Jump to content

User talk:Delusion23/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

You changed a date on the article. Did you have a reason for doing so? Britmax (talk) 19:23, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

NPL

Regardless of whether it's ever happened before or not - promotion to the Conference South is possible and needs to be displayed in the article. Southern league teams can be promoted to the Conference North and it works both ways. Nobody knows what the geographical make-up of the Conference North-South teams is going to be so any guesswork now is crystal balling. It needs to be put back in, but I don't like to edit-war, so it'd be better if you did it. Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:41, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Obviously it doesn't matter where Chasetown are in relation to the Conference South clubs... if there are 22 clubs at that level that are further north than Chasetown, then Chasetown would enter the Conference South on promotion. Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Appolgies for seeming like I'm trying to start an edit war. I'd like to explain my reasoning:

As you know, 6 teams are promoted from level 7 to level six at the end of the season. 2 each from NPL, Southern League and Isthmian League.

3 most northern teams go to Conference North. 3 most southern teams go to Conference South.

This season there is only 1 team in SL/IL which is further north than Chasetown (Hednesford Town by a couple of miles). If they are promoted to Conference North they are not going to displace the 2 NPL teams as they are guaranteed to be further north than any other team that could possibly be promoted from SL/IL. Hednesford would instead displace other SL/IL teams from entering Conference North.

I agree that if both teams promoted from the SL are further north than an NPL team they displace them to Conference South. I'm just pointing out that this season this cannot possibly happen. Other seasons in the future maybe.

Hope this explains why both teams promoted this year would go to the Conference North. Delusion23 (talk) 19:12, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

It's more complicated than that. It's not always the case that the three most northern clubs go to the North, and the others to the South. It depends on the location of the clubs already at level 6. How about if Altrincham, Gateshead, Southport and Barrow all get relegated from the Conference National? Not a highly likely instance, but possible. All four are further north than Chasetown, and there'd be a possibility that Chasetown would find themselves further south than 22 other level six clubs, therefore they'd play in the Conference South. There's also the possibility of clubs at level 5 or 6 going bust and being demoted below level 6. The point is that it is possible this season, and we won't know until the end of the season. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:36, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Very true, I hadn't considered the relegation of clubs from the Conference National. I'll change it back to the conference north/south we had before. I propose that once we know at the end of an NPL season we update it to either conference north or conference south depending on where the champions end up, for clarity, as has been done in past seasons. Keep up the good work with the league updates by the way! :) Delusion23 (talk) 19:48, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Yep, I'd agree with that - once we know where the champions are headed (and you're right that it's a near-certainty), we can make it clear in the table. Thanks for the compliment, and thanks for doing the updates when I'm busy elsewhere - saved me quite a bit of time when I came back from holiday a few weeks back and you'd done the NPL tables :) Bretonbanquet (talk) 01:04, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
And thanks for tidying up that Southern League map. Someone put it on the talk page saying he didn't know how to add it to the article, so I just bunged it on there even though it looked a bit of a mess and Chippenham was in the sea! Maps aren't my strong point but it looks a lot better now :) Bretonbanquet (talk) 01:07, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, no worries with the map. Most of the hard work (coorinates and team names) had been done already by the person who put it on the talk page. Got the hang of maps after a lot of trial and error to work out how the code works. The Isthmian League one I've just done was horrible! If there were a map that zoomed into the different regions of England it would be better. Delusion23 (talk) 19:19, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Whitley Bay Copypaste

Out of curiousity, was my guess as http://nlextra.wordpress.com/featured-clubs-2/ as your suspected copypaste source correct? (Don't know Whitley Bay well enough to write it myself, I've been doing Ashington. :) - Wmcduff (talk) 13:07, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

While I was sorting out spelling/grammar/sentence structure issues I noticed that it was more or less directly copied from [1]. It's a good source for the history of the team but obviously copy/paste has copyright issues attached to it. :) Delusion23 (talk) 13:11, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Determining notability

