Talk:Arsenal F.C.–Chelsea F.C. rivalry

Removal of statistics
I'm sorry but this has been ridiculous so far...How many pages of club's statistics can anyone find throughout the wikipedia? Thousands. How many articles about derbies include lists of matches and statistics? Many as well. So, what's the problem with this particular article? - Sthenel (talk) 22:20, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * As stated in official policy, Wikipedia is not a list of statistics. Argying that other stuff exists is not valid as a standalone argument for inclusion. As the consensus at the deletion discussion for the standalone article showed, that level of detail is not suitable for Wikipedia, and there are resources such as Soccerbase which already do cover this. A summary is enough here. Qwghlm (talk) 22:43, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

A list of past matches for a derby seems quite important. Including the league matches doesn't make it confusing (this is what an article should not be) and in so many derby-articles no problem has been found in this case. - Sthenel (talk) 13:16, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I never said it was confusing, I said it was unnecessary, and I am not the only one who thinks this. Qwghlm (talk) 14:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Notable?
Is this rivalry really that notable? I mean, I know the two teams are regularly in direct competition for the league title these days, but are they actually rivals? They're not from the same part of London, and games between the two are never really as heated as matches between Arsenal and Spurs or Newcastle and Sunderland, for example. – PeeJay 20:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

you obviously haven't heard about the shennigans from the late 60s/ early 70s, when tottenham were a laughing stock and arsenal looked to chelsea and west ham as rivals! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reggybabe (talk • contribs) 21:53, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

What happened to all the Statistics?
Someone edited it. and its just fake, we lost 789 times? really wtf. can someone fix it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonyds13 (talk • contribs) 23:41, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Arsenal F.C.–Chelsea F.C. rivalry. 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/20080227004632/http://www.footballfanscensus.com/issueresults/Club_Rivalries_Uncovered_Results.pdf to http://www.footballfanscensus.com/issueresults/Club_Rivalries_Uncovered_Results.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140301030022/http://www.footballfanscensus.com/londonfootballreport08.pdf to http://www.footballfanscensus.com/londonfootballreport08.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://review.chelseafc.com/page/LatestNews/0,,10268~1471656,00.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140626074307/http://www.chelseafc.com/chelsea-article/article/1336457/title/attendances to http://www.chelseafc.com/chelsea-article/article/1336457/title/attendances

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:01, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Honours
Football League Centenary Trophy is nowhere included as an official trophy, I checked many reliable Arsenal profiles, even the official Arsenal website does not list it in "Trophies" section, meanwhile Soccerway includes Premier League Asia Trophy and Emirates Cup as an official trophies, so if you'll keep adding this one-off centenary tournament then im expecting to add those two as well. Snowflake91 (talk) 10:44, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
 * If Centenary Trophy doesn't qualify to be on the page, what's the reason for Full Members Cup being there? Chelsea doesn't include it in their honours roll picture. Both of these tournaments were played during the season as competitive matches (unlike Emirates Cup or Asia Trophy which were pre-season friendlies). Plus I think it's flawed to exclude tournaments that aren't on a club's website anyway as some clubs list all their tournaments even pre-season ones (see Tottenham). Hashim-afc (talk) 17:56, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The trophy is listed below in the prose, but not on that specific picture – even the Community Shields are not in the pic, so can we remove them as well ? TBH only MAJOR honours should be listed in those tables, namely PL, FA Cup, Leageu Cup, and major UEFA trophies (so no super cups, neither community shield neither uefa supercup), everything else is a minor trophy. Snowflake91  (talk) 18:07, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
 * So is the only reason for the inclusion of Full Members Cup and exclusion of Centenary Trophy that Chelsea includes it at the bottom of their honours page but Arsenal doesn't include it on their honour page? Seems like a very flawed criteria to include. Eg Tottenham includes all their trophies on their page even pre-season ones. I agree with you tbh about only having major honours but right now that's not what's on the page, if we are going to have things like Full Members Cup on the page I can't see why to exclude Centenary Trophy which was a mid-season competitive tournament just like Members Cup. Thoughts? Hashim-afc (talk) 18:12, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

North West London Derby ??
Never heard it called that ever. It kind of implies that the two clubs are located in NW London when neither are. I don't think it's ever had a widely known title. But since it is the oldest London derby in terms of being in the Football League/Premier League football and that their two stadiums are the nearest and roughly equidistant from Trafalgar Square/Charing Cross, it could be called the Central London Derby. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bovis Messroom (talk • contribs) 21:12, 24 January 2022 (UTC)


 * There are several sources which calls it by that name (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6), however it is very possible that they actually got this name from Wikipedia, and not vice versa. Snowflake91  (talk) 21:19, 24 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I've also never seen or heard it referred to as that. For one thing, it erroneously suggests that both clubs are actually in North West London. Furthermore, this article has referred to it as the "North West London derby" since at least March 2020, whereas most of the links listed above are from 2021 (the oldest is from December 2020). The same editor also added the term to the Chelsea F.C.–Tottenham Hotspur F.C. rivalry article, but it has since been removed. It could be those other articles just copied what they found on Wikipedia. I'd be interested to see it in an older and more reputable source. SteveO (talk) 22:13, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Design Honours table
@Snowflake91 Regardless of the question of whether official minor honors (Football League Centenary Trophy, Full Members' Cup) are taken into account in the honour table, I see no reason to reject the design completely based on the argument of using coloring as a key for information.

Therefore, in order to avoid a pointless edit-war from the outset, I have compared the two design variants and am a supporter of OPTION A, as it not only identifies the record holder in the competition (i.e. an added value of information for the reader) and also Domestic, European and Worldwide honours are compared at a glance. If you don't like the dotted border style, you can leave it out as far as I'm concerned. But overall I like the design with more information content in option A much better. Miria~01 (talk) 16:31, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

record in the competition. Miria~01 (talk) 16:43, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * style="font-size:120%;;"| Honours (OPTION A without dotted)
 * Numbers with this background denote club holds
 * Numbers with this background denote club holds
 * Numbers with this background denote club holds
 * Numbers with this background denote club holds
 * }


 * Option B, its simple and provides all necessary information, there is zero reasons for red/blue team name colours despite being there for decorative purposes only. The first table is too clunky with all those European/Worldwide/total rows, its not like they won so many trophies that "worldwide" would need its own row. "International" is enough, everything that is not domestic is simply "international". However, option C would be fine if the team name colours would be removed, and if the Worldwide/European gets merged into simply "International". And only the current names of the competition should be listed to avoid row-breaking, for example just "Community Shield" and "Europa League" (none of the teams won it when the competition was called "UEFA Cup" anyway, so its not needed). Snowflake91  (talk) 16:48, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

record in the competition. The color scheme of the teams is irrelevant to me. Thought it was the preferred style at the rivalry-articles. Option C should then be correct.
 * style="font-size:120%;;"| Honours (OPTION C)
 * Numbers with this background denote club holds
 * Numbers with this background denote club holds
 * Numbers with this background denote club holds
 * Numbers with this background denote club holds
 * }