Talk:Tottenham Hotspur F.C./Archive 1

ENIC

Can anyone update their cross investments/ownerships in other football clubs. I have seen that they sold the majority of their stake in Slavia Prague thus avoiding falling foul of UEFA rules but have not seen any published confirmation. --Vivbaker 09:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Not fully understanding share dealings, does the following link mean ENIC are offering to buy all Spurs shares? http://www.londonstockexchange.com/LSECWS/IFSPages/MarketNewsPopup.aspx?id=1501238&source=RNS KingGorack 14:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Well they are kind of already done the deal for buy back of shares when the share price was rather low, this in fact just raises the share price in the buy back, this is why I didn't sell mine back then. Sadly I didn't sell 2 days ago when I should of done, I just checked the share price today. Ouch, Doh. o well. I guess I'll hold. Govvy 15:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Colours

2 things:

1- The kit is inaccurate, but I don't know how to do that part. The home shirt's base color is white, while the away's is blue. They both look the same in the art.

2- Are we able to add a third shirt design? Spurs are not the only team in the world with three shirts in rotation (Man U- Black is one). What about goalkeeper shirts?

68.249.73.174 20:00, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

I have managed to get the home shirt right - but i'm having trouble with the away. I could get the away kit to just be all blue, but for the mean time i'll try and see if i can get it correct!--Cavs 19:23, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Here is the perfect shirt (with logos): http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/he/7/76/Kit_body_spurshome.png spurs229

Reserves

I have removed the reserve team players from the current squad because they are not in the current first team squad, they are in the reserves. I know it's a little pedantic but the section was getting a little bulky, also no other article on Premiership clubs contain such an extensive list of players. I think that generally speaking only players that have first team experience, or at least have a squad number, should be included. The club's official website is a good guide for this sort of thing. [1]. Rje 17:13, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

Good changes

I agree that the squad list was looking too bulky (thanks to me!) and the reserves didn't really need to be there. It's almost too hard to distinguish clearly between first teamers and reserves when some of the reserves on the club's site have squad numbers, are printed on the backs of programmes and are found on the bench every now and again, and some have. I think people will find the little sentence I added helpful. (Well done for starting the talk page; with facts changing so quickly (especially in the transfer windows), it's good to have a place to discuss changes. I hope people find the sentence I just added helpful. Great Briton 20:00, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

Celeb. Fans

Added a list of celebrity fans from http://www.topspurs.com/thfc-celebfans.htm GL3N

Changed Squad List

I've changed the squad list around, it is the same layout as Manchester Utd's, looks neater and easier to navigate. User:GL3N

Well i changed it back to the previous format, as the new format is not an improvement to what was currently used (added extranious information that was better off in articles not in list), and the previous format is a the recommended format as per Wikipedia:WikiProject Football, in which the page was used in the development of, changes to the format should be discussed their.

Famous/infamous fans

I suggest removing this section. There's no evidence for most of them, and no real reason for an encyclopaedia to list them. Someone's just added Phil Cornwell, which, apart from being a red link (I know who he presumably is - the comedian from Dead Ringers etc. - but that's just my guess!) doesn't give any evidence whatsoever. It also means people add spurious names (like Roy Keane twice!) or their own names etc. Any thoughts on this? Stephenb (Talk) 12:32, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I wondered about him yesterday but if you google his name you get this, which does state he's a Spurs fan. I must admit that the list is a little long and some of the other teams do have a similar list. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 14:33, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, so he is! Perhaps the list ought to specify that such a link ought to be included with each entry. That said, I still think its essentially non-encyclopaedic information - it's not about the club, more about the person listed - perhaps a category of "Tottenham Hotspur F.C Fans" (and similar for the other clubs) would be better? Hmmm, actually, I like that idea - where's the best place to suggest it more generally? Stephenb (Talk) 17:49, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Why not create List of notable Tottenham Hotspur F.C. fans rather than a new category? CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 01:44, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's another idea, though it might get a merge tag suggesting merging back to the original article! :-) Anyway, when I have some spare time again, I might just try that - this list doesn't do add anything useful where it is - it says virtually nothing about the club. Stephenb (Talk) 09:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Heh, or maybe not - see this deletion discussion. Maybe they should just be removed - the list is really non-encyclopaedic, pretty unverifiable (odd web pages/discussion boards etc. can't really count) and if the information isn't notable enough for a mention on the individuals page (category or not) then it isn't notable enough here. Perhaps we ought to vote on the sections removal? Stephenb (Talk) 09:43, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Tottenham fans

