Talk:Berliner FC Dynamo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Move
I'd suggest that this page be moved to Berliner FC Dynamo - obviously keeping the redirect from the current name. The name BFC Dynamo Berlin is tautologous - the B stands for Berliner. ArtVandelay13 20:03, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- Done! Thank you for your suggestion. I am not a jelly donut and all that ... Wiggy! 20:43, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Nadia, You've cut out a ton of information without providing any explanation or justification. Or put in stuff that is just plain wrong (i.e. Dynamo's ten titles are not a German record. They are an East German or DDR-Oberliga record and to characterize them as "German" is incorrect.). It was Dynamo that led the way in seeing the championships stars policy updated - why cut all that material out. Less isn't more - please don't whitewash the article. Wiggy! 19:33, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Poor edits
Nadia, please stop making inappropriate edits to this page.
- I took the time to review each of the links you added to the page and in general they are the type of link to be avoided in that they do not reference significant new information or tend to be only peripherally related to the club. You've included links to a search engine page, shopping pages, pages that link to each other, and some that are dead or seriously out-of-date. And I'm afraid just don't understand what a page about a group of three women showing off their tattoos has to do with BFC. While there may be merit in sometimes linking to foreign language sites that include useful material, appending German language news reports to an English language page is marginal at best. The links you are adding are simply not making the page any better. Your interest in the Ultras/hooligan side of fan culture would be better served by leaving those links on the Ultras page you put together - and even then I'd comb through your links to keep just the best.
- Repeatedly removing the link to the English language site that provides a useful overview of the club, including some history, standings, logos, a table full of basic club info, etc. is inappropriate. There is probably more information about that club on that one page than there is in all the links you keep appending - and its offered up in a concise easy-to-read format. It is a useful resource, please leave it be.
- Dynamo was at the forefront of the controversy over championship stars. Including it is appropriate and in context and provides links to other aspects of German football. I don't understand why it is repeatedly being removed.
- Marking up Dynamo's titles as a "German record" without explaining what kind of record it is rather vague and misleading. A record of what? It's a DDR-Oberliga record for number of titles won. Ten consecutive titles in German first division play is a record. But it's not an overall national record as Bayern hold more titles. This was was noted in the qualifying preamble to the honours section - which was repeatedly edited out, and is now orphaned as some sort of afterthought. That preamble should have resolved the issue cleanly and simply.
- During its dominant period Dynamo was a Stasi club, plain and simple. Editing out the title of the history section describing it as such is just a whitewash. There's no reason not to leave it be.
- When an article is heavily edited and material removed its considered good form to provide some justification for deleting the material. That's not been done. I've tried to provide explanations for my edits, I'd appreciate your doing the same as its one of the most basic courtesies here. It might help me understand why stuff is getting tossed.
- Your cut and paste of famous players has left a German language header in place that needs to be fixed. It's an English page and edits and links should reflect that.
- Some useful material has been added through your edits, and I've seen you've done some good work on other pages, but this is just turning into a mess that needs sorting out. Let's do that. Wiggy! 21:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Some reference material re:Stasi control of BFC Dynamo
German language stuff can be run through the language tools at Google for a translation for English speakers.
- a Times (UK) article about manipulation in East bloc football
- profile of a permant exhibition in Leizig about the Stasi's role in East German football
- an essay on Berlin football
- Tagesspiele news article about questionable practice in East German football]
- a book about East German football
[edit] Repeated vandalism
Nadia, It is inappropriate and goes against established Wikipedia policy to remove relevant references and repeatedly place spam links on a page. It's clear you are a Dynamo fan, but you can't keep erasing relevant parts of the club's history and useful reference material. Please stop and put some effort into managing your POV. Wiggy! 22:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Non-standard formatting
Look Nadia, I'm sorry but formatting lists column-wise as you've done at Berliner FC Dynamo makes it real tough to add to items to a list and is just not as readable as a simple list. There's a place for the use of tables like that, but this isn't it. Have a look at how the English club pages are formatted by way of example. Simple rows, clear links, etc. A similar approach is used on other club pages. Column formatting just doesn't work for some header categories. I've reverted the page to using standard row formatting. Thanks. Wiggy! 17:17, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Specific concerns
Nadia please stop making inappropriate edits. You've done some good things with the various tables you've added, but a number of your current edits are inappropriate:
- Please don't insert your personal versions of the club logos in the articles. They are quite simply incorrect and should not be used where there are clearly better alternatives available. The logo displaying a single star and the number 10 is in use on the club website and follows the DFB guidelines set for the use of championship stars. The version you keep posting is clearly an un-sourced homemade thing. I have not seen any source that shows Dynamo's use of the East German national crest - if you have one, put it forward. I have asked you this repeatedly and you are ignoring me. Show me. Make me believe.
