Talk:Queens Park Rangers F.C.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Queens Park Rangers F.C. article.
Article policies
England Portal
This article is supported by WikiProject England, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to articles relating to England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article associated with this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
WikiProject on Football
English football Portal
The article on Queens Park Rangers F.C. is supported by the WikiProject on Football, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of Association football related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page; if you have any questions about the project or the article ratings below, please consult the FAQ.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by the England task force.

Contents

[edit] Rewrite of recent history and current season

Some sections have got a bit messy. They could be condensed without losing any information. I propose a rewrite as per the following structure:

1. 1983 - 1996: QPR in the top division. (amalgamating "Mixed Fortunes", "Return of Gerry", "Sale of Ferdinand".

2. 1996 to present: decline and financial troubles (amalgamating "financial crisis..", "success at last" and "current season". I propose to split this into two sections; one regarding the team's performance on the pitch, and the other regarding the club's financial difficulties off it.

3. Latest news.

Unless anyone has any objections, I'll rewrite these sections after the Stoke game. The Angel of Islington 21:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Current Season / Recent News

I suggest that the second of these two sections be deleted and its contents moved to the former. The only item in it is the recent brawl at Harlington. I also note that the following:

The unusual circumstances of the game - it was not an official match and took place at QPR's training ground - means it could be difficult for the FA to act.

has been copied verbatim from the page at this link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/q/qpr/6341485.stm The Angel of Islington 09:01, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Having looked a bit more closely, I discovered that most of the section had been culled from this and other articles. I have removed "Recent News" and included it under "Current Season" complete with citations. The Angel of Islington 07:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fictional characters CAN be fans

Fictional chracters are not real people and are therefore not famous fans and should be avoided.


Why on earth can't a fictional character be a fan? That is absolute nonsense. Sherlock Holmes IS a famous pipe smoker - but he's fictional. The character supports QPR - that is fact. I really don;t see what the problem is. Please do not revert without further discussion. Robsteadman 20:28, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


I have checked out Fulham FC's article and they do not mention Wolfie Smith. I have checked the West Ham United article and they do not mention Alf Garrnet. It is without any shadow of doubt that the mentioned chracters express their club allegiance throughout almost every episode of their respective shows. The comedy 'Bottom' is not as famous or popular as 'Citizen Smith' or 'Til death do us part' and Eddie Hittler only mentions QPR in 2 or 3 episodes. Putting Eddie Hittler and the chracter from Little Britain as famous QPR fans seems a rather desperate atempt to add more people to the list. It also makes QPR fans look rather daft.

[edit] Russell Charman Is A Hoax

Please do not add this name back without providing a source. I can't find any reference for this person actually existing. dcandeto 17:41, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

The person does exist and is a qpr fan, but is not a famous one. If you look back at eailer edits you will see that it says on one revision "Russell Charman - aka charruss" the same charruss, that added an offenise comment to black burn rovers on the black burn rovers page. since then charruss has created a fake article about a "Russell Charman" who plays for a fake team, aka "The Toronto Tigers" i know this all this becuase i know the guy that keeps making these cries for attension. 14:01, 25 March 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.250.164 (talk • contribs) 14:09, 25 March 2006

The Toronto Tigers are a new candian team people may consider this fake because the Tigers are not very well known nor are the players,But take my word they do exist! and they do have a striker by the name of Russell Charman who is a QPR fan but is not connected to me in any way. The AKA Charruss Edit was mearly saying that he had the same name as me. I admit to editing the blackburn Rovers Page and since it has been reverted i have not made any more stupid comments.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Charruss (talk • contribs) 14:30, 25 March 2006

It would depend on what people see as a stupid comment. After vandisling the computer network page at school, the offensive comment on the blackburn rovers page, the creation of a team by you, called the Toronto Tigers, which i can find on record of. The only record i have found so far, of a team called the toronto tigers, is a womens in-line hockey club, and a baseball team. And after those edits you made to the other pages listed above, it is hard for me to believe that it is a real team. i'm sure i am not the only one. --81.159.250.164 14:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

PEOPLE PLEASE STOP ARGUING RUSSELL CHARMAN AND THE TORONTO TIGERS DO EXIST. please could people not delte this name just because there freinds name is the same it is so childish) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Volkan126 (talk • contribs)

The Toronto Tigers do exist, but russell does not play for them. The page here on wikipedia about the toronto Tigers is false, and if you look who created the page, you will see that is is Charruss, the same charruss that keeps adding his name to the famous fan list, when he isn't a famous fan. And how can you say that they are a new team when on the page you created says they where created in 1963. Russell charman is not manage of the toronto tigers, and there is no toronto tigers listed on the team list on the offical USL site —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.250.164 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 25 March 2006

The toronto tiger's are a football/soccer team, however the they do not play in the USL, they are a small part time team and i think they do have a player/manager called Charman although i am not sure of his first name- it is possible that this person is a QPR fan and seeing as they do have a page about them on wikipedia it is only fair that hey get added to the famous fan list. Furlong29 12:40

