Misplaced Pages

Talk:Old Firm: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:52, 11 September 2013 editMagicEagle67 (talk | contribs)112 editsmNo edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 20:08, 11 September 2013 edit undoEscape Orbit (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers74,602 edits →Validity of Old Firm: We're still waiting for those citesNext edit →
Line 27: Line 27:


The whole point of this 'Old Firm' page should allow for this information to be displayed because you know fine well that people outside the fanbase of RFC 1872 DO NOT RECOGNISE the term 'Old Firm' because of the compulsory liquidation event. Of course there are going to be commercially driven news organisations in particular keen to cling to the term in order to generate money, however the term is no longer representative of the two Clubs it was used for to describe. It is not unreasonable to suggest it should be in there to make people aware of the reality. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:48, 11 September 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> The whole point of this 'Old Firm' page should allow for this information to be displayed because you know fine well that people outside the fanbase of RFC 1872 DO NOT RECOGNISE the term 'Old Firm' because of the compulsory liquidation event. Of course there are going to be commercially driven news organisations in particular keen to cling to the term in order to generate money, however the term is no longer representative of the two Clubs it was used for to describe. It is not unreasonable to suggest it should be in there to make people aware of the reality. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:48, 11 September 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Still waiting for those cites... Waffle about the possible status of Rangers is of no relevance. Let's see something that says "The old firm no longer exists". If we know fine well that people don't recognise the term "old firm" then it should be easy to find those cites. Where are they? Who are these people? Why is their opinion noteworthy? (Be forewarned; forum posts by random anonymous people don't count. This is an encyclopaedia, not a football fan site.) --<font color="purple">]</font> <sup>]</sup> 20:08, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:08, 11 September 2013

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Old Firm article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconPolitics of the United Kingdom
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
More information:
/ 
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconFootball: Scotland / Celtic Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Scottish football task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Celtic F.C. task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconScotland High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:Archive box collapsible

Validity of Old Firm

The liquidation of Rangers FC 1872 has questioned the relevance and or validity of the term 'Old Firm'. Fans of Rangers FC claim that the Club formed in 1872 is still the 'Same Club' as the Club admitted to SFL Div 3 in 2012.

However under Scots Law of incorporation this is an impossibility. Under Article 12 of UEFA Club Licencing document “A licence applicant may only be a football club, i.e. a legal entity fully responsible for a football team participating in national and international competitions…”. So they are NOT the same Club under the Law of the Country they operate nor are they recognised as the 'Same Club' as European football's governing body. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MagicEagle67 (talk • contribs) 14:20, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Please see ongoing and archived discussion at Talk:Rangers F.C.. Misplaced Pages doesn't accept original research, please provide sources and gain consensus at Talk:Rangers F.C. or on this talk page if you wish to make such a substantial edit. Cheers, VanguardScot 14:26, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
The term 'Old Firm' was never an official term. My point is that fans outwith Rangers FC 2012 are questioning the validity of the term in light of the compulsory liquidation under Scots Law of Rangers FC 1872. The term was used to describe two Clubs that were formed in 1872 and 1888. Only fans of Rangers FC believe that the Club survived a liquidation event. Which is contradictory to Incorporation rules under Scots Law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MagicEagle67 (talk • contribs) 14:35, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Why is there a section on 'Old Firm' page detailing Celtic Fans protest of legislation? What has that to do with a term 'Old Firm'? This page clearly constructed and edited by fans of Rangers FC 1872 (In Liquidation). — Preceding unsigned comment added by MagicEagle67 (talk • contribs) 14:40, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
That is classic WP:OR. The old firm is a commonly used term and that is the reason it has a wikipedia page. The term "New Firm" is also not an 'official term' but it is a commonly used term that refers to a football derby, so it has a wikipedia page that is sourced to RS's. If you want to change the article to say that the OF no longer exists then you need to provide WP:RS, not some gibberish copy and pasted from a fan blog. Also stop removing the talk page headers they are an important part of WP:Footy. VanguardScot 14:45, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

