Talk:Ultras

Pictures

I think the pictures which were used are not fitting to the article at all. As you can see at the banners it's not Schalke Ultras who show the "Happy Birthday" wallpaper, it's just normal fans. Also saying "Happy Birthday" in this way isn't the typical "Ultras-way" to do it. The other picture also doesn't fit, because it shows the Barra Brava in Argentina and not Ultras, which might be similar but not the same. Abgas (talk) 08:44, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Missing information

What is the article missing:

The origin of the "Ultra" usage. from what I remember there were three major possiblilites:

Ultras, as in "extremist" or "extreme";
Ultras, from the Clockwork Orange term Ultra Violence;
An acronym created by early Sampdoria groups

Public detractors of the movement

Some photos. I could get plenty of photos with permission from Colectivo 95 (FC Porto), but it would make the article look very one sided.

notable incidents

Given time, this could be a featured article, methinks. \ wolfenSilva / 10:56, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The word "ultra" is usually said to be italian in origin, which translates as "radical". There is an argument that it could be spanish derived, where the meaning is extremist supporter, hooligan, right-wing extremist. it is unlikely to be of english origin.

In italy, Ultras are traditionally thought of as right wing, violent and racist, which has given rise to left-wing / anti-racist / antifa ultras all over europe to combat this problem. Limes 06:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Political Allegiance

I think the ultra groups should have their political allegiance next to them. There used to be a map of Italian ultras groups on this page.

Revisit this article?

I think the biggest mistake in this article is to confuse ultra culture with other forms or football supporting.

The ultra culture can be said to have born with Fossa at 1968. It got its name when a Turin journalist used the term to describe Torino's supporters who later adapted it as their official name: Ultras Granata.

And by no means this is not to claim that "organised football supporting culture" would have born at 1968 with Fossa. For example even in Turin itself Fedelissimi Granata had existed much longer.

Neither should movemento ultra be confused with other football supporting subcultures. "The original scarf-waving and chanting English culture" or later burberry brigades are very different from ultras. (And this is not to start argument if there is better or worse support in The Kop than in Curva Nord. It is just different.)

(Luckily American tailgating in soccer matches was already excluded. :D )

How about creating topic "football (soccer) supporting cultures" and under that we could discuss different subcultures? Now this feels bit like someone would try describe everything about rock music in the topic of Sex Pistols.

Tim (March 30th, 2006)

As a true football fan, I find this alticle rather strange as it seems to give the ultras an easy ride. I have been unfortunate enough to encounter ultra groups both at games and away from the stadium and I feel the contention that they are not violent or are somehow different to regular hooligans is somewhat misleading. Also the adoption of such extremist right-wing iconography is dealt with in a rather blase way. While I admit that British football still has problems with violence, racism and racist chanting, there is nothing on the scale of what regularly transpires amongst ultra groups. (Jim - 30/1/06)

In light of various threats alleged to have been made to Liverpool supporters - threats attributed to "ultras" from Juventus, perhaps this article needs to be enhanced.

For example an article in The Times talks about threats that certainly put the "ultras" into a category of violent football hooligan, if the reports are true:

The reactions of that hard-line element among the Turin club’s followers have increased Liverpool’s concerns about the safety of their supporters on Wednesday. No public comment was made on the matter yesterday, but club officials are known to be worried about the threats of violence that have been made on websites by Juventus “ultras”. These messages carried threats to “break the bones of the red animals”. One of them read: “I want to see them covered in their own blood.”

I myself would rather not alter the article - I am a Liverpool supporter myself and so could be seen to putting a biased slant to things - but someone needs to review the article to balance it out.

--sideiron 21:32, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I agree that this article needs a revist, some sections of it don't feel to me to be NPOV, particuarly the hooliganism section. I am not a football supporter, and so don't know anywhere near enough to do justice to this article. I'll have a think as to where to make a note of it to try and attract some attention. Thryduulf 21:37, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

As a massive football fan im going to try and clear this up as best i can right here

ULTRAS is a term used to describe a group of hardcore supporters in country's from Europe, these fans are extremely fanatical about their clubs and whilst this fanaticism isn't always violent, some ultras groups will kick off when they feel threatened

here in England we use the term FIRM, but these are usually limited to groups who's sole purpose is to fight another firm, or opposing supporters they are not one and the same thing, ultras groups exist here but these groups do not tend to be violent, we also tend to dissociate ourselves from the term ultras itself just for one simple reason, we associate the term with violence and death as most fan stabbings (ie the two leeds fans that were killed in turkey ...or the aforementioned juventus group) thus our ultras fans don't tend to use the term

thus most groups that might be considered "ultras" by european standards are not ultras in the strictest sense of the word as the only reason they come together is for peaceful football supporting, never engaging in violence, its important that this difference is made clear, because whilst we english have a rep for football violence it is not conducted by the majority of the large "ultras" groups, that is left to the FIRMS

i did my best to explain ....i hope you understand lol

Tony Spike (talk) 22:17, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Groups losing banners...

