Talk:Atlanta United FC

@Walter Görlitz: The article in question uses the nickname in the sub-header. Why is this considered "unsupported"? ^[1] Thanks, wilson (talk) 16:05, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Because there's no discussion of it in the article and there's no reference in the article to support. 16:13, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

So, one source using it, but not discussing it isn't enough? If so, that sounds fair. The reason I'm asking is that this source has used the nickname at least one other time. Another reference.^[2] It does feel like they are trying to create the nickname. Thanks, wilson (talk) 16:32, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

There are two problems. The first is that you still have only one writer, Rob Usry, using the term. Google supports the term as referring to Adidas and the Chinese flag. http://www.si.com/planet-futbol/2016/11/15/atlanta-united-fc-uniform-mls-expansion-jersey and http://www.ajc.com/sports/pro-sports/atlanta-united-unveils-new-logo/gdq5HKSWQrqxMpj1pa2sEL/ reference it, but only in relation to the jersey, not the team name. Nothing else using that phrase at si.com. ESPN.com does not use it in relation to the team and mlssoccer.com does not use it at all.

The second problem is that you are missing the key element: you need to include a paragraph, or at least a sentence, about it in the article, and supply the reference there. Infboxes should summarize referenced content in the article, not simply store important facts.Walter Görlitz (talk)

I agree with Walter Görlitz. Nicknames usually develop over time and are fairly easy to cite because multiple reliable sources use them. This is a brand-new team, so it's not likely to have any established, well-known nicknames at this point. While it's certainly possible this first nickname could gain traction and start being used by others, it isn't there yet. If you have to "dig" to find a source for a nickname, that's a great indication it's not established yet. I run into the same issues with stadiums and arenas as editors want to add nicknames as soon as the place is built or renamed, just because some fan blog or a single writer refers to the facility as such (or editors just make up nicknames themselves). Not everything has a nickname (or doesn't yet) and there's nothing wrong with that. Just wait until it actually happens. Again, that's of no surprise with a brand-new team like this, and will be the case for Mercedes-Benz Stadium once it opens. --JonRidinger (talk) 13:02, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: Recently removed some excess context that was given for the opening game. The attendance statistics that were removed are of only minor interest, as they are not record setting or otherwise notable by themselves. I am less certain about the removal of the statement that Yamil Asad scored the team's first goal (although the time was perhaps excess information). After reviewing all articles for MLS teams I found that half of them mention the team's first goal scorer in their team's history section (Although Minnesota United FC's edit is mine, and Orlando City SC's article has far too much information about the opening game). This survey has left me uncertain as to whether this information should be included on this page. Let me know your thoughts. GiovanniSidwell (talk) 20:58, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Check Montreal, Portland and Vancouver as well. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:36, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here, Montreal has no mention of who scored first, just that their first game was 2-0. The other two do have a sentence stating the team's first scorer (Kenny Cooper and Eric Hassli, resp). GiovanniSidwell (talk) 21:54, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

I missed your earlier point. I'm fine with adding the goal scorer. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:52, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: @Notch505: Brad Guzan has not signed a contract with Atlanta, and is not loaned out by them. However he did sign a "pre-contract", with many outlets reporting that he would make the move to Atlanta at the end of the EPL season. Is this a fact worth presenting on the page, and if so where wold be the appropriate place? GiovanniSidwell (talk) 12:15, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

If by "many outlets" you mean MLS or the team itself, then let's update the subject's article and this one, otherwise drop it until there's official confirmation. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:17, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Atlanta United FC. 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/20110121070705/http://corporate.homedepot.com/wps/portal/%21ut/p/c1/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os3gDdwNHH0sfE3M3AzMPJ8MAF0sDKND388jPTdUvyHZUBAB6afqn/dl2/d1/L2dJQSEvUUt3QS9ZQnB3LzZfMEcwQUw5TDQ3RjA2SEIxUEY5MDAwMDAwMDA%21 to http://corporate.homedepot.com/wps/portal/%21ut/p/c1/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os3gDdwNHH0sfE3M3AzMPJ8MAF0sDKND388jPTdUvyHZUBAB6afqn/dl2/d1/L2dJQSEvUUt3QS9ZQnB3LzZfMEcwQUw5TDQ3RjA2SEIxUEY5MDAwMDAwMDA%21/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110108042058/http://www.atlantafalcons.com/roster-staffs/arthur-blank/ to http://www.atlantafalcons.com/roster-staffs/arthur-blank/

