Talk:Potential London NFL franchise

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Football League, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the NFL 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.National Football LeagueWikipedia:WikiProject National Football LeagueTemplate:WikiProject National Football LeagueNational Football League articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

American football Low‑importance

	American football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject American football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of American 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.American footballWikipedia:WikiProject American footballTemplate:WikiProject American footballAmerican football articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

London Canada

Why are you changing it to London UK? JohnJohnson111 (talk) 15:41, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's not London, Ontario. - BilCat (talk) 17:48, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RfC about the version of English to use in this article

Should this article be written in American or British English? Bazonka (talk) 14:33, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Although NFL is a US thing, primarily the article is about London, so in my opinion, per WP:ENGVAR, British English should be used. Broad consensus is required before the AmE template can be replaced though. Bazonka (talk) 14:31, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think stay US at least for now, as there is no team, just an idea originating from the US. Red Jay (talk) 15:21, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not clear why the lack of a team is suggestive of AmEng. After all, a hypothetical future roster will in any case be predominantly from the US! Even taking that less literalistically, what's it to do with the actuality of such a franchise? It's already the case that the topics covered are overwhelmingly British, or otherwise non-American: UK newspapers, UK locations and stadia, UK fans, UK law, EU law. You have to squint at this very hard to conclude, "yeah, US topic". 109.255.211.6 (talk) 07:43, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing actually in London. This is is an American idea relating to an American league. Will the player in/near the middle of the offensive line be the 'centre', will he be protecting the QB from the opposing defense? There arguments for both varieties of English, but I think there will be lots of US edits that will be correected. Red Jay (talk) 10:15, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Which speaks exactly to my point, and against your previous one. As it stands the article is largely about non-US entities, notwithstanding that they're not actual properties of an actual franchise -- necessarily, what with it not existing. (Which I assume is what you mean by your otherwise curious statement that "There is nothing actually in London.") If and when there's a franchise with a roster the issue about 'centers' and 'defenses' there might actually be a stronger case for it to be in AmEng (depending in part how such a team finesses that issue themselves.) 109.255.211.6 (talk) 22:46, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. You have convinced me,it should stay as US English Red Jay (talk) 06:06, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By pointing out that your initial argument based on that conviction was logically flawed? A more common occurrence than people area generally prepared to admit! 109.255.211.6 (talk) 12:55, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a "English English vs US English" issue. It's conventional to refer to well-known cities without further qualification, even if more than one city has that name. Hence, Vancouver. (I happen to live across the river from Vancouver, WA, and I don't have a problem with this.) There was a proposal to require the fully-qualified city name; it was not popular.--Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 16:55, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Isaac Rabinovitch: You seem to have been distracted by the 5-year-old discussion in the thread above. That's really not what this discussion is about. We really are talking about the variety of English, i.e. whether we should change "traveled" to "travelled", "caliber" to "calibre" etc. As far as I'm concerned this is an article about something in England, and so BrE is most appropriate, but someone has put an AmE template on it which needs consensus to remove. Maybe I'm wrong, hence the discussion. Nothing to do with whether we talk about "London" or "London, England". Bazonka (talk) 18:39, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I stand corrected. What I should have said is that this is a very silly argument to expend any time on. --Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 21:45, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your valuable input Isaac. Bazonka (talk) 22:01, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

American English for now. Red Jay brings up an interesting point about center/centre and defense/defence. Because of the sport's strong ties to the US, I believe the American variants of these football terms should be used. I can see an argument for leaving the football terms in American English and changing the rest of the words to British English, but this seems too tortuous. If/when the sport becomes firmly entrenched in the UK, we should switch to British English, provided that the UK media regularly "translates" the football terms into British English. RisingStar (talk) 04:00, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The practical implications of this seem relatively limited at the moment. There's the tortuous pivoting between the terms "soccer", "association football" and "football" (in reference to the game that involves actual balls and actual feet, rather than handegg), but that's inevitable, given the topic. There's also the occasional "-ize" spelling. Like "finalized" (source given, the Guardian), and "criticized" (source, the Telegraph). I suspect this is only going to get more jarring until (and unless) it gets less so. 109.255.211.6 (talk) 12:55, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]