Talk:Celtic F.C./Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Address

Can someone add the deleted address for Parkhead? I can't figure it out....Winterbottom

What Deal with FAI ?

What deal? I thought the reason why Celtic had so many Irish players was because of the club's heritage. Can someone please provide a citation for this alleged deal?

100 years

Should be some mention of the crest change in 1988. A picture would be nice too.

UEFA Cup run 2003

It is often stated that an estimated 80,000 Celtic fans were in Seville. Is there any documentary evidence of these numbers? Jimbo79 23:41, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

The Guardian - "More than 50,000"

UEFA.com -"With up to 70,000 Celtic and 30,000 Porto fans expected in town, the headline in Tuesday's El Correo de Andalucía ran: 'The invasion has begun'."

CNN-SI - "In the bleachers at Seville's 52,000-seat Olympic Stadium, the green-and-white colors of Celtic far outnumbered the blue of Porto. Tens of thousands of fans, mostly Scots, who traveled to southern Spain without a ticket watched on giant video screens in the city center." -- Arwel 00:57, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

It is pretty well documented that they took 80,000 to Seville.

Mine is only an eye witness account but I would say that 80,000 is perfectly plausible. The whole city was jammed with tens of thousands of people wearing hooped shirts. They were noisy but well behaved. PalX 11:50, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

So where do you get 80,000 from "up to 70,000"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.66.194 (talk • contribs)

See the sub-article [1][2] Rockpocket 19:05, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

It is 'at least' 70k and I would say a lot of papers said it was 80k so it is debatable but rounding it up it is probably 80k IMO.

Are three citations really needed for the whole 80,000 fans thing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Capt underpants (talk • contribs)

It does seem excessive, but was in response to a lot of edit-warring about the figure, some editors using a report from the day before the final to claim it was only 50,000. Camillus (talk) 11:45, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

It was said by pretty much all the media at the time that Celtic had 80,000 or so there. Also recall it being described as the greatest post-war movement of people or some such as well. siarach 11:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Too many external links

There are way too many external links at the bottom, can somebody get rid of some of them? I don't know enough to know which ones are useful and which are just spam or advertising. --Awiseman 15:03, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree, if someone who knows which are worth keeping can trim out the others, that would be ideal. Otherwise I will do it. --Guinnog 15:08, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree - I suggest keeping the official site and the BBC, binning the others.Hippo43 18:41, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Done. --Guinnog 18:48, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Stock Exchange

Is Celtic Football Club still a publically traded company and if so what is their ticker symbol? Thanks John R G 04:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Celtic PLC shares are traded on the Alternative Investment Market. Their ticker symbol is CCP. Rockpocket 05:59, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you I made the update which took alot of time. The Alternative Investment Market and the London stock market look almost the same but I did put Celtic under Alternative Investment Market which I had to make a new site for which I do not mind. I found some other football clubs but they all say LSE for london stock exchange and some might be for Alternative Investment Market which I do not know the difference. Can you tell me of anyother football clubs or sports teams that are publically traded and wheather they are lse or aim so that I can add the information to their sites or do you want to. Thank you. John R G 23:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

The Old Firm and sectarianism

Currently this section says "At its worst extreme this sectarianism has manifested itself in sectarian violence;..." What sectarian violence are we talking about? This reads as though Celtic's fans have been guilty of sectarian violence, which seems wrong to me, though I may be mistaken. Any suggestions for how to improve it?Hippo43 10:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Have you never seen the images of Celtic and Rangers' "fans", wearing football shirts as "colours", in Northern Ireland throwing petrol bombs at each other? This used to happen weekly in the 70s and 80s. Rockpocket 18:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind the 70s and 80s, a quick image search reveals this article (look at the images) [3] [4].

