Talk:Fenerbahçe S.K.

GA review comments
Hey, here you go... It's a long way from a GA in my opinion. The biggest issue is the lack of English copyediting, so right now I'll fail it. Feel free to get in touch with me for anything specific. The Rambling Man 17:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Citations must be placed per WP:CITE, that is usually immediately after punctuation.
 * Lead citations are a bit over the top. In general the lead is okay without citation because you talk about what's in the lead later on in the main part of the article and that's the best place for the citation.
 * "Yellow Canaries" - citation required.
 * "Official site writes Black Stocking FC (founded in 1899), Kadıköy FC (founded in 1902) and Fenerbahçe FC (founded in 1907) are same clubs, at least most of founders are same.[13] " - sorry to sound blunt but that really doesn't make much sense. I'd suggest an English copyedit.
 * "However this information is unsubstantiated and unproved." - then why use it?
 * "On the other hand, a historian and journalist Selahattin Duman did a research[14] on Fenerbahçe history in recent years. In his serial articles that published on SABAH newspaper, he states that there isn't evidence of Fenerbahçe before 1907, but the Black Stockings." - again, an English copyedit needed.
 * Supporters section completely unreferenced.
 * Technical staff is borderline trivia.
 * Notable players - what makes them notable? Inherently WP:POV I'm afraid.  Check out some football WP:FA's like Arsenal F.C. for help here.
 * Date ranges must use en-dash so 1963-64 should be 1963&nash;64, see WP:DASH for the details, and be consistent, it's either 2001–02 or 2001–2002 (prefer former).
 * For the other sports sections, use main and expand more on each.
 * References - don't use the scrolling ref table. Use two columns with reflist.

Peacock terms and poor English
Apart from the improvements suggest above, the tone of this article is very unsuitable for an encyclopedia. To take but one example, please review this sentence "The passion of the Fenerbahçe fans has been recognised by many of the teams that dare to pay the visit to the deadly feud that these Turkish giants thrive in". Apart from being poorly constructed, what is meant by "the teams that dare to pay the visit(sic!)"? An equally serious error is that the whole article is written in very bad English. Just look at the first sentence of the first paragraph "Official site writes Black Stocking FC (founded in 1899), Kadıköy FC (founded in 1902) and Fenerbahçe FC (founded in 1907) are same clubs, at least most of founders are same". This sentence alone contains at least five rather obvious language errors. With so many errors in one single sentence, it is not surprising that it gets hard to read the article because of the language. If possible, someone with a good command of English should rewrite this article, correcteing all the language mistakes and aiming at more suitable wording in many cases. JdeJ (talk) 16:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

LOL —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thprfssnl (talk • contribs) 01:09, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Things to improve
The text drops a number of unknown name at you, especially in the history section JdeJ (talk) 10:51, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Ziya Songülen and Necip Okaner founded Fenerbahçe Spor Külübü a century ago in 1907 on Beşbıyık Street in Moda - What is Moda?
 * Ayetullah became the first General Secretary - Who is Ayetullah?

Moda is a town/district in Istanbul, on the Asian side of the Bosphorus. Maybe it could be changed to ". . in Moda, Istanbul" to be more specific, but it's not incorrect as it is, either.

Ayetullah is Ayetullah, one of the people involved with establishing the club. You must be aware that surnames weren't mandatory in Turkey at the time, so he is simply known as "Ayetullah bey", or "Mr. Ayetullah". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.107.83.192 (talk) 09:03, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Information on Ayetullah should be given more or taken away if there is no information about him. Otherwise, it sounds like Iranian religious leader was among founders of the club)) (DJSurvivor (talk) 11:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)).

stadium capacity
someone made a typo on the capacity it has a full stop instead of a comma. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.173.98 (talk) 14:41, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * This is an arguable point given that many European countries use the decimal point as a thousands separator and the comma for decimals. I doubt that anyone would believe that the stadium capacity was 60!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanel76 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Luis Aragones
he could be the new manager —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.170.86.213 (talk) 21:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