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) 10:19, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: Montreal Impact has the North Star bell. The Portland Timbers have Timber Joey. These elements of their supporter culture have sections on each team's respective Wikipedia page. To unilaterally dub Atlanta United's Golden Spike as "trivial" and subsequently delete all reference is quite cavalier. -Tennisace101 (talk) 19:45, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

You're right. It describes the bell in three sentences and only mentions a few key individuals who have participated. I just cleaned that up and tagged it as using primary sources (which is a problem your list, but not the star itself). Portland has their practice described in their mascot section. All of these are useful, when they're encyclopedic. Your entry described the spike (it's not a proper name and should not be capitalized) with a source from MLSSoccer.com, and that could have stayed. The list of all 17 participants from the 2017 season in a table was problematic. That you were already planning for the 2018 participants is even more problematic. Another odd question, if the list is important, why hide it? Along with also goes against MOS:COLLAPSE, I get the feeling you thought it was too much. I think that describing the spike would be both appropriate and useful. However, listing the participants isn't. I know of no other team articles that list the man of the match for every game. It's done in season articles, usually per-match. Since the spike wasn't just for the MoM, it's just a PR or hype tool when it's not. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:06, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

I take your point. By you reverting the entire edit, it made it seem like even the description of the tradition was trivial. Based on other articles, I will only include a brief description of the tradition on this page along with a couple of examples (using language such as "among others") similar to what was done in the Montreal Impact article. Tennisace101 (talk) 03:10, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes. Sorry. So much time. So little to do. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:08, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Strike that. Reverse it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:09, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

There's been a bit of a edit war going on over the use of "club" or "team" in the introductory paragraph of the article. I personally have been an advocate for the use of "club" since the article is about the overall organization and all the teams the organization fields in multiple levels of association football in the United States. Of course, like any article about an association football club, the primary focus is on the first team competing at the highest level, but that shouldn't preclude the use of the word "club". Many other articles about teams competing in MLS use the term "club". — Preceding unsigned comment added by C. Gerstle (talk • contribs) 12:59, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

This is an article about the first-division team not the club. It mentions some of the work of the club, but that's incidental. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:59, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Except there is no article about the "club" that's separate from the article about the first team. And there's no example of an association football club that has one article about the club and another about the first team. The article on Werder Bremen for example says it's about the sports club, yet the entire article is almost exclusively about the football team that competes in the 1. Bundesliga. As the first team is the focal point of the club, the article should and does focus almost exclusively on them. - C. Gerstle — Preceding unsigned comment added by C. Gerstle (talk • contribs) 23:41, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Then be WP:BOLD and write one. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:25, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

And we name articles based on WP:COMMONNAME and that's the name that should be reflected in the article. If they have a different legal name, as you believe they do, then we can mention it, but not make wholesale changes, especially when you're the only editor wanting that change. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:43, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

The common name for the sports club based in Bremen that competes in the Bundesliga has a common name of "Werder Bremen" yet the article is allowed to mention the club's full legal name "Sportverein Werder Bremen von 1899 e.V." in it's article, both in the intro and in the info box. What makes this article different? — Preceding unsigned comment added by C. Gerstle (talk • contribs) 00:57, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Please 1) sign your comments and 2) stick to WP:COMMONNAME. I don't care about the state of any other article, only this one. What's the club's the commonname? What does the club call itself in press releases? What does the league call it? What do media outlets call it? Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:02, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

First, I find it quite incredible that you do not care about maintaining consistency in the presentation of articles across this encyclopedia. One would think that for quality assurance purposes you would want there to be a common format in articles about similar topics. You wouldn't consider a discrepancy between, say, two different articles about countries having a consistent format? Second, the media reports and league articles on the club are of course going to use the name of the club commonly used by the public, or at least an abbreviation. I have provided a source that clearly states that the full name of the organization is "Atlanta United Football Club" (www.atlutd.com/contestrules). Thus it is perfectly reasonable, if not prudent, to spell out the full name of the organization in both the info box entry "Full Name" and in the introductory paragraph, provided that it is followed up with a remark that the organization is more commonly known by a shorter name, then use that short hand name throughout the rest of the article. C. Gerstle (talk) 01:13, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for signing your post.

I do care about consistency. Look at all of the other MLS articles if you want consistency, but I'm not willing to play that card. One would think that you would start closer to home first rather than looking far afield. Are you sure you want consistency to be the requirement? I'd rather have COMMONNAME be the requirement.