I think we need to clear this up in some way - maybe clarify that we mean sectarian violence in Northern Ireland, not Scotland, and perhaps, as Rockpocket says, emphasise that these "fans" are simply wearing their football shirts as "colours", and that this kind of violence is not in a football context. PhilLeotardo 16:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

It is not just Northern Ireland. This link was sourced from Sectarianism_in_Glasgow. andychambers

I've removed the referance to "the Soldiers Song" being an IRA song; it's the english language version of the Irish national anthem.

How to fix the hoops??

Does anyone know how to sort the image of the strip in the infobox? Right now both strips have a plain green left arm [or right arm] but I am too much of a tard to fix it. Thanks. PhilLeotardo 16:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Notable players

Please note that this section is not reserved for players who are popular with Celtic fans. Mo Johnston is highly notable for his infamous u-turn that, at the time, was almost unthinkable in Scottish football. Thus i believe he should be included in this section. Would the editor(s) who keep removing him please justify their reasons for doing so? Thanks. Rockpocket

I agree - this section should of course include the greats as well as recent departures and controversial players such as MoJo. Winterbottom 15:49, January 8th 2007

I agree - he is notable.Hippo43 12:19, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Homegrown talent

This has surely been discussed here before. Can someone find a source for it? I'm talking about the statement that Celtic are the only team to have won the cup with home-grown talent? I'm too busy to find it myself at the moment, so I'll restore the tag for now. --Guinnog 21:19, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

On closer examination, the refs there clearly verify the 30 miles from Glasgow claim. Is there a better form of words we need to clarify the "home-grown" claim? --Guinnog 21:23, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Born in the country the club is based in or something? I still haven't seen a source saying that they were the first. Archibald99 21:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I've added a source that uses "homegrown" to confirm that statement. We could always put it in quotes if it is considered unencylopaedic. Rockpocket 02:47, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Archibald99, would you like every word sourced? The sources states (my bold):

...not only were they the first British side to win the trophy, but the achievement of both reaching the final and winning the European Cup with a team comprised entirely of home-grown, local players (they were all born within a 30-mile radius of Celtic Park), has never been repeated in European football.

If a first hasn't been repeated, it is the only time it has occurred.Rockpocket 21:04, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Despite the BBC quote, I would suggest that "home-grown" is misleading and an unsuitable term to use. As I understand it, to state a player is "home-grown" is to imply that the player has been trained and developed through the club's youth system. Nationality is not a factor. (For example, due to EU anti-discrimination law, the recommendations UEFA are currently considering for "home-grown" quotas would class Irish Diarmuid O'Carroll as home-grown but not Glasgow-born Mark Wilson.) 2 of the Lisbon Lions (William Wallace and Ronnie Simpson) started with other senior clubs and were already well established footballers before their respective moves to Parkhead - Wallace was a Scotland international and Simpson was 35! Obviously the Lions were all Scottish and born within the 30-mile radius - would there be any problem with merely saying a team composed entirely of local players, or Archibald99's born in the country the club is based in? Caledonian Place 02:19, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I believe Steaua Bucarest won it in the 80's with a team of Romanians. Winterbottom

I agree, it is a team made up of all local players

Captain

On the current team list someone should put whos captain and vice

Done. Captkrob 18:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I removed vice because it cannot be proven. The manager could change his mind on a whim... Also clubs (usually) list only one official Captain.

"Glasgow Celtic"

I cleaned this up a bit - extended it to English and foreign commentators, although some in Scotland make the same mistake. If anyone can find a source for David Hannah or Tommy Burns using "Glasgow Celtic" please add it to the article!PhilLeotardo 14:29, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with this change. There are other "Celtic" named clubs out there, most notably the Boston Celtics. Furthermore, "The Celtic Football Club" doesn't really provide much more information and I haven't met anyone that is offended by the club being referred to as "Glasgow Celtic". Most Scottish clubs in the SPL are named after their town, so referring to the team as "Glasgow Celtic" is just a convient way to refer to where they play (especially considering the word Celtic makes people think of Ireland). I definitely don't believe that even a short discussion of who "incorrectly" and unoffensively referring to the team as Glasgow Celtic merits to be in the second paragraph of the article. Captkrob 15:25, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

