Talk:Wigan Athletic F.C.
Page contents not supported in other languages.
| This is thetalk page for discussing improvements to theWigan Athletic F.C. article. This isnot a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies |
| Find sources: Google (books ·news ·scholar ·free images ·WP refs) ·FENS ·JSTOR ·TWL |
 | This article is ratedB-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The stadium ia located in Newtown, and isn't nearest to Springfield / Beech Hill geographically like some people believe. seefor the club's address on the offical website.
If I'm not mistaken, isn't Newtown mentioned/included in the stadium's address on the back of match tickets? Sorry, no link, I'm afraid. Also, there is poor grammar in the 'Traditions at Wigan Athletic' section: 'Wigans', 'premiership' etc.82.31.33.17821:30, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article could really use a lot more in terms of Wigan's history, especially with the club now playing in the top flight of English football. Perhaps someone more familiar with Wigan's history could add to this article. See otherPremier League teams for examples. -Pal14:56, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
this has been partially resolved to the extent of being able to provide a reasonable history from 1978. other premier league clubs have famous player lists, which could be added, but other than that - its pretty much wholly completed (history at least) ~Markz17
the League table needs to be in table format: anyone up to it?
Most "Capacity" posts do not consider that actual (even verifiably reported) attendance can and does occasionally exceed actual (and reported) capacity. It shouldn't. But sometimes it does, like the first FA Cup Final at the original Wembley. There is a room to quote an official capacity, and also to state the highest actual attendance.ChrisJBenson (talk)23:04, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Today's (26 Dec 2005) attendance has been reported as 25,017 by every source I can find, meaning the capacity of 25,004 stated in the article must be incorrect.Wigan's official site states the capacity as 25,000 exactly,[1] states 24,826. I'm going to put the capacity as 25,017 for now, but if anyone knows the correct figure could they please update itOldelpaso19:25, 26 December 2005 (UTC) ITS 25,138[reply]
-- sorted. the ground has recently had 120 odd seats added.
I am a wiganer and happen to know that the record attendance at the jjb is 25,023 vs liverpool in 2005/2006 season as I went to that match. So far no crowd has surpassed that not in rugby or football. Also every seat was filled for that game there was absolutely no seats left so I'm geussing that is the true capacity.Wiki23509:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The record attendance at the JJB Stadium for Wigan Athletic is 25,133 for a match against Manchester United on May 11, 2008:[2]Dean1960 (talk)21:14, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The official capacity is 25,138 and the latest record attendance was some match vs Manchester United and the attendance was 25,133FootyLad42 (talk)01:12, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of this article is written in the style of a newspaper article. Please consider adding such content and commentary to WikiNews instead.Stifle12:20, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
resolved to an extent in the big edit i made a few weeks ago - Markz17
Should there be a picture of the old 'Tree and Crown' badge on the page? Maybe in the history section.
I AGREE, but dont have the image, anyone can help ? - Markz17
I have a picture, anyone who can put a pic on the page, please e-mail me, [email removed]- Tedders
Why is there a "club captain", "team captain" and "vice captain"? Surely it's just "captain" and "vice captain", the latter being captain a lot due to the former not playing. The captain should neither player be on the pitch is surely not set in stone?
Officialy, Matt Jackson is the club captain but Arjan De Zeeuw has been appointed as the team captain, with Baines as vice. Tedders
I've cleaned up the 'Traditions' section, adding links and improving the ridiculously informal tone and grammar. Also, can i suggest thatKeith Gillespie be included as a notable former player, as his stint at Man United made him fairly famous.82.31.32.4814:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
can someone make a kit that has big shoulders like Wigan's real one?
Aa a couple of users are revert-warring over what kit to use in the infobox, a little discussion wouldn't go amiss. Two points: firstly, the infobox kit representations are supposed to be general, not featuring every last detail and secondly, to meImage:Kit_body_Wigan_home07.png, with its jagged edges does not look much likethe actual kit itself, so thinwhitesides looks like the right template to use.Oldelpaso23:34, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I made a new one!FootyStavros22:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Wigan athletic badge.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used underfair use but there is noexplanation or rationale as to why its use inthis Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to theboilerplate 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 withfair use.
Please go tothe image description page and edit it to include afair use rationale. Using one of the templates atWikipedia: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 oncriteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at theMedia copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk)05:35, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wigan Athletic have revealed a new club crest on their website - can someone legally upload it onto the Wigan page?Steveweiser (talk)18:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"2007/08 Season 17 home games without defeat. They play Manchester United in the last game of the season with the chance to become the only team not to lose at home during the season."