but not jet... need waiting to oficial presentation... —Preceding unsigned comment added by SunriseProjector (talk • contribs) 13:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Notable players?
Where is the list of notable players? why it was deleted? Scragnothh (talk) 17:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Lefter's Nationality
Unlike L.Küçükandonyadis is a Rum(half Turk half Greek), we should know that he was a Turkish national team striker, also he has been living in (Prince Islands-Büyük Ada)Turkiye since he is known ever. I think we should put only Turkish flag; i'm strongly sure that if he was asked about this, he wished to be appeared as a Turk when his name is seen on the screen. This issues may seem weird for some but actually the Greek Flag next to his name is the real weird thing, because as many know he is currently a Turkish Citizen. Kutay 22:54, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree with that Lefter wanted to be known as a Turk not a Turk-Greek Redman19 (talk) 14:42, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Since he had an international career with Turkey the greek flag has nothing to do next to his name...Redman,if he wanted to be known as only Turk and not Greek-Turk,would he ever played for AEK,the symbol of the Greeks who came from Turkey after 1922? 81.24.180.193 (talk) 12:00, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Transfer 'rumours'
Please remember that Wikipedia is not a gossip forum and it is not a crystal ball. Players should only be added as squad mambers after the transfer has actually taken place and not before. In particlular Emre Belözoğlu keeps getting added as a squad member. If you look at his article page, you'll see that the transfer is on hold. So for the time being he remains a Newcastle United squad member. When the transfer takes place, then he can be added as a Fenerbahche squad member. DrFrench (talk) 18:20, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Page is a car-wreck
Anyone willing to fix it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.230.106 (talk) 10:40, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for volunteering. The edit button is thataway. -- Escape Artist Swyer Talk Contributions 18:42, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

this page is laughable, the introduction is a freaking absolute mess, i don't think anyone would want to try and fix this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.126.71.56 (talk) 08:11, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, this article is an absolute joke. There aren't any citations for the records, notable fans, transfer record, recent seasons, award winners ETC. 68.81.67.201 (talk) 13:21, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Kazim
Why is there an English flag near Colin Kazim's name? He plays in the Turkish national team. Please also edit his page. And also its the same for Ali Bilgin. In their page it says " ... born Turkish player". So they're theoretically Turkish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.165.155.142 (talk) 14:41, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

An image on this page may be deleted
This is an automated message regarding an image used on this page. The image File:100th year logo.jpg, found on Fenerbahçe S.K., has been nominated for deletion because it does not meet Wikipedia image policy. Please see the image description page for more details. If this message was sent in error (that is, the image is not up for deletion, or was left on the wrong talk page), please contact ST47. STBotI (talk) 01:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

In-Continents
I know that Fenerbahçe are in the Asian part of Turkey but Turkey's mainly in Europe so are they entitled to chose which Champions League they partake in? The C of E (talk) 17:54, 7 April 2009 (UTC)


 * There is no seperation for Turkish clubs to participate in continental competitions. Turkish teams in all sports disciplines compete in European cups since the contentions are held in professional terms, appr. since late 50s. Cheers, Umi1903 (talk) 08:48, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Protection Requirement
That article is needed to semi-protection due to vandalist attacks day by day. Would any admin protect that please. Thank you. Rangond (talk) 17:31, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