It ain't called Glasgow Celtic. No original research please. --Guinnog 15:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Not really sure what the original research is a reference to in my post. I'm just saying I disagree with going deeply into detail on who refers to it incorrectly shouldn't be done at the top of the article. I merely objected to PhilLeotardo's edit. Simply stating that people refer to it as "Glasgow Celtic" despite the fact that is not the team's real name is fine. Captkrob 18:05, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Captkrob, which change do you disagree with? I don't think my edit to the article aadded any extra guff, just cleared up what was already there. As Guinnog says, the club is not named Glasgow Celtic, just as Everton are not Liverpool Everton. It's not a question of anyone being offended, just clearing up a common misconception - surely one of the uses of an encyclopedia? By all means move it to the end of the opening section. Perhaps we should clarify that other clubs have been named after the original Celtic - Belfast/Blantyre/Bloemfontein Celtic etc PhilLeotardo 16:36, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Eh, I'm easily convinced on this one. I guess I really just thought that what was already there before the edit was sufficient to make the point that the official name was not Glasgow Celtic. Going into who actually uses the term correctly and including sources seems like a distraction from the opening section, and seems to suggest that there is something really wrong with calling the club by the non-official name. If you want to add any more detail on it being called incorrectly, it should likely go in another section of the article. Captkrob 18:03, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Article ban

I'm pretty fed up with reverting the bullsh*te of those who write insults and other trash in the article.Shouldn't we consider about a ban for non registered writers?I've already talked to a Admin (whose name I unfortunately forgot).In his opinion the IP writers had some good additions that were worthier than the destroyings.What´s the editors' opinions?-Lemmy- 11:52, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I personally don't mind doing reverts. Its a daily reminder of just how energetic some people are about Scottish soccer, Celtic in particular. But I also don't think it is unreasonable to ban non-registered users (many of whom, in my opinion, seem to have Wikipedia accounts but just aren't always logged in). The article is pretty well developed and maintained by the registered users, so I don't think we would lose anything by giving it some kind of semi-protected status. Captkrob 17:51, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Im for a ban on anons tbh - this article is one of the most constantly vandalised i have on my watch list. siarach 11:49, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

You could always make a request, i'm not sure it qualifies per Wikipedia:Semi-protection policy. Rockpocket 18:41, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Nationality / Flag

Is there some central place a policy or discussion exists regarding the nationality/flag given to a particular player or team? In general, it seems that the nationality is the national team a footballer plays for (eg, Aiden McGeady has Ireland and Bobo Balde has Guinea, even though McGeady is technically Scottish and Balde is technically French) and a football team's nationality is the league it plays in, not necessarily the country (eg, Cardiff City is listed as an English team). People constantly edit these back and forth and I'd like to be able to link to some wikipedia policy regarding it. If no one knows then I'll poke around a bit further. Captkrob 18:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I poked around a little bit and found a rather long talk page regarding the player flags here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football/Clubs . There certainly isn't a whole lot of discussion much less agreement on it, however. Captkrob 18:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I reverted the replacement of the Malaysian flag with the Scottish flag for Shaun Maloney, on the principle he has no links, ancestral, national or professional, to the country (other than the accident of birth). We wouldn't, for example, use the Indian flag for Cliff Richard. McGeady and Balde is a more complex issue, I think. Rockpocket 06:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it depends mainly on the player's nationality, which if it isn't clear, goes to the national team played for. McGeady for example is Scottish as only a grandparent is from RoI. Archibald99 15:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

That seems a fair and logical guideline to follow. Rockpocket 18:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

No where has a vote or policy declaration of any kind been taken, but if you go to the above WikiProject link, it is stated that it should be the country of the national team. Therefore Balde should be Guinea and McGeady should be the Republic of Ireland. I'm still looking to see if there is a more official/standard policy on this, however, so I think it is safe to leave McGeady and Balde as they are for now. Captkrob 21:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

What about the likes of Charie Tully? Surely he should have the flag_of_ulster instead....Pretty sure he was born under that flag - never ever thought I'd use that phrase...

