![]() | Belgium national football team is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 11, 2017. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Nowadays more native English speakers speak American English than British English, but for the following reasons (only) British English is to be preferred in this article:
If you happen to find American English words in this article, please replace them with an alternative that is valid in UK English. Thank you, Kareldorado ( talk) 11:25, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
I can't say I like that this section has been moved off the page... I understand WP:RECENT, but there's also the argument of how relevant recent information may be to a certain topic. At least, I don't think those three bullet points at the top of WP:RECENT apply to this section in this article.
I checked about 80 other national team's pages, and only a few don't have recent matches/fixtures information: Gabon, Scotland, Wales and Peru (if you don't count historical teams). Some countries do mention it in 'shorter' ways though: Greece has an empty section with a "Main article: " link. Austria, Montenegro, Norway and Northern Ireland only show the Euro 2016 Group table, without separate information for those matches (which 'automatically' keeps it up to date; although N Ireland does separately mention Friendlies). Similar for Uruguay in its own region.
In any case, that's over 70 other pages (including all of the larger football countries) that always have a full dedicated "Results and fixtures" section. I didn't check all their article quality rates, but since almost all pages do it, it should be an indication of what people may expect to be present on a national team's Wikipedia page. I know Peru is a FA-rated article (without that 'recent information'), but on first impression, it really makes me wonder whether that team is actually still active today. In fact, it's not very consistent that it (and Belgium) does have recent information about the players, but not about the matches. — Sygmoral ( talk) 19:10, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Help me identify former players! ManFromNord ( talk) 08:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Even though these sections do not take many sentences and the tables do not ask for that many bytes neither (because of the templates) these moves would seem both logical and desirable, since they are not so much about the team as a whole. Other opinions? Separate list articles? Kareldorado ( talk) 18:18, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
For me it is okay, but I would like consensus on this one: shall we integrate the following table in the article? In that case, maybe it should be part of the "Belgium at the World Cup"-template - separated from the other (overview) table with a space, of course. In case we do it for the FIFA World Cup, the same should be done for the UEFA European Championship and the Summer Olympic matches, in my opinion.
Anyway, nice work, ProudTarjaholic! I will temporarily move the table here in case you don't finish it yet today:
List of FIFA World Cup matches | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Year | Round | Opponent | Score | Result |
1930 | Round 1 | ![]() |
0–3 | Loss |
Round 1 | ![]() |
0–1 | Loss | |
1934 | Round 1 | ![]() |
2–5 | Loss |
1938 | Round 1 | ![]() |
1–3 | Loss |
1954 | Group Stage | ![]() |
4-4 | Draw |
Group Stage | ![]() |
1–4 | Loss | |
1970 | Group Stage | ![]() |
3–0 | Win |
Group Stage | ![]() |
1–4 | Loss | |
Group Stage | ![]() |
0–1 | Loss | |
1982 | Group Stage 1 | ![]() |
1–0 | Win |
Group Stage 1 | ![]() |
1–0 | Win | |
Group Stage 1 | ![]() |
1–1 | Draw | |
Group Stage 2 | ![]() |
0–3 | Loss | |
Group Stage 2 | ![]() |
0–1 | Loss | |
1986 | Group Stage | ![]() |
0–1 | Loss |
Group Stage | ![]() |
2–1 | Win | |
Group Stage | ![]() |
2–2 | Draw | |
Round of 16 | ![]() |
4–3 | Win | |
Quarter-final | ![]() |
1–1 5–4 ( pen.) |
Draw | |
Semi-final | ![]() |
0–2 | Loss | |
Third Place Play-off | ![]() |
2–4 | Loss |
Keep up the good work, Kareldorado ( talk) 19:34, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi, after some reconsideration I would like to delete the Popular culture section, and will carry on arguments pro and con:
PRO deletion:
AGAINST deletion:
Any more comments? Be my guest! Kareldorado ( talk) 07:15, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
The dates in references are sometimes written in full, sometimes in 3-letter abbreviations. What's it gonna be?