Please don't take offence to this question, but what level of checking that has gone into determining whether or not a club has participated in the FA Cup? I only ask because you have tagged a lot of articles in a very short space of time. Regards, —WFC— 14:47, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Shortcut
No worries, I simply checked the articles to see if they made any reference to playing in the FA Cup and if there was no reference I added a template. If the club has actually played in the FA Cup then this should be added to the article and the template removed as this is the criteria for football team notability in England. It's a cut off point to make sure Wikipedia doesn't become full of articles/stubs on sunday-league football teams. If I've made any mistakes then apologies, but there are a lot of clubs that have debatable notability and I was simply flagging as many as I could find.
See the shortcut in this section for info on football notability. Regards :) Delusion23 (talk) 14:56, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough (using the FA Cup as a barometer is the one WP:FOOTY guideline I actually agree with!). Provided that articles aren't actually PROD-ded at that sort of rate, I guess there's no problem with marking them as potentially not notable. Regards, —WFC— 15:06, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Might be handy to stick a note on the talk page for each one (a pain I know, but, you know, copy and paste and all...) as it's not clear to the casual observer why they've been tagged - and I note at least two which have been untagged without anything added to the article to demonstrate the notability. Blue Square Thing (talk) 21:02, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
I'll start pasting the reasons for the flagging onto the talk pages but it'd be quicker if I weren't the only person attempting it as there are over 100 different non-notable football teams. Thanks for letting me know that the templates have been removed from some without improvement. May take a while before any real consensus is formed though.
Okay, every single football team I can find below level 10 that has not played (or at least been noted to have played) have now been flagged as of dubious notability. Took less time than I thought it would. Delusion23 (talk) 00:46, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
I'd say there is pretty clear consensus to use the FA Cup as the yardstick (barring clubs that meet the GNG of course). I'd say give it a week or so, AfD one article that you're nigh on sure have never played in the FA Cup, and take it from there. —WFC— 06:50, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Just to ask, why is WP:FOOTYN being used? It is only an essay, and has been totally discredited at many AfDs. I may also point out that whilst I once agreed with the player side of the criteria, that of entering a country's national cup for clubs is a very poor one, and seemingly not thought through at all - in France I believe many thousands of clubs enter the Coupe de France. I would therefore ignore it as a barometer of notability. To date we have used FA Cup, FA Trophy and FA Vase as a notability yardstick for English clubs, and it seems to have worked fine. Number 57 08:38, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

PS - you tagged this article despite it clearly stating that the club have played in the FA Cup. Number 57 08:38, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
I've initiated an AfD on this matter. I had long been under the impression that the FA Cup was considered as the basic barometer; if Number 57 is right, the AfD should at least give a little clarity to that. Regardless of which way the final decision goes, it will hopefully be based on a strong set of arguments one way or the other, which should serve us well going forward. —WFC— 09:11, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Apologies, I acknowledge the mistake on the Achilles site, but I was going through the articles at a fast pace in order to get through them all. The notability criteria can been seen as a tad ambiguous so any clarity that can be given to the matter would be helpful. Whether or not many of the flagged articles are eventually deleted, several were nothing more than 1 line explaining that it was a football team from the same name as the village they play. I would not be against many of these clubs being merged with the article for the village or town they play in (in for example a Sports section). I'll place several articles into AfD and we can take it from there. A merger may be a simple compromise. Delusion23 (talk) 10:53, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
I don't think multiple AfDs is the way to go. Start small. —WFC— 11:06, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
That's fine. I've put an AfD on one page with the aim of starting a discussion about the criteria as a whole. See Cowfold F.C.. Delusion23 (talk) 11:08, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Just seen that you've put an AfD on another article (Crane Sports F.C.) which is probably a better example as they have competed in the F.A. Vase but not the F.A. Cup. The one I highlighted has not competed in either and so will most likely be deleted with few complaints. Delusion23 (talk) 11:29, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Overton United F.C.

I removed the proposed deletion tag you placed on Overton United F.C., as the article has been discussed at Articles for deletion in the past and per policy is now permanently ineligible for deletion via proposed deletion. Compliance with policy is the only reason I did this, and I have no comment one way or the other on the merits of deletion. If you still believe the article should be deleted, feel free to list it at Articles for deletion again, making sure to follow the instructions at WP:AFDHOWTO. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:27, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip :) Knew there were 2 types of deletion process but wasn't sure which one to use in this situation. Delusion23 (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Similar procedural removal of proposed deletion tags at Colden Common F.C., Fleetlands F.C. and Sporting Bishops Waltham F.C.. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:04, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 2010–11 Northern Premier League Challenge Cup

The article 2010–11 Northern Premier League Challenge Cup has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

List of this season's results in football knockout competition open to members of league at levels 7 and 8 of the English football league system. No evidence of general notability via significant media coverage.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