Dave Murray of Iron Maiden (the band) is an acknowledged Spurs Fan, as his article in this same encyclopaedia shows

New club badge

As of the revision 2006-01-19 19:16:46, the version of the club badge used on this page was the one uploaded by me. It is black like the badge was released to press on Thursday (look at the club website or any newspaper now using the new badge). My version was originally taken from the official site, with transparency added, and saved into PNG format. The white background and all of the white in the text and the ball was made transparent, while the white in the cockerel was left white. I made this decision based the preview of the Aston Villa match programme (a limited edition to celebrate the new badge), but it is still not clear whether the area between the ball 'patches' should be transparent or white. If it is shown that, to be correct, the ball should be white and black and not transparent and black, then the file should be changed accordingly. I will revert to the more correct version on the Tottenham page.

I also propose changing Image:Tottenham_Hotspur_crest.png to the new badge, and moving the old crest to a different name. THe advantage of this is that all the pages that use the old crest will now use the new badge. The multiple versions of the badge that have been uploaded should also be deleted down to one version.

The club badge is Navy not Blackreleased to press

The navy version should definitely be used - with the thin white border, and white behind the cockerel and ball (not transparent).

The constant fuss over the badge has gone on long enough. I propose:

1. Upload a navy version of the current badge, with transparency in the background, white in the cockerel and ball, under file name Tottenham_Hotspur_Badge.png or Tottenham_Hotspur_FC.png

2. Move the previous crest to Tottenham_Hotspur_Crest_1983-2006

3. Move the previous full shield to Tottenham_Hotspur_Shield

4. Remove and redirect redundant instances of the badge/crest/shield.

Any thoughts? (Please sign your comments)

Great Briton 21:58, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

The navy version of the crest has been deleted as having no copyright status associated with it. Hence, I have restored the black version as it was several revisions ago. I guess that will have to do until someone uploads a navy one without copyright problems. Stephenb (Talk) 11:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the one I just added to the main page should do. - Pal 13:42, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I have uploaded a new version of the crest to Image:Tottenham_Hotspur_Badge.png. It is navy, with white in the cockerel and ball, and transparency in the background. It has the correct fair use licencing tag, I believe, any objections to this being used on the article? --Great Briton 20:25, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks like everything's proper regarding the license, and it's better than the jpg I put up there that lacked transparency, so I've gone ahead and changed to the new version. - Pal 21:34, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Yids

Want thing that is missing from the article is Spurs' fans nickname, "yids". In particular, do you guys consider it offensive or not? That's something I always wondered- people I ask are split over this issue. Borisblue 07:44, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

• Depends I think, being a Tottenham Fan I don't find it offensive, on the other hand some people may. Although its not an 'official' nickname. Only a supporters name for the team.

