Talk:Fenerbahçe S.K.

message: Hey, here you go...
*Citations must be placed per WP:CITE, that is usually immediately after punctuation.
*Lead citations are a bit over the top.  In general the lead is okay without citation because you talk about what's in the lead later on in the main part of the article and that's the best place for the citation.
*"Yellow Canaries" - citation required.
*"Official site writes Black Stocking FC (founded in 1899), Kadıköy FC (founded in 1902) and Fenerbahçe FC (founded in 1907) are same clubs, at least most of founders are same.[13] " - sorry to sound blunt but that really doesn't make much sense.  I'd suggest an English copyedit.
*"However this information is unsubstantiated and unproved." - then why use it?
*"On the other hand, a historian and journalist Selahattin Duman did a research[14] on Fenerbahçe history in recent years. In his serial articles that published on SABAH newspaper, he states that there isn't evidence of Fenerbahçe before 1907, but the Black Stockings." - again, an English copyedit needed.
*Supporters section completely unreferenced.
*Technical staff is borderline trivia.
*Notable players - what makes them notable?  Inherently WP:POV I'm afraid.  Check out some football WP:FA's like Arsenal F.C. for help here.
*Date ranges must use en-dash so 1963-64 should be 1963&nash;64, see WP:DASH for the details, and be consistent, it's either 2001–02 or 2001–2002 (prefer former).
*For the other sports sections, use  and expand more on each.
*References - don't use the scrolling ref table.  Use two columns with .
It's a long way from a GA in my opinion.  The biggest issue is the lack of English copyediting, so right now I'll fail it.  Feel free to get in touch with me for anything specific.  The Rambling Man 17:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA review comments 

message: Apart from the improvements suggest above, the tone of this article is very unsuitable for an encyclopedia. To take but one example, please review this sentence "The passion of the Fenerbahçe fans has been recognised by many of the teams that dare to pay the visit to the deadly feud that these Turkish giants thrive in". Apart from being poorly constructed, what is meant by "the teams that dare to pay the visit(sic!)"? An equally serious error is that the whole article is written in very bad English. Just look at the first sentence of the first paragraph "Official site writes Black Stocking FC (founded in 1899), Kadıköy FC (founded in 1902) and Fenerbahçe FC (founded in 1907) are same clubs, at least most of founders are same". This sentence alone contains at least five rather obvious language errors. With so many errors in one single sentence, it is not surprising that it gets hard to read the article because of the language. If possible, someone with a good command of English should rewrite this article, correcteing all the language mistakes and aiming at more suitable wording in many cases. JdeJ (talk) 16:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peacock terms and poor English 

message: The text drops a number of unknown name at you, especially in the history section
*Ziya Songülen and Necip Okaner founded Fenerbahçe Spor Külübü a century ago in 1907 on Beşbıyık Street in Moda - What is Moda?
*Ayetullah became the first General Secretary - Who is Ayetullah?
JdeJ (talk) 10:51, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Things to improve

message: someone made a typo on the capacity it has a full stop instead of a comma.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.173.98 (talk) 14:41, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is an arguable point given that many European countries use the decimal point as a thousands separator and the comma for decimals.  I doubt that anyone would believe that the stadium capacity was 60!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanel76 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  stadium capacity 

message: he could be the new manager  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.170.86.213 (talk) 21:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Luis Aragones  

message: Where is the list of notable players? why it was deleted? Scragnothh (talk) 17:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable players?

message: Unlike L.Küçükandonyadis is a Rum(half Turk half Greek), we should know that he was a Turkish national team striker, also he has been living in (Prince Islands-Büyük Ada)Turkiye since he is known ever. I think we should put only Turkish flag; i'm strongly sure that if he was asked about this, he wished to be appeared as a Turk when his name is seen on the screen.
This issues may seem weird for some but actually the Greek Flag next to his name is the real weird thing, because as  many know he is currently a Turkish Citizen.
Kutay 22:54, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Lefter's Nationality

message: Please remember that Wikipedia is not a gossip forum and it is not a crystal ball. Players should only be added as squad mambers after the transfer has actually taken place and not before.  In particlular :Emre Belözoğlu keeps getting added as a squad member.  If you look at his article page, you'll see that the transfer is on hold. So for the time being he remains a Newcastle United squad member. When the transfer takes place, then he can be added as a Fenerbahche squad member. DrFrench (talk) 18:20, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transfer 'rumours' 

