Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
A news item involving 2009–10 Premier League was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 10 May 2010. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
Bit of a moot point, but why are the links to the derbies in the Results grid shortened to an 'a'? Why not a 'D' for 'derby' for example?? - Ck786 ( talk) 21:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
United aren't the only team guranteed to compete, as it's impossible for Liverpool and Chelsea to be overtaken by so many other teams with only 10 games to go. Remember the rest still have to play each other so points get dropped. The pro-United editing on wikipedia is a joke at times. -- 81.154.213.36 ( talk) 17:57, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Then what do you compute so that you get the list of the already saved teams ? 82.240.207.81 ( talk) 09:24, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm not an expert in maths or anything so I don't know the formula for calculating who's safe and who's not. Obviously the 'if 17 teams can't finish above you' point is pretty much it, but considering a table is relevant to all teams results against each other, some will secure safety by virtue of the other teams taking points off one another. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.230.242 ( talk) 13:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
How petty is this discussion? - Ck786 ( talk) 21:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
I would just like to point out that as Ricky Sbragia resigned in the 2008-09 season and Steve Bruce was appointed in the 2008-09 season (which officially ends on the 30th June (see last season's discussion about this exact thing)) that that appointment does not belong in this season's page and as such I think it should be moved to the 08-09 page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.146.39.246 ( talk) 15:43, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Can we have the table that the other leagues have which show the position after each round, ive tried to do it but didnt know how to change it so that the right positions would be highlighted for europe? MotorSportMCMXC ( talk) 22:35, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Can we have only the top five goal scorers by removing the single goal scorers. It actually looks like clumsy. Chock ( talk) 15:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
No Wayne Rooney? Scored 26 PL goals!
84.143.81.63 (
talk)
11:06, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
This section is always in danger of being used as a "fact junkyard" and therefore on constant edge of violating WP:NOT#IINFO. While I agree that some facts are worth preserving, such as "first/last goal of the season" or "fastest/latest goal in a match", the notability of "First penalty kick of the season" or anything cards-related or miscellaneous stuff is rather questionable. Hence we should agree on a definitive set of facts which can be applied to all league season articles, pending that these can be properly sourced, of course. I further suggest that this discussion should be led over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Season article task force since this is not an Premier League-only issue ( La Liga season articles, among others, also tend to have stuff like this). -- Soccer-holic I hear voices in my head... 22:33, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
on the results they should have links to see reports on each match. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deanolympics010 ( talk • contribs) 23:38, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Am I just imagining things, or is the line between the three goal scorers and the two goal scorers thicker under the player name, club, and goals column? I'm using WinXP and IE if that helps anyone. I've looked at the code, and I can't seem to figure out what could be doing it. Anyone else notice this too? 69.135.191.49 ( talk) 15:01, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at the season article task force talk page about potential layout changes to this and related articles in order to establish a common layout for those. The changes include
The proposal can be found here and is open for comment at the respective section of the SATF talk page. -- Soccer-holic I hear voices in my head... 11:32, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Anyone know what time Mascherano was sent off against Manchester United for Liverpool? I think there is a chance this might be later than the Kaboul card. 94.2.191.78 ( talk) 19:10, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Should someone make a page for Spurs' win against Wigan? There is already a page for the Man U-Forest game where Ole Gunnar Solskjaer scored 4 goals off the bench, so I think we shold have a page for a game where someone equalled the record for the most goals scored in a Premier League match. 222.154.46.60 ( talk) 19:54, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
How should Portsmouth F.C.'s entry into administration be marked off on the league table? Should the points simply be deducted with a footnote regarding the penalty or should a full paragraph and sub-heading be entered? User:TheOneKEA —Preceding undated comment added 11:56, 26 February 2010 (UTC).
Should we refrain from putting mathematically unsure information on information for qualification of European competitions?
