Jump to content

Talk:Dallas Sidekicks (1984–2004)

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

Comment

[edit]

Is there an article anywhere detailing the return of the Sidekicks? KitHutch 00:53, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is. I'll list it in the article as well. Make sure to scroll down. OsFan 17:30, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Washington, Lookingland added
What I meant by article was an announcement from the league or the new Dallas organization itself. Two paragraphs in the Baltimore Sun doesn't sound that official to me. I'm still waiting for the return of several other teams that took a year off and then never came back. KitHutch 19:13, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll concede there has not been an announcement from the league or the new Dallas organization themselves, but Ed Hale, the Blast team owner stated it. I would imagine an owner would know what's going on. OsFan 20:47, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Blast owner may have stated that the Sidekicks are returning, but on the ESPN2 broadcast, Steve Ryan, the MISL Commissioner, only mentioned Detroit in 2006 and Orlando and Newark in 2007. That was no Dallas Sidekicks mentioned. KitHutch 03:02, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As someone in Dallas there is some movement in the offices, but there has been for two years! Steve Ryan said earlier this year that Dallas would be back but again he has said that every year! Hardcorekicks 10:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sidekicks.jpg

[edit]

Image:Sidekicks.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dallas Sidekicks Logo 1984-92

[edit]

File:Dallassidekicks2.gif

Plagarism or self ref

[edit]

This article has content identical to the one page referenced as a source. Either this one has plagarized from that one or that one is using content from this one. Either way there is a serious problem. --Mcorazao (talk) 04:39, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep articles separate

[edit]

This article is about the original Dallas Sidekicks. The expansion team that was recently awarded in the Professional Arena Soccer League is not related to this team other than being named after them. Precedent already exists for two separate articles for current teams that are named after older defunct indoor soccer team. For example, see Tacoma Stars (MISL) and Tacoma Stars (2003)/ Baltimore Blast (1980–1992) and Baltimore Blast (current)/ San Diego Sockers (1978–1996), San Diego Sockers (2001–2004), and San Diego Sockers (2009)/ Wichita Wings and Wichita Wings (2011), etc. I could list more articles that follow the same precedent. KitHutch (talk) 01:32, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

[edit]

Based on the news articles about the Sidekicks return this is the same Sidekicks team that played from 1984-2004. - They are going to retire Tatu's #9. - All of the old banners from when the team played at Reunion Arena where saved and where hanging at the press conference. - Most of the teams front office is made up of people that where apart of the Sidekicks in the past including the Sidekicks former owner Sonny Williams and former general manager Jim Tolbert who are apart of the new ownership group. I think its safe to say that this is the same Sidekicks. Links to all of the info: http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/soccer/post/_/id/15360/dallas-sidekicks-reboot-in-november http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/sports/Dallas-Sidekicks-Return-to-North-Texas-149717425.html http://thescoopblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2012/05/dallas-sidekicks-tatu-are-back.html http://www.paslsoccer.com/ Link to pics from the Press Conference: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.347953151930835.82073.327936623932488&type=3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grave35 (talk • contribs) 04:16, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose They are claiming the heritage of the old team. The current Sockers have done that, but it doesn't mean they are the same franchise. The articles also mention how the original Sidekicks folded, which would mean this is a different team. KitHutch (talk) 13:29, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay then by that logic there should be two pages for the San Jose Earthquakes given that its the same thing we have here with the return of the Sidekicks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grave35 (talk • contribs) 00:32, 3 May 2012 (UTC) Also per the Sidekicks web site under history: May 1st that the Sidekicks will play their 20th season — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grave35 (talk • contribs) 00:38, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are two San Jose Earthquakes pages: the current team is at San Jose Earthquakes while the NASL teams is at San Jose Earthquakes (1974–88). This will be the 20th season that a team named the Dallas Sidekicks as played indoor soccer, but it is two different franchises over those twenty seasons. KitHutch (talk) 01:21, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was talking about MLS. In 2005 the Earthquakes left for Houston, then came back in 2008 and kept all the history that old team had. How is that any different then what we have here. Grave35 (talk) 03:52, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How come there are two pages for the Ottawa Senators of the NHL: Ottawa Senators and Ottawa Senators (original)? By your logic they should be on one page as should Baltimore Colts (1953–1983) and Baltimore Colts (1947–1950). KitHutch (talk) 17:28, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ottawa & Colts: Did the new Senators/Colts claim the history of the of the old ones and make it part of there history. I know the Sens did not and I don't think the Colts did as well. My point is if you are going to claim the history of the old team and make it your history then in my opinion you are not a new team. If this was a new Sidekicks then why say that this will be the 20th season of the team and not the 1st and why not recognize the old teams history over claiming.Grave35 (talk) 04:27, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

By that logic, I could die and someone could start using my name and claim they are the same person? That's what happened with the Sidekicks. The original franchise died in 2004. That team has not been operating since. A new team with the same name was just created. They can claim the heritage of the old team, but they are just a separate franchise. BTW, there is now a new article for the Heat team that just entered the PASL. KitHutch (talk) 15:08, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First off: I know better then to use that logic on people. 2nd: You did not answer my questions......... - If this was a new franchise why say this will be season 20 and not 1: I don't buy what you said about it been the 20 year of a team named the Sidekicks because that fly's in the face of being a new franchise. - If this was a new franchise why claim all that history and make it yours over recognizing it, like the Ottawa Senators did. - I should have asked this in the first place: What in your eyes makes this a new franchise? And if its what I think it is, being a expansion team in a new league then fine, I call bs on that too for the same reason's that I gave, but I am just about done with this.Grave35 (talk) 20:18, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is a new franchise because the original franchise ceased operations. That means it was dead. Between 2004 and 2012, there was no Dallas Sidekicks franchise operating. A new franchise began operating this year. This new team adopted the name and the heritage of the original team. I have no problem with that, but to say it is the same team is illogical and inaccurate. Let's not revise history. We all agree that the San Jose Earthquakes are not the same team that operated in the NASL in the 70s/80s. This year, the Earthquakes began wearing a "Established 1974" on their jerseys. Does that mean that from 1996 to 2011, they weren't the same franchise as the original team and now they are? KitHutch (talk) 01:53, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • As the official Team Historian of the Dallas Sidekicks (both old and new), I suggest that two separate articles be kept. While the Dallas Sidekicks Historical Archive will acknowledge the heritage, staff, and some ownership is shared by the two franchises, I will keep a second record book for the new team. The 2012 Sidekicks are indeed a new franchise that is claiming the history of the old one. This is necessary for marketing. The team records, however, will be kept separate. I support having a separate page for the new franchise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balthrop (talk • contribs) 03:16, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for future expansion

[edit]

These sources can be used to expand and improve this article. - Dravecky (talk) 02:51, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wilonsky, Robert (October 9, 1997). "Net Loss: After 13 years of survival and success, Dallas Sidekicks coach Gordon Jago leaves behind the team he kept alive". Dallas Observer. Retrieved December 7, 2012.
  • Wilonsky, Robert (June 10, 1999). "Ain't that a kick? Tatu has been a Dallas Sidekick for 15 years -- in case you hadn't noticed". Dallas Observer. Retrieved December 7, 2012.
  • "Best Litigation of 2002: Sidekicks vs. Desperados". Dallas Observer. September 26, 2002. Retrieved December 7, 2012.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dallas Sidekicks (1984–2004). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:09, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dallas Sidekicks (1984–2004). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:53, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dallas_Sidekicks_(1984–2004)&oldid=1206867497"