message: Anyone willing to fix it?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.230.106 (talk) 10:40, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for volunteering. The edit button is thataway. -- Escape Artist Swyer Talk Contributions 18:42, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page is a car-wreck 

message: Why is there an English flag near Colin Kazim's name? He plays in the Turkish national team. Please also edit his page. And also its the same for Ali Bilgin. In their page it says " ... born Turkish player". So they're theoretically Turkish.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.165.155.142 (talk) 14:41, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kazim 

message: This is an automated message regarding an image used on this page. The image :File:100th year logo.jpg, found on :Fenerbahçe S.K., has been nominated for deletion because it does not meet Wikipedia image policy. Please see the image description page for more details. If this message was sent in error (that is, the image is not up for deletion, or was left on the wrong talk page), please contact ST47. STBotI (talk) 01:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: An image on this page may be deleted

message: I know that Fenerbahçe are in the Asian part of Turkey but Turkey's mainly in Europe so are they entitled to chose which Champions League they partake in? The C of E (talk) 17:54, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no seperation for Turkish clubs to participate in continental competitions. Turkish teams in all sports disciplines compete in European cups since the contentions are held in professional terms, appr. since late 50s. Cheers, Umi1903 (talk) 08:48, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  In-Continents 

message: That article is needed to semi-protection due to vandalist attacks day by day. Would any admin protect that please. Thank you. Rangond (talk) 17:31, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection Requirement 

message: fenerbahce was found in 1907, not 1905. 1905 is foundation time of rival of fenerbahce, galatasaray.
:Thats correct, it is 1907, verified on official website. Hitro talk 18:34, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  not 1905 

message: I don't find this section encyclopedic. It is unsourced and I assume its factual accuracy can never be verified. It should be removed.Hitro talk 18:36, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As this section stands it is original research and shouldn't be included. Regardless, I really don't feel that these famous fans sections are worth noting in football club articles, particularly clubs with a huge fanbase, which will inevitably include notable/famous people. Dancarney (talk) 08:48, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have removed it, Please discuss here before restoring. Hitro talk 18:53, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable Fans!!! 

message: This article has quite a few issues. These are the ones that occur to me.
*Lot's of usage of "Turkcell Süper Lig" - unsponsored name should be used to avoid confusionwhen sponsors change, so Süper Lig.
*A lot of the English is very poor in the History section "So strict in fact that the Sultan, Abdulhamit the 2nd, forbid that the Turkish youth may not set up a club nor engage in the game of football played by the English families that was watched in envy." is a prime example. The emphasis is far too heavy on the club's 21st Century history - 585 words on 1905-2000, 682 words on 2001-2009. Things such as Zico's nickname do not belong here.
*Historical players is a terrible title. There seems to be no explanation for why these players deserve their own paragraph rather than any others. 
*Too many club vice-presidents and members of staff included. I don't think that the names of the club Masseurs or Vice-President responsible for Law & Institutional Relations are worthy of inclusion.
*The lists of former presidents and managers are so big that they shouldn't be included, particularly as we already have :Category:Fenerbahçe S.K. presidents and List of Fenerbahçe S.K. managers, which may be linked to instead. This would ease reading of this page.
*The records section has massive overuse of bold text, is completely unreferenced, and includes details already covered in the previous (Acheivements) section, such as Most Istanbul Football Leagues won. The record victories should only be the greatest goal difference achieved in one game by the club. Anything less is not a record. I previously put some of the individual records with the rest of the club records, but they appear to have been moved back.
*Transfers In and Out do not belong on this page, it's too much recentism. Transfers may be detailed in individual season articles, perhaps something like Fenerbahçe S.K. 2009–10 season, or Transfers in Turkish football Summer 2009.
*Scorers in Turkish national team is totally irrelevant to a club team's article and should not be included.
*Player award winners should only include where players have one an international competition whilst contracted to Fenerbahçe, otherwise this is also irrelevant.
*Lot's of POV in the Museum and Stadium sections "The Fenerbahçe Şükrü Saracoğlu Stadium is rapidly becoming one of Europe’s elite football arenas" and "Fenerbahçe has a huge leading profile over other clubs concerning trophies. " shouldn't be in here, for example.
*Sponsorship - is this really of interest/relevance?
*Support section goes on a bit. It reads like a series of mini-adverts for the various supporters' groups'  websites. That bit should just be a list of the different supporters' groups, as there is not much more to say about them of note.
I'm sure there's other stuff, but I think that's plenty of issues to address for a start. Dancarney (talk) 11:08, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a good effort to bring these problems under light, I shall try on my part to improve this article. Hitro talk 18:55, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whilst page is locked, my problems with it 

