docked 9 points by the league.[78] Another bid was also received by the club from Singaporean Peter Lim, who increased his initial offer[clarification needed] to $507 million.[79]" to

"On 16 April 2010 Martin Broughton was appointed Chairman of the Club in order to oversee the sale of the club by the owners, Tom Hicks and George Gillett.[75] In May, accounts were released showing the club to be £350 million in debt with losses of £55m, causing auditor KPMG to qualify its audit opinion.[76] The club's creditors, including Royal Bank of Scotland, took Gillet and Hicks to court to allow for the resale of the club. A High Court Judge at the Court of Appeal (The Old Bailey, London), Mr. Justice Floyd, eventually ruled in favour of the creditors and paved the way for a sale of the club to New England Sports Ventures, although Gillet and Hicks still had the option to appeal the verdict [10]. However Gillet and Hicks got an 11th hour reprieve from a Texas district court just before the interim bank-appointed board were about to consider the $477.2 million sale. The Texas court issues a restraining order after the the two owners said the board were responsible for an "epic swindle" by selling the club for less than its supposed value. The club then issued a statement saying: "The independent directors consider the restraining order to be unwarranted and damaging and will move as swiftly as possible to seek to have it removed." The Financial Times said the board may ask a British court to decide whether the Texas court had jurisdiction in the case. Pending the decision, however, Liverpool's debt is due on 15 October 2010; if not paid in time it is possible that the club go into administration and consequently be docked 9 points by the league.[78] On the 14 October 2010, Mr. Justice Floyd again ruled in fravour of Liverpool FC and declaering Hicks and Gillett's petition as "unconscionable".[11]. He (Mr. Justice Floyd) also set a deadline of 1600 GMT for Hicks and Gillett to withdrew thier petition to the US courts or be found in contemp of the British Courts.[12] Another bid was also received by the club from Singaporean Peter Lim, offer of £320 million. However, this was later withdrew, Lim stated: "The [Liverpool] board is intent on selling the club to NESV to the exclu>sion of all other parties, regardless of the merits of their bids." [13] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rleaky (talk • contribs) 00:12, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Writing style

Date: 27 July 2015

It should say Liverpool Football Club is a Premier League football club based in Liverpool; but instead it reads as Liverpool Football Club are a Premier League football club based in Liverpool. Having viewed the (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_American_and_British_English#Grammar) page, it has come to my attention that the use of the word "are" has been misused in the Liverpool F.C. article and here is why. Observe one example from the Comparison of American and British English listed under the Grammar section; BrE: FC Red Bull Salzburg is an Austrian association football club; AmE: The New York Red Bulls are an American soccer team. Please contact Qed237 about this, explain why and change it to read as Liverpool Football Club is a Premier League football club based in Liverpool. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.29.184.214 (talk) 12:52, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Honours and Text

Opening section: Liverpool are officially the most successful English club in terms of overall major honours won (47).

Honours section: Although not recognised as a major honour, Liverpool won the Football League Super Cup in 1985-1986 season. This should be added to Honours won. Solid Snack90 (talk) 21:18, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Reliable sources being SkySports for both points above. Solid Snack90 (talk) 21:23, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Super Cup? You don't mean the Charity Shield which is already listed?. Govvy (talk) 23:13, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

English Football League Supercup: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_League_Super_Cup Solid Snack90 (talk) 23:20, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

I honestly didn't know about the Football League Super Cup, first time I've heard of it thanks to you. Maybe you want to raise the issue at WT:FOOTBALL, sounds competitive due to the issue with being banned from Europe, but I am sure not sure which issue it should be in, competitive or friendly competition. Govvy (talk) 11:27, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Yes - it was a competitive competition and was played during the football season, not at the beginning like friendly competitions. This should be added under HONOURS —> Domestic —> Cup.

