This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Pro Evolution Soccer (video game) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Pro Evolution Soccer" video game – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
I think it is fair to say that Pro6 will be one of the biggest sports game this year... and it is just a footnote at the bottom of this page... I think it needs to be made seperate so more detail can go into it (the loss of licensing with germany/chelsea, glitches, changes ect). Once the game is played more I am sure people will have alot more to say about it. Consider it... ALSO this discussion page is a mess! sign comments everyone! ( RuSTy1989 22:33, 26 October 2006 (UTC))
This has been done already hasnt it?
Are we happy with it?
There is no point on adding different articles for each PES/WE game coming out, so the PES3 and PES4 articles now redirect here. There are somethings missing now, which I'll try to complete as soon as possible including...
\ wolfenSilva / 12:39, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
There is already is PES5 page what about that?
Well, actually no. There comes a Japanes WE first. Then in October/November there comes PES. Then in Jnauary of the next year there comes a WE:PES edition and that is the same game.: Fireball00 20:32 (CEST)
new versions of the game released in america for PSP/PS2, also, itd be nice to get a summary of the "tactics" games.
I'd like to see more info on the engine this game uses, because after the install there are very few files and there are only 5 files in the "dat" folder which contain 1.14 GB, so I am just more curious on the engine this game uses, also more info on why it takes quite a good video card to make it run properly, is this perhaps because it uses old technology? i think so. - Raul 06:57, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
The article said: "The final assault on EA Sports' FIFA Series crown was with the 2002 top-selling title Pro Evolution Soccer 2, based on Winning Eleven 6."
The two series were already in competition and still are, so the expression "The final assault" is someone's POV, unless Konami or the developers described the gameas such, and either way it's a bit of a pompous description. If it was the first one to out-sell a FIFA game or come close to, which is what this seems to imply, then this should be stated and backed up with a source. I've removed the above for now.
Several other things in the article seem to just be the authors' opinions, so the following things need a source to back up their claims:
Other POV comments suh as
probably shouldn't be there at all since they're just an opinion. If a lot of fans agreed about something like this then it could be said "many argue that..." but it should still have a source. I don't think the first point is concensus among fans in any case. I'll try and track down some sources for these but help would be appreciated. Jimbow25 13:59, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
This is the first time I have come across this article, and read it in depth, and the "future games" section seemed to have some information that was not only out of place, but perhaps POV. That is, the latest revision of the article. Whilst some of the things stated that perhaps do have some basis in the game, the vast majority of it is POV/irrelevant. And besides, it's in the wrong section. I would revert that now, but it's perhaps a bit too late, and I'd end up accidentally vandalising the article or something, knowing me. Perhaps someone else can do it instead, or at least reword it? -- 194.247.231.8 03:17, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
This can be found about halfway down the page:
"If the pass (including through ball passes) that is made is parallel to the run of the receiver of the ball, the player will jump over the ball automatically. This is rarely beneficial and usually results in balls going out of play or possession conceded. This happens because the step-over button (R2) has been pressed. Not pressing this will stop this occuring."
This isn't true; when I tried it out, I definitely didn't press the R2 button when the 'jump over' occurred.
its true, i tried to play the ball to the wing and for no reason the guy jumped it and nit was a throw in conceded
Is the 'special features' section really needed? It doesn't teach people anything worth knowing, it's too anal and applies only to people who already play the game consistently. It reads like a tips section from a games magazine aimed at 14 year olds. Not really suitable for inclusion.