Notable Players 2

suggest change to the style adopted by Rangers FC page . discuss PalX 14:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I have no strong opinion on the style, except I see no value in adding current players, as the Rangers article does. They are already listed in a nearby section. Rockpocket 18:08, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

did david james ever play for celtic , on loan frm liverpool in the 5-1 win! email : ayrshirelad123@aol.com

We need to remind ourselves about the principle that notable players will by definition already have pages. There should never be redlinks here. If you come across an omission, write the article first, then include it here. Thanks. --Guinnog 18:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Note added. Time to use warnings on talk pages if it continues I'd say. Archibald99 18:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I have deleted a number of players out of this section because it was becoming more like a list of former players rather than notable players, however, there are some redlinked players there that I do think are notable - most notable of these are Latchford and McGarvey--Vintagekits 18:55, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure. I've removed them again for now; it's easy to add them again once the articles are written. Incidentally, wasn't Latchford English? --Guinnog 19:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Guinnog yeah, your probably right to take them out until there is a page done for them. However, there are a number of players still on it that are not notable Celtic players, its suffers slightly from recentism and needs some perspective--Vintagekits 19:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with that and would support slimming the list down somewhat. Less is often more in these things. --Guinnog 19:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll get to work--Vintagekits 19:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I have a problem with this. Who is deciding those that "are not notable Celtic players" an those that are? For example, someone like Ian Wright is clearly notable as a footballer by anyone's standards. However, was he notable as a Celtic player? Probably not, he only played 8 times, yet he is included. Mohammed Salim was only with Celtic for a few months, yet he is listed. In contrast Ulrik Laursen is hardly notable in the wider context of football, but he played for Celtic 40 times including in the UEFA Cup Final, surely he is more notable to Celtic than Wright.

So either we list any player that has their own article, or we start drafting some guidelines about what criteria must be met to be included in the list. If it just comes down to a personal opinion of notability, then we are going to have a lot of edit warring going on. Rockpocket 06:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

And while I'm on the subject, why is Liam Miller notable? Played less games than Laursen (and many others since removed) yet has hardly gone on to a glorious career elsewhere. And how about Juninho Paulista, a true legend (in his 9 games in the Hoops....). Lets try and be ob jective about this. Rockpocket 06:49, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Rock, I agree, its a difficult one, we will probably leave it down to concensus for now until someone can come up with some hard and fast rules.

Secondly, I prefer the Rangers style of listing notable players - would anyone object to it being changed?--Vintagekits 14:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

It's awful at the moment. Unless it can be sorted out (ie made to look like part of an article in an encyclopedia), I'd be in favour of just deleting it. --Guinnog 19:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I think deletion might be a bit drastic--Vintagekits 20:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

What if we set some kind of criterion such as a 50 game minimum for the player to be in the section or played for Celtic at least 10-20 yrs ago. This means a (recent) player had enough of an impact on the club to have 50+ appearances OR it is an older player notable enough to have his own article. For some perspective, Artur Boruc has played 47 games, so he would almost qualify to go on the list while Jan Vennegoor of Hesselink, while notable to clubs such as PSV, would not yet be considered "notable" to Celtic... maybe to appease people we can also have a "List of Previous Celtic Players" article that has anyone people want to throw up there, including players without articles. There must be some reasonable compromise because I agree that the current section is so large it isn't worth looking through. Ideally, people that really want to know about the club might browse through the section of notable players to learn more about the club's history, but now people probably just ignore the entire section. Captkrob 22:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I like, I like!! My suggestion - #minimum 15 years since they last played - minimum of 50 games and consenus amonest or borderline players #aswell as setting up a Category to be added to biography pages for all former players--Vintagekits 22:37, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

A category already exists (Celtic F.C. players). The idea behind a separate page is so even players w/o pages may be added. Maybe even put a little more info than the name and flag (years played, position, apps/goals, captain). Certainly not a description of the player (that gets nasty). But if it is on a different page you can spread it out more, maybe make a table, etc. Captkrob 00:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I like the cut of your jib Captkrob old bean--Vintagekits 00:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)!