I can provide sources for every MLS club that gives a legal name that no one know except someone in the back office. And that's the point. COMMONNAME is reasonable, not an unknown legal name that you have to dig into some obscure page on their website or a legal document of incorporation. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:25, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

• Comment I fully protected the article due to the edit warring. I have no comment for most of the content at dispute, but there is one thing I want to point out. The generally accepted style is not to use "The" to begin the article. For example, it's Vancouver Whitecaps FC, not "The Vancouver Whitecaps FC". And indeed, the lead of the article was pretty stable until recently. See here for how it looked. Enigma^msg 03:46, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:11, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

I was thinking about this and https://www.atlutd.com/contestrules does indeed call the sponsor of the content "Atlanta United Football Club, LLC", so why are you insisting in calling it only "Atlanta United Football Club"? You're missing the limited liability company designation. That's what your allusion to one (of several dozen) German clubs does. Again, you're talking legal name and won't even discuss common name. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:11, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

What should I conclude from the lack of conversation? I've restored it to the longstanding name until you offer something concrete. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:59, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

All I have are more legal documents about sponsors and liability release forms for parents enrolling their kids in the club's academy (https://atlanta-mp7static.mlsdigital.net/elfinderimages/ATL%20UTD/Tickets/Atlanta%20United%20Release%20and%20Waiver%20of%20Liability.pdf) that refers to the club as "Atlanta United Football Club, LLC". C. Gerstle (talk) 16:08, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

I've also looked at similar documents for other MLS clubs and they all make it clear when their legal name is not their club's name by including a DBA statement (e.g. KSE Soccer, LLC, dba "Colorado Rapids" or OnGoal, LLC, dba "Sporting Kansas City"). The ones involving Atlanta United have no such disclaimer.C. Gerstle (talk) 16:11, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps we need to alert a larger community to discuss. If you're interested, mention this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football or possibly Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous). Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:14, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Done: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#Club_names_in_Major_League_SoccerC. Gerstle (talk) 16:37, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

On the topic of "club" vs "team", I personally think it would be redundant to have a page for the club and one for the first team given that the first team is the focal point of the club and is the primary topic of any article on a football club, such as the Manchester United article. But let's say that we accept your premise that article is too focused on the first team to be called an article about the club. What additional info about the central organization would you recommend? C. Gerstle (talk) 00:41, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

It was brought up that the current introduction to this article is inadequate. I created this talk section to address this. Here is my first draft of a new intro, but I'd like to get other editors on board to craft a thorough and appropriate one:

Atlanta United FC is an American professional soccer club based in Atlanta, Georgia. The club was founded in 2014 by Home Depot co-founder and Atlanta Falcons owner Arthur Blank as an expansion team in Major League Soccer. [2] The club is the first MLS club from the Deep South region of the United States.

The first team began play in 2017 as a member of the Eastern Conference of Major League Soccer (MLS) and was only the third MLS expansion club to qualify for the MLS Cup Playoffs in their inaugural season (after Chicago Fire SC and Seattle Sounders FC). The club also broke MLS records for regular season and playoff attendance in their inaugural season and broke the long-standing record set by the New York Cosmos in 1978 for highest average attendance of any first division soccer club in the United States. In 2018, the club launched a reserve team to compete in the USL Championship, and the first team finished runners-up for the Supporters' Shield behind the New York Red Bulls and qualified for the 2019 CONCACAF Champions League. In that same year the club broke its own records for single-game and average attendance.

The first team plays its home matches in Mercedes-Benz Stadium in downtown Atlanta. The current manager is former Argentina and FC Barcelona manager Gerardo "Tata" Martino.C. Gerstle (talk) 03:22, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Looks good to me. But there will be an update after Saturday's match (to indicate how they finished this year). Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:45, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

I propose that we limit the all-time goal and assist record lists to the top ten. If there is a tie toward the bottom, then we can include more than ten for that reason, but I think that otherwise, ten is a reasonable place to stop. Otherwise, the list can become unwieldily long. At the moment, the assists record list has a top ten, plus several players tied for eleventh. I want to remove the elevenths and only have the top ten, but I wanted to post here first to make sure no one had any opposition to it. It would still be a good idea to keep track of the players with three assists or two goals so that when they get their next assist or goal, we will know that they need to be added. Let me know what you all think.Jacoby531 (talk) 02:04, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Top ten. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:42, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change "tailgate" back to "supporter" as the descriptor for the type of group Footie Mob is with the "Supporters" section content. The change to tailgate was made to create a derogatory descriptor for Footie Mob by characterizing the group as less than a fully functional supporters group. In fact, Footie Mob is the largest supporters group for this team.

