Talk:FC Zenit Saint Petersburg

Archiving

Just a notice that I'm going to request automatic archiving on this talk page.   Jhony  |  Talk   13:30, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Racism

Racism towards black people? Anyone want to cite something on the page about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.37.16.220 (talk) 00:18, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/may/14/uefa.zenitstpetersburg

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/2299242/Zenit-fans-are-racist-admits-Dick-Advocaat.html 2 reliable sources Spiderone (talk) 16:56, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:JP1.jpg

The image File:JP1.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --09:07, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, my God! St. Petersburg is the city in Florida, U.S.A. !!! The correct name of Russian city is Sankt Peterburg !!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.111.103.110 (talk) 14:29, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Requested move 2009

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was no consensus for move. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 17:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

---

FC Zenit Saint Petersburg → FC Zenit — It's a common practice in England to customize foreign clubs' names by appending city to their actual name; this produced Inter Milan, Sporting Lisbon, Rangers F.C. etc. Zenit's name pretty looks like another case of this, hence the requested move. The club clearly prefer "FC Zenit" name: their site located at http://www.fc-zenit.ru/ is named "The Official Zenit FC Website", they are referred simply as Zenit in the news section (http://www.fc-zenit.ru/eng/main.phtml) and their official name is "FC Zenit joint-stock company"[1]. Both FC Zenit and FC Zenit St. Petersburg has been adopted by a significant section of the English-language media as evidenced by Google News: hits for "fc zenit", zenit -"st. petersburg" and "zenit st. petersburg". Finally, it isn't easily confused with other clubs' names such as FC Zenit Čáslav since the latter are low-profile and get much less news coverage [2]. -- Barocci  21:53, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related page moves.  Barocci  22:10, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Oppose

1) see logo and contact information of the club on the site - FC Zenit Saint Petersburg. 2) too many words name Zenit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WildCherry06 (talk • contribs) 22:28, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

1a) What contact information you are referring to? I only found "Copyright © 1999-2009, Zenit Football Club" at the bottom.
1b) Regarding logo, what's the point? The logo is in Russian language, but Zenit is never called "Zenit St. Petersburg" in Russian, you as a Russian speaker know that. Anyway, "Saint Petersburg" on the logo is not meant as a part of the club name, that is clear from previous logo, File:FC Zenit Saint Petersburg old logo.png, where one can explicitly read "Санкт-Петербургский Футбольный Клуб Зенит" (Football Club Zenit from Saint Petersburg).
2) Concerning "too many Zenits", may I please refer you to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC? After all, FC Zenit has always been a redirect to FC Zenit Saint Petersburg and as far as I know, nobody has ever complained about that.  Barocci  23:24, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - This may only be my opinion, but I find "FC Zenit" to be too vague a name for this article. Anyway, the club logo clearly says "Football Club Zenit Saint Petersburg", making the current title perfectly fine. – PeeJay 01:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

It really surprises me that people are paying so much attention to logo while ignoring the fact that the club clearly prefers to name themselfs simply "FC Zenit", based on the website evidence. Does logo have undue weight? Any reason why you assume "Saint Petersburg" on the logo to be a part of club's name and not just a mention of the city (did you read my explanation why it is the latter above)? Is every word on logo a part of club's name (should Rangers thus be moved to Rangers Football Club Ready based on their logo File:Rangers.png)? Why even take team crests in consideration? Is this policies-based approach? And do you find Rangers F.C. a vague name as well? (given the existence of Club Social de Deportes Rangers, who also call themselfs just "Rangers" (see Gastón Cellerino for example)) You are just ignoring WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, aren't you?  Barocci  02:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose. As the nominator says, both "FC Zenit" and "FC Zenit Saint Petersburg" are used. However, "FC Zenit" is the name of more than one club, so it makes sense to retain the "Saint Petersburg" part as a disambiguator. This seems to me as one of those rare win-win cases—we get to disambiguate a common name and still are left with a name that enjoys real-life use.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:37, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Procedural close, no move made, the discussion below has become dysfunctional and is not contributing to a reasoned decision on this article title. An article move by an editor, not requiring admin intervention, is perfectly acceptable under our WP:RM guideline. That fact that this article was moved without discussion after a previous move decision two years ago is irrelevant. Policies and guidelines permit such moves as RM decisions are not binding in any sense, especially after 2 years. The only caution for editors is not to make undiscussed moves during an ongoing RM as that is considered disruptive. Not the case here. Editors interested in changing the name of this article should open another RM and stick to policy-based arguments for or against the alternative name. The history of moves is irrelevant. Impuning the character and behavior of other editors will carry no weight in the decision and should be avoided. Plus, this article could use a bit of work as it has been tagged for references since 09/2011 Mike Cline (talk) 18:42, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