• The Rangers F.C. article has a selection of both players who are notable from a Rangers perspective, and players notable from a world football perspective. Personally, I don't think there should be any set criteria, it should be fairly obvious whether a player is notable, and both of the aforementioned sets of players should be included. Archibald99 22:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

It can only fairly obvious if you already have some implicit, if not explicit, benchmark against which you measure their "notability" in mind. Therefore you must have some criteria to make such a judgement. If we don't have any guidelines I could argue that anyone who has played for Celtic and has their own article (thereby satisfying WP:N) is inherently notable and thus must be included. We have to ask ourselves, what exactly is the point of such a section? Is its purpose to

1. provide a ready link to the key players in Celtic history (i.e. list players particularly notable to Celtic for some reason, irrespective of their wider profile)
2. provide a ready link to all Celtic's ex-players (i.e. a list of people who meet WP:N and played at least one match for Celtic)
3. provide a ready link to highly notable ("famous") players who have worn the strip (i.e. list players with a particularly notable wider profile, irrespective of their importance to Celtic)

I personally think 1. should be the purpose of the section, and with that in mind it shouldn't be too difficult to think up some guidelines for inclusion. I also oppose the inclusion of any player currently playing for Celtic. Those players are included in the squad list and their inclusion again is completely redundant, since the the reader can easily find a link to their article elsewhere in the article. As an aside, if 1. is the basis of the section, there is no reason we can't have links to people without articles (yet). Rockpocket 01:45, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Excellent proposal. Let's go with (1) then. I also agree that current players don't belong here. I would go with at least five years ago. I would even support redlinking players here if we agree they were very significant to Celtic. --Guinnog 03:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

(1) sounds similar enough to Vintagekits and my proposal that I'll agree with it in principle. Redlinking is fine but I don't think it will be an issue if we set the guidelines right. I think it is fine to have players that have recently left the team. If you impose a 5-year limit then players such as Henrik Larsson, Stiliyan Petrov John Hartson wouldn't make it onto the list and would be nowhere on the Celtic page enough though they should be, and I would argue Larsson must be. I would think anyone who has played 100+ games should be eligible. For the older guys that we don't have as many stats on, most should be obvious. I think an edit-first ask questions later policy on players who left Celtic 15+ years ago would be fine. Captkrob 03:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the responses guys. My feeling about guidelines (which, as with all on WP, should not be restrictive if one can make a good argument for someone outwith these guidelines):

• Around 100+ first team appearances gets you in.
• Ex-players only, but no limit on when they last played (If When the mighty Paul Telfer scores a hat-trick in the Champions League Final this season, he should be included after leaving this coming summer ;)
• Irrespective of number of games, if they were a significant "first" for Celtic they could be included (e.g., Gil Heron)
• However, trivial firsts should be discounted (e.g. Shaun Maloney - as the first Malaysian born Scot under 4 feet tall to don the Hoops)
• Irrespective of number of games, if they were unique, unusual, or newsworthy (beyond the norm) in relation to Celtic they could be included (e.g., Mo Johnston and Alfie Conn, Jr. for obvious reasons)

I would say as long as the player is either conspicuous, memorable, great, remarkable, noticeable, noted, outstanding, [[[unusual]]], uncommon, eminent......that's all. I would [[[NOT]]] set a limit on appearences. Winterbottom