Very un-encyclopaedic page. The standard of writing is amateur and content is jumbled. The amount of criticism was ridiculous and wholly inappropriate. This page has been used as an excuse to fuel the FIFA vs. PES war. Full of opinions, not facts. Numerous citations needed.-- Mr.bonus 14:22, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
The criticism section is very poor, consisting of scores of unproven minor 'flaws'. Even if some of them exist, an encyclopaedia is not the place to relate or ponder them. If someone wants to sort through and include RELEVANT criticism, fine, as long as sources are cited. DO NOT re-list the criticism section in its entirety.-- Mr.bonus 14:22, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
I started to work on this article but have been called to a meeting. The overall tone is not especially POV, but their are lots of opinions and weasel words and weasel phrases. "It has been criticized" -- Ok, by whom? I've seen much worse, but someone needs to go through and tighten this stuff line by line. Another example is speculation I tagged about the next teams to be included -- may be true, may be interesting, but it needs a verifiable reference (a comment on the talk page would suffice). I think it should not take a lot of time to make these many little changes if the editor is knowledgeable on this game.-- A. B. 13:22, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
User 217.42.169.70 put the following paragraph in the middle of my comment above, I'm sure such a worthwihle comment shouldn't be removed so here it is again:
When I was young everyone played FIFA, we loved it, but then Pro Ev came along and now everyone is creaming over it. I will never play it, i refuse, why can't we all play FIFA instead. Sure FIFa may be like my genitalia, it is cheesy and looks the same year after year, but if you get a flavour for it, you just have to come back for more.
why should we play FIFA, the only people who buy FIFA nowadays is 10-year-olds who think its amazing because of all the teams and names. ProEvo rules, it is far superior to FIFA and that is why more and more people are turning to ProEvo nowadays! 81.153.12.87 19:22, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks to B'man for addressing some of the points I brought up a few months ago, the number of unsourced statements seem to be less and in places this article is much improved, though it seems to take a backwards step in other places as well. I've added 2 linked references, but more are needed. My main complaints about the recurring problems with this article are:
why was the information about the coloquial term "vinnygoal" removed? as it is trivia relating to pro ev and a valid fact. Mr. patterson 13:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking about trying to tidy up and bring together the ISS, Pro Evo and Winning Eleven pages - and their various offshoots - in one article, tracing a more encyclopaedic history of Konami's football games; it strikes me that with different titles and companies producing different games, things are a bit messy! Then perhaps the short paragraphs for each game featured could be retained as individual pages which the main article could link to? Any thoughts? Ezy Rider 13:47, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Image:Pro Evolution Soccer 2008.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 05:05, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
pro evolution 6 and the 2008 game sucks ass ive got pro evolution soccer 5 on the original x box and the game play on that his a lot better thought we was goin forward not backwards konami u need to sort this now or fifa is goin 2 end up been the best footy game about. all u have concentrated on his the graphics even the replays dont look real and gameplays shite —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.105.241.37 ( talk) 00:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
The release date is wrong, pes2008 has been available since yesterday here in germany, at least the ps2 version -- Janzomaster 21:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
The Rivals section is woeful, there's absolutely no evidence given for any of the comments and its about as unencyclopedic as you can get. -- Simonski ( talk) 15:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Image:PES2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 14:31, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Image:PES3.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 14:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Image:PES5.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 14:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
The opening sentence under games doesnt make sense to me. Is it just the first game names PES? Needs further explanation imo. Tehw1k1 ( talk) 05:38, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Just a thought, wouldn't it be better for this page to be 'Pro Evolution Soccer (series)' or similar as I wish to create a new page on each of the videogames, like 'Pro Evolution Soccer' for the first game.
Also, would it be allowed to post some sort of table on each of the separate games' pages with all of the real player names on them?
feeder18 ( talk) 18:54, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
The image Image:PES 2009.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
The following images also have this problem:
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:02, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
aba ra —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.129.206.143 ( talk) 14:13, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
aba ra —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.129.206.143 ( talk) 14:13, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
daria tu avdaria saqartvelo magaria —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.129.206.143 ( talk) 14:14, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
While in my opinion the topic is noteworthy, this page isn't written "like an advertisement" it just is an advertisement.