Also, can we get ‘Liverpool is officially the most successful English club in terms of overall major honours won (47).’ To the opening paragraph as this is fact and currently lead Manchester United (45). Solid Snack90 (talk) 12:19, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 February 2020

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Add 76 DF Neco Williams to First-team squad. Brotato The Great (talk) 19:43, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Not done: he has not been added to the squad list by the club yet. ^[4] REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:50, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

What about FA Cup? Brotato The Great (talk) 15:46, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

The same could be said about Pedro Chirivella, Adam Lewis or Yasser Larouci to name a few. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 18:32, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

References

^ http://tribalfootball.com/articles/sunderland-accept-liverpool-cash-plus-player-offer-henderson-1681741
^ http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/13685517.stm
^ http://www.slotsday.com/liverpool-will-slot-game/
^ "First team". Liverpool F.C. Retrieved 11 February 2019.

Haha good point, never mind. Brotato The Great (talk) 20:25, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Liverpool in the Media

A match the club is playing also features in the film Iron Man 3 which the Mandarin (played by Ben Kingsley) is watching when Iron Man makes a surprise entrance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.225.81.105 (talk) 15:02, 26 February 2020 (UTC) (165.225.81.114 (talk) 16:11, 26 February 2020 (UTC))

@165.225.81.114: do you have a reliable source that confirms that? REDMAN 2019 (talk) 14:16, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2019

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Celebrity fans include Brad Pitt, LeBron James, Daniel Craig, Dr. Dre, Liam Neeson, Nelson Mandela and Clive Owen. Dan Akister01 (talk) 10:46, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

That would need realible sources, but it's not clear that this information really belongs in the article. – Thjarkur (talk) 11:02, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Nobody cares about celebrity fans, They're no more important than anyone else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.69.4.89 (talk) 13:16, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

League And European Cup Double

The Doubles and Trebles; section mentions that Liverpool have done the European Double (League and European Cup) once; 1976–77, However they have actually done this twice, the second time being 1983-1984. Please can this be updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:868C:8E00:1119:1BCA:3EFA:95F3 (talk) 23:52, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Not done: they also won the league that season making a treble. You will find it under the Doubles and Trebles section under League, League Cup and European Cup. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 16:36, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 February 2020

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liverpool F.C. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Delete Andrew Parkinson as operations director; he left to Plymouth Argyle in 2019. Add Throw-in coach: Thomas Grønnemark to Club officials -> Coaching and medical staff Brotato The Great (talk) 16:57, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Done REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:45, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

I've removed Grønnemark as he is a freelance coach who does the same thing at various clubs across Europe. Spike 'em (talk) 15:30, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

International Treble

Working noting that Liverpool FC, and are the first and only English club, have won the International Treble of: UEFA Champions League, UEFA Super Cup and FIFA Club World Cup? I know it’s not a traditional treble in the sense of not including Super Cups, but I feel it maybe should be mentioned under the Treble section, which like Man United’s European Treble is mention in their equivalent section? Solid Snack90 (talk) 03:19, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

I don't think it's particularly notable. Mainstream media has not been reporting it as a treble, so nor should we. NapHit (talk) 11:30, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

I agree, they haven’t, but do we not think it’s worth mentioning? It’s a unique feat that no English club has ever done, I agree it’s not a ‘treble’ in the traditional sense, but it’s something no club from England has ever done. Didn’t want to be a divvy and just lash it up, hence the talk topic (: Solid Snack90 (talk) 21:14, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Solid Snack90 at the bottom of the doubles and trebles section. Manchester United's page also has it. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 10:11, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Exactly. At the United European Treble was achieved across 50 years, by winning the European, Cup Winners and UEFA Cup. I agree, it’s by no means a treble as in ‘major honours - although even that term is subjective, it should definitely be mentioned, like the Man United one has on their page. I’d like to discuss with other contributors because I don’t want be come across an arse and just do it and provoke an Edit War (: Solid Snack90 (talk) 12:18, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