GL3N 17:37, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

In the 1960s series Til Death Us Do Part character Alf Garnett first refered to Hotspur as Jews. Racist fans of West Ham, Chelsea and Arsenal copied this and called the Hotspur fans and players "Yiddos". The non-racist majority of the Spurs' fans didn't percieve this as pejorative and started to identify with the "nickname". (Similar things happend in Amsterdam, where Ajax fans use the flag of Israel as their symbol.) In 1994 Suprs fans sang chim chim churoo, Jürgen was a German, but now he is a Jew, refering to Jürgen Klinsmann who played for the Spurs. --Maulesel 21:33, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

As a Jewish Spurs fan, my tuppenyworth of thoughts: Tottenham was traditionally supported by Jews long before Alf Garnett (played by Warren Mitchell - a very vocal Spurs fan) cited this fact. The term Yid is probably offensive in every single context except in the stands at White Hart Lane where fans have adopted it as a token of defiance (in a similar way to, perhaps, Americans adopting 'Yankee' during the War Of Independence). The term is now probably even more meaningless because these days younger fans are more likely to support Arsenal now that the Jewish community in London falls more within their catchment.Mickyrisk 09:35, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, both Tottenham and Arsenal have the highest number of Jewish supporters. A quick visit to the average North London high street and It's not difficult to see why. --JamesTheNumberless 09:13, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I think it merits a mention in the article, perhaps in the same fashion as the section in the Ajax page that Maulesul refers to. Incidentally, I remember reading an interview with David Baddiel (himself Jewish, albeit a Chelsea fan) a few years back saying that racism amongst football fans was on the decline and that the only thing you heard chanted on the terraces these days was "Yids!" but that that wasn't racism, it just meant "Tottenham". Arthur Holland 14:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

"A quick visit to the average North London high street and It's not difficult to see why"

Hmmm... not sure if Golders Green or Stamford Hill are really average. Or does James have his own agenda here?Mickyrisk 13:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Not sure what agenda I could possibly have. Both my parents grew up in North London and admittedly although I haven't seen every nook and cranny of the place you do notice the Jewish community. I'm not referring to the occasional Orthodox Jew you might see but the specialty shops, the fact you can find Kosher food without too much difficulty (which is much more difficult in the rest of London, or indeed the UK) stands out immediately. Personally I'm not sure about the "Yids" nickname. Although I've probably been to fewer than 10 home games I've never actually heard it used until the past couple of years, on web forums. Plus given the international nature of foorball these days it's probably not appropriate. --JamesTheNumberless 09:44, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you please reframe from putting "Yids" down as a nickname. This isn't a nickname, this is a reference from a spat coverted to a chant. Also the club official responce is that they don't want or need the nickname as "Yids". Govvy 12:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC))

I have redrafted the scetion on the use of "Yid" and hope that all will find this rewrite accurate and acceptable. PaddyBriggs 18:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

A friend of mine wanted to take his son to a game at White Hart Lane and found to his surprise that there were plenty of tickets available for the Manchester United game. Apparently this was because it coincided with the Jewish New Year. Millbanks 22:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Gastroenteritis

Shouldnt the article say it was 'gastroenteritis' and not food poisoning?

Mido's Departure

There is no mention of Mido's departure from the Lane. Does he merit addition to the Past Players of Note list? Also, what's a good way/location to mention it? DamionOWA 21:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

No need to, he's been back for a while and it looks like we're having difficulty getting rid of him :( He'd hardly be an ex player of note as he's not notable for anything. --JamesTheNumberless 14:29, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Except possibly for being a spoiled brat, who can play, but only plays when he feels like it. --JamesTheNumberless 14:30, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Mido is like a good trailer for a bad film. ( Jeff the Northern MonkeySpur )

European Trophy Haul

Man United have won at least 3 European Trophies and they have also won the European Super Cup. Am I the only one here who can see a bit of baised text. I also noticed how the Premiership table vanished soon after Spurs' loss to West Ham resulting in Arsenal taking the last Champions League qualification spot.

Man United have won the Champion's League twice and the Cup Winners Cup once for a total of 3 major European trophies. I think that many people don't consider the Super Cup as a 'major' European trophy, since it's basically a European equivalent of the Charity Shield, which nobody claims is equivalent to winning the Premiership! Anyway, if you're including 'minor' European trophies then Spurs have won the Anglo-Italian Cup once :-) As for the league table vanishing, I suspect that this is due to fact that the season ended soon after Spurs' loss to West Ham and hence the details were added to the the Premiership Record section rather than appearing in the Current Season section. Anyway, why would fans want to 'remove' mention of their best ever Premiership season? Tdrawler 19:09, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Article structure

The reason for having a short introduction is firstly to prevent wasted space to the right of Contents, which makes the article page size unnecessarilly long and secondly to better structure the article.

