Talk:Emley A.F.C.

Emley A.F.C.

The case of the club moving is similar in some senses to Wimbledon F.C... as you can see Wimbledon has a seperate article to Milton Keynes Dons and A.F.C. Wimbledon. Should the situation be the same for Emley?... the history is currently located at Wakefield F.C.. - Deathrocker 07:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:AFcEmley.gif

Image:AFcEmley.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Emley A.F.C./Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

. Requires photographs Requires addition of inline references using one of the {{Cite}} templates Requires copy-edit for WP:MOS Keith D (talk) 14:51, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 14:51, 21 February 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 06:23, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

This should be made consistent with the way Wimledon's split into MK Dons and AFC Wimledon is handled

A previous comment (from 2007) made the point that this article is inconsistent with how Wimbledon's split is handled on wikipedia. For Wimbledon there is an entry titled "Wimbledon FC" which takes the club up to 2004, then there are separate entries for AFC Wimbledon and MK Dons.

The original club was Emley FC which is 2005 split into two - Wakefield FC and AFC Emley. AFC Emley was a new legal entity but was formed from the reserve side of the original club and continued to play at Emley's ground, in Emley and with Emley's badge and colours. This is in some ways similar to Wimbledon, though in their case there was no link to the club that now plays in Milton Keynes.

It would be better to follow the same model as the Wimbledon wikipedia entries, where there is an entry for the club under the name Emley FC (changed to Wakefiled & Emley, then Wakefield-Emley) that takes the history up to 2005 when the split ocurred. At that point AFC Emley was formed and later became Emley AFC, and Wakefield-Emley became Wakefield FC. At present Wakefield FC (now defunct) holds all the history for Emley FC as well, though it does state that the club was formerly Emley FC it does not make it clear that all the honours up to 2005 (ie all of them!) were won under the name Emley FC. Arguably the pre-2005 history should be on the Emley AFC entry since the club was based in Emley up to that point (HQ remained at the Welfare ground even though the first team played in Wakefield), however I understand the argument that Wakefield FC was the continuation of the old legal entity.

Irm2204 (talk) 15:07, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't see how readers are helped by splitting the Wakefield F.C. in two, and there being three articles instead of two. The first club continued in existence under different names and its history doesn't really need splitting. I don't think the MK Dons model is a good one to follow – the split there is arguably because MK Dons renounced Wimbledon's history, although I suspect it is more due to the very strong feelings aroused by the matter.

Re the honours issue, I have added a heading in the Wakefield article to make it clear that the honours were won as Emley. Number 57 16:33, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Your argument that readers are not helped by this change should surely apply to the Wimbledon/MK Dons case as well shouldn't it? I don't think it holds up anyway. Emley FC was in existence for 100 years before changing to Wakefield FC and it does not have its own presence on Wikipedia (it redirects to Wakefield FC). I think readers would have a much clearer view of the Club's history if it had its own entry presented in the same way as Wimbledon/MK Dons. Your assertion that because MK Dons renounced Wilmbledon's history and this makes the split of their pages valid is irrelevant. They, like Wakefield/Emley FC, are the same club as the original Wimledon FC whether they renounce the history or not.

What do others think? Irm2204 (talk) 08:56, 2 May 2022 (UTC)