Jump to content

Talk:2015–16 Premier League

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 77.101.232.190 (talk) at 22:44, 31 May 2015 (Fixture announcment date: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconFootball: England / Season Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as Low-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the season article task force.
WikiProject iconEngland Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Watford

Watford should not be added to the new season just yet, as both Bournemouth and Middlesbrough have two games left and can leapfrog Watford in they both win their next two games and Watford lose their final game. 86.41.103.184 (talk) 16:22, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is reported in media they are promoted. M'boro has only one match left. QED237 (talk) 16:26, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to read the BBC Sport article that says Watford clinched promotion to the Premier League after they beat Brighton and other results went their way. [1] QED237 (talk) 16:34, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The question now if they be included on the national map or the London map due to proximity. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 23:22, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

West Ham

West Ham are safe now with 44 points, because the bottom 2 cannot catch them and it's impossible for both 3rd bottom Sunderland and 4th bottom Leicester to overtake West Ham because the play each other. i.e. if Sunderland were to reach 45 points it would be by beating Leicester who could then only have a maximum of 43. It's certain that one of these 2 teams finishes below West Ham along with QPR and Burnley.Concentrate2 (talk) 21:34, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AFC Bournemouth or Bournemouth

There has been editing back and forth about what is right so I think we should find consensus. We listed them only as Bournemouth last season in Championship and we usually omit AFC, FC and such lettering making Arsenal F.C. to Arsenal, Hull City A.F.C. is piped to Hull City and so on. But Bournemouth is different? Should we use AFC or not? QED237 (talk) 17:07, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose AFC in this case. There's no other Bournemouth club neither in the present nor in the past to confuse both, unlike the case of Wimbledon F.C. or AFC Wimbledon. The Replicator (talk) 21:49, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I reckon it should be AFC Bournemouth. I hear them referred by "AFC Bournemouth" a lot more frequently than just "Bournemouth". - J man708 (talk) 14:43, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose AFC. If we add AFC, then we would have to be consistent and add FC or AFC to every team in every league. Also, as Qed237 said, they were listed as Bournemouth in last season's Championship. Barinade2151 (talk) 19:06, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Bournemouth is different, yes. AFC Bournemouth is their correct name, and has been for over 40 years. It's the reason why they're alphabetically first in the FA Cup draw, ahead of Arsenal and Aston Villa in the third round, for example. There is also a Bournemouth FC, who play in the Wessex League, and there have been instances where supporters and reporters have travelled there in error in the past. Their club crest shows AFC Bournemouth; their website is afcb.co.uk. In short, they can be listed as Bournemouth, but it would be incorrect to do so.Cardboard Captain (talk) 11:01, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. The FA Cup draw is the important factor here, as it shows the FA considers "AFC" part of their name. Ditto the fact of the existence of Bournemouth FC. AFC's website is afcb.co.uk, their official Twitter account is AFCBournemouth (etc), and they use that name for themselves (so we should follow, really.) The BBC's home page for them is [www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/teams/afc-bournemouth]. Some news agencies use the "AFC" part, some don't (mostly to save space, I suspect). The confusion is easily seen here where the headline uses "Bournemouth", and the subheading adds the "AFC". Black Kite (talk) 13:39, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Food for thought - "FC's" aren't always deleted everywhere possible on Wiki, because some usage is warranted. Sydney FC is a big one that is never referred to as just "Sydney", as is shown here. If the FA refers to them as AFC, they themselves self reference to AFC, then surely that is what we should call them. Ditto clubs like AS Monaco, AC Milan and AEK Athens. - J man708 (talk) 13:56, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I see there are some different opinions here. Regarding Monaco, there was a discussion ansd champions league article and now they are only Monaco and not AS Monaco (I am in favour of as). I suggest we wait and see what the official table at the Premier League says when it is updated, if they use AFC, we can do that to. Qed237 (talk) 11:41, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Another one is AC Milan. I get that Inter are shown as Internazionale, but having AC as just Milan is so ambiguously vague. We've also got clubs like Odense Boldklub who are listed as simply OB, even though this current shambolic system should theoretically have them called simply Odense. Perhaps we should address this once and for all on Wiki:ProjectMayhem... I mean, Football? - J man708 (talk) 02:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
AFC Wimbledon, AFC Fylde, AFC Telford United, AFC Totton and AFC Rushden and Diamonds are just some of the teams listed here on Wikipedia in their correct alphabetical order in their respective leagues (AFC Wimbledon are second behind Accrington Stanley). Ironic, then, that the first and biggest club in this country to use the 'AFC' prefix is incorrectly listed as 'Bournemouth'. Cardboard Captain (talk) 11:45, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is the first article I've seen on the Premier League's site, and as you can see it refers to AFC Bournemouth throughout. Black Kite (talk) 16:06, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2015

Bournemouth should be top of the table as their official name is AFC Bournemouth which makes them alphabetically higher than Arsenal. Spunkyator (talk) 16:05, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done All the other teams don't have FC or AFC in their name in this table, or any other pages. Throughout Wikipedia they are referred to as Bournemouth. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:08, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fixture announcment date

You might want to put that the fixtures are announced on Wednesday 17 June - I just came here looking for this information. Source: http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/premier-league-2015-16-fixtures-announced-9361987