I have done some reasearch on the tigers and have discovered that there player/manager is called russell charman, however the chairman is called watts but not sam watts.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Furlong29 (talk • contribs) 11:42, 26 March 2006

It would be nice if you showed us this proof, at least given us a link. Unless you can find proof outside of wikipedia. A famous fan can only really be added to the list if lots of people have heard of them. the information on the toronto tigers on wikipedia was created by charruss, and can't really be classed as proof. --81.159.21.248 12:17, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

CHARRUSS HAS A USER ON WIKIPEDIA BUT MR. 81.159.250.164 OBVOUSLY DOESN'T SO WHO WOULD U TRUST MORE A REGULAT USER OR JUST SOME RANDOM IP ADRESS—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.233.145 (talk • contribs) 14:49, 26 March 2006

how hard can it be to create a user account? 5 minutes, 30 seconds? If you want me to create an account i will, but would you trust me more then? and how do we know who just said that if they didn't bother to sign it? --81.159.21.248 16:07, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

  • The Wikipedia pages on the Toronto Tigers and Russell Charman have been deleted, so do not try to use them as justification for his notability. Fan1967 00:52, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Famous fans - again.

The list of 'famous fans' is ill-fitting with the whole concept of an encyclopedia entry, so I removed it. Also, it doesn't reflect well on QPR, or its fans - it is a bit pathetic.

Qprmeteor 22:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] squad template

Could somebody who knows about the team make a squad template? Guidelines can be found here SenorKristobbal 09:37, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I've made a basic template and have placed it on the currently available player pages. Is there an easy way of editing a basic template and propogating any changes than editing every page?

Qprmeteor 23:47, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, just figured it out! Qprmeteor 00:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] QPR Userbox

I've created a QPR user box you can put on your user page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:User_QPR

Qprmeteor 23:29, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gianni Paladini/Gun incident

I have just updated the Gianni Paladini bio. I am amazed after writing it, that this page has no referral to the gun incident/resultant coup. And before anyone asks, I rewrote it because I am a big Ian Holloway fan. Rgds, - Trident13 10:01, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A note on British English

British English should be used for articles on Britain related topics. Likewise, American English should be used on articles pertaining to American topics. For a clearer example, please visit this sub-section on the differences between their usage. However, is" works better than "are" with the term club as it is a singular and not a plural noun. (Compare with the word team which is a plural noun) --Siva1979Talk to me 13:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Famous fans - yet again

The famous fans (or rumoured to be fanous fans) section has cropped up again. No other club page has this, and I feel that it should be removed as unnecessary clutter. How does everyone else feel on this? Qprmeteor 15:55, 15 November, 2006 (UTC)

I would be inclined to keep it, so long as the list is properly referenced and is made up of genuinely famous people (rather than any old Tom, Dick or Harry). I notice that the only name in it at present is not referenced. If no-one can find a reference, it should be removed. Isn't Robert Smith of the Cure a fan? The Angel of Islington 09:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
On second thoughts, I've chopped it out. Only one name and it's not referenced. If anyone wants to reinstate the section then he or she can do so with references. The Angel of Islington 07:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Robert Elms is a famous QPR supporter, he has stated that he is a QPR fan many times. I was going to add him to the list, but then it occured to me that if I was a QPR supporter, I wouldn't want to do anything to advertise any connection between the club and Robert Elms. If somebody wants to add him to the list he is definately a OPR fan and there are sources online that can be quoted, but I would understand if people prefered to leave his name off the list and keep his QPR association quiet. After all, Arsenal fans don't want Osama Bin Laden's support for the Gunners mentioned on their list either. 217.38.66.40 00:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Rod Stewart was a Ranger's fan. I watched a show at the Camden Roundhouse in 1973 and he had come straight from a game, scarf still around his neck. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alesome (talk • contribs) 18:14, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Strange, he now says he's a Celtic supporter. He was born in North London and played for Brentford as an apprentice so not sure he'd have a strong affiliation to QPR. Had probably just been given a scarf at the game as a freebie and he thought it would look good for his gig. Think we can safely say it's not worth including in the article though...Dick G (talk) 22:31, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Suspension of Richard Hill

Richard Hill remains suspended pending club investigations - presumably they will make a decision this summer. Saying that Warren Neill has replaced him gives an incorrect impression however, as he was signed on a contract until the end of the season to cover the gap in the coaching staff. John Gregory has been quoted on the official QPR website saying that he is looking for new coaching staff (including attempting to sign up Neill). Therefore Richard Hill has not been per se replaced by Warren Neill (yet!)81.154.187.97 16:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Queens Park Rangers badge.png

Image:Queens Park Rangers badge.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:43, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I will be pleased to do this in three days' time. I have law exams in the meantime. If you could hold off, that would be great. The Angel of Islington 04:59, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History of the club