Thoughts? Rockpocket 06:19, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Larsson, Petrov and Hartson are all mentioned under recent seasons. I agree with keeping "interesting" players from the past like Heron, Conn and Johnston. --Guinnog 11:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I made a stub for Peter Latchford and added him to the list. Anyone fancy doing one for Frank McGarvey or adding to the stub on Latchford? --Guinnog 12:37, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I've created McGarvey's article (btw, this sublime player's financial situation, puts Pierre's comments about his salary requirements into full perspective). Rockpocket 07:04, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Well done. All the more important we source those remarks! --Guinnog 07:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I found a source for those too. It has some comical examples of comments in very poor taste [5]. Rockpocket 07:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Notable Players 3.....

I'd say as long as the player was conspicuous, memorable, great, remarkable, noticeable, noted, outstanding, unusual, uncommon, or eminent. Then they should be included.

I would not set an appearence limit for inclusion. Will we ever fully agree.....no. Hopefully we can come to some sort of an agreement though, instead of edit war 07'....

It doesn't look very good if the information keeps changing ever few hours. Doesn't make for reliable information.

Winterbottom

Pierre van Hooijdonk

Do we really think he was a notable player for Celtic?

"He moved on to Celtic in 1994 and scored 57 goals for the club in 68 appearances. He left Celtic over a wage dispute towards the end of the 1996/1997 season, stating that the reputed £7,000 a week he was being offered might be acceptable for a "homeless person" to live on but not for a man of his talent ."

Notable players should include fairly recent players, controversial players (like Pierre) and the greats. He may have been gready but he was notable. (deleted attack; see WP:BLP) Winterbottom

(I added the tag; the whole article could do with some sources if anyone fancies improving it.)

--Guinnog 22:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't have a strong opinion either way, though his goals to game ratio is pretty remarkable, I suppose. Rockpocket 05:47, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd go with notable also--Vintagekits 12:10, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe we should start a new article Former Celtic Players and do away with Notable ?????

George Connolly or George Connelly?

I moved the article on this player from the former to the latter spelling. As there are no references whatsoever in the article, I couldn't verify if this was correct. Can someone with a reliable paper reference please check? Thanks --Guinnog 19:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure you're right, can't find a source however. Archibald99 22:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

It's correct trust me :-) Winterbottom Thanks for changing it by the way.

Nationality of MON

I notice there is an ongoing edit war over which flag icon to place beside Martin O'Neill's entry in the managers' list. Can I encourage editors with strong feelings on the subject to discuss here rather than getting into an edit war? --Guinnog 21:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I think Martin O'Neill contains all relevant information, including his captaincy of the NI national side. Archibald99 21:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

What has that got to do with his Nationality - read the GFA!!!--Vintagekits 21:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

O'Neill is a footballer manager; I don't think they were covered in the Good Friday Agreement. I agree with Archibald99 that his having been born there and having played for their national team rather point to him being Northern Irish. --Guinnog 21:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

1. Nationality is covered by the GFA 2. thats not even the NI flag!--Vintagekits 21:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

If agreement cannot be reached on this I am quite happy to remove all the flag icons in this section. Has O'Neill himself made any statements on what nationality he regards himself to be? If not then we go with the de facto NI flag, the one the national team still uses to represent itself I think. --Guinnog 21:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

My understanding of the honours system would say that O'Neill would not have an OBE if he wasn't British. And I explained the flag in my last edit summary for this. Archibald99 21:29, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Well then, without meaning any disrespect, you dont know what you are talking about--Vintagekits 21:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Err, none taken. But I do know that non British people can only get OBEs etc. in special cases, if you can show me a link to suggest this is the case... Archibald99 21:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The only symbol the NI football team uses officially to represent itself is this [6] just because fans use the former government standard means nothing.--Barry^talk 21:48, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Not so. See for example [7]. --Guinnog 21:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The Irish Football Association does not use and image of the Flag once on its website[8] even in its store compare that to Scotland [9] and England [10]