The vast majority of the page just explains how great the game is. I think it should be deleted and completely rewritten. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.166.211.161 ( talk) 21:38, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
This article says that the game was titled "World Soccer: Winning Eleven 5" in North America, yet there is no mention of the release date. If it wasn't released in North America, then change the text. Otherwise, if it was released there, then put a release date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PS4Fanboy1232 ( talk • contribs) 18:12, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Pro Evolution Soccer (video game) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Pro Evolution Soccer" video game – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think it is fair to say that Pro6 will be one of the biggest sports game this year... and it is just a footnote at the bottom of this page... I think it needs to be made seperate so more detail can go into it (the loss of licensing with germany/chelsea, glitches, changes ect). Once the game is played more I am sure people will have alot more to say about it. Consider it... ALSO this discussion page is a mess! sign comments everyone! ( RuSTy1989 22:33, 26 October 2006 (UTC))
This has been done already hasnt it?
Are we happy with it?
There is no point on adding different articles for each PES/WE game coming out, so the PES3 and PES4 articles now redirect here. There are somethings missing now, which I'll try to complete as soon as possible including...
\ wolfenSilva / 12:39, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
There is already is PES5 page what about that?
Well, actually no. There comes a Japanes WE first. Then in October/November there comes PES. Then in Jnauary of the next year there comes a WE:PES edition and that is the same game.: Fireball00 20:32 (CEST)
new versions of the game released in america for PSP/PS2, also, itd be nice to get a summary of the "tactics" games.
I'd like to see more info on the engine this game uses, because after the install there are very few files and there are only 5 files in the "dat" folder which contain 1.14 GB, so I am just more curious on the engine this game uses, also more info on why it takes quite a good video card to make it run properly, is this perhaps because it uses old technology? i think so. - Raul 06:57, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
The article said: "The final assault on EA Sports' FIFA Series crown was with the 2002 top-selling title Pro Evolution Soccer 2, based on Winning Eleven 6."
The two series were already in competition and still are, so the expression "The final assault" is someone's POV, unless Konami or the developers described the gameas such, and either way it's a bit of a pompous description. If it was the first one to out-sell a FIFA game or come close to, which is what this seems to imply, then this should be stated and backed up with a source. I've removed the above for now.
Several other things in the article seem to just be the authors' opinions, so the following things need a source to back up their claims:
Other POV comments suh as
probably shouldn't be there at all since they're just an opinion. If a lot of fans agreed about something like this then it could be said "many argue that..." but it should still have a source. I don't think the first point is concensus among fans in any case. I'll try and track down some sources for these but help would be appreciated. Jimbow25 13:59, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
This is the first time I have come across this article, and read it in depth, and the "future games" section seemed to have some information that was not only out of place, but perhaps POV. That is, the latest revision of the article. Whilst some of the things stated that perhaps do have some basis in the game, the vast majority of it is POV/irrelevant. And besides, it's in the wrong section. I would revert that now, but it's perhaps a bit too late, and I'd end up accidentally vandalising the article or something, knowing me. Perhaps someone else can do it instead, or at least reword it? -- 194.247.231.8 03:17, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
This can be found about halfway down the page:
"If the pass (including through ball passes) that is made is parallel to the run of the receiver of the ball, the player will jump over the ball automatically. This is rarely beneficial and usually results in balls going out of play or possession conceded. This happens because the step-over button (R2) has been pressed. Not pressing this will stop this occuring."
This isn't true; when I tried it out, I definitely didn't press the R2 button when the 'jump over' occurred.
its true, i tried to play the ball to the wing and for no reason the guy jumped it and nit was a throw in conceded
Is the 'special features' section really needed? It doesn't teach people anything worth knowing, it's too anal and applies only to people who already play the game consistently. It reads like a tips section from a games magazine aimed at 14 year olds. Not really suitable for inclusion.
