Talk:Club Necaxa

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Club Necaxa 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

Mexico Mid‑importance

	Mexico portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mexico 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.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Football Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Alex Aguinaga

There's weasel words in this section and an overwhelming sense of fandom in the whole thing. I stopped short of deleting it because I think that it can be retooled into something a lot better that fits into Wikipedia's policies. Instinkt 21:02, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Necaxa's name pronunciation

How is Necaxa's name correctly pronounced in Spanish? --Carioca 23:09, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where was neutrality left?

Even as a Necaxa fan myself I can't help but shrug at the fanboyism this article was writed with. I've put neutrality tags on the article, but it needs serious rewriting.

Fanboyism???

i wrote the article.... it is the facts best to my knowledge. o.k there are two phrases that are over the top.. haha ... yet, i see  the wiki pedia does this all the time.... even more......  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alertclub04 (talk • contribs) 03:23, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Try and get an updated source. The club website is gone, and it's now a discussion board. If you know of a current site, use it. I saw these comments at the femexfut site, but I couldn't link them.Openskye (talk) 12:32, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

......................................... People come on read this: "After having a successful decade, many childern and adults who witnessed and watched Necaxa success have a team to root for. In one and many occasions, Club Necaxa teams in the latter half of 1990's and with in the new millennium have been dismembered to fortify the ambitions of the C.F America of Mexico squad(2004-2005-2006-2007-2008-2009). The debate is still on going within FIFA, which is a monopoly in itself,the owners of Monopolies , and Emilio Azcárraga Jean and the integrity of the sport.

Today's Necaxa, and some of its players wear and wore the emblem with pride, and some players devoted serious time, effort and energy to keep the team alive from the regulation rules with in commercialized Primera "A" league of Mexico."

It is 1) awfully written, very poor English and 2) extremely subjective, not impartial at all, full of personal opinion. That is speculation and speculation has no room in an Encyclopedia. Please make comments like these in your own website or so:

"many childern and adults who witnessed and watched Necaxa success have a team to root for"

"with in the new millennium have been dismembered to fortify the ambitions of the C.F America of Mexico squad(2004-2005-2006-2007-2008-2009)"

"The debate is still on going within FIFA, which is a monopoly in itself,the owners of Monopolies , and Emilio Azcárraga Jean and the integrity of the sport."

Nobody is disputing whether this is true or not but the thing is that that's exactly what we are supposed to avoid here, statements that can be disputed. This is an informative resource and as such it must stand only with factual evidence for any claim made here (i.e. by quoting legitimate sources).

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.111.186.243 (talk) 22:27, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2000-today

I believe that this part of the article is written based on a fan's perspective, instead of an informative perspective.

I would like to see an article up to wiki's standards, not a 'post' best seen on a forum or a message board. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Androd25 (talk • contribs) 21:09, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Club Necaxa. 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/20100225145858/http://necaxafutbol.com/ to http://www.necaxafutbol.com/

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) 19:32, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]