It is simply not true that groups who lose their main banners "traditionally split up". Look at all the banners that change hands in the course of a season in Poland, for example. You'd have groups splitting up every other week...

Groups

The list of groups must be in a new page, or somebody that knows how to place them with order must edit this page.

List of groups created

I create the page for the list of ultras groups, the List of ultras groups need to be expanded, so the extense list of this page can be deleted.

I'm gonna edit the list of groups section. This page is fine, but that list make it too long, and it keep growing. So i'm going to put the link to List of ultras groups in that section. I can't put all the groups alone, so i will put the current list in the talk page of the list page, i will make it in three days if nobody oppose to it.--Bauta 06:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@Rapid Wien: ALTE GARDE is not ultrà, they are hooligans. -sol invictus-

@US American groups: are those really groups that deserve the term "Ultras"? According to my own epxerience in the US, the atmosphere at a graveyard is more exciting and lively than at a footie match. A group of 5 people in the stands, jumping up and down doesn't make them ultras, does it?

@Belgium: De Noormannen are not ultras! Drughi are!

Merge?

As stated on this page the list of groups page was created to simplify this page. Someone who knows how to do it please cancel that proposal and make one new with the suggestion of the section on this page to be traspased to the list page

The two pages should be merged in my opinion. What is incredibly odd about the Ultras list page is that there are Ultras Groups listed on both the main page and the Talk Page. Take the England Ultras Groups for instance - on the Main Page is a list of supposed Ultras Groups - non of which seem to be real Ultras Groups and certainly not the ICF who are a Hooligan Firm and do not call themselves Ultras. Then on the Talk page there is another totally different list with the details of 'real' Ultras Groups in England such as the Accrington and Aldershot Ultras, together with links to their websites. So, taking that into account surely the two pages should be merged and the two different lists combined into one on this page? Tangerines 21:54, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger is for the best.--Short pat 00:35, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And if you check, the two articles were merged nearly four months ago...... ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 00:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense?

under detractors - "...to more serious criticisms like theft of highway service stations..." is this manglish (perhaps meaning robberies etc.) or nonsense? Dibo 06:24, 31 May 2006 (UTC) It is nonsence, sir.--Short pat 00:36, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update

I will try to add most of the "ultras" and "barras" to the list of ultras that are still missing, unify both lists and upload pictures for the ones allready on the list. I've already corrected some of the Argentinian names, added one for mexico, three for Costa Rica and one for colombia.

Shed End Invincibles

How r u? I took Shed End Invincibles off the list of groups 'cause they don't exist anymore, someone keeps putting their banner up but they don't ever do anything else and the banner is falling to pieces.

External Links

I cleaned the links list, removing 404's, forums, non pertinent and team specific sites. Sites listed should only be related to the general "ultras" term and not single supporters groups. As Wiki guidelines, forums should not be listed. Maybe Tifonet.net is to be listed only in the italian voice? Fototifo.it contains just pics so it's easy to browse it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.38.79.109 (talk) 12:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

seems like an apologia for ultras

The article as it currently reads seems like an advocacy piece, trying to convince us that ultras are peaceful and rumors of hooliganism are overplayed and unfair, and so on. It needs to be made much more neutral, and statements cited to specific people rather than made out of thin air. --Delirium 15:48, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. It reads, without any citation, that "Ultras are just misunderstood"... --Bobak 20:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add that I am trying to work on this and get this neutral without rumour. And to get sources cited. Tangerines 19:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No ultras in England

There are no ultra groups in England, the toon ultras are a bunch of kids who just shout and get a little abusive. They should be deleted. They are noise groups.

Sorry but here are Ultras Groups in England. Accrington Stanley and Aldershot Town for instance are two of the clubs who have Ultras Groups. The Accrington Ultras are an officially recognised Fan Group. Both of these Groups have websites. Tangerines 21:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The real ultras groups in england are Jorvik Reds (York City) [1]and Holmesdale Fanatics (Crystal Palace) more groups are emerging but most groups are somwhere between tifo and supras groups. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.89.5 (talk) 22:23, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

just because they have a website, official club recognition or the name ultra, dosnt make them an ultras group, just a fan group,

whilst their are some extreme fan groups in the country not only is the term "ultras" not really all that popular (firms is a more popular term) hardcore supporters groups are usually 100% peaceful, ....proper ultras groups in other country's tend to not be so fussy

thus whilst their are ultras groups in england they are not ultras groups in the strictest sense

Tony Spike (talk) 21:37, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article Clean up

