Talk:Tranmere Rovers F.C./Archive 1

Archive 1

most significant games

I'd have a doubt as to whether to two play off semi-final defeats could be counted as amongst Tranmeres most significant results. The first perhap's solely for marking the end of the King era - in terms of the actual football, the more important games then were any of those at the end of the season that stopped us getting the second automatic spot.

The second was just a crap dire result, it stopped us going up, but it wasnt that that actually changed the team.

Alternative suggestins would have to include: 3-1 victory over Villa in the first leg of the Leage Cup semi 4-3 comeback over Southampton in the FA Cup beating Newcastle in the League s Centenary tournament (all referred to in body of the article)

• The person who originally put the most memorable games originally had the idea to put in ten but either couldn't find any more than four or gave up. I'm sure there are more memorable games than the play off loss last year but it did partly cause last season's poor campaign (Pally01 12:27, 23 June 2006 (UTC))
• interesting - I'll try and get some of the other sin then. There was a '73 result that the official site lists as another lifetime highlights, sadly I was a tad too young for that

Belboid 12:34, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

(Belboid 13:11, 23 June 2006 (UTC))

Well 'significant results' are distinct from 'highlights'. Under the latter heading one would certainly include the 3-0 FA Cup win at Goodison Park in 2001. Nicander 18:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Chris Malkin

I just created his article, due to his being Blackpool's record signing, but I'll leave it to those in the know as to whether he should be in Tranmere's "notable players" list. - Dudesleeper · Talk 13:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

A note on British English

British English should be used for articles on Britain related topics. Likewise, American English should be used on articles pertaining to American topics. For a clearer example, please visit this sub-section on the differences between their usage. However, is" works better than "are" with the term club as it is a singular and not a plural noun. (Compare with the word team which is a plural noun) --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 18:40, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

'Team' is a collective noun and therefore singular, not a plural noun. Nicander 19:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

In America yes... but I think you'll find that in British English... team is a plural noun. So it should read 'Tranmere are' rather than 'Tramere is'... This is the convention used by both the BBC and Sky Sports. Will --172.212.70.110 17:33, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Famous fans

Look. Ray Stubbs played for Tranmere so comes under past players, the Weston spirit supports Tranmere but doesn't mean that Simon Weston supports them. Routledge and Jackson were born in Birkenhead, but it doesn't mean they support Tranmere. You'll be putting Daniel Craig in next.... (Quentin X 12:58, 26 November 2006 (UTC))

Ray Stubbs is a tranmere fan, Quentin. So it's been added again.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.27.251 (talk • contribs)

Simon Weston does support Tranmere quentin. Don't be a geek all your life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.27.251 (talk • contribs)

Simon weston is an irregular attendee at the club a'hole, so take that lilly white head out of your lilly white supporting a'hole and get with the programme.

Simon Weston Does attend Rovers Games! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.139.195.38 (talk • contribs).

If you can cite somewhere that states that Simon Weston is a Tranmere fan then please do. If not then leave your name calling to the terraces. (Quentin X 21:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC))

I'll say it again. Ray Stubbs played for Tranmere. Either have him there are have him in famous fans. It's like saying Dixie Dean is a fan or Steve Coppell. Personally I hope Tranmere get promoted this year, but this is not a debate about who loves their team more. Either have him in one or in the other, not both. And you should really desist from calling me names. It's just boring. And it will cause you to be banned from editing for a while. (Quentin X 23:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC))

He was a boyhood Tranmere fan, and he appeared briefly for Tranmere. His main career has been in radio and TV. So I think he should be included. Why should you have the final say Quentin? Escpeically when you support a team we all hate-Bolton. I think you may be slightly biased against us.... and thanks for saying you hope we get promotion, I, of course, hope you get into Europe (cough,splutter) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.27.251 (talk • contribs)

Simon Weston sat a few rows behind me in the Kop some seasons ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.68.229 (talk • contribs)

Simple then, I'll just take him out of famous former players seeing as he never actually played for you. (Quentin X 13:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC))

Thanks, I never added him to former players. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.27.251 (talk • contribs)

What. you can have a player who also supports the club, so we can put Ray Stubbs in both. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.83.8.26 (talk • contribs)

To the Scouser who keeps vandaling the page and saying how Tranmere are overshadowed by Everton/Liverpool, please stop doing it, bindipper. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.27.251 (talk • contribs)

When did the "Famous fans" section get deleted? I don't see why we can't have Ray Stubbs as a former player and supporter. It's documented that he played for the club and I've seen him say he's a fan more than once on the TV. I've also seen Simon Weston at games; and whilst I can't say he's told me he's a fan, I can't think of a good reason for him to come unless he is.

i think you can be a former player and fan. i would view gary lineker as a leicester city fan as well as a former player. i would view him as a former everton player but not an everton fan. ray stubbs has, on numerous occasions, claimed to be a tranmere fan on national tv. if you asked ray stubbs who he supports he would say tranmere.. so surely he has the deciding vote? the very fact that we are talking about him makes him famous.. he is famous.. and a tranmere fan. and thus a famous tranmere fan. end of. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.49.56 (talk) 13:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Viking name?

