Jump to content

Talk:Cork City F.C.

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Information in my edits are sourced in full or in part from the official Cork City FC website with their permission, feel free to contact them for confirmation if necessary.

Wiki rocks, all is good !!

Small additions

[edit]

Just added the Supporters Society UCC link, in attempt to get something organised for next year. Excellent wiki article, nice stats from corkcityfc.ie! -Gav

Tabulated Records

[edit]

I've taken the liberty of editing the records: not the records themselves! but rather i've created tables to aranged the records into 4 columns, and reduced the ammount of white space in each record. the result is that the article is about 1.4 the length it once appeared, leaving more room for more detail :)--Gav 21:52, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    • Well sorry dodge :p i just stuffed them into a table as a quick edit since before my edit the page was 90% a list of records. --Gav

Cleanup

[edit]

Someone who has a better knowledge of the club more then myself really needs a once over on this article, it a miss match of coloured tables of various kinds, as well the history could be written in a way so that it looks less like the one on their web site an more like an article not a just miss mash of stuff. I also had to remove the heros and villains section, it's just to POV to even be considered for this article, folks this is not a fan site this is an Encyclopaedia, if you want an idea of what this article should and has the potential to look like, i would take a look at the various EPL articles, like ones for Arsenal F.C., or Liverpool F.C. and others, Arsenal what should be strived for. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 03:13, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article Size

[edit]

The article was approaching Wikipedia's advised page limit, so I have broken the content up into other pages to get round this.

That's good, but it's standard good practice to post your plans on the talk page *before* making wholescale changes like that! So that others can contribute.
Personally - while moving and creating a "History of football in Cork City" is possibly an OK idea - I think that some of the other stuff may not be appropriate for an individual article. You may find that some of the new "table of X" articles will be flagged with "not enough context" or some other {{cleanup}} tags! I think there may have been other or better ways to resolve the "article is too big" issue. Guliolopez 16:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also - FYI - The WP article size standard is a guideline and not gospel. It should not be interpretted as an immediate spur a "cull" parts of the article. See Arsenal F.C.. This is a great article, (which happens to be "oversized") and doesn't suffer from some of the issues that the Cork City article does. Personally I think we should probably have just had a concerted effort to summarise some of the "season summaries", and "tidy up" some of the tables (which were probably a bit overpopulated with every available stat) rather than moving everything to their own articles. Guliolopez 16:26, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rights lads I'm reverting all of these changes. I'm going to remove all the coloured tables and have basic text for most sections. I strongly suggest a Cork fan rewrites the History into one brief article rather than a season by season guide, particularly when that is available (almost word for word) on the Club's official site [1] Dodge 18:47, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Template

[edit]
Cork City Football Club
The Club | Season Placings | European Competition
League Records 1985-2005 | Turners Cross
Manager Records | Football In Cork City

To Do List for Cork City Page

[edit]

I'd prefer if a fan wrote the history rather than a Pats (me!) fan remove that year by year thing Dodge 16:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unless no objections, (and until someone can think of something better) I am likely going to (at the very least) summarise the awful and impenetrable "year by year", "blow by blow" section into a decade by decade history. That should go someway to improve this article. Guliolopez 19:26, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I say go ahead. Once you've put down the template. I'm sure we(the Irish football people) can edit it. Good luck Dodge 19:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK - Per above, I've summarised the "year by year" headache into a "decade by decade" summary - reducing the original ~2300 words to ~1400. Summary draft is here. I'm not sure it's quite slim-line enough yet to replace the existing history, so I'd welcome any help/feedback on further summarisation before I move it to the main article. Guliolopez 19:25, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Have edited your draft. Don't think we need to know about every League cup or Munster cup failure, also removed the list of Friendlies. Does any other club list frindlies in its history? Good work though Dodge 00:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History rewrite

[edit]

Per above, Dodge and myself have completed an (exhaustative) effort to summarise the "history" section of the main article. See Cork City FC - History (Draft). Further comment/edits from other editors welcome before it replaces the current text. Guliolopez 10:36, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Capacity

[edit]

Ive updated the capacity of turners cross to 13,000.If any one can get an exact capacity that would be great. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.101.222.28 (talk)

Hi. From where does the 13,000 estimate come? I may be mistaken, but I understood that (even with the new "Shed End" stand), Turner's Cross capacity remains around 9000. To my understanding, capacity for each part of the ground is:
South/DonnieForde 1900 +
North/DerrynaneRd 1200 +
West/SaintAnnesRd 2800 +
East/OldShedStand 1500
= Total Seated of <7500
Accounting for (at a maximum) ~1500 "standing in the gaps between seated areas", the total capacity remains ~9000
See [2] or [3] Am I missing something? Where does 13,000 come from? Guliolopez 01:07, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Coekcityfc.gif

