Talk:Wolverhampton Wanderers F.C./Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

article

I am pleased to see this article has been expanded so dramatically - but I cant help thinking that from the lack of wiki markup and the details given pertaining to other clubs, most of this material could be in violation of copyright. I've googled some text though and found nothing - it's a nice expansion of the article - but what are your sources?

-- Zaphod Beeblebrox 12:00, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)


Dingles

Can somebody please tell me what is wrong with this statement: 'Local rivals refer to the club and its fans as "The Dingles" after a fictional character on the daily ITV rural-affairs soap opera Emmerdale.'?

There is some very biased editing going on if Wikipedia can not report the nickname by which most fans know the club.

(comment above left by anonymous user, 19:15, 12 Feb 2006 (UTC))

I don't know when this nickname appeared (I never heard it when I lived in Wolverhampton, although that was a few years ago). A quick Google search revealed that it appears only to be used to refer to Wolves by West Brom fans, so I can't say I believe that "most fans know the club" by this name. It is certainly not a nickname that has the magnitude (or the history: the Dingles only appeared in Emmerdale during the 1990s) that "Wolves" has, so if it appears anywhere in the article it shouldn't be in the opening paragraph.
It also appears to be a name used by fans of several other clubs (Blackburn, Preston, West Ham, Swansea, etc. etc.) to refer to their local rivals, so it's not something that WBA fans can claim for themselves either. --RFBailey 20:13, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I am not a fan of West Bromwich Albion. I am a fan of Walsall. The statement which keeps being edited out does not say "most dans know the club" by teh nickname; it says "Local rivals refer to the club..." And that is true. The majority of fans of West Midlands Football Clubs refer to Wolves' fans as "The Dingles".

I know that one northern club is also referred to as The Dingles - the sentence does not make an exclusivity claim.

I'm sorry that the Dingles only appeared in Emerdale during the 1990s. I thought Wikipedia was a modern-day reference source; not a history project.

It is a factual statement; it is not meant to be derogatory; and is constantly being edited out by somebody.

I have lived in Dudley and the surrounding areaa for almost 30 years and been a Wolves fan, supporter and season ticket holder for most of those years and have yet to hear someone refer to the Wolverhampton Wanderers team or thier fans/supporters as "Dingles" or "The Dingles". Bear in mind that the majority of my family, friends, colleagues, acquaintances etc are not Wolves fans but are West Bromwich Albion, Aston Villa or Birmingham fans mostly due to those being premiership teams while Wolves are a championship team and therefore if this has been deleted from the main page then I believe this is the correct course of action.--Malibu Stacey 03:41, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


===>

Stacey, you should get out more - check out any Saddlers, Baggies, Blues or any other local football teams message boards. They will all refer to the team in Wolverhampton as "The Dingles".

All of my Walsall supporting friends call Wolves 'The Dingles' and a lot of Albion fans do also. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lpyvmat (talk • contribs) 12:44, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Glenn Hoddle's Contract.

Quote: "Coach Stuart Gray was put in temporary charge of the first team for a month after Jones's dismissal, before Glenn Hoddle was appointed on a permanent contract."

Glenn Hoddle was given a 6 month contract during last season (2004/2005) which was then extended at the start of this season (2005/2006). I am not 100% sure how long a contract he signed but as a best guess it was a 1 year rolling deal as seems to be the standard for managers in the Premiership & Championship these days.

--Malibu Stacey 03:33, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


Player profiles

Just added a pile of profiles for players for . Will complete when I get time, unless someone else gets there first! --Steve-Ho 12:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Victory over Man United

I don't think they were the first Midlands team besides Aston Villa or Coventry to win a competitive match against Man United in 25 years - Derby beat them 3-2 at Old Trafford in 1997, for starters (We haven't had much to celebrate in the past ten years, we cling to what we get...). I've corrected the statement to say West Midlands, which, I assume, is what was intended. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.6.99.157 (talk • contribs) 15:05, 14 October 2006 (UTC).

A note on British English

British English should be used for articles on Britain related topics. Likewise, American English should be used on articles pertaining to American topics. For a clearer example, please visit this sub-section on the differences between their usage. However, is" works better than "are" with the term club as it is a singular and not a plural noun. (Compare with the word team which is a plural noun) --Siva1979Talk to me 13:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Article needs a re-write

This article needs a rewrite - it's overlong - the history section is too long to sit inside a general article on the team - it may be better to have a sub-article and a precise of the information. Clubs songs needs editing and limiting to the most notable; Hooligans section is badly written and unreferenced. The team section includes this summer's transfers - while this is notable in the transfer close-season, most wikipedia articles omit these when the season gets underway - wikipedia isn't meant to be a fansite/ news-site etc. List of former notable players - again should be alist and not have the additional comments. Generally, it the entry just needs a rewrite and a prune! Views from people? Steve-Ho 22:38, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Eight months later and the page still needs a rewrite along these lines, I think. The new notable player list change is excellent, but some of the other sections could do with some heavy editing. The hooligans section can be deleted, in my view, along with lots of details from 2005 onwards, and the stuff on the fanzine is unencyclopedic. Shortly after the start of the new season is the perfect time to do the editing, as things settle down. Views? Paul haynes 14:13, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Mike Stowell request for expansion

Hi, I've just created the Mike Stowell article. I don't have much information. However, since he played for Wolves for ages, watchers of this page might be able to add a little info. Thanks! Guinness 19:45, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Added infobox and expanded article Sinfony81 12:35, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Chairman

Didn't Graeme Souness become chairman after buying the club?