- The image of Mielke has been tagged as improperly sourced. You need to respect that. The caption attached to the image isn't even close to proper English.
- Replacing accurate image files with your own personalized and incorrect versions is not a particularly welcome tactic. Its unnecessarily aggressive.
- Please don't revert copy edits that are intended to clean up the English of an article. They are not some kind of personal attack, but are simply intended to make the article clear and readable. Properly translated, well written articles carry more authority and better serve users.
- Please put some effort into verifying the accuracy of your edits and managing your POV. I can't argue with stuff that's NPOV, correct, and well presented, but you're not taking that approach and it shows.
- Your talk page is knee-deep in complaints about your general conduct. Given that you often quickly edit out additions to your talk page I would guess that it is embarrassing for you to face up to on some level. This would be more fun for you and everyone else if you showed some respect for other editors and for the quality of your own work.
Wiggy! 04:57, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Get it right
Nadia, you're quite capable of making useful contibutions, so why don't you stop wasting my time and yours (and that of other editors) by posting material that is incorrect, unlicensed or POV. You added some decent stuff with the various tables you've put in place, put persist in making petty edits. Give it up and stick to the valuble stuff. It looks likes you're able to add good material but can't bring yourself to rise above this other nonsense. I think everyone would appreciate it if you would just play nice. Wiggy! 15:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Current logo
I'm sorry, Nadia, but it isn't clear what you are trying to say. Pepe doesn't own exclusive rights. The logo that is currently displayed is the one in use on the club website with the addition of a championship star. My own feeling is that a simple Dynamo logo should be displayed without the star, and the championship version with a star displayed elsewhere with a proper explanation of what it is. But, of course, you have a different view.
Now I have reverted your addition of the logo because the caption or explanation you have attached to it is written in poor English, it is unclear, and doesn't significantly add to the article. There is no direct connection between this logo and BFC's European Cup appearance - its just coincidental.
Wrestling over this stuff with you is getting tiresome and I really do not want to be fighting over this all the time. I'm simply interested in seeing a well-written, factual article in place. Maybe we make some peace. How about we display a basic logo (with no star) in the info box and display a championship logo (with a star and an explanation) further below? That represents an accurate up-to-date position.
And do me a favor by not adding unnecessary tags to articles I have edited. While the articles may need sourcing tagging something just because I edited it is counter-productive and is a waste of everyone's time. Go out there and be a good, productive editor. Wiggy! 14:10, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- P.S. if you have a link to current information about Pepe and the legal status of the logo (I see you've marked the item as 2007) please post it so eveyone can have a look. Wiggy! 14:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Thanks for the references. They provide some information and I see that there is some other similar stuff out there. I haven't seen anything more current than April 2006 (about a year old) nor have I seen anything that indicates the issue has been resolved one way or another. So, besides the championship star, what is the difference between the logo at the top of the page and the one you keep posting? Note also that the caption you've put in place is still incoherent (i.e. it is not even close to proper English and so is quite confusing) and is going to be copy edited to put it into shape for use on the English Wikipedia. Some of the detail referred to there more properly belongs as part of the main body of text in the related trivia section.
-
- As near as I can see the most definitive source remains the club web page. The team photo shows the use of the logo bearing the single championship star. Both the plain logo and starred logo appear at various places on the website. One of the references you posted indicates the club is using any one of three different logos (1966, post-70s, and championship). Help me out here. What is the critical difference that makes it so important to you to display the additional logo? Wiggy! 22:21, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Clear reference
You know Kay, there is a very clear reference in the Vereinslexikon as to the history of the name of this team and it doesn't include Spielvereinigung Dynamo. While the club was part of the larger sports association it was never simply SV Dynamo. Do you plan to apply this approach to every single club that played under the SV banner? This is perfect example of the stupidly single-minded approach to editing that repeatedly gets you blocked. Get a life. Wiggy! 15:29, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