@Solid Snack90: Would you like me to request a vote on the matter at WP:FOOTY? REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

I don't think it's worthy of inclusion, but the input of other users would be welcome. A vote at WP:FOOTY is a good idea. I think the note at the bottom of the section is sufficient. Also, as they weren't won in a season, I do think it's a stretch to call it a treble. They're usually considered to be won during one season, not across two. NapHit (talk) 13:44, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Good point. However they are connected, you can only get into the Super Cup or CWC if you have won the Champions League the previous season and that could be called a treble. But that said I'm no expert and would like to get a vote on the matter by mulltiple people. Hopefully more qualified to judge on such matters. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:59, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

@Remen2019 - please if you could. @Naphit, I 100% agree, it’s definitely a stretch to call it a treble, but with it being a unique feature, and with users generally viewing the Honours subsections of Domestic, European and World, rather than reading paragraphed sections of entries, I think it’d look much neater and better bullet pointed under the ‘treble’ section, although it’s not a treble!!! Haha, nice one for the I out guys. Solid Snack90 (talk) 13:55, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Of course :) REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:59, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

I have started a vote at WP:FOOTY REDMAN 2019 (talk) 14:11, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

I seem to have missed Treble (association football) as others were quick to remind me so I'm afraid the the likely answer is no but I will monitor the vote just in case Solid Snack90 REDMAN 2019 (talk) 14:25, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

@REDMAN 2019, nice one, was worth the discussion at least. Appreciate it! Solid Snack90 (talk) 21:23, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Proposed changes to first paragraph

I propose changing (emphasis mine)

The club has won six European Cups, more than any other English club, three UEFA Cups, four UEFA Super Cups (both also English records), one FIFA Club World Cup, eighteen League titles, seven FA Cups, a record eight League Cups, one Football League Super Cup and fifteen FA Community Shields.

to

The club has won six European Cups (the third most in Europe), three UEFA Cups, four UEFA Super Cups (both English records), one Club World Cup, eighteen first division League titles, seven FA Cups, a record eight League Cups, and fifteen Community Shields.

The Football League Super Cup was a one-season competition that was held as a form of compensation to clubs that were banned from European competitions. I don't think it's legitimate enough (and other minor honours such as Sheriff of London Charity Shield or doubles and trebles) to be added to the lead section where only the most important achievements are noted. Other changes include emphasizing based on wider region, removing brand names (FIFA, FA; UEFA was ignored to eliminate ambiguity for similar cup competitions) for consistency as European Cups has none, and increasing accuracy (League to first division League as second division is not counted). Ae245 (talk) 10:18, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

I agree with everything apart from two things. I don't think you need to specify the League titles were in the First Division. I think this will be obvious to almost all readers, they won't be expecting lower league titles to be included in the count. On the Football League Super Cup, I'm on the fence. I'm not sure if it should be included or not. The Sheriff of London Charity Shield shouldn't, but I understand the argument to include the super cup trophy. Would be interested to hear other voices on this. NapHit (talk) 13:07, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

The League titles should remain as is (it links to the top-division title winners page). I'd support removal of the FL Super Cup. The parentheses after the European titles could be change to "all English records" just to make it clear that neither of the top 2 European cup winners are English. Spike 'em (talk) 14:06, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

League titles should remain. I don't see the FL Super cup as notable enough though. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 14:20, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

I am fine with dropping the 'first division' suggestion. Ae245 (talk) 02:52, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Hmmm, I’d have to disagree with the removal of the Football League Super Cup from the opening paragraph, but I’m all for discussing why it should or shouldn’t! And then letting democracy determine the outcome! For me, we can’t retrospectively (as in demote something today in the here and now) judge the value of a competition, at the time it was a big deal, it had the ‘elite’ English clubs competing for the inaugural title, it was played over 18 matches in which clubs played their full strength teams and was only a ‘Super Cup’ in name only. From this, the Full Members cup was born and again, taken serious by teams entered in that competition.

