This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 110 | ← | Archive 114 | Archive 115 | Archive 116 | Archive 117 | Archive 118 | → | Archive 120 |
I'm going through Special:LintErrors, and I've found several hundred high-priority errors in articles tagged by this WikiProject. I've put a list of 74 articles affected by misnested tags below. The wikitext parser is going to change in June, and any page with an error may display strangely.
What's needed right now is for someone to click these links and compare the side-by-side preview of the two parsers. If the "New" page looks okay, then something's maybe technically wrong with the HTML, but there's no immediate worry. If that column looks wrong, then it should be fixed. Taking the first item as an example, the problem is in the infobox (the wikitext for the infobox should be highlighted in the editing window, underneath the preview). I don't see a significant difference in the infoboxes. If you're satisfied with the appearance in the new rendering, then you're done.
If you want to know more about how to fix these pages, then see mw:Help:Extension:Linter/html5-misnesting. For more help, you can ask questions at Wikipedia talk:Linter.
There are also a few hundred table errors (see mw:Help:Extension:Linter/deletable-table-tag); I'll post those separately. Whatamidoing (WMF) ( talk) 22:51, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Should Category:Segunda Liga players and Category:LigaPro players be merged, considering they are both about the Portuguese second tier - Segunda Liga to LigaPro was just a rename, by the looks of it. R96Skinner ( talk) 00:54, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Either the same blocked user that edit using ip as block evasion, or other user that decide to add back the flag (but not wish to associate with the edits), those flag was added back by this edit ( Special:Diff/827948241) Anyone wanner clean up the flags? Matthew_hk t c 23:25, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
139.194.203.119 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) and CuteDolphin712 ( talk · contribs) seem to think that the {{ birth date and age}} template's use of (age 26) instead of (age 26 years) is both problematic and incorrect. The editor has taken correcting that problem in articles. I warned the editor that this behaviour was unconstructive and suggested that a discussion should be started at the template. Any comments or concerns? Walter Görlitz ( talk) 06:04, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
How comes the references are at the top of the page? And is there a parent list? Govvy ( talk) 20:30, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Any reason we don't have an article on this team? They play in the Dutch 2nd Division, separately from the senior team... Giant Snowman 13:26, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I wonder if this project wants to add WikiProject Football template to redirects based on what articles that in Category:All WikiProject Football articles for example (the example for WikiProject Medicine).-- جار الله ( talk) 15:40, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I wonder if this project wants to add WikiProject Football template to redirects based on what articles that in Category:All WikiProject Football articles for example (the example for WikiProject Medicine).-- جار الله ( talk) 15:40, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Imagine we all agree that the runner-up finishes were to be included in players/teams list of honours (i know we don't, so i'm not even going in that direction, just suppose we do).
Thus, picture the following scenario: a player appears in four FIFA World Cup tournaments, and gets a 1st, a 2nd, a 3rd and a 4th place. If the current version at Álvaro Arbeloa (for example, only saw it in this article https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=%C3%81lvaro_Arbeloa&diff=next&oldid=839274937) seems to suggest a consensual direction, would we REALLY need (in the case presented in the lines above) FOUR LINES (or THREE, since a fourth place is not an honour) for their World Cup achievements? With all due respect, what on earth is wrong with this version (please see here, also from Mr. Arbeloa https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=%C3%81lvaro_Arbeloa&diff=839274937&oldid=839274845)?
Inputs please, attentively and continue the good work -- Quite A Character ( talk) 21:21, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
"Yes" to your initial question. Also, good point, I never add it myself (the "winner" mention) as i (wrongly, perhaps?) feel it's implied. -- Quite A Character ( talk) 12:46, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
I was wondering if it's my browser or screen size, but I can't seem to read the squad statistics table, some strange wrapping is going on and the final two rows look out of alignment. Also all the transfers tables don't match up on my screen, even when I changed my res. I was wondering if anyone else has issues looking at Man City season pages. Cheers. Govvy ( talk) 23:03, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
Same problems. Govvy ( talk) 23:39, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
This list is articles affected by what's called the "deletable table tag" error. This error mostly happens with nested tables. Again, these may or may not display strangely, and the only way to find out is for someone to look at them.
Taking the first item as an example, the table in the ===UEFA club rankings=== section isn't closed properly, which makes it display strangely (i.e., in the ==External links== section and with the Commons category box half merged into the end of the table). It's obviously broken now, and it will actually be slightly less broken with the new parser, but it needs to be fixed.
If you want to know more about how to fix these pages, then see mw:Help:Extension:Linter/deletable-table-tag. Send questions to Wikipedia talk:Linter. Whatamidoing (WMF) ( talk) 22:59, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Talk:Premier Development League#Men's only about whether the lede should contain "men's only". This was prompted after one of the keepers of the Canada women's national soccer team, Stephanie Labbé, successfully trialled for Calgary Foothills F.C., but the league refused to allow her to sign by stating it was a men's only league. Please offer opinion on the talk pages. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 05:22, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Long shot, but does anyone have copies of the AFS Reports from around 2000? When I was working on the Benny Fenton article, I discovered that the obit that was previously on the 11v11 website had disappeared and isn't rescuable. I know that their obits were also published in the Reports, so it might be in one of those. Alternatively, if anyone knows of other sources for the dates of his spell (as a youth) at Colchester Town, and his various non-playing roles at Charlton (which I have since moved to the talk page), that would also be great. Thanks, Nzd (talk) 12:19, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Per Bojan Krkić is this now a thing that we are listing in season summaries for Career Statistics? I think an over-zealous editor is at work here, but surely reserve team appearances are not an 'appearance'. Koncorde ( talk) 10:38, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
An update to {{ age}} means that it now checks that dates are valid. A lot of dates used in articles have problems such June 31 or February 29 in a non-leap year. Help cleaning articles from Category:Age error is needed. It would be great if people familiar with football would clean some of the relevant articles in the hidden error tracking category. Search for "Error:" in an article to find the error (or errors). A typical fix is to change the first of the following to the second
{{Age|1989|27|1|2009|07|14}} {{Age|1989|1|27|2009|07|14}}
because the dates should be |year|month|day
. An unknown month or day can be replaced with 0. I try to check the birth date in the article for the player, if its available. Thanks!
Johnuniq (
talk)
09:38, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
I was wondering if those pages should follow the same naming conventions, at the moment I thought there was two different ways we were naming the pages, but Man City is a bit different with EDS, I was wondering if we should be a bit more strict. As you can see below.
Should we stick to one format title? Govvy ( talk) 09:10, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Can someone else please deal with this disruptive editor on Man City article. Thanks. Govvy ( talk) 11:57, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Number 57: By that definition, do you want to list all the players in an academy in a list on the main club article that have made one or more appearances in the first team? That could range from one player to say 40 players? Players are already separated into First team, reserve, under-23, under-21. You will be breaking MoS if you start doing that. Govvy ( talk) 12:28, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
The players are not listed as being in the first team – which is based on the list on the club website. Rather, they are listed separately as having made appearances ( one of them this season). This seems like information as relevant to a football club's current squad as the on-loan players. Keen to know who the 17 other academy players who have made first team appearances are; they should certainly be added to the page as well. OZOO (t) (c) 12:49, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Can I get a read as to whether this subject meets WP:NFOOTBALL. ~ Kvng ( talk) 15:16, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
A new feature for embedding interactive maps has recently been added to Wikipedia. <mapframe> could be useful for some of the football pages (on clubs, leagues or stadia) that currently use {{ location map}}. I've drafted out a map for London football stadia (see below).
It should also be possible to create a template and module system to simplify the map making, storing the coordinate information for clubs and stadia (or even retrieving them from wikidata) and generating the json data for the markers. The map template would then just need basic map information along with a list of clubs and/or stadia.
Any comments? Jts1882 | talk 13:01, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Update I've put together a template {{ football map}} that can create maps with a number of stadia marked. It's very rudimentary with limited error checking at this stage. There are two demos: Template:football map/demo for London stadia and Template:football map/demo2 for the Russia world cup.
It's crude and a first step. I need to think about how to preceed. Any suggestions are welcome. Jts1882 | talk 15:13, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
What about that t-shirt icon? Govvy ( talk) 15:15, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
This section on the A.S. Roma page seems to have popped out of nowhere since the stabbing last week. Why is the entire section about English fans getting attacked? Surely there have been conflicts with other fans, but the entire section seems like a sensation piece based on recent events. Danieletorino2 ( talk) 15:00, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
There is clearly disagreement about this section. It was not prompted by a 'stabbing'. The fan seriously injured in Liverpool recently was not stabbed. I disagree that it was very POV and/or tabloid. It certainly was not biased. The bias seems to be in some of the comments here. It was based on reported facts. I also didn't feel it was poorly written, but then again I wouldn't would I?. It was an attempt to highlight the astonishing prolonged history of knife violence upon fans from England when visiting Rome. And to highlight that the attacks are typically from behind - the obvious inference being that they are cowardly. Quite frankly if Wikipedia is to be a valuable and reliable source of information then the detail I added should have been left on. What we now have is sparse sanitised partial information - that is what I would label tabloid and bordering on useless. ( Limhey ( talk) 19:38, 8 May 2018 (UTC))
By toned down you mean hacked to the point of sanitised uselessness. All the important numerical detail of the attacks has gone.
