Talk:San Diego 1904 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).

San Diego Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject San Diego, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to San Diego and San Diego County 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.San DiegoWikipedia:WikiProject San DiegoTemplate:WikiProject San DiegoSan Diego articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject San Diego To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Assess : Rate San Diego related articles from Category:Unassessed San Diego articles and Category:Unknown-importance San Diego articles with the {{WikiProject San Diego}} project banner.
Cleanup : A cleanup listing for this project is available: clean-up listing for San_Diego
Expand : San Miguel Mountain, Most articles from Category:Stub-Class San Diego articles.
Photo : Request photos that are needed from Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in San Diego County, California to include in each article.
Stubs : Work on articles in Category:San Diego County, California geography stubs.
Other : * Add {{WikiProject San Diego}} project banner to related articles' talk pages and assess.
- Maintain and further improve articles already of high-quality.
- Get San Diego into Featured article status.
- Improve groups of articles to meet the standards for a Good or Featured Topic.

Reverted Move[edit]

The official name for this club is 1904 FC, not San Diego 1904 FC. See here: https://twitter.com/1904_FC/status/920662725725786117. Please do not revert my move. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bashum104 (talk • contribs) 00:19, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's not? http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sports/sd-sp-nasl-team-name-20171017-story.html claims both names as possible. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4993900/San-Diego-1904-born-club-unveil-crest-colours.html only calls it the name with the city. Meanwhile, teams don't always add the city name in twitter names. https://twitter.com/WhitecapsFC Please find a non-primary source to support and discuss any potential move. Although http://www.nasl.com/news/2017/10/18/san-diego-nasl-club-unveils-name-and-logo and http://www.nasl.com/nasl-teams seem to favour the name without the city name. Comment from other editors, particularly @DSM FC:. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:07, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Walter Görlitz: The first article does not mention San Diego 1904 FC except in reference to the crest. The second article does, but it's just a summary of press releases from the team. The team is brand new, and the official name is clearly 1904 FC. Any non-primary source at this point is just going be the author's interpretation ;the official press releases. If the team had been around for a year and people were still calling it San Diego 1904 FC then it might make sense to disregard the official sources. I go into more depth on this on the talk page for: 1904 FC. Bashum104 (talk) 04:09, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't buy your claim that something that disagrees with your interpretation is "just going be the author's interpretation". There are fact checkers at reliable sources, which is why we include them. If they get the facts wrong, time will tell. Still waiting for others to discuss. Might need to include WP:FOOTY more directly. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:25, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The trade mark is San Diego 1904 FC (Serial: 87645631) TheBigJagielka (talk) 13:43, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The league and team do seem to be using simply "1904 FC" as its official name. However, we might want to give this a few months until WP:COMMONNAME sorts itself out. Right now the common name would still just be San Diego NASL team based on the number of uses. Yosemiter (talk) 16:02, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FC for this team is not fully "Football Club"[edit]

Yes, I see them use the term "football" on the (one-page) website, but they never call themselves "1904 Football Club". Just as Seattle Sounders, and other MLS teams use the term "FC" without calling themselves a "football club". Unless you can find sources that use the full name, it simply alludes to the British English term. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:36, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Walter Görlitz: Oh ok, thank you for clarifying!!! -NetWitz- 00:46, 22 October 2017 (UTC)NetWitz[reply]

And to clarify further, since there was something about German heritage there (which was not clear to me), it could stand for Fußball-Club. With a large Spanish-speaking contingent, in San Diego, they could be appealing to that fanbase with Fútbol Club. So let's not assume for now. We'll see what they call themselves in about six month. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:49, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Anchorman reference[edit]

I put back the line about the name being seen as a possible reference to Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy, this time making clear that the connection was not OR but was suggested by journalists. The cited sources include the San Diego Union-Tribune, Sports Illustrated, Daily Mail and the Sun. Certainly notable enough to be worthy of inclusion. SixFourThree (talk) 19:24, 1 February 2018 (UTC)SixFourThree[reply]

Comment on page move[edit]

Just to be clear, this is a merger with an already existing team, ASC San Diego. Some kind of merger between the teams's histories needs to take this to reflect this fact, ideally when there is greater coverage by reliable sources. Jay eyem (talk) 05:07, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]