Talk:FC Sachsen Leipzig

Fair use rationale for Image:Sachsen Leipzig 3.png

Image:Sachsen Leipzig 3.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

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

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

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:33, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

---

BSC Chemie Leipzig → BSG Chemie Leipzig – Typing error Abcmaxx (talk) 15:02, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

• Support. Move to the correct and WP:COMMONNAME, see [1]. Zarcadia (talk) 15:55, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
• Support per nom & Zarcadia. ^walk victor falk ^talk 13:23, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Returned to FC Sachsen Leipzig

Gentlemen, the previous page move made the English wiki the ONLY wiki that identified the team as BSG Chemie in all of wikidom (yes, including the German wiki), which puts it out of step. Please have a look at the discussion on my talk page. Moving the page within a week of the collapse of the club is somewhat premature. The longterm fate of the team certainly isn't settled out and the move ignores the last two-and-a-half decades of history. That's a bit of wp:recentism, don't you think? Wiggy! (talk) 06:20, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

BSG Chemie Leipzig, FC Sachsen Leipzig and BSG Chemie Leipzig

I think that it is a mistake to try do describe four or five clubs (BSG Chemie Leipzig, FC Sachsen Leipzig, BSG Chemie Leipzig, SG Leipzig Leutzsch/SG Sachsen Leipzig and LFV Sachsen Leipzig) in one article. I understand that the clubs are connected, but honestly, the article has become quite confusing. I think that at least the new BSG Chemie Leipzig deserves its own article and that we should end this article by describing that the club folded in 2011 and its successor clubs. In this article, it is not even mentioned that the new BSG Chemie Leipzig was founded in 1997. All I can see is that FC Sachsen Leipzig was somehow "refounded" as BSG Chemie Leipzig in 2011. How am I from that supposed to understand that BSG Chemie Leipzig was founded already in 1997? /EriFr (talk) 10:30, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

I agree, it is extremely confusing. The same is also the case for the other traditional Leipzig club. It was VfB, then eventually became Lok, then VfB again and now it's Lok once more. I'm not so sure all of those reincarnations in both Lok and Chemies case are really direct successors! Calistemon (talk) 21:39, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

This article is indeed needlessly confusing. The title - FC Sachsen Leipzig - is that of the club that existed between 1990 and 2011. The lead section, however, starts with describing BSG Chemie Leipzig as an existing club, thus giving the impression that this article is about the club that was founded in 1997. That club has the same name as the historic Chemie Leipzig that existed between 1949 and 1990. The contemporary namesake is however only one of the clubs that claim to be a successor of the historic Chemie Leipzig, the other being SG Sachsen Leipzig (although that club is no longer active).

There are three options to solve this problem. The first is to rename this article BSG Chemie Leipzig (1997), focus the article on the current club and rewrite the history-section as to describe all the other clubs as predecessors. This is the easiest solution, but given the distinct history of all these clubs, probably not the best one.

A better solution would be to focus this article on FC Sachsen Leipzig, as the title indicates, and create two new articles for the historic BSG Chemie Leipzig and its contemporary namesake. This is how the German Wikipedia does it.

The thirth option is to consider FC Sachsen Leipzig as the successor of the historic Chemie Leipzig, and describe the histories of these two clubs in this article (together with the brief overview of the pre-WWII clubs). In that case, a new article BSG Chemie Leipzig (1997) should be created.

I think the thirth solution combines the best of the other two options, and I think this is the one to choose. Tridek Sep (talk) 06:54, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

I think we need to proceed with this. The article is quite confused, and it is very hard to develop the section on recent history. There are now two distinct lines of successor clubs (or more precisely, clubs claiming to be successors): (1) the line that draws on the traditions of BSG Chemie Leipzig (now represented by BSG Chemie Leipzig (1997)) and (2) the line that draws on the traditions of FC Sachsen Leipzig (now represented by LFV Sachsen Leipzig). I vote for the second option (how the German Wikipedia does it), secondly on the third option. Best regards. /EriFr (talk) 22:07, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

TuRa Leipzig and "Lokomotive Leipzig"?

The article says:

"The prewar identity of the club is rooted in the establishment of Britannia Leipzig in 1899 and its successor TuRa Leipzig. During the Soviet era the traditions of the club were continued in the East German teams BSG Chemie Leipzig and Lokomotive Leipzig before the emergence of FC Sachsen Leipzig following German reunification.[1]"

"Lokomotive Leipzig", could refer to SC Lokomotive Leipzig (1954-1963) or 1. FC Lokomotive Leipzig (1966-1991). These are two separate clubs. It is not clear which one of these clubs the text refers to, but "Lokomotive Leipzig" is linked to 1. FC Lokomotive Leipzig. Do you think that is correct? I think not. Take a look at this map: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5c/FC_Sachsen_Leipzig_grafische_Historie.png I do not have acess the source ("Enzyklopädie des deutschen Ligafußballs 7"), but I can't see any particulary strong connetions between Tura Leipzig and 1. FC Lokomotive Leipzig. I believe the text should say "SC Lokomotive Leipig".

/EriFr (talk) 10:23, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

• Added archive https://archive.is/20130205181836/http://www.uber-football.com/2012/05/rest-of-leipzig.html to http://www.uber-football.com/2012/05/rest-of-leipzig.html

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:05, 27 September 2017 (UTC)