Jump to content

Talk:Tottenham Hotspur F.C./Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

Barclays Asia Trophy

Someone needs to add the Barclays Asia Trophy to Tottenham's honors. It may not be a major honor but its still a trophy. 86.158.238.107 (talk) 11:35, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it's worth noting. These competitions are just friendly games with a name that will make more money. It seems like most teams in them are a win or two away from winning a trophy. This was Tottenham's second "cup final" in about a week. --Bill (talk|contribs) 12:46, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
A more appropriate place to mention it is probably on the 2009-10 season page. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Also, please see here for a related discussion on the inclusion of friendly tournaments in players article honours sections. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:59, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


Jewish

From the article - Support section - 'Many fans, however, disagree with the use of the name "Yid", and believe it will only attract more racism.'

Many should be changed to some. Some is unquestionable whereas many is highly debatable and impossible to quantify.
Also a visit to the spurs ground on a match day will find many tens of thousands singing songs related to this heritage which is highly relevant to judging supporters attitude. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.43.32 (talk) 08:41, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Also a reference should be made to articles such as one by a Spurs fan David Aaronovitch at http://timesonline.typepad.com/david_aaronovitch/2007/03/aaronovitch_yid.html who explains the use and origins of the term amongst Spurs fans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.43.32 (talk) 08:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Also that few, if any, of these "many fans" support Spurs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.20.123.101 (talk) 21:14, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I've added the Aaronovitch ref and a couple of others (Guardian and Independent Articles, one by David Baddiel and the other quoting him) which will hopefully help clarify the issue. Arthur Holland (talk) 11:53, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Ownership and share issue

I have re-inserted the ref to increase in share capitalisation (£30m) and purchase by ENIC which disproportionatly increases the % in ownership by ENIC. This is not insignificant given the amount involved at a time of economic uncertainty.If the concensus is that this is not of import then I am happy to see it removed againTmol42 (talk) 22:04, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I've just posted a comment on your talk page apologising for reverting your original edit. I didn't mean to do so. I'm not quite sure how, but I reverted it in the process of making another edit. Sorry again. I had a 'mare, as a football pundit might say. The news is obviously relevant. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:08, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
I know the feeling I wish sometimes there was a WP button that allowed you to bury over hasty reverting in a deep dark hole so nobody can see it. To be honest I got bored watching the g*****s on MoTD and needed a more healthy and worthwhile distractions.Tmol42 (talk) 22:25, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Add 10:10 support per 4-11 September 2009 Guardian?

Add 10:10 support per 4-11 September 2009 Guardian? 99.54.141.242 (talk) 23:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Superleague Formula

Do we really need this section? This article is suppose to be about the Spurs football team not the Spurs F1 team. Govvy (talk) 20:28, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I think that a link to Tottenham Hotspur (Superleague Formula team) is sufficient. No need to summarise that article here, since it is of very minor significance in comparison to the topic as a whole. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:36, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Actually, maybe there's scope for merging some sections, such as the affiliated clubs and social responsibility sections, with this one into some sort of affiliations or external relations section? Cordless Larry (talk) 20:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

New affliated club

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/international/news/tottenhamhotspurlaunchpartnershipwithsouthchina031109.html

The Hong Kong football Club, South China AA is now affliated with Tottenham. Someone please update the page. Endlesstalks (talk) 09:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Eight one win merits mention

Today (November 22 2009) Tottenham beat Wigan 8 goals to 1 - a win so notable that it surely deserves mention here. It might also be worth pointing out that most of the goals were in the second half. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 21:37, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually, it was 9-1, not 8-1. But yes, we should find out if this is a club record of any sort and include it in the article if it is. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:04, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
It seems to be a Spurs record win for a top-flight match. The best place to note this would be the statistics and records section, but all that contains is a link to List of Tottenham Hotspur F.C. records and statistics, which already mentions it. I think that it would make sense to have the most important records listed in the main article. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:10, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Done. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:25, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

NPOV Tag

A NPOV tag has recently been added to the article, Giving there was not a single sentence in this discussion page about the neutrality of the article, I have removed it temporarily. Personally I don't see much in this article that differs from other football club pages, however if some users feel it is bias then fair enough, but hopefully we can discuss it here first before simply adding a tag and degrading the article, thanks Prem4eva (talk) 12:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

I've been through this article a hell of a lot performing clean-ups for POV over the years to help try and keep all aspects neutral. The only thing I haven't done is citation the history. But it should not need any tags for NPOV at all. Govvy (talk) 22:09, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, I re-read the article a couple of times after seeing a tag had been added and I couldn't really see what had provoked it, if the user that added it comes here and says what they feel is NPOV then fair enough, but nothing jumped out at me to warrant it. Prem4eva (talk) 23:24, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
I think the reference to POV is that which had been added yesterday to a rather old posting on POV from 2008 at Talk:Tottenham Hotspur F.C.#Some POV in article removed above. Tmol42 (talk) 23:52, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Ah, You're right there Tmol, I'll have a quick look through the article tomorrow for possible POV parts, (if someone doesn't get there before me), think a neutrality tag was prob a bit harsh, phrases like that are used quite often but there you go, cheers Prem4eva (talk) 00:37, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Did you have a "quick look", or are you just assuming nobody will notice? - Dudesleeper / Talk 21:01, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
No, Have been/am v.busy at the moment, so only doing a small amount on the current season page, but I will get round to it, maybe you should make a real discussion about it instead of an interchangeable response to a comment left in 2008 and it would get a proper look-in, as I said, I will give it a "quick look" when I am able to, which as you seem so worried, will hopefully be in next few days. Prem4eva (talk) 22:49, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
I think that Dudesleeper has a point here, as proven by these two edits. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:53, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
I'm not arguing there isn't POV, The tag was kind of added out of the blue and because I didn't see the comment made in the upper reaches of the page, it was difficult to know where to start, some of the stuff removed is POV and I have been planning to have a look but as I said I have been very busy over the last few days and apart from the quick update of the season page, haven't had time. I started this section simply to find out what was considered POV and when I realised my mistake of missing the explanation, I said I would have a look, since wikipedia isn't any of our jobs, for a few days it took a back-burner and certainly don't think there is any need for snide comments. Prem4eva (talk) 23:07, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Understood, and I'm pleased (as I'm sure Dudesleeper is too) that you're willing to help fix the POV. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:10, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
I've made a lot of edits to the History section and all its subsections, I believe that was the only place to really have POV because the rest of the article is just facts and stats, hopefully that sorts it out suitably for the tag to be removed, if not, examples please. 23:55, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Splitting History section into new article

It seems to me that the history section for Tottenham is too large to sensibly remain on this page. A separate article called something like History of Tottenham Hotspur F.C. could cover this in depth, with a briefer version remaining on the main club article. Dancarney (talk) 11:02, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I would support this. The history section is far too long and should be replaced by summary style text. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:25, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
There are also plenty of precedents at Category:History of football (soccer) by club. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:03, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
As there's no dissent, I've moved the whole section into a new article. Dancarney (talk) 16:37, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Taarabt