This bizarre wilful sanitising is replicated by the change of heading from Violence to hooliganism. Check out the definitions of both here on Wikipedia. Habitually stabbing people is correctly termed violence. ( Limhey ( talk) 21:09, 8 May 2018 (UTC))
Violence related to sporting events is classed as Hooliganism! Govvy ( talk) 21:42, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Edit war going back a week over a detail on the table. Enigma msg 16:08, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
Flix11 invited me to this discussion. Sb008 and LICA98 have been notified by me in my talk page, hopefully they will come. Also summon Kante4, S.A. Julio, RafaelS1979, who frequently edit Bundesliga and Serie A templates; as well as Frietjes, who currently has the most recent edit on the template documentation. @Sb008: I do not see anything seriously wrong with the way we use footnotes and statuses. To try getting your point, I read your manifesto in Template talk:2017–18 Eredivisie table, and saw some subjective assumptions. Similar the "C" and "Q" status cannot be combined, since it's a final and an intermediate status which can't apply at the same time... Intermediate and final statusses can't be combined, especially if they apply to a different cyclus. An European league season is not a phase of an Eredivisie season...So it's either "C", "R", "O" or "Q" or no status. These statuses are mutually exclusive...A status for the Cup winner is not among the predefined statuses. So it has to be define using the "X" status. None of them appeared in the instruction, as far as I know. You would also like to dedicate a status for domestic cups winners. Sorry, template documentation currently suggests us use a note for that case. Centaur271188 ( talk) 18:55, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
|status_PSV=C,Q
or what?
Frietjes (
talk)
20:41, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Enigmaman, Flix11, Koncorde, and LICA98: sorry for pinging again, just in case my first one did not work. @Sb008: another manifesto here? I do not have to tell you what I know or think about footnote, status and phase. Similarly, I think there is no point in looking up their definitions in the dictionary, just to question the way we practically use them here. As far as I know, Wikipedia does not work that way. We have a template documentation, and a consensus on editing tables. If you think that instruction have logical flaws, then please propose a change and discuss it here. Until we agree to make such change, do not start an edit war just because you think your way is better. Centaur271188 ( talk) 05:56, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
What’s the view on having these sections in League season articles? Are they notable? I notice that worldfootball.net seems to collate this information. Is it regarded as a reliable source, although even if it is we don’t necessarily want to reproduce all information from stats sites? Eldumpo ( talk) 20:23, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
The worldfootball page for Premier League shows the position at the end of the given round e.g. round 36 shows some teams as having played 35 games. This is more practical than keeping rigidly to the original fixtures, whereby if the first match of the season is postponed the positions by round could not be filled in for some clubs (or at least, clubs not played would by default be shown last?). Notes shouldn’t be added unless they’re sourced. I don’t see why the WF link can’t just be used if this topic is deemed notable. Do any other sites carry this info? Eldumpo ( talk) 22:16, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
I've noticed that for many English teams there seems to be a lot of inconsistency regarding a table overview of club performance by season. I looked at the MOS for articles here which doesn't seem to provide much guidance. As an example, I went to Brighton & Hove Albion F.C. hoping to see a table showing the level they have played in by season as with the table I've seen at Salford City F.C.#Seasons (& I swear I've seen it for at least two Championship or other EFL teams) but there was nothing - I remember the ones I'd seen before because they listed all the previous names for the different levels but didn't put the level number by them which as a layperson was confusing). At least Brighton has a graph but upon hearing of the recent promotion/relegations, what I was interested in was seeing at a glance their previous level each season. Is there a reason the articles don't have these? Because it would be too long for some of the older clubs? I feel like I've explained myself terribly here but this is the one thing I was looking for and I'm quite surprised they're not included - I'm looking for something to work on right now & would love to add these in but thought it would be sensible to mention it here first and see if there would be any objection to these being added. ... CJ [a Kiwi] in Oz 20:07, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brenda Viramontes and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniela Carrandi, there is an ongoing discussion as to whether the Liga MX Femenil is "fully professional" and, more generally, whether citations describing a league as "professional" are sufficient to establish its status as a "fully professional league." Sources [1], [2], and [3] clearly describe the league as "professional" but do not use the phrase "fully professional" at any point. However, it's also worth noting that, outside Wikipedia and mirrors, there are no Google results using the exact phrase "fully professional league" to describe the English Premier League (or more specifically, there are four pages of alleged results, none of which actually do so.) So clearly we don't need a citation using that exact phrase. However, while the EPL is clearly fully professional, some users have raised doubts as to whether this description is really accurate for this league. That being said, an AfD is not the appropriate place to be having this discussion, so I'm bringing it here. Pinging GiantSnowman as he participated in the discussion over there. (On a side note, similar questions regarding Liga MX Femenil's notability were raised at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lia Morán, but that's a different situation since she hasn't actually played a game in the league yet and as such wouldn't pass NFOOTY regardless.) Smartyllama ( talk) 16:37, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
At the beginning of the season Man City played away in Spain against Girona in this Trophy, but we don't seem to have any information on this friendly tournament on wiki. I was wondering if we should have a page or not? Govvy ( talk) 06:56, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I tried to edit the honours section for my local non-league club Haringey Borough as they won the Isthmian Division One North playoff final 2017-18 last Sunday. Previous winners of the playoff final have it listed in their honours section on their wiki pages. It is a great achievement for a club of Borough’s size, being promoted to the Isthmian Premier is the highest that the club has ever climbed in the football pyramid. My edit was rejected on the grounds that winning the playoff trophy is not an honour. Another user suggested that I posted in the football forum. If the general consensus is that it shouldn’t appear as an honour, fair enough, but I thought that it was worth raising. Many Thanks, Donbenkneetoe ( talk) 21:14, 10 May 2018 (UTC) Donbenkneetoe ( talk) 21:14, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
I agree that league survival isn’t an honour. However, Huddersfield do have last year’s Championship Playoff final listed as an honour. Just looking at the current members of the Premier League, 11 of the teams have previous playoff victories listed as honours on their Wikipedia pages (Bournemouth, Burnley, Crystal Palace, Huddersfield, Leicester, Man City, Stoke, Swansea, Watford, West Brom, West Ham). Many other professional and non-League teams also list playoff success. I agree with you that it is an interesting debate as to whether a playoff victory is an honour or an achievement. Perhaps as you say, no club should list it as an honour. However, as so many clubs do have it listed as an honour, as a compromise I would suggest that at the very least Haringey’s section could be renamed ‘Honours and Achievements’ and that the playoff final victory is included. I am new to editing Wikipedia and respect everyone’s views here. Kind Regards. Donbenkneetoe ( talk) 07:31, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
On a similar note, should promotions and play-off victories be listed for players as well? Kosack ( talk) 11:23, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Haringey Borough did indeed get a trophy for winning the playoff, I was there to cheer them on :) Donbenkneetoe ( talk) 11:39, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
what is the formula for the points in 1936 Soviet Top League? for 1937 Soviet Top League it looks like it's 4*w+1*d+0*l? Frietjes ( talk) 16:15, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
The Sud Ladies Cup article has been nominated for deletion. Can members of WP:Footy please come and offer their feedback here. TheBigJagielka ( talk) 20:44, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Please can an Arabic speaker read this press release image and add any missing details to South West Asian Football Federation article? I've seen some news articles claim that the Iraq and Oman FA are also members of the group but I've not been able to verify it. 22:05, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Translation |
---|
The Federation of the KSA, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, Yemen, Bangladesh, India, Maldives, Pakistan and Sri Lankan have established a regional union in Asia, following the coordination meeting which brought together the heads and representatives of these federations in Jeddah. The Federation's intention is to establish the Association of Southwest Asia in order to foster the interests of the member associations in the member states, as well as supporting the administrative competencies represented by the federations that are members of the Southwest Asian Union in continental and international systems. The meeting agreed to assume the President of the Saudi Federation Adel bin Mohammed Ezzat presidency of the Union, while the current president of the South Asian Federation will be Vice-President, and Luai Al-Subaie the functions of the Secretary-General, to conduct the work of the Union until the General Assembly, and decided to choose the city of Jeddah, . It was decided after the meeting to discussing the mechanism of development of the Southwest Asia Association with the concerned parties in order to establish a strong structural, administrative and regulatory system that will regulate the work of the Federation in order to enhance its success and effectiveness during the coming period. |
Should appearances in the end of season play-offs (in England) be included in the infobox and/or as League appearances in the "Career statistics" table? 77.130.195.244 ( talk) 06:39, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
Not sure if this is the most ideal place to ask, but: I've just created the Alexis Zárate article due to his professional footballing career, but while researching him there's actually been a big court case regarding rape. here, here and here. Is there a specific way we go about wording legal things, I'm not sure how to. Not helped by the language barrier either, which is making it trickier to understand the full order of events. Could someone who fluently understands Spanish take a look, please? R96Skinner ( talk) 19:25, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Will someone please verify that the subject of this draft has played at the fully professional level? Robert McClenon ( talk) 10:14, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Could an Admin please semi-protect Jlloyd Samuel, Thanks, JMHamo ( talk) 14:30, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
I saw that some articles about Macednoian clubs were recently moved and renamed in the style of replacing Č Ž and Š with CH ZH and SH, for instance most famous FK Rabotnički, but also others like GFK Tikveš etc. Is there any new policy about that considering transliteration macedonian to latin? I believe we should return them to Rabotnički... Linhart ( talk) 21:15, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
The club name in Macedonian is ФК Работнички, which in the past used to be translated/transcripted as FK Rabotnički but the transcription rules have changed over 10 years ago and letters like ч or ш are no more translated as č/š (that were used in Yugoslavia) but they are now replaced with ch/sh instead
There is not much English secondary source, but may be sufficient to as a citation for a proposed move to FK Rabotnicki ( FIFA.com 2018, BBC 2010, 90min 2018), but yet it would be tug of war on move discussion between Rabotnicki or Rabotnički , but definitely not Rabotnichki. Matthew_hk t c 11:06, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
If you look at the template on the page there are a huge amount of stub season articles, from the 1930s onwards and I am not sure if they even pass WP:NSEASONS. Should they be AfD'ed or not? Govvy ( talk) 21:11, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi. What is the consensus regarding including honours for players who weren't in the squad for a cup final? For example,
Mikel Arteta was an Arsenal player when they won the
2014–15 FA Cup, and he was actually the first player who lifted the cup on the podium at Wembley. Also, Arsenal.com says:
[1] "Former captain Mikel spent five years at Arsenal, and led the Gunners to consecutive FA Cups in 2014 and 2015" and "After winning the FA Cup twice with the Gunners, Mikel left the club at the end of the 2015/16 season". He played in earlier rounds of the competition but he was not in the squad for the cup final (I'm not sure whether he received a medal or not). Does this mean the 2014–15 FA Cup should be included in his honours section? I ask this because it was recently removed.
