Talk:Middlesbrough F.C.

message: Looking at the box at the top of the page, it says we're currently under review as a good article. However, we're not actually listed as being on the page. Is that normal? Mofs--86.29.17.242 14:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking at the history from the date of nomination, someone nominated lots and lots of football clubs for GA status, and then they were all removed, probably because the nomination was done so lightly and for so many things, but the notifications weren't removed. So I'll remove the tag since it's not really applicable right now. --Simmo676 15:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On the subject, what do we want to do before going for Good artile then? Is it just the "notable players" section to really sort out? I read the suggestions before and that was the only major thing to change.mofs--86.29.26.79 19:10, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: All I can think of is those notable players, so that. Sorting out the players (numbers, etc.) might also be important but that's quick to sort. --Simmo676 21:05, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good article review

message: I've nominated the article for featured article status. Given it meets the comments that were given in the peer review and it seems to meet the FA criteria as well (in my opinion anyway), I put it forward. Feel free to leave support/objections from the link at the top of the page! --Simmo676 19:30, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry if I seem rude, but why not try GA first before attempting FA? Ashnard Talk Contribs 15:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought that, given differences between the article standard and what I perceived to be FAC based on other team's articles, I might as well put it straight forward for FA status, and since an article could fail FAC but be passed on GA (I think) I thought I might as well try it out for the higher one right away. --Simmo676 15:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fair enough. Thanks. Ashnard Talk Contribs 15:48, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Featured article candidate

message: Here is a list of mostly minor issues with the article. As they are not significant enough to warrant an oppose, I have listed them here instead of the FAC.
*Is the lion mascot really significant enough to be included in the lead?
*There were major fears that the club would fold in 1986 - simpler to write "The club nearly folded in 1986" or similar.
*They finally turned professional for good - "Finally" is redundant, and "for good" is a little informal.
*The paragraph about the financial problems reads awkwardly.
*Middlesbrough fans can be found all over the world, in places as far apart as Norway,[35] Northern Ireland, South Korea,[36] Singapore,[37] Azerbaijan and New York. - it is not necessary to list different places, that is already implied by "all over the world".
*Prominent supporters clubs include the Official Supporters Club, the Middlesbrough Disabled Supporters' Association, Derbyshire Reds, and Middlesbrough Supporters South. - what makes these prominent?
*Club staff - this isn't a directory. Is the club historian etc. really that notable?
*The number of external links looks excessive, ensure that the links all meet the guidelines in WP:EL. Oldelpaso 18:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was a bit disappointed it closed while things were still ongoing, and in the small number of different respondees but I suppose with all the FAC's there are they need to be shared out and am definately thankful to those that did respond. Anyway, a "Community" section sounds good, whether in addition to or in a merged replacement of the Media section. "Public relations" maybe? Or perhaps its own section might indeed be better. --Simmo676 22:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was surprised how quickly it was closed, normally at least a week is given. Still, if all the points raised are dealt with the article should be in a strong position when it is next submitted. Oldelpaso 10:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

text: With regards the MFC in the Community inclusion, I took a look at it and it says on the website that it is completely independant of the club, however it does receive support. So, given it's separate, is it actually relevant to this article? --Simmo676 19:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Can I just point out a small error is the date really 2012? as in the following :- The First World War soon intervened and football was suspended. In 2012 Boro went on to win the league Before league football resumed, Middlesbrough won the Northern Victory League, but the team were unable to maintain their previous form and finished the 1919–20 season in mid-table.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.12.77.66 (talk) 21:43, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Minor issues

message: Just removed this paragraph:There is no notable rivalry with their immediate neighbours Hartlepool United and Darlington. This is mainly because the clubs have very rarely been in the same league. In fact some Middlesbrough fans indirectly support the two clubs by looking out for results and occasionally attending games when Middlesbrough are not playing.
Block quote
Seemed a bit jarring. Feel free to renter it if you can reference it - I couldn't find any specific articles online myself. --Mofs (talk) 23:27, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rivals 

message: I just submitted the article for a peer review to see how we can get it to FA. I also have been editing  Steve Gibson's page recently and would appreciate any comments/ changes people can make to improve it. A picture of him (fair use of course) would be particuarly useful.
Cheers guys.--Mofs (talk) 10:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, with reference to the peer review from OldElPaso, I've removed these links. We don't need that many!--Mofs (talk) 07:23, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review etc 

message: Are the "Smoggies" really a nickname that Middlesbrough fans use? I always thought it was a derogatory name used by rival supporters. Or have Boro fans embraced it like how Arsenal have embraced "Gooners". --Tocino 18:17, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed it is a nickname of derogatory origins that fans have adopted for their own use. One of the most common uses of the term is in the phrase "Smoggies on tour" (see link) displayed on flags while on away trips, especially during the UEFA Cup run. --Simmo676 (talk) 21:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Also it has not been unknown for away fans to turn up at the ground dressed in nuclear/biological warfare protection suits, although this is now frowned upon by the police and there has been a few expulsions from the ground.--The Mercenary 73 (talk) 18:32, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nicknames 