Where is he?! Should be in the 'on loan' section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.220.54.63 (talk) 15:00, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Would this section be of interest beneath the supporters section with verifiable examples such as...in celeb supporters Paul Whitehouse who stated on the Danny Baker radio show broadcast Saturday 13th February 2010 that he was a season ticket holder at Tottenham although he is now more of a fairweather fan. In pop culture an example would be the BBC drama the glory glory years [broadcast in the 90s] in which four girls try to get tickets to the 1961 cup final. Norniron (talk) 10:31, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

No, it doesn't need to be mentioned, there has been has been additions before and it just turns into list craft and it starts to get far to big and doesn't really add to the article. Besides the article is about the team, not the supporters. Govvy (talk) 13:59, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
I have no particular opinion, but Chelsea have such a section, while another club have an entirely separate page for similar.--ClubOranjeT 22:12, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Govy. It will add nothing of value and we will spend time removing uncited edits from flyby IP's about so called celebs.Tmol42 (talk) 23:18, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

The stock quote link is broken. The correct link is http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/prices-and-news/stocks/summary/company-summary.html?fourWayKey=GB0008962986GBGBXAIMI —Preceding unsigned comment added by Socialmedia (talk • contribs) 21:50, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 89.242.44.143, 17 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} The Celtic midfielder Scott Brown is listed as part of the spurs squad.

89.242.44.143 (talk) 19:25, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Not done: After checking http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/players/player_profiles.html Scott Brown does not appear on the list. Spitfire19 (Talk) 20:30, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


Pending changes

This article is one of a number selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Pending changes" would be appreciated.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 00:26, 17 June 2010 (UTC).

Squad numbers for new players

Numerous anonymous editors (and a few registered ones) have been adding squad numbers for William Gallas and Sandro to the article and to the players' own articles, despite these not having been announced yet. Tottenham have now added Gallas to the team section of their website, but note that his squad number is listed as TBC. Please do not make up squad numbers for players who do not have them yet. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:05, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

History section

With the creation of the much-needed History of Tottenham Hotspur F.C. article, the history section here is empty. While it needed to be cut down, hence the creation of the history article, we should presumably have a summary here. Does anyone want to help write it? Cordless Larry (talk) 22:06, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

{{editsemiprotected}} Can you at least copy the lede of the History of Tottenham Hotspur F.C. article here as a summary?? Thanks, 83.70.226.11 (talk) 21:52, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Done. Could do with a little expanding as well. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Squad number sources

Recently, as anyone who has this article on their watchlist will know, there have been lots of additions of squad numbers for newly signed Spurs players. Lots of these were unsourced and reverted, but even some of the referenced additions turn out to have been wrong. For example, Sandro was assigned 33, based on UEFA and ESPN sources, but now it turns out that he is actually number 30. Can I suggest that in future we only use the Spurs website as a source for squad numbers? Cordless Larry (talk) 20:22, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Stadium plans

I have updated the 'Plans' section (renaming it Stadium Plans) following recent announcements from the club about the Northumberland Development Project and the option taken out to take over the Olympic Stadium. Given the latest developments I have also transferred some of the historic detail about the early stages of the project from this section to the main article on the Northumberland Project which has also been upaded and revised accordingly. Hope the balance between both articles is to others approval! Tmol42 (talk) 14:50, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Good work, although the section on the Olympic Stadium is a bit confusing. It states that the club dropped plans to move there, and then registered an interest. Perhaps "was reported to have been dropped" would be better? Cordless Larry (talk) 15:31, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, done.Tmol42 (talk) 16:28, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Geoffscottnz, 27 October 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} The Head Physiotherapist at Tottenham Is currently Geoff Scott, Can be checked on the club Website.

Geoffscottnz (talk) 16:29, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Geoffscott, I had a scout around on the site and could not find a listing for Head Physio. Found a couple of old news refernces to appointment as academy physio and on putting Defoe's fingers back straight Ouch! Can you point to the location on the websire/ provide a URL, thanks. Tmol42 (talk) 17:02, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Biggles2000, 27 October 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

Head Physiotherapist is Geoff Scott can be seen in current club directory http://www.premierleague.com/staticFiles/bc/3b/0,,12306~146364,00.pdf, In respect to the Flag, he is from New Zealand

http://www.thefa.com/~/media/Files/PDF/TheFA/MedInvitation.ashx/MedInvitation.pdf

Current Club Doctor is Shabaaz Mughul (From England) . The listings for Aaron Harris and Danny Murphy are in respect to the Academy and are now out of date.

Biggles2000 (talk) 17:39, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Done Thanks, Stickee (talk) 05:08, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

come on you spurs!

Perhaps worth mentioning the existence of this phrase and how it relates to this club. COYS etc. Lots of people say it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.206.212.41 (talk) 02:48, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Manager John Cameron

The flag beside John Cameron's name should be the Scottich Saltire & not the English flag. (Jasg1874 (talk) 21:53, 24 December 2010 (UTC))

Done Thanks,Tmol42 (talk) 22:17, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request - Add Andros Townsend to squad

Townsend has played a match for the senior club. He is currently on loan to Milwall until the end of the 2011 season. 75.72.219.206 (talk) 16:18, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Baseball Watcher 21:27, 14 April 2011 (UTC
Good suggestion IP. As Baseball Watcher has responded first, I will leave answering the request and amending the article to his discretion. —Half Price 21:40, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Be bold, you can just go ahead and do it, no need to defer for something like this. Woody (talk) 18:19, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Done Well I suppose so. I've waited 24 hours. Edit done. —Half Price 20:44, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit Request

David Baddiel is a Chelsea fan, not an Arsenal fan: Replace: Jewish comedian, author and Arsenal-supporter David Baddiel produced a short film With: Jewish comedian, author and Chelsea supporter David Baddiel produced a short film

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Stickee (talk) 04:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Done Well there wasn't any ref to say he was a Chelsea fan either. A quick Google search finds this. That was hard. —Half Price 10:53, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Category:Former Southern Football League clubs]

Have just reverted for second time a change of category which moved back the Categorisation to Category:Former Southern Football League clubs from the category Category:Member clubs of the Southern Football League. The former is a sub cat of the latter and as per WP:CAT it the correct application of guidelines. If it moves agai could someone else who agrees step in as I have used up my daily revert allocance!Tmol42 (talk) 17:44, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Category:Former Southern Football League clubs is being emptied as "Former" categories are discouraged. The vast majority of former members were already in the main category and the remainder were moved prior to the latter being deleted. Cheers, Number 57 17:50, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
I have checked the Categories listings and there are currently 1800+ categories which start Former.... Please could you refer to the section of the Guidelines which indicate that such categories are discouraged. In any case the purpose of categorisation is to help with usability and I cannot see the benefit of including a club which left the Southern Footbsll League over 100 years ago being categorised as a Member of that League instead as a Former Member. I will consider refering to the discussion page at WP:FOOTY.Tmol42 (talk) 20:09, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
I don't recall where it was, but I once created a Former... category and it was deleted with the rationale that all past and present should be in the same category. This appears to be the case in the majority of football-related categories - i.e. Category:Premier League clubs, which includes all past and present Premier League clubs, although there are still a few "Former" ones around (Football League for instance, although this category was actually only created in the last couple of weeks so is by no means a standard). As noted above, the vast majority of former Southern League clubs were already in the main category and only a few were in the former category, hence the move to rationalise it. By all means take it to WP:FOOTY - it is one of the few places capable of rationale debate on Wikipedia! Number 57 21:27, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
I've just realised that the Former Southern League clubs category was also only created in the past couple of weeks, and previously all articles (including the Tottenham one) were just in the main category. Number 57 22:01, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
I don't think how recently it was created is an arguemnt to get rid of it. Conversely having seen THFC added only to the 'Member Category' on 16 July 2011 and then directly after to the newly created 'Former Member Category' only a hours laterhere it struck me at the time as being of utility. Seems to me to argue to add all the other Former Members would have been the best way forward rather than take a retrograde stepTmol42 (talk) 22:14, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Harveydjhank, 19 August 2011