If you take a look at the Arsenal FC page, they list the League Centenary Trophy in their opening paragraph, and rightly so because at the same it WAS a big deal which clubs taken serious, including an epic semi-final against Liverpool.

I guess what I’m trying to say is, which I highlighted in the opening paragraph is this - we can’t judge the prestige and value of a trophy today, it has to be judged at the time for what it is/was, if you get me? Who’s not to say in 10 years time we do the same with the EFL/League Cup?

As for the other suggestions, I think it’s important to emphasise them being English records, in regards to the European competitions, maybe include both? I’m definitely against putting ‘first division’ before league title as today a first division may be associated with League 1. Solid Snack90 (talk) 17:25, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

This competition was referred to as 'shambolic', 'despised'[14] and a consolation tournament.[15] By definition, it would not qualify as a "respected", established competition that deserves mentioning in the lead. I don't think it's as big a deal as you say. Just because other club articles have something in a different way does not mean this one needs to follow suit. You can't compare this competition to EFL Cup or others because it was held for only one season, which should be an obvious indicator of long-term insignificance. There's a reason why not all trophies are listed in the first paragraph - to summarize only the most important stuff and in this case Football League Super Cup is not as important as the other trophies. Ae245 (talk) 02:52, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

@Ae245 - that article is a very subject review on the tournament. I’d point you to the official Liverpool FC Honours page who include the Football League Super Cup as an ‘honour’, there’s not much anyone can say about that - if the club recognise it, I think the opening paragraph should reflect it. In regards to other articles, I know it’ll never happen as it’d require a gigantic amount of effort, but if one club mentions an honour of a particular tournament, I think that it’s only right to be consistent and present in other clubs’ articles who’ve won it - the Full Members Cup for example, the Centenary trophy Arsenal won as a ‘one off’ tournament. I get your point, and like I said, I won’t stand in anyone’s way, ultimately it’s a group decision and if more people are in favour of removing it, then so-be-it. I do think the fact the club mention it as an honour on their official site should dictate the answer though! https://www.liverpoolfc.com/history/honours Solid Snack90 (talk) 09:32, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

The club website is a WP:SELFSOURCE, it is better to see how independent sources view the competition. I don't see a problem with listing the competition in the honours section, but I don't think it should be in the lead. By your argument we should also put the FA Youth Cup and Lancashire league titles in the lead. Spike 'em (talk) 11:07, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

@Spike ‘em - not the Youth Cups, because that’s clearly a youth competition, but the Lancashire League was a massive deal back in the day, with Arsenal being the only southern professional team at the time (don’t quote me on that) - the Lancashire League held many northern club powerhouses at that time before the League’s united and crated the first all country league. I’d argue not putting that in the opening paragraph as that league has been superseded, much like why the Sheriff of London Community Shield isn’t mentioned in the opening paragraph. You’ve missed my previous point though, we can’t look and call it pointless as of today, at the time, like I said teams were clearly interested in winning it and from this the Full Members Cup was created.

As I’ve said on many occasions now, I’m all for the general consensus dictating the decision (: Solid Snack90 (talk) 12:09, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

coefficient ranking

Why don't we have this? it is notable and most definitely not biased. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 10:55, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think it's necessary. It adds little value to the article. Never understood the point of including that in club articles. But, if there is a consensus to add it, then I will go along with that. NapHit (talk) 12:52, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

We have had it in the past but it was removed by 9XY see discussion. However I don't see a clear consensus at all. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:15, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

[1] ttp://tribalfootball.com/articles/sunderland-accept-liverpool-cash-plus-player-offer-henderson-1681741

[2] ttp://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/13685517.stm

[3] ttp://www.slotsday.com/liverpool-will-slot-game/

[Liverpool_FC_First_Team-4] "First team". Liverpool F.C. Retrieved 11 February 2019.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]