Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Danish football champions

Danish football champions
This list is just as good as Swedish football champions, which also is a featured list. ka la  ha  20:55, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose The list part is fine, but the prose needs citations for the format changes. Oldelpaso 20:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The information on the format is taken from the listed entries in the "External links" section, and referencing the changes would mean several refs to the same sources. Changing the "External links" header to "Sources" would indicate that the links are the grounds of the article, and I think that would be the most "clean" solution. What do you think about that? Poulsen 11:11, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * With several paragraphs of prose I think inline citations are a must, even if they would be multiple references to the same two sources. Using allows multiple citations of the same source in a neat manner. Oldelpaso 19:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I will begin making inline citations - if you have the time, it would be nice if you would insert cn tags to make it clear exactly what to source. Poulsen 08:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Support, they've all been dealt with now. Oldelpaso 19:14, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Too many red links; several players and even a team. Punkmorten 07:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If creating 30 or so stubs will make this list featured, then I'll go ahead and make them. Poulsen 11:11, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, I would like to point out, that the mentioned Swedish football champions has a few red-linked clubs as well - even the 1925 winners Brynäs IF Fotboll. Poulsen 15:23, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Support - this is fine now (although it would be nice for all those Danish football seasons to have articles). -- ALoan (Talk) 18:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose too many unnecessary abbreviations (AB, BK, B1903, B 93...). And why does B 1901 redirects to a club that was founded in 1994?Circeus 01:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * At least some of the abbreviations are the traditional way of refering to these clubs (fx. AB, KB, B 19xx). To avoid any mistakes, I have now enforced the most recent use of the Danish FA, to ensure a standard.
 * Lolland-Falster Alliancen is ultimately a merger of B 1901 and B 1921. This is now mentioned in the LFA article. Poulsen 13:06, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That doesn't make the article any less jargonistic. Swedish football champions at least uses titles that are minimally more explicit (e.g. usually the title of the article). Circeus 23:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't quite follow you. In your initial post you say there are too many abbreviations. I then remove those abbreviations that an authoritative source deems unnecessary. You then promote the standard of the Swedish equivalent, which fx uses abbreviations like IF, FF and BK, and short names like AIK and GAIS - much in the same tradition as what was (and still is) in the Danish football champions article. The only way it makes sense to me is if you are against club abbreviations (KB, AB .. - though not in the Swedish champions article), but for pre- and suffixes (BK, IF, FF ..). Is that the case? Poulsen 00:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the objection is the use of abreviations for club names, not associated prefixes/suffixes. I suggest the following changes:
 * KB to Kjøbenhavns Boldklub
 * AB to Akademisk Boldklub
 * B93 to Boldklubben 1893
 * AGF to Aarhus Gymnastik Forening
 * That should remove any confusing abbreviations for club names. Tom pw (talk) 11:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * But the thing is - the long names are seldomly, if ever, used in the Danish press, by the Danish FA, or by the clubs themselves. Naming their respective articles that way is almost purely a Wikipedia phenomenon, and should not be taken as gospel on how to refer to these clubs. Please consult the Danish FA link already provided for the way to refer to these clubs; a way repeated by both nationwide Danish media; Danmarks Radio (1st division, 2nd division) and TV 2 (Denmark) (1st Division, 2nd Division). Also, I can not see any arguments, except convenience, that longer names should prevail. And how is AGF in any way different from fore example AIK? Poulsen 13:46, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Because the abreviations are confusing for those not familiar with the subject. (Also, AIK isn't mentioned in the article). Tom pw (talk) 14:34, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * In the Danish football champions article, KB and AB are written and noted as Kjøbenhavns Boldklub and Akademisk Boldklub in the introductory prose parts of the article. There should be no confusion on the part of fx. KB being Kjøbenhavns Boldklub, if you read the entire article. AIK is mentioned in the Swedish article, which has been referred to many times in this discussion as a comparable article, due to its similar content and Featured List status. Poulsen 16:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Support - I have been a main contributor to the list, but would like to state that, especially after the different objections have been dealt with in a standardizing matter, I think the article is fit to be featured. Poulsen 09:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Support - as kalaha said, it's just as good as the Swedish list, despite the redlinks, which the Swedish one contains as well. A very well constructed list. к1иg---   f1$н---   £я5ω1fт  14:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)