No, as he has not bought the club. Fingerpuppet 18:26, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Chants

Is it just me or has the chants section become a total mess full of any old rubbish. Personally I can't see what it adds to the article but if it is kept it should be trimmed to one or two key chants (Stevie Bull tatter, Wandering Star etc) - X201 16:24, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

would agree - I would lose the lot really - it isn't encyclopedic or even that noteworthy Steve-Ho 16:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Notable Former Players

What's the generally held opinion of what constitutes a notable former player? Is it a player who has made a notable contribution, or a famous player who has played for the club? Cases in point - Vio Ganea, Joachim Bjorklund. -- Andymarczak 13:16, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello I'm from Republic of Moldova

(sorry for my bad english) Hello my name is Lefter Victor I'm 19 years old i i'm a big fanat os FC Wolves can you send tu mai email some news aboute Fc Wolves.

I've removed your email address because you'll get a load of spam if you leave it on here. - X201 10:35, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Revision 23 April 2007

I've done a deep revision back to the 16 April because bits of vandalism that were missed by other reverts are now being reverted as part of reverts of other vandalism (if you follow me) so I've gone back to the 16th because that version looked like the last good copy and was before the period of vandalism started - X201 10:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

This is a reply to a message placed on my talk page, I am copying it here for the benifit of anyone else who didn't understand my revision.
I monitor the Wolves article whilst at work, in order to fend of the ridiculous number of Albion fans, Blues fans and just general morons who think their idea to vandalise the Wolves page is original. I made the revert because, as the article history shows, the preceding day (22 April) had had a higher than normal level of vandal activity. In the middle of various people fixing the article and removing the vandalism some vandal material had become part of the article and was being reverted back into the article when other vandalism was removed, therefore I did a revision back to a much earlier date, to the last edit by an editor with a user name, all of the vandal edits had been from IP users so I took the safest way out and reverted to a known user with a trustworthy edit history. The reason the edits were not replaced were two fold, as I mentioned I was at work and I don't think the boss would be too happy to see me editing it and secondly if the information was added by a genuine IP user, they would notice the information was missing and replace it. - X201 18:54, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Arrests

I've removed the sentence about Wolves having "very few arrests" because the Home Office arrest figures make it impossible to stand up. Wolves arrest record is better than most but a long way away from "very few". Here is a link to the latest stats. (PDF) [1] - X201 12:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Famous fans

I've removed the listing of famous fans altogether. Most of it isn't really information relevant to the club, it's heavily unsourced, and having it is likely to encourage rather dubious additions to it. That somebody is a Wolves fan may be notable enough for inclusion in the article about that individual, but usually not the club. (This has been discussed here, where it was revealed that Bill Clinton is allegedly a supporter of Oxford United.....) --RFBailey 19:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I fully agree. I'd much rather see the fans section used to report on real fans. I'm trying to piece together some info on the "Air Wolf" period when Wolves fans chartered planes to Newcastle but I'm not going to add it until I can find sources for it, far too much of this article is unsourced. - X201 20:12, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Notable Former Players

I removed vio ganea and bjorklund...What did THEY ever do?

I'll see your Ganea and Bjorklund and raise you Steve Corica - X201 20:13, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

They might aswell have added darren anderton.

I'm going to remove a few players who are in no way notable! Windy

I recommend you establish some notability criteria, otherwise it just comes down to one person's opinion against another as to who is notable. --Jameboy 16:36, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, I would suggest actually being signed to the club as opposed to being on loan should be one, also should there be a minimun number of games played or goals scored for the club? Windy 10:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm in favour of that, something along the lines of 100 appearances or 100 goals should be the qualifying mark. I'm not in favour of having players there just for the fact that they once played for us and are now famous elsewhere (or more, likely given Wolves in the 90's - were famous and then played for us)
On that basis I just removed that Saudi player someone re-added. I've never heard of half the other people on the list so if anyone fancies removing the ones which aren't notable feel free. Windy 20:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I think if there was something like an official hall of fame, or dream team, this would solve the problem. such a list or even the shortlist could substitute for a notable players list. Anyone with good club contacts could make the suggestion that the fans parliament or the supporters club sort one out. Its long overdue anyway. What did THEY ever do? (part 2) Mixu Paatelainen (22 games) Ade Akinbiyi (37 games) are included BUT Dennis Westcott (220 games 215 Goals) etc, etc not worthy. Maybe a top ten goal scorers, top ten appearences and top ten international caps instead of a notable players section might add some objectivity and make "what did they ever do" questions redundant. What do people think on this point? Paul.