Giovani Dos Santos is number 17 for tottenham hotspur, Danny Rose is listed as a midfielder when in fact he is a defender, Emmanuel Adebayor is number 10 for Tottenham after they completed a loan deal for him and Lassana Diarra has not got a number yet but is in fact a tottenham hotspur player. HDJH (talk) 01:06, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Do you have any sources for these changes? The Official Site has things listed as they appear on the Wikipedia page as well. Jnorton7558 (talk) 01:18, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request

"When they won the League Cup once more in 2008, it meant that they had won a major trophy in each of the last six decades – an achievement only matched by Manchester United." I'd suggest this is a relatively trivial achievement to be including in the header. It could be included as an aside in the relevant section of the Tottenham Hotspur history page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seandeloughry (talk • contribs) 12:41, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Nicknames

I have been trying to encourage another editor to stop repeated adding references to "Yid Army" etc to the Info Box Nicknames section and changing Lilywites to Archaic and come here to discuss. Having made two changes which I have reverted the editor will run up against WP:3RR next time but I would prefer to avoid edit war could someone else also get involved please, Thanks Tmol42 (talk) 21:29, 30 August 2011 (UTC) Mr Tmol42, Answer the points below please.

OK, this is what I said: I am sorry to have had the temerity to make a change to the Spurs page, the change turning on a subject that has been discussed before. Before dismissing the tiresome addition of Yids to the list of nicknames, consider this. We are very very proud of our Jewish connections and sometimes fly the Israeli flag. We took over the title of "Yids" many years ago and turned it into a nickname now used more than Lillywhites. Therefore it should be listed second, after Spurs. It's mentioned later on in the entry with the caveat that apparently some celebrity thinks Yids is a term to be avoided as it is similar to racial taunts. Rubbish. Chanting “monkey” or “nigger” at an individual player by opposition fans is not the same as our fans singing “Yid Army” or “Who let the Yids Out?” or “Yid-o-o” to celebrate/cheer the team on. We had a famous player called Ronnie Rosenthal around fifteen years ago, an Israeli, and he had no problem with our Yids nickname. In any event, that we see it as a nickname may be inconvenient but there we are: it's a fact and facts are what encyclopaedias are all about. So I'm going proudly to put Yids back as a nickname with a reference to the comments on the controversial aspect further down in the entry. Yours, Herbolzheim (Lloyd, actually, London E17). Herbolzheim (talk) 21:01, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

[Then the geezer called me stupid and accused me of claimimg to be the guardian of Tottenham culture etc blah blah. He has deleted at now. He is a caution and no mistake.]

I then said: You are rather pompous aren't you? My arguments are intellectually sustainable and I really do know what I'm talking about. You, on the other hand, come across as just rude. How do my arguments fail to stand up? Where do I claim to be the authorised guardian of Tottenham culture? (And do you mean the club and its supporters or the place?) Assertions of "rubbish" and accusations about a lack if credibility are not good enough mate. BTW - I have been going to Spurs since 1962 when I was in the womb of my mother who was brought up with Jewish folk in NE London. I started to go to games with my own friends from Stamford Hill, Walthamstow and South Tottenham in 1975. I have fought battles with other fans, verbal and the real-deal. We started to sing "Yid Army" in 1991, but had for years flown the Israeli flag and wore the SOD on our jackets and white butchers coats, especially when invading the Arsenal North Bank at Highbury. My father and grandfather are Spurs fans (the latter used to wear a skull-cap at home and thought it perfectly normal so to do). My best-mate is Jewish and a season ticket holder - he comes from Woodberry Down which is equidistant between Arsenal and Tottenham. What are your own credentials? Herbolzheim (talk) 22:05, 30 August 2011 (UTC) PS I don't know how to get into the entry's discussion page. PPS The entry should also mention SAN: Spurs Against the Nazis. SAN was active in 1978-80 with some seriously tough white and black young men who would cheerfully take on Chelsea and West Ham racists. Not many clubs have a multi-cultural tradition like ours, certainly not prior to the mid-90s. These are facts - I've seen far more dubious claims in some Wikipedia entries.

Finally: Yids is going back soon. L

Finally finally - I haven't reverted 3 times today, only twice. And Lillywhites is archaic - nobody says that apart from the Daily Telegraph. We are The Yids and other supporters call us that. They don't say "golly, here come the Lillywhites!"

It is odd that you are insistant that the apparent 'nickname' be present in the infobox when the article has a paragraph in the 'support' section regarding the history and usage of the term "Yids". It also refers to some fans finding the name offensive so would be unsuitable to be regarded as an official nickname along with "Spurs". I think that the article has sufficient coverage of the term hence it is not needed in the infobox. And as much as I enjoyed reading your biography, it didn't prove anything or justify your edits. User:joesayers talk 22:56, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
I don't claim to know much about football, but find it hard to believe that the term "Lilywhites" is archaic and only used by the Telegraph, given it's used by the BBC, Yahoo!, Sky... I could go on but I think the evidence is there. --Kinu t/c 23:06, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
(ec)As already indicated on my Talk Page where most of this was originally posted I have no intention of responding to what appears to amount to nothing more than your personal biography and contains nothing which meets the requirements of WP:V in justifying a change to the article. I see from the back history of your two accounts(!) User talk:82.11.178.239 and User talk:Herbolzheim you have been formally advised on both your Talk Pages about how you should conduct yourself towards other editors on Wikipedia. Please take the advise offered to you by other editors. Seek change through consensus. Just repeatededly reverting will not achieve anything. Tmol42 (talk) 23:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Listen Tmo, you have plenty of history yourself, I can see. Mr Contentious. I see that you deleted your high-handed stuff to me so that the others you moaned to took your side. Well I am learning - and am grateful to you and others about this process. Nothing has been reverted so hush. NOW: No Spurs fan or enemy mentions Lilywhites normally. We know it is an old and revered nickname, just as Crystal Palace were called The Glaziers and Everton The Toffees. But it is rarely used, apart from by Stuart Hall of the BBC when he eloquently seeks to add spice to a report, and without doubt Yids is used more frequently in London and by soccer fans all over the gaff. That is simply a fact my friends. I think that The Yids should appear as the second nickname. As to any offence, it lost that ages ago. Even the Hassidim up at Stamford Hill - who in the main don't go to soccer and those that do often support Arsenal - know that it means Spurs fans. But I will write to a couple of Rabbis in NE London and maybe the Board of British Jews and see what they say. I work for a charity (volunteer) with a multi-faith board and I'll get their take as well. Re my biography, maybe I'll write a book about my life as a Spurs fan, young and old(er), as it seems to have been so well-received. But the version here was just to show my credentials and was rather abridged. I think that any commentators on the subject of Spurs nicknames should be qualified in some way - e.g. a Spurs fan, a sociologist specialising in NE London, a Jew (actually that does grate - my mates prefer to be called "jewish" rather than a Jew, but don't mind Yid), or someone with another relevant attribute. Sorry if there are any spelling mistakes as I haven't learnt to spell-check these pages (yet). Yours on the Shelf (which should also be mentioned but that's for another day). Herbolzheim (talk) 21:21, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