Recent edits have filled out the History section but it looks a little too big now and prob warrants its own article. If this prod doesn't get a discussion going I'll add some tags in a few days.... Dick G 09:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

excellent idea, although I think the main reason why the page contains more than it needs is because of recentism 219.89.227.181 19:55, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
I definately think that it needs to be split off, and seeing as no-one has objected here in almost two months since it was suggested, I'll go ahead and do it. — Gasheadsteve Talk to me 17:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Additionally, the section titled Current season should go to Queens Park Rangers F.C. season 2007-08. — Gasheadsteve Talk to me 17:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Now done, but what's left in the main club article could probably do with a bit of tidying up. — Gasheadsteve Talk to me 17:48, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The World's Richest Club

Individuals continue to add the above statement (or variations thereof) to the page. This appears to be a common misconception of what equity investment actually means. While QPR have undoubtedly received investment from three very wealthy people this does not mean the club is wealthy by association. These investors have purchased shares in the club's holding company and will not have paid a huge amount for those shares since the club itself (and thus its share price) is not highly valued. Therefore the actual equity injection into the club is not huge and certainly not even close to the raw equity investment made at Premiership clubs whose share values are much higher. QPR is in debt and is still losing money, that alone makes it a cheap purchase. However Chelsea are reportedly also a loss-making club but are regarded as wealthy. The difference is the additional investment over and above the equity injection that is made by the indiviudual shareholders together with the club's assets (in terms of the players and the ground). Until Messrs. Mittal, Ecclestone and Briatore make those kinds of funds available to QPR and the club builds a valued portfolio of players, extinguishes its debt and removes the mortgage on its ground it will not be regarded as wealthy. A cursory look at QPR's financial statements will tell you that Rangers are far from being considered the world's richest club. I will try and add some neutral language that avoids me having to revert these errors time and time again. Dick G (talk) 23:43, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Rather appropriately the Daily Telegraph have written an article on the very point I have made above. Will add it to the relevant section... Dick G (talk) 01:07, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Just to add a lawyer's point of view: a club is wealthy only if it legally owns lots of money. A football club, just like any other company is its own legal person and quite separate from its shareholders, directors and backers. Therefore, having rich backers does not make a club any richer than I would be by having a rich grandfather. His property would remain his unless he gave it to me. 125.237.232.112 (talk) 23:59, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notable Players?

How are some of the players under the "Notable Players, Past and Present" section notable? This section is huge. Ben Sahar? Zeshan Rehman? Sampsa Timoska? Are you serious? How are they notable? QPR have almost been relegated and are currently in the bottom half of the table, how on earth is that notable? I can understand players like Martin Rowlands and Akos Buzsaky being listed there due to their recent exploits, but this list needs to be about 50% smaller. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.199.7.85 (talk) 19:04, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

How are some of the players under the "Notable Players, Past and Present" section notable? This section is huge. Ben Sahar? Zeshan Rehman? Sampsa Timoska? Are you serious? How are they notable? QPR have almost been relegated and are currently in the bottom half of the table, how on earth is that notable? I can understand players like Martin Rowlands and Akos Buzsaky being listed there due to their recent exploits, but this list needs to be about 50% smaller. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.199.7.85 (talk) 19:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Because they've played at international level. Regardless of their ability (or perceived ability) in the context of the club's current or past status they have international caps. I expect that is why they are listed but I admit I have seen no debate on the criteria for this section. Dick G (talk) 21:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rivalries

These are generally original research, and shouldn't be included without good sourcing. The problem is that sudden "rivalries" can arise because of an incident at a game (or outside it, if involving a firm) but these are generally forgotten quickly. As regards the ones that are being added at the moment;

  • I can find one reference to a Luton-QPR rivalry
  • The only reference to Watford says that it isn't a real rivalry
  • I can't find anything at all to do with Stoke
  • Previous versions tried to add Bristol City and Cardiff - nothing there either

Unless these additions are better sourced, they'll have to be removed. I have blocked the latest sock of JackQPR (User:Benyank) who kept adding it. As I say - good sources - info stays. Black Kite 12:20, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Terry Venables and Stan Bowles

Whoever rewrote the history section missed out a huge chunk of QPR's success. Runners-up in 1976 with Bowles and co? The Terry Venables era that saw them promoted and compete in the UEFA Cup within a short span? Where is this info? ByteofKnowledge (talk) 07:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

The section on this page is a summary - a more full treatment of the club's history is at History of Queens Park Rangers F.C.. The main club page needs just an abridged history but I agree that it skips about 30 years! Feel free to be bold and add it yourself, but please keep it short. Cheers Dick G (talk) 22:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I've added the missing history now. Cheers Dick G (talk) 05:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New club badge

"Before the game QPR unveiled a new club badge to signify what they hope will be a new era at Loftus Road." [1]

An article on the official site is here. Basically, this means that the current badge on our article is out of date, I would assume. Dreaded Walrus t c 17:04, 4 May 2008 (UTC)