Talk:List of Manchester United F.C. players (25–99 appearances)

List class articles cannot be GAs
See WP:WIAGA, you could renominate at WP:FLC if the issues of the last review have been addressed. I have removed the GA nomination. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:43, 17 July 2011 (UTC) – HonorTheKing (talk) 01:00, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * That you for the info, I did not know so.

Number of matches criteria
Why 25 matches? Strange number. Maybe change it to 20? — Corwin of Amber (talk) 09:14, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

– HonorTheKing (talk) 09:32, 17 August 2011 (UTC) – HonorTheKing (talk) 12:32, 17 August 2011 (UTC) – HonorTheKing (talk) 13:11, 17 August 2011 (UTC) – HonorTheKing (talk) 13:35, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Too little of a number, And even tho it was the first of its format to be created, other English clubs followed with similar articles in this name; Bristol, Fulham, Stoke City, Bolton Wanderers.
 * I see, but there are other examples: List of Bradford City A.F.C. players with fewer than 50 league appearances, List of Burnley F.C. players (50–99 league appearances) etc. But I think we should choose the number to make relatively equal lists. Now we have 439 players in 1–24 players list and 220 players in 25–99 players list. So we can expand the second list, maybe even make 1–9 matches and 10–99 matches? I think it will be more adequate and balanced. Also round numbers with zero in the end (10, 20) are visually better than 25 etc. —Corwin of Amber (talk) 12:04, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes but as you can see those examples run in 2 articles format (–50,50+), while the other format are in 3 (1–24,25–99,100+ || 1–24,24–49,50+). You will not find article with "(fewer than 20 appearances)" but you will find "(fewer than 25 appearances)", If we add the 1–9 article, it will damage the article even more. Remember, no matter what you do, the first article will include atleast 420 players (twice more then the other two).
 * Also view WP:FOOTY archive, Here, and see it was talked before related on the issue of how many we should include.
 * I don't see what's the problem with having 3 articles: 1–9, 10–99 and 100+ matches? How it can damage any article? I counted the numbers, so if we make 1–9 matches article it would consist of 315 players, in 10–99 matches will be 344 players. It is much more even than in current articles (439/220). —Corwin of Amber (talk) 13:04, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes but don't you think 1–9 is too little? I am not talking about the amount it includes but the name. It will not last long before someone will request for a merging to become two articles. or even a delete.
 * For amateur it may seem too little, but we can always explain that there are much more footballers who played several matches and left the club than players with at least 10 matches (it can be demonstrated statistically by comparing the numbers like I did above). So such potential request for a merging or deletion will be objected by strong basis. —Corwin of Amber (talk) 13:21, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't agree with you, It was already talk about the number of kb and number of players the article should include, we now need to be same as other articles.
 * Ok, it was just the suggestion for improvement, I know that it's hard to accept changes and when you work with the articles for a long time you think that they are great & nothing should be changed because you get used to it. But I respect your contrubutions for Manchester United related articles and agree that you deserve the right to decide such questions. —Corwin of Amber (talk) 15:20, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It's all well and good saying that we might be getting stuck in our ways, but what makes you think things need changing? As far as I can tell, the current boundaries allow for similar numbers of players in each list. – PeeJay 21:54, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I know, but I can't understand why it's 25, not 10, 20, 27, 30 etc.? 100 games is understandable, but 25? We discuss this question in Russian wikipedia, and there are many people who find 25 number rather strange. Reader opens the article and sees the certain list: 25–99 players, and thinks: what does it mean? Is it some special category of players? Does players with 25 matches form some group? But as far as I know there are no reliable sources verifying number 25 in context of separating players groups. So to my mind it's only the question of making 2 balanced lists with about even numbers of included players. —Corwin of Amber (talk) 02:49, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Why are you being so difficult? 25 is a nice round number that creates a list of similar length to the other two. This matter is closed. – PeeJay 12:32, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * 25 is a nice round number that creates a list of similar length to the other two — that's simply not true, but I see that you don't want to change anything so I stop this pointless discussion. —Corwin of Amber (talk) 04:36, 20 August 2011 (UTC)