The changes was made here for no other stated reason: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=838398739&oldid=838032398&title=Atlanta_United_FC Natlanta2 (talk) 17:47, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

 Done NiciVampireHeart 18:59, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Atlanta United FC's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "atlstats":

• From List of Atlanta United FC records and statistics: "Statistics | Atlanta United FC". Atlanta United. Retrieved December 19, 2018.
• From Atlanta United 2: "Statistics | Atlanta United FC".

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. Feel free to remove this comment after fixing the refs. AnomieBOT⚡ 19:45, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Please see this discussion on my talk page for some background, but the club has never spelled out "football club" officially. There is no source that says "the name of the team is atlanta united football club" other than a promotional tweet from years ago that has no official weight and has never been applied by the club or media sources. Alyo (chat·edits) 14:08, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

More specifically, the holding LLC is called "Atlanta United Football Club" but the team, what this article is about, is always just Atlanta United or Atlanta United FC. There is not and has never been a source that spells it out. Here's a site search for mlssoccer.com, and here's one for atlutd.com. No meaningful results.

Here's the official MLS competitive guidelines saying that a team called "Atlanta United" will be participating in the competition, which I personally think is suggestive that the team has actually dropped the FC completely. To the extent "FC" is still used for branding...that's all it is used for. Two letters on the crest, never spelled out, and potentially not even part of the team name anymore. By COMMONNAME, the team is probably "Atlanta United". A google news search of "Atlanta United FC" gives few recent media hits that aren't the auto-generated header at the top of AtlUtd's website. (Compare that to "Chicago Fire FC" or "Inter Miami CF", both of which are used frequently by media and club.)

There is far more reason to move this article to "Atlanta United" than there is to start spelling out "Football Club". It's stupid, sure, but that's the MLS/american soccer culture for you. This link that's been added is just a crest explainer, and has nothing to do with the team name--and also still doesn't say that the team name is "Atlanta United Football Club"! Alyo (chat·edits) 14:32, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm going to copy over a comment by 2A04 at AN:EW so I can respond to it:

I am grateful for him to state this false claim on record here (won’t call it something else, albeit it would be appropriate) -> a few refutations: , , , , and most importantly, -> Atlanta United Football Club, LLC (the “MLS Team”). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A04:4540:640C:9000:5D13:B01E:6405:359A (talk) 14:33, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

I have discussed some of these examples before, but:

1. Sounders -- Hmm, I'm actually unsure about this one. This is the charter of a connected fan group, not the club themselves. Per the 2024 rebranding, the team appears to just be "Seattle Sounders FC", with all their registration and branding being "Seattle Sounders FC," "Seattle Sounders," “Sounders" and "SFC." This page very nicely says "We are Seattle Sounders FC". Here's another rebrand link. Here are results for "football club" on the official site--most but not all predate the rebrand. I'm 50/50, but I would not revert "Football Club" if added to this article.
2. Dynamo -- Per self use, Twitter handle, and the 2020 rebrand that said they will "now be officially known as the Houston Dynamo Football Club", it's clearly correct to refer to the team as "football club", and our article does so.
3. LAFC -- Again, lots of use of "football club" by MLS, the team's media guide, etc, so I fully support calling the team "Los Angeles Football Club", which our article does.
4. Chicago Fire -- In 2019, the club specifically rebranded as "Chicago Fire Football Club". Our article reflects that, which I support.
5. Atlanta United -- I've discussed this before, but "Atlanta United Football Club, LLC" is the name of a corporation, not the team. If we look for the equivalent documents for Atl Utd as what I've referenced above, here is the style guide. The team is "Atlanta United", with the note that "Atlanta United FC is used for formal executions only." I also linked to the MLS rules above, which list the teams: "Houston Dynamo FC", "Chicago Fire FC", "Los Angeles Football Club" and..."Atlanta United".

Note how you will never find the same level of sourcing for "Atlanta United Football Club" as I can easily find for all the clubs listed above. I do not in any way believe that "football club" should be removed from all MLS articles, or even any others besides Atlanta's. But this team did the dumb thing of putting "FC" on their crest with no intention of calling themselves "Football Club", and now they still have that sitting there despite effectively renaming the team to "Atlanta United". Thus, my edits about "football club" have been limited to this team and this team only. If we want to rename this article, I'm completely in favor of that. Alyo (chat·edits) 15:49, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

For me to assume good faith in your participation, you will first have to restore the edit as it was before you reverted without consensus/approval or WP:RFC -> .