If I remember correctly, a bot actually repeatedly changed them from 3-letter to full-months in the past weeks, which was then sometimes (perhaps not consistently) reverted. Do we want to stay with 3-letter months? Is there a reason to? It's actually just as easy to simply write the months in full; it's not like there's limited space. But whatever the decision, let's make this consistent. (I'm happy to go over all the references to update them) — Sygmoral ( talk) 02:23, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
MarshalN20 suggested a deletion of both. Several featured articles do report the honours section, but the reasons why I favoured this step as well are as follows:
With thanks for your understanding, Kareldorado ( talk) 17:54, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
This might serve as a reminder for which things to keep updated - like this we can do it more systematically. Please take care of the totals when changing numbers in tables.
After a new selection is announced:
After each match:
Monthly or, if possible, sooner:
Of course, additions and changes are welcome. Kareldorado ( talk) 14:16, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
At first sight there is little to add after the circumstantial reviews by Cirt and Parutakupiu.
However, before the long winter break of the national team there are still some adaptations needed in upcoming two weeks:
Kareldorado ( talk) 04:44, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Refer to
Help:Citation Style 1#Templates: cite web really is only a 'last-resort' option, if all other options have been exhausted. If nothing else is applicable, only then use
cite web; that's how I interpret it.
cite news is for, I quote: news articles in print, video, audio or web. Any website that posts news articles therefore should (imo) be quoted with a cite news template, often with a website=... parameter. The only good use for cite web, I believe, is for information on websites that is not posted as a news item, and cannot therefore be considered to be a "news article" (such as a link to FIFA regulations). (Some websites may require a
cite journal instead, if they're the website of a magazine, since those are "magazine articles", not "news articles". )
Concerning the publisher vs website parameter, I understand that Sporza is indeed not the name of a website, so I guess the 'website' parameter should not be used. But I was hesistant to use the publisher parameter because Sporza is not a company, and every documentation about the
publisher parameter says it should only be used for real companies (in this case, VRT: VRT is doing the publishing through its Sporza brand). Anyway, I guess that's too confusing, and if not "publisher" or "website", I don't know what to call Sporza, so I guess we should probably use publisher=Sporza anyway. But I do believe cite news should be used, not cite web, as the latter is too generic. Sporza does publish news articles on their website, and that's exactly what cite news is for. —
Sygmoral (
talk)
00:25, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
After the unsuccessful FAC1 I managed to show the article to a native speaker, and she agreed with the last reviewer that the prose needs a lot of work. She has kindly rewritten the "actions" and "supporters" sections, which I will wiki-edit shortly. I'm keen to help get the article up to FAC standard so you can nominate it again. Are you still up for it? Edwininlondon ( talk) 10:43, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Addressed topics brought up by NapHit in FAC1 |
---|
I'll start with trying to deal with NapHit's list:
Kareldorado ( talk) 10:59, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
|
The Wikipedia template for football kits is quite a hard one, because its dimensions are not realistic. But we have to use it of course. Still, it shows only the front, and not the sides. Currently, the Belgian kits have some 'compromises' that don't exactly make them look more realistic, in my opinion. It feels like the separate elements of the designs got more attention than the complete picture did. I have two issues with their current form:
So this is what I made of it for the Away shirt, back in November. I think the stripes on the right one are much more realistic, and the Belgian colours... it's not perfect, but it's more accurate than in the original.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Current
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Improved
|
I could still add the neck thingie, if that's a problem. But I don't feel like this adds to the realism; it's actually too thin, and also: "less is more". My suggestion just uses the default neck from the template. Oh and I would also change the socks because they don't have those stripes when seen from the front. Maybe just a single stripe next to the edge.
The Home shirt also needs to loose the excess stripes on the socks, and in the body I'd just make it so that the stripes "disappear under the armits", as I did with the shirt above. And make the red stripe on the shoulders a little more wide.
Any objections? – Sygmoral ( talk) 19:30, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
An IP-user removed the 'Captain' note next to Vincent Kompany, and denoted only Eden Hazard as the 'captain'. While he is correct about this squad's captain, Kompany is without a doubt still considered the standard captain of the team. But we can't really have two different players both be called "the" captain, I assume.