message: In the Historical Players section it is mentioned that Wederson is playin for the Fenerbahce. But Wederson had signed with Bursaspor last month.here is the link: http://www.tff.org.tr/Default.aspx?pageId=526&kisiId=30098. Please correct that mistake.. 95.142.137.144 (talk) 17:09, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wederson is a Bursaspor player 

message: Guiza and Kazim are not in the plans of Aykut Kocaman, they will be sold soon. 195.240.250.105 (talk) 08:07, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guiza and Kazim 

message: I have been removing overly detailed kit images from this article's infobox because they are problematic -  firstly, the adidas logos are included, which is a potential breach of copyright, something which Wikipedia has to strenuously try and avoid. Secondly, these logos are overdetailed, making the image cluttered - note that Template:Football kit states "the template is for showing basic team colours. It is not supposed to be an accurate drawing of the kit." Sadly, an editor keeps undoing this without specifying a reason. I have tried to start a discussion on their user page, but no response was forthcoming. I can see no good reason why the images in this edit should be replaced by the ones in this one. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 15:13, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As the page is now locked, it would be most helpful if a discussion could commence.Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 14:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Mind if I add a 3rd opinion on this as it was me who noticed the dispute and requested the protection? I totally agree with your statement on that adidas logo s we don't want to get hit with any copyright charges. But I do think that you may be overreacting on the other things as you say the logos are over detailed but apart from the adidas logo, I see no other logos on it at all. From what I've noticed it's not as bad as some I've seen such as the ones at 2009–10 FC Barcelona season and Barcelona Sporting Club So my compromise for this would be allow the one he was trying to add but remove the adidas logo from it to avoid the copyright things as I don't think that the kit is cluttered at all with the extra detail. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 16:33, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The images I used are the same, but with the adidas logo removed! I had to make new images from the ones being used as they were on Commons, and on Commons an editor is insistent on getting logos, crest, sponsors names, etc. in there. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 16:38, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well the ones he was doing seemed to have different coloured shorts and socks opposed to the mainly plain white ones we have here. That's why I got the impression they were different. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 16:42, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

text: Oh, It's just that I noticed in this edit that he tried to add, he tried to have blue shorts and socks opposed to plain white ones. Not being an expert on Turkish football, I don't really know which one is the correct kit for Fenerbahçe.  The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 07:26, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The club's website has images of white shorts and socks for the home kit, with away/third colours of all-blue and all-white.. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 08:37, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kit excess detail 

message: lebron james is not the chairman lol  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.63.198 (talk) 17:40, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  chairman 

message: Fenerbahce won European medals in the swimming and athletics sections, their boxing section recruits european and world champions. Fenerbahce athletes also won many Olympic medals. 195.240.250.105 (talk) 09:14, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Important 

message: We need a seperate section for the football team like Galatasaray lol Wikipedia bureaucracy has continually stopped any and all of my efforts. Help!1907AbsoluTurk (talk) 19:43, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you suggesting that Fenerbahçe S.K. should be the article for the multi-sports club and that there should be a separate article Fenerbahçe S.K. (football team)? If so, be bold and go for it. There is indeed precedent with Galatasaray. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 19:56, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

text: It looks like a major problem is that when you're creating the page you are not putting in an edit summary, nor any hatnotes at the top of the article, and so bots will flag this up. With any explanation of what is being done then the new article qualifies for speedy deletion. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 09:28, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that there is now a Fenerbahçe S.K. (football team), and this is where things such as the current football squad, kit images, etc should be. Not on this article. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 15:53, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fenerbahce (Football Team) 

message: Given the recent ban on adult males at Fenerbahce, shouldn't there be a small section on this blatant sexism? It's a vile example of such and where clubs practice such blanket sex/race bans, it ought to be highlighted. OldSquiffyBat (talk) 08:25, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sexism at Fenerbahce 

