Talk:St Kilda Football Club

message: What does the table of Attendances represent? It seems like a mix of all attendances, with the inclusion of the 22,000 against Port Adelaide. Needs to be changed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.181.29.189 (talk) 05:50, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attendances? 

message: Do Not Valndalise the factual information plced on the article.
Have reverted the article back to the version with the encyclopedic information regarding our clubs awards and honours.
DONT ACT LIKE A MORON.
IF YOU ARE ONE LEAVE THE ARTICLES TO SOMEONE WITH A SENSE OF FACT.  
210.50.228.5 (talk) 01:28, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: These charming comments above are brought to you by the one and only BrianBeahr, an indefinitely blocked editor.  His edit and comment style are instantly recognisable.  We will not be bullied by you Brian.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.180.244.218 (talk) 14:11, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: According to the company names registry, "St Kilda Saints Football Club Ltd" is the new legal name of the social club only - and NOT the football club itself which appears to be still registered under the name of "St Kilda Football Club Ltd".  If anyone has any evidence to the contrary then please provide it.  Otherwise please don't change the official name of the club in the article. Afterwriting (talk) 17:03, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official football club name 

message: It it becoming increasingly apparent that this article - and other St Kilda F.C. articles - is once again being subjected to sockpuppet editing by an indefinitely blocked user. I am currently monitoring the suspected sockpuppet's edits. Afterwriting (talk) 16:08, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If you believe you see new sockpuppets of User:BrianBeahr working on this article, it helps if you can provide diffs to show the resemblance. EdJohnston (talk) 18:27, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It is almost certainly him again but at present he is flying just under the radar and not making it blatantly obvious.  At present I don't know how to do the "diffs" thing properly. Afterwriting (talk) 11:09, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  FYI  -  Sockpuppet editing 

message: It has become increasingly obvious that the "new" editor User:BawBaw1 is yet another in the long list of sockpuppet accounts of the indefinitely blocked user User:BrianBeahr.  I have, therefore, reverted his most recent edits.  Brian, I do not wish for you to be indefinitely blocked, but you have been for numerous valid reasons.  If you want to edit on Wikipedia you will need to do so by following the correct process for getting yourself unblocked.  Seeking to avoid the block by continuing to create sockpuppet accounts will not achieve anything.  You really need to understand this and do something about it. Afterwriting (talk) 11:05, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further sockpuppeting by BrianBeahr 

message: (the entire article was copied here. it has been deleted for the sake of brevity elektrikSHOOS 05:21, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: Don't just copy the entire page. Please say what specifically needs to be edited, in the form of "Please change X to Y." elektrikSHOOS 05:21, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 210.50.115.227, 19 September 2010 

message: To update the 2010 GF results
CrysysKore (talk) 08:10, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Please request changes in the form of "Please change X to Y." elektrikSHOOS 17:37, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from CrysysKore, 2 October 2010 

message: Anx10else think that the artice need soures and is pro st kilda? Stilltha1 (talk) 11:03, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Stilltha1, your spelling and grammar could use some improvement, but yes, I agree, the latest scandal is notable (receiving major media coverage) and should be covered in the article. I'm too lazy, though - someone will do it, hopefully. 203.45.95.236 (talk) 13:25, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  sources 

message: Nearly all pages for other AFL clubs have this, so St Kilda needs it as well.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sverik25 (talk • contribs) 07:00, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs an Attendances/Membership section 

message: I'm bringing this here because it's one of the clubs Mick has been associated with. I'm just seeking a few more views on a discussion underway about an image an editor has proposed for the article. See the article history and the Tak page. HiLo48 (talk) 03:14, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: As Malthouse did not have any premiership success at St Kilda as a player then I can't see any reason why there should be a photo of him in the article. His association with St Kilda is not prominent in the public mind. His prominence in AFL is nearly all about his coaching career rather than his playing career. So I would not support including a photo of him in the St Kilda article. There are many other more appropriate people than him. Yahboo (talk) 07:56, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry to have confused you. The proposal at hand is for a photo to be added to the Mick Malthouse article, not this one. HiLo48 (talk) 09:31, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed [[Mick Malthouse]] picture 

message: Didn't the club have a dalliance with the nickname "Panthers" for a few years? 2001:44B8:201:6C00:2CF9:F9EE:487A:3D67 (talk) 07:53, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Panthers 

message: Not sure why this is as it is the same club, just a different team. The other article seems to insinuate that it is a separate club "franchise". Rulesfan (talk) 01:00, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Women's team in separate article?