The 'Essential facts' heading has survived many edits and therefore has concensus. If 62.164.251.198 objects he should register and argue his case here. BlueValour 00:11, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

• The proper length of the lead section isn't determined by wasted space, but rather by the length of the article as stated in the Wikipedia style guide as shown here. Nevertheless, I have condensed the introduction from it's extended version, but included some of the pertinent info that was moved to a new section. Honestly, it's the length of the contents box that is causing the wasted space, not the intro. Really there should be a separate history page, and the history section on this page should be a summary of that page. That would eliminate the many subheadings in that section and shorten the contents box. I may do this when I get the time. - Pal 14:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Sponsorship

I would have thought there would have been a mention of sponsorship, currently Mansion, and kit providers, Puma. I appreciate one page can't fit everything to do with the club, but I think these are important pieces of information. Wikipedia is used for research, and this is the sort of thing someone may want to look up.

External Linkage

Is there any reason that Spurs Forum is included as an external link when there are a few other notable fan forums out there (in fact, ones that were removed a few months ago)? Shouldn't we either keep them all or remove them entirely? --HelloHelloHi 04:12, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Squad Transfers section

I've noticed there are no values, the fee's of the players in the transfers section, can someone add that please. Thanks. Govvy 15:25, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I have once again restored the recent transfers section, which includes values. Lilywhite Shayne 00:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I had a thought, but maybe we could create an addon page with all the transfers spurs have ever done, could be a good rescource. Govvy 12:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Govvy, I agree. And have created a Spurs Transfers page: Tottenham Hotspur F.C. Transfers. All are welsome to contribute... there's a LOT of players' details to add. Lilywhite Shayne 23:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Transfers page has been deleted, so I have added a recent transfers section. Bluedevil04 05:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Notable Players

MC was a key player in Spurs' success last season (Spurs' highest ever EPL finish). Do you think he's work a mention in the "past players of note" section? --192.43.227.18 22:50, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

• The transfer fee alone makes him notable I think. The notable players list could do with shortening to just the true legends - Jamie Redknapp, Kasey Keller etc are hardly up there with Gazza and Hoddle. --Elzar 11:36, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
  • I agree, just because a player had a reputation when he joined Spurs, doesn't mean they made a huge impact in their time at the club. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilywhite Shayne (talk • contribs)
  • Article has the wrong fee - a big chunk of it depends on appearances

Okay the new format looks horrible, can someone clean it up, make it... nicer looking. Govvy 10:21, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I have changed the format, added start to finish dates, added flag icons for players. Just needs a little finishing up. Govvy 11:29, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Censorship of the records section

Someone keeps deleting items from the "records held by Tottenham" section and pretending they aren't accurate. Records for under achieving as just as valid as any other.

I don't see anybody pretending they aren't accurate or 'censoring' them. The whole point of Wikipedia is that pages evolve over time, as different people edit them. I'm not sure whether the "Fewest matches played by an English top-flight club in a season: 40 2005-06" (which I presume you're referring to) is necessary; it seems a bit too much like trivia to me. I could add lots of other 'records' to the section ("Most Egyptian players in England", "Club most disliked by Arsenal fans" etc.) which are 100% 'accurate' but which should (obviously) not be in the article.