This has been discussed many times before and the consensus was always that "Yids" should not appear in the infobox. Cheers, Stephenb (Talk) 06:32, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate that it has been discussed but dislike some editors' attitudes to new people revisiting subjects. I don't know why Yids should not be stated as the second most-used nickname. It is a fact that the term is used by the club's own fans and facts are what encyclopaedia's are about. Why should it not be listed after Spurs and before - the hardly used - Lilywhites? The history of its useage and the fact that some people may find it offensive is secondary and should come later. But nobody I know finds it offensive - they are offended that it is not simply given as our nickname and want to show rivals how it has become a badge of honour. It is nothing like a group of fans shouting racial abuse at a player during a game - there are no parallels are there? Herbolzheim (talk) 08:44, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

And once again you are directed to the verifiability policy. You have still yet to provide any reliable sources showing that this nickname is worthy of inclusion in the infobox, more than just derogatory, is worth mentioning beyond what is in the article already, etc. From what I can tell, given a quick search, it's used less than Lilywhites, at least by actual media. Others have indicated that it has been discussed before, and unless you can provide actual information, as in from reliable sources and not simply what you claim is true, I fail to see the justification for this addition. --Kinu t/c 19:46, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
Also, as for your statement that "I think that any commentators on the subject of Spurs nicknames should be qualified in some way," remember that this is the "encyclopedia that anyone can edit." My "relevant attribute" (as you term it) for being involved in this discussion is that I am interested in maintaining the integrity of an encyclopedia and making sure the core policy of verifiability is met. On the other hand, considering oneself to be an expert on a topic will not exempt one from that policy. --Kinu t/c 20:07, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

No, I'm sorry but that reasoning just doesn't fly. Use by the media is one thing, but use by fans is another and just as valid. My job is to get some evidence rather than just say that it is the case. I know that I am not exempt from any policy. That said, there are loads of subjective assertions in Wkp that are flagged as requiring evidence or not flagged at all. Herbolzheim (talk) 08:40, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

It may be worth noting that, on the 18 September 2011 edition of Match of the Day 2 on BBC2, presenter Colin Murray referred to Tottenham Hotspur as The Lilywhites. This suggests support for leaving Lilywhites as a valid nickname, although it does not invalidate the suggested use of Yids in the article.LenF54 (talk) 15:53, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Check out some of my Spurs player biographies for example Tommy Cable. I often use the nickname Lilywhites or Lilies. Northmetpit (talk) 11:04, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Commentators can't use the word yid. So this point doesn't work. Fans use the word all the time, apart from middle-class guys over 60 (and they are guys as not many of our wives and girlfriends went prior to 1990). You rascals know full well that we say yids more than Lillywhites at a ratio of about 20:1 or greater. Yids should be given as the second-most used nickname for Spurs, with a note about it being turned from a feeble insult into a badge of honour, and a caveat about being offensive to some: IF we can get evidence that it is as widely used as I say. I'll find some when time. BTW check out the kits now - you'll be lucky to see any white at all at this rate (light blue, royal blue, mauve, yellow, black - and now and then traditional navy and white).--Herbolzheim (talk) 23:51, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Herbolzheim, in the past the Tottenham have released statements to tone down the chanting of "Yid Army" and the language at matches, the club do tend to have a stance, they can't stop the periodic chanting but they can condone it. I think what happens is a build up over time for the use of the chat and it is well used, and you can say it is a nickname in some regards, but Wikipedia is about having a neutral point of view, and keeping the article balanced, if a simple slang "Yid" creates arguments then it has unbalance use and on that, it shouldn't be used. Govvy (talk) 12:50, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

What a load of rubbish. "Yids" masy be offensive to some folk - in fact it isn't to many, including Jewish fans - but it is definitely used more than Lillywhites which is an affectionate old name used mainly by older fans and the odd commentator like Stuart Hall. Therefore, it should be given as THFC's second most commonly used nickname. There is no intellectually sustainable argument against this as Wikipedia is about facts (that is to say, if I can prove my point, which is hard as the press don't like using the word Yid, but I will). OK - we can say that it isn't used in the press or by the club itself as some people are said to find it offensiv e. I'll tell you what I think, I think some Wiki editors don't want it used because they are a bit anti-semetic themselves, or because they are gooners, or because they just think that they know best and don't want to change the way the article reads. 82.11.178.239 (talk) 14:01, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Again I would like to point out WP:POV Naming , this is down to balance of the article attached by citations, official papers, news groups don't use the term Yids to refer to Tottenham football club, it's a nickname referring to the supporters, to attach the nickname where you want too on the article would be an incorrect use of it and incorrect placement. Govvy (talk) 15:01, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Spot on Govvy. End of debate!Tmol42 (talk) 16:35, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
User talk:82.11.178.239 This is for discusing the article, it is not the place for making totally unfounded accusations about other editors. Do not reduce the debate to accusing some editors of being anti-semitic. Nor do editor's football affiliatons matter one jot when they make reasoned contributions about the article. Please keep you unhealthy thoughts about fellow editors to yourself.Tmol42 (talk) 16:35, 19 November 2011 (UTC

Mr TMO, you again. You are being a bit of a bully because your arguments don't stand up. I say this because you have threatened to have me barred yet again, this time dramatically accusing me of false accusations and giving me final warnings (while I can't do likewise to you, yet: yes, I DO think that some people who are anti-semetic and/or anti-Spurs don't like the fact that we have taken over Yids as a badge of honour. It is just possible that one or two also edit Wikipedia isn't it? I also know that some souls are sensitive to the term for various reasons including plain decorum, and that it is unofficial. That's why it needs handling very carefully and rigtly so. (Just as you do - less rightly so. You have a track-record of issue-taking on slight technical points with new people and hating being "wrong" and threatening people. Everyone kmows that it is indeed true and human that some editors think they know best - be honest. I'm not saying that YOU are anti-semetic my old china plate.)