---

FC Zenit → FC Zenit Saint Petersburg – Move made without discussion, and against the decision previously made on the talk page.Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 11:21, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

• Support - actually we shouldn't have this discussion. Some administrator should move the page back as a result of the previous discussion, and if Barocci wants to move it to FC Zenit he should make another "requested move discussion", when this article is in it's right position.Mentoz86 (talk) 07:57, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Nice campaigning. [3] I very much welcome editors to the discussion, but presenting them the situation in such a POV-ish manner is a bit unconstructive, don't you think? Barocci (talk) 21:22, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
    • It's not about campaigning at all, but as I've already stated: this discussion shouldn't be needed as per the previous discussion. I tried to move it back to FC Zenit Saint Petersburg, but since I'm not an administrator, it wasn't possible, so I simply expressed my opinion about it and asked an administrator for a hand, which I haven't gotten... Mentoz86 (talk) 03:14, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Support. And agree with Montoz86. It should not have been moved without a new RM. Walrasiad (talk) 13:44, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose. Yup, I am bold and the very same policy some of your, guys, actions are seemingly relying upon says "Editors may make changes without prior discussion" and then "Further discussion should then be undertaken on the article discussion page", so I believe it says I am not obliged to discuss my every single step and I see nothing controversial in moving an article from an incorrect to a correct name, but, if you are interested in discussing the matter, let's do it. However I honestly can't see any discussion on the subject here (which is a bit surprising), so let me start one:
• The move to FC Zenit that I've done is, I believe, an improvement. First of all, the club is never called "Zenit Saint Petersburg" in Russian, it's always just "Zenit", because the club is called that, "Zenit", and nobody really thinks there's a need for any disambiguation between reigning Premier League champions and some Second Division outsider, that's just stupid. Second, the club is clearly prefers to call themselves "FC Zenit" in English as well: their site is http://en.fc-zenit.ru/main/, at the bottom you can see "Football Club Zenit. All rights reserved.", in the club section "Zenit football club was established in May, 1925. At first the team was a part of the Leningrad Metal Plant in the name of Stalin. The club carried the name Stalinets from 1936 to 1940, when the club got its current name – Zenit. FC Zenit is the only team in the Russian Premier League representing St. Petersburg." and so on. Finally, the very reason the article was called FC Zenit Saint Petersburg initially is because of well known systematic bias of UK residents to (sometimes incorrectly) call foreign clubs (FC +) Club name + City name, like FC Inter Milan or AZ Alkmaar (note that both articles' names are correct). In case of Zenit, even in the UK-based press, both Zenit and Zenit Saint Petersburg are used, so I believe it is perfectly well to move the article to its correct title, which is simply "FC Zenit". Thank you guys for reading. Barocci (talk) 16:54, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Example: FC Zenit, Zenit. Note that all recent headlines use simply "Zenit". On a separate note, please don't use any Google hit-based argument, total hits count says nothing about the recent usage because two or three years ago Zenit St Peterburg name were used more often, but now as the club become fairly well known in Europe it is no more the case, so you cannot correctly measure recent usage that way. Barocci (talk) 17:06, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
    • Oh, and the decision that the nom is referring to was made more that two years ago, things I believe have changed in favour of the move since then (as shown above). Barocci (talk) 17:17, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
      • Comment Why does the text on the club badge in the article read "Футбольный клуб Зенит Санкт-Петербург", which I believe is the Russian for "Football Club Zenit Saint Petersburg"?Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 21:42, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
        • Citing club logo section of the official website, http://en.fc-zenit.ru/main/history/logo/ : "When Zenit returned to the highest Russian league in 1996, the club brought order to its club documentation: the blue-white-light blues started to come on the field in shirts with the official club emblem – an arrow, a ball, and the golden ship of the Admiralty, with the words Saint-Petersburg Football Team written in a circle around the emblem. Starting from 1998, the team emblem took on a more modern look, and was made an officially-registered trademark. " Note that the text in two previous logos read "Футбольный клуб Зенит Санкт-Петербургский" and "Футбольный клуб Зенит Ленинградский", i.e. "Saint Petersburg Football Club Zenit" and "Leningrad Football Club Zenit", how they managed to loose that "-ский" suffix during the latest redesign I don't know :), but I don't think that this suffix-on-the-latest-logo issue is important for the club nor is it really important for the subject discussed there, as it is perfectly clear from the text cited above that they really meant Football Club Zenit from Saint Petersburg, or, well, at least there's no hint that they meant otherwise. So Zenit case now looks more similar to that of Ajax than that of Inter (thankfully, the former article is not located at FC Ajax Amsterdam either.) Barocci (talk) 22:10, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
          • (e/c)There is also an occasionally used naming convention in Russian to write club name as FC Club name (City name), maybe they meant that in the latest redesign but dropped the brackets for aesthetics reasons, a similar convention is used in ru-wiki, for example "Арсенал (футбольный клуб, Лондон)" (Arsenal (football club, London)), Зенит (футбольный клуб, Санкт-Петербург) (Zenit (football club, Saint Petersburg)). Anyways all that is a bit speculative to suggest, the source says Saint-Petersburg Football Team and nothing else so we should stick to that for the matter of logo meaning. Barocci(talk) 22:36, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
          • Well, that history isn't actually mega clear - no mention of the name change from Stalinets, it just 'happens'. Whe the text including the city's name is mentioned it never says anything along the lines of 'despite not be ing part of the club's official name...'. I note that UEFA [4] and the BBC[5] both call the club, Zenit St Petersburg, so I don't think that FC Zenit is the WP:COMMONNAME in English, though it is probably that in Russian.Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 22:23, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
            • As far as I know (and the evidence suggests), both "simply" Zenit and Zenit St Petersburg are WP:COMMONNAMEs. For example, from the UEFA.com link you've given: "Zenit 2-0 Dinamo Bryansk", "Shakhtar Donetsk 2-2 Zenit", "Zenit 2-1 Lokomotiv Moskva" an so on. Barocci (talk) 22:47, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
              • BBC, on the other hand, prefers Zenit St.Petersburg, while also using [6][7] "simply" Zenit freely. But for an opposite example I've given a link to SkySports search earlier that showed they favour Zenit over Zenit St.Petersburg. Barocci (talk) 22:57, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
                • It might be that the official name of Zenit is FC Zenit, but UEFA uses FC Zenit St Petersburg as the official name ([8]), and in articles about the club in The Telegraph([9]), ESPN ([10]) and Guardian ([11]) Zenit St Petersburg is used. AZ Alkmaar is often called AZ, even though AZ Alkmaar is the "right" name for a wiki-article, same goes with Inter Milan, Sporting Lisbon, AND Zenit Saint Petersburg. Per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:USEENGLISH, this article should be moved back. Mentoz86 (talk) 14:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
                  • No, UEFA actually uses shortened version extensively. Just click on "More news" link [12] and read the headlines or scroll down to the Matches section. Barocci (talk) 07:49, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

The Telegraph uses incorrect names such as Apoel Nicosia (instead of APOEL F.C.) or FC Basle (instead of FC Basel). In fact, I oppose the move exactly per WP:COMMONNAME, since both shortened and extended name are common, both are English, shortened is official and extended is incorrect, and the same naming pattern to use official name in such case is used for similar articles: compare FC Zenit (and not Zenit St Petersburg) to AZ (football club) (and not AZ Alkmaar), F.C. Internazionale Milano (and not Inter Milan), Sporting Clube de Portugal (and not Sporting Lisbon), APOEL F.C. (and not Apoel Nicosia), FC Basel (and not FC Basle), AFC Ajax (and not Ajax Amsterdam), N.E.C. (football club) (and not NEC Nijmegen), Bayer 04 Leverkusen (and not Bayer Leverkusen), Olympique Lyonnais(and not Lyon), Olympique de Marseille (and not Marseille), FC Girondins de Bordeaux (and not Bordeaux), shall I continue?.. Barocci (talk) 08:21, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

• Support - the previous RM discussion from November 2009 (Talk:FC Zenit Saint Petersburg#Requested move), which sought to move it to 'FC Zenit' was closed as "no consensus" - even though there was 100% opposition to said move. I suggest a move back. GiantSnowman 17:26, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
  • At least in that request back in 2009 there were a couple of arguments, albeit invalid and easily refutable, in favour of "FC Zenit Saint Petersburg" naming. And now nobody cares to elaborate at all. May I politely remind that Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion and "Wikipedia has established processes to deal with certain procedures. These include deletion discussions and featured content. Because these processes are somewhat institutionalized, they are sometimes wrongly assumed to be majority votes. In reality, Wikipedia's policy is that each of these processes is not decided based on a head count, but on the strength of the arguments presented and on the formation of consensus.". Please, present a clear and valid argument for the article to be named "FC Zenit Saint Petersburg".Barocci (talk) 21:08, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
    • We have one arguments, and that is that the discussion was lost two years ago, and nobody supported you. You then waited two years, and instead of starting another discussion you simply moved the page without asking, even though there were nobody in support two years ago. As I've stated before, this page should be moved back by an administrator, and then you can start a new discussion, and I'll start using "arguments".Mentoz86 (talk) 03:14, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
      • Your suggestion contradicts Wikipedia:Consensus#Reaching consensus through editing policy, already cited. I don't understand why are you pressing for administrative intervention there, as if some administrator should revert all my edits because they are mine, not yours, and you disagree on that naming issue, as well :) Per policies, I was not required to start another discussion, which I didn't because this article doesn't get much attention from editors practically meaning chances that somebody would be interested in elaborating on the subject are small, and that discussion (which really looked like a set of fast thoughtless replies) in 2009 clearly illustrated that. So I believed the move would be an improvement because 1) now as compared to 2009 it is clearer from official club website how they prefer themselves to be called in English, 2) now as compared to 2009 "just" Zenit name is used more often. Times are changing, really. I remember watching Zenit away game against Olympique de Marseille on TV in English back in November or December of 2007, and while Olympique de Marseille was shortened to "OM" they managed to shorten FC Zenit as "ST-PET". Bloody hell! Imagine Chelsea F.C. being shortened as "LOND"! :) Thankfully it's impossible now so yes, times have changed. Barocci (talk) 13:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
        • No, there is not needed a RM to move a page, but you did two years ago, and there were no consensus to move it. And Yes, I want administrator intervention since you did moved the page regardless of the consensus to not move the page. It's not your edits I want reverted, it's the page move. And if there is clearer now that the page should be moved, than in 2009, why didn't you start a RM to discuss it, instead of moving the page when you obviously are the only editor that thinks that FC Zenit is the right place for this article. Comparing Zenit to Chelsea is just silly, in my opinion, as noone have ever called Chelsea "Chelsea London". You wanted arguments, look on my other reply for arguments. Mentoz86 (talk) 14:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
          • As far as I know, the Germans call Chelsea "Chelsea London". I think you've got the point anyway. As for you obviously are the only editor that thinks that FC Zenit is the right place for this article, it's the arguments' strength, not the votes count that is important in Wikipedia, and if that sole rule didn't exist, I won't be a Wikipedia editor at all. Barocci (talk) 07:39, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Moving the page back mid-discussion would just cause more drama. It is not adversely affecting the encyclopedia to have another RM at this time; after all, this is two years in the future, and as Russian football because more well-known in English-language sources facts may change. That certainly does not excuse Barocci's having moved in spite of the previous opposition when he knew it would be controversial, for which he deserves a good slap with a trout. As for the move itself, the club is almost always referred to by the expanded title in English-language sources. This is an open-and-shut case ofWP:COMMONNAME. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 15:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• That certainly does not excuse Barocci's having moved in spite of the previous opposition when he knew it would be controversial I obviously didn't know, I thought no one would care. Among the Wikipedians that gathered there, I believe only Ilikeeatingwaffles and me edited the article itself. Barocci (talk) 06:32, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
  • On the subject, I believe you, while in good faith, are passing UK-based sources as English-language sources, but English is a worldwide language and when you would look at the complete picture what you've said (the club is almost always referred to by the expanded title) would not be the case, for example Russian news agencies, which are more reliable sources on a Russian football club as they have better accuracy on this particular subject, don't use the expanded title in headlines at all Itar-TassRIANovosti Russia Today nor do the local newspaper St.Petersburg Times. Barocci (talk) 07:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
    • That's why I said "almost always". Local sources are obviously more likely to use the "real name" of the club, but we are obliged to follow common use in order to provide the most familiar name for the majority of our readers. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:31, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
      • True, and then take a look at the issue from another point. Let's assume UK-based readers of Wiki read The Telegraph and the like and prefer FC Zenit St Petersburg. Russia-based readers are used to the official name (by the way FCZ abbreviation is well known itself, for example, it is used on fan scarves [13]) and prefer FC Zenit. How are we supposed to count where are the majority of this article readers from, Russia or UK? And then let's consider Europe, but uefa.com uses both Zenit and Zenit St Petersburg. And then we consider our worldwide audience, but fifa.com, like Russian sources, prefers Zenit in headlines [14]. And then some US news outlet I suppose prefer Zenit St Petersburg so... Well... Unfortunately we could not reasonably measure the most familiar name by asking readers of this article about their preferred news sources. That's why, based on my observations, I came to the conclusion that both names FC Zenit and FC Zenit St Petersburg are roughly WP:COMMONNAMEs. Hence the initial move to the correct name. Barocci (talk) 11:27, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
        • It's not about where "this article readers from". Articles are not supposed to be written to cater to a particular audience: they are supposed to be general enough, and provide enough context, for unfamiliar readers as well as fans of the subject. Furthermore, considering that we have a Russian Wikipedia, it does not make particular sense to cater for Russians to the detriment of non-Russians on the English Wikipedia.Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:52, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
          • It's a bit of exaggeration to call redirect a detriment. And I suppose the same audience that reads Russia Today, St. Petersburg Times etc also reads Wikipedia. Barocci (talk) 12:32, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
• Comment. Please take notice of the proposed move destination. It is not FC Zenit St Petersburg. It is FC Zenit Saint Petersburg. A name that is almost not used at all, even in the UK.[15] If you believe (I don't) that the article should be moved to FC Zenit St Petersburg, then you should indicate that in your replies i.e. "Support move to ... instead" because this request is not about a move to the title some of you are arguing for. Barocci (talk) 10:23, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Good catch. I'm happy for the move to be to the appreviated "St" if that's more common. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:31, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
• Comment - it is worth noting that the Russian-language version of the article is called 'Zenit (football club, St Petersburg)'. GiantSnowman 11:56, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I've already explained that earlier [16], Russian-language version of Arsenal F.C. article is called 'Arsenal (football club, London)' for the same reasons. Barocci (talk) 12:20, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
• (e/c) Comment. Breaking news! If fact, we have a guideline that covers that exact case. It is called Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sports). It explicitly reads:

