Talk:Buxton F.C.

message: 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. I have made the necessary changes. Please feel free to comment on this. --Siva1979Talk to me 18:13, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A note on British English 

message: I have been trying to develop the entry for Buxton FC if anyone has any suggestions or information please can they get in touch with me through this page.
Thanks.
Ladybucks 15:44, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A request for any additional information

message: "Situated over 1000 feet above sea level, the Silverlands is the highest ground within the Pyramid of football and substantially higher than the highest Football League ground which is The Hawthorns built in 1900, standing at 551 feet above sea level. Next comes Vale Park (525 feet) and Boundary Park (509 feet)."
Sorry - this is untrue I'm afraid.  There are two higher grounds then the ones listed - #2. Is Tow Law Town F.C. which according to The Ordinance Survey is a whopping 300 metres above sea level or 984 in old money, and #3 is A.F.C. Emley whose ground is located between 180 and 190 meters (185m = 606ft) on my map. --Gavinio 12:19, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's cool - thought you still ground shared with them.  I just thought if you're talking about NL football the references should be absolute - anyway, it inspired me to make the page listing the highest grounds! --Gavinio 11:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Height of Ground 

message: The statement "A wooden stand was erected on one side of the pitch and replaced by the current main stand in 1965" is incorrect. The correct date was 1958. I was involved in taking the old stand down and building the new one. I did try to correct the article, but Wikipedia preferred to trust some obscure football magazine that first published the wrong date. Beardmore. 2A02:C7C:58D4:D300:A0AB:8B82:7531:3C5 (talk) 10:16, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you know of a published source – a newspaper or other magazine, say – that has the correct date? Unfortunately Wikipedia requires a reliable source, and a personal account doesn't count (I'm not suggesting you're wrong, just explaining the policy). Dave.Dunford (talk) 17:24, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in Wikipedia article 

message: User:Number 57 and I are in dispute over the inclusion of the sentence  before mention of their reaching the second round of the FA Cup and winning the Derbyshire Senior Cup the same season (2022–23). I didn't originally add this, as it happens, but I think it's arguably as significant as their cup run (and definitely more significant than winning the Derbyshire Senior Cup). It's their second-highest league finish ever (since 1980–81, apparently). Number 57 considers this "a fairly routine season" and cites WP:RECENTISM. I disagree. Dave.Dunford (talk) 12:58, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not their second-highest league finish (why do you keep making these inaccurate claims?) – they have finished in a higher league position at least five times since the formal pyramid came into existence (and their spell in the Combination in the 1890s was arguably at a higher level). None of the other high-finishes are referenced, so it clearly is recentism to mention this one. Number 57 15:02, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I was misinterpreting what you said in your edit summary – apologies – and I hadn't realised that the Northern Premier League was previously tier 6 (I'm not a Buxton fan or non-league expert). But I'd argue that it's not that the recent success is being given undue weight, but that their earlier history is under-represented; if the article were more comprehensive, those earlier successes would be mentioned. And surely missing out on the playoffs by a point is more significant than winning the Derbyshire Senior Cup? I'm also not sure why you're getting so upset about the inclusion of one short sentence containing easily verifiable information. Dave.Dunford (talk) 17:17, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure why you're getting so upset about the exclusion of one sentence about a not-particularly-notable end of season position. You have twice misunderstood the level of notability of the season in question, and just seem to be digging in to defend the initial misunderstanding. Or, from previous interactions, it seems you just don't like people editing text you've added or amended. Number 57 19:18, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll leave it alone, but WP:AGF. Dave.Dunford (talk) 22:27, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  League position 2022–23