Jump to content

Talk:Reading F.C.

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

Trivia section

[edit]

I went ahead and axed the Trivia section, both the note about the fanzine and the one about the number 13 shirt are now in the history section. Hope it's of help. I wasn't sure what the consensus is on the fan registration for number 13, whether it should be put in the squad list or not, so I both added the number and put a note in the history section that the club started the tradition in 2001. I'll let the collective hive mind determine whether the addition to the squad list should stay.Ken in California 17:25, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reading F.C. Kit

[edit]

Wearing Home Strip Away rumour

[edit]

Have found an article [1] which appears to give the background for this rumour, which does seem to be feasible. However, can't find any other sources, and don't want to insert an unfounded rumour about a rumour without any other citations. Anyone know if the article is correct? MartinRe 17:57, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not convinced. I'm sure the "not changing kit" rumour was around before 92/93, though I have no proof. I do remember listening to 6-0-6 on the way home from that game, on which Danny Baker was ranting on about us making Brighton change their kit, and I can remember thinking that we had the right to do it (at the time I believed the rumour). But that may be my memory playing tricks.
Another explanation I've heard is that it was an April Fool's Day joke in one of the local papers and took off from there. Deadlock 11:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I heard it because Reading play in Royal Berkshire, so are the Royal team and it gove the preference. I heard something about Preston aswell.
Jimmmmmmmmm 19:08 24 March 2006
I'm hardly an impartial observer, given that I wrote the article in question, and I'm not going to be much help because I can't remember exactly what prompted me to include the paragraph about the Brighton game. What I can say is that it was based on a conversation I had rather than a theory I derived myself.
Also, I had not heard the legend before 1992 (which counts for little in pre-www days as I was living 200 miles away). And finally, in any event the article does not claim to be definitive on the issue, using the phrase "it appears".


When Shamrock Rovers, League of Ireland, away colours clashed with Cork City's new Home shirts Rovers had to play in Cork's away colours. In Serie A Lazio's sky blue and Sampdoria's White away shirts were deemed to have clashed in a game and in the second half Sampdoria wore their first choice, or home colours, with them adopting a red away shirt the next season because of this reason. Do not know the dates for any of the above

21:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Past Kit

[edit]

There is a new hooped away strip for the 2007-2008 season [2]. Should we include a section on past Reading F.C. strip? JoeWiki 09:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Early Reading FC kits [3][4]
2004-2005.
2004-2005 (a).
2005-2006.
2005-2006 (a).

2007-2008 Away Kit

[edit]

On the new hooped away kit, I've modified it this morning as the photos on the official site show dark sleeves and shorts. Socks are difficult - which is the predominant colour? The dark colour is not black, it's a very dark grey (call it charcoal), but at present we only have a _blackhoops template and I'm not sure whether to bother doing a charcoal one/medium grey one (should probably be the lighter colour with the dark sleeves and collar indicating that charcoal is the base colour of the shirt). Kruador 10:13, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Current first team squad

[edit]

In my opinion, this section should be deleted, as the information changes too quickly. I forsee it being very difficult to keep up to date. --Lancevortex 09:06, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'd tend to agree, with the notable exception of keeping the point about no. 13, I hadn't heard that before. An encyclopaedia isn't really the place I'd go to find out current football squads. MartinRe 17:48, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, the first team squad information seems to be a standard thing for the football club wiki pages - for example see Arsenal and Man U. This being an easily editable resource allows for information to change on it as it happens. As long as the squad list is dated it should not be a problem. The No. 13 thing is cool, and a citeable reference make it more believeable for those not in the know. --Doctor Moley 00:34, 01 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The fans

[edit]

Fans are on official squad list, but not actually "playing" on field and not register in the FA list. Matt86hk talk 19:25, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tabulation of lists

[edit]

The managerial history and notable players should not be in tables. They are lists and should be formatted as such. Using tables makes editing the lists much more fiddly, especially for newbies. --Lancevortex 09:06, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Williams and Hopkins as caretakers

[edit]

Adie Williams and Jeff Hopkins were part of the four player caretaker managerial team that took over after McGhee walked out, but they stepped down after a few weeks when Quinn and Gooding got the job permanently. I'm not sure exactly when that happened, but it certainly wasn't as late as May 1997. Deadlock 12:10, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Most Capped Player

[edit]

I have reverted to Jimmy Quinn, and added the caveat (while at Reading). Quinn actually got 48 full NI caps in total, and most of Convey's have been earned before he joined Reading. Deadlock 17:16, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And I've done it again. Ívar Ingimarsson might well overtake Jimmy Quinn at some point, but not yet. He's only gained 11 caps whilst at Reading. Deadlock 13:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Club records

[edit]

The Reading Evening post have stated that Reading now hold the record for longest unbeaten run in a season for the second flight. (Previous holders being Liverpool with 28 in the 2nd division in 1893/93)[5] The reading claim was mentioned in the print version of [6]. Is this worth an addition, and, if so, what's the best way to phrase it?