I didn't want to revert it yet because it's a somewhat confusing issue. Should E. Hazard be called "2nd captain", even though he will in fact always start the game as captain throughout the European Championship and its preparations? How else could we elegantly solve this? – Sygmoral ( talk) 16:42, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
I want to cope appropriately with the notability issue of current players in this article's "Notable" section, something brought up by Barryjjoyce. I also invite my mentor MarshalN20, Belgian sidekicks Sygmoral and Pelotas, and Yorkshire football authorities GiantSnowman and Matthythewhite to discuss and reach a consensus.
Basically, I have two questions:
1) Do you agree that a Belgian NFT player can be perceived as notable if he either won a team trophy (= league title or national cup) in a foreign top division league (or Europa League or Champions League), either an individual trophy (most valuable player / top scorer) of that league?
2) What do you generally recommend most as 'reliable' source for individual player career information (including team trophy wins)? Soccerway? Weltfussball? National Football Teams? Any other? (Plenty of choice ...)
Thanks in advance, Kareldorado ( talk) 19:46, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
I refer to: WP:MOS -- Infoboxes -- References in infoboxes. I remember reading that in the past: it says that references should not appear in infoboxes if those refs already appear in the body of the article. The idea, I'm sure, is that the infobox is sort of meant as a summarization of the body, so it should not introduce "new" information, only repeat what is already said in the body. (and that's the reason I am against the Elo ratings and the "biggest win" and "biggest defeat" in that infobox template, but they always go against me when I suggest removing them from the template, so ah well :p) – Sygmoral ( talk) 12:36, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
I get a bit annoyed when Danielmordor removes refs that I put in the Recent Players section (this wasn't the first time), because Wikipedia says all information should be sourced, and a lot of information in this section isn't. But I left it alone this time. Not so for the note about the Spain match last year though, that seems too important not to say anything about. I also don't understand why the explanatory note about Kompany's captain-status had to be removed, but anyway ... (Danielmorder must hate refs and notes!)
Anyway, I'm not writing just to complain, but to change something about how we maintain these tables: he has also been updating players' clubs, which I understand, but someone had already asked him two weeks ago not to do so on the Wales article, citing a recent WP:FOOTY discussion. "The clubs mentioned should be the clubs the played with at the time of that call-up". Now, I don't want to revert those edits because I'm too lazy to look up who was playing for what club, but I think we should enforce this in the future. Another thing (from that discussion) is that the age should always be "age at that date" rather than "current age" in this table. Actually the same is true for "Current squad" because that table always relates to a specific call-up, too. If we're going for Featured Article anyway, might as well take ALL recommendations into account! So I will try to enforce this as soon as the squad for 1 september is announced, if no one disagrees here. – Sygmoral ( talk) 07:31, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Belgium national football team. 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}}
).
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the
|checked=
to true
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:31, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
|deadurl=true
. –
Sygmoral (
talk)
15:46, 31 October 2016 (UTC)Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Belgium national football team. 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}}
).
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the
|checked=
to true
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:37, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 28 external links on Belgium national football team. 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) 11:09, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Belgium national football team. 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) 04:29, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Belgium national football team. 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) 13:57, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
In the first paragraph, we see the Dutch and German names for "Belgium national football team", but not the German. Now, I have never been to Belgium, but I understand that even though German is the language of about 1% of the Belgians, it's official (I believe). That's why the German name for "The Red Devils" and the abbreviation for the RBFA is in the infobox, no? So Surely the German name of the team should be in the first paragraph, or no German at all. Harambe Walks ( talk) 20:09, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Afghanistan national football team which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 15:18, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Afghanistan national football team which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 14:49, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
Tedesco was born in Italy, but he grew up in Germany and since both Germany and Italy are EU members, he has citizenships of both countries. And he works in Germany more than in Italy.