[edit]

Image:Coekcityfc.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:19, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Crest

[edit]

Would a discussion on how and when the crest has changed be a good addition? If anyone has the information (pictures/dates) I feel that this could be an interesting addition and could be included on the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.147.141.101 (talk) 11:05, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As you point out, unless a verifiable source (with dates) can be found, any such additions could be quite weak and problematic in terms of WP:VER. I say "weak" because, save for the most recent change, the crest hasn't changed to any notable extent over the years. The original logo (red ball, crest and banner) remained unchanged for a long time. When it did change in the 1990s and mid-2000s the changes made were slight. (Colour change to green and then green/gold. With slight tweak to banner length, font and text). The 2007/2008 logo update might be the only really notable change. (Removing ball and modernising Cork's "ship between towers" symbols. Return to black/red colour scheme). While it might be worthwhile adding a sentence or two on this to the "kits/colours" section, it is quite weak, and would absolutely require supporting refs. I'd recommend that it only be added if a VER source can be confirmed for the impetus/logic behind any of the changes. And confirmed dates of course. Guliolopez (talk) 12:22, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with lead

[edit]

I am cutting down on the prevalence given to recent issues with the club in the lead section. It violates the guidelines on recentism (see Wikipedia:Recentism). The lead section should broadly reflect the entire history of the organisation; this issue is covered in detail in the appropriate section of the text and deserves no more than a brief mention in the opening. AC+79 3888 (talk) 15:22, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move

[edit]

Moved to 'Cork City Football Club' to allow changes to Cork City F.C. Fionnsci (talk) 23:22, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. But you should have raised the discussion topic BEFORE making any moves or renames! Guliolopez (talk) 12:34, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
ANd FYI - You should also consider having a look at resolving the DAB/incorrect link issues this move has caused. By reviewing/correcting the lists here and here. Guliolopez (talk) 12:53, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like a huge amouont of aricles....is the only way to correct this to do it manually? Seems hugely time consuming. Fionnsci (talk) 15:10, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rename CON (discuss well in advance of any rename)

[edit]

In due course, the Cork City FORAS article should probably be moved to "Cork City Football Club". (Though NOT YET. While the club owns the name, rename shouldn't occur til the club starts playing/trading under that name). At that time, this article should probably be renamed to make way. In anticipation of the rename at some later stage, probably good to get some WP:CON now about what to rename this article to. Personally I think this article should be moved to Cork City Football Club (1984–2010). This would reflect similar naming setups at Cheshunt F.C.(1880–1931) and Tampa Bay Rowdies (1975–1993). Any other ideas? Guliolopez (talk) 22:07, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that Cork City Football Club, established 1984, should be considered to be no more. As stated in the paragraph below, the youths are still around, in spite of the League of Ireland side's absence. Also, it's of Cork City FORAS Co-op's intent not only to be renamed as Cork City Football Club, but to regain the history of old. In the official programme from last night's game, the chairman's notes (and others') read as if both clubs were the same. For example, referring to Timmy Kiely (a former player of Cork City, from former seasons) as a former player, citing the club's birth year as 1984, not 2010, and stating that they never ceased to exist (also citing the youth team as proof of continued existence). Paz-CCFC (talk) 15:21, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think that when the name is returned, the articles should be merged. It will, in effect, be the same club. There is only one article on Derry City F.C. despite the very similar situation. The only real reason we needed a new one for Cork City was due to the name change. Fionnsci (talk) 19:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If the articles become merged later, the name Cork City F.C. should be restored. I can see no good reason for spelling out "Football Club", especially when pretty much every club in the world uses initials there. – PeeJay 10:56, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should just take up from where we left off, and leave the Cork City FORAS Co-Op page separate from the Cork City Football Club page. Include a note and link about it. Its a very important part of our history, but now that there's an extensive Cork City FORAS Co-op page, should we not leave it be and avoid trying to merge them? It seems like a very messy unnecessary task? Joseph 18:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reopen

[edit]

In the light of recent edits I think it's worth reopening this discussion to try and find a consensus. While the intro may need tweaking to address the change of name ownership, recent edits which assert that "Cork City Football Club is an Irish football team that plays in the League of Ireland" are not correct. "Cork City Football Club" does NOT play in the LOI. A club which owns the rights to the name, but verifiably does not play under that name, may play in the LOI. But - as per the above and separate discussions - until the LOI verifiably "recognises" the continuity/transfer of honours/etc, any changes which cover the 1984 club and the 2010 club are (at least) premature. Given the open discussion above (and elsewhere), editors interested in making broad changes to this article should provide detail and references supporting the "it's now the same club" position. Otherwise it's not in keeping with WP:CON or WP:VER. Guliolopez (talk) 22:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion has been opened here. Guliolopez (talk) 22:53, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Youths