Even as a fan with wishful thinking, I know this is not right. Premierleague.com has them standing at 8-5-6 on the season, far from unbeaten at home. An impressive record, but not unbeaten.I assume it should therefore be removed.NJDevils1087 (talk)05:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
While I accept that Wigan's stint in the Premier League is hugely significant to the club's history, the fact that the last two seasons gets almost three times as much coverage in the "history" section as the preceding 70-odd years is ludicrous. The Premier League section needs trimming considerably......ChrisTheDude (talk)09:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Admittedly this is the case - but attendances have gone up by a factor of 10 since successive promotions - hence recentism is inevitable. I feel that rather than trimming Premier League history extensively - it may be more appropriate for someone to bulk up the early history (seeBlackburn Rovers,Manchester United I'd gladly do it - but sources are difficult to find.markz17 (talk) 04:53, 04 June 2008 (GMT)
Can people please stop messing around with this section by putting in players who haven't even signed Wigan (yet?). Please enter a suitable link as proof, in the players profile. Also the current squad is for those players who have signed professional contracts.—Precedingunsigned comment added byDoctormouse (talk •contribs)13:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure when a player who has just signed up for the club becomes a "former player". Have removed his name from the list of "Notable former players".—Precedingunsigned comment added byKmisra (talk •contribs)08:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
While I'm sure you guys would rather not be reminded of that day(although looking at our respective league positions now, I think you could be said to have had the last laugh :-) ) I was wondering if anyone could tell me who WAFC's captain on the day was, as I understand the usual captain at that time wasCarl Bradshaw, who was left on the bench that day........? --ChrisTheDude (talk)09:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It wasStuart Balmer—Precedingunsigned comment added by80.192.157.226 (talk)13:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Boston United were the Northern Premier League leaders, therefore Wigan, as runners-up were put forward for election." -- I don't see how that follows. Why were Boston United not put up for election? --Jameboy (talk)00:16, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Boston's ground was not up to League standard. Has been amended accordingly.James3500 (talk)14:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Fanbase and Supporters section sounds like it has been hacked several times and is trying to balance some personal opinion and objective facts. There are several sentences that are clearly written by several people e.g.
"Attendances at Wigan Athletic games are certainly disappointing by Premier League standards but easily outweigh those of the Wigan Warriors Rugby League, showing the shift in popularity from the failing Super League side."
I think that this is two sentences, written by two people and the subjective second half is barely worth keeping in this section as there is another section covering this subject. If it is staying then citations are needed for comparing the attendances between the clubs and for suggesting that Wigan Warriors is a 'failing Super League side'. I think the 'failing' adjective should be removed.Amelvin1968 (talk)13:55, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Could do with a cleanup, since there seems to be a lot of players from the past couple of seasons in this section. It's understandable somewhat, but can former loan players such as Marcus Bent and Neil Mellor really be considered "notable"?J Mo 101 (talk)22:00, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are more than a few references to 'the Latics' in the article. Apart from the argument that the term is used in a non-encyclopaedic way, why is there no explantaion anywhere in the article about its use and etymology.Richard Avery (talk)07:17, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've entered in the development squad, in order to bring the page up to the standard of that of other clubs who have theirs listed. All the players listed have been given a squad number by the club (see:http://www.wiganlatics.co.uk/team/player-profile/) so therefore are more than eligible to be mentioned here. I suggest (as in the case of Filip Orsula) once they make a first-time appearance, then they should be entered into the first team squad section.— Precedingunsigned comment added by92.239.69.177 (talk)12:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Martínez and Díaz were not the first. Paul Gascoigne was replaced in the'91 final byNayim.98.251.1.61 (talk)01:10, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wigan is in Lancashire, not Greater Manchester. Greater Manchester is the administration authority. Geographically Wigan is in Lancashire...............— Precedingunsigned comment added by80.192.142.248 (talk)19:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The history section of this article is very long, compared to FA-class articles likeArsenal, which have a "History of-" article. Any support for one for Wigan, and keep the most important information (founding, election, Premier League, League Cup Final, FA Cup win) in a shorter one on this article?Tátótát (talk)18:55, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Earlier today, someone edited the Wigan Athletic F.C. article to readWigan Pathetic Football Club in the club name section on the right-hand side of the article's intro. You'll be pleased to hear that I spotted the error and quickly reverted the edit back to the previous revision from16:03, 26 July 2015 byRichardOwen97. Discovered that the same user had committed the same offence twice, but this time it was in the club name section at the top left of the article.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link onWigan Athletic F.C.. Please take a moment to reviewmy 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 thechecked parameter below totrue orfailed 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 byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online08:03, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I dont know how to edit the kit, can someone do it?FootyLad42 (talk)01:13, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links onWigan Athletic F.C.. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
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 byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)06:50, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links onWigan Athletic F.C.. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
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 byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)01:09, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It strikes me that, given the club's name is a collective noun, that it should be treated as singular, rather than plural (e.g. 'the club was' rather than 'the club were') in almost all scenarios. American English calls for these to always be treated as singular, whilst British English calls for either singular or plural depending on whether the group is being considered as a composite whole or individual members (with all references in the article, I believe, falling into the former camp). See the 'that team' referencehere for reference.WP:MOS calls for commonality in use of language where possible and, given that British English allows for either, the use of it as a singular would seem the right choice here even if the argument on who, exactly, we're referring to is dismissed.Itsfini (talk)00:57, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
HelloUser:Sir Knson (I am assuming you were also the unnamed IP editor reverting previous changes). You have been repeatedly reversing changes made by multiple editors - see alsoWP:3RR - without explanation. From my point of view, it is inappropriate to be stating Wigan Athletic "is" (present tense), when the rest of the paragraph is about the past ("was"). The section is about the history of the club. The longer wording establishes a strong link from the demise of Wigan Borough to earlier previous history. Please give reasons for your changes and work to build consensus.Paul W (talk)16:27, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