Worth adding, but best to wait until the run is over, I think. -- Deadlock 17:19, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Hopefully it will be a while yet. :) MartinRe 22:17, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tried to tidy up the just inserted records as follows:

  • like the FA Cup record. - what record?
  • without conceeding a goal, of 1103 minutes, verified, (goalkeeper was Steve Death, was unclear on first reading)
  • score 5 goals and lose - not really notable.
  • longest run unbeaten in the second tier - see above.
  • finished second in the 2nd tier, and not go up. - mentioned in previous paragraph. MartinRe 22:17, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Reading have the most failed attempts at winning the FA Cup. RFC entered the competition at the same time as Notts County, but County have won it and RFC haven't. Odd sort of record, certainly.
Apparently in 1895-96 Liverpool went the first five games undefeated. Coupled with their 28-game run in 1893-94 that makes 33 in the second tier (they spent 94-95 in Div 1). Some people are now claiming that 33 games is the longest unbeaten run in the second tier, so I've changed the wording slightly. Hopefully it can be reverted in a couple of weeks. Deadlock 14:32, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have the paper (Reading Post) to hand, but I read yesterday that if Reading got promoted today (which they did) that would be a record for the promotion in the fewest amount of games (40). Anyone else have the paper or another reference for this? Roll on sunderlands 105pts record :) MartinRe 17:07, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Liverpool did it in fewer than 28 games back in 1894, so 40 can't be the overall record :-) It might well be the record for a 46-game season; though I'm pretty sure Notts County did it in 40 games as well a few seasons back. Deadlock 14:09, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think notts county were also mentioned in the same article, but I'm unsure how many games were in the season in that case. (more games means 40 games is soonest on a %age basis) Also, I don't know if the fastest referred to earliest date or # of games. I'm sure at the end of the season something definitive wll be published about which records were beaten this year. Might be worth grouping records achieved in this season together, if there's enough of them. Also, semi-related, is it worth separating the league honours into "1st/2nd tier/cup" to make it clear at what level the result were at? (similar to Sunderland_afc#Honours) Regards, MartinRe 14:19, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]


[Can't see anywhere else to put this] There's a couple of sentences in the records section that read "This is because Reading and Notts County were the first of the football clubs that exist today to enter the competition, in 1876-77, and they have both lost one game per season since, apart from in 1894 when Notts County won the cup. In that same year's competition, Reading became the only team to have ever fielded a convict and went on to lose 18-0 to Preston North End, who were so worried about the lack of grip on Reading's quagmire of a pitch, that they played with nails hammered into their boots!"

Reading first entered the FA Cup in 1877/78, whilst the 1893/94 Preston-Reading match was played at Preston so there's at least two things wrong there. It was Reading who tried to get the PNE game called off because of the state of the pitch. When the match was played, the Preston players used studs of some sort whilst Reading's did not - however, the hobnail story rings a bell that I can't place and I think it might refer to a match played in Reading, probably in the Caversham Cricket Ground era. And while we're here the "convict" was a soldier who had been confined to barracks, which isn't quite the same.

I've had a go at re-writing the paragraph from the article (cited above), because I thought it was a little convoluted. Hope nobody minds. Cheers! --Alex Craven 05:02, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Record added by 146.176.61.103

[edit]