For the same reason I am proposing deletion of 2010–11 Northern Premier League President's Cup. Struway2 (talk) 15:56, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletions

Hello. Just to let you know I've removed the proposed deletion tags from Liss Athletic F.C. and Locks Heath F.C., both of which played at level 10 in the Wessex League Div 1 relatively recently, and from Winchester Castle F.C., who played in the Hampshire League at what equates to current level 10. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:57, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough, probably a good idea to make this clearer on their article pages, maybe mentioning that the teams' highest league position at their highest level is level 10? I'm all for keeping articles where teams have played at level 10, it just wasn't clear from the article or refs. Thanks.Delusion23 (talk) 12:09, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

You may be interested

...in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Notability of season articles for minor cups. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:37, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, when you add coordinates to articles, as you did here, please don't be overly precise. Six places of decimals on degrees is about 10 cm - for a railway or Metrolink station, four places (10 m accuracy) should be enough. Thanks. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:19, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Apologies, didn't know that. Cheers. Delusion23 (talk) 17:35, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that

Hi, I didn't reply to your first message because I was worried my article might be discovered as well! As it is I see Struway had already spotted it. I definitely think there's a case for notability concerns, although I have just posed a conundrum on WT:FOOTY which is an argument for avoiding the split. I'm not too fussed about it though. —Half Price 18:59, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey, no worries. I was also worried about some kind of issue coming up about my North West Counties League articles! But it seems the consensus is okay with league seasons so long as the teams themselves are notable and the articles are well written/referenced. You made a good point, the merger for the NPL cups was also done because they took up too much space on the season article.Delusion23 (talk) 19:58, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

File:2011 Welsh Devolution Referendum results map.PNG

Did you make the map? If so, many thanks - but could you make the key a bit larger, as it's unreadable as it stands (at Welsh devolution referendum, 2011) without opening up the map file itself? Cheers, Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

No worries, glad it helped :) I'll give it a go as soon as I can get round to it. Not enturely sure how to replace a file on wikicommons yet so I'll have a look into it. Delusion23 (talk) 21:17, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Seems simpler just to make the image larger which I've just done. Hope that's OK!Delusion23 (talk) 21:21, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Much better - thanks! (I could have done that myself but didn't think - d'oh!) Ghmyrtle (talk) 23:46, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Bromsgrove Rovers F.C.

Hi ya. I know you're not responsible for the mis-information but as you formatted it I thought I'd fill you in on it. Sporting formed as a new club several months before Rovers withdrew from Southern League. They were formed by fans that grew tired of the mismanagement by the Rovers owner. I'm currently not however sure if Rovers have completely folded as there is gossip about them returning for the 2011-12 season. Greverod (talk) 23:31, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Happy First Day of Spring!

re: AfD on Codicote F.C.

I replied to your proposal to delete Codicote F.C. well over a month ago but it appears you didn't notice. Codicote F.C. exists as an article because it meets the common-use criterion that a team which has played in the FA Vase is notable and worthy of an article. Codicote F.C. has played in the FA Vase. Falastur2 Talk 16:36, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough, though I don't personally agree with the consensus that playing in the first qualifying round of an amateur cup grants notability, I've been down that road before. It's fine having a go at me for not knowing they've been in the FA Vase, it's just it would've been more helpful if you'd just added the Vase info to the article instead of complaining about an 'incorrect' flagging. Anywho, I've removed the PROD tag and added the info about the FA Vase qualifying round defeat to the actual article so that the club's greatest achievement can be seen by all and not cause future confusion. Cheers. Delusion23 (talk) 18:57, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
True enough, and I apologise for my somewhat aggressive style on here - I'm really not like this in person. I can see your point about the FA Vase and its dubious notability, but I wasn't the one who thought up that guideline - it was in existence long before I made that article, else I would never have made it. I probably should have referenced it too, but I've never been any good at adding much prose to articles. I tend to leave it to those who are good at it. You can probably tell by the poor job I did of actually writing what text there is. Oh well, live and learn. Thanks all the same. Falastur2 Talk 21:42, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
No worries, I probably shouldn't have been so sarcastic either to be honest and you did do right to point out the guideline to me. There's actually a discussion going on right now about the notability of sports teams here: Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(sports), if you're interested. Makes it all the more complicated I guess that these guidelines aren't entirely agreed upon, and the FA Vase guideline is just one way of interpreting WP:FOOTYN by saying that the Vase is a national cup. I hope that a specific guideline for notability of English football teams can be generated eventually. Keep up the good work on your articles anywho, though I'd hate to admit it: even the bitters are notable :P Cheers. Delusion23 (talk) 22:14, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Cleethorpes Town F.C.