message: No indication of how this very short article meets notability guidelines.  Appears to be sentences simply moved from the main article. RadioFan (talk) 00:42, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, FB Radio and Fenerium should be merged with this article, there isn't enough information for them to have their own seperate article.I can metge them as soon as there is new confirmation and also we should propose those articles for deletion if this proposal is accepted.Rivaner (talk) 15:22, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Fenerium]] and  [[FB Radio]] 

message: I have looked through the article quickly but couldn't find any original research, maybe I didn't look really well :). So if anybody can point out the "original research" parts, I am ready to replace them with proper sources and new information. Thanks for your time.Rivaner (talk) 15:25, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians and Mr. Pereira,
There was a statistics declared about the last Fenerbahce-Antalyaspor match, it is the “Throws/Successful Throws count” as Antalya:13/3 Fenerbahce:33/3 !
What does that mean?
It means that Fenerbahce is devastated by Caner/Şener, as it is the case in many other matches, who are beleived as the most successful back players of Turkey.
These two players spent 30 attacks of Fenerbahçe by themselves, they gave the ball they posess as a gift to their opponent.
They, especially Caner, threw the ball sharply, without aiming anyone, through over the crowd. 
Nobody feels uncomfortable from this fact. You spent most of the Fenerbahce attacks like this, and nobody says “Hey, what kind of attack organization is this, don’t you  have any other action like strutting, two to one, dribbling, etc. ?  Why then in every attack you toss away the ball over the crowd or throw it to out? 
 
Please watch the match again to observe this, you will understand what I mean.
 
Ok, then thinking that the attack organization of FB is mainly “the throws of Caner/Şener or Gökhan”, how many is the goal/asist counts of these three players in 20 leage mathes? I say it, just 1! (By words: One)
 
They say that FB backs always attend to the attacks, what is the result? One asist in 20 matches!
 
Besides, these men also always abandon the defence, so, poor stoppers act like backs, and poor Mehmet Topal acts like stopper, these three’s contribution to defence is minimal.  
 
As a summary:
Caner / Sener / Gökhan  are not doing defensive duties well, and offensively they toss the ball meaninglessly onto the crowd, so they spend much of the attacks of FB.
 
This is my opinion. 
If you agree please stop the backs Caner/Şener spending the attacks. 
 
The statistic is clear: 33/3
Veysel Peru Veyselperu (talk) 14:43, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Does this have anything to do with the article? Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 15:20, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

text: As far as I can understand, you are giving your personal opinions on the very recent tactics of Fenerbahçe's football team. What is the verifiable, relevant information that you think to be added to this article about the Fenerbahçe multi-sport club? Also, why is this directed to the current manager of the team? The "good of Fenerbahçe" is irrelevant for Wikipedia. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 09:27, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion 

message: The table gives a short overview about the major international honours, while the active departments section is generally about the department, its history, all honours won etc. Furthermore, the figures about the international honours in the infobox in the lead section are linking to the table, so please stop deleting it. Baki.d (talk) 10:24, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The table is a repetition of information further down the page, and selective in its scope. If you have this table you also have to have a table of national honours won, and that would get unweildy to the point of uselessness. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 10:40, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It's in a totally different form after all, plus the runners-up positions are also listed, while in the departments section only the championship titles are being shown. Also, international honours > national and regional honours. It doesn't harm to have this table. Baki.d (talk) 10:55, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't see how the different form is relevant - it doesn't add anything. If you think runners-up places should be included then include them for the different sections and at national level - don't pick and choose arbitrarily. Just because international honours are "greater", that doesn't mean that national level honours aren't important. Whether or not there is "harm", I think that this table is repeating honours as a way of puffing up the article. The facts should stand as they are, don't need to state them more than once. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 11:39, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The point is the infobox links to them, and as such they are all in a clear overview in one table, in one spot. That's not the case in the departments section. I don't see how stating that international honours are more important than national ones is arbitrary, it's a simple fact. And I didn't say that the others are unimportant, but they aren't as noteworthy as the international ones. Plus other similar multi-sport club articles also have it, like Galatasaray for example. Why not just let it be? Baki.d (talk) 12:10, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't a valid argument, but I don't think we're going to reach an agreement here. Could do with some third party input from neutral editors. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 16:28, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It was me who included that table. As Baki.d already pointed out, the figures in the infobox link to it, so I say keep it. Akocsg (talk) 22:21, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table concerning international honours 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
* 
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:53, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:22, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion