Talk:2016–17 Celtic F.C. season

Football: Scotland / Celtic / Season 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Scottish football task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Celtic F.C. task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the season article task force.

Article

Article fails many policies and consensus. These are wp:mosflag, WP:NOTSTATS, WP:LISTCRUFT, WP:V and discussions at WP:Footy including Here and Here.

Celtic aren't representing Scotland in friendlies and neither is there opponents as such fails wp:mosflag. Assists, time on pitch are unverifiable so fails WP:V and not defined internationally as discussed in above discussions so should not be included. Overviews of season should be included as prose in relevant sections and not as bullet points essentially failing WP:LISTCRUFT and last but not least season overviews fail WP:NOTSTATS and are again covered by discussions at WP:Footy If you wish to include this content this discussion should be held there.Blethering Scot 17:25, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Original Research Squad, appearances and goals

Table contains minutes on pitch which is not source able and is original research. Table should be converted to one that is approved by WP:footy to remove this original research.Blethering Scot 21:14, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re-introduction of the overview tables

Based on the discussion Statistics in Seasons the overwhelming majority want to keep these in seasons. Happy to discuss how to improve them if needed. Kyndigs (talk) 05:30, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted as no effort has been made to source the articles properly to meet verifiability issues. Local consensus does not overrule core polices. Blethering Scot 18:42, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Won't get into an edit war here, but there is no original research in these sections, the information is common sense verifiable, summarising known information is not original research in this case. So the CP is not being violated Kyndigs (talk) 01:26, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]