Talk:Arsenal F.C.

Capacity

The capacity of the Emirates Stadium should be 60,000, not 60,355. See Arsenal.com "Stadium FAQs": [1] Jawley (talk) 06:16, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

== we love u spurs arsenal scum! the gooners are a bunch of wankers. no pride your team is shit ==

That's clearly incorrect - the attendance for the Liverpool match last weekend was 60,094. [2] The 60,355 comes from the club's official report to shareholders and is also repeated elsewhere on the site [3] as well as the Premier League's website. [4] The 60,000 is just a rounding-down and inaccurate. Qwghlm (talk) 12:20, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Numbers

Arshavin the Tottenham hotspur fan as a chiled,has been transferred to arsenal he no. 13 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robben11 (talk • contribs) 03:15, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Not confirmed by either club nor the FA yet, so just hold off until he is, thank you. If the clubs are taking their time then so can we. :) Qwghlm (talk) 10:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

He is claiming he will be 23 anyway!—MDCollins 15:35, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

He has now signed but no squad number has been confirmed... yet. As it could either be 13 or 23 (or 6 or 29) so please don't add one in until officially confirmed by the club. Thanks. Qwghlm (talk) 17:07, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

They have photographed him with an Arsenal shirt on the Arsenal.com website and his number is 23. Just get it up already! 94.208.86.29 (talk) 17:15, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing it out... already corrected! Qwghlm (talk) 17:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Andrei/Andrey

Is there actually a correct spelling here? I've almost always seen it spelled as "Andrei," but Arsenal's website uses "Andrey." A lot of times there are a few "correct" transliterations, which is probably the case here. Which should we use? Eightball (talk) 04:41, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

So does the Zenit FC website, which prefers Andrey (see here). But this is really a discussion for Talk:Andrei Arshavin, isn't it? Qwghlm (talk) 10:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I've opened a requested move discussion open over there, all welcome to contribute. Qwghlm (talk) 10:25, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Result: Not move - (i.e. keep Andrei Arshavin) - as a move cannot be supported by WP:COMMONNAME evidence. As a result, this page should probably mirror the spelling of the player article.—MDCollins (talk) 23:18, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Arshavin's official Twitter page uses Andrei as the correct spelling Twitter.com/ArshavinAndrei.

The TRUE reason why Arsenal Fans are referred to as Gooners.

{{editsemiprotected}} Arsenal fans often refer to themselves as "Gooners", the term being derived from the nickname for the head of the Arsenal 'Firm' in the 80's, and it became the nickname of the 'firm' itself. These most passionate of fans were always on the North Bank at Highbury.

With all due respect, there is probably no one agreed-upon origin of the word "Gooner" and so to save on endless uncitable debate on the matter, it is best to try and give an impossible to cite claim here. Qwghlm (talk) 04:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Arsenal third shirt

I noticed that Arsenal's 2008/2009 third shirt isn't included in this article.The third shirt for this season, which is officially chosen by the club itself is last season's away shirt and it is mentioned in Premier League's official website as well as Arsenal's official online merchandise store, until it was removed due to stock clearance. I believe that the third shirt should be added. Gunner0095 (talk) 13:49, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Why is 'Arsenal' plurar?

"Arsenal Football Club ... are an English professional football club based... They play...". In my opinion, it is ridiculous. Arsenal is a club, it is a singular word. I ask the entire article converted into singular form. YemeniteCamel (talk) 20:22, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

In UK Englsh Grammar the convention is that singular nouns relating to groups i.e. committee, government, team etc are treated as though they are plural. This convention differs from US English where the singular of the verb is used, I believe as the norm. So it is correct in this case as the club is a UK based one to say "Arsenal are..." or "The club are...." By the way this issue has been aired / resolved plenty of times before.Tmol42 (talk) 20:36, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

New away shirt

Just wondering now that the 08/09 season has finished, when the new away shirt[5] will be put under team colours? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eltigue (talk • contribs) 16:51, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

The season is definitely not over until at least the end of the month & the FA Cup final, if not even later with the summer internationals. The transfer window starts July 1, so maybe then? Qwghlm (talk) 15:12, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

They've announced a new 3rd strip on the website. Can someone stick it on the page as A) It's a locked article and B) I haven't got the foggiest how to do it! Twsf (talk) 00:20, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Y Done. The website says the stripes are redcurrant but they look more grey to me, I've done a half-way approximation of the two. Qwghlm (talk) 11:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Details of Shares and ownership of the club

I believe the details in this section are wrong, as the shares stated add up to a total of 131.3% percent which clearly makes no sense! This should be looked at! 78.105.206.251 (talk) 00:34, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I think you're double-counting the numbers:

• Board of directors shares: 28.3 + 16.1 + 0.8 = 45.2%
• Nina Bracewell-Smith: 15.9%
• Red & White: 25.0%
• Total owned by these three blocs together: 45.2 + 15.9 + 25.0 = 86.1%