I have removed a load of players from the list, never heard of the people who don't have their own article, should they be removed as well? Think 100 apps should be the minimum to be on the list. Windy 17:56, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

100 apps would disqualify someone like Robbie Keane though. It's not always length of service that makes someone notable, look at Tevez at West Ham (once he's sold), he only played 25 games or so but he'll be forever remembered there. The 100 apps criteria includes players like Steve Corica over Keane or Irwin! Also I saw John de Wolf's been removed, bit harsh, any Wolves fan through the 90s will consider him a bit of a legend in his own way. It's a tricky issue but setting strict boundaries like apps only throws up some perverse results that simply do not reflect the category purpose. Sinfony81 11:37, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

As well as the 100apps / 100goals criteria, you could also add everyone included in the book Legends of Wolves as these have already been called 'notable' by someone else. Foxhill 12:47, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Sinfony81 - the 100 limit is "problematic" (John de Wolf's is also famous outside football in Holland). As for Legends of Wolves book, it includes 100 players, about twice as many as listed - is this too many for an encyclopaedia? Informally (and, yes, pretty vague), a criterion might be do they answer the question “what did they ever do for Wolves?” with something tangible. Includes John de Wolf, Steve Daley and Robbie Keane, but excludes Sami Al-Jaber and Steve Corica. The “I haven’t heard of them” criterion could be backed up with “and credible literature such as Legends of Wolves don’t mention them” does this make sense? Paul haynes 16:27, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

As with any section on the wiki, if it grows too long you can create a page List of Wolverhampton Wanderers players and move the info over. This is how List of Arsenal F.C. players (which is a featured list so would be a good guideline to follow), List of Swindon Town F.C. players and most of the others in Category:Lists of footballers by club were created. Once in their own article it's easier to ascribe an inclusion rule in the lead section and the list can grow as long as needed without making the main article unstable. Foxhill 15:59, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
I would agree with the "what did they do for Wolves" criteria, and would suggest players be added and the page created if the list becomes a similar length to the Arsenal/Swindon lists. Could a separate list be made for the players from the book, much like there is for the Football Hall of Fame players? I have no objection for John de Wolf, Steve Daley, Robbie Keane etc. being added if it is felt they are judged to be notable (I think Keane is but have no real opinion of the other two either way)Windy 22:22, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
I saw the Arsenal/Swindon lists and sounds a good idea. Paul haynes 16:27, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm for the new list being created immediately, with the list on the club page being pretty much set in stone with indisputables like Wright, Bull etc with more contentious inclusions going on the List of Wolverhampton Wanderers players list. - X201 11:31, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
I have made the page with list from the Wolves page, no idea how to create a table like the Arsenal and Swindon ones. Windy 07:51, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Wolverhampton Wanderers F.C. Seasons

I have added a new list to Wikipedia Wolverhampton Wanderers F.C. Seasons. It lists Wolves League stats for each season (Won, Draw, Lost, F, A, Pts) it also list Cup wins ans final appearances. It has space for each seasons top goal scorer (I haven't got this info so if someone could add that would be great). If someone could just double check the info to make sure it's correct and I haven't dropped any typos. Thanks. - X201 15:12, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Trivia

Surely Wayne Hennessey shouldn't be listed here as one of the players either "born in Ireland or of significant Irish descent"? He's Welsh!

Agreed. and he wasn't the only one, so I've removed the whole paragraph. Andymarczak 13:16, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Truly great names

The second sentence of this article makes a ridiculous and unsupported claim that Wolverhampton Wanderers is "one of the truly great names in the world of football". The only citation given is a "puff piece" on a local news website. I do not believe such "weasel words" are warranted in wikipedia. And if the sentence does warrant inclusion it doesn't warrant it so close to the top of the article. Not being somebody with a NPOV with regards Wolves I merely flagged this up as a Weasel Word section rather than delete it. I note that Sinfony81 changed the wording of the section (to better wording) and yet described my actions as vandalism. Get a grip. A different perspective than yours isn't vandalism. I didn't edit the section I flagged it up for an edit. I still think it needs an edit to delete this wording - or at the very least to move it further down the article. I don't propose to do it myself because I do not have a NPOV - but would appreciate some discussion and consensus about the sentence. I simply do not believe that a sentence from a puff-piece on a local website - BBC or not - constitutes the most important thing about Wolverhampton Wanderers FC and therefore should not be so high up on the article. 87.127.44.154 07:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Leaving aside the sentence issue for a moment, Sinfony81 described your edit as vandlism as did I in my subsequent fixes of changes made in your edit. Your edit [2] deleted the colour of the shorts in the kit section and deleted 23 dates from the article resulting in deleted titles broken links and broken citations. That edit looks like a classic case of vandalism. It might have been accidental, but I'm scratching my head as to how seeing as only some dates were affected
The sentence - I hate it, especially where it sits in the article I could tolerate it further down the article, but you must concede that Wolves' history does place them as an important club in the history of British football. Yeah the sentence is a puff piece and a better one needs to be found, but also Wolves' standing in football needs to be recorded as well. - X201 08:07, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I didn't know that the colour of shorts and dates had been changed in my edit - certainly I had no intention of doing so. I can be fairly described as a novice when it comes to Wikipedia but with my knowledge of computers and the way I pick things up fast I am at a loss to understand how anything else could have been changed when I added the weasel words tag. If they were I can understand how the impression was gained that the alteration was vandalism but that was not my intention - I was unaware that anything else had been changed. I merely intended to flag the sentence up for discussion and apologise for other inconvenience. Thanks for moving this section to the foot of discussion I wasn't aware that new topics are added at the foot - surely it would make sense for old discussions to be further down, in a sort of archive, and for fresh discussions to be up front at the top. But I guess that is a Wikipedia format not just on this page. I won't add anything else to discussion on the phrase, I've said it (but to point out that the article itself should point to Wolves' status in history - it shouldn't need separately mentioning), I merely wanted to explain that this wasn't an attempt at vandalism. 87.127.44.154 08:18, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I described your edit as vandalism purely because of the alterations it caused (and your IP based name made me suspicious this was wanton vandalism, sadly this page suffers its fair share) and I tried to solve the weasel claim with my edit. Nonetheless, I agree with X201 that the quote itself is pretty lame, but I feel such an angle is relevant to stress the club have an important history within English football. The article as a whole eventually needs a big rewrite anyway, we need to address the space devoted to each era, the 1990s is fairly well done imo as a decade, yet the Hoddle era (not even 2 full seasons) has almost as much detail Sinfony81 01:18, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I see that the editing has resolved this, though for future reference, the following website shows that Wolves are 4th (after Manu, Liverpool, Arsenal) in all time points-gained league, evidence for such claims: http://www.statto.com/database/alltimetable.php?cn=eng