Your Prod has been removed (not by me) probably through reasoning that a new and working external link to the club's own web site had been found and is suitable. I have cleaned up the article, but like you I think notability is dubious. Acabashi (talk) 17:36, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know :) The excuse given in the edit summary is that they are notable cos they are 2nd in the league. The notability is dubious, so I'm going to tag it for AfD and see if the issue can be sorted in a discussion. Delusion23 (talk) 18:34, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Good idea. It might at least prompt supporters of the article in its present state to find refs for notability, although I can't find any, and the club's web site is hardly independent of course, which is implied in the renaming of the links. A claim of notability might (I think will) come from the association with Tommy Watson, Jammal Shahin, or others who went on, but notability is not transferrable unless these others laud the club in serious independent sources - maybe this article should eventually be merged with Tommy Watson (footballer born 1969) - but I would go with AfD first if you feel this is best. Acabashi (talk) 19:17, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, think the best argument for keep would come up if it could be proved that they are a continuation of the old team that played in the FA Cup. The argument from association isn't likely to work. After all, then we'd have to make an article on everything Tommy Watson related, like his house, car, or teacher he had for maths (you get the idea :P ). Just so you know, the article is now in AfD here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Cleethorpes_Town_F.C.. Delusion23 (talk) 19:27, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Iceland national under-14 football team

Hello Delusion23. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Iceland national under-14 football team, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. Thank you. Salvio Let's talk about it! 00:57, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Okay, pretty new to Speedy Delete tags so not sure when they are supposed to apply. All I know is that this article will be a very unconvroversial PROD so giving it even the 7 days a PROD gives is generous. Any advice on speedy deletes would be welcome. Thanks. Delusion23 (talk) 01:07, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Well, speedy deletion is only for extremely uncontroversial cases (John Doe is my ten-year-old best friend; you rock, John or Buy this product. It's awesome), because it's an exception to the rule that pages can be deleted only after a consensus of uninvolved editors has been found. There are many cases that do not qualify for speedy, but that are a snow delete; in these cases, unfortunately, a patroller can only use afd or prod... And remember that speedy deletion aims at getting rid of pages that do not establish significance and not the one about subjects that lack notability; this is a rather subtle difference, that can only be learnt by trial and error... Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:44, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

One World Trade Center

How was my edit considered vandalism? I cited my source and verified it was accurate. Ktmorewiki1 (talk) 22:52, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Many apologies, clicked the wrong user. Your edit wasn't the one I was trying to flag. I've removed the tag from your talk page. Sorry again, just me being stupid... It's getting late. Delusion23 (talk) 22:57, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Okay no worries. Thanks for clarifying.

Ktmorewiki1 (talk) 23:00, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

New FC United of Manchester Stadium

you need to tell the truth then —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.7.95.66 (talk) 15:50, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

im sorry for the edits but this has got all of mjfc's trustees backs up, mjfc have not agreed to anything with fcum and it will all depend on what they offer, to date we have 3 pitches of great quality, which we have struggled and fought for!!! just like fcum are doing. we have a meeting with andy walsh ad mcc tomorrow where we will hear what they propose. upto now we believe we will get 1 pitch.. and we will get moved to broadhurst park. from the off this is not acceptable!!! there is a very long way to go! all the sneaking around behind the half of the trustees backs is not the way to go!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.7.95.66 (talk) 16:07, 14 April 2011 (UTC) Please comment

I understand that the stadium may be a controversial issue, depending on what is actually planned for the site. I'm simply keeping the wiki article free from comments like "FC united after sneaking round with the council came up with lets steal 10yrs and 300k of Moston juniors time and money to build you a stadium so you dont cause a fuss about us giving TAL to CITY" which don't belong in the articles themselves and would be best discussed in the article's discussion pages if need be.
I also do not know the full scale of the plans but would hope that all those involved can come to an agreement that benefits everyone. I had previously heard that FCUM had been in contact with MJFC : "In order to develop the facilities at this site both FC United and Moston Juniors FC would need to agree to a collaborative approach, the clubs have already engaged in some dialogue and the discussions have been very positive with both clubs supportive of a collaborative approach." - taken from here So I would hope that both sides have been kept up to date on the issues. Delusion23 (talk) 16:18, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