I've tidied up the 'record' for the minute, although I'm not sure my version is accurate - have there been any other top-flight clubs with shorter seasons? I'm very much against 'Premiership' records; despite what Sky would have you believe, clubs had been playing football for the best part of a century before the Premiership came along. Tdrawler 17:11, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Trust me someone has been censoring the section on mulitple occasions - they have also been saying the data is inaccurate without giving any sources. When seasons were abandoned half way through in war time then there will be clubs who have played less games I suppose, though I don't think that really counts as it wasn't within their control. Also, obviously there weren't so many games back in the 19th century, thus the need for the modern era point. I agree that one could add any record, but surely playing the fewest number of games is of a great deal of significnance in terms of being notable? Certainly far better than other items that have appeared in that section such as 4th biggest sponsorship deal ever or whatever it was (I hremoved that a while back) - IMO only things that involve being the best (or worst) at something should be there, otherwise it iasn't a record. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.3.255.72 (talk • contribs) 20:56, September 29, 2006 (UTC).

I'm afraid I can't just "trust you", it's up to you to provide evidence for your claims. Also it's up to you to provide evidence that the data you've inserted is accurate (see Citing sources). If I were to insert something like 'White Hart Lane has the greenest grass in the Premiership', I wouldn't be surprised to see someone remove it without providing evidence of its inaccuracy.

I haven't been able to verify the fact with a few web searches, so I will remove it. FWIW as far as I remember, the commentators on the radio last year said it was the fewest number of games played by a top-flight club for about 100 years, but without a better source, I don't see how this can remain in the article. If you can cite a source for this, I'd be delighted to put the item back in the article.

I'm with you on the 4th biggest sponsorship deal not being encyclopaedic, but any loosely defined term like 'modern era' shouldn't be included IMO. References to 'eras' should only be included where the 'era' is a) a significant change to the rules or play of the game and b) has an easily defined starting (and, if applicable, ending) point. Examples such as the change to 3 points for a win, and rugby going professional are therefore worth recording, but other 'eras' like 'modern era' are not defined.

As for your suggestion that records about being the best/worst should be included, what would you suggest about the following records? (I've made most of them up but assume they're correct)

• Norwich City have the best pies in English football
• Charlton Athletic have the best family facilities at an English top-flight club
• Arsenal have the best stadium in English football
• Portsmouth FC have conceded fewest goals in the 2006-07 Premiership season

Finally please sign you comments with four tildes (~~~~). If you enjoy editing wikipedia, please consider signing up for a user account! Tdrawler 09:13, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

You don't need to go back to the 19th century. Sunderland played 40 games during the 2001/02 season. Source : http://www.safc.com/match/?page_id=2593&team=39&season=2001-2002 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulmn (talk • contribs)

Which is exactly why it's a daft record, it's a bit like have a record fewest runs by one batsman in an innings in cricket, or lowest break in snooker, or highest three dart score in darts. Someone is bound to do it sooner or later but they're almost certainly not going to be the only one who ever does and there is absolutely no way to "break" the record, you can only equal it. --JamesTheNumberless 10:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Support section

I changed the "references to Jews" section to a more general "support" section, it was definitely undue weight before. I've toned it down, but it still badly needs citations. Oldelpaso 20:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I note that this section has had some vandalism recently. Unfortunately it still currently says "...the highest amount of supporters with average, to low, I.Q..." Ignoring the fact that the incorrect use of "amount" (rather than "number") betrays the low I.Q. of the author, it is still clear that this clause should simply be removed. Patjennings45 22:20, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I have removed and reverted what I can. Regards, Govvy 22:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Spurs Hall of Fame.

Shall we do a sub-article for the Hall of Fame? Govvy 12:50, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Created "Len Duquemin" profile.

I just added a short profile for Len Duquemin he is one of the former players of note. He is from Guernsey so we need a flag for him on the noted section. If anyone would like to add anything to his profile page that is helpful please do. There could be more added to it and stats box. Govvy 12:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Martin Jol's stats table and manager's table

As these tables change with every game Spurs play, could people put a date by them so that readers know when they are relevent to.

Thanks --Athosfolk 11:18, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I personally don't like them and would like them to go! Govvy 11:55, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Stadium, Crest and Colours.