For example, by the time immediately after the League Cup Finals in 2010, Manchester United should have probably secured a place in Champions League through their position in the league, leaving the Europa League spot for the winner of the League Cup for the sixth place of the league. However, it is not mathematically secured. I wonder if such highly probable but not guaranteed information? Ckhandy ( talk) 17:46, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Pos | Team | Pld | W | D | L | GF | GA | GD | Pts | Qualification or relegation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Chelsea | 28 | 19 | 4 | 5 | 65 | 26 | +39 | 61 | 2010–11 UEFA Champions League Group stage |
2 | Manchester United | 28 | 19 | 3 | 6 | 66 | 24 | +42 | 60 | 2010–11 UEFA Europa League Third qualifying round 1 |
3 | Arsenal | 28 | 18 | 4 | 6 | 66 | 31 | +35 | 58 | 2010–11 UEFA Champions League Group stage |
4 | Tottenham Hotspur | 28 | 14 | 7 | 7 | 50 | 27 | +23 | 49 | |
5 | Manchester City | 27 | 13 | 10 | 4 | 52 | 35 | +17 | 49 | 2010–11 UEFA Champions League Play-off round |
6 | Liverpool | 28 | 14 | 6 | 8 | 45 | 28 | +17 | 48 | 2010–11 UEFA Europa League Play-off round |
The highlighting in football tables has always been there to indicate what positions get which European places. Additional places which are variable and not simply tied to "xth in the league" get a note clearly explaining why that spot is where it is as the table stands. The highlighting and note will quickly inform readers what the current state of play is, and how it may change in the future. It's exactly the same as having the table with teams filled in in the first place; it is purely for information of how things stand and it doesn't mean anything at all until all the games are played. Just as the teams are moveable, we can have movable qualification highlighting. To my knowledge, this has been the custom across all European fotbal tables for the last few years. And, as Giggs was attempting to say, there is a "Qualified" label which can be added when a team is certain of it's Euro place. Aheyfromhome ( talk) 19:25, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
As of 24 April 2010, Hull City still have chance to escape from relegation mathematically although the chance is virtually zero. (They have to overcome a goal difference of 23 goals from West Ham United in 2 matches and some other conditions apply.) As Wikipedia requires a neutral and unbiased point of view, this kind of mathematically uncertain information should be not included. How can you guarantee that West Ham United won't lose at 0:6 in 2 matches, while Hull City win at a margin 6:0 in their 2 matches too? Ckhandy ( talk) 18:48, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
That point is currently the focus of an edit war. You most likely viewed the page when someone had edited to say that Hull were relegated. KP-TheSpectre ( talk) 18:56, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
arent liverpool going to lose their place should fulham win the europa league? so wouldnt that make them not guaranteed spot in that competiion? also, fulham will play either by winning EL or by fair play table. Barciur ( talk) 22:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I couldn't find this discussed earlier, so I'll now raise the question. Why is the map that shows the geographic location of the cities where the teams participating are based a map of England and Wales and not just of England? I could give counterarguments of the three main arguments in support of Wales' being included that I can think of.
Considering the above, may I suggest the inclusion of a map of England in the article, instead of the one that is currently there? -- МагьоÑник ( talk) 02:10, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Should the streaks/runs in the infobox also indicate when they began, instead of just when they ended? Digirami ( talk) 21:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Can some more content on the final match and that Chelsea have won the league be added so this article can go on the front page? -- Eraserhead1 < talk> 20:57, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't this section be removed? If not there should be something clear to explain what it is compared to Results. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.64.80.55 ( talk) 15:21, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on 2009–10 Premier League. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:51, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 20 external links on 2009–10 Premier League. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi, this edit was apparently vandalism. Biologos ( talk) 14:08, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
A news item involving 2009–10 Premier League was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 10 May 2010. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
Bit of a moot point, but why are the links to the derbies in the Results grid shortened to an 'a'? Why not a 'D' for 'derby' for example?? - Ck786 ( talk) 21:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
United aren't the only team guranteed to compete, as it's impossible for Liverpool and Chelsea to be overtaken by so many other teams with only 10 games to go. Remember the rest still have to play each other so points get dropped. The pro-United editing on wikipedia is a joke at times. -- 81.154.213.36 ( talk) 17:57, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Then what do you compute so that you get the list of the already saved teams ? 82.240.207.81 ( talk) 09:24, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm not an expert in maths or anything so I don't know the formula for calculating who's safe and who's not. Obviously the 'if 17 teams can't finish above you' point is pretty much it, but considering a table is relevant to all teams results against each other, some will secure safety by virtue of the other teams taking points off one another. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.230.242 ( talk) 13:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
How petty is this discussion? - Ck786 ( talk) 21:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
I would just like to point out that as Ricky Sbragia resigned in the 2008-09 season and Steve Bruce was appointed in the 2008-09 season (which officially ends on the 30th June (see last season's discussion about this exact thing)) that that appointment does not belong in this season's page and as such I think it should be moved to the 08-09 page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.146.39.246 ( talk) 15:43, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Can we have the table that the other leagues have which show the position after each round, ive tried to do it but didnt know how to change it so that the right positions would be highlighted for europe? MotorSportMCMXC ( talk) 22:35, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Can we have only the top five goal scorers by removing the single goal scorers. It actually looks like clumsy. Chock ( talk) 15:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
No Wayne Rooney? Scored 26 PL goals!