Sports teams In cases where there is no ambiguity as to the official spelling of a club's name in English, the official name should be used. No ambiguity means that: The name is used on the English-language section of the club's official website The name has been adopted at least by a significant section of the English-language media and it is recognizable The name is not easily confused with other clubs' names.

That is exactly the case of FC Zenit, I made every point clear in previous replies. There was at least one move based on that guideline, FC Dynamo Kiev → FC Dynamo Kyiv. Barocci (talk) 12:12, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

• • It seems to me that this discussion would not be started, had I made a reference to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sports) in my original move; I however encourage further input on the issue discussed, now with the regard for the guideline cited above. Barocci (talk) 22:43, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
    • You mean if you'd known about Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sports) at the time. And this still isn't an open-and-shut case: the guidelines document best practice, but where consensus lies one way and the guideline the other it's the guideline that has to give. My impression of the guideline was always that it was intended strictly for spelling, specifically in things like exactly how a Romanised foreign title was converted into Latin script, rather than simple presentation. And then there's the quibbling over what exactly connotes "at least by a significant section of the English-language media", where the section in question appears to be the English editions of local news outlets. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 07:53, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
      • The guidelines document best practice, but where consensus lies one way and the guideline the other it's the guideline that has to give. No, I believe it is not the way it works. We have policies which tell us what to do and why to do it, and guidelines to help us with how to do it. Rather than using a page's "guideline" designation as an excuse to make an exception, suggest reasons why an exception should be made. Since Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sports) explains how to apply a more general WP:COMMONNAME it that particular case, without a good reason for breaking Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sports), !vote that contradict Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sports) would also contradict WP:COMMONNAME, an established policy, and thus is to be discarded as irrelevant before the consensus is determined. Barocci (talk) 09:59, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
        • My impression of the guideline was always that it was intended strictly for spelling, specifically in things like exactly how a Romanised foreign title was converted into Latin script, rather than simple presentation. The guideline, however, reads pretty clear: if the official spelling of club's name in English is unambiguous, use official name. If the name satisfies conditions 1), 2) and 3), it is unambiguous. "FC Zenit" satisfies 1), 2) and 3) and thus should be used per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sports). Note the guideline reads "official name should be used" not "official spelling should be used". Barocci (talk) 10:23, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
          • And then there's the quibbling over what exactly connotes "at least by a significant section of the English-language media", where the section in question appears to be the English editions of local news outlets. FIFA.com, UEFA.com and SkySports are not exactly English editions of local news outlets. All these have clearly adopted "FC Zenit", as hyper-links above prove. Barocci (talk) 10:32, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
            • Er, UEFA call the team Zenit St Petersburg [17] as do Sky Sports[18] and FIFA [19].Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 11:00, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
              • Obviously these call Zenit both. I'll even do the math for you:

http://www.uefa.com/teamsandplayers/teams/club=52826/profile/index.html: "Zenit St Petersburg" - 3 times, shortened "Zenit" - 65 times, "Zenit Leningrad" - once used on the page

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11670/7390205/Zenit-confirm-Arshavin-interest: "Zenit St Petersburg" - once, shortened "Zenit" - 4 times

http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/clubfootball/news/newsid=1552927.html: "Zenit St Petersburg" - once, shortened "Zenit" - 4 times

Barocci (talk) 13:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Counting the uses in one of these articles is irrelevant. An equivalent piece on, say, Manchester United would use the term "Manchester United" at the beginning, and then shorten to "United" for most of the rest of the article. I note that in your 65 "Zenit"s on the UEFA page you include the fixture list, where most of the team names are shortened versions: Tom, Rubin, Terek, etc.Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 13:50, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

So you are basically throwing out names that are shorter than FC Zenit St Petersburg for the reason that they are, er, shorter. This approach is not based on any Wikipedia policy or guideline as far as I know. And please suggest reasons why the uses of "Manchester United" and "Zenit St. Petersburg" are equivalent. I believe they are not: United F.C. would not satisfy conditions in Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sports). As for what you've called "shortened versions" of other Russian clubs' names, not all but many of them are in fact correct official club names in English as well. Barocci (talk) 14:42, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

You misunderstand, I am merely refuting your claim that UEFA, FIFA and Sky Sports call this club Zenit. The links show that they call the club Zenit St Petersburg, and use Zenit as a short form of this. Are you saying that Tom Tomsk, Rubin Kazan and Terek Grozny are not the correct names for these clubs? Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 15:55, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Second requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Aervanath (talk) 17:16, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

---

FC Zenit → FC Zenit Saint Petersburg – According to WP:COMMONNAME and WP:USEENGLISH, this article should be moved back.relisted--Mike Cline (talk) 16:52, 17 February 2012 (UTC) Mentoz86 (talk) 20:33, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

• Comment - And this time I will not participate in the discussion, to prevent another Procedural close. Mentoz86 (talk) 20:35, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose I really fail to see why FC Zenit Saint Petersburg accords with WP:USEENGLISH, but FC Zenit doesn't. Nor does WP:COMMONNAME seem to support the move request. An advanced Googlesearch in English for "fc zenit" excluding "wikipedia" gives 2,470,000 hits. A search for "fc zenit saint petersburg" excluding "wikipedia" gives just 537,000 hits. Even a search for "zenit st petersburg" excluding "wikipedia" is more popular, producing 1,620,000 hits. At the present time, I would say the case for a move is not made. Skinsmoke (talk) 06:27, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment: Agree that the proposer makes no valid case above. However a valid case is not hard to make, see below, and there seems to be no case at all for the current name; Your ghit counts show nothing at all unless you somehow sort out which of the first search apply to this club and which to the several others by the same name, see FC Zenit (disambiguation). Vote below.Andrewa (talk) 06:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves.Mentoz86 (talk) 22:16, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
• Support move to FC Zenit St. Petersburg, though it may be a separate topic of discussion whether to include the full stop. Searching Google News indicates that this is the name most commonly used in English-language media. It is also the name used by UEFA here. Favonian (talk) 16:27, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
• Support. No case seems to ever have been made that this is the primary meaning of FC Zenit, and it seems unlikely, see FC Zenit (disambiguation). So in the absence of such a case (tell me if I've missed it) this move (whose edit summary official name is no case at all in terms of WP:AT, and which was contrary to a previous RM decision) should be revoked (which is what this move proposes), and the DAB moved to the undisambiguated name. Neutral about Saint, St or St..Andrewa (talk) 23:33, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I have posted a heads-up at Talk:FC Zenit (disambiguation) but it's a formality rather than a requirement. Similarly I think it's a waste of time and effort to reformat this as a multiple move (the main effect of which would be to post a similar heads-up, but by bot rather than by hand). If this move goes ahead the DAB should simply be moved too. Andrewa (talk) 18:58, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
• Support move to FC Zenit St. Petersburg per Favonian. FC Zenit can be used for disambiguation, since it may refer to multiple teams. Cloudz679 22:13, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