Paul haynes 13:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Such a table is meaningless when you take into account "games in hand" that other teams may have!!! 87.127.44.154 20:25, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
there are no "games in hand" and that is the point - in the history of professional football in England only ManU, Liverpool, Arsenal have accumulated more points than Wolves. Fact. None of the other 3 is a founding member of the league. Greatness=history+winning league matches+silverware Paul haynes 14:41, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
With regards to User:87.127.44.154, I have guessed that he might have some kind of internet filter installed. If you look through his recent contributions, you will see edits such as this, and, of course, this one. It appears that any number that is at least six digits long is being removed, possibly in a crude attempt of an internet filter to prevent the user (or their children, and he is forgetting to turn the filter off) from posting telephone numbers on the internet. --Dreaded Walrus t c 09:31, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks to the Dreaded Walrus, I have tracked down the source of the problem being the JahJah add-on for Firefox - which affected the way numbers displayed on websites (it is supposed to allow "free" internet phone calls over normal lines). I have now disabled this addon and apologise once again for any inconvenience caused. The vandalism to this page was not intentional. 87.127.44.154 20:25, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


Irish Players

Something needs to be done about this, either it's integrated into the article or it is made clear that that particular piece of information is not wanted. Opinion anyone? - X201 19:04, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I have removed it because it is unsourced (and not true) and have left a warning message on the person who added its userpage, until it is added in with a source then I would say we keep removing it and report those who keep readding. Windy 00:04, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

hall of fame

Glenn Hoddle is one of the inductees to the hall of fame for 2007. Nominally, this is as a player, so does he get added to the list or not? The argument for yes is that he managed the club for (part of) 3 seasons, while the argument for no is that he did not play for Wolves and he was chosen as a player (the fact that he isn't popular is a separate issue). Paul haynes 13:04, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Liquidator "lyrics"

I have re-added the "lyrics" to The Liquidator, no explanation was given for their removal and they are key to allowing people with no knowledge of the club work out why the song was banned in the first place. I don't like having them there and they show the club and it's supporters in a bad light but they are needed to explain a fact and a small piece of the clubs history. - X201 08:37, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Carlos Kameni

According to national-football-teams.com played Nigerian keeper Carlos Kameni for Wolves during the 2003-04 season before signing for Espanyol for the start of the 2004-05 season. Does anyone know if that´s true? Sebisthlm 16:11, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't seem to be so. There was a lot of hype about him possible signing on a years loan from Le Havre - [3] [4], he signed a loan contract [5], got his work permit application rejected for the first time [6] and the deal fell through when the appeal was rejected [7]. So in short, no. 86.21.74.40 16:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I think you'd heard of it if it actually was true. Thanks for quick response, btw! Sebisthlm 18:36, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

McCarthy Korea link

McCarthy is NOT leaving wolves - do not alter the article saying otherwise

official statement is here: http://www.wolves.premiumtv.co.uk/page/News/0,,10307~1184022,00.html

Sinfony81 (talk) 17:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Academy/Under 18s squad

Is it really necessary to include this? I doubt it somehow. --RFBailey (talk) 21:42, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


With Wolves now a Premier League club (thus more popular) and their academy having it's most successful Premier League season ever I think more information should be given on the academy/U-18's. Arsenal, Man Utd have this as well and there is no decent argument to defend them having this information shown and not Wolves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lauhammed (talk • contribs) 14:30, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Naming Convention

There are a few mixed opinions about the naming convention for the Old First Division. Some users wish the Honours to be listed as 'Premiership and/or Old First Division Titles' or something similar. This would fall into line with other clubs wiki pages that follow this standard. Rather than get into a 'revert war' I thought I would post it here for discussion. Explain your feelings on the matter. My opinion is that we calla spade a spade and go for 'Premiership/Old First Division Titles' as they are the same thing. No reason to belittle the club rich history. Let our rivals do that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.22.23.10 (talk) 02:09, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

The title won was called Division 1. The club list it as Division 1 in the season ticket and on their website. Every other club in the country follows this convention as well. Wikipedia follows this convention. The Division 1 article is about Division 1 and not the Premiership. If we do as you suggest then we have to follow the logical conclusion and rename everything with it's modern name so the Honours section will look like this.
It's a confusing mess - "Division2/Division4" - The individual links take the reader to the correct page that has the history of that competition on it. Also Division 1 and the Premiership are not the same thing. The Premiership/PremierLeague is a totally separate break-away league and cannot bee seen as a direct replacement for Division 1. Leave it as is. - X201 (talk) 22:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