This was previously agreed upon to be left untouched. If that isn’t restored, I won’t engage further than this once and waste my time. I will however, make sure that WP:OWN and WP:POV won’t succeed, please be aware that if the condition is not met and I don’t respond further, measures to ensure the above violations are prevented will be taken nonetheless.

Quoting you: American soccer clubs copy the "FC" with no intention of calling their team a "Football Club" because of an appeal to (European) tradition and because it looks cool in FIFA. […] . False statement as such, which has been refuted. What was the intention behind posting it regardless?

1. The document is uploaded to the official club website and the charter applies to both parties, which are mentioned with full names in the document. Read it. Full name is Seattle Sounders Football Club

2., 3., 4. - all served their purpose to refute your false claim mentioned above.

5. Atlanta United Football Club is the full name, both of the entity operating the team and the team. It says MLS Team or Team for a reason. When the legal entity and the team have different names under which they operate, it is mentioned as d/b/a, which you should be familiar with as a lawyer. Cases in point: . Atlanta United has no such disclaimer, on the contrary.

If your argument was valid, the club would actively discourage the use of Football Club. It does the opposite.

Quoting you: But this team did the dumb thing of putting "FC" on their crest with no intention of calling themselves "Football Club". Again, a deliberately false statement. What is the intention behind this?

I will refer you to the club’s website AGAIN: It breaks down the club name piece by piece, explains it and spells it out. It even affirms that it is called a Football Club, this is what the FC stands for, period. Not only are they called a Football Club, they ARE a Football Club.

The owner of the franchise announced the full name on social media when the club began play in the MLS. You suppressed the source, and unless you restore it again, this will be the last comment on my end (see first paragraph).

Effectively, you are arguing AGAINST the club’s official statements on its own website and social media and that of its core employees, such as the Director of Fan Data, Alvarez .

Add-on: Forgot the official MLS Kick Off Blog, which also calls the team Altanta United Football Club.

Provide proof and sources that the club is expressly opposed to and discouraging spelling out FC to Football Club and present it here after you have found it. 2A04:4540:640C:9000:5D13:B01E:6405:359A (talk) 10:31, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm...not going to respond to threats...? You can't attach conditions to assuming good faith. That's a policy that you're required to follow. I encourage you to strike that. I'll respond to the rest of this later, but drop the hostility, especially since it appears that you and I have never had this discussion before. Alyo (chat·edits) 17:33, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

I will add these pieces of information to be preserved and to add context to this particular content dispute:

The revert of Alyo’s edit which he promised has not happened yet, as of August 31, 2025. -> Quote Alyo: This is an edit warring noticeboard. I can undo my edit (again) to give us time to discuss, but I would like you to make these content arguments on the article's talk page […] from AN:EW

1. Alteration of the hidden note, reverts, claims and other edits by Alyo to the club name were repeatedly made without prior discussion on the talk page. -> Quote Alyo: The name of the team is just "Atlanta United FC". The organization uses "FC" as branding, but does not actually spell out out "Football Club". Do not add "Football Club" without discussion on the talk page.
2. A previous topic discussion on the Football project page from 2018 saw a majority favor the inclusion of the club’s full name:
3. Another previous discussion on Alyo’s talk page from 2024 reached a compromise to include the full club name in the info box. -> Quote Alyo: In the spirit of compromise, I have left "Football Club" in the infobox in the fullname parameter […]
4. The sourced link to the full name was then removed by Alyo in November 2024, without prior discussion on the talk page and without obtaining consensus from other editors. -> Quote Alyo: remove single tweet for club name that is otherwise unsupported, since it causes confusion. The club uses "FC" as branding, but does not actually spell out out "Football Club". It's dumb, but is what it is --2A04:4540:6424:7C00:E947:5A12:BB39:F241 (talk) 13:51, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm not particularly invested in engaging with you when you misrepresent what I've said and done this egregiously. You're twisting most of what I say, so I'm not particularly inclined to continue. And you still haven't struck your threats above. Let me know if you'd support a page move discussion (to "Atlanta United") though. Alyo (chat·edits) 20:00, 1 September 2025 (UTC)