not 1905
fenerbahce was found in 1907, not 1905. 1905 is foundation time of rival of fenerbahce, galatasaray.
 * Thats correct, it is 1907, verified on official website. Hitro   talk  18:34, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Notable Fans!!!
I don't find this section encyclopedic. It is unsourced and I assume its factual accuracy can never be verified. It should be removed. Hitro  talk  18:36, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * As this section stands it is original research and shouldn't be included. Regardless, I really don't feel that these famous fans sections are worth noting in football club articles, particularly clubs with a huge fanbase, which will inevitably include notable/famous people. Dancarney (talk) 08:48, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I have removed it, Please discuss here before restoring. Hitro   talk  18:53, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Whilst page is locked, my problems with it
This article has quite a few issues. These are the ones that occur to me. I'm sure there's other stuff, but I think that's plenty of issues to address for a start. Dancarney (talk) 11:08, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Lot's of usage of "Turkcell Süper Lig" - unsponsored name should be used to avoid confusionwhen sponsors change, so Süper Lig.
 * A lot of the English is very poor in the History section "So strict in fact that the Sultan, Abdulhamit the 2nd, forbid that the Turkish youth may not set up a club nor engage in the game of football played by the English families that was watched in envy." is a prime example. The emphasis is far too heavy on the club's 21st Century history - 585 words on 1905-2000, 682 words on 2001-2009. Things such as Zico's nickname do not belong here.
 * Historical players is a terrible title. There seems to be no explanation for why these players deserve their own paragraph rather than any others.
 * Too many club vice-presidents and members of staff included. I don't think that the names of the club Masseurs or Vice-President responsible for Law & Institutional Relations are worthy of inclusion.
 * The lists of former presidents and managers are so big that they shouldn't be included, particularly as we already have Category:Fenerbahçe S.K. presidents and List of Fenerbahçe S.K. managers, which may be linked to instead. This would ease reading of this page.
 * The records section has massive overuse of bold text, is completely unreferenced, and includes details already covered in the previous (Acheivements) section, such as Most Istanbul Football Leagues won. The record victories should only be the greatest goal difference achieved in one game by the club. Anything less is not a record. I previously put some of the individual records with the rest of the club records, but they appear to have been moved back.
 * Transfers In and Out do not belong on this page, it's too much recentism. Transfers may be detailed in individual season articles, perhaps something like Fenerbahçe S.K. 2009–10 season, or Transfers in Turkish football Summer 2009.
 * Scorers in Turkish national team is totally irrelevant to a club team's article and should not be included.
 * Player award winners should only include where players have one an international competition whilst contracted to Fenerbahçe, otherwise this is also irrelevant.
 * Lot's of POV in the Museum and Stadium sections "The Fenerbahçe Şükrü Saracoğlu Stadium is rapidly becoming one of Europe’s elite football arenas" and "Fenerbahçe has a huge leading profile over other clubs concerning trophies. " shouldn't be in here, for example.
 * Sponsorship - is this really of interest/relevance?
 * Support section goes on a bit. It reads like a series of mini-adverts for the various supporters' groups' websites. That bit should just be a list of the different supporters' groups, as there is not much more to say about them of note.


 * That is a good effort to bring these problems under light, I shall try on my part to improve this article. Hitro   talk  18:55, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

"Player award winners should only include where players have one an international competition whilst contracted to Fenerbahçe, otherwise this is also irrelevant." I'm absolutely with you on that point, Dancarney! For example: Emre Belözoglue & Roberto Carlos were not under contract with Fenerbahce when they were named by Pele in his Top 100 list in 2004. Zico never even played a match for Fenerbahce. And Daniel Güiza joined Fenerbahce only after he won the EURO 2008 with Spain - so he became Euro Champion being a RCD Mallorca player. A bit of a reach in these cases relating the said players accomplishments to Fenerbahce... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.176.200.74 (talk) 03:31, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Wederson is a Bursaspor player
In the Historical Players section it is mentioned that Wederson is playin for the Fenerbahce. But Wederson had signed with Bursaspor last month.here is the link: http://www.tff.org.tr/Default.aspx?pageId=526&kisiId=30098. Please correct that mistake.. 95.142.137.144 (talk) 17:09, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Guiza and Kazim
Guiza and Kazim are not in the plans of Aykut Kocaman, they will be sold soon. 195.240.250.105 (talk) 08:07, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Kit excess detail
I have been removing overly detailed kit images from this article's infobox because they are problematic - firstly, the adidas logos are included, which is a potential breach of copyright, something which Wikipedia has to strenuously try and avoid. Secondly, these logos are overdetailed, making the image cluttered - note that Template:Football kit states "the template is for showing basic team colours. It is not supposed to be an accurate drawing of the kit." Sadly, an editor keeps undoing this without specifying a reason. I have tried to start a discussion on their user page, but no response was forthcoming. I can see no good reason why the images in this edit should be replaced by the ones in this one. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 15:13, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * As the page is now locked, it would be most helpful if a discussion could commence.Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 14:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Mind if I add a 3rd opinion on this as it was me who noticed the dispute and requested the protection? I totally agree with your statement on that adidas logo s we don't want to get hit with any copyright charges. But I do think that you may be overreacting on the other things as you say the logos are over detailed but apart from the adidas logo, I see no other logos on it at all. From what I've noticed it's not as bad as some I've seen such as the ones at 2009–10 FC Barcelona season and Barcelona Sporting Club So my compromise for this would be allow the one he was trying to add but remove the adidas logo from it to avoid the copyright things as I don't think that the kit is cluttered at all with the extra detail. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 16:33, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The images I used are the same, but with the adidas logo removed! I had to make new images from the ones being used as they were on Commons, and on Commons an editor is insistent on getting logos, crest, sponsors names, etc. in there. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 16:38, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well the ones he was doing seemed to have different coloured shorts and socks opposed to the mainly plain white ones we have here. That's why I got the impression they were different. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 16:42, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I dunno about the shorts and socks. They may have ended up as collateral damage in the shirt war. Shorts and socks are identical in the 2 edits I highlighted in the OP, though. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 23:00, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, It's just that I noticed in this edit that he tried to add, he tried to have blue shorts and socks opposed to plain white ones. Not being an expert on Turkish football, I don't really know which one is the correct kit for Fenerbahçe. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 07:26, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The club's website has images of white shorts and socks for the home kit, with away/third colours of all-blue and all-white.. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 08:37, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