• Comment - I don't think FC Zenit should be used for disambiguation, as FC Zenit St. Petersburg is the club the is most known of the FC Zenit's, and was a redirect to FC Zenit Saint Petersburg before the page was moved here. Mentoz86 (talk) 13:49, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

• Support move as above, per Favonian and COMMONNAME. GiantSnowman 11:58, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

I saw it mentioned in the discussion that UEFA uses 'Zenit Saint Petersburg', but I checked and UEFA actually just uses "FC Zenit" as the official name on their site. link--Львівське (говорити) 20:29, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

New Kit 2015-16

Please put the new kits. Here are the images: Home kit: http://image-load-balancer.worldsportshops.com/Images/watermarked_thumbnail.aspx?img=78024&photoNum=1&t=I&catalog=SoccerUCL&w=300&h=300

         http://en.shop.fc-zenit.ru/pictures/image.php?width=450&height=500&image=/upload/mediabank/686459-450/front_siniy.jpg

Away kit: http://en.shop.fc-zenit.ru/pictures/image.php?width=450&height=500&image=/upload/mediabank/686457-106/front_belyy.jpg

         http://en.shop.fc-zenit.ru/pictures/image.php?width=450&height=500&image=/upload/mediabank/686459-105/front_belyy.jpg

Racism

Why is there no mention of the club and its fan's racism? This seems relevant. 174.29.81.203 (talk) 03:21, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on FC Zenit Saint Petersburg. 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/20120515210605/http://www.uefa.com/memberassociations/association=rus/news/newsid=1787404.html to http://www.uefa.com/memberassociations/association=rus/news/newsid=1787404.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140903175123/http://themoscownews.com/sports/20140311/192384970/Zenit-St-Petersburg-fires-coach-Luciano-Spalletti.html to http://themoscownews.com/sports/20140311/192384970/Zenit-St-Petersburg-fires-coach-Luciano-Spalletti.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120616232548/http://en.fc-zenit.ru/stadium/petrovsky/info/ to http://en.fc-zenit.ru/stadium/petrovsky/info/

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) 18:08, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on FC Zenit Saint Petersburg. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.uefa.com/magazine/news/kind%3D134217728/newsid%3D497842.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.uefa.com/competitions/uefacup/news/kind%3D1/newsid%3D696278.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.uefa.com/memberassociations/association%3Drus/news/newsid%3D1787404.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120607173744/http://en.fc-zenit.ru/stadium/new/ to http://en.fc-zenit.ru/stadium/new/

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) 00:44, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 16 March 2018

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: Not Moved per the sources provided which show the use of the current name in reliable sources. (non-admin closure) –Ammarpad (talk) 10:30, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

---

FC Zenit Saint Petersburg → FC Zenit – Placing this move request on behalf of @Cricket246:, who I will invite to state their reasons. GiantSnowman 09:51, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 09:51, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi to all. I noted that in Europa League pages that the name "Zenit Saint Petersburg" is used but the club officially names itself as "FC Zenit" so shouldn't we use only "Zenit" as the name in all the competition pages? The official club name is FC Zenit only do I think we shouldn't digress from the original name. Cricket246 (talk) 09:56, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose per both official name and common name policies. Zenit Saint Petersburg is the name commonly used in reliable sources [20], [21], [22], [23] Zarcadia (talk) 23:58, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose per above, Zenit St Petersburg is the common name. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:24, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

---

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.

Титул России

Привет Зенит! Меня зовут (Газфорт-2021), это мой ник, и я хочу поздравить вас с восьмым титулом. Ты заслуживаешь это !!! Поздравления .. Привет из Болгарии.