Talk:History of Ipswich Town F.C.

England managers

I know what's meant, but it's odd language (formally) to say the club "produced" Robson/Ramsey. They're not battery chickens. --Dweller (talk) 12:25, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. It's just a "placeholder" until my thoroughbred mind kicks in a provides me with an eloquent yet meaningful alternative. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:02, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Eras

We need to sort these out. I think it's OK to hyperbolically call the amateur and pro days "era"s, but the few years of a manager's reign is pushing it a little, formally, if fine colloquially. --Dweller (talk) 15:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I hadn't got round to sorting out section headings yet other than to make them easier to edit. I'd look at History of Gillingham F.C. for a good FA with similar needs. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:26, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Recentism

Need I say more? --Dweller (talk) 15:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

No. I'm getting there. The amateur section is now three quite chunky paragraphs and I expect the next few sections to be evened out. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:25, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Ace. I'll also take a stab at a hidden message at end pleading with people not to add gumpf. --Dweller (talk) 16:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Only problem is sourcing images from the bygone eras. Just begging for a Paul Mariner photo from a Flikr guy... fingers crossed. Otherwise it's re-use the current stock (again) and I think everyone's sick of them by now (especially you and John Wark!)... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

It'd be nice to have a vaguely historical image for the lead pic. --Dweller (talk) 10:36, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I know. It's difficult because ITFC went pro in 1936 so images aren't PD. Pre-pro pictures look impossible to get hold of. I'm working on it. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:42, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

"Key players"

I think even if we find sourced material saying "a, b and c were key players in this period", it smacks of POV to include them. I think it's worth mentioning players who score particularly notable (historic) goals, man of match in cup finals, get sent off, save a penalty or keep a ball from going over line in major matches etc, but identifying a bunch, to the exclusion of another bunch who may indeed be mentioned in a different RS, is a bad idea. --Dweller (talk) 16:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I've axed a bunch of lists of players already. I agree, this lot need to go. Go for it. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:15, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I've removed some more; with a hidden comment on one that I think should be in, but in a different format. I also think Thijssen and Muhren should stay. From what I know of ITFC, their signings were highly significant and I think in fact a bit more should be made of them. I also wonder whether we should ensure the key individual club record holders are mentioned, with a piped link somehow to "their" section on the records list page. --Dweller (talk) 11:36, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm trying to find sources which relate to the significance of the Dutchmen, I agree they made an impact and I'm trying to find something that isn't just plain OR. As for record holders, I think that's a fair idea, just let's not go over the top! Most apps, most goals, most expensive signing perhaps, not much else if you ask me. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd go with that. Maybe first and most caps, too. --Dweller (talk) 12:11, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

"Election" to the Football League

This should really be expanded a little. It was an arcane system, and needs a bit of spelling out, for such a historic moment. Also, the Gillingham fact from the Lead needs restating and reffing. --Dweller (talk) 12:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay, okay, I'll get onto it. I'm going home now anyway so expect more expansion this afternoon... The Rambling Man (talk) 13:00, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Remove?

"The 1896–97 season saw the arrival of the first European opponents at Portman Road in the shape of Sparta Rotterdam who were defeated 10–0 by an Ipswich representative XI." Relevant for history of Portaloo Rd, but not for ITFC as they weren't directly involved in the match. --Dweller (talk) 10:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Possibly but perhaps I need to find out if the Ipswich XI was derived from the team, then it'd be relevant, yes? I'll go check... The Rambling Man (talk) 11:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Minor issues listed here

Rather than create a new section for each little issue, I thought it'd be worth putting them all together. --Dweller (talk) 11:42, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

• Sammy Chung - doesn't seem to need to be mentioned in this article. --Dweller (talk) 11:42, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I'm not actually sure where that edit came from. I don't recall adding it in....! The Rambling Man (talk) 11:45, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
• Mariner might be more noteworthy, but his inclusion is not currently justified, except that he was a record buy at the time. However, none of the previous record buys are worthy of mention... so why him? --Dweller (talk) 12:19, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Only one I could get a picture of? The Rambling Man (talk) 12:51, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
    • lol! He was a pretty important player. He must've scored a notable goal or two, or made some more long-lasting impact on the record book? --Dweller (talk) 12:54, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Yeah. I'm sure he did, I'll need to check. Plenty of internationals, top scorer for a bit, record buy for a bit... The Rambling Man (talk) 13:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
• Who scored the goal that won Ipswich the FA Cup? --Dweller (talk) 12:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Roger Osborne - I'll add... The Rambling Man (talk) 12:51, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

League runner up claim

There's an error in the article. I didn't remove it because it has a reference and I didn't want to risk upsetting the ref number system. (Not sure how it works.)

It concerns the 1980-81 season. It says if Ipswich had won their "last" game, they'd have been champions. This is not the case. The match in question was their second-last as they had a game in hand on Villa. Had they won it, they'd have still been in second place and would have needed to win the final game too, to catch Villa. So it never came to a "win and we're champions" situation, as stated.

The inaccurate reference given is for a You Tube vid (!! reliable sources!).

If anyone doubts this by the way, check out the final league table, which shows Ipswich finishing 4 points off the top. So a win in the match in question wouldn't have been enough.

217.43.165.196 (talk) 10:43, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely. Removed the assertion, removed the unreliable source, Soccerbase confirms what you've said. Thanks for bringing it to our attention, but next time, feel free to edit it yourself. The reference numbers take care of themselves! Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:08, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on History of Ipswich Town 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/20100414041921/http://www.fchd.info/IPSWICHT.HTM to http://www.fchd.info/IPSWICHT.HTM
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.itfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/HistoryDetail/0%2C%2C10272~342496%2C00.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130428055537/http://www.ipswich.gov.uk/site/scripts/documents_info.php?documentID=885&pageNumber=19 to http://www.ipswich.gov.uk/site/scripts/documents_info.php?documentID=885&pageNumber=19
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110525163751/http://soccernet.espn.go.com/players/manager?id=31 to http://soccernet.espn.go.com/players/manager?id=31

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:32, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of Ipswich Town 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/20120501120434/http://www.statto.com/football/teams/ipswich-town/2010-2011 to http://www.statto.com/football/teams/ipswich-town/2010-2011
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120501123307/http://www.statto.com/football/teams/ipswich-town/2011-2012 to http://www.statto.com/football/teams/ipswich-town/2011-2012

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:28, 30 September 2017 (UTC)