Talk:Football pitch

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Football pitch. 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/20131023004546/http://www.the-afc.com/en/football-development/referees/26293-evolution-of-football-field-markings to http://www.the-afc.com/en/football-development/referees/26293-evolution-of-football-field-markings
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) 11:49, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Triangular corner flags in English football was closed as keep; however, there was some support for some kind of merge in the discussion. This discussion is to test if there is consensus for a merge, or if a separate article is sufficient. Some editors in the AfD argued that merging this to Football pitch argued that a merge would be WP:UNDUE; this will also be discussed in this discussion. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 20:56, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: *This is not double jeopardy; the admin who closed the AfD made it clear that a merge could be pursued if it was deemed appropriate. (It should be noted that The C of E created the article in question, and is naturally in favor of retaining it as a separate entity.) BlueMoonset (talk) 23:51, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

text: *Also pinging AfD closer  Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:07, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: *Pinging all the contributors after there was no opposition to the opposition after a week, which was justifiably given, does seem to be WP:CANVASS to me. Otherwise, why was it not done straight away? May I humbly suggest WP:STICK here as the majority still believe that the article should be kept as it is.  The C of E   God Save the Queen! (talk) 08:04, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all, this is not canvassing: this is precisely the reason why I notified all participants of the discussion, as opposed to only editors who took one side. Secondly,  said in his closing edit that a merge discussion could be pursued, which is being what is done here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:25, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

text: Again, I'm pointing out something that I might not agree with - but if things are even on AfD, then you may get a different merge perspective on the actual talk page. I personally am unsure about which way I want to jump. Nosebagbear (talk) 09:55, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

text: Oppose not double jeopardy because the closer suggested bringing it here, but I would have voted merge at the AfD if I thought it proper. SportingFlyer talk 16:21, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

text: Oppose no consensus at AFD and there is no obvious merge target. I don't believe the article is to niche either.Blethering Scot 08:46, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: For historical reasons, the dimensions of the pitch are given in whole numbers of yards.  I propose we switch the likes of "16.46 metres (18 yd)" to "18 yards (16.46m)".  —Quantling (talk | contribs) 14:14, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I made the change to use the historic, round numbers instead of the modern, high-precision numbers. —Quantling (talk | contribs) 17:42, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yards and metres 

message: I see from your edit history that the Sido Makmur SP II Field is one that you are knowledgeable about.  I appreciate what appears to be enthusiasm on your part but, please, highlighting it serves no purpose to the present article.  Can we remove the image without having to go to Wikipedia arbitration?  —Quantling (talk | contribs) 19:28, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Miscellaneous pitch