Nonetheless, UEFA does use the flag on its site to represent NI, which gives us an official justification for regarding this as the flag of NI for football. --Guinnog 22:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean "Nonetheless" - you mean "Nonetheless" that doesnt suit my arguement!--Vintagekits 22:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

"Nonetheless" means much the same as "however". See [11] or any paper dictionary. --Guinnog 22:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Really it that what it means??? What would I do without you? What I was saying, incase it went over your head, is that you dismissed the fact that the IFA dont use that unofficial flag and you tried to dismiss that fact with a "nonetheless"--Vintagekits 22:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Back on Topic: Can you provide a source that says O'Neill is not Northern Irish/British? Archibald99 22:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

1. He is Irish and has stated that in a number of interviews, 2. That is not the flag of Northern Ireland and is only accepted by 1 community and therefore POV--Vintagekits 22:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

It should then be a simple matter to produce a verifiable reference where he says he is not British. I'll support your POV when you produce that reference. Until then, --Guinnog 23:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

That arguement is immaterial and I will one cross that bridge when I come to it. That is not the flag of Northern Ireland so shouldnt be used--Vintagekits 23:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Again, no source. See my edit summary for the last change I made to the MON flag for two or three article links suggesting the contrary. Archibald99 23:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

If I may, this seems like a rather touchy subject and as someone who does not live in either Scotland, Ireland, or Northern Ireland, I will attempt to provide a somewhat neutral view. I have read page upon page regarding nationality flags for players (not managers). As discussed above, Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football/Clubs states that the flag of a player should use the following order of precedence:

• Flag of national team played for
• Flag of citizenship
• Flag of place of birth (if no national caps and no information of citizenship)

Unfortunately, it seems that what one considers him/herself to be is irrelevant. For example, Bobo Balde was born in France but has the flag of Guinea because that is the national team he plays for. Since MON played for the Northern Ireland national team, if one buys the argument that a manager's flag follows the same precedent as a player's flag, then no source is needed as the national team takes precedence. Captkrob 00:45, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

If that is the precedent that is laid down then I accept that, however, that is not the flag of Northern Ireland and should not be used.--Vintagekits 00:48, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I endorse Captkrob's position. Rockpocket 05:17, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I would also accept Captkrob's view. I can't see the logic in your arguement Vintagekits. You state that "(the Ulster banner) is not the flag of Northern Ireland so shouldn’t be used" to represent Northern Ireland, yet you appear intent on replacing the Ulster banner with the RoI flag which equally is not the flag of Northern Ireland, as the Flag of Northern Ireland article states.

Also you accept that MON is Northern Irish in a footballing context, having played for the IFA team yet you want to use the Irish tricolour, which is already used to represent the FAI side, to represent him or other members of the nationalist community. Surely you must recognise that this gives the erroneous impression that he, or any other nationalist player who has represented the IFA side, has represented the FAI side.

I would suggest the logical extension of your position would be to support Guinnog's earlier suggestion of having no flags or banners at all, other than the IFA logo.Caledonian Place 15:51, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

More than one of you are bordering on disrespect, but worse, you're getting off topic. If we're agreed that the precedent holds (people haven't really had enough time to disagree with my previous post), then the only real issue is the flag. It seems that Vintagekits and others have pointed out that is not the proper flag for Northern Ireland. Which, being an myself, it is certainly news to me (amazing what European Soccer teaches you). It seems that this is an extremely important discussion, but one that shouldn't take place in the context of a Scottish soccer team's article. I suggest taking it up on the pages for Northern Ireland, Northern Ireland national football team, or better yet the Flag of Northern Ireland page itself (the last one is actually a rather nice discussion on the topic). The Northern Ireland page refers to that flag as the "former" flag of Northern Ireland (1922-1972) but since the only official flag is , then is used to disambiguate. Perhaps someday one of the flags discussed here will replace it and make this issue easier. Captkrob 17:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Also this article. Archibald99 17:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Captkrob already referred to that (fascinating) article in his post above. I regard the issue as settled for the moment; I intend to refer to it at Talk:Northern Ireland national football team, and have already done so at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Flag icons - manual of style entry?, where I am arguing that overuse of flag icons is detrimental to the project. I am deeply indebted to you for the thoughtful input. --Guinnog 18:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Unless I've misread (more than possible), are they not two separate articles? Archibald99 18:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