[edit]

Can "Cork City Football Club" be considered dissolved, seeing as the youths, a part of the entity, have been playing beyond the 23rd of February, are just finished their season, and will be continuing on in a few months, still as Cork City FC? I don't even think the holding company, Cork City Investments FC Ltd, are dissolved. They're in liquidation, but I'm not sure they're actually dissolved. I mean, they owned the rights to the name "Cork City Football Club" until a few days ago - if they were dissolved/out of existence, then would the have been able to own anything? Paz-CCFC (talk) 15:21, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with "Cork City FORAS Co-op"

[edit]

This is the way to go. It's a simple merge, the vast majority of the information in the Cork City FORAS Co-op article is in this one. The "Stadium", "Ownership", "Coaching staff" sections are the same in both, the info box here doesn't need to be changed. The "Current Squad" is actually more up-to-date here, and the "See also" section has an extra link here. The "External Links" are better here too. The opening paragraph and history section in the Cork City FORAS Co-op article are pretty much in this article too, perhaps worded slightly differently, in both the opening paragraph and in the 2010s part of the history section. There is a significant amount of information about the current situation in this article - the temporary name "Cork City FORAS Co-op" is mentioned in the opening line, in the second paragraph, and three times in the 2010s section.

Perhaps this "The current club manager is Tommy Dunne.[1] The club play in the League of Ireland First Division, with home games played at Turners Cross.[2] City's crest is a variant of the Cork coat of arms - two castles and a ship." could be added to the opening section of this article? It might be worth considering changing the "Kits and colours" section of this article to encompass crests too, although that's not for this merge but future edits.

It's good to have "Cork City F.C." as the main article for the club instead of "Cork City Football Club" and the "Fordsons F.C." link at the top as it is. It reflects the temporary name better, and people get straight to the club page when searching for "Cork City FC", and with the merge people should be directed to this page if they enter the search terms "Cork City FORAS Co-op". --Hsetne (talk) 17:31, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Before this merge is completed, references would need to be added to support the assertions that:
  1. The club "will compete under this name next season" (as prophesied without cite in the intro)
  2. That the FAI (or any other body) has acknowledged (or are on a path to acknowledge) that the IP purchase included the honours/history (as implied by the "merge" of the pre-Feb 2010 honours)
In short, as noted before, until the club is actually playing/trading under the name "Cork City Football Club" in the league (and the league/etc applies that name to the club), then this seems premature. (Again, not disputing that this is likely to happen, but let's not rush ahead of ourselves and start presenting the likely 2011 season state as current state). Guliolopez (talk) 19:53, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The official club website claims the history and honours back to 1984, as you already know. Straight from the horses mouth so to speak. This article, http://www.corkcityfc.net/home/2010/06/01/its-in-the-right-hands/, deals with both of your concerns. As a matter of interest, I've yet to see any club provide citations for this, see Napoli, Messina, Derry, Limerick, Waterford and countless other football clubs. --Hsetne (talk) 20:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So, there's two points here - neither of which address the issues raised:
  1. The assertion that "the official website says so, therefore it's true" is problematic in terms of the guidelines relating to primary sources. As per the concern above, we really need to find secondary sources (FAI/league/news/etc) before we can safely deal with the history/honours/etc under the one article. And - from what I can tell - the league has not yet recognised any continuity. Compare the "club info" sections for (for example) CCFC and Limerick on the FAI/League site. Note the foundation dates, honours sections, etc.
  2. The point that "the Limerick F.C. article doesn't cite the 'continuity question'" is problematic from several quarters. Firstly, Limerick demonstrably CURRENTLY play under the name, so that is covered. Secondly, as has been noted before, while that club were playing as "Limerick 37", and the honours/etc were separate, the article name was "Limerick 37". It wasn't moved/merged until 2009 when the corresponding "real life merge" took place.
As above, these issues need to be addressed before the merge takes place completely. Guliolopez (talk) 22:14, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Addressing both points: Yes, the official club website is a primary source, but do you honestly think a club in the League of Ireland First Division will make the news over claiming it's history? I've never seen any other club make the news over it. While the club doesn't currently compete in the League of Ireland under the name "Cork City Football Club", the club is allowed to trade under that name. As for Limerick, it is unclear in their situation whether they were able to trade as Limerick Football Club when they were competing under the name Limerick 37, whereas it is crystal clear in this case. Trading under the name and competing in the League of Ireland under that name are two separate things. Since the club is allowed to trade as Cork City Football Club, the club can be called Cork City Football Club. The youth teams continued to compete under the name Cork City Football Club when owned by the fans. While the club can't change the name the club competes under in the League of Ireland during the season, that is not to say that the history can't be claimed as it has been done by the club. I think in this case a primary source should be acceptable. --Hsetne (talk) 23:05, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
To summarise:
  1. The club website is acceptable as a primary source on wikipedia. It is simply saying that the history belongs to the club.
  2. The club can be called Cork City Football Club because the club can trade under the name Cork City Football Club. --Hsetne (talk) 23:17, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is it going to be merged now that both points have been dealt with? Hsetne (talk) 17:59, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but I still don't see that the first (core) point is addressed at all. Namely that there's still no secondary sources confirming use of the name outside the club website. (Or - in the same vein - recognition of continuity of honours/etc). Guliolopez (talk) 20:03, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Primary sources are acceptable, I don't know why you don't accept it. But, here's another source http://www.ohod.ie/index.php/news. It says that essentially the club is playing in the League of Ireland under the name Cork City FORAS Co-op, but that the supporters' trust has purchased everything good about the club from the previous holding company. I'll re-iterate, trading under the name and competing in the League of Ireland under that name are two separate things, so the pages can be merged. Hsetne (talk) 15:28, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thought this would've been merged by now. Hsetne (talk) 14:06, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The 2011 fixture list calls the club Cork City: http://www.airtricityleague.ie/images/stories/2011_Season_Airtricity_League_Fixture_List.pdf The new crest, as can be seen in this article, shows "Cork City Football Club" and "1984". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hsetne (talk • contribs) 13:19, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Club honours, history, etc