This is where the page has problems because since Rangers FC 1872 liquidated there is no derby. The page has a piece on Celtic fans protesting about Government legislation yet you are deleting ANYTHING that mentions liquidation of RFC 1872(IL)? That is clearly devious. MagicEagle67 (talk) 14:50, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

The liquidaton of The Rangers Football Club Plc is adequtely covered in the relevant wikipedia articles. Still you refuse to give sny sources to back up your claim the 'old firm' no longer exists? VanguardScot 15:54, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
The liquidation of Rangers FC 1872 has clear mistruths. The Club under Scots Law is no longer and I will bring that evidence to the table. Where is your evidence that the 'Old Firm' is still in existence? What constitutes it's very existence in your mind? What my point is, is that fans outside of Rangers FC no longer recognise the 'Old Firm' as a terminology or a relevant term given the liquidation of Rangers FC 1872. As I said before, it is clear this page has been constructed and edited by fans of Rangers FC 1872 giving ignorance to a Compulsory Liquidation and how there is a section on Green Brigade protesting about government legislation on this page I will never know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MagicEagle67 (talk • contribs) 18:10, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
The article talks about protests against Scottish Parliament legislation by both sets of fans, which is sourced to RS's. There is no point in you continuing this discussion without any sources to back up your proposed changes. You were asked for your RS's about six hours ago and still haven't provided any. VanguardScot 19:18, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
You are asking me for sources on the 'Old Firm'? The 'Old Firm' is a hypothetical terminology used to describe a rivalry between Celtic FC formed in 1888 and Rangers formed in 1872. Scot's law and to anyone outside the Rangers fanbase, Rangers FC formed in 1872 are no longer in existence. Only emotional fans of Rangers FC and organisations who have commercial interests in having ANY Rangers FC in existence believe the fiction that they survived a compulsory liquidation event. Celtic were never part of any 'Old Firm' with a club formed in 2012. My point is that the term 'Old Firm' is now a term that has to be used as a past tense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MagicEagle67 (talk • contribs) 13:29, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
You are simply asked to provide a RS that backs up your claim that the term old firm is now only used in the past tense. I have found numerous RS after a quick google search that say otherwise (, , , ) so I am taking your continued editing of this page as vandalism. See Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia and What Misplaced Pages is not. VanguardScot 15:41, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

My point is that contrary to certain media outlets using the term for commercial advantage as well as fans of RFC 1872 clinging to a fiction the 'Club never really died', the term 'Old Firm' can only be in existence when both Club's the term was used to describe are also both in existence. Here we even have the current THE RFC 2012 head of media communications describing how RFC 1872 did in fact die whilst making the comment "No matter how Charles Green attempts to dress it up, a newco equals a new club. When the CVA was thrown out Rangers as we know them died 1 other media outlets describe CVA rejection meant '140 years of History' formally ended (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Now we also have the head of the Scottish Football Association giving us an insight into the consequences of there being NO RANGERS AT ALL (8) This is where the fiction was created that the 'Club didn't really die' absurdity.

The whole point of this 'Old Firm' page should allow for this information to be displayed because you know fine well that people outside the fanbase of RFC 1872 DO NOT RECOGNISE the term 'Old Firm' because of the compulsory liquidation event. Of course there are going to be commercially driven news organisations in particular keen to cling to the term in order to generate money, however the term is no longer representative of the two Clubs it was used for to describe. It is not unreasonable to suggest it should be in there to make people aware of the reality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MagicEagle67 (talk • contribs) 19:48, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Still waiting for those cites... Waffle about the possible status of Rangers is of no relevance. Let's see something that says "The old firm no longer exists". If we know fine well that people don't recognise the term "old firm" then it should be easy to find those cites. Where are they? Who are these people? Why is their opinion noteworthy? (Be forewarned; forum posts by random anonymous people don't count. This is an encyclopaedia, not a football fan site.) --Escape Orbit 20:08, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Categories:
Talk:Old Firm: Difference between revisions Add topic