Guys: I am in the process of some quantitative research which should help the debate along. I'm also in touch with local and national Jewish bodies. I'll tell you something interesting. When I started this research I did seraches on Lilywhites, Lillywhites, and Yids. Try it folks. For the first two you get naff all about Spurs but loads of stuff on Cambridge City and Preston NE. For the third, tons of returns back on THFC and its supporters. Also, several fansites say that Yids is a badge of pride, used since the 1900s when THFC was the team of choice for Eastenders jumping on a tram or bus up the A10; and/or since the 1970s in response to taunts from Chelsea, West Ham and Arsenal fans. Finally, apologies to Mr Govvy. It WAS wrong of me to use the word "rubbish". I admit to being a bit prickly as I think some can seek to exclude newcomers, and I was in a rush. (I was late for a soccer match: Leyton Orient v Stevenage as my daughter has turned out an O). Sorry and thanks for all comments meant in good faith. I just think that if I can evidence it, it should be made clear that Yids is the most frequently used nickname after Spurs wherever nicknames are covered in the entry as a neutral fact. Then any controversy can be discussed. --Herbolzheim (talk) 15:21, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Bitter debate

On 31 August 2011 an editor added "bitter" to "rivalry", citing emphasis. This was deleted by a second editor on 1 September 2011 as an unnecessary POV. The first editor added it again on 2 September 2011, again citing emphasis. I removed it later that day ("It's a POV - as previously stated. (As a shareholder and life member of the supporters club) I believe only some of us are bitter / envious. It doesn't belong in a Wikipedia article."). The first editor again added it on 3 September 2011 ("It doesn't matter what you like to think. It is bitter compared to some rivalries - only Rangers-Celtic is more dangerous"). It seemes that this first editor feels that only his opinion counts ("It doesn't matter what you like to think.") and, while I am happy to concede that, for example, the rivalry between West Ham and Leyton Orient is somewhat mild, to say that "only Rangers-Celtic is more dangerous" is astonishing. What is "dangerous" about the rivalry between Arsenal and Tottenham? I remain of the view that "bitter" is not appropriate for this encyclopaedic entry and I have again deleted it. I have no wish to force my opinion on others so would other editors like to comment, please, in the hope that there may be some kind of consensus? LenF54 (talk) 17:12, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Totally agree, The editor concerned, despite advice from several other editors, appears to have failed to grasp that personal opinions and observations have no place for justifying changes to Wikipedia. See discussion above on Nicknames! Tmol42 (talk) 17:36, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Len: Tmo is not being objective 'cos he lost an argument with me. Anybody else out there? It is a bitter rivalry. It doesn't matter what ONE likes to think. It would be nice if we all got along but the rivalry between Spurs and Arsenal is more than normal. It is dangerous to take children to Spurs-Arsenal matches. I was told off for giving my bonafides about following Spurs for years. But they count. As do yours. But I am afraid that rivalry needs more emphasis. Must I dig out all the news reports of trouble and rancour? It is not my point of view for goodness sake - ask anyone in N London. "Bitter rivalry" has a place in an encyclopaedia if it is true which it is. It also applies to Celtic-Rangers and Norwich-Ipswich and West Ham-Millwall. Herbolzheim (talk) 17:01, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it's suitable. You keep saying it's true, which may be the case, but that ignores one of our key policies here at Wikipedia: Verifiability. Specifically, "The threshold for inclusion of information in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". What's important is sourcing content, as Wikipedia is not a place for original research or personal opinion. At the moment this is your personal opinion, because it's unsourced. Further, I would personally not like to see it included because it can have negative connotations towards the supporters groups -- specifically that they are bitter. I can certainly understand wanting to emphasise it, I just don't think that using "bitter" is the right way to go about it. I'm not sure what would be better; "arch-rivals" would obviously be preferable, and very easily sourced in reliable publications ([1][2][3]), but it doesn't really fit in the sentence construction. Can anyone think of any alternatives? Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 17:24, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there may be a better way of getting it in. But it's been bitter from the outset. Fighting was reported long before the 70s. It wasn't that Arsenal moved to N London, although that annoyed Spurs and Orient; it is usually understood to be the fact that they took Spurs' place in the top flight after WW1 despite finishing lower in the second flight. Later on, Arsenal fans may have resented Spurs successes and beating them to the first double and first European competition win, and their assertion of playing glorious football. Many fans were involved in the out-and-out fighting that took place in and around the grounds in the 1970s and '80s. And Spurs may have resented Arsenal's subsequent rise to outstrip them in terms of success and stadium size. Regarding POV, it is a point of view that "bitter" isn't appropriate. It would be interesting to ask 20 fans at random, ten from each team, if bitter applied. If it can be shown to be appropriate it should be included, rather than ommitted because the fact is unsavoury or unfortunate. I'll have a look at the West Ham-Millwall entry and some history. Herbolzheim (talk) 17:49, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Later after a quick look: the Wikipedia entry on West Ham-Millwall says: "The rivalry between Millwall and West Ham United is one of the longest-standing and most bitter rivalries in English football,[3] with both sets of supporters considering the other club as their main rival.[4]" Herbolzheim (talk) 17:56, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

It would be better to add a couple of (referenced) sentences to explain the origin of the rivalry. That way no-one has to rely on a single adjective to gain an understanding; one sentence is simply not enough to put across the nature of the rivalry. Right now an unfamiliar reader would get the impression that minor rivalry with West Ham and Chelsea is almost as important as that with Arsenal. There isn't even a link to North London derby in the section. At the same time I'd consider removing some of the fluff that is the Social responsibility section below it. Oldelpaso (talk) 18:00, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

OK - when time will do so. Thanks. Herbolzheim (talk) 20:33, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't want to sound too Star Trekish but a good wikipedia article will be neutral, logical (Vulcanised!), adding the word "bitter" is very human and adds emotional textual content to explain the rivalry. I really feel that would go astray from the POV guidelines and become original content which is what we don't want. Govvy (talk) 13:40, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Govvy. But "bitter" is used elsewhere in Wikipedia to describe other rivalries, such as West Ham and Millwall. I'm working on getting some qualitative and qualtatitive evidence. I also think that, as has been suggested, we need to explain why it started and has endured. There are plenty of assertions in Wikipedia that don't have evidence, or say "evidence required"; but no problems. Cheeers. --Herbolzheim (talk) 15:21, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Maybe those other articles need to be edited them to be more uniform, Govvy (talk) 15:24, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Feel free. Go through Wikipedia and tackle every assertion made without evidence. Also, tell the guys who check the Millwall and West Ham pages that their rivalry isn't bitter. You may have a job on your hands. But two wrongs don't make a right as my old Yiddisher mum says. Like I say, no problem. Best ... --Herbolzheim (talk) 15:50, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

London Wiki

Anyone wish to develop the London wiki [www.london.wikia.com] equivalent article (or any others if desired)? Jackiespeel (talk) 16:03, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Kit section

just a thought, should Kit manufacturers and Shirt sponsors be in a table next to each other to shorten the article length? Govvy (talk) 13:56, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Giovani dos Santos

Can you peeps keep an eye on the article, I've noticed that in the last two days a strange number of edits, no citations given for changes, and I am not sure on if the data is all correct. regards Govvy (talk) 14:23, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

THFC v Athletico Madrid 1963: Number 8

CAN anybody please confrim who wore the number 8 shirt? I thought it was Greavesy, but it turns out that he wore number 10 (you can see it on his back in some old footage). Anybody out ther who can help? TMO? Len? :-)

--Herbolzheim (talk) 15:45, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

All I know is that was the cup winners cup final that Spurs won 5-1 on 15 May in Rotterdam Govvy (talk) 16:04, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

According to MEHSTG here the team was Bill Brown; Peter Baker, Ron Henry, Maurice Norman; Tony Marchi, Danny Blanchflower, John White; Cliff Jones, Jimmy Greaves, Bobby Smith, Terry Dyson, which suggests it was John White wearing 8 and just a while before his fateful golf round too!Tmol42 (talk) 16:10, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
On that note, the 1962–63 Tottenham Hotspur F.C. season article in the season list would be a good one to do up if you would like something to do Herblozheim, Govvy (talk) 16:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

OK. I may well do so. Many thanks indeed for your other points. BTW: use of caps a Civil Service thing to quickly show a response to parts of a text, but point taken. TMO: Thanks. Yes, it seems like it was the ill-fated White. I'd hoped it was JG. Someone has bought me a retro shirt with Nr.8 on the back... --Herbolzheim (talk) 16:28, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

London Wiki

There is a 'wanted page' request for THFC on www.london.wikia.com - would someone oblige and create it? Jackiespeel (talk) 23:04, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Redknapp Record

Redknapp's record is now 88 wins in 174 games, bringing his win percentage to 50.57%, and putting him into 4th place in the top 20. GulagOrkestar (talk) 21:21, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

NB the record refers to the date at which the stats is applicable. If you would prefer you are welcome to go ahead and update, but bear in mind it changes each week, so be prepared for the ongoing task too!Tmol42 (talk) 22:22, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Squad table format

A discussion is being held here on the possibility of rolling out a new squad template. The new template, named {{football squad player2}}, differs from the standard squad layout in several ways:

  • It features a sort function
  • Comes in a single column format that can be understood by screen readers.
    • Single column format ensures that low resolution browsers, including mobile devices, do not get part or all of the second column cut off.
    • Single column format ensures less clutter, particularly at lower resolutions, for wide sections such as the Arsenal loan section.
  • It gives nationality its own column; at present flags are featured in a blank, untitled column
  • It complies with Wikipedia's guidance on flag usage.
  • It leaves enough space to add images of current players, an example of which can be seen at Watford F.C#Current squad.

It is proposed that the new template be added to some of Wikipedia's most high-profile club articles, which might include Tottenham Hotspur F.C.. To give your thoughts, please read and contribute to the discussion at WikiProject Football.

Regards, —WFC— 00:47, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 1 February 2012

Tottenham have a large fanbase in the United Kingdom, drawn largely from North London and the Home Counties. Five times between 1946 and 1969, Tottenham had the highest average attendance in England.[33][34] There are also Tottenham supporters' clubs located all over the world. Tottenham were 9th in average attendances for the 2008/9 Premier League season, and 11th for all Premier League seasons.[35] Famous historical supporters of the club have included such figures as A.J. Ayer.[36][37] Tottenham supporters have rivalries with several clubs, mainly within the London area. The fiercest of these is with North London rivals Arsenal. They also share notable rivalries with fellow London clubs Chelsea and West Ham United.[38] The club, as with many clubs in London, has a large Jewish following and this has led to much anti-semitic provocation[39][40] against Tottenham supporters. Tottenham supporters, Jewish and non-Jewish, united against this and adopted the nickname "Yids", developing chants to support this. Many fans view adopting "Yid" as a badge of pride, helping defuse its power as an insult.[41] Today it is mainly used to distinguish Tottenham fans from other football supporters. Many fans, however, disagree with the use of the name "Yid", and believe it will only attract more racism.[42] In April 2011, Jewish comedian, author and Chelsea-supporter[43] David Baddiel produced a short film stating that the anti-semitic chanting is as unacceptable as the abuse formerly suffered by black footballers, and must be stamped out accordingly.[44] A similar situation exists in Amsterdam with regards to Ajax fans.[45]

Remove all information about the club's supposedly "jewish" identity. This only provokes abuse and is unnecessary when describing the clubs background. I myself as a jewish tottenham hotspur supporter,speak on behalf of my fellow fans. Thankyou

WallyJohnson (talk) 16:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

 Not done, not going to remove informative and sourced content--Jac16888 Talk 17:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Notable former players

Seems to me that the section of notable former players is rather incomplete. All members of the Hall of Fame that have the status as a "Tottenham Hotspur Legend" are missing. What is the reason for that? Shouldn't they even more be notable former players? Or is there anything that I just didn't notice? 77.177.65.154 (talk) 02:24, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

See List of Tottenham Hotspur F.C. players which contains a chronological list of players inclunding legends etc. Tmol42 (talk) 02:30, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I've seen that list. Thanks alot. But that doesn't answer the question. Why is the listing in this article limited to some players of the Hall of Fame? Either they should all be listed or there must be a note: "all members of the Hall of Fame except those who became legend!" Is it just me or doesn't that seem to make sense? 77.177.65.154 (talk) 12:55, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I am pretty sure there has been discussions before on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football about including such lists on football pages where, unlike the fans' nominated 'Player of the Year' awards are seen as arbitrary or commercial decisions and I understand they have been stripped off on other football club pages. Other editors may take the view that the Spurs legends could be added here so lets see what others think too.Tmol42 (talk) 14:11, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
It should be all in or all out, so for the time being I have updated to match the club's own list of "Great Players", as found here. On this page there is no distinction between so-called legends and other players the club deems worthy of note. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 14:28, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Update list of Club honours

Not only is the URL reference out of date, but the list of "honours" mentions "runners up". That's not a recognized Honour by Club standards, and should be removed. I could not find another example of an English Club citing "runners up" moments in history as an honour to mention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raghtal (talk • contribs) 13:13, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Try looking at Arsenal F.C.#Honours, Everton F.C.#Honours, Sunderland A.F.C.#Honours, Manchester City F.C.#Honours, etc. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 13:26, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for those references. perhaps it would help to have this article use the same format for listing honours, where winning an honour is formatted differently than a runners up result | raghtal | (talk) 15:14, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

released players

louis saha and ryan nelsen both releasedby tottenham should remove from squad list — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daveahkiin (talk • contribs) 20:39, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 31 July 2012

|- class="vcard agent" | style="text-align: center" | 9 | style="text-align: center" | MF | style="padding-right:15px;" | Wales WAL | style="padding-right:15px;" | Gareth Bale

86.171.188.251 (talk) 23:53, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed.. Mdann52 (talk) 15:07, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Gareth Bale's #9 jersey

Is this permanent, or just for the U.S. tour? If its permament, it needs to be changed in the current squad section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.89.140.11 (talk) 13:21, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

It will be changed (if needed) when the THFC website confirms the permanent numbers for the 2012-3 season.LenF54 (talk) 17:45, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request 17 Aug 2012

A list of record apperance holders and record goal scorers would be appropriate as i have noticed this feature on many other clubs Wikipedia pages. A club of Tottenham's stature surely needs something like this as we dont exactly have a lack of great goalscorers/ apperance makers in our history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edwardpav (talk • contribs) 21:35, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Already published as its own article. See \ here linked from main article. Tmol42 (talk) 16:27, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
That doesn't have Top 10 appearances. I would support its addition. LenF54 (talk) 16:42, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Presume to the statistics article along with all the other similar records. Otherwise we will go back to the days when endlessly correcting anon IPs adding all sorts of stats.Tmol42 (talk) 17:09, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
In fact this page re THFC players also provides the information. Tmol42 (talk) 17:15, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
It does not have a list of the Top 10 appearances - as requested by Edwardpav. The information can be derived from the list referred to but since there is a list at "List of Arsenal F.C. records and statistics" it would not appear to be out of line with practice to have one for THFC? Top 10 of appearances isn't random like "the 10 tallest" or "the 10 with the longest hair", so on this occasion I support the creation of such a list for adding to the List of Tottenham Hotspur F.C. records and statistics article. LenF54 (talk) 19:11, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 20 November 2012

182.178.38.235 (talk) 14:03, 20 November 2012 (UTC)we are shit we know it

Not done: this is not an edit request. ⋘HueSatLum ? ❢⋙ 14:08, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Reliable source for coaching/backroom staff

This page from the official site gives a fairly full list of the coaching/backroom staff. I leave it to others to decide how much of this information should be included in the page. --MrStoofer (talk) 14:15, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Notice to Spurs editors.

Have added Peer Review to 2009–10 Tottenham Hotspur F.C. season - PR. Have also updated to-do list at the top of the talk page. Govvy (talk) 12:27, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Gomes

Heurelho Gomes left the club last summer

Lloris should be No. 1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atthewmay (talk • contribs) 16:13, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Are you sure about that? Mattythewhite (talk) 16:21, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Squad Numbers

In the Europa League Chiriches will wear 12 and Lamela 33 as the numbers 6 & 11 were initially registered for Parker and Bale.Statto74 (talk) 11:12, 4 September 2013 (UTC)


Club Directors

The list of Club Directors is incomplete. The following should also be added: Donna-Maria Cullen - Executive Director Darren Eales - Director of Football Administration — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.171.127.186 (talk) 15:43, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 20 September 2013

Please change the current third kit to the newly released version

source: http://shop.tottenhamhotspur.com/category/view-all-spurs-third-kit?TRE00000#facets=%7C1 155.192.180.10 (talk) 10:14, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Please update the list of Directors too. Donna-Maria Cullen (Executive Director) and Darren Eales (Director of Football Administration) should also be included on this list

http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/directors/tottenham-hotspur — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.171.127.186 (talk) 15:02, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Partly done: The third kit seems to be correct already -- see there. I have updated the directors list, but the source only lists them as "director", and the official website appears no longer to list directors. Can you identify the nationality of Donna-maria Cullen, please? --Stfg (talk) 12:09, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Top Ten

Can't we have a top ten goalscorers and appearences please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.152.58.81 (talk) 14:06, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

FA Cup

Why no mention of the FA Cup ribbons? We are the reason why every cup competition in the world has them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.152.58.81 (talk) 14:08, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

David Baddiel

I noticed reference about Baddiel moaning about us and the yid word but no mention of him laughing at jewish people and tottenham's jewish connections in his old program fantasy football league. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bestzona (talk • contribs) 10:10, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Edit Request Caretaker Managers

Is it really relevent to have Caretaker managers in the list of former Managers? With the exception of David Pleat (from 21/9/03 - 3/6/04) they all managed for relitively few games and it hardly seem relevent? This would drop the list by 7. Any thoughts?Statto74 (talk) 08:43, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Since ENIC have taken over all the Managers have been "Caretakers" and it will stay the same until they sell the Club — Preceding unsigned comment added by 460316DSG1 (talk • contribs) 15:13, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 June 2014

Mike England and Alan Gilzean are the latest inductees to the hall of fame http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/hall-of-fame-mike-england-alan-gilzean-270913/

Steffen Freud is also still in the first team coaching staff and has been removed 86.132.9.153 (talk) 15:19, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

 Already done DJAMP4444 18:34, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 June 2014

any reference to "cup winners cup" should be "european" cup winners cup....... NOT as stated in this wiki as uefa cup winners cup.can someone please edit this correctly.thankyou 86.179.124.51 (talk) 21:21, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 14:52, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Missing detail on 2014/15 home and away kit socks

Good job on the representation of the new home and away kits in the info box; looks very accurate. However, the current home socks have a yellow and blue line running around them (matching other areas of the kit) which is missing from the image. Also, there are prominent yellow stripes running down both sides of the away socks which are absent from that image. Can someone make these additions (I'm not sure how to add this myself)? Cheers Brunanburh (talk) 19:30, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 September 2014

In the first paragraph it says that the Tottenham Hotspur new training ground is at Bulls Cross in Enfield. In fact it is in Whitewebbs Lane Enfield and is situated mainly on the historic Forty Hall Estate (owned by the London Borough of Enfield). Source: Google maps and Google Earth Tone1950 (talk) 09:29, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Google maps and Earth can be wrong, using a source like the club's own website/press releases or news outlets would be considered reliable Cannolis (talk) 06:32, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 November 2014

The crest badge has a cockerel on it because the founder Victor Coates had a ring with a cockerel on it as the cockerel was in the Coates coat of arms. Victor used the ring to emboss cockerel into wax as his seal

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Stickee (talk) 11:43, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

First European Cup qualification

Shouldn't there be some reference to the club competing for the first time (and last unfortunately) they competed in the European Cup? 1961-62 when they made it to the semi-finals. Seems pretty significant to me.60.240.5.113 (talk) 08:52, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

HELLO? Any particular reason why this has been ignored while more recent requests have been responded to? 60.240.5.113 (talk) 13:28, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Do you have any source for it? QED237 (talk) 14:46, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure why it needs a source when for example, "Since then, Tottenham have won the FA Cup a further seven times" doesn't have a source, which appears under "History."
I swear I don't get the inconsistency with Wikipedia source referencing.
I note now that it is actually mentioned in the full History article, so perhaps it's not big enough to go into the extended club article. And I also note that there is no source referenced for it! So maybe it needs to be removed now! Seriously, where do we draw the line with referencing? 60.240.5.113 (talk) 13:22, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Honours section

I got reverted the other day on Ryan Mason's article because I added the league cup runner-up medal to his honours and was told a runner-up isn't an honour. So was wondering if having runners-up in the honours section should be removed from this article as well, or is the person that told me wrong? William-95 (talk) 20:24, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

William, For clubs see here Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Clubs. For players it's ditto with the view that a player with a significant number of honours would not then also have runners up medals included,(e.g.Messi). It seems from discussions at WP:FOOTY this debate occurs all too frequently but with the same 'soft' concensus result, at least as far as players in UK leagues are concerned. Clear as mud I know!Tmol42 (talk) 21:01, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
I am new to Wikipedia and I was just curious to find out about the rules, thanks for the helpful information!William-95 (talk) 18:16, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on Tottenham Hotspur F.C.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:27, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tottenham Hotspur F.C.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:32, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Affiliated Clubs

The affiliation with Real Madrid was ended in 2014 - http://www.caughtoffside.com/2014/11/23/tottenham-confirm-end-to-special-relationship-with-real-madrid/ 86.133.84.3 (talk) 21:21, 2 May 2016 (UTC)RD 02/05/16

 Done I have removed Real Madrid from the list. Govvy (talk) 18:12, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Vincent Janssen number?