well as you can tell most of mjfc wasnt, 2 members of the board where approached 6 weeks ago and where sworn to secretcy! the rest of mjfc found out when M.E.N was caught photographing our pitches on the 6th of april. I have a council report from feb showing MJFC where earmarked for that fund, now that fcum have had there funding and site pulled. we now have to give them our lease... and share our funds which we will probably never get to use now!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.7.95.66 (talk) 16:32, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I hope you are told everything in the meeting, then you'll know more than me. Hope they keep you up to date from now on as I wasn't aware that people had been kept in the dark about the proposals and if they have then it's not on. Have a nice trip to Manchester for the meetings :) Hope you get a good deal out of all this! Cheers, Delusion23 (talk) 16:40, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

hope my additions where ok today! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.7.95.66 (talk) 14:14, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Looks good to me :) Maybe you should consider creating an account? Delusion23 (talk) 14:27, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

fc have missed the deadline for funding, they can next apply in feb or march, the planning is going to go on past the 15th that is why I changed the dates. even if fc get the panning there timing is up the wall they will not be in by the start of next season — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.7.95.66 (talk) 09:17, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Fair does. It would be good if you could put a source in the article as the current sources say they are aiming for a 2012 opening. Delusion23 (talk) 14:53, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
it was only what i had heard, as from last night confirmation on the members site of fcum with regards to the planning date and I love they way they riddled there way out of the funding issue.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.7.95.66 (talk) 09:20, 7 September 2011 (UTC)</span
Well we should still wait for a reference to be available before we change it. This is an encyclopedia after all. Delusion23 (talk) 10:15, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks! :D I did trawl all the way up to Banbury to be there for the magic moment, haha, it was a comfortable win and a great day. The obligatory pitch invasion and champagne in the centre circle, and even the Banbury fans joined in. Yes, the first Cornish team ever to rise to that level, and five promotions in six years. It's been a hell of a ride. Good luck to FC United in the play-offs - maybe we'll meet in the Conference National one day?! It'd be a long trip! And thanks for all your hard work on the non-league articles - I did it all on my own last year and it's great to split the work! Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:29, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

NPL 2011/12

Looks great so far! I will probably start articles for the Southern and Isthmian Leagues in my sandbox very soon - like you say, there's no point in going live with them before the info is clearer (as much as these leagues are ever clear!) because people will start to shout "crystal balling" and take them to AfD and all sorts. I think last year I started them in mid-May and the info was all clear by then. We'll probably make pretty good guesses as to where the various teams will end up with regard to the geographical splits in the First Divisions, but in their infinite wisdom, the league boards could think differently! Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:37, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Exactly, I think it's interesting to try and figure out how it might fall into place. Unusual for the Northern League to have no clubs go bust! I assume Ilkeston will reform, but not try to "do a Chester" and aim for the Evo-Stik League, so maybe one of their clubs will be repreived (so long as it's not Spalding again!). The Southern League is the hardest to figure, with Windsor going bust, then Almondsbury and Atherstone resigning. I can't see Andover getting a reprieve, they were awful this season, but maybe Beaconsfield SYCOB will escape. There's often one or two surprise disappearances during the summer too, like VCD and Bromsgrove last year. The Western League isn't promoting anyone this year because Larkhall Athletic failed the ground grading, so maybe that will have an impact. We'll have to keep our eyes open for news :) Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:13, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, League football just isn't the same! I do support Orient (for evil deeds in a past life or something) so I'm pleased with their season, but in general, I prefer non-league footy. Some wise man said "failure is more interesting than success" so maybe that has something to do with it, although I still prefer it when the failure happens to someone else's team! Good luck against Bradford, that will be a toughie, the way Bradford have finished the season. You're right about the crowds - some really good attendances across the country at this level, which is fantastic. I'll keep my fingers crossed on Thursday :) Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:41, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Unlucky, mate :( I know what it's like to lose a play-off final - I've seen Orient lose two of them, and it's no fun at all. Good luck for next season, hope you keep your team together and strengthen it for 2011-12. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:07, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Cheers mate, just got back from Colwyn Bay, so close yet so far. Suffered with 2 of our best players suspended but it was a pretty even game and they got us on the break. They deserve it in the end, finishing 2nd after all. We'll regroup and try and win it outright next season :D Bring on Chester FC! (We helped them form by giving them advice as a fellow fan-owned club, so should be a fun few games) We'll meet Truro one day in the conference, we'll just be a little late to the party! Delusion23 (talk) 21:21, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Good to hear you put up a good fight, sounds like the best team won on the day. FCUM v Chester ought to bring in a decent crowd! We'll save a place for you in the Conference ;) Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Glynn Hurst