chairman
lebron james is not the chairman lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.63.198 (talk) 17:40, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Important
Fenerbahce won European medals in the swimming and athletics sections, their boxing section recruits european and world champions. Fenerbahce athletes also won many Olympic medals. 195.240.250.105 (talk) 09:14, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Fenerbahce (Football Team)
We need a seperate section for the football team like Galatasaray lol Wikipedia bureaucracy has continually stopped any and all of my efforts. Help!1907AbsoluTurk (talk) 19:43, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting that Fenerbahçe S.K. should be the article for the multi-sports club and that there should be a separate article Fenerbahçe S.K. (football team)? If so, be bold and go for it. There is indeed precedent with Galatasaray. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 19:56, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I think it should. But when I did, it was marked for deletion and when I removed info from the original article, the wikipedia elites reversed everything. 1907AbsoluTurk (talk) 00:43, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It looks like a major problem is that when you're creating the page you are not putting in an edit summary, nor any hatnotes at the top of the article, and so bots will flag this up. With any explanation of what is being done then the new article qualifies for speedy deletion. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 09:28, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Please note that there is now a Fenerbahçe S.K. (football team), and this is where things such as the current football squad, kit images, etc should be. Not on this article. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 15:53, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Sexism at Fenerbahce
Given the recent ban on adult males at Fenerbahce, shouldn't there be a small section on this blatant sexism? It's a vile example of such and where clubs practice such blanket sex/race bans, it ought to be highlighted. OldSquiffyBat (talk) 08:25, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Fenerium and FB Radio
No indication of how this very short article meets notability guidelines. Appears to be sentences simply moved from the main article. RadioFan (talk) 00:42, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree, FB Radio and Fenerium should be merged with this article, there isn't enough information for them to have their own seperate article.I can metge them as soon as there is new confirmation and also we should propose those articles for deletion if this proposal is accepted.Rivaner (talk) 15:22, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Original research?
I have looked through the article quickly but couldn't find any original research, maybe I didn't look really well :). So if anybody can point out the "original research" parts, I am ready to replace them with proper sources and new information. Thanks for your time.Rivaner (talk) 15:25, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Suggestion
Hello fellow Wikipedians and Mr. Pereira,

There was a statistics declared about the last Fenerbahce-Antalyaspor match, it is the “Throws/Successful Throws count” as Antalya:13/3 Fenerbahce:33/3 ! What does that mean? It means that Fenerbahce is devastated by Caner/Şener, as it is the case in many other matches, who are beleived as the most successful back players of Turkey. These two players spent 30 attacks of Fenerbahçe by themselves, they gave the ball they posess as a gift to their opponent. They, especially Caner, threw the ball sharply, without aiming anyone, through over the crowd. Nobody feels uncomfortable from this fact. You spent most of the Fenerbahce attacks like this, and nobody says “Hey, what kind of attack organization is this, don’t you have any other action like strutting, two to one, dribbling, etc. ?  Why then in every attack you toss away the ball over the crowd or throw it to out? Please watch the match again to observe this, you will understand what I mean. Ok, then thinking that the attack organization of FB is mainly “the throws of Caner/Şener or Gökhan”, how many is the goal/asist counts of these three players in 20 leage mathes? I say it, just 1! (By words: One) They say that FB backs always attend to the attacks, what is the result? One asist in 20 matches! Besides, these men also always abandon the defence, so, poor stoppers act like backs, and poor Mehmet Topal acts like stopper, these three’s contribution to defence is minimal. As a summary: Caner / Sener / Gökhan are not doing defensive duties well, and offensively they toss the ball meaninglessly onto the crowd, so they spend much of the attacks of FB. This is my opinion. If you agree please stop the backs Caner/Şener spending the attacks. The statistic is clear: 33/3 Veysel Peru Veyselperu (talk) 14:43, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Does this have anything to do with the article? Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 15:20, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, i believe it is for the good of Fenerbahçe and the article. Regards. Veyselperu (talk) 07:28, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * As far as I can understand, you are giving your personal opinions on the very recent tactics of Fenerbahçe's football team. What is the verifiable, relevant information that you think to be added to this article about the Fenerbahçe multi-sport club? Also, why is this directed to the current manager of the team? The "good of Fenerbahçe" is irrelevant for Wikipedia. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 09:27, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Table concerning international honours
The table gives a short overview about the major international honours, while the active departments section is generally about the department, its history, all honours won etc. Furthermore, the figures about the international honours in the infobox in the lead section are linking to the table, so please stop deleting it. Baki.d (talk) 10:24, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The table is a repetition of information further down the page, and selective in its scope. If you have this table you also have to have a table of national honours won, and that would get unweildy to the point of uselessness. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 10:40, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


 * It's in a totally different form after all, plus the runners-up positions are also listed, while in the departments section only the championship titles are being shown. Also, international honours > national and regional honours. It doesn't harm to have this table. Baki.d (talk) 10:55, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Don't see how the different form is relevant - it doesn't add anything. If you think runners-up places should be included then include them for the different sections and at national level - don't pick and choose arbitrarily. Just because international honours are "greater", that doesn't mean that national level honours aren't important. Whether or not there is "harm", I think that this table is repeating honours as a way of puffing up the article. The facts should stand as they are, don't need to state them more than once. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 11:39, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The point is the infobox links to them, and as such they are all in a clear overview in one table, in one spot. That's not the case in the departments section. I don't see how stating that international honours are more important than national ones is arbitrary, it's a simple fact. And I didn't say that the others are unimportant, but they aren't as noteworthy as the international ones. Plus other similar multi-sport club articles also have it, like Galatasaray for example. Why not just let it be? Baki.d (talk) 12:10, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't a valid argument, but I don't think we're going to reach an agreement here. Could do with some third party input from neutral editors. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 16:28, 1 February 2018 (UTC)


 * It was me who included that table. As Baki.d already pointed out, the figures in the infobox link to it, so I say keep it. Akocsg (talk) 22:21, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 9 November 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: not moved (page mover nac) Flooded  with them hundreds  11:09, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

– Correct name without dots as per club and Turkish naming rules. Can be confirmed through club's official online presence. Also in line with WP naming conventions guideline for sports teams and was discussed on WikiProject Football. Junk2711 (talk) 01:51, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Fenerbahçe S.K. → Fenerbahçe SK
 * Fenerbahçe S.K. (football) → Fenerbahçe SK (football)


 * Oppose It was no consensus in the WP:Footy. without dot affect the consistency of 100+ Turkish football club, and in the project did not reach consensus to do so. Matthew hk (talk) 07:29, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose Per Matthew hk. Also, this sort of change needs to be done en masse via a centralised discussion rather than individual clubs at a time. Number   5  7  12:11, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose - I agree that all clubs should be moved to titles without dots, but this isn't the correct method for gaining the consensus to do so. – PeeJay 12:45, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 13:13, 9 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose as above - whatever naming convention is decided, it needs to be constant for all Turkish clubs. There needs to be a central discussion, not a bunch of ill thought out RMs. There is no consensus anywhere that we should not use dots, not any evidence presented that dots are not used. GiantSnowman 13:18, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment. I have been working with a few of these, and I don't know what impact this has had or will have on the subject of "dots" or full stops in these club names; however, I've noticed that in most cases on Wikidata when the club name is included on several other-language Wikipedias, the dots are omitted. Exceptions I've seen were when other-language wikis used the full name, such as "Spor Kulübü", instead of "SK" or "S.K." None Few of the other-language wikis that I've encountered include the dots – none . This observation may have an effect on any future formal discussion to put an end to this challenge.  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  15:18, 9 November 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:53, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Fenerbahçe ve Kadıköy Futbol Takımı İlk Fotoğraf (Aralık 1908).jpg
 * ZiyaSongülenFB.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:22, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Fenerbahce-5-star-yildiz-logo-arma-compartman.webp