Talk:Valour FC

Football: American & Canadian 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the American and Canadian soccer task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Canada: Manitoba / Sport Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Manitoba.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian sport.

date format[edit]

The rest of the league uses the MDY format it would be unusual to keep this at DMY, although either are acceptable for a Canadian article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:18, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. I think I accidentally changed it back when I was resolving conflicts while editing. I agree it should be MDY as he rest of CPL uses it. Blue jays (talk) 20:21, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I can understand problems. I accidentally warned an editor for edit warring half an hour ago because they got the last edit into a series of edits. And the soccer in Canada template shouldn't be on here since no teams are listed on it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:29, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Waking the Red is an unreliable source?[edit]

Why has Waking the Red been labeled as an unreliable source? It does actual reporting on Toronto FC and CPL-related news, has an editors and a set list of authors. It is a frequently-cited source on the Canadian Premier League and on Toronto FC and not labeled unreliable. The article cited is authored by the site's managing editor, and therefore should fall under the exception of WP:UGC: Content from a collaboratively created website may be acceptable if the content was authored by, and is credited to, credentialed members of the site's editorial staff. Blue jays (talk) 20:40, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's a blog. Based on its tag line, "A Toronto FC community", it seems more like a forum than a reliable source. I added that in the reason field. It should probably not be tagged in those articles as well ; ) . I don't know if it's a RS. It does have an editorial board (https://www.wakingthered.com/masthead) but no guidelines. It's not clear if it's an extension of SB Nation, and what sort of oversight it offers (https://www.sbnation.com/community-guidelines) As for the "managing editor", according to https://www.sbnation.com/users/Charlie%20O'Connor-Clarke he "joined" Sep 4, 2016, he wasn't appointed. He is also has "membership" in several other groups, so it's not clear what sort of source it actually is. I'm open to taking it to WP:RSN since there's been no discussion of it there. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:58, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to look into this further to sort this out. SB Nation is a sports news site which has hundreds of blogs about individual sports teams. Each blog has a main page only has articles from members of their staff (editors and contributors), and cannot be posted by anyone like a forum would. Rather, the fanposts section is a forum where anyone can participate, obviously not a reliable source. From SB Nation's openings page, it is clear that contributors and editors have to apply for the positions (not join on their own), and are paid for their work (Neither are full time, but both site manager and contributor positions are paid a monthly stipend.). I think this would make them fall under the exception as the content was authored by, and is credited to, credentialed members of the site's editorial staff. Blue jays (talk) 22:01, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ownership[edit]

I changed the infobox ownership from "Winnipeg Football Club" to "Winnipeg Blue Bombers" as to not confuse readers into thinking that Valour FC is the reserve team of another soccer team. Many readers will not know that Winnipeg FC actually refers to the Blue Bombers. Wasialoneorinthehd (talk) 19:55, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The ownership of Valour FC is referred to as Winnipeg Football Club by the team and media, see example 1, 2, 3, and 4. The distinction made in these articles is relevant, Winnipeg Football Club refers to the company owning both Valour FC and the Winnipeg Blue Bombers, while the Winnipeg Blue Bombers refers to the Canadian football team run by Winnipeg Football Club. UmpireRay (talk) 21:03, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]