Talk:History of Sunderland A.F.C.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the History of Sunderland A.F.C. article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

North East England Mid‑importance

	North East England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject North East England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North East England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.North East EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject North East EnglandTemplate:WikiProject North East EnglandNorth East England articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Mid‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Football: England Mid‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. 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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	English football portal This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

History of Sunderland A.F.C. has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 15, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
January 18, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed
January 18, 2009	Peer review	Reviewed
May 10, 2009	Peer review	Reviewed
Current status: Good article

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of Sunderland A.F.C.. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20051201053630/http://www.cafc.co.uk/personality.ink?page=7724 to http://www.cafc.co.uk/personality.ink?page=7724

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:57, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on History of Sunderland A.F.C.. 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:

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) 08:17, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on History of Sunderland A.F.C.. 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:

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) 23:12, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to clean-up the article[edit]

It makes no sense that there is more information on the last two decades, which have been the least successful in Sunderland history, than all prior history together. This is due to adding information about random singing of players, which is not necessarily important in the grand scheme.

We ought to keep only the significant parts. There is no reason to mention every season, who was signed, and how Sunderland finished, as there's a List of Sunderland A.F.C. seasons article for that.

1. Recent coverage will always be slightly more detailed because there areore sources to do so. This is an example of WP:RECENTISM which can a problem sometimes, but may actually just indicate earlier portions of the history need expanding rather than other sections being reduced.

2. Be careful removing important information, and cited information. For instance big signings (particularly club records) are inherently notable. I would suggest you re-add Darren Bent and Gyans signatures for instance. Significant results, performances, and appearances are also inherently notable (as would be famous players ending the season as top scorers for instance).

3. Adding post season summaries of each season is itself a symptom of #1 so even though the habit is to discuss each season with a bullet point breakdown of the year, try and mix up the information with other significant data from that period of time. Koncorde (talk) 19:11, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1. Very accurate.

2. Thing is, "club records" should be taken into account with the prices of the time. Football player prices go up, so it's not so hard to break that record. Bent cost more than Shackleton, but what was payed for Shackleton was bigger money for its time than what was recently paid for Bent.

3. I fully agree! I think we only need summaries for seasons where the club won the league, was relegated, or promoted. OK, sometimes a near-championship season can be mentioned. There is no reason to mention seasons where team was neither near the relegation zone nor near Euro/promotion zone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxim.il89 (talk • contribs) 11:53, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Record attendance:[edit]

Max. Please understand the following:

We do not use sources that use wikipedia as their source. This is circular sourcing per WP:CIRCULAR.
Fan Banter is not a reliable source. It's just a fan website. There is no longstanding reliability of its content, no named author etc. and when you look at the content you find it is often lifting entire paragraphs from wikipedia article on the same subject with only small changes.
You added the claim "an English record for its time". This claim is not found on the Fanbanter source, nor is it included on the source used on the list at List of record home attendances of English football clubs from SAFC.com. Again, per WP:CIRCULAR we do not use wikipedia as a source unto itself. We might check for other sources on associated pages (as I did above) but it does not support the outcome.
When looking for other sources you can find examples such as Talksport. In this case, the Talksport article actually gives different attendance numbers and has already aged (missing West Ham matches etc) meaning its current reliability is in question. There may be more / better etc but they need to be a reliable source. Koncorde (talk) 13:47, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]