Hashim-afc (
talk)
11:43, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
References
Should I put them on the end of this season club pages or the coming season? Govvy ( talk) 19:08, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
I have a doubt about interim managers: should they have the same consideration as players, using WP:FPL as a parameter? I mean, some managers are suspended and generally their assistants are in charge of the team during the match.
In my opinion, the second one is notable enough to earn a page, but I have doubts about the first one. MYS 77 ✉ 19:19, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Currently, this list is only served for archived AfD discussion, but due to name title, I think other deletion nomination which listed in TfD, CfD, MfD, FfD and RfD (expect PROD) should be also archived, What is your idea? Pinging GiantSnowman and other's people comments are welcome, thank you! Hhkohh ( talk) 10:35, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi everyone, I write this post in order to do proposals about different templates in presentation of past games. I think that we could adapt the "score templates". I propose to begin only with the "World Cup Finals tournament games". Friends, we are talking about "old games" that a lot of readers haven't seen. Than it will be much interesting to adapt with a "chronological presentation of goals" using added "br/ code and giving the "score evolution". "Dry" Final scores are not always reflected a game. With my proposal new readers-younger readers will receive a better information. That also gives "energy" to the presentation. Eventual missing penalty kick could find a place in those small lists, it was often turning point of a game. "Encyclopedia is also to inform and not only simply publish". My proposal targets also to add information because it's nearly impossible to write a "fiable" summary of each game. I think it's also better to insert the First name initial letter of goalscorers. I also propose to use Flags icons for referees. And also with flags, to insert flags above the line-ups BUT, follow my advice, "50px" size is enough for games with kits templates illustrations. LAST, I will be glad to receive lessons to be able to create "football kits templates". Per example, shirts with "federal logo" makes all the difference. To give you ideas of my proposals, I use it when creating/updating " 1974 FIFA World Cup Groups pages" (see 1974 Group B, Poland vs West Germany to see a example with missing penalty). Many thanks to waste time to read me, and to answer me. Shanon11 ( talk) 12:32, 22 May 2018 (CET)
I wonder why players from 1991 to 1996 are even on the European Golden Shoe article, when the award was not even given during those years? and under the section 'multiple winners' Ally McCoist are shown with 2 awards, even when he didn't even get one, as it didn't exist during that time. I looked up some information on my own, and indeed no award was given to any of those players, so why should they be there? Isn't it best to just remove them and simply write that no award was given from 1991 to 1996? The award was given first in 1967-68 season, as an example, this would be the equivalent of me adding top scorers to this article before 1967, as no award were given there too. This is an article for an actual award, not an article for european top scorers in general. Could someone please help me out with this? SteamingStars ( talk) 10:22, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
An article in The Independent from September 1992 describes the 1991/92 award as the "Adidas Golden Boot". Jmorrison230582 ( talk) 14:39, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Would Amos Nasha pass WP:FOOTYN? Made an appearance (and sitting on the bench a few times) for West Ham United in the early rounds of the Europa League in 2015. Only problem is that the team ( FC Lusitanos) he played against probably aren't professional. JSWHU ( Talk page) 23:44, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Do players not pass NFooty when playing in the FA Cup proper rounds anymore? Govvy ( talk) 22:02, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Edit war going back a week over a detail on the table. Enigma msg 16:08, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
Flix11 invited me to this discussion. Sb008 and LICA98 have been notified by me in my talk page, hopefully they will come. Also summon Kante4, S.A. Julio, RafaelS1979, who frequently edit Bundesliga and Serie A templates; as well as Frietjes, who currently has the most recent edit on the template documentation. @Sb008: I do not see anything seriously wrong with the way we use footnotes and statuses. To try getting your point, I read your manifesto in Template talk:2017–18 Eredivisie table, and saw some subjective assumptions. Similar the "C" and "Q" status cannot be combined, since it's a final and an intermediate status which can't apply at the same time... Intermediate and final statusses can't be combined, especially if they apply to a different cyclus. An European league season is not a phase of an Eredivisie season...So it's either "C", "R", "O" or "Q" or no status. These statuses are mutually exclusive...A status for the Cup winner is not among the predefined statuses. So it has to be define using the "X" status. None of them appeared in the instruction, as far as I know. You would also like to dedicate a status for domestic cups winners. Sorry, template documentation currently suggests us use a note for that case. Centaur271188 ( talk) 18:55, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
|status_PSV=C,Q
or what?
Frietjes (
talk)
20:41, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Enigmaman, Flix11, Koncorde, and LICA98: sorry for pinging again, just in case my first one did not work. @Sb008: another manifesto here? I do not have to tell you what I know or think about footnote, status and phase. Similarly, I think there is no point in looking up their definitions in the dictionary, just to question the way we practically use them here. As far as I know, Wikipedia does not work that way. We have a template documentation, and a consensus on editing tables. If you think that instruction have logical flaws, then please propose a change and discuss it here. Until we agree to make such change, do not start an edit war just because you think your way is better. Centaur271188 ( talk) 05:56, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Someone added the staff back on Leeds United F.C. using LinkedIn as a source. Wasn't there something against using that website to cite? Govvy ( talk) 10:55, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Participants may be interested in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports#RFC on the use of notable games sections AIRcorn (talk) 08:06, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi, reviving this post from archive 114 (I haven't deleted it there) because it got no responses at the time and I think it's worth talking about! As with last time, apologies about the length. This might also help with some off the stuff about player inclusion on main page articles discussed under "Manchester City F.C." in archive 116.
Users aren't served well when U23/academy article pages use the squad template that's found on the main club articles. Users will be visiting these pages principally to see how their side's development players are progressing. How old they are, how many players they have in a certain position, are they internationally capped, a professional yet etc. [a] They won't be looking to click around numerous articles with little information in them - and indeed a lot of these players won't have articles.
This sort of summary can frequently be found in season articles for first-team players, but development players don't tend to be included. And we have these articles that can service this need (and indeed, if they don't what's the point of them?).
So my suggestion would be to provide a single sortable table including all academy scholars (as these players will frequently be in the under-23 side pretty quickly) and a selection of any players the club has who are under the age of 23 (more on this in a sec).
The closest existing examples of what I'm talking about that I'm aware of are Leeds United F.C. Reserves and Youth Team and Everton F.C. Reserves and Academy. With the latter, I had a play with adding some of the stuff I've been talking about above/below (some of it has been changed since, hence the URL link).