It's just been noted by Qwghlm on the Project Talk page that this article is missing 3 key elements to bring up the standard of the article. We need a joint effort to add in the three sections explaining the crest and colours of Spurs as well as adding a section about the stadium. These three elements should take priority. Govvy 14:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd also suggest, following on from those comments (which I completely agree with) that the history section should be split to a new article, with only a brief summary. See what's been done for the Arsenal page. Bear in mind WP:RECENT when updating the history section. I'll try and help when I can, but I have very little time to edit wikipedia these days I'm afraid. Tdrawler 16:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I have added a small section on the club crests. I could only find a mention of pre-1955 crests though so this part could do with expanding if possible. KingGorack 21:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Good job, I referenced all those url's in there, fixed the images size and alignment, had a look in Firefox and IE, looks good in both. Cheers. Govvy 00:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I have now also added a small section on the club's kit. again its not too detailed but a start for others to build on from. KingGorack 21:57, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I had a look at the kit section you done, pretty good stuff, cheers. Govvy 11:12, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

FA Youth Cup honours

Should we move those honours into Tottenham Hotspur F.C. Reserves & Academy ? Govvy 12:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Stadium

I added a new section for the stadium, you peeps might want to check it over. :) Govvy 13:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't most of this belong in White Hart Lane? howcheng {chat} 16:44, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Doh, hmm, I'll remove it then, I think we need to make that White Hart Lane, stadium link stand out clearer. Also adding a template for all the spurs links at the bottom might help make things clearer. Govvy 17:30, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

heh, anyway, updated, added a header for the stadium. I think it needed it before, surprised no one added a header for that part. Govvy 17:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Charity partnership

I think we might mention the charity partnership with SOS Children's Villages UK which has just been announced: http://www.soschildrensvillages.org.uk/charity-news/tottenham-sos-partnership-270307.htm I am a bit conflicted (as I work for the charity) from adding it to the page myself. SOS is also the official FIFA charity and partners celticFC but this is the only UK club partnership. --BozMo talk 08:10, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Done !! PaddyBriggs 08:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

2006-2007 Season

A bit to much padding and waffle here don't you think ??!! PaddyBriggs 08:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Probably - unfortunately, your edit got caught up in some removal of vandalism I did - I've tried to repair, but feel free to re-edit the bits I've missed! Stephenb (Talk) 08:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

07/08 3rd kit

http://www.footballshirtculture.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=292&Itemid=26 This is the third kit, its awsome!!!!

Got one on order, bit it isn't the third kit. It's the 125th celebration kit, and will be worn at the home game which falls closest to Sep 30th 2007 the 125th annaversary of the clubs formation. Spurs have returned to the all yellow for the alternate kit which should be added to the pic's at the top. I'll add something about the 125 shirt in the kit section. Djarra 16:31, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Former players of note discussion.

That's getting pretty big, I thought it would be a good idea to move it into it's own article then have it setup like List of Manchester United F.C. players. What would the rest of you think of that idea? Govvy 15:07, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Very good idea. There are a lot of important former Spurs players out there and they do warrent such a page. Perhaps a good starting point would be Walter Tull? Djarra 16:13, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking the same thing, I think it would be a good idea. I think we should also move the official hall of fame that's currently below to the same page. Mattgibbins 17:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

The list is getting ridiculously large, particularly as these players are supposed to be notable. In my opinion there are several players that could be removed, with some of the more recent ones that stick out to me being Samways, Thorstvedt, Barmby, Armstrong and Leonhardsen. Thurls 12:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Agree. Needs pruning. PaddyBriggs 14:36, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Lampard

Someone included Frank Lampard as No 8 of Spurs :(

Could anyone tell me who's real no 8?

Forza Getafe 10:55, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

It's correct now (it was Jenas)

Fair use rationale for Image:Tottenham Original.gif

Image:Tottenham Original.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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 05:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)