So are you prepared to go to every other clubs wiki page that have Premiership/Division 1 and so forth and try to tell their editors that they need to follow your opinion of what is best practice and change what they have been doing for ages? Didn't think so. Leave things as they are. I am happy with Premiership/Old First Division and Championship/Old Second Division and since most wiki pages for most clubs follow that example it suggests most other people are as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.43.180 (talk) 11:34, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Rivals

Removed Coventry City from the list as although Coventry might consider Wolves as rivals, Wolves fans don't feel the same way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.25.47 (talk) 23:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

What about Marlow? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.22.23.9 (talk) 06:59, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

You idiot. Everyone knows Marlow consider their biggest rivals to be Tottenham. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.43.180 (talk) 11:30, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Intro Sentence

Maybe it is just common with British English but it just reads as if its odd. Does anyone else get the same reading it? Anything we can do about that? Hooper (talk) 00:36, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmmmm. Is this version better? --RFBailey (talk) 04:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
As a user of AmeriEnglish Bastardization my first instinct is to want to put a The before the club's name but I know it isn't actually like that. That may be what is throwing me off. This diff is more readable to me, but in all fairness, I think someone on the other side of the big lake should be the one to make the call as 9/10 people coming to this page are probally using European English and it may sound just fine to them. Hooper (talk) 16:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
As a rabid user of English English I took a look at a few other football club pages and they either are as per Wolves is now or as Wolves was before the recent edit. The use of 'is' rather than 'are' as in... xxx Club is a professional.... or xxx Club are a professional..... is a variable which may be worth playing around with, personally I like is . I think adding a The would not work but think bringing the word professional further up front does make ita bit awkward. For two exemplars of IMHO equally good footy club articles in the Championship using two variations on a theme look at Ipswich Town F.C. and Norwich City F.C. Methinks though I'd better get a back quickly to the real world!Tmol42 (talk) 16:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Pronouncing "Molineux"

Could someone help me know how is the name pronounced in this case? The usual (French) pronunciation of "Molineux" is with "oe", but I have been told that in the case of this specific place in Wolverhampton, it is pronounced "Molin YO". Thanks --Karpada (talk) 17:58, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

(NB. I am not a linguist)General pronunciation of it in England is as "Molli-new" or "Mollin-oo", but I can imagine that someone with a Black country/Birmingham accent would pronounce it as "Mollin-yo" from their propensity to change "You" sounds to "Yo" in common speech. Nanonic (talk) 18:31, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
You can hear the reporter using the standard pronunciation on this youtube video at around 1:30 and the narrator throughout this vid. For an example of the local accent have a listen to the clips from BBC - Voices - Wolverhampton. Nanonic (talk) 18:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Moll, in, yoo 82.37.25.45 (talk) 17:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

to be deleted

this is nonsense

They are, however, still consistently ranked in the all-time top four English teams since the league's inception in 1888, placed behind only Manchester United, Liverpool and Arsenal on popular website Football 365's all-time league table[2

They are not consistently ranked in the all in the all-time top four English teams since the league's inception in 1888.

The table sourced takes into account points in lower divisions outside the top division, so has no merit in ranking who are the best

why would anyone include this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.241.73.130 (talk) 17:16, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

This is a stated fact from a reliable sources - this could be altered to top 10 perhaps - although WWFC are consistently ranked in the top 10 even on sliding scales for points from lower divisons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.50.200 (talk) 22:47, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Famous Fans

I added a section regarding famous Wolves fans - can someone detail why they went to pains to delete this please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.50.200 (talk) 22:50, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Firstly because we advise against it as it comes under the general heading of trivia and it doesn't mean much to the club that some people who have been on the telly in the last 20 years support them, thousands of others attend every game. It might mean something to the person and may have a great input on their life, in which case the information would go into their article (see for example Adrian Chiles. As well as this, you have to have citations from reliable sources to prove that each person has said 'I support Wolves' Nanonic (talk) 23:23, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I will return with citations sir. I do find "and it doesn't mean much to the club that some people who have been on the telly in the last 20 years support them" a particuarly negative and uniformed statement considering that one such listed fan (David Coleman) was responsible for spearheading the process that saved Wolves from the precipice of extinction in the 1980s and is pertinent to the main article.

These fans also often act as unofficial ambassadors for clubs so I would contest the lack of value and 'trivia' label you've ascribed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.144.234.98 (talk) 08:53, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Managers

A list of managers to present day would be useful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.144.234.98 (talk) 13:14, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

The managerial section lists notable managers and links to the main Managers article - X201 (talk) 13:35, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Kits

These need updating. Anybody know how? The third kit needs removing altogether. Suggest black pinstripes are taken out of home shirt and that would be the only change needed for that kit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Green Wolf Cub (talk • contribs) 16:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Robert Plant as VP

Shouldn't we mention Robert Plant being made Vice President of the Football Club the previous week???

http://goal.com/en/news/9/england/2009/08/17/1445515/led-zeppelins-robert-plant-flattered-to-be-wolverhampton--115.186.67.32 (talk) 22:55, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Honorary VP. - X201 (talk) 20:29, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Missing Players

The squad seems to be missing a number of players including Edwards, Halford, Maierhofer, Hill. Haven't seen any news reports to say these players have left. Also the link to the Wolves site on the squad section is broken and goes to a deleted page. TomorrowsDream (talk) 08:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect link

Under a New Regime, a new start: Steven Fletcher is linked at the bottom as a new signing, but the link is to the wrong Steven Fletcher, a disabled Canadian MP. I do not know how to change the link, can someone please link the right Steven Fletcher to his person? Thanks Tom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.210.232.119 (talk) 17:44, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Wolverhampton Wanderers 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:59, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Wolverhampton Wanderers F.C.