I think this proposal would provide an improved selection of information for the users. My inclination would be go with including loan players and go with all under-23 players, with a combination of table information/prose that marks out players who may have progressed beyond this stage. It'd be good to reach some sort of consensus on this idea, not because I think these sorts of articles are ever going to be completely standardised, but just so whether we agree it's something to work towards. Cheers, HornetMike ( talk) 17:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I have seen a few articles such as 1943 Santos FC season. They're tagged as stubs, but there's only one piece of useful information in the article. Should we be nominating such for deletion? Walter Görlitz ( talk) 20:00, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Please take note that Rita Guarino has just won the Italian women's league as coach of Juventus Women, the female squad of Juventus F.C. of Turin. -- SERGIO aka the Black Cat 08:21, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Where should we add player transfers after a club season is over? (With over I mean all official matches played, not 30 June.) Should we add transfers to the 2017–18 season or to the 2018–19 season? SLBedit ( talk) 19:07, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi. I recently added honours to the honours section of Mikel Arteta, Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, Gabriel Paulista and Santi Cazorla. With each edit I added a source to a video showing the players receiving medals on the podium at Wembley. The videos actually show the players getting handed the medals. However, Mattythewhite reverted them and said "Youtube videos of people holding medals really isn't sufficient". For that reason I want to ask: what is sufficient? Surely evidence of the player receiving a medal means that he got the honour? If not then how do you define a player getting an honour? Because John Terry was not in the squad for the 2012 Champions League final but he has the honour on his page presumably due to the photos/videos showing him receive a medal. Hashim-afc ( talk) 19:01, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Sources like the mirror and goal.com are not reliable, nor are online videos. You need solid, written sources to verify who got a trophy or not. A YouTube video of someone on the winners’ podium doesn’t mean anything. If you can find official club sourcing or reliable sources like you did with arteta then they can stand, otherwise there is no concrete proof. Also, isn’t this like the 5th time recently that the same thread has been made? It’s even listed above at the top of the page in a separate post! Davefelmer ( talk) 12:38, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Pictures of people with medals aren't conclusive or reliable of them actually receiving an award. We need something firmer. That's basic stuff. Giant Snowman 17:22, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
I added this from FourFourTwo as evidence that Alan Hansen got a League Cup medal in 1982 although he missed the final. I take it this is OK as it is a reliable source, and although it's an interview we shouldn't assume people lie about such trivial things. He mentions they're all on display at Liverpool's museum so a source from there might back it up. Harambe Walks ( talk) 15:56, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Users involved are TPTB ( talk · contribs) and 8Dodo8 ( talk · contribs). Edit warring started on 11 September 2017. SLBedit ( talk) 22:50, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
I think at the very least, it should be the main thing in the lede of the history article. Heck, I'd argue Steaua București needs to be edited from a disambiguation page, into an article (Or WP:OUTLINE) regarding the court case/history dispute. I don't think this really is an arguement regarding the champions league template, it needs to be looked at more objectively to avoid confusion, which I still have. Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 10:44, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
The short version is, CSA Steaua (the army sports club) owned the football team until 1998, then separated it into an affiliated non-profit of some kind, dodgy businessman Becali got involved and in 2003 turned it into a private enterprise run by him without consent from the army, courts have decided that current 'Steaua' has no rights to the name and that's why they are now called FCSB in the Europa League etc. Meanwhile the army restarted their football team (new CSA Steaua) last year in the bottom tier.
The dispute is over who own the impressive history and honours prior to 2003; both teams claim them on their websites but to be honest, in my opinion neither has a particularly good good claim: if FCSB has been ruled a different club, how can they claim honours won before their existence, and the new CSA is only one year old, so can they really claim honours won by a team with the same name and parent organisation which ceased activity 15 years earlier (it must have done so if FCSB was the only Steaua team from 2003 until 2017)?
At the moment, UEFA considers FCSB to be the successor to 1986-era Steaua. So that should probably be the article linked to on the template. An alternative could be to link to the History article, but I realise that's a very unusual way to do it. Just to confuse matters further, I understand the army possesses the physical trophies. Crowsus ( talk) 15:57, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Can an admin sort out User:Hashim-afc and User:Davefelmer as they have been on this little edit-war on the Man U article, well that what is seems to me, as they revert each others edits since 14 May. Govvy ( talk) 12:14, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
No idea why this was brought here nor what this notion of a ban is for considering I reverted the other user only once on the United article, and multiple other editors have reverted him in the past few days too so it isnt just between me and him. Evidently from the discussion here as well it isnt seen as a clear-cut issue. In terms of the debate in general, I dont find Number 57's argument for listing a comp under the current name instead of the general name to be true at all as its not like anyone who won the League Cup in the late 90s and early 00s has it listed as the "Worthington Cup" for instance. It is just the League Cup, and personally I feel thats better as its more easily identifiable to readers, who might not know it under all its different incarnations, and thus might not know what is being referred to. Davefelmer ( talk) 16:30, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Oh and furthermore, it is listed as the League Cup for most other clubs including Arsenal and Liverpool. So why should United's say EFL anyways? Whats the consistent standard that should be applied here? Davefelmer ( talk) 16:32, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Deviating from the original discussion, but it's relevant nonetheless. Just had to make some changes to the Arsenal F.C. page, where I've noticed the honours format is very inconsistent. The biggest bugbear I have is the "gold trophy", recognition of a fine achievement but it doesn't need to be mentioned in the lead, and using the same image twice in the article borders on the self-indulgent. Parity please, let the readers think and achievements speak for themselves. Lemonade51 ( talk) 11:14, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
How do I join this group? -- IAWI ( talk) 12:32, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
I have nominated List of Vancouver Whitecaps FC players for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.
I was hoping to get some community input on whether or not this article should be de-listed. This is my first time doing this so I hope I don't annoy too many people by posting here if I'm not supposed to. Cheers. Jay eyem ( talk) 04:19, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
User:Davefelmer keeps adding into the intro of the Paul Scholes article that "he is one of the most decorated footballers in history". In my view such a statement is very vague and not necessary in this intro. Davefelmer supports the use of this term by saying that "7th most trophies out of millions of players" makes him "one of" the most decorated. This logic is flawed in my opinion because then where is the limit? Should the player with the 100th most trophies have that statement too seeing as he is 100th out of millions of players? There were discussions before involving Davefelmer about using this term on the Sir Alex Ferguson page which led to the conclusion that it should not be used. For that reason I removed the term but I've now done so three times and don't want to start an edit war. I'd like to hear your opinions on whether this is actually appropriate for the intro of the article. He also used this term to say that Scholes was the most decorated player in English history, which I've changed to "won more trophies than any other English player in history" as this is much clearer to me and less vague. However can we be sure there aren't amateur English players that have won more trophies? I'd like to hear your thoughts on this as well. Hashim-afc ( talk) 19:19, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm not a fan of using "most successful", "most decorated", etc. in any article as it smacks a bit of WP:PEACOCK. In the instance of Paul Scholes I think that it would be sensible to simply state the major honours he's won in the lead, broken down by competition - I think that he holds the record for number of English league titles won by an English player (and is behind Ryan Giggs for all players) which would definitely be worth noting in the lead (if I'm correct!). Ilikeeatingwaffles ( talk) 15:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
If you are willing to say "most titles out of any English player" why then is "most trophies of any English player" not fair to use? The sources clearly show not to distinguish between certain types of honours ie "major" honours so why is it potentially biased to include that, when every trophy won is counted in the measure? Davefelmer ( talk) 19:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Aggregation of different types of honours into one grand total is confusing, and assumptions are made in it. Just compare eggs with eggs by breaking things down by competition. By the way, most non-league competitions in England do not feature reserve teams - they are all clubs' senior team. Ilikeeatingwaffles ( talk) 08:17, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
You do realize you're arguing that the source includes all trophies while simultaneously arguing it only includes domestic/European trophies (or first-team, top-flight, competitive trophies, as you put it) and leaves out the U-19 trophy. Madshurtie ( talk) 20:50, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Also, I didn't fight to include any honours on the Arsenal F.C. page. Madshurtie ( talk) 20:52, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
In all fairness if you look across the football world, competitive football leagues didn’t even start in most countries until 30-40 years ago. Only in Europe and South America has it been played for a long, long time. North America is a good example of this as the MLS is still in its teenage years I believe and the Canadian league began like 5 years ago. Thus teams from most countries have not been around for long enough to win anywhere near as much in comparison to the best teams in Europe so it would make sense their players are less decorated. There are actually very very few clubs in football and even sport that achieve huge trophy hauls to the levels we are talking about to make it on these lists as players. There are a few highly decorated clubs in Central America though so maybe you could have someone from there, although there doesn’t seem to be a reason to generally doubt the neutrality of this list based on what it says is its criteria for inclusion.
If sportskeeda is an unreliable source for the total count, what about the one Madshurtie introduced above? https://www.football365.com/news/top-20-players-ranked-by-amount-of-club-trophies. Davefelmer ( talk) 12:36, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
On a Scholes front, anyone want to look at his stat box which shows his first time with Utd ending in 2011, and a second period of 2012-13. Now given he played to the end of 2011-2012 season and only re-signed in 2013 this seems incorrect to me? Yes / no? Should in fact be the first period ending in 2012, and second period being a 2013 only? Koncorde ( talk) 01:27, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
After being reverted by User:Kante4 at Dani Ceballos, i was then informed by them that it had been decided (apparently after consideration in the Gareth Bale article) to reinstate honours where a given player is not even part of the matchday squad. We agreed that it would be best to bring the "situation" here.
Can someone please inform me where is the (new) logic in that? Attentively -- Quite A Character ( talk) 20:14, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
User:Kante4, can you please bring more light into the thread? I honestly do not know what to answer User:EchetusXe. -- Quite A Character ( talk) 12:03, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Somehow it's not listed at Bale anymore, but there was a discussion sometime (i am pretty sure...). Kante4 ( talk) 14:51, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Someone added the 2005 supercup to the Lionel Messi article also, despite him not playing in it at all. Shouldn't that be removed? SteamingStars ( talk) 15:07, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.
Portals are being redesigned.
The new design features are being applied to existing portals.
At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{ Transclude lead excerpt}}.
The discussion about this can be found here.
Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.
On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.
Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.
So far, 84 editors have joined.
If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.
If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.