Why does this article keep erasing his German identity? HiddenFace101 ( talk) 19:10, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
![]() | Belgium national football team is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 11, 2017. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Nowadays more native English speakers speak American English than British English, but for the following reasons (only) British English is to be preferred in this article:
If you happen to find American English words in this article, please replace them with an alternative that is valid in UK English. Thank you, Kareldorado ( talk) 11:25, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
I can't say I like that this section has been moved off the page... I understand WP:RECENT, but there's also the argument of how relevant recent information may be to a certain topic. At least, I don't think those three bullet points at the top of WP:RECENT apply to this section in this article.
I checked about 80 other national team's pages, and only a few don't have recent matches/fixtures information: Gabon, Scotland, Wales and Peru (if you don't count historical teams). Some countries do mention it in 'shorter' ways though: Greece has an empty section with a "Main article: " link. Austria, Montenegro, Norway and Northern Ireland only show the Euro 2016 Group table, without separate information for those matches (which 'automatically' keeps it up to date; although N Ireland does separately mention Friendlies). Similar for Uruguay in its own region.
In any case, that's over 70 other pages (including all of the larger football countries) that always have a full dedicated "Results and fixtures" section. I didn't check all their article quality rates, but since almost all pages do it, it should be an indication of what people may expect to be present on a national team's Wikipedia page. I know Peru is a FA-rated article (without that 'recent information'), but on first impression, it really makes me wonder whether that team is actually still active today. In fact, it's not very consistent that it (and Belgium) does have recent information about the players, but not about the matches. — Sygmoral ( talk) 19:10, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Help me identify former players! ManFromNord ( talk) 08:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Even though these sections do not take many sentences and the tables do not ask for that many bytes neither (because of the templates) these moves would seem both logical and desirable, since they are not so much about the team as a whole. Other opinions? Separate list articles? Kareldorado ( talk) 18:18, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
For me it is okay, but I would like consensus on this one: shall we integrate the following table in the article? In that case, maybe it should be part of the "Belgium at the World Cup"-template - separated from the other (overview) table with a space, of course. In case we do it for the FIFA World Cup, the same should be done for the UEFA European Championship and the Summer Olympic matches, in my opinion.
Anyway, nice work, ProudTarjaholic! I will temporarily move the table here in case you don't finish it yet today:
List of FIFA World Cup matches | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Year | Round | Opponent | Score | Result |
1930 | Round 1 | ![]() |
0–3 | Loss |
Round 1 | ![]() |
0–1 | Loss | |
1934 | Round 1 | ![]() |
2–5 | Loss |
1938 | Round 1 | ![]() |
1–3 | Loss |
1954 | Group Stage | ![]() |
4-4 | Draw |
Group Stage | ![]() |
1–4 | Loss | |
1970 | Group Stage | ![]() |
3–0 | Win |
Group Stage | ![]() |
1–4 | Loss | |
Group Stage | ![]() |
0–1 | Loss | |
1982 | Group Stage 1 | ![]() |
1–0 | Win |
Group Stage 1 | ![]() |
1–0 | Win | |
Group Stage 1 | ![]() |
1–1 | Draw | |
Group Stage 2 | ![]() |
0–3 | Loss | |
Group Stage 2 | ![]() |
0–1 | Loss | |
1986 | Group Stage | ![]() |
0–1 | Loss |
Group Stage | ![]() |
2–1 | Win | |
Group Stage | ![]() |
2–2 | Draw | |
Round of 16 | ![]() |
4–3 | Win | |
Quarter-final | ![]() |
1–1 5–4 ( pen.) |
Draw | |
Semi-final | ![]() |
0–2 | Loss | |
Third Place Play-off | ![]() |
2–4 | Loss |
Keep up the good work, Kareldorado ( talk) 19:34, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi, after some reconsideration I would like to delete the Popular culture section, and will carry on arguments pro and con:
PRO deletion:
AGAINST deletion:
Any more comments? Be my guest! Kareldorado ( talk) 07:15, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
The dates in references are sometimes written in full, sometimes in 3-letter abbreviations. What's it gonna be?