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Wolverhampton Wanderers F.C.'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "chairman":

  • From Burton Albion F.C.: "Chairman is working to keep Burton Albion ahead of the game". This Is Derbyshire. 23 March 2010. Retrieved 15 August 2010.
  • From Queens Park Rangers F.C.: "Briatore is QPR Holdings chairman". BBC. 4 February 2008. Retrieved 4 February 2008.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 11:54, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Wolverhampton Wanderers 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) 14:02, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Wolverhampton Wanderers 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) 01:12, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Wolves' promotion to Premier League (April 2018)

Wolves were promoted to the Premier League on 14/04/18 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43771511), but due to semi-protection status of the page (overkill if you ask me) I can't update it as an unregistered or new user.82.23.42.196 (talk) 22:00, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

They may have won the league but the season has not ended... JMHamo (talk) 22:05, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

And why does the fact that the current season has not ended prohibit reference to the fact that the club has already been promoted (as per BBC link above, unless in Wikiworld somehow even the BBC is an unreliable source) with a few games of this season remaining and is expected to play in the EPL next season? Don't get it, sorry.82.23.42.196 (talk) 22:47, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

The template instructions say that the field covers last season, i.e. no this season. In theory the field should not be updated until June when teams are legally accepted into their new leagues/divisions. - X201 (talk) 08:08, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

'The field' covers last season? The entry is about the club and covers surely EVERY season of its existence going back to its formation in 1877 and entry as a founder member to the Football League in 1888, not "last season" (which, by the way, finished eleven months ago). I accept that the club is not formally accepted into the EPL until June, but why can it nonetheless be recorded that it is expected (subject to EPL approval) that the club will play in the EPL in 2018-19? Or must Wikipedia entries be out-of-date for a set period of time before they can be updated to reflect the status quo in the present?82.23.42.196 (talk) 22:47, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

The field is specifically there to hold the "Last completed season". Can I suggest you look at the bottom of the template where the field for the current season resides. The decision about what goes into the template was decided upon by the Wikipedia community over at WikiProject Football that would be the best place to find the reason why. - X201 (talk) 07:22, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Name to long

I would like to suggest using just Wolverhampton in the player info boxes as using the full Wolverhampton Wanderers:

  • 1. Is not necessary as there is no other club with Wolverhampton in it's name. We usually only use the full name when there are multiple clubs with part of the name the same.
  • 2. Is to long and messes up the formating of the box.
  • 3. We can stil use the full name everywhere else, like current club, intro and so forth.

Insert your opinion bellow, Katz191 (talk) 12:36, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Can you provide an example where it's messing up the Infobox please. Not sure if I'm looking at the same thing you're referring to. - X201 (talk) 12:58, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't believe points one and two are correct. Mattythewhite (talk) 13:04, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
"We usually only use the full name when there are multiple clubs with part of the name the same." - not true at all. You will find dozens of infoboxes showing Brighton & Hove Albion, for example. Also literally nobody ever refers to this club as "Wolverhampton", it's either "Wolverhampton Wanderers" or "Wolves" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:26, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
It's also not true that this is the only club with Wolverhampton in its name, as there's also Wolverhampton Sporting, Wolverhampton Casuals, and Wolverhampton United -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:30, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
On the mobile version names as long as this move the appearances and goals outisde of the info box. Though I did not know there are other Wolverhampton's, so putting only Wolverhampton is maybe not the best. But I think something similar has happened to Inter Milan (in the info box you have Internazionale even though they are known as Inter Milan or just Inter, never Internazionale) and we should judge similar situations in the same manner. That said, if it's only me i'll leave it be. Katz191 (talk) 22:06, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 June 2019

Change Wolves record Molineux attendance was in a First Division match against Liverpool to Wolves record Molineux attendance was in an FA Cup tie against Liverpool. Source: Wolverhampton Wanderers The Complete Record by Tony Matthews. Paulofthewolves (talk) 19:09, 4 June 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. NiciVampireHeart 05:58, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 July 2019

Please add to club honours: 2019 Premier League Asia Trophy winners Bobbydazzler75 (talk) 13:16, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Melmann (talk) 12:09, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Retired No1 shirt

I have searched high and low and can find no confirmation from the club that they have retired the No1 shirt. Local media at the time (e.g Local newspaper) reported that it was Patricio's decission to not wear the shirt, not a club decision to retire it. I think this has been been picked up by other sites that have missed the detail and then erroneously reported as the shirt being retired. - X201 (talk) 07:41, 3 September 2019 (UTC) Additional link to the Wolves news article on the subject - X201 (talk) 09:10, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2020