You're adding in the total the board owns (45.2%) to that number again to get your total of 131.3%, but that's already been counted once, so that's where you've made the mistake. Qwghlm (talk) 09:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

yeah sorry fair enough i forgot kroenke was now a board member sorry for bothering you silly me 78.105.206.251 (talk) 14:57, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Current squad list

Last season we had a rather protracted discussion/argument about which players should be listed under the 'Current squad' section. I believe the compromise we reached stated that the list would show the first-team players from Arsenal.com plus any reserve/youth players who were named in the squad for a competitive match. While this was a decent compromise at the time it also developed a list that doesn't appear in any other source, which is sort of original research. So for this season I think we should definitively decide which squad list to use. There are a few options:

• The Arsenal.com first-team squad
• First-team squad + reserve players. ARSENAL HAVE BOUGHT BRAZILLIAN RONALDO FOR A STAGGERRING 32.5 MIL'!!!!! ARSENE WENGER WAS SAID TO HAVE TOLD THE SPECTATORS THAT" YES, RONALDO IS THE BEST PLAYER OF ALL TIME AND WILL MAKE HISTORY AT ARSENAL, THATS WHAT WE WISH"
• UEFA's list for the Champions League (probably wouldn't be available until August)

Personally I think the best option is to show just the first-team players under the main Current squad subheading (perhaps change that to "First-team squad") and show the reserve players below underneath the Reserves and Academy subheading (like how it is done here). That way we make it clear which players are in the first-team, while also showing all the reserve players on the main page (because Wenger will end up playing a lot of the young guys over the course of the season). Cheers. Eightball (talk) 19:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Disagree. Compiling a list from multiple cited sources is not original research by any definition (else List of Arsenal F.C. players is also original research) - it's just aggregating verifiable data. Players who have been named for the first-team should be in the first-team squad list, not relegated to a Reserves or Academy sub-section. In any case, including all the reserves and academy players on the main article would take up too much room. Qwghlm (talk) 17:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

We aren't aggregating multiple sources, we're just applying our own arbitrary standard. WE are deciding who belongs under the current squad list, not any actually authority (such as Arsenal or UEFA). Besides, it would hardly take up any room at all to add the reserve players (it's quite a small list), especially since a few of them would be removed from the current squad listing. There is no need to include a list of academy players because any academy players who get first-team playing time also appear in the reserves squad. This creates a clear distinction between first-team and reserves (remember when Wilshere was made a full first-team players last season? it was a pretty big deal, but our list makes it look like he was simple given a new number. that's pretty misleading) while also recognizing that some of the reserve players deserve to be listed on the main page. Hope this clears things up. Eightball (talk) 20:16, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

This is what I am proposing. Eightball (talk) 20:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I think it makes the page way too long. And information on reserve team players who don't make the first team should really belong in Arsenal F.C. Reserves. And you get edge cases - e.g. Gavin Hoyte and Mark Randall have played first-team games in the League and League Cup - which section do they get put into? For me the logic is simple - you get named in a first-team match and given a shirt number, that makes you without a doubt a first-team player - it's citable, logical and straightforward. Qwghlm (talk) 13:44, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

It BARELY makes the page longer, that's just factually incorrect. Mark Randall and Gavin Hoyte are listed as Reserve players, not First-Team players, according to Arsenal.com. They would obviously go into the Reserve squad list. One of my biggest concerns is with players like Gibbs, who played so well recently that he was moved up to the full first-team (i.e. he isn't a reserve player anymore). But there is no way, given our current layout, to reflect that. Eightball (talk) 19:05, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Why don't you separate First team players, and reserve team players?

That's exactly what I'm saying :) Eightball (talk) 19:05, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I have read the discussion and I somewhat agree with you, however removal of players with actual first team experience such as Fran Merida is wrong. Deletion of Szczesny, Frimpong and Emmanuel-Thomas in my opinion would be exceptable. If we used Arsenal's website as our only source then we should just provide a link and not bother. We all use our discretion as the season moves forward and do so because as a rule of thumb, Arsenal update only at the start of each season. Most other team's wiki page are done this way and not in the structure you are proposing. As an example, using your method last season Kieran Gibbs would not be considered as a first team member until this season when Arsenal actually added him. This season another player may become the victim. I notice you want to protect Jack Wilshere's status so why not others? (ArsenalWiki (talk) 18:21, 16 July 2009 (UTC)).

