Talk:National League North

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the National League North 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

Football: England / English non-league 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.
	English football portal This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the English non-league task force (assessed as Low-importance).

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Finances[edit]

Are any teams fully professional in Conference North? Are any players or teams amateur? Ffda (talk) 01:03, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They are mostly semi-professional.--EchetusXe (talk) 15:57, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Location of page[edit]

Shouldn't this page really be at Football Conference North?

Apparently not: English football league system

Fair use rationale for Image:Football Conference.png[edit]

Image:Football Conference.png 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Chrislintott (talk) 10:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Map is incorrect[edit]

It says teams from the counties in red or maybe purple go into the Conference North, yet Lowestoft Toen in Suffolk (yellow) are in the Conference North — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.159.177.110 (talk) 15:50, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What happens if both teams relegated from the Conference Premier are in Conference North or South ?[edit]

Explanation is needed of what happens if both relegated teams are clearly in Conference North or South region. E.g. if both relegated teams are relegated to the Conference North region, would the southernmost team in the North area have to be moved to the South area for next season to keep the same number of teams in each region ? This would imply that teams on the border between North and South can find themselves moving North and South fairly often. Rcbutcher (talk) 23:07, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When all the promotion and relegation issues are sorted Conf North and Conf South are regarded as one big pool of clubs, then divided equally between the 22 northern most clubs and the 22 southern most clubs. The FA.L.C. advise their recommendations on allocations, but then nothing is settled until the Football Conference AGM approves the constitution, usually around the beginning of June. Which is why I find it strange that someone has already amended the member clubs for 2015/16 when they haven't actually been decided yet... DJhinckley (talk) 19:49, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 31 May 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. EdJohnston (talk) 23:46, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Conference North → National League North – The league is to be renamed the National League North due to a re-branding – Source. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 00:32, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 00:39, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Because this is not a sponsor rename (Vanarama had no say in the decision), a move to the new name makes sense. O N R (talk) 20:25, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support However, I do wonder what the point in having separate articles for the three divisions is. There is barely any prose in there, quite a lot of content could be moved to the season articles (or duplicates them); the remainder would easily fit in a single article. Number 5 7 10:47, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support - no-brainer. The official (i.e. unsponsored) name of the league has changed, so the article title should reflect this fact -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:52, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Mattythewhite (talk) 15:57, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support - to match change in name. Giant Snowman 17:35, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on National League North. 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/20100916192508/http://www.footballconference.co.uk/history.php to http://www.footballconference.co.uk/history.php

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 11:01, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]