As part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Football I have started to clean up this article. I have made some initial small edits, but will be making more substantial changes over the coming days. Included in that is a total revamp of all the lists of ultras groups that appear on both this article and on List of ultras groups. If I make an edit that you disagree with or delete an Ultra Group that you think should remain, please let me know Tangerines 20:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note to add to this, now the article seems a lot better, I aim to try and research into getting some sources to verify much of the content. And also to ensure that the whole article is NPOV. Especially with the apparent differences between Ultrs groups in different countries - where it seems that in some countries Ultras appear to be general supporters who have tifo displays and support the club, and in other countries where Ultra groups seem to be more on the fringes of the club and for all intents and purposes are a hooligan firm. This, in my opinion, needs to be discussed in more depth on the page than at present. Tangerines 18:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Melbourne Victory Blue & White Brigade

Just to clarfiy, the reason this has had to be removed from the list of groups is that the linked page, used to verify the group, does not work. The website given, http://www.bluewhitebrigade.com/, comes up with "the page cannot be displayed". If there are online newspaper articles mentioning the group then by all means add them with that link. ♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 15:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wheres the ultras listing for Spain?

In answer to the above question, asked presumably by User:81.155.163.62, the only group that was listed was the Beer Front of Levante, however the website for that group seemed to be more about a hooligan firm than an Ultra group and so it was removed. If you have groups names with full verificatin for their existence, add them to the list. They need to be referenced though. ♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 00:33, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Groups

As part of WP:WPSPAM I've tagged the 'List of Groups section with the {{Cleanup-spam}} tag. I believe that this is collection of external links is innappropiate on Wikipedia (following the guidlines on WP:EL and WP:NOT. If a user want't to research all the different Ultras groups they wouldn't use Wikipedia they would use Google or a dedicated Ultras site. -- Rehnn83 ^Talk 14:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the entire "List of groups" section should be removed per WP:NOT#LINK . It would be best to replace it, if possible, with a link to an appropriate link repository with the same information. Does dmoz have such a list? --Ronz 16:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Section removed. I couldn't find a dmoz list, or anything similar to use as a replacement. --Ronz 04:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That link, WP:NOT#LINK, does not state that there should be no lists. In addition there appears to have been no real discussion about whether or not the list should be removed.♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 15:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you bring skim through Wikipedia_talk:External_links a bit. If you still aren't convinced, start a discussion there. --Ronz 16:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Being relatively new, I shall make sure to have a proper read before even thinking of discussing. I can understand your reasoning on deleting the groups, but not being sure about many wikipedia policies especially in relation to simply deleting listd without any real discussion, I would rather find out first before bringing it up there. I know that, for instance, some pages on dubious topics are put up for deletion (AfD?), and that a consensus has to be reached on that before action is taken one way or the other. But I have no idea about simply deleting a whole list without discussion, especially when reading this, WP:NOT#LINK which does not seem to be an "open and shut case" that all lists should be removed and it does seem open to interpretation.♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 16:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: The reason I deleted so quickly was because there had been no further discussion after four days and the original notice about it had been moved to an archive: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2007_Archive_Apr#List_of_Groups_on_Ultras. --Ronz 16:24, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As the person who originally tagged the article - I created this discussion here to gauge opinions. The only ones coming forward where in agreement with my original message. Ronz just beat me to it. -- Rehnn83 ^Talk 19:29, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed this link - http://www.spraci.com/pages/bennis/scarves-ultras.html - Info page on the history of the ultras movement as it was a repost of a supertifo.it article. Limes 06:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Antifa Ultra

Added a little info about leftist / radical ultras groups, commonly referred to as Antifa Ultra or Antifa Hooligans, which may or may not derive from the song of he same name by Spanish Ska Punk band Los Fastidios. Limes 06:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me a bit about Parma's ultras if you know ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.141.179.132 (talk) 03:33, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Celtic Cross

Please remove the reference to the Celtic cross being used by fascist and being an offensive image. The Celtic Cross is not used by these groups - it is more akin to a target cross-hair as if you compare the two symbols you'll see that is definately a Celtic Cross. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.254.234.251 (talk) 13:31, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

well, as anti-fascist football supporter, i know that it is used. in great britain, the main 3 clubs that use it are chelsea, cardiff, and glasgow rangers. their harline casuals are far-right, especially chelsea and rangers who share a link. --PCAnarchist (talk) 16:01, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Ultra Groups - Green Brigade and other things.

These are group that claims ultra status, when in fact they are not. they can only properly have a claim, because of the fact that to every game they bring flags. they never engage in violence, although have a far left politcal aleigence.

"Far-" and "no violence" are self-excluding. 78.34.103.67 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:24, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

a table needs to be made showing all the known european and others sorted by their respectable countries, showing current status, foundng, colours, aleigence, teams, etc. also, adding casuals to this aswell may be a good idea. in te case of Glasgow Celtic, the CSC (Celtic Soccer Casuals/Crew) is their offical casuals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PCAnarchist (talk • contribs) 15:36, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Restored material

Thank you for adding some reference to the restored material, however a large amount is still uncited and if it remains like so for a month I will trim the article again Gnevin (talk) 16:07, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tifo San Siro.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Tifo San Siro.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:26, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Manjappada.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:38, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Russia!

Why is this section absent? They're the ultimate ultras.