Thank you. — The Transhumanist 07:38, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
I don't know why, but there is some bug were the portal template will affect the reflist template and stop the reflist from splitting into columns. One example is Newcastle United F.C., can someone good with templates have a look thanks. Govvy ( talk) 17:15, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
This is only my second pre-season as an editor so I'm not certain what is accepted and what isn't. A few editors have been reverted for unsourced changes to these persons: Eduardo Berizzo, Cristian Ganea, Ander Capa. Are these club updates with photos sufficient as a source to change their clubs now, although the players were apparently due to move at the end of June? I'm happy to wait but it seems unfair to revert the changes if the information is actually considered to be accurate? Crowsus ( talk) 17:58, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
It seems that the official FA profiles of English international players no longer exist. On most articles of English youth or senior international players there is a link in the external links section to an FA profile, but none seem to be working. Considering this is the source for youth international stats this is a bit of a problem... -- Stuart1234 ( talk) 13:33, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
I was wondering if we could make a project page with a list of sources that shouldn't be used on football articles. Govvy ( talk) 14:09, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
User:SLBedit is removing all the vice captain information from the squads on club articles, there was no consensus or talk regarding removing this information. I like to know who the vice captains are on club articles, I feel this is useful information being removed and this feels very disruptive. I was going to restore all his edits, but I thought this would border on warring with him. Would appreciate some help, cheers. Govvy ( talk) 11:56, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 110 | ← | Archive 114 | Archive 115 | Archive 116 | Archive 117 | Archive 118 | → | Archive 120 |
I'm going through Special:LintErrors, and I've found several hundred high-priority errors in articles tagged by this WikiProject. I've put a list of 74 articles affected by misnested tags below. The wikitext parser is going to change in June, and any page with an error may display strangely.
What's needed right now is for someone to click these links and compare the side-by-side preview of the two parsers. If the "New" page looks okay, then something's maybe technically wrong with the HTML, but there's no immediate worry. If that column looks wrong, then it should be fixed. Taking the first item as an example, the problem is in the infobox (the wikitext for the infobox should be highlighted in the editing window, underneath the preview). I don't see a significant difference in the infoboxes. If you're satisfied with the appearance in the new rendering, then you're done.
If you want to know more about how to fix these pages, then see mw:Help:Extension:Linter/html5-misnesting. For more help, you can ask questions at Wikipedia talk:Linter.
There are also a few hundred table errors (see mw:Help:Extension:Linter/deletable-table-tag); I'll post those separately. Whatamidoing (WMF) ( talk) 22:51, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Should Category:Segunda Liga players and Category:LigaPro players be merged, considering they are both about the Portuguese second tier - Segunda Liga to LigaPro was just a rename, by the looks of it. R96Skinner ( talk) 00:54, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Either the same blocked user that edit using ip as block evasion, or other user that decide to add back the flag (but not wish to associate with the edits), those flag was added back by this edit ( Special:Diff/827948241) Anyone wanner clean up the flags? Matthew_hk t c 23:25, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
139.194.203.119 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) and CuteDolphin712 ( talk · contribs) seem to think that the {{ birth date and age}} template's use of (age 26) instead of (age 26 years) is both problematic and incorrect. The editor has taken correcting that problem in articles. I warned the editor that this behaviour was unconstructive and suggested that a discussion should be started at the template. Any comments or concerns? Walter Görlitz ( talk) 06:04, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
How comes the references are at the top of the page? And is there a parent list? Govvy ( talk) 20:30, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Any reason we don't have an article on this team? They play in the Dutch 2nd Division, separately from the senior team... Giant Snowman 13:26, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I wonder if this project wants to add WikiProject Football template to redirects based on what articles that in Category:All WikiProject Football articles for example (the example for WikiProject Medicine).-- جار الله ( talk) 15:40, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I wonder if this project wants to add WikiProject Football template to redirects based on what articles that in Category:All WikiProject Football articles for example (the example for WikiProject Medicine).-- جار الله ( talk) 15:40, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Imagine we all agree that the runner-up finishes were to be included in players/teams list of honours (i know we don't, so i'm not even going in that direction, just suppose we do).
Thus, picture the following scenario: a player appears in four FIFA World Cup tournaments, and gets a 1st, a 2nd, a 3rd and a 4th place. If the current version at Álvaro Arbeloa (for example, only saw it in this article https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=%C3%81lvaro_Arbeloa&diff=next&oldid=839274937) seems to suggest a consensual direction, would we REALLY need (in the case presented in the lines above) FOUR LINES (or THREE, since a fourth place is not an honour) for their World Cup achievements? With all due respect, what on earth is wrong with this version (please see here, also from Mr. Arbeloa https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=%C3%81lvaro_Arbeloa&diff=839274937&oldid=839274845)?
Inputs please, attentively and continue the good work -- Quite A Character ( talk) 21:21, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
"Yes" to your initial question. Also, good point, I never add it myself (the "winner" mention) as i (wrongly, perhaps?) feel it's implied. -- Quite A Character ( talk) 12:46, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
I was wondering if it's my browser or screen size, but I can't seem to read the squad statistics table, some strange wrapping is going on and the final two rows look out of alignment. Also all the transfers tables don't match up on my screen, even when I changed my res. I was wondering if anyone else has issues looking at Man City season pages. Cheers. Govvy ( talk) 23:03, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
Same problems. Govvy ( talk) 23:39, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
This list is articles affected by what's called the "deletable table tag" error. This error mostly happens with nested tables. Again, these may or may not display strangely, and the only way to find out is for someone to look at them.
Taking the first item as an example, the table in the ===UEFA club rankings=== section isn't closed properly, which makes it display strangely (i.e., in the ==External links== section and with the Commons category box half merged into the end of the table). It's obviously broken now, and it will actually be slightly less broken with the new parser, but it needs to be fixed.
If you want to know more about how to fix these pages, then see mw:Help:Extension:Linter/deletable-table-tag. Send questions to Wikipedia talk:Linter. Whatamidoing (WMF) ( talk) 22:59, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Talk:Premier Development League#Men's only about whether the lede should contain "men's only". This was prompted after one of the keepers of the Canada women's national soccer team, Stephanie Labbé, successfully trialled for Calgary Foothills F.C., but the league refused to allow her to sign by stating it was a men's only league. Please offer opinion on the talk pages. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 05:22, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Long shot, but does anyone have copies of the AFS Reports from around 2000? When I was working on the Benny Fenton article, I discovered that the obit that was previously on the 11v11 website had disappeared and isn't rescuable. I know that their obits were also published in the Reports, so it might be in one of those. Alternatively, if anyone knows of other sources for the dates of his spell (as a youth) at Colchester Town, and his various non-playing roles at Charlton (which I have since moved to the talk page), that would also be great. Thanks, Nzd (talk) 12:19, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Per Bojan Krkić is this now a thing that we are listing in season summaries for Career Statistics? I think an over-zealous editor is at work here, but surely reserve team appearances are not an 'appearance'. Koncorde ( talk) 10:38, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
An update to {{ age}} means that it now checks that dates are valid. A lot of dates used in articles have problems such June 31 or February 29 in a non-leap year. Help cleaning articles from Category:Age error is needed. It would be great if people familiar with football would clean some of the relevant articles in the hidden error tracking category. Search for "Error:" in an article to find the error (or errors). A typical fix is to change the first of the following to the second
{{Age|1989|27|1|2009|07|14}} {{Age|1989|1|27|2009|07|14}}
because the dates should be |year|month|day
. An unknown month or day can be replaced with 0. I try to check the birth date in the article for the player, if its available. Thanks!
Johnuniq (
talk)
09:38, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
I was wondering if those pages should follow the same naming conventions, at the moment I thought there was two different ways we were naming the pages, but Man City is a bit different with EDS, I was wondering if we should be a bit more strict. As you can see below.
Should we stick to one format title? Govvy ( talk) 09:10, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Can someone else please deal with this disruptive editor on Man City article. Thanks. Govvy ( talk) 11:57, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Number 57: By that definition, do you want to list all the players in an academy in a list on the main club article that have made one or more appearances in the first team? That could range from one player to say 40 players? Players are already separated into First team, reserve, under-23, under-21. You will be breaking MoS if you start doing that. Govvy ( talk) 12:28, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
The players are not listed as being in the first team – which is based on the list on the club website. Rather, they are listed separately as having made appearances ( one of them this season). This seems like information as relevant to a football club's current squad as the on-loan players. Keen to know who the 17 other academy players who have made first team appearances are; they should certainly be added to the page as well. OZOO (t) (c) 12:49, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Can I get a read as to whether this subject meets WP:NFOOTBALL. ~ Kvng ( talk) 15:16, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
A new feature for embedding interactive maps has recently been added to Wikipedia. <mapframe> could be useful for some of the football pages (on clubs, leagues or stadia) that currently use {{ location map}}. I've drafted out a map for London football stadia (see below).
It should also be possible to create a template and module system to simplify the map making, storing the coordinate information for clubs and stadia (or even retrieving them from wikidata) and generating the json data for the markers. The map template would then just need basic map information along with a list of clubs and/or stadia.
Any comments? Jts1882 | talk 13:01, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Update I've put together a template {{ football map}} that can create maps with a number of stadia marked. It's very rudimentary with limited error checking at this stage. There are two demos: Template:football map/demo for London stadia and Template:football map/demo2 for the Russia world cup.