If I remember correctly, a bot actually repeatedly changed them from 3-letter to full-months in the past weeks, which was then sometimes (perhaps not consistently) reverted. Do we want to stay with 3-letter months? Is there a reason to? It's actually just as easy to simply write the months in full; it's not like there's limited space. But whatever the decision, let's make this consistent. (I'm happy to go over all the references to update them) — Sygmoral ( talk) 02:23, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
MarshalN20 suggested a deletion of both. Several featured articles do report the honours section, but the reasons why I favoured this step as well are as follows:
With thanks for your understanding, Kareldorado ( talk) 17:54, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
This might serve as a reminder for which things to keep updated - like this we can do it more systematically. Please take care of the totals when changing numbers in tables.
After a new selection is announced:
After each match:
Monthly or, if possible, sooner:
Of course, additions and changes are welcome. Kareldorado ( talk) 14:16, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
At first sight there is little to add after the circumstantial reviews by Cirt and Parutakupiu.
However, before the long winter break of the national team there are still some adaptations needed in upcoming two weeks:
Kareldorado ( talk) 04:44, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Refer to
Help:Citation Style 1#Templates: cite web really is only a 'last-resort' option, if all other options have been exhausted. If nothing else is applicable, only then use
cite web; that's how I interpret it.
cite news is for, I quote: news articles in print, video, audio or web. Any website that posts news articles therefore should (imo) be quoted with a cite news template, often with a website=... parameter. The only good use for cite web, I believe, is for information on websites that is not posted as a news item, and cannot therefore be considered to be a "news article" (such as a link to FIFA regulations). (Some websites may require a
cite journal instead, if they're the website of a magazine, since those are "magazine articles", not "news articles". )
Concerning the publisher vs website parameter, I understand that Sporza is indeed not the name of a website, so I guess the 'website' parameter should not be used. But I was hesistant to use the publisher parameter because Sporza is not a company, and every documentation about the
publisher parameter says it should only be used for real companies (in this case, VRT: VRT is doing the publishing through its Sporza brand). Anyway, I guess that's too confusing, and if not "publisher" or "website", I don't know what to call Sporza, so I guess we should probably use publisher=Sporza anyway. But I do believe cite news should be used, not cite web, as the latter is too generic. Sporza does publish news articles on their website, and that's exactly what cite news is for. —
Sygmoral (
talk)
00:25, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
After the unsuccessful FAC1 I managed to show the article to a native speaker, and she agreed with the last reviewer that the prose needs a lot of work. She has kindly rewritten the "actions" and "supporters" sections, which I will wiki-edit shortly. I'm keen to help get the article up to FAC standard so you can nominate it again. Are you still up for it? Edwininlondon ( talk) 10:43, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Addressed topics brought up by NapHit in FAC1 |
---|
I'll start with trying to deal with NapHit's list:
Kareldorado ( talk) 10:59, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
|
The Wikipedia template for football kits is quite a hard one, because its dimensions are not realistic. But we have to use it of course. Still, it shows only the front, and not the sides. Currently, the Belgian kits have some 'compromises' that don't exactly make them look more realistic, in my opinion. It feels like the separate elements of the designs got more attention than the complete picture did. I have two issues with their current form:
So this is what I made of it for the Away shirt, back in November. I think the stripes on the right one are much more realistic, and the Belgian colours... it's not perfect, but it's more accurate than in the original.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Current
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Improved
|
I could still add the neck thingie, if that's a problem. But I don't feel like this adds to the realism; it's actually too thin, and also: "less is more". My suggestion just uses the default neck from the template. Oh and I would also change the socks because they don't have those stripes when seen from the front. Maybe just a single stripe next to the edge.
The Home shirt also needs to loose the excess stripes on the socks, and in the body I'd just make it so that the stripes "disappear under the armits", as I did with the shirt above. And make the red stripe on the shoulders a little more wide.
Any objections? – Sygmoral ( talk) 19:30, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
An IP-user removed the 'Captain' note next to Vincent Kompany, and denoted only Eden Hazard as the 'captain'. While he is correct about this squad's captain, Kompany is without a doubt still considered the standard captain of the team. But we can't really have two different players both be called "the" captain, I assume.
I didn't want to revert it yet because it's a somewhat confusing issue. Should E. Hazard be called "2nd captain", even though he will in fact always start the game as captain throughout the European Championship and its preparations? How else could we elegantly solve this? – Sygmoral ( talk) 16:42, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
I want to cope appropriately with the notability issue of current players in this article's "Notable" section, something brought up by Barryjjoyce. I also invite my mentor MarshalN20, Belgian sidekicks Sygmoral and Pelotas, and Yorkshire football authorities GiantSnowman and Matthythewhite to discuss and reach a consensus.
Basically, I have two questions:
1) Do you agree that a Belgian NFT player can be perceived as notable if he either won a team trophy (= league title or national cup) in a foreign top division league (or Europa League or Champions League), either an individual trophy (most valuable player / top scorer) of that league?
2) What do you generally recommend most as 'reliable' source for individual player career information (including team trophy wins)? Soccerway? Weltfussball? National Football Teams? Any other? (Plenty of choice ...)
Thanks in advance, Kareldorado ( talk) 19:46, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
I refer to: WP:MOS -- Infoboxes -- References in infoboxes. I remember reading that in the past: it says that references should not appear in infoboxes if those refs already appear in the body of the article. The idea, I'm sure, is that the infobox is sort of meant as a summarization of the body, so it should not introduce "new" information, only repeat what is already said in the body. (and that's the reason I am against the Elo ratings and the "biggest win" and "biggest defeat" in that infobox template, but they always go against me when I suggest removing them from the template, so ah well :p) – Sygmoral ( talk) 12:36, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
I get a bit annoyed when Danielmordor removes refs that I put in the Recent Players section (this wasn't the first time), because Wikipedia says all information should be sourced, and a lot of information in this section isn't. But I left it alone this time. Not so for the note about the Spain match last year though, that seems too important not to say anything about. I also don't understand why the explanatory note about Kompany's captain-status had to be removed, but anyway ... (Danielmorder must hate refs and notes!)
Anyway, I'm not writing just to complain, but to change something about how we maintain these tables: he has also been updating players' clubs, which I understand, but someone had already asked him two weeks ago not to do so on the Wales article, citing a recent WP:FOOTY discussion. "The clubs mentioned should be the clubs the played with at the time of that call-up". Now, I don't want to revert those edits because I'm too lazy to look up who was playing for what club, but I think we should enforce this in the future. Another thing (from that discussion) is that the age should always be "age at that date" rather than "current age" in this table. Actually the same is true for "Current squad" because that table always relates to a specific call-up, too. If we're going for Featured Article anyway, might as well take ALL recommendations into account! So I will try to enforce this as soon as the squad for 1 september is announced, if no one disagrees here. – Sygmoral ( talk) 07:31, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Belgium national football team. 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}}
).
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the
|checked=
to true
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:31, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
|deadurl=true
. –
Sygmoral (
talk)
15:46, 31 October 2016 (UTC)Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Belgium national football team. 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}}
).
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the
|checked=
to true
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:37, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 28 external links on Belgium national football team. 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) 11:09, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Belgium national football team. 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) 04:29, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Belgium national football team. 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) 13:57, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
In the first paragraph, we see the Dutch and German names for "Belgium national football team", but not the German. Now, I have never been to Belgium, but I understand that even though German is the language of about 1% of the Belgians, it's official (I believe). That's why the German name for "The Red Devils" and the abbreviation for the RBFA is in the infobox, no? So Surely the German name of the team should be in the first paragraph, or no German at all. Harambe Walks ( talk) 20:09, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Afghanistan national football team which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 15:18, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Afghanistan national football team which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 14:49, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
Tedesco was born in Italy, but he grew up in Germany and since both Germany and Italy are EU members, he has citizenships of both countries. And he works in Germany more than in Italy.
Why does this article keep erasing his German identity? HiddenFace101 ( talk) 19:10, 13 October 2023 (UTC)