Talk:History of Arsenal F.C. (1886–1966)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the History of Arsenal F.C. (1886–1966) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

History of Arsenal F.C. (1886–1966) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 7, 2013.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 4, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
June 13, 2007	Featured article candidate	Promoted
November 14, 2021	Featured article review	Kept
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 11, 2009, December 11, 2011, December 11, 2013, December 11, 2015, December 11, 2017, December 11, 2019, December 11, 2020, December 11, 2023, and December 11, 2024.
Current status: Featured article

Football: England / Arsenal Low‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	English football portal This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Arsenal task force (assessed as High-importance).

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

FAC Comments

Rather than jamming up the FAC page, I've placed comments here. Please note that I don't insist I'm correct on any given comment - I'm as happy to have an explanation of why I'm wrong as to have it changed.

“after Arsenal played Derby County in an FA Cup tie in 1891, two of Arsenal's players were offered contracts with the Rams.[4]” Changing "Rams" to "opposition" might prevent possible confusion – I know the nickname, but not everyone will.
“Woolwich Arsenal played in the Second Division for eleven seasons, and generally occupied mid-table before the appointment of Harry Bradshaw in 1899;” If, as I guess, he was appointed as manager, could you make that clear?
“Despite some strong performances in the FA Cup — the club reached the semi-finals in both 1905–06 and 1906–07[8] — they soon faded.” I’m not actually convinced that sentence sums up the evidence from the reference. I see 10th, 12th, 7th, 14th, 6th, 18th to 1909/10. 18th is definitely “faded”, but the run is more complex than that – perhaps you would like to expand on it?
~~“Woolwich Arsenal moved there in the 1913 close season” – close season is a bit of jargon – wikilink it to explain?~~
“The club controversially rejoined the First Division in 1919…” – I think this paragraph needs an overall reference, to support details like the AGM, and why it was controversial. The current refs only support the final table positions quoted.
OK, it’s referenced in the next paragraph. Given that those 2 paragraphs deal with exactly the same issue (and the next one, in fact), ought they to be one paragraph? Or add the ref into the first as well, either would do.
“Although the move to Highbury brought about much larger crowds and finally warded off the spectre of financial ruin” – Does the later ref support this as well? If so, perhaps putting it at the end of the paragraph to indicate it supports the whole would be best.

~~Can you just tell me where exactly in the conservation plan ref I should be looking. It's rather long....~~

~~“Chapman's adeptness at picking the right man for the job proved vital” – could probably do with a reference to support this statement.~~
~~“after Arsenal's goalkeeper Dan Lewis let a harmless-looking shot slip through his arms and into the net” – why the double reference? The first ref supports the statement perfectly.~~
“Arsenal bounced back the following year, winning their second League title in 1932–33; after another weak start Arsenal went on a long winning run to catch up, culminating in a 5-0 win over second-placed Aston Villa at Highbury in April to clinch the title.” – This rather jarred me on reading it. I think perhaps something more like “Arsenal bounced back the following year, when after another weak start they went on a long winning run, culminating in a 5-0 win over second-placed Aston Villa at Highbury in April to clinch their second League title in 1932–33.”
~~“By this time Chapman's first set of signings had started to show their age” – the sort of statement that could do with a reference?~~
~~“Despite Chapman's sudden departure” – you’ve just said he died – is this wording a little redundant?~~
“George Allison (who had formerly been a director of the club) took over the job full-time” – how about “took over as manager” to make it clear. The mention of “full-time” is tantalising – was he acting as part-time manager or assistant or something?
~~“a hat-trick of League titles” – wikilink hat-trick, make it “successive League titles” to be clearer that is was the 4th title, but third in a row?~~
~~“replaced with modern Art Deco stands, parts of which remain to this day” – with inevitable demolition, it might be worth “future proofing” this statement.~~
~~“In November 1945 Arsenal played one of the most extraordinary and controversial matches in their history” – could you confirm if the references back up that statement?~~

~~Just confirm the source backs up "one of the most controversial matches", if you would, please.~~

~~“by the end of the match they had only seven fit players on the pitch;[52] Newcastle took full advantage and won 1-0.” – I’m being rather picky here, but is 1-0 “full advantage”?~~
~~“Apart from finishing third in 1958–59, Arsenal usually finished in mid-table” – there’s a couple of not-too-shoddy 5ths in there. I think you may be generalising a little too much.~~

Overall I enjoyed the article. J.Winklethorpe ^talk 20:49, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have made edits to answer most of these points - nearly all of which I agreed with, with the exception of the following:

I have retained the two links to the 1927 Cup Final, as one is text and the other video.
The 1932-33 season sentence I have tweaked, but not to your suggested version as I thought it was just as awkward.

Thank you for your comments, I'm glad you enjoyed reading the article! Qwghlm 20:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a couple of remaining queries J.Winklethorpe ^talk 20:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page numbers now cited.

Excellent, that ref now supports the sentence.

Hmm. The exact quote, Spurling p.67, says "Arsenal's match against Dynamo proved to be the club's last real tango with controversy for 15 years" Admittedly, it's not very clear from that reference alone that it is one of the most controversial incidents, however, though it is popularly regarded as so. What would you suggest changing it too if this is not satisfactory? Qwghlm 21:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, the most that quote supports is "one of the most controversial matches in that period of their history" or something similar. If it's popularly regarded to be more than that, I'm sure there'll be a reference to it somewhere. J.Winklethorpe ^talk 08:13, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well Spurling's book devotes an entire chapter to the one match, but the official history glosses over it and only mentions it in passing (perhaps due to its nature). What I have done is strike it out for now entirely, and when I get some time to read up, I'll replace it with a direct quote from a contemporary player or observer to better reflect the mood. Qwghlm 09:28, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a good plan. J.Winklethorpe ^talk 08:30, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:1932 FA Cup Final.jpg

The image File:1932 FA Cup Final.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:54, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Main page request

Nominating this for TFA on September 6, 2013, at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests -- Lemonade51 (talk) 18:41, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

this whole page has been changed and vandalised by spurs fan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.64.112.221 (talk) 11:02, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Inflation and financial comparision

If I understand the article correctly, £ 125.000 as of approx. 100 years ago, should correspond to £ 88.000.000 today. If that's true, then £1 (around 1910) would eaqual £704 (in recent years). Can this really be correct ? Boeing720 (talk) 02:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of Arsenal F.C. (1886–1966). 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/20070928011849/http://www.englandfootballonline.com/TeamClubs/ClubsMostPlyrsMatch.html to http://www.englandfootballonline.com/TeamClubs/ClubsMostPlyrsMatch.html

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) 18:46, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on History of Arsenal F.C. (1886–1966). 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) 01:29, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on History of Arsenal F.C. (1886–1966). 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) 06:23, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article review needed

This very old Featured article has not been maintained to FA standards, and should be submitted to Featured article review if issues are not cleaned up. There is considerable uncited text (I tagged only a small bit of it), and much of the uncited text looks like either puffery or original research or editorializing. There are also some duplicate links that can be located and cleaned up by installing the script from User:Evad37/duplinks-alt. I hope someone can address the sourcing issues so a FAR will not be needed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:48, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the above about the uncited text, which does not seem to have been addressed since SandyGeorgia posted their notice. Is anyone interested in fixing up this article? If not, I'll submit it to FAR in a couple of weeks. Z1720 (talk) 15:16, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]