It's crude and a first step. I need to think about how to preceed. Any suggestions are welcome. Jts1882 | talk 15:13, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
What about that t-shirt icon? Govvy ( talk) 15:15, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
This section on the A.S. Roma page seems to have popped out of nowhere since the stabbing last week. Why is the entire section about English fans getting attacked? Surely there have been conflicts with other fans, but the entire section seems like a sensation piece based on recent events. Danieletorino2 ( talk) 15:00, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
There is clearly disagreement about this section. It was not prompted by a 'stabbing'. The fan seriously injured in Liverpool recently was not stabbed. I disagree that it was very POV and/or tabloid. It certainly was not biased. The bias seems to be in some of the comments here. It was based on reported facts. I also didn't feel it was poorly written, but then again I wouldn't would I?. It was an attempt to highlight the astonishing prolonged history of knife violence upon fans from England when visiting Rome. And to highlight that the attacks are typically from behind - the obvious inference being that they are cowardly. Quite frankly if Wikipedia is to be a valuable and reliable source of information then the detail I added should have been left on. What we now have is sparse sanitised partial information - that is what I would label tabloid and bordering on useless. ( Limhey ( talk) 19:38, 8 May 2018 (UTC))
By toned down you mean hacked to the point of sanitised uselessness. All the important numerical detail of the attacks has gone.
This bizarre wilful sanitising is replicated by the change of heading from Violence to hooliganism. Check out the definitions of both here on Wikipedia. Habitually stabbing people is correctly termed violence. ( Limhey ( talk) 21:09, 8 May 2018 (UTC))
Violence related to sporting events is classed as Hooliganism! Govvy ( talk) 21:42, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Edit war going back a week over a detail on the table. Enigma msg 16:08, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
Flix11 invited me to this discussion. Sb008 and LICA98 have been notified by me in my talk page, hopefully they will come. Also summon Kante4, S.A. Julio, RafaelS1979, who frequently edit Bundesliga and Serie A templates; as well as Frietjes, who currently has the most recent edit on the template documentation. @Sb008: I do not see anything seriously wrong with the way we use footnotes and statuses. To try getting your point, I read your manifesto in Template talk:2017–18 Eredivisie table, and saw some subjective assumptions. Similar the "C" and "Q" status cannot be combined, since it's a final and an intermediate status which can't apply at the same time... Intermediate and final statusses can't be combined, especially if they apply to a different cyclus. An European league season is not a phase of an Eredivisie season...So it's either "C", "R", "O" or "Q" or no status. These statuses are mutually exclusive...A status for the Cup winner is not among the predefined statuses. So it has to be define using the "X" status. None of them appeared in the instruction, as far as I know. You would also like to dedicate a status for domestic cups winners. Sorry, template documentation currently suggests us use a note for that case. Centaur271188 ( talk) 18:55, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
|status_PSV=C,Q
or what?
Frietjes (
talk)
20:41, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Enigmaman, Flix11, Koncorde, and LICA98: sorry for pinging again, just in case my first one did not work. @Sb008: another manifesto here? I do not have to tell you what I know or think about footnote, status and phase. Similarly, I think there is no point in looking up their definitions in the dictionary, just to question the way we practically use them here. As far as I know, Wikipedia does not work that way. We have a template documentation, and a consensus on editing tables. If you think that instruction have logical flaws, then please propose a change and discuss it here. Until we agree to make such change, do not start an edit war just because you think your way is better. Centaur271188 ( talk) 05:56, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
What’s the view on having these sections in League season articles? Are they notable? I notice that worldfootball.net seems to collate this information. Is it regarded as a reliable source, although even if it is we don’t necessarily want to reproduce all information from stats sites? Eldumpo ( talk) 20:23, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
The worldfootball page for Premier League shows the position at the end of the given round e.g. round 36 shows some teams as having played 35 games. This is more practical than keeping rigidly to the original fixtures, whereby if the first match of the season is postponed the positions by round could not be filled in for some clubs (or at least, clubs not played would by default be shown last?). Notes shouldn’t be added unless they’re sourced. I don’t see why the WF link can’t just be used if this topic is deemed notable. Do any other sites carry this info? Eldumpo ( talk) 22:16, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
I've noticed that for many English teams there seems to be a lot of inconsistency regarding a table overview of club performance by season. I looked at the MOS for articles here which doesn't seem to provide much guidance. As an example, I went to Brighton & Hove Albion F.C. hoping to see a table showing the level they have played in by season as with the table I've seen at Salford City F.C.#Seasons (& I swear I've seen it for at least two Championship or other EFL teams) but there was nothing - I remember the ones I'd seen before because they listed all the previous names for the different levels but didn't put the level number by them which as a layperson was confusing). At least Brighton has a graph but upon hearing of the recent promotion/relegations, what I was interested in was seeing at a glance their previous level each season. Is there a reason the articles don't have these? Because it would be too long for some of the older clubs? I feel like I've explained myself terribly here but this is the one thing I was looking for and I'm quite surprised they're not included - I'm looking for something to work on right now & would love to add these in but thought it would be sensible to mention it here first and see if there would be any objection to these being added. ... CJ [a Kiwi] in Oz 20:07, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brenda Viramontes and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniela Carrandi, there is an ongoing discussion as to whether the Liga MX Femenil is "fully professional" and, more generally, whether citations describing a league as "professional" are sufficient to establish its status as a "fully professional league." Sources [1], [2], and [3] clearly describe the league as "professional" but do not use the phrase "fully professional" at any point. However, it's also worth noting that, outside Wikipedia and mirrors, there are no Google results using the exact phrase "fully professional league" to describe the English Premier League (or more specifically, there are four pages of alleged results, none of which actually do so.) So clearly we don't need a citation using that exact phrase. However, while the EPL is clearly fully professional, some users have raised doubts as to whether this description is really accurate for this league. That being said, an AfD is not the appropriate place to be having this discussion, so I'm bringing it here. Pinging GiantSnowman as he participated in the discussion over there. (On a side note, similar questions regarding Liga MX Femenil's notability were raised at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lia Morán, but that's a different situation since she hasn't actually played a game in the league yet and as such wouldn't pass NFOOTY regardless.) Smartyllama ( talk) 16:37, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
At the beginning of the season Man City played away in Spain against Girona in this Trophy, but we don't seem to have any information on this friendly tournament on wiki. I was wondering if we should have a page or not? Govvy ( talk) 06:56, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I tried to edit the honours section for my local non-league club Haringey Borough as they won the Isthmian Division One North playoff final 2017-18 last Sunday. Previous winners of the playoff final have it listed in their honours section on their wiki pages. It is a great achievement for a club of Borough’s size, being promoted to the Isthmian Premier is the highest that the club has ever climbed in the football pyramid. My edit was rejected on the grounds that winning the playoff trophy is not an honour. Another user suggested that I posted in the football forum. If the general consensus is that it shouldn’t appear as an honour, fair enough, but I thought that it was worth raising. Many Thanks, Donbenkneetoe ( talk) 21:14, 10 May 2018 (UTC) Donbenkneetoe ( talk) 21:14, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
I agree that league survival isn’t an honour. However, Huddersfield do have last year’s Championship Playoff final listed as an honour. Just looking at the current members of the Premier League, 11 of the teams have previous playoff victories listed as honours on their Wikipedia pages (Bournemouth, Burnley, Crystal Palace, Huddersfield, Leicester, Man City, Stoke, Swansea, Watford, West Brom, West Ham). Many other professional and non-League teams also list playoff success. I agree with you that it is an interesting debate as to whether a playoff victory is an honour or an achievement. Perhaps as you say, no club should list it as an honour. However, as so many clubs do have it listed as an honour, as a compromise I would suggest that at the very least Haringey’s section could be renamed ‘Honours and Achievements’ and that the playoff final victory is included. I am new to editing Wikipedia and respect everyone’s views here. Kind Regards. Donbenkneetoe ( talk) 07:31, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
On a similar note, should promotions and play-off victories be listed for players as well? Kosack ( talk) 11:23, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Haringey Borough did indeed get a trophy for winning the playoff, I was there to cheer them on :) Donbenkneetoe ( talk) 11:39, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
what is the formula for the points in 1936 Soviet Top League? for 1937 Soviet Top League it looks like it's 4*w+1*d+0*l? Frietjes ( talk) 16:15, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
The Sud Ladies Cup article has been nominated for deletion. Can members of WP:Footy please come and offer their feedback here. TheBigJagielka ( talk) 20:44, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Please can an Arabic speaker read this press release image and add any missing details to South West Asian Football Federation article? I've seen some news articles claim that the Iraq and Oman FA are also members of the group but I've not been able to verify it. 22:05, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Translation |
---|
The Federation of the KSA, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, Yemen, Bangladesh, India, Maldives, Pakistan and Sri Lankan have established a regional union in Asia, following the coordination meeting which brought together the heads and representatives of these federations in Jeddah. The Federation's intention is to establish the Association of Southwest Asia in order to foster the interests of the member associations in the member states, as well as supporting the administrative competencies represented by the federations that are members of the Southwest Asian Union in continental and international systems. The meeting agreed to assume the President of the Saudi Federation Adel bin Mohammed Ezzat presidency of the Union, while the current president of the South Asian Federation will be Vice-President, and Luai Al-Subaie the functions of the Secretary-General, to conduct the work of the Union until the General Assembly, and decided to choose the city of Jeddah, . It was decided after the meeting to discussing the mechanism of development of the Southwest Asia Association with the concerned parties in order to establish a strong structural, administrative and regulatory system that will regulate the work of the Federation in order to enhance its success and effectiveness during the coming period. |