84.143.81.63 (
talk)
11:06, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
This section is always in danger of being used as a "fact junkyard" and therefore on constant edge of violating WP:NOT#IINFO. While I agree that some facts are worth preserving, such as "first/last goal of the season" or "fastest/latest goal in a match", the notability of "First penalty kick of the season" or anything cards-related or miscellaneous stuff is rather questionable. Hence we should agree on a definitive set of facts which can be applied to all league season articles, pending that these can be properly sourced, of course. I further suggest that this discussion should be led over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Season article task force since this is not an Premier League-only issue ( La Liga season articles, among others, also tend to have stuff like this). -- Soccer-holic I hear voices in my head... 22:33, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
on the results they should have links to see reports on each match. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deanolympics010 ( talk • contribs) 23:38, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Am I just imagining things, or is the line between the three goal scorers and the two goal scorers thicker under the player name, club, and goals column? I'm using WinXP and IE if that helps anyone. I've looked at the code, and I can't seem to figure out what could be doing it. Anyone else notice this too? 69.135.191.49 ( talk) 15:01, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at the season article task force talk page about potential layout changes to this and related articles in order to establish a common layout for those. The changes include
The proposal can be found here and is open for comment at the respective section of the SATF talk page. -- Soccer-holic I hear voices in my head... 11:32, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Anyone know what time Mascherano was sent off against Manchester United for Liverpool? I think there is a chance this might be later than the Kaboul card. 94.2.191.78 ( talk) 19:10, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Should someone make a page for Spurs' win against Wigan? There is already a page for the Man U-Forest game where Ole Gunnar Solskjaer scored 4 goals off the bench, so I think we shold have a page for a game where someone equalled the record for the most goals scored in a Premier League match. 222.154.46.60 ( talk) 19:54, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
How should Portsmouth F.C.'s entry into administration be marked off on the league table? Should the points simply be deducted with a footnote regarding the penalty or should a full paragraph and sub-heading be entered? User:TheOneKEA —Preceding undated comment added 11:56, 26 February 2010 (UTC).
Should we refrain from putting mathematically unsure information on information for qualification of European competitions?
For example, by the time immediately after the League Cup Finals in 2010, Manchester United should have probably secured a place in Champions League through their position in the league, leaving the Europa League spot for the winner of the League Cup for the sixth place of the league. However, it is not mathematically secured. I wonder if such highly probable but not guaranteed information? Ckhandy ( talk) 17:46, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Pos | Team | Pld | W | D | L | GF | GA | GD | Pts | Qualification or relegation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Chelsea | 28 | 19 | 4 | 5 | 65 | 26 | +39 | 61 | 2010–11 UEFA Champions League Group stage |
2 | Manchester United | 28 | 19 | 3 | 6 | 66 | 24 | +42 | 60 | 2010–11 UEFA Europa League Third qualifying round 1 |
3 | Arsenal | 28 | 18 | 4 | 6 | 66 | 31 | +35 | 58 | 2010–11 UEFA Champions League Group stage |
4 | Tottenham Hotspur | 28 | 14 | 7 | 7 | 50 | 27 | +23 | 49 | |
5 | Manchester City | 27 | 13 | 10 | 4 | 52 | 35 | +17 | 49 | 2010–11 UEFA Champions League Play-off round |
6 | Liverpool | 28 | 14 | 6 | 8 | 45 | 28 | +17 | 48 | 2010–11 UEFA Europa League Play-off round |
The highlighting in football tables has always been there to indicate what positions get which European places. Additional places which are variable and not simply tied to "xth in the league" get a note clearly explaining why that spot is where it is as the table stands. The highlighting and note will quickly inform readers what the current state of play is, and how it may change in the future. It's exactly the same as having the table with teams filled in in the first place; it is purely for information of how things stand and it doesn't mean anything at all until all the games are played. Just as the teams are moveable, we can have movable qualification highlighting. To my knowledge, this has been the custom across all European fotbal tables for the last few years. And, as Giggs was attempting to say, there is a "Qualified" label which can be added when a team is certain of it's Euro place. Aheyfromhome ( talk) 19:25, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
As of 24 April 2010, Hull City still have chance to escape from relegation mathematically although the chance is virtually zero. (They have to overcome a goal difference of 23 goals from West Ham United in 2 matches and some other conditions apply.) As Wikipedia requires a neutral and unbiased point of view, this kind of mathematically uncertain information should be not included. How can you guarantee that West Ham United won't lose at 0:6 in 2 matches, while Hull City win at a margin 6:0 in their 2 matches too? Ckhandy ( talk) 18:48, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
That point is currently the focus of an edit war. You most likely viewed the page when someone had edited to say that Hull were relegated. KP-TheSpectre ( talk) 18:56, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
arent liverpool going to lose their place should fulham win the europa league? so wouldnt that make them not guaranteed spot in that competiion? also, fulham will play either by winning EL or by fair play table. Barciur ( talk) 22:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I couldn't find this discussed earlier, so I'll now raise the question. Why is the map that shows the geographic location of the cities where the teams participating are based a map of England and Wales and not just of England? I could give counterarguments of the three main arguments in support of Wales' being included that I can think of.
Considering the above, may I suggest the inclusion of a map of England in the article, instead of the one that is currently there? -- МагьоÑник ( talk) 02:10, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Should the streaks/runs in the infobox also indicate when they began, instead of just when they ended? Digirami ( talk) 21:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Can some more content on the final match and that Chelsea have won the league be added so this article can go on the front page? -- Eraserhead1 < talk> 20:57, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't this section be removed? If not there should be something clear to explain what it is compared to Results. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.64.80.55 ( talk) 15:21, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on 2009–10 Premier League. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:51, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 20 external links on 2009–10 Premier League. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi, this edit was apparently vandalism. Biologos ( talk) 14:08, 14 June 2019 (UTC)