"Tranmere Rovers F.C. are the only team in the English league with a Viking name. " What does that mean? Lots of town names came from the Vikings. --AW 14:21, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

It means precisely that- Tranmere are the only team in the league with a Nordic/Viking-derived name. The Viking influence is stronger on the Wirral Pensinsula than most other places in the UK. Many of its place names, such as Pensby, Irby, Greasby etc are Nordic-derived. If you can find another football league team with a Viking name, then go ahead, you'll be a long time looking. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.229.27.251 (talk • contribs).

How about Scunthorpe United. According to the Scunthorpe article "The town appears in the Domesday Book (1086) as Escumetorp, which is Old Norse for "Skuma's homestead", a site which is believed to be in the town centre close to where the present-day Market Hill is located." I'm going to change this to "one of the only names..." --AW 18:51, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Or Grimsby? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mogsy7 (talk • contribs) 16:24, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Kit

"The 2006/07 away kit is black with silver trim." Should the away picture be updated? It's all yellow --AW 18:55, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Doesnt matter now the new one is yellow -- curttrfc —Preceding comment was added at 18:13, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

oops!

Sorry. I reverted the wrong edit! I'll fix it. --PabloMartinez 20:01, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Tracrest.gif

Image:Tracrest.gif 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 02:48, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

The Dave Watson era - note on the 2001-02 season

Just one thing that I think is a little inaccurate and sorry to labour a point.

No-one (outside of the Wirral anyway)expected Tranmere Rovers to win the division now known as League One in the post-relegation 2001-02 season. Of the trio relegated from what is now the Championship in 2001, both Tranmere and QPR had been relegated by a considerable margin in the end and both clubs were still in severe financial difficulties. The Rovers team would probably need a little time to pick itself up and Dave Watson was a rookie manager. At least one season of consolidation below the play-offs to mid-table looked on the cards for both of this pair before they started to really move forward again. Of the three who came down the ones who seemed likeliest to challenge at the time were in fact Huddersfield, who had gone on a strong run and been about to pull off a big relegation escape only to blow it on the last day of the season (the Terriers' financial meltdown hit some 12 - 18 months later).

At any rate Reading were the clear title favourites in that league that year (as they had been the previous year only failed to make it). After the Royals Stoke and Bristol City looked the next likeliest as well as Wigan who were big players by now. Also Cardiff seemed well-backed (even if nothing is necessarily as it appears under the Sham) having come out of the basement division along with Brighton. Even Wycombe, having just played in an FA Cup semi-final, may have looked a better bet to some than Rovers at that point in their history.

It wasn't until that strong run in the latter stages of the 2002-03 season that saw Rovers so nearly catch up with the top six from a long way out that Tranmere looked genuinely ready to claim their place in the second tier back again.

172.188.106.137 (talk) 11:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

'Chairman'??

I guess it's a standard thing on the football pages for it to say who the 'Chairman' is, but Rovers' 'Chairman' is not a man. Maybe Wikipedia should think about a bit of gender neutrality. BonRouge 13:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)BonRouge

There's no need for politically correct terms to start being used on this page! Chairman is fine, and indeed, Lorraine often referred to herself as the chairman!

As far as I'm aware, Lorraine Rogers has always used the term 'Chairman' (such as in her programme notes), and not asked to be called 'Chairwoman' or similar. -- Mogsy7 (talk) 21:10, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

As PJ is now back in charge, and a man, this one can be laid to rest —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.193.72.77 (talk) 19:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

100%

I don't think that the fact that Tranmere have a 100% record is warranted. I've got a 100% record in my house as the only person to live there who has scored at Deepdale but I haven't stuck that in Preston's history.

(Pally01 18:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC))

i like that fact actually, your comparison doesnt really work imo

(Belboid 13:26, 23 June 2006 (UTC))

• I disagree. Man Utd. are the only club to have a 100% record at Northampton, Bolton at Halifax etc.. If you include this fact on the Tranmere page it could cause lots of unneccessary info on other teams pages. (Pally01 12:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC))