It's linked from the word "here" near the end of the post. Easter egg links, tsk tsk. :) Thanks again, I really appreciated the quality and thoughtfulness that went into your contributions. --Guinnog 18:48, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Aah, silly me. Cheers. ;) Archibald99 18:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

(deindent) Here's what the FIFA website has: [12]. I regard that as conclusive. --Guinnog 18:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I think Marin would probably find all this a bit silly. I mean it's a flag for God's sake. A piece of cloth. You can't choose where you were born.... Winterbottom

Player Categories

Mildly related to the above, I've noticed a fair amount of edit warring going on when it comes to Categories on various players. For some reason I seem to recall this happening on Stephen McManus more than anyone else. Recently people have added and removed (multiple times) "Roman Catholic Scots" and "Irish-Scots" (how to wikify?). It seems to me that both of these need some justification, as simply playing for Celtic or having a particular last name does not make one of a particular religion or cultural background. Any insight on what ya'lls individual policies are would be helpful. Captkrob 23:56, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

It happens regularly with players such as Chris Burke and assorted other young Rangers players. The edits are usually made by anons and are wholly unverifiable, as well as, IMO, being deliberately malicious. Archibald99 00:05, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I've been removing them where there seems no justification for them. I'd agree that it seems to have been done on the basis of surname and/or having played for Celtic in many cases, which is not encyclopedic. One was just added to Tommy Burns and rather than revert it I asked the editor who added it to justify why they had done so. However I think these categories should be removed on sight where there is no verifiable evidence for them in the article, and more especially in the cases of living people under WP:BLP. --Guinnog 00:05, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Another article to consider when adding/removing player categories: List of British football players with dual nationality. Shaun Maloney is on there with Ireland and Malaysia listed as alternate nationalities. Captkrob 23:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

IRA songs

I'm indebted to those whose edits led me to follow up "A Soldier's Song". It's, as the anon editor pointed out, the English language version of the Irish national anthem, and as such can be cited as a song of Irish nationalism but not I think of republicanism. I've amended the language of the OF &S section accordingly and also corrected the info about what Lawwell actually said and I realise I buggered it up! I took Quinn's quote as being Lawwell's, sorry, I will just fix it. Here's the quote any way, from http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/sport.cfm?id=1587672006

"Celtic are different, to the extent we have strong Irish roots and Irish links," said Lawwell. "A proportion of our fans celebrate those roots and links by singing Irish ballads. In no way could these ballads be described as sectarian, but I think in some quarters it is misinterpreted as sectarian. It is not sectarian behaviour. There is a difference there. We are a proud Scottish club, but with strong Irish connections. It's a fact and we don't want to hide it."

--Guinnog 23:28, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

"Celtic" Disambiguation

Does anyone else completely disagree with "Celtic" re-directing here? If so, please fix it and any dissenters may post their discussion here. Captkrob 20:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed the relevant part from the article. Here's the RfD page. Archibald99 21:10, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

2004-05 season

Hi,Tims!Please note that I created a plain template for the missing 2004-05 season.Now it needs some information to fill the big gaps.Regards. -Lemmy- 15:06, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Smei-protection

This article should be semi-protected- it is constantly being attacked by anon vandals. Astrotrain 23:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The most notable one being you and your POV pushing!--Vintagekits 23:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Requested [13] Astrotrain 12:06, 10 March 2007 (UTC)