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
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
List of York City F.C. players is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
OK, Matty - point taken. I hadn't spotted the 100 matches criterion! But I think you need to rethink this. Greening is about the most successful former York City player currently playing in the football league (OK, I know - don't bother telling me I'm wrong...), and it seems very odd not to have him listed anywhere in association with the club! Snalwibma 10:59, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I am considering changing the criteria for exceptions - such as record transfer fee's received (e.g. Greening) and division top scorers (which would include Andy Bishop). Mattythewhite 11:05, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why am I being made out to be the villain? I made the list, and gave it decent criteria. 100+ apps and Clubman of the Year award winners; almost identical to the criteria of FL's, such as Arsenal players and Manchester United players. The criteria given "and players who have achieved a high level of fame within the game in general" hardly makes sense - how do you define that? And its patronising to the club anyway. Why, especially, Neil Warnock be on? He made no contribution to York City. 4 appearences. He made his name as Sheffield United manager, not as a York City player. Now that is just patronising the club. Mattythewhite 13:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
you're not being made as a villain, your silly criteria which you're blindly inforcing is because people do not agree with it. please look up the word "notable" in the dictionary ands then apply it in the context of football. it is not like myself or Snalwibma are removing notable former players.. we are adding into the list some of the most famous players ever to appear at the club.
hypothetically for example, if diego maradona came out of retirement to play with york city, but only played 5 or so games, he would still be applicable in terms of notability on a list such as this because he is a more notable footballer in genrals. now i am not comparing neil warnock to maradona (haha), but a man who was just last season the head of a premiership team is indeed notable within the context of football. hence why on Garforth Town's article they have socrates, careca and lee sharpe as notable formers, they haven't played for that club 100 times.
phone up the club and ask them yourself who they recognise as having a higher level of notability jonathan greening or ian blackstone. if anything its degrading to the club to leave the bigger names out because you're making it look like nobody who is known throughout football in general (high level of notability) has played at the club. in football there is not some recognized standard that a player has to play 100 games at a club to be notable, that isn't the real life case of football so why push that here?-- SalvoCalcio 02:44, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why is it just the York list you're trying to "improve"? Why not Arsenal's list, they have the same "silly criteria". Notability means having a Wikipedia article, but someone, I don't know who, so don't have a go at me, made the 100+ apps rule for these lists. But you're coming in, with this extremeley flexible rule. Like what you said about Warnock, hes notable in terms of football. Not York City. Thats what this list is all about. Notable York City players. Not just some guy who's famous for something else, like managing Sheffield United. You don't get the point its for notable York City players, players who have done something at the club. Unlike Warnock, 4 apps. Thats just pathetic. I'll bring this to WikiProject Football, to get a wider range of opinions on the matter. Mattythewhite 10:41, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
umm cause i have no interest in arsenal, and i have seen this teem plays when you were still running around in a nappy. see, List of U.S. Città di Palermo players for an examples of a very good list. warnock was a york city player and he has achieved great notablity, do the maths kid, "notable york city player".
place yourself in a real life situation on the terrace for a second and you'll realise how ridiculous your little wp:own violation over this articeles is...
mattythewhite: who are among our most notable club footballers from our past?
fan #1: Jonathan Greening and Keith Houchen.
mattythewhite: sorry, wrong answer. they have not played over 100 games for the club exactly. they are two of the most famous people to ever play for city true.. but somehow, in some sort of far-fetched warped ideology, not notable at all. you'll have to pick again.
see how absolutely ridiculous that is in the context of real life? is no different here. also on a sides note, there is something wrong with the format of the lists, all of the flags dont line up properly when you click on the nationality icon, i shall fix it.-- SalvoCalcio 19:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please just tell me how I have ownership over these articles. I overlook them as a York City fan. Give one example of me "owning" them. What browser are you using? The flags are okay in IE. And can you please learn to be civil? I'd preffer not to be called a kid. Mattythewhite 19:48, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My opinion is that these lists should be used for notability within the context of the club, rather than the game as a whole, and that notability criteria do need to be rigorously applied in order to prevent people from adding their favourite player for example. Having said that, players who have made a great contribution to the game elsewhere clearly deserve a mention. Have a look at List of Southampton F.C. players and you will see that a few notable exceptions to the notability criteria have been mentioned in the prose above the list itself. Can I suggest this approach be taken here, as I think it would constitute a reasonable compromise. This would remove the need for 'high level of fame' as a criterion, which is highly subjective in any case. Cheers --Jameboy 11:26, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All the "exceptions" listed at the top of the Southampton page did play at least 40 games for the club, though, as far as I can tell, which is a reasonably significant contribution. I would not support the inclusion on such a list of a player who only played half a dozen games for a club before going on to greater (unconnected) fame elsewhere. For example, I wouldn't include Jlloyd Samuel on the list for my club, Gillingham, based on the 8 games he played for us in 2001...... ChrisTheDude 11:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point. Remove Warnock entirely in that case. I suppose Greening could, at a push, be mentioned as an exception, but it wouldn't bother me if he was missed off either. --Jameboy 12:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
league stats only vs. full.. but many missing[edit]
if you look down the list there are too much (*) next to a lot of players names to show that only league stats are available. its a bit of an eyesore... should all of them just be shown for league stats for some consistency? i mean over 30 (*) is ugly.--SalvoCalcio 01:50, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Probably should give league only a try. If we ever need to get all stats back, we can simply revert. Mattythewhite 08:30, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
