Talk:Expansion of the A-League Men

Expansion Colours

In regards to expansion colours where does it state that Melbourne 'Heart' will be Red and white? Auxodium III 16:44, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Well Carls12 originally uploaded the image File:MelbourneHeartColours.png under the name MelbHeartLikelyColours, however I uploaded the same image under the current name for consistency, as we can always upload a new version with updated colours if the need arises. I've asked Carls12 to join this discussion to give his reasons. Also, when starting a discussion on any talk page, please use the "new section" or "+" button on the top of the page. Thanks, timsdad ^(talk) 06:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Is the pre A-League history really relevant here?

Under the sub-heading Foundation we have almost 700 words on things that happened before the A-League existed. Doesn't seem relevant to an article on the Expansion of the A-League. HiLo48 (talk) 07:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

It's now over three weeks since I made this comment. Does anybody care?

(I do note that a lot of those who frequently edit soccer article seem to rarely to look at Discussion pages.) HiLo48 (talk) 08:49, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

seems to be fine... --Auxodium III 08:24, 20 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Auxodium III (talk • contribs)

That national Soccer League is very important to how the A-League has been created. You just cant ignore the bloody previous 27 years... goodness sake.--124.169.220.73 (talk) 04:38, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

...and speculation is getting a bit out of control here

Wikipedia has policies against speculation at wp:speculation. While an article of this nature must address some plans for the future, everything in the Future section must be in doubt. HiLo48 (talk) 08:46, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Fury Fail

Needs somethign to say about NQ Fury being given the boot!--TinTin (talk) 04:58, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Expansion of the A-League. 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:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2008/03/20/12353_news.html
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2008/03/20/12353_news.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080504060814/http://www.news.com.au:80/mercury/story/0,22884,23626990-13222,00.html to http://www.news.com.au/mercury/story/0,22884,23626990-13222,00.html

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: 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:05, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Expansion of the A-League. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20070318152841/http://stuff.co.nz/3987779a1823.html to http://www.stuff.co.nz/3987779a1823.html

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: 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:08, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Expansion of the A-League. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://stuff.co.nz/3987779a1823.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120906084642/http://au.fourfourtwo.com:80/news/249803,let-the-sunshine-in-to-a-league.aspx to http://au.fourfourtwo.com/news/249803,let-the-sunshine-in-to-a-league.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080905071209/http://au.fourfourtwo.com/news/65860,tasmania-wants-aleague-bid.aspx to http://au.fourfourtwo.com/news/65860,tasmania-wants-aleague-bid.aspx

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) 05:57, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Don't bother changing this page

There is a user who claims ownership and will just revert everything you do and not even contact you to discuss why they flushed your hard work down the toilet. Well I am not interested in a revert war with children so I did not revert their deletion of my contribution but I thought I should warn anyone else. Just don't bother. It will be hard work for nothing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.138.164.191 (talk) 04:18, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

There's this user who doesn't understand that there is this thing called "formatting". Flushing your "hard work" down the toilet? In case you didn't notice, I kept your edit from the 24th of December in? Your whinging would have at very least a leg to stand on if you went through the hard work of actually making the template that you demanded that needed to be there, but instead you red-linked the incorrectly named "Template:2018-2019 Bid Interest" and wanted someone else to create your template for you?
- J man708 (talk) 12:12, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

EDIT - Also, learn where the bottom of a talk page is. Your whinging isn't brang to the fore because it's so important that everyone must stop what they're doing to read it! - J man708 (talk) 12:13, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Kind of harder to contact someone when they edit from an IP, and not from a named account. --SuperJew (talk) 16:58, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks anony user 144.138.164.191 if you are still about. I was about to do a lot of updates and improvements to this page - but if this Jman fellow is an obsessive territorial type then I won't waste my time. By the way - I looked at what you wrote in the history. Cracking stuff. Keep at it. Don't let losers like that get you down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.34.201.158 (talk) 01:27, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Was going to do a big update, but if yours was deleted by this Jman wanker then I certainly will not bother. Gotta love these dicks who think that they own pages. 49.2.28.84 (talk) 14:56, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Criteria for a bid

What is the criteria for a bid to be included on this article? I think a set of criteria needs to be established to prevent this page becoming purely speculative. For instance the Launceston article appears to be based entire on "Mark Bosnich thinks it would be a cool idea", which I think doesn't warrant inclusion. The speculation about the NT also appears to be a Chief Minister thinks it's a good idea, rather than anything formal. These are quite different from Hobart based Tasmanian bid, Geelong bid, South Melbourne bid and the previous Canberra bid, which have /had detailed plans. I think as a minimum, some kind of organisation should exist for it to be considered credible, and viable for inclusion. Perhaps they have to have formally made a bid / expression of interest to FFA? I am open to ideas, just needs to be cleared up a bit. --TinTin (talk) 03:28, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

"Fastest growing area"

User:CJinoz wants to include the above descriptor in the text about Dandenong in the Markets under consideration.... section. My position is that the expression is only ever used in marketing style language, and has no precise meaning. My next door neighbour's block of land is a faster growing area. It has grown at a rate of 50% per annum recently because they have had two kids in two years. It all depends on the area you choose. There is no formal statistic available that tells about "Fastest growing areas". Sourcing is irrelevant. The expression is a perfect example of weasel wording. It does not help the case for that location, and does not belong in Wikipedia. HiLo48 (talk) 03:03, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Casey/South east Melbourne is verifiably one of the fastest-growing areas if not nationally then at least in Victoria. I could overload with links but all you need to do is check out a simple news search. As far as I can tell from articles about the bid (again, referenced), this is part of what makes the bid viable and is being used to promote the area as a preferred option for an expansion team. The wording could be tightened perhaps but I maintain that it is relevant. ... Thanks,   CJ [a Kiwi] in  Oz  03:58, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

You have failed to respond to any of my concerns. For starters, define "area" in "fastest-growing area". HiLo48 (talk) 04:24, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

As I said, the wording could be tightened. I responded to your concerns above - you say "fastest growing" is only used in marketing, I have provided you a number of references based on statistics. You have your opinion, I have mine, hopefully an uninvolved editor could have a look. ... Thanks,   CJ [a Kiwi] in  Oz  08:35, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

I am completely uninvolved. My interest is in encyclopaedic use of language, not tabloid language copied from the Herald Sun. I abhor the expression "fastest growing". The example of my neighbours proved its pointlessness. I agree more eyes would be welcome. HiLo48 (talk) 09:42, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

You interpret it one way, I interpret it a different way. By uninvolved editor I mean someone who is neither your nor me but can pop a fresh set of eyes across this. ... Thanks,   CJ [a Kiwi] in  Oz  16:32, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

I don't think we interpret it any differently at all. That would be difficult to do. We just have different views on the point of using such an expression. HiLo48 (talk) 08:08, 18 May 2018 (UTC)