Hello Delusion, seen as your an FCUM fan I would like to ask you if Glynn Hurst still plays for you. I ask this because on his page it says he retired but in his infobox it says he is still playing for FC United and also in his lead aswell, cheers, LiamTaylor 12:35, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I don't believe he plays for FCUM anymore and is retired. I suppose the infobox needs updating to reflect this :) Delusion23 (talk) 12:39, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Okay, cheers for that. ohh and Good look to you guys in the play-offs, as a Hyde fan I hope to see you at Ewen Fields next year. :D. LiamTaylor 13:00, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks mate, setting off for Bradford Park Avenue in a few hours to watch it. Good luck to Hyde too in the relegation battle, guess you're hoping your Tameside rivals Stalybridge can do you a favour on Sat? Hope we play you guys next year, the more Greater Manchester derbies the better :D Delusion23 (talk) 13:08, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
I agree pal, hope Bridge do us some huge favour, but we play Corby who said they are going to play a bunch of U18s so... anyway hope you can beat BPA, by the way if we get Curzon Ashton boss Gary Lowe next season we are having super Mike Norton :) LiamTaylor 13:25, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Well done last night, now just Colwyn Bay in the way of you and the Conference North.LiamTaylor 12:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Yeah the atmoshere was amazing last night :D Gonna try and get tickets to the final but they are limited. May just go along for the day anyway. It is a bank holiday after all! Rollercoaster season, 2nd round of the FA Cup beating Barrow and Rochdale, drawing against Brighton to get a replay, and going from 2nd bottom to 2nd top in the league. Goalkeeper scored a goal from his own box, striker saved a penalty, into playoff finals. What a year! Delusion23 (talk) 12:38, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Well that sounds good, a dam site better than our season, we gone from bottom to third bottom (wow), but this year we won a cup game for the first time in years :) we beat Oldhem Boro in the Manchester Premier Cup (not so hard) then got beat of Droylsden, we even beat Leamington in the FA Cup but then lost to Alfreton. We went from a squad of 30 odd to a squad of 13 then started a re-building proccess, sacked manager, the whole board resigning and now a new board and two players in caretaker charge. And a relegation battle which is going down to the last game of the season. I think your season was a tad bit better. :) LiamTaylor 13:36, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
One more win and we're in your league! Congrats on managing to stay up! Delusion23 (talk) 15:25, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
I tell you what, I was at Corby yesterday to see us win, worst ground to celebrate but we did a 50 man pitch invasion and did a lap of honour with the players round the athletics track around the pitch, great day, cheers, LiamTaylor 16:06, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