[edit]

Decided to leave this alone til the league started - to see what happened. However I'm afraid I'm back to this again. As stated previously, while the club website maintains an "unbroken line" from the 1984 club, the FAI sites do not seem to do so. As much as I'd like to find one, I can find no association/league source which acknowledges that the honours/etc from the 1984 club are attributed to the current club. Granted it might be just that they havn't updated the site yet, but the league website specifically does NOT attribute the pre-2010 honours to the club. Nor does it show a club foundation date of 1984 - but one of 2009. As such there's still no secondary source to support the current structure of the article. Others have argued that buying the rights to the intellectual property would have included the "honours history"/etc. However the responsible bodies don't seem to have publicly recognised this. Some also argue that the youth teams/etc kept the continuity flag flying. However the FAI continue to label the youth teams with the "Foras" moniker. So, I'm back to the point from October: without a secondary source recognising a continuity of honours/etc, this article should AT LEAST be restructured to reflect this point. (That the club itself sees a continuity - but this is as yet not formally acknowledged by the regulatory bodies.) Guliolopez (talk) 01:50, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The FAI label the youth team as "Foras Co-op", because they still are that. Up until the end of their season in 2010 (April/May), they were Cork City Football Club. For the 2010/2011 season (the youth league doesn't run concurrently with the senior LoI), they were registered as Cork City Foras Co-op. Since their season is still underway, they can't change the name. So, the FAI's reference of the youth teams as Foras is to do with the senior and youth leagues not being run in line, rather than the FAI thinking we're a different club than the one founded in 1984. From next August/September onwards, they should be referred to as Cork City Football Club, again.
Also, I wouldn't take everything that's on loi.ie as 100% true/updated. According to the website, "Cork City Foras Co-op" (at this moment, no club of that name exists) were founded in 2009. But, if what they're saying is that it's a different club to Cork City Football Club, they haven't even gotten the foundation year right - they should've put 2010 down. To be honest, though, I'd say all this misinformation is down to the website not being updated. They also don't have Derry down as 2010 First Division champions under their club information, for example. Paz-CCFC (talk) 00:41, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cork City 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 22:08, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Cork City 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:

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) 18:56, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Cork City 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:

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) 18:51, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cork City 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:

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) 04:51, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Updated logo.

[edit]

Can somebody update the logo on this page and on the Women's team page? The logo that is used is an incorrect version of the logo, which doesn't include the white border. The correct version is linked here: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0500/9647/2215/files/CorkCityOfficialCrest_7e31f629-ee2d-4ee0-bc49-1c0790c91866.png?v=1730220016 93.107.3.223 (talk) 16:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The version used "on the Women's team page", which is File:Cork City F.C. crest.png ([4]), does have a white border? Otherwise not sure why any changes are needed (has the crest changed? Is the border "part of" the crest? Or is it just used around the crest when placed on non-white backgrounds? What rationale or refs support the proposed change? And why, in particular, would a change be required on the Cork City FC Women team's article [when the image there already has a border]?). Guliolopez (talk) 21:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cork_City_F.C.&oldid=1254202316"