They are not actual first-team players, Arsenal.com makes this very clear. They are simply reserve team players who have gotten time in competitive matches, primarily as a result of Wenger's tendency to play young players in the League Cup. My method is far more factually correct: I haven't deleted any players, I simply moved them to the proper section. Eightball (talk) 21:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

And no, other team articles are actually NOT done that horrible way. They simply take the official squad list from team websites. I don't understand how that isn't the obvious decision here but whatever, this is Wikipedia. Eightball (talk) 21:56, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Are you kidding yourself? Of the 20 premiership teams only Blackburn Rovers' wiki page is done the way you are suggesting. I have read back and you seem to be alone in your argument, so why do you persist? This page has had this structure for a long time and needs no correcting. Take this to an Arsenal administrative. Also thank you for passing my Eboue update off as your own. (ArsenalWiki (talk) 23:55, 16 July 2009 (UTC))

You're new here so I've tried to be patient, but you better listen up now because if you keep reverting the page I'm going to start getting annoyed. "My way" isn't just showing the reserve squad on the main page. I'm only doing that out of the kindness of my heart because many of those players will be on the League Cup roster and probably deserve to be on the main page. My suggestion is simply that we use the official Arsenal squad list from their website. I don't see any logical way you can argue against that. Arsenal has their official squad, we list it on here, done. The structure previously in place only existed for the last season and is the result of a compromise I made in order to prevent the "current squad" list from including a bunch of 17 year old youngsters that probably wouldn't even see time for the reserve team. This article is the ONLY ONE in which the current squad listing is made up by Wikipedia editors, and not directly cited from an official source. That is original research by any definition. I'm telling you again: do not revert the article. From the tone of your comments you appear to be very confused as to what I am trying to improve; hopefully I cleared that up for you. Eightball (talk) 02:07, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Why don't we just provide a link to the official site and be done with it? We use our discretion as moderators to improve even on their work, not copy. Like I said before Gibbs was not added to Arsenal's first team (on arsenal.com) until April time, so by your standard we would have had to wait. I suggest listing only players who have played competitive football for Arsenal, that is why it is called a squad list. You are changing the title to first team, as a tool for your argument. I would say in reality you are either in the first squad or the youth squad and the reserve squad (for short periods of time) is a combination of the two (not the concern, but this is how it appears to take place at Arsenal). I do understand your Man City argument, though this is a result of them not promoting the amount of youth players Arsenal do (I would be shocked if any of their youths players get games this season with the demands of the new owners, which then reflects upon their first team squad list). Please leave it the way it was and in future discuss the possibility of changes with administrators. Which you have done before and got nowhere. I may be new however it did not stop you from copy and pasting the reserve squad for which I have committed a high proportion of the work (along with the youth page). I joined recently to help improve an already excellent page and not just edit for no reason. I tried to help with the removal of Szczesny, Frimpong and Emmanuel-Thomas, you should see that as a compromise. I'am going to undo one last time and return it to it's original format. If the administrators agree with you by all mean change it. Make sure they read all discussion between us and the other moderators you have challenged in the past. (ArsenalWiki (talk) 15:21, 17 July 2009 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by ArsenalWiki (talk • contribs)

60.50.77.113 (talk) 15:45, 21 September 2009 (UTC)According to Arsenal.com, Fran Merida and Luke Ayling share the same squad number, 32. Previously the former used the number 46. Now Merida uses 32, and according to UEFA.com, Luke Ayling uses 46. Also about the Kerrea Gilbert and Jay Emmanuel-Thomas number 38 and 42 thing, Arsenal.com is accurate but the Online store isn't. Kerrea Gilbert is not 38, Emmanuel-Thomas is.

/* External links */

Can you please include the official Arsenal FC soccer schools websites in list of external links [6] and [7] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.161.35.177 (talk) 12:31, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Arsenal badge size

A while ago the size of the Arsenal badge in the infobox was reduced from 180px to 150px. It looks a bit small now and other club's badges are bigger. I'd like to know why this was done. Woolwich (talk) 22:03, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

bum chums.

According to Arsenal.com http://www.arsenal.com/first-team/players and http://www.arsenal.com/reserves-youth, Fran Merida and Luke Ayling share the same squad number, 32. Previously Fran Merida uses the number 46. Now Merida uses 32, and according to http://www.uefa.com/footballeurope/club=52280/competition=1/index.html, Luke Ayling uses 46.Skisagooner (talk) 15:35, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

gay boys gay money

Can the prominence of the stock market details of the club be justified? I see no reason for any mention of this at all, other than perhaps a short reference to being publicly owned. This seems like a plug by an employee to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Le chien manquee (talk • contribs) 21:07, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

tottenham till we die

AFAICT it's the same pronunciation as the common name "arsenal", and it isn't a surprising pronunciation (i.e., it is the one almost all people would guess from its spelling if they had never heard the word pronounced before). So what's the point of it? ― A. di M. — 2nd Great Wikipedia Dramaout 16:51, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

It appears that someone added IPA for most/all the English clubs some time ago. They are mostly superfluous for native English speakers - "Arsenal" is just the word arsenal, as you say - but perhaps they are useful for our foreign readership, who knows? Lfh (talk) 21:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

gay boys

Hi, I'm sure this must have come up several times before, but surely the line in the summary that claims Arsenal "...are the only Premier League side to have completed a season unbeaten." should be made clearer? The club completed their Premier League fixtures without being beaten, but lost 6 times (I think) that season in the cup competitions. Perhaps it should be reworded as ""...are the only side to have completed a Premier League season unbeaten." Decorativeedison (talk) 00:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Tottenham

we hate arsenal, scum of the earth we are the great Tottenham