message: hello
has anyone got a free use picture of the manager to help improved his wiki page. (Off2riorob (talk) 17:31, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  gareth southgate 

message: I think that the club's debt of £85 million is sufficiently noteworthy to be added to the main article. --New Thought (talk) 08:10, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Club Debt 

message: Hi - a string of edits from 86.141.196.22, who doesn't use edit summaries, have made a fair lot of change in the "Legends" section. I don't know this topic and hope these edits are correct - can anyone verify? Cheers DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 10:40, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh and here's the main diff - hope this helps. DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 10:42, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some edits from 86.141.196.22 

message: I'm still worried about the Legends bit. It's getting edited a bit, but it claims it is sourced from the Evening Gazette. Surely, if it is a known, existing list, then it doesn't need editing, and a good ref can be provided, and it should be stable, woo hoo. A half-holiday for the village schoolchildren and chocolate pennies all round; thank you Lady Pease. On the other hand if it's just people's personal opinions on who is or is not "a legend", which is what some recent edits look like, then the list should not be here and all and needs deleted. Do please comment, I feel as if I'm whistling in the dark here! :) DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 07:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just taken a look at the original version of the Legends list, which excludes Mark Schwarzer, Robbie Mustoe and Graeme Souness. Mattythewhite (talk) 07:42, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Great, and thank you for the reply. Do you think that that represents a stable version that should be regarded as "the right one" and if so can we give a reference for it? Cos there is no way it's going to remain stable, I fear, unless it's possible to point to one thing and say "but this is the right one"! cheers DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 07:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The ref we give at the Gazette has gone. However the Wayback Machine still has it and it lists these players:
1. GEORGE CAMSELL
2. GEORGE HARDWICK
3. WILF MANNION
4. BRIAN CLOUGH
5. JOHN HICKTON
6. WILLIE MADDREN
7. TONY MOWBRAY
8. BERNIE SLAVEN
9. JUNINHO
10. GARETH SOUTHGATE
- and that's yer lot. Fans voted for that list of 10 from an initial shortlist of 40. The list of 40 is also on that page but it does not explain how the 40 got onto the list, so if this article is talking about the list that was voted for, it's the 10 above. Please have a look at the archived page and see what you think. Cheers DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 08:13, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Since someone very helpfully added the Wayback Machine archive for this, I've put in an HTML comment which I hope may dissuade people from changing the list. Cheers DBaK (talk) 11:35, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legends ? 

message: The capacity of the ground was recently modified and in trying to verify the change I looked at the source quoted and found that a specific figure was not given only some vague capacity details. A reference that actually gives the figure quoted is required. I have tagged it with  until a suitable source can be supplied. Keith D (talk) 11:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added Middlesbrough's official site as a ref, which notes that recent modifications have reduced the capacity to 34,988. Fribbler (talk) 12:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Keith D (talk) 16:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Ground capacity

message: Is there a page for this on the go?Mofs (talk) 17:11, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: 2009-10 season

message: When does the season actually, officially, properly change over? It's a mess of back-and-forths at the moment and at least of the edits are not even well done which gives us broken links and factually wrong juxtapositions. Is there some consensus reachable here (or already reached elsewhere??) on when the changes should actually happen? The whim of individual editors (yes, including me!) is surely not a good guideline ... :) Best wishes DBaK (talk) 07:36, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The official changeover date is 1 July of each year, it is also the date when players who are out of contract leave. I think there is some agreement on the football project to retain information as is until that date. The same problem happens every year when people keep changing the league and the playing squad before the changeover date. Keith D (talk) 08:23, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Season changeover date? 

message: As of 8th April 2010, this page has been heavily reduced in size with a host of references removed. Compare now with: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Middlesbrough_F.C.&action=historysubmit&diff=346689279&oldid=340498968. I have attempted to put some sections back how they were but I'm sure there's a better way to do it... who deleted everything in the first place?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.160.12 (talk) 10:18, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Abuse/mass deletion

message: The History section of this article is so littered with POV that it's almost unbelievable. I'll start cleaning this up. Dancarney (talk) 10:34, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: Is there a definitive list of correct nicknames anywhere? I've just reverted the list to an earlier version but I'm not sure it's correct yet. I was sure that at least one recent contribution was a joke or mistake, and others seem dubious, but surely there's some reference somewhere which can nail this for sure and not just have it dangling in the breeze? On a separate but related matter, if you are sure that it needs to list both "Boro" and "The Boro", as if they were two separate nicknames and no-one could ever infer the one from the other, do please feel free to say so. <g> Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 18:45, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nicknames again 