Should appearances in the end of season play-offs (in England) be included in the infobox and/or as League appearances in the "Career statistics" table? 77.130.195.244 ( talk) 06:39, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
Not sure if this is the most ideal place to ask, but: I've just created the Alexis Zárate article due to his professional footballing career, but while researching him there's actually been a big court case regarding rape. here, here and here. Is there a specific way we go about wording legal things, I'm not sure how to. Not helped by the language barrier either, which is making it trickier to understand the full order of events. Could someone who fluently understands Spanish take a look, please? R96Skinner ( talk) 19:25, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Will someone please verify that the subject of this draft has played at the fully professional level? Robert McClenon ( talk) 10:14, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Could an Admin please semi-protect Jlloyd Samuel, Thanks, JMHamo ( talk) 14:30, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
I saw that some articles about Macednoian clubs were recently moved and renamed in the style of replacing Č Ž and Š with CH ZH and SH, for instance most famous FK Rabotnički, but also others like GFK Tikveš etc. Is there any new policy about that considering transliteration macedonian to latin? I believe we should return them to Rabotnički... Linhart ( talk) 21:15, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
The club name in Macedonian is ФК Работнички, which in the past used to be translated/transcripted as FK Rabotnički but the transcription rules have changed over 10 years ago and letters like ч or ш are no more translated as č/š (that were used in Yugoslavia) but they are now replaced with ch/sh instead
There is not much English secondary source, but may be sufficient to as a citation for a proposed move to FK Rabotnicki ( FIFA.com 2018, BBC 2010, 90min 2018), but yet it would be tug of war on move discussion between Rabotnicki or Rabotnički , but definitely not Rabotnichki. Matthew_hk t c 11:06, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
If you look at the template on the page there are a huge amount of stub season articles, from the 1930s onwards and I am not sure if they even pass WP:NSEASONS. Should they be AfD'ed or not? Govvy ( talk) 21:11, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi. What is the consensus regarding including honours for players who weren't in the squad for a cup final? For example,
Mikel Arteta was an Arsenal player when they won the
2014–15 FA Cup, and he was actually the first player who lifted the cup on the podium at Wembley. Also, Arsenal.com says:
[1] "Former captain Mikel spent five years at Arsenal, and led the Gunners to consecutive FA Cups in 2014 and 2015" and "After winning the FA Cup twice with the Gunners, Mikel left the club at the end of the 2015/16 season". He played in earlier rounds of the competition but he was not in the squad for the cup final (I'm not sure whether he received a medal or not). Does this mean the 2014–15 FA Cup should be included in his honours section? I ask this because it was recently removed.
Hashim-afc (
talk)
11:43, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
References
Should I put them on the end of this season club pages or the coming season? Govvy ( talk) 19:08, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
I have a doubt about interim managers: should they have the same consideration as players, using WP:FPL as a parameter? I mean, some managers are suspended and generally their assistants are in charge of the team during the match.
In my opinion, the second one is notable enough to earn a page, but I have doubts about the first one. MYS 77 ✉ 19:19, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Currently, this list is only served for archived AfD discussion, but due to name title, I think other deletion nomination which listed in TfD, CfD, MfD, FfD and RfD (expect PROD) should be also archived, What is your idea? Pinging GiantSnowman and other's people comments are welcome, thank you! Hhkohh ( talk) 10:35, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi everyone, I write this post in order to do proposals about different templates in presentation of past games. I think that we could adapt the "score templates". I propose to begin only with the "World Cup Finals tournament games". Friends, we are talking about "old games" that a lot of readers haven't seen. Than it will be much interesting to adapt with a "chronological presentation of goals" using added "br/ code and giving the "score evolution". "Dry" Final scores are not always reflected a game. With my proposal new readers-younger readers will receive a better information. That also gives "energy" to the presentation. Eventual missing penalty kick could find a place in those small lists, it was often turning point of a game. "Encyclopedia is also to inform and not only simply publish". My proposal targets also to add information because it's nearly impossible to write a "fiable" summary of each game. I think it's also better to insert the First name initial letter of goalscorers. I also propose to use Flags icons for referees. And also with flags, to insert flags above the line-ups BUT, follow my advice, "50px" size is enough for games with kits templates illustrations. LAST, I will be glad to receive lessons to be able to create "football kits templates". Per example, shirts with "federal logo" makes all the difference. To give you ideas of my proposals, I use it when creating/updating " 1974 FIFA World Cup Groups pages" (see 1974 Group B, Poland vs West Germany to see a example with missing penalty). Many thanks to waste time to read me, and to answer me. Shanon11 ( talk) 12:32, 22 May 2018 (CET)
I wonder why players from 1991 to 1996 are even on the European Golden Shoe article, when the award was not even given during those years? and under the section 'multiple winners' Ally McCoist are shown with 2 awards, even when he didn't even get one, as it didn't exist during that time. I looked up some information on my own, and indeed no award was given to any of those players, so why should they be there? Isn't it best to just remove them and simply write that no award was given from 1991 to 1996? The award was given first in 1967-68 season, as an example, this would be the equivalent of me adding top scorers to this article before 1967, as no award were given there too. This is an article for an actual award, not an article for european top scorers in general. Could someone please help me out with this? SteamingStars ( talk) 10:22, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
An article in The Independent from September 1992 describes the 1991/92 award as the "Adidas Golden Boot". Jmorrison230582 ( talk) 14:39, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Would Amos Nasha pass WP:FOOTYN? Made an appearance (and sitting on the bench a few times) for West Ham United in the early rounds of the Europa League in 2015. Only problem is that the team ( FC Lusitanos) he played against probably aren't professional. JSWHU ( Talk page) 23:44, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Do players not pass NFooty when playing in the FA Cup proper rounds anymore? Govvy ( talk) 22:02, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Edit war going back a week over a detail on the table. Enigma msg 16:08, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
Flix11 invited me to this discussion. Sb008 and LICA98 have been notified by me in my talk page, hopefully they will come. Also summon Kante4, S.A. Julio, RafaelS1979, who frequently edit Bundesliga and Serie A templates; as well as Frietjes, who currently has the most recent edit on the template documentation. @Sb008: I do not see anything seriously wrong with the way we use footnotes and statuses. To try getting your point, I read your manifesto in Template talk:2017–18 Eredivisie table, and saw some subjective assumptions. Similar the "C" and "Q" status cannot be combined, since it's a final and an intermediate status which can't apply at the same time... Intermediate and final statusses can't be combined, especially if they apply to a different cyclus. An European league season is not a phase of an Eredivisie season...So it's either "C", "R", "O" or "Q" or no status. These statuses are mutually exclusive...A status for the Cup winner is not among the predefined statuses. So it has to be define using the "X" status. None of them appeared in the instruction, as far as I know. You would also like to dedicate a status for domestic cups winners. Sorry, template documentation currently suggests us use a note for that case. Centaur271188 ( talk) 18:55, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
|status_PSV=C,Q
or what?
Frietjes (
talk)
20:41, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Enigmaman, Flix11, Koncorde, and LICA98: sorry for pinging again, just in case my first one did not work. @Sb008: another manifesto here? I do not have to tell you what I know or think about footnote, status and phase. Similarly, I think there is no point in looking up their definitions in the dictionary, just to question the way we practically use them here. As far as I know, Wikipedia does not work that way. We have a template documentation, and a consensus on editing tables. If you think that instruction have logical flaws, then please propose a change and discuss it here. Until we agree to make such change, do not start an edit war just because you think your way is better. Centaur271188 ( talk) 05:56, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Someone added the staff back on Leeds United F.C. using LinkedIn as a source. Wasn't there something against using that website to cite? Govvy ( talk) 10:55, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Participants may be interested in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports#RFC on the use of notable games sections AIRcorn (talk) 08:06, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi, reviving this post from archive 114 (I haven't deleted it there) because it got no responses at the time and I think it's worth talking about! As with last time, apologies about the length. This might also help with some off the stuff about player inclusion on main page articles discussed under "Manchester City F.C." in archive 116.
Users aren't served well when U23/academy article pages use the squad template that's found on the main club articles. Users will be visiting these pages principally to see how their side's development players are progressing. How old they are, how many players they have in a certain position, are they internationally capped, a professional yet etc. [a] They won't be looking to click around numerous articles with little information in them - and indeed a lot of these players won't have articles.
This sort of summary can frequently be found in season articles for first-team players, but development players don't tend to be included. And we have these articles that can service this need (and indeed, if they don't what's the point of them?).
So my suggestion would be to provide a single sortable table including all academy scholars (as these players will frequently be in the under-23 side pretty quickly) and a selection of any players the club has who are under the age of 23 (more on this in a sec).
The closest existing examples of what I'm talking about that I'm aware of are Leeds United F.C. Reserves and Youth Team and Everton F.C. Reserves and Academy. With the latter, I had a play with adding some of the stuff I've been talking about above/below (some of it has been changed since, hence the URL link).