146.176.61.103 added "Only side to win All Football league's apart from the Premiership in English football". I was about to edit this into proper English, but I'm not sure if this record is actually correct. Does anyone know if RFC are the only club to have done this? --Lancevortex 09:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really right, although it depends a bit on definitions.
Wolves have won Divisions 1, 2, 3, 3N and 4 (all before 1992 and the introduction of the Premiership). Burnley have managed 1, 2, 3 and 4. Both Luton and Millwall won Divisions 2, 3S and 4 before 1992 and sine then have won the third tier (which at the time was effectively Division 3). -- The Cube 17:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 26/08/06, it was mentioned on BBC Berks that Reading and Wigan were the first clubs to have played each other in all four divisions. Does anybody know how to verify this, and is it worth adding to the page? --Alex Craven 04:51, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This link proves they have played each other in all 4 divisions: http://www.reading-mad.co.uk/news/loadnews.asp?cid=TMNW&id=294585. Of course, it doesn't prove that no other teams have done the same thing. Marky-Son 10:06, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I removed the link to vital football added by 86.142.48.164, as it didn't appear to be suitable (the simple list of clubs in VitalFootball didn't help, it made it look like advertising). 86.142.48.164 responded by blanking the rest of the external links, so am restoring these. Please add any comments on whether the insertion/removal of the original link was/was not correct here. Cheers, MartinRe 20:16, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Records - Clarification request

[edit]

Club records are one of two types:

  1. Record is "best X" that the club achieved
  2. Club achieved "best X" on record.

Obviously all records of type (2) also imply (1), but records of type (1) do not imply (2). The problem with the current wording is that it is not clear what type of record is meant. For example, "Best win" means record for a Reading team, but "Longest unbeaten run" is record for all teams, but how is an unfamiliar reader supposed to know that it's not the other way around? Any suggestions on what would be the best way to make this disctinction clearer? Possibly list all records of type 1, with a footnote for those that are also of type 2? Break them down into club records and national records a la Arsenal F.C. records? Ideas? MartinRe 17:04, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I split the records into two sections to see how it looks, and it seems okay to me, so I've went ahead and updated it, please feel free to revert/change if a better layout is found. MartinRe 17:11, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Looks okay to me! Now we just have to hope people stop posting "non-records" as has been the case recently... -- Robwingfield 18:57, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stadium Capacity

[edit]

I received a season ticket renewal letter today from RFC. I quote:- "...our capacity of 24,054 is one of the smallest in the Premiership..." I've been trying to get hold of an accurate figure for ages; I knew it wasn't 24,200 as a lot of seats were removed when they put a scoreboard in. --Deadlock 21:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the figure should remain quoted at 24,200 as per the website for the moment until they offically confirm it. Quoting from your own renewal letter is borderline WP:OR, and looks very similar to the example case set out in WP:V#Verifiability.2C_not_truth which has problems with verifibility. Regards, MartinRe 21:27, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think you should change it to 24,054 - might have done so myself had I not just seen this Talk page for the first time. There was a point when the club announced that the capacity was reduced to 24,105. Since the stadium has opened, the changes I can remember are:
(a) introduction of two gangways in South Stand,
(b) insertion of extra seats above the previous top row coupled with removal of some at the top of each aisle, and
(c) removal of seats for larger scoreboard.
I've also heard suggestions that there will be an attempt to get a few extra seats in by August 2006 - only thing I can think of is the removal of the gangway in the South-West corner (with use of netting presumably for any FA Cup tie where the away side needs the whole end).
[Above from The Cube on 6/5/2006, but I don't have an account.]
You missed (d), the addition of seats in the corners of the West Stand (the "Megablock").
The 24,054 capacity is also listed in the very glossy and logo-festooned "2006/2007 Supporters' Guide", available from the club ticket office. Since it's from the ticket office there's a vague possibility it's correct, BUT I've also had a reply to my email to the club webmaster asking about this issue. He says he believes the capacity to be 24,225, and the web site has been updated with this figure. So, I'm changing it to 24,225 - it's the most easily verifyable official figure available, though I'm not convinced it's correct. --Deadlock 21:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The website now says 24,045. One day all the sources will agree (possibly next season, if the expansion happens!). Deadlock 19:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The attendance for the Manchester City game on 11/9/2006 suggests that the true capacity is somewhere around the 24,225 mark, although I feel sure that this will continue to be a mystery. I think I spotted another small change as well - there used to be a camera position at the top of the lower West in the centre, and (from the other side of the pitch) it looked to me as if that area was now all seats. Can anyone confirm? The Cube 22:52, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well I can confirm that last change now. Some nice new shiny blue seats where the camera position used to be. The Cube 13:52, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Premiership title triumph

[edit]

What fans will be expecting a Premiership title, isn't this overly optimistic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marky-Son (talk • contribs) 18:05, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's called being a supporter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.1.56.36 (talk • contribs) 16:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Either way, what the fans think shouldn't be included here. Mark272 14:44, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Record transfer fees

[edit]

I agree that this should be in here, but is it right to include as a record an element of the fee that may never be paid (as has been included for Seol)? Also, the fee we paid for Martin Butler eventually reached £850,000 but I never saw that quoted as a record, with the £800,000 for Carl Asaba remaining in all lists until the signing of Leroy Lita.--The Cube 21:05, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unknown-importance

[edit]

Why is this article in Unknown-importance football articles is there a page discussing the importance. I would say the article is important as this team are in the English Premiership which is watched all round the world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.245.252.204 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 6 December 2006

It's because the article hasn't yet been formally assessed by WP:FOOTBALL, not that people don't know whether it's important or not. robwingfield «T•C» 11:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The finest foreign team seen in Italy

[edit]

The Article refers to the 1913 Reading tour of Italy. Does anyone know if it's possible to get back editions of the Italian publication Corriere della Sera going back this far? JoeWiki 08:48 05 January 2007 (UTC)

Of course not you bellend. 86.157.169.64 (talk) 22:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Famous Fans

[edit]

Ricky Gervais has gone on record (an interview I read, can't remember where, sorry) as saying "everyone assumes that 'cos I'm from Reading, I support Reading FC. I don't. Nothing against them, I just have absolutely no interest in football. At all." (paraphrased from memory). Unless someone can source a reliable quote from the man, I move that he be STRUCK FROM THE RECORD.  :-D 89.241.6.25 22:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I move that he be struck. Actually, he went up in my estimation coz Reading sux Wikinista 06:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rivalries

[edit]

Someone recently added the section, someone else added Citation Needed tags. I then added the cite for Didcot Triangle and the section banner. I'm aware that these rivalries exist (or at least, did exist in the past) but don't have good sources.

However, I don't think I've really seen any Arsenal/Reading rivalries particularly, so I'm deleting that. Objections? Kruador 12:22, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The way it is written it is confusing as two rivals are mentioned and then Aldershot appear as an afterthought. 21:43, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Club Crest

[edit]

I think there should be a separate section for the club crest(s), as there have been several over the years. Something similar to that on the Chelsea_F.C. page? Chris 193.195.33.25 12:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wallingford Quadrangle

[edit]

Should we include the Wallingford Quadrangle because were leaving Wycombe Wanderers! Yet the last game against these sides was back in Feb 2002, but we are missing one team out! Clyde1998 11:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History

[edit]

Can we have a separate place for our old stadium and the mad stad?

Can we have a separate part for the Mad Stad Era and the Coppell Era?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Clyde1998 (talk • contribs) 11:14, 7 July 2007.

There's already an article at Madejski Stadium, so no need for a separate section in this article. You could try creating a new article at Elm Park (stadium). Feel free to expand the history section to give more detail to the Burns & Pardew eras... robwingfield «T•C» 18:26, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Elm Park

[edit]

I've Added a page for Elm Park (stadium) Clyde1998 15:16, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seasons Of Reading

[edit]

Can We Create A Seasonal Page For Reading Like Reading Season 2006-07 and Reading Season 2007-08? Clyde1998 15:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No reason why not... there are such pages for other clubs. Go ahead. robwingfield «T•C» 22:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What can we include in the seasonal pages? Clyde1998 17:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to do the Reading Season 2005-06 Clyde1998 13:15, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I think that there should be a rule to say that you can only mention past seasons. As current seasons are news, not encyclopaedic. Even then you could argue that only 'notable' seasons should me mentioned (e.g. first season, record breaking season, season where something was achieved)82.19.76.250 17:56, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thankfully the 2008-09 season section was recently heavily pruned, but this article still suffers from extreme recentism. There is as much coverage given to the last three seasons as to the previous 130-odd years of the club's existence, with far too much detail about individual match results and goalscorers in those recent seasons. Lancevortex (talk) 19:10, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reading FC Navigation Box Update

[edit]

I'm updating the RFC Box. Clyde1998 18:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another Update has been done Clyde1998 (talk) 17:34, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Big Four"

[edit]

"On 8 December 2007, Reading defeated Liverpool 3-1 at home, notching their first win ever against one of the "Big Four" English clubs (Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and Manchester United)." This isn't actually true, as we have previously beaten Chelsea in the league (1926 and 1930) and the League Cup (1987), and Manchester United in the Cup (1927). Maybe you could change it to 'their first ever win against one of the so-called "Big Four" in the Premier League', but given the potentially fluid nature of this grouping (look at how recently Chelsea achieved this elite standing), it seems to have fairly limited significance for an encylopaedic project. --Alex Craven (talk) 03:11, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why can the article no longer be edited?

[edit]

? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.231.47 (talk) 15:22, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been semi-protected due to excessive vandalism. If you create an account and make 10 edits to unprotected pages you will be able to edit this article. However if you continue to add lines such as "they have booked their place in league one for the 2010-11 season after confirming the laughable appointment of Brendan Rogers" as you did here and here then it's likely that your edits will continue to be reverted. Lancevortex (talk) 14:44, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rodgers leaves

[edit]

http://www.readingfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10306~1907119,00.html

Mycroft (talk) 18:32, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested semi protection

[edit]

Knowing football fans this is likely to be full of abuse soon Mycroft (talk) 18:47, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reading F.C. Academy

[edit]

Note: Flags indicate national team as defined under FIFA eligibility rules. Players may hold more than one non-FIFA nationality.

No. Pos. Nation Player
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Rick Allaway
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Adam Lockwood
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Chris Smith
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Andre Boucaud
— {{{pos}}} Republic of Ireland IRL Jonny Hayes
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Piere Joseph-Dubois
— {{{pos}}} Denmark DEN Mikkel Andersen
— {{{pos}}} Australia AUS Oliver Bozanic
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Daniel Spence
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Alex McCarthy
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Lawson D'Ath
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Charlie Lassaso
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Frank Raymond
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Michael Hector
No. Pos. Nation Player
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Nick Arnold
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Gozie Ugwu
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Jordan Obita
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Oliver Kelly
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Jack Mills
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Carl McHugh
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Dean Santangelo
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Angus MacDonald
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Jacob Walcott
— {{{pos}}} England ENG James Rowe
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Alex Stockinger
— {{{pos}}} England ENG John Goddard
— {{{pos}}} England ENG Harry Harding

What is this all about - can't this information be added, or otherwise put into a separate Reserves / Academy page like Portsmouth have ( http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Portsmouth_F.C._Reserves_and_Academy ). I've set up a few profiles for our younger players. As far as I'm concerned once they get a squad number they are 'notable'. Maffff 15 May 2011. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maffff (talk • contribs) 20:34, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brian McDermott (footballer)

[edit]

Perhaps someone with knowledge of the topic would sort out this edit, please?[7]. Apart from the formatting it seems over-detailed, unsourced and poorly written. TerriersFan (talk) 15:34, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of 2001 Play-Off Final at Millennium Stadium?

[edit]

Worth a mention somewhere, I would have thought. Reading came close to winning it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.5.45.224 (talk) 19:54, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Squad table format

[edit]

A discussion is being held here on the possibility of rolling out a new squad template. The new template, named {{football squad player2}}, differs from the standard squad layout in several ways:

  • It features a sort function
  • Comes in a single column format that can be understood by screen readers.
    • Single column format ensures that low resolution browsers, including mobile devices, do not get part or all of the second column cut off.
    • Single column format ensures less clutter, particularly at lower resolutions, for wide sections such as the Arsenal loan section.
  • It gives nationality its own column; at present flags are featured in a blank, untitled column
  • It complies with Wikipedia's guidance on flag usage.
  • It leaves enough space to add images of current players, an example of which can be seen at Watford F.C#Current squad.

It is proposed that the new template be added to some of Wikipedia's most high-profile club articles, which might include Reading F.C.. To give your thoughts, please read and contribute to the discussion at WikiProject Football.

Regards, Edinburgh Wanderer 19:43, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Albert Victor (Ben) Butler

[edit]

I've created a stub about Albert Victor (Ben) Butler, a Reading player who died in WWI. Please help improve it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:15, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here, here, and here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 18:43, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Reading 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) 14:46, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Reading 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) 23:46, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fulham result

[edit]

I've removed the 7–0 home loss to Fulham as a record, because the BBC were stating that it was the "worst home result in 100 years" or words to that effect. Can we find a more reliable source than the local rag? MIDI (talk) 16:23, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

[edit]

Please keep an eye on this page - the names of the Reading FC owners and manager are regularly being changed/vandalised SBNX1 (talk) 13:56, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Reading_F.C.&oldid=1209983570"