• Surely Tranmere fans should have the final say over this- as you are obviously not a Tranmere fan if you supprt the knobbers (Bolton as you admit on your page) Butt out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.27.251 (talk • contribs)

as a tranmere fan i dont agree that we should have the final say. wikipedia belongs to everyone, including the tranmere rovers page. it is a souce of information to anyone who wants it. however, i think we should be alowed to claim that we are the only british team with a 100% record at the highbury stadium because it is true. yes, you argue man utd could write the same about northampton or whoever but that is not the same. that doesnt surprise anyone. i think by the very nature of the size of the two different clubs (arsenal and tranmere) it is an interesting fact. if some other club the size of tranmere had that fact it would interest me and i would like to read about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.49.56 (talk) 13:31, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I dont agree with the part where its not put down that we arent rivals with liverpool, Yes we are. As we are with Everton and Bolton —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.27.60.27 (talk) 16:45, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Biggest rivals - neutrality

I have had a go at tidying up the rivals section, which is tagged for disputed neutrality. I've taken out some of the most obvious POV statements and tried to reduce the section - most clubs' pages have a much shorter section about rivalries. It's not perfect, but if anyone else would like to further update this section, then perhaps the tag could be removed. Mogsy7 (talk) 13:21, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I tried to "neutralise" the section by massively shortening it. I wasn't sure if all the detail on rivalries was necessary .U+003F (talk) 18:49, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

The best tranmere matches are the ones with joshhhh heywooooooddddd. we suck on mars bars, but he fails to win everytime :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.245.51 (talk) 23:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

History

The article had become very long, and dominated by the history, so I split the page U+003F (talk) 14:24, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

One Les Parry or two?

Current manager; former centre back? One person or two? The places of birth and ages suggest that unity of persons is possible, as did one piece in the Guardian, but anonymous editors have been disassociating the two. Can anyone refer us to anything that will determine the matter?

Two different people. Well known fact amongst Tranmere fans, but if any further proof is needed please read the complete history of tranmere rovers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.131.176 (talk) 22:41, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

To avoid forking the discussion, could replies be directed to the appropriate section at WT:FOOTY. Thanks Kevin McE (talk) 09:09, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Bert Cooke

I see that Tranmere's manager Bert Cooke (1912-35) doesn't have a wikipage. Is it possible that Bert Cooke is in fact former Port Vale player Albert Cook and there's a spelling error somewhere along the way? U+003F^? 22:36, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tranmere Rovers F.C./GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'll begin a review now and make straightforward copyedits as I go. (Hey I thought this looked familiar...here we go again) Please revert if I inadvertently guff the meaning. I'll jot queries below: Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I must say, scanning over it - that if you feel you've added everything you want to, then merging with History of Tranmere Rovers F.C. looks to me like a good idea. If you look at Wikipedia:FA#Sport_and_recreation and scan some of the football FAs such as Sunderland A.F.C., York City F.C., and Luton Town F.C. for starters, you can see they are big or bigger than a combination of the two articles on Tranmere. Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

The two articles were split because the history bit was so long (not to mention unreferenced, and a copyright infringement). It's somewhat slimmer now, and could go back. Here's a test merge. However, I note that this comes to 65k in size, and WP:SIZERULE suggests that such an article should be divided. U+003F^? 10:45, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Ahaa, no they are two different measurements - the readable prose size is only 17 kB (2908 words) - you can put the tool in your monobook here at User:Dr pda/prosesize.js - once loaded you get a "page size" in your toolbox in hte left hand column. Very useful. So this could be double the size and not need splitting. I think a single merged article is a major improvement and something that could with some polish and review end up at FAC. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:38, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Great, thanks for the pointer. A couple of questions: can I just perform a merge now, or does it have to be put up for discussion? And: can the GA review carry on, or would it have to be restarted after such a big change to the article? U+003F^? 13:59, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Scratch the questions, I've fired ahead and merged the two articles. U+003F^? 16:46, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Right then, on to business....some comprehensiveness queries first.

You have both "Superwhites" and "Super whites" in the article, choose one (like occurs in sources) and align all the spelling.

 Done U+003F^? 11:25, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Anything about the club badge/emblem? And have their been more than one?

 Done U+003F^? 12:07, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Anything about rivalries?

 Done U+003F^? 12:07, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Anything about fans? fanzines? publications both official and unofficial?

 Done U+003F^? 12:07, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Now prose/referencing queries.....

1. Well written?:

Prose quality:

Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:

Citations to reliable sources, where required: - just one tag to fix.

No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:

Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:

Pass or Fail: - just one tag to fix but looking good. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:45, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Tag fixed in my absence! U+003F^? 23:38, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Aha, so it was, ok done then. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:50, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Merge

As proposed in the GA review. U+003F^? 16:45, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Current kit images

Sometime in December 2015, someone removed the pictures of the current kit. It was then "reversed" by another editor, but that edit reversal resulted in a new kit that appears green for the away and white with green stripes for the home kit. I'm not sure if that's just an off blue or if there's some error that has been made. Can someone review the images and see if they need to be corrected? It doesn't seem to agree with the introductory paragraphs which indicate white with blue. 71.170.31.210 (talk) 18:53, 11 April 2016 (UTC)