Very un-encyclopaedic page. The standard of writing is amateur and content is jumbled. The amount of criticism was ridiculous and wholly inappropriate. This page has been used as an excuse to fuel the FIFA vs. PES war. Full of opinions, not facts. Numerous citations needed.-- Mr.bonus 14:22, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
The criticism section is very poor, consisting of scores of unproven minor 'flaws'. Even if some of them exist, an encyclopaedia is not the place to relate or ponder them. If someone wants to sort through and include RELEVANT criticism, fine, as long as sources are cited. DO NOT re-list the criticism section in its entirety.-- Mr.bonus 14:22, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
I started to work on this article but have been called to a meeting. The overall tone is not especially POV, but their are lots of opinions and weasel words and weasel phrases. "It has been criticized" -- Ok, by whom? I've seen much worse, but someone needs to go through and tighten this stuff line by line. Another example is speculation I tagged about the next teams to be included -- may be true, may be interesting, but it needs a verifiable reference (a comment on the talk page would suffice). I think it should not take a lot of time to make these many little changes if the editor is knowledgeable on this game.-- A. B. 13:22, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
User 217.42.169.70 put the following paragraph in the middle of my comment above, I'm sure such a worthwihle comment shouldn't be removed so here it is again:
When I was young everyone played FIFA, we loved it, but then Pro Ev came along and now everyone is creaming over it. I will never play it, i refuse, why can't we all play FIFA instead. Sure FIFa may be like my genitalia, it is cheesy and looks the same year after year, but if you get a flavour for it, you just have to come back for more.
why should we play FIFA, the only people who buy FIFA nowadays is 10-year-olds who think its amazing because of all the teams and names. ProEvo rules, it is far superior to FIFA and that is why more and more people are turning to ProEvo nowadays! 81.153.12.87 19:22, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks to B'man for addressing some of the points I brought up a few months ago, the number of unsourced statements seem to be less and in places this article is much improved, though it seems to take a backwards step in other places as well. I've added 2 linked references, but more are needed. My main complaints about the recurring problems with this article are:
why was the information about the coloquial term "vinnygoal" removed? as it is trivia relating to pro ev and a valid fact. Mr. patterson 13:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking about trying to tidy up and bring together the ISS, Pro Evo and Winning Eleven pages - and their various offshoots - in one article, tracing a more encyclopaedic history of Konami's football games; it strikes me that with different titles and companies producing different games, things are a bit messy! Then perhaps the short paragraphs for each game featured could be retained as individual pages which the main article could link to? Any thoughts? Ezy Rider 13:47, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Image:Pro Evolution Soccer 2008.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 05:05, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
pro evolution 6 and the 2008 game sucks ass ive got pro evolution soccer 5 on the original x box and the game play on that his a lot better thought we was goin forward not backwards konami u need to sort this now or fifa is goin 2 end up been the best footy game about. all u have concentrated on his the graphics even the replays dont look real and gameplays shite —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.105.241.37 ( talk) 00:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
The release date is wrong, pes2008 has been available since yesterday here in germany, at least the ps2 version -- Janzomaster 21:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
The Rivals section is woeful, there's absolutely no evidence given for any of the comments and its about as unencyclopedic as you can get. -- Simonski ( talk) 15:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Image:PES2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 14:31, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Image:PES3.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 14:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Image:PES5.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 14:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
The opening sentence under games doesnt make sense to me. Is it just the first game names PES? Needs further explanation imo. Tehw1k1 ( talk) 05:38, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Just a thought, wouldn't it be better for this page to be 'Pro Evolution Soccer (series)' or similar as I wish to create a new page on each of the videogames, like 'Pro Evolution Soccer' for the first game.
Also, would it be allowed to post some sort of table on each of the separate games' pages with all of the real player names on them?
feeder18 ( talk) 18:54, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
The image Image:PES 2009.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
The following images also have this problem:
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:02, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
aba ra —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.129.206.143 ( talk) 14:13, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
aba ra —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.129.206.143 ( talk) 14:13, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
daria tu avdaria saqartvelo magaria —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.129.206.143 ( talk) 14:14, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
While in my opinion the topic is noteworthy, this page isn't written "like an advertisement" it just is an advertisement.
The vast majority of the page just explains how great the game is. I think it should be deleted and completely rewritten. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.166.211.161 ( talk) 21:38, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
This article says that the game was titled "World Soccer: Winning Eleven 5" in North America, yet there is no mention of the release date. If it wasn't released in North America, then change the text. Otherwise, if it was released there, then put a release date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PS4Fanboy1232 ( talk • contribs) 18:12, 11 May 2021 (UTC)