SPL, IPL 11-12

Just a heads up that I've created 2011–12 Isthmian League and 2011–12 Southern League, obviously a bit of guesswork involved, but I think they fit in with your idea of how the NPL will look. You've got Hednesford up there and I've got Barwell down here, for example. I've moved a couple of teams between the SPL and the IPL, but who knows if they'll turn out to be right or wrong. I have no idea about reprieves either. I heard Beaconsfield and Andover won't get reprieves but I think we'll be a bit short of teams otherwise. I don't know. Did Retford get an extra relegation? That might mean a reprieve for somebody, right? Bretonbanquet (talk) 21:32, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I found out about it on the FC United forums and it's confirmed on their official website now. Pretty certain it'll be accepted as the NPL can't force them to pay for players that they can't afford after Worksop pulled out of the ground share. Could mean that Ossett Albion or even Spalding or Shepshed get reprieved. I actually think that Stafford Rangers will be reprieved in Conference North due to Ilkeston's folding. That would mean Burscough and Hucknall being reprieved, which in turn means Shepshed get reprieved and NPL North returns to a 22 team league. Retford's double relegation complicates things further... Good work on the SPL and IPL season articles, the border between the 2 is way more complicated than for the NPL. Be interesting to see how close the predictions are to the real outcome! Delusion23 (talk) 22:21, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Also, just wondering if Larkhall Athletic and Wantage Town should be included as they won the Western League and the Hellenic League respectively and did apply for promotion [2]. Would they be in the SL S&W and C? The only level 9 league that didn't have any team in the top 2 apply for promotion was the Northern League. Whitley Bay missed out on GD, but they won the FA Vase again so at least they got that! Delusion23 (talk) 22:43, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
It's such a complicated business! I've just been reading about Rushden & Diamonds are teetering on the brink, in about £700,000 of debt. If they got thrown out of the Conference, then they could end up anywhere, with more reprieves, for Southport etc. I guess we won't really know until the suits sit down and thrash it all out. Larkhall (and the runners-up Bitton) and Wantage failed the ground grading, so they didn't make it. All those decisions seemed incredibly harsh, usually with the work being done, just not within the required timeframe. Guildford City won their league, but were refused the ground grading for some complicated reason, so Chertsey go up - but there is still some legal wrangling going on... Makes the Premier League seem so dull! Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:56, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Wow, you've definately done your research then! What resource do you use for the ground grading results? I've been looking for them with regards to Farsley, Coalville and New Mills. I read that Larkhall were upgrading their ground as they were being promoted, does sound very harsh, I thought if they had planning permission etc. they'd be allowed up. In contrast, QPR weren't even docked a point for their transfer wranglings... Teams at this level lose 3 points for fielding ineligible players after all. I agree, it removes all the drama! Delusion23 (talk) 23:08, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
I generally just google the clubs and check out the local news sites, then I find bits and pieces like this and this. Also the individual league websites sometimes have snippets here and there. I thought that too about QPR! Dodgy transfers, third-party ownership of players - a non-league club would have been crucified for that, and would have definitely lost points. Usually I think they lose all the points gained from matches in which the ineligible player played, which could be 1 or 3, or maybe 12, 15 or 20, whatever! It's a brutal world, non-league! Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:21, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Glapwell

[3] Bevo74 (talk) 23:54, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Cheers Bevo, sad news. I'll add this info to the 2010–11 season. Delusion23 (talk) 23:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Rushden & Diamonds

Hi there.

I see that you've removed Rushden & Diamonds from the Southern League Premier Division.

No problem there, but having seen the Southern League's constitution (albeit the 18th June one!) they are listed as members subject to appeal.

Do you know which league (if any!) they'll be in this season?

Thanks and Best Wishes

Adam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam.king11 (talk • contribs) 16:13, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I personally haven't removed them from any article. But I did add that their place in the Southern League Premier Division is only provisional: i.e. they have the place so long as they sort out the club's financial issues in time. Their hearing is on the 4th of July I believe. Looks to me like there's still lots of scenarios that could still happen. The club could fold, it could go on hiatus for a year with no league, it could be let in the Southern League, or it could go into a lower league like the United Counties League. Hope they get let in to the Southern League! It's not as bad as what happened to Chester City and Halifax Town, they both had to start at level 8 rather than 7 (both of them won their respective leagues last season so it isn't all bad!). Good luck :) Delusion23 (talk) 08:37, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Black Country Rangers

Hi Again!

I've created a page on newly promoted West Midlands Regional League Premier Division side Black Country Rangers.

If you, or any non-league fans, could help add to the page (history/references) then please feel free to do so. Adam.king11 14:09, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I've added some info refs, an infobox, some categories and a stub tag. Hope that helps :) Struggled to find much more info about their past as they're not on the football history database. Are they a relatively new team or were they previously known under a different name perhaps? Delusion23 (talk) 14:26, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I think they've been around for a few years - they did ground-share with Willenhall Town for a while but then moved to Tividale more recently. I have heard that they want to move in to the old Oldbury United ground (adjacent to the M5 at Junction 2) but that a new team wants to go in there from next season (Brierley Hill & Oldbury United). So it could be a possible ground-share with Black Country Rangers the higher placed side as Brierley Hill & Oldbury United would have to start in the Birmingham AFA.

Speaking of Willenhall Town, I've also done a page on their landlords Sporting Khalsa. The page was removed before, but I hope it stays up this time as they are now a Step 6 side. Thanks for the advice on Marlborough Town, incidentally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam.king11 (talk • contribs) 16:00, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Cool, I've added more info to their article too. Good that these teams now get articles due to their promotions. Delusion23 (talk) 16:45, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Delusion23/Archive_1&oldid=1089866747"