message: A discussion is being held here on the possibility of rolling out a new squad template. The new template, named , differs from the standard squad layout in several ways:
*It features a sort function
*Comes in a single column format that can be understood by screen readers.
**Single column format ensures that low resolution browsers, including mobile devices, do not get part or all of the second column cut off.
**Single column format ensures less clutter, particularly at lower resolutions, for wide sections such as the Arsenal loan section.
*It gives nationality its own column; at present flags are featured in a blank, untitled column
*It complies with Wikipedia's guidance on flag usage. 
*It leaves enough space to add images of current players, an example of which can be seen at Watford F.C#Current squad. 
It is proposed that the new template be added to some of Wikipedia's most high-profile club articles, which might include . To give your thoughts, please read and contribute to the discussion at WikiProject Football. 
Regards, Edinburgh Wanderer 19:42, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Squad table format 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Middlesbrough F.C.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131024081843/http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/news/latest/0%2C%2C1~3505015%2C00.html to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/news/latest/0%2C%2C1~3505015%2C00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130902035155/http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/club/stadium-story to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/club/stadium-story
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131020074918/http://www.footballfanscensus.com/issueresults/Club_Rivalries_Uncovered_Results.pdf to http://www.footballfanscensus.com/issueresults/Club_Rivalries_Uncovered_Results.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/boro-fc/boro-fc-news/tm_headline%3Dwe-ll-be-spot-on%26method%3Dfull%26objectid%3D18751361%26siteid%3D109975-name_page.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/News/ClubNewsDetail/0%2C%2C1~1499019%2C00.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/News/ClubNewsDetail/0%2C%2C1~586586%2C00.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nationalfootballmuseum.com/halloffame.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:52, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: How come Middlesbrough's new kits arent in the article instead of last seasons? --Kind regards ChocolateRabbit  23:05, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably because no one has worked out/created the appropriate icons to create the new kit. Keith D (talk) 11:30, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kit icons 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Middlesbrough F.C.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140222062407/http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/anglo-scottish-cup/1975-1976/results/fn to http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/anglo-scottish-cup/1975-1976/results/fn
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120421145629/http://www.football-league.co.uk/clubs/20100801/middlesbrough_2293498_1781145 to http://www.football-league.co.uk/clubs/20100801/middlesbrough_2293498_1781145
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:21, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Middlesbrough F.C.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140222062718/http://www.statto.com/football/teams/middlesbrough/2009-2010/table/2009-10-21 to http://www.statto.com/football/teams/middlesbrough/2009-2010/table/2009-10-21
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140222062721/http://www.statto.com/football/teams/middlesbrough/2009-2010/table to http://www.statto.com/football/teams/middlesbrough/2009-2010/table
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:52, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 11 external links on Middlesbrough F.C.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131116054519/http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/club/club-history/0,,1~51936,00.html to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/club/club-history/0,,1~51936,00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140223004856/http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/club/club-history/0,,1~352488,00.html to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/club/club-history/0,,1~352488,00.html
*Added  tag to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/club/club-history/0,,1~352495,00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120726204352/http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/club/club-history/0,,1~352502,00.html to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/club/club-history/0,,1~352502,00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140222163952/http://origin-www.premierleague.com/page/middlesbrough to http://origin-www.premierleague.com/page/middlesbrough
*Added  tag to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/news/latest/0,,1~1201014,00.html
*Added  tag to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/news/latest/0,,1~1209302,00.html
*Added  tag to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/news/latest/0,,1~1307364,00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203203725/http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/club/grounds to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/club/grounds
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140213133040/http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/club/rockliffe-park to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/club/rockliffe-park
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131205045541/http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/fans/supporters-clubs to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/fans/supporters-clubs
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110326082920/http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/fans/flags-and-banners/0,,1~618925,00.html to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/fans/flags-and-banners/0,,1~618925,00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131211062304/http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/news/latest/0,,1~3107912,00.html to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/news/latest/0,,1~3107912,00.html
*Added  tag to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/news/latest/0,,1~1168641,00.html
*Added  tag to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/news/latest/0,,1~1264934,00.html
*Added  tag to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/news/latest/0,,1~1798024,00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140402204127/http://www.middlesbrough-mad.co.uk/sngl/ed21/other_history_section/index.shtml to http://www.middlesbrough-mad.co.uk/sngl/ed21/other_history_section/index.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130606202951/http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/club/managers-index to http://www.mfc.co.uk/page/club/managers-index
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:20, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: So a string of edits has added all of Middlesbrough's U23 players to the first team player's list and the changes haven't been reverted. I just wanted to know why as there is already a page dedicated to the U23 and U18 squads where the players are already listed there (Middlesbrough F.C. Reserves and Academy). It makes no sense to have the U23 players mixed in with the first team, no? ~~ Brududesom (talk) 11:09, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - the youth team aren't needed here if listed on their own page, I have redone the list based on the first team as given on the official website and updated the citation accessdate. EdwardUK (talk) 12:00, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits to Players section