Remove Os Wolvinhos from the club's nicknames. The only nicknames are Wolves and The Wanderers. Bobbylad77 (talk) 00:03, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Done during normal vandalism check. - X201 (talk) 08:00, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Wolverhampton Wanderers F.C./GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 22:32, 12 October 2020 (UTC)


Lead
  • You need a citation for footnote 1
  • "The current season is the club's 66th season in total at the highest level." - Unclear what the current season is  Done
  • You don't need the floodlights citation in the lead per WP:LEADCITE Done
  • Ditto with the European Cup citations Done
  • and the West Brom citation Done
Infobox
  • Where are the alternate colors cited? The colours and badges section mentions an all white road outfit, which doesn't seem to be what is pictured in the infobox, but I'm not seeing the maroonish one cited anywhere  per answer below
The kits aren't usually cited in the infobox, although the club website has info on them. As for the maroon kit, I have updated the kits and badge section. The colours and badge section states that all-white is the clubs' traditional away kit. It doesn't say that it is always used, in fact it goes on to list all of the non-white away kits that have been used recently. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 12:21, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Formation and the Football League
  • " in which they played the first Football League match ever staged (against Aston Villa)" - Source only says that the first goal in Football League history was in that match, not that it was the first match staged.  Done
FA Cup success and world war years
  • "FA Cup success and world war years" - You've already linked the FA Cup in the last section, no need to link it again. You also link it again later in this section.
 Done. The second one actually links to the 1949 final. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 12:28, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
  • "became established as one of the leading club sides in England in the years leading up to the Second World War," - Do the sources explicitly say this? I can't very, as it's cited to an offline source, a paywalled source, and a dead link.
  • "gave the championship to the Merseysiders instead" - I'm assuming that Liverpool are the Merseysiders, but that's not obvious Done
  • " This game had been the last in a Wolves shirt for Stan Cullis, and a year later he became manager of the club. In Cullis's first season in charge, he led Wolves to a first major honour in 41 years as they beat Leicester City to lift the FA Cup, and a year later, only goal average prevented Wolves winning the league title." - Citation needed  Done
  • Explicitly state that there was no football during the two world wars  Done
Cup success in the 60s and 70s
  • "Cullis's sacking did not prevent the season ending with relegation (the first time Wolves had known relegation since 1922–23) and the club's first spell outside the top division since 1932. Exile from the top flight lasted only two seasons however, as Wolves were promoted in 1967 as Second Division runners-up." - Citation needed  Done
  • "The club's return to the English top flight in 1967 heralded another period of relative success under Bill McGarry, with a fourth place league finish in 1971 qualifying Wolves for the newly created UEFA Cup. En route to the UEFA Cup final, they defeated Juventus and Ferencváros before losing to Tottenham Hotspur 3–2 on aggregate; a 2–1 home defeat in the first leg proving decisive. Wolves lifted silverware two years later when they won the League Cup for the first time by beating Manchester City 2–1 in the final. Despite relegation again in 1976, Wolves bounced back at the first attempt as Second Division champions under manager Sammy Chung, and then under manager John Barnwell, the turn of the decade saw them finish in the top six in the league and win the 1980 League Cup, when then-record signing Andy Gray scored the only goal of the final to defeat the reigning European champions and League Cup holders Nottingham Forest." - Citation needed  Done
Financial crisis
  • "The club was "saved" from liquidation at the last minute" - Why is saved in scare quotes?  Done
  • "brought immediate promotion back to the First Division under manager Graham Hawkins, but the Bhattis' failure to invest sufficiently in the club soon saw things unravel as the team suffered three consecutive relegations through the football divisions under different managers" - The promotion to the first division is not mentioned in the source. Graham Hawkins is not mentioned in the source. The fact that different managers were involved each year is not mentioned in the source.
  • Link receivership at the first mention, not the second  Done
  • "the team reached the final of the inaugural play-offs but were denied promotion by Aldershot. Building on that, the team achieved both the Fourth and Third Division championships in the next two seasons and won the 1988 Football League Trophy Final at Wembley." - Citation needed
  • "The 1986–87 season saw Wolves' first-ever campaign in the Fourth Division, where, with the guidance of new manager Graham Turner and the goals of Steve Bull, who would ultimately score a club record 306 goals" - Rephrase this, as it almost gives the impression that 306 goals is a season figure, not a career figure.
The Hayward Years
  • No need to link Graham Taylor in back-to-back sections
I can't find multiple links to him. Did you mean Graham Turner instead? REDMAN 2019 (talk) 12:05, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
  • "Their stay proved short-lived however as they were immediately relegated back to the newly retitled EFL Championship." - Citation needed
Promotion, relegations, turbulent times
  • "Following relegation, Norwegian Ståle Solbakken became the club's first overseas manager" - Source does not explicitly state that he was the first overseas manager
  • "and led the team back to the EFL Championship in his first season, setting a new club record points total of 103 which is also an all-time record for the most points accumulated by any team during a Tier 3 season." - Citation needed
Fosun
  • "Zenga was sacked after just 14 league games and Paul Lambert appointed as his successor in November 2016 but, at the conclusion of the season, Lambert too was dismissed" - Source does not state Zenga lasted 14 games.
  • "Under Nuno, Wolves went on to clinch the 2017–18 Championship title, to return to the Premier League after a 6-year absence." - Citation needed
  • "Wolves replicated their seventh-place finish in the Premier League in 2018–19 with the same placing in the 2019–20 Premier League, albeit that they recorded two more points in 2019–20 than the previous season and only missed out on sixth place on goal difference on this latter occasion." - Citation needed
Colours and badge
  • No need to bold the motto.
  • Link old gold at the first usage, not the second
Stadium
  • "The stadium finally now had four complete stands that would form its basis for the next half-century." - Citation needed
  • "this redevelopment formed the stadium for almost twenty year" - Citation needed
  • "raising the current official capacity to 31,700" - Not finding this in the source
Other players
  • It's unclear if the citation from the main players table is suppose to cover this or not. Either way, it needs a direct citation
U23 squad
  • We need some prose here, besides just the main article link (looks like this might be discussed in the other teams section, which raises the question of why the basically empty section exists)
Out on loan
  • This whole table needs cited
Other teams
  • "U23 side are also participating in Premier League International Cup 2019-20." - Citation needed. Also, the COVID kinda killed this, so an update is needed
  • "Home games are primarily staged at AFC Telford United's New Bucks Head home." - Citation needed
  • The Wolves Women section is based on a source from 2018. This is potentially out-of-date, so a more recent citation is needed.
  • Also, no need to both bold and link Wolves Women
Football staff
  • The source is from 2017. Some of these names are missing/potentially outdate, so this needs a rework with everyone cited and a more recent source.
Medical staff
  • The entire list is uncited
Club executives
  • Note 2 needs cited
  • Matt Wild is not mentioned in the references
Notable players
  • "Andy Gray, Emlyn Hughes, Paul Ince and Denis Irwin are all previous League Championship medal winners who have also represented Wolves. Joleon Lescott went on to play for England 26 times scoring once. Robbie Keane went on to become Ireland's all-time leading goalscorer with 68 goals in 146 appearances." - citation needed
Managerial history
  • "The first manager, George Worrall, was identified by the title of "club secretary", a post that continued until the appointment of a full-time manager in the modern sense was made in 1922." - Citation needed
  • "In the 21st century, Dave Jones, Mick McCarthy and Nuno Espírito Santo have led the club into the Premier League. Kenny Jackett took Wolves to a record EFL League One (Tier 3) points haul of 103 as they won this division in 2013–14." - Citation needed
Support
  • "As well as having numerous supporters' clubs across the United Kingdom,[97][98][99][100][101][102][103] " - Per WP:SYNTH, you're better off having just one source that states this
I'm not sure what to do with this. Each source refers to a different supporters group. Am I supposed to choose one? REDMAN 2019 (talk) 11:41, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Rivalries
  • " it is of less significance. As Wolverhampton historically sat within the boundaries of Staffordshire, a Staffordshire derby between Wolves and Stoke City is also recognised." - Citation needed
  • " Wolves' closest geographic rival is actually Walsall" - Not supported by citation
Finances
  • Most of this section is written in reverse chronological order, which isn't great
Honours
  • "Only Manchester United, Liverpool and Arsenal have more all-time points. With 7,780 league goals scored over 120 seasons (as of the end of 2018–19 season), Wolves have the third highest total of all-time league goals: only Manchester United and Liverpool have more." - Citation needed
  • A lot of these honours don't seem to be cited. In fact, many of them aren't even mentioned in the prose body, so far as I can tell.
League history
  • Entire section is uncited.
References
  • Ref 9 is cited 15 times to the Matthews book. No page number is given. The page numbers are needed.
  • Ref 13 (ESPN FA Cup Final Upsets) is dead
  • Ref 22 (Hats off to Hanot) is dead
  • I'm not convinced that wolvesheroes.com is a reliable source. In fact, it calls itself a blog, so probably not.
  • Ref 46 (Fosun Group takes over Wolves) redirects to the site home page.
  • Ref 60, the historical kits one, needs an accessdate parameter
  • Ref 82 (Wolves Women to Face Manchester Utd.) is dead
  • All of the references to the worldwide Wolves fan clubs need accessdates. Also, it's unclear from the information from the information included on some of these if they really are fan clubs, or just teams named Wolves.
  • Junk Archive Blog is not a reliable source.
  • Ref 127 (Fosun Group takes over Wolves) redirects to the site home page.
  • The Beautiful History is not a reliable source.
  • There's no consensus as to whether or not the Daily Mirror is a reliable source or not, so you'll need to find a better source for GA.
  • "molineuxstadiumthroughtheages.blogspot.com" is not a reliable source
  • Ref 87 (End of the Wright Era) is dead.
  • Ref 88 (Billy Wright) needs an accessdate
  • There's enough of these that need accessdates that I don't feel like calling them out individually. Pretty much, if it's an online source that's not internet archived, it needs an accessdate.

Sorry, but I'm gonna have to quick-fail this, simply because the referencing is nowhere near the GA standards. Failed a lot of spot checks, there's so much uncited material, and many of the sources are either dead or unreliable. There's just too much work here for a single GA review period. Hog Farm Bacon 03:10, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the review. I will address these issues in the future. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 19:56, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 May 2021

There all french!

Oui, oui! Excuse my French: "I'm Sorry I'll Read That Again".--Jack Upland (talk) 05:26, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wolverhampton_Wanderers_F.C./Archive_1&oldid=1149370453"