I see his number is No. 9 for Holland, but Spurs? When did he get that number? I see no indication on Tottenham's website for him being issued the number nine shirt for the season. Govvy (talk) 12:22, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Carter-Vickers

Has been on the bench this season and is included here on Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Tottenham_Hotspur_F.C._squad Statto74 (talk) 21:02, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

I agree with his inclusion based on the fact that he's been named to the matchday squad multiple times so far this season (and a few times last) even though he hasn't played yet. Winks and Onomah are also listed as part of the development squad on the Tottenham web site, but are listed here (although I guess both have actually played this season unlike CCV). Dawindler (talk) 22:11, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Sheriff of London Charity Shield Suggestion

Hi editors, just to note that this page currently claims a 1934-35 season win of the Sheriff of London Charity Shield. The trophy was not competed for that season and it went into hibernation in the previous year (1933-34 season) which Tottenham did win in May 1934. This needs to be reviewed and amended. I have tried to make the edit but it was reverted. I leave it to your discretion, the trophy page is very well referenced for all matches played from newspaper and published records so it is quite clear there was no match that year. Mountaincirque 11:44, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

While it is on the Tottenham Hotspur website that it was won for the following season that's the source being used that's why it's on the list. Govvy (talk) 15:22, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
I have been in email contact with the Spurs club historian today and he confirmed that there was an error on their site. He reviewed all programmes and fixture lists in the club record for the 1933-35 seasons. He has now removed the listing for the Shield win in 1934-35 which was in fact a friendly match, he noted it will be removed from the club's handbooks and programmes from henceforth also. ([4]). I hope that the error can now be removed from this page and will leave it to the editors here to do so. All the best: Mountaincirque 14:16, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 February 2017

Club badge is incorrect where represented as it no longer officially features the trademark symbol (TM). JackSpur (talk) 14:56, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

You lost me, the one in the infobox looks fine as far as I can see. Govvy (talk) 15:11, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
This badge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tottenham_Hotspur_F.C.#/media/File:Tottenham_Hotspur.svg - which is featured as the main Club badge on this Wikipedia page, has 'TM' next to the R on HOTSPUR - this is no longer part of the official Club badge JackSpur (talk) 15:16, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 Not done We would need a copy of the "new" logo and proof that it is the official logo. - looking at the club's website, the logo with TM is used in numerous places, but I don't see any use without - Arjayay (talk) 15:37, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
To spare further argument - I will contact you directly with proof JackSpur (talk) 15:56, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
I can't see why Tottenham's logo Trade Mark would expire, unless you work for Tottenham, and can provide a reliable information it will stay the way it is. Govvy (talk) 16:29, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
JackSpur - I have received your e-mail, but always try to keep discussions open and on the record - so others know what is happening. In your e-mail you have stated
"The badge - where possible - always is displayed without the TM present on the Official Club website. Please also consult our social media channels for further examples."
The Official Club website - see the scarves each side of every page - has numerous examples with the TM, whilst social media is not considered a reliable source at Wikipedia.
Presumably the club issued a press-release, or made some form of statement, when the decision to change the logo was made? This will need to be resolved.
However, we can do nothing until you upload a copy of the current logo. This must be uploaded to en.wikipedia, not Wikimedia commons, and you must add a free-use rationale for each use - please see File:Tottenham Hotspur.svg for the current wording. Please give the new file a new name e.g. "Tottenham Hotspur 2017", as if you try to use the same name, it will be rejected.
Thanks - Arjayay (talk) 17:43, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Admiral Kit

Admiral became kit manufacturer in 1977 and lasted three seasons, I have amended this from 78-80 to 1977-1980Statto74 (talk) 12:49, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2017

Wrong linking in the Section:

2 Stadium

But, on 1 October 2010 Tottenham Hotspur's chairman Daniel Levy advised that the club had registered an interest in bidding for the stadium in conjunction with AEG (Europe) to keep its options open while there remained uncertainties about the success of the Northumberland Development Project.[1]

Linking is wrong, it's not the AEG (Europe), but the Anschutz Entertainment Group (AEG).

As can be seen in the article, also in the cites.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Stadium_(London)

Section: Post-Olympics use

On 12 November 2010, it was announced that two bids had been shortlisted for the stadium post-Olympics. They were a joint bid from Tottenham Hotspur F.C. and Anschutz Entertainment Group (AEG), and a second bid from West Ham United F.C. and Newham Council.[2]

Thanks for correcting. 2003:C6:2BDA:B784:51A9:1B3D:D91A:727D (talk) 16:18, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Stadium Plans THFC Official website. Accessed 2 October 2010.
  2. ^ "Tottenham and West Ham Lead London 2012 Stadium Bid". BBC News. 12 November 2010.
 Done I have reviewed and fixed the link accordingly. Govvy (talk) 17:14, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2017

Luis camilo álvarez vega (talk) 22:51, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — IVORK Discuss 23:06, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Honours

Anyone mind if I strip out the honours from Costa Del Sol Torny, to AIA Cup? I don't see it adds any value listing those smaller summer tourney honours. Govvy (talk) 21:25, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

They at least belong in a different category from the other honours which have some historical significance. Say something like Summer Friendly Tournaments (or Wenger Cups), which could be wrapped in the {{Show}} template. But deletion is fine too.
On the subject of honours, is the double of the league cup and Anglo-Italian Cup really notable? Jts1882 (talk) 06:35, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

I've made some changes to the subsections in the honours section. The Costa Del Sol tournament, AIA Cup etc are now in a Friendly Tournament subsection, separated from the historical leagues and cups. This seems a reasonable alternative to deletion, although I have no strong objections to deletion. Jts1882 (talk) 15:23, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

One slight problem with the leagues under the header, there are non-league (competitive honours) in Other honours/Friendlies Maybe they should be under Non-league honours header. Govvy (talk) 17:46, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
To me Other honours/friendlies includes other competitive honours as well as friendlies (but I see what you mean). I don't like the term non-league as the southern league in particular and the other leagues were (and some are still) genuine leagues. We played in them before the Football League was a truly national league. While the named FL was higher quality overall it was still just one of several leagues with regional cover. The league/non-league distinction we apply now was not an accurate description of football at that time. The FA Cup was the only national competition. That was what I was trying convey with the historical competition label (they are other honours and competitive). Perhaps three categories - major honours, other competitive honours, and friendly tournaments - would be better. Jts1882 (talk) 20:06, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

On the 'historical competitions' part, I'm not sure about the inclusion of the Football League South championships. They were very short lived and took place during the Second World War, which the football association don't hold as official records. Furthermore neither league season in question was actually completed. A lot of teams played more games than others etc.

I also agree with Jts1882 in that the "double" of league cup and Anglo cup is a little pushing it. One is even listed as a friendly, you wouldn't say the Emirates Cup and FA Cup was a double would you? Davefelmer (talk) 21:54, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

k, I removed the doubles bit, Govvy (talk) 18:06, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Fourth Captain

Is having a 'fourth captain' an official thing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irish factoids (talk • contribs) 10:42, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Only just noticed that now you mentioned it, I removed it. Govvy (talk) 19:30, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tottenham_Hotspur_F.C./Archive_4&oldid=1140148491"