I think this proposal would provide an improved selection of information for the users. My inclination would be go with including loan players and go with all under-23 players, with a combination of table information/prose that marks out players who may have progressed beyond this stage. It'd be good to reach some sort of consensus on this idea, not because I think these sorts of articles are ever going to be completely standardised, but just so whether we agree it's something to work towards. Cheers, HornetMike ( talk) 17:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I have seen a few articles such as 1943 Santos FC season. They're tagged as stubs, but there's only one piece of useful information in the article. Should we be nominating such for deletion? Walter Görlitz ( talk) 20:00, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Please take note that Rita Guarino has just won the Italian women's league as coach of Juventus Women, the female squad of Juventus F.C. of Turin. -- SERGIO aka the Black Cat 08:21, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Where should we add player transfers after a club season is over? (With over I mean all official matches played, not 30 June.) Should we add transfers to the 2017–18 season or to the 2018–19 season? SLBedit ( talk) 19:07, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi. I recently added honours to the honours section of Mikel Arteta, Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, Gabriel Paulista and Santi Cazorla. With each edit I added a source to a video showing the players receiving medals on the podium at Wembley. The videos actually show the players getting handed the medals. However, Mattythewhite reverted them and said "Youtube videos of people holding medals really isn't sufficient". For that reason I want to ask: what is sufficient? Surely evidence of the player receiving a medal means that he got the honour? If not then how do you define a player getting an honour? Because John Terry was not in the squad for the 2012 Champions League final but he has the honour on his page presumably due to the photos/videos showing him receive a medal. Hashim-afc ( talk) 19:01, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Sources like the mirror and goal.com are not reliable, nor are online videos. You need solid, written sources to verify who got a trophy or not. A YouTube video of someone on the winners’ podium doesn’t mean anything. If you can find official club sourcing or reliable sources like you did with arteta then they can stand, otherwise there is no concrete proof. Also, isn’t this like the 5th time recently that the same thread has been made? It’s even listed above at the top of the page in a separate post! Davefelmer ( talk) 12:38, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Pictures of people with medals aren't conclusive or reliable of them actually receiving an award. We need something firmer. That's basic stuff. Giant Snowman 17:22, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
I added this from FourFourTwo as evidence that Alan Hansen got a League Cup medal in 1982 although he missed the final. I take it this is OK as it is a reliable source, and although it's an interview we shouldn't assume people lie about such trivial things. He mentions they're all on display at Liverpool's museum so a source from there might back it up. Harambe Walks ( talk) 15:56, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Users involved are TPTB ( talk · contribs) and 8Dodo8 ( talk · contribs). Edit warring started on 11 September 2017. SLBedit ( talk) 22:50, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
I think at the very least, it should be the main thing in the lede of the history article. Heck, I'd argue Steaua București needs to be edited from a disambiguation page, into an article (Or WP:OUTLINE) regarding the court case/history dispute. I don't think this really is an arguement regarding the champions league template, it needs to be looked at more objectively to avoid confusion, which I still have. Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 10:44, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
The short version is, CSA Steaua (the army sports club) owned the football team until 1998, then separated it into an affiliated non-profit of some kind, dodgy businessman Becali got involved and in 2003 turned it into a private enterprise run by him without consent from the army, courts have decided that current 'Steaua' has no rights to the name and that's why they are now called FCSB in the Europa League etc. Meanwhile the army restarted their football team (new CSA Steaua) last year in the bottom tier.
The dispute is over who own the impressive history and honours prior to 2003; both teams claim them on their websites but to be honest, in my opinion neither has a particularly good good claim: if FCSB has been ruled a different club, how can they claim honours won before their existence, and the new CSA is only one year old, so can they really claim honours won by a team with the same name and parent organisation which ceased activity 15 years earlier (it must have done so if FCSB was the only Steaua team from 2003 until 2017)?
At the moment, UEFA considers FCSB to be the successor to 1986-era Steaua. So that should probably be the article linked to on the template. An alternative could be to link to the History article, but I realise that's a very unusual way to do it. Just to confuse matters further, I understand the army possesses the physical trophies. Crowsus ( talk) 15:57, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Can an admin sort out User:Hashim-afc and User:Davefelmer as they have been on this little edit-war on the Man U article, well that what is seems to me, as they revert each others edits since 14 May. Govvy ( talk) 12:14, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
No idea why this was brought here nor what this notion of a ban is for considering I reverted the other user only once on the United article, and multiple other editors have reverted him in the past few days too so it isnt just between me and him. Evidently from the discussion here as well it isnt seen as a clear-cut issue. In terms of the debate in general, I dont find Number 57's argument for listing a comp under the current name instead of the general name to be true at all as its not like anyone who won the League Cup in the late 90s and early 00s has it listed as the "Worthington Cup" for instance. It is just the League Cup, and personally I feel thats better as its more easily identifiable to readers, who might not know it under all its different incarnations, and thus might not know what is being referred to. Davefelmer ( talk) 16:30, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Oh and furthermore, it is listed as the League Cup for most other clubs including Arsenal and Liverpool. So why should United's say EFL anyways? Whats the consistent standard that should be applied here? Davefelmer ( talk) 16:32, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Deviating from the original discussion, but it's relevant nonetheless. Just had to make some changes to the Arsenal F.C. page, where I've noticed the honours format is very inconsistent. The biggest bugbear I have is the "gold trophy", recognition of a fine achievement but it doesn't need to be mentioned in the lead, and using the same image twice in the article borders on the self-indulgent. Parity please, let the readers think and achievements speak for themselves. Lemonade51 ( talk) 11:14, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
How do I join this group? -- IAWI ( talk) 12:32, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
I have nominated List of Vancouver Whitecaps FC players for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.
I was hoping to get some community input on whether or not this article should be de-listed. This is my first time doing this so I hope I don't annoy too many people by posting here if I'm not supposed to. Cheers. Jay eyem ( talk) 04:19, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
User:Davefelmer keeps adding into the intro of the Paul Scholes article that "he is one of the most decorated footballers in history". In my view such a statement is very vague and not necessary in this intro. Davefelmer supports the use of this term by saying that "7th most trophies out of millions of players" makes him "one of" the most decorated. This logic is flawed in my opinion because then where is the limit? Should the player with the 100th most trophies have that statement too seeing as he is 100th out of millions of players? There were discussions before involving Davefelmer about using this term on the Sir Alex Ferguson page which led to the conclusion that it should not be used. For that reason I removed the term but I've now done so three times and don't want to start an edit war. I'd like to hear your opinions on whether this is actually appropriate for the intro of the article. He also used this term to say that Scholes was the most decorated player in English history, which I've changed to "won more trophies than any other English player in history" as this is much clearer to me and less vague. However can we be sure there aren't amateur English players that have won more trophies? I'd like to hear your thoughts on this as well. Hashim-afc ( talk) 19:19, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm not a fan of using "most successful", "most decorated", etc. in any article as it smacks a bit of WP:PEACOCK. In the instance of Paul Scholes I think that it would be sensible to simply state the major honours he's won in the lead, broken down by competition - I think that he holds the record for number of English league titles won by an English player (and is behind Ryan Giggs for all players) which would definitely be worth noting in the lead (if I'm correct!). Ilikeeatingwaffles ( talk) 15:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
If you are willing to say "most titles out of any English player" why then is "most trophies of any English player" not fair to use? The sources clearly show not to distinguish between certain types of honours ie "major" honours so why is it potentially biased to include that, when every trophy won is counted in the measure? Davefelmer ( talk) 19:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Aggregation of different types of honours into one grand total is confusing, and assumptions are made in it. Just compare eggs with eggs by breaking things down by competition. By the way, most non-league competitions in England do not feature reserve teams - they are all clubs' senior team. Ilikeeatingwaffles ( talk) 08:17, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
You do realize you're arguing that the source includes all trophies while simultaneously arguing it only includes domestic/European trophies (or first-team, top-flight, competitive trophies, as you put it) and leaves out the U-19 trophy. Madshurtie ( talk) 20:50, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Also, I didn't fight to include any honours on the Arsenal F.C. page. Madshurtie ( talk) 20:52, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
In all fairness if you look across the football world, competitive football leagues didn’t even start in most countries until 30-40 years ago. Only in Europe and South America has it been played for a long, long time. North America is a good example of this as the MLS is still in its teenage years I believe and the Canadian league began like 5 years ago. Thus teams from most countries have not been around for long enough to win anywhere near as much in comparison to the best teams in Europe so it would make sense their players are less decorated. There are actually very very few clubs in football and even sport that achieve huge trophy hauls to the levels we are talking about to make it on these lists as players. There are a few highly decorated clubs in Central America though so maybe you could have someone from there, although there doesn’t seem to be a reason to generally doubt the neutrality of this list based on what it says is its criteria for inclusion.
If sportskeeda is an unreliable source for the total count, what about the one Madshurtie introduced above? https://www.football365.com/news/top-20-players-ranked-by-amount-of-club-trophies. Davefelmer ( talk) 12:36, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
On a Scholes front, anyone want to look at his stat box which shows his first time with Utd ending in 2011, and a second period of 2012-13. Now given he played to the end of 2011-2012 season and only re-signed in 2013 this seems incorrect to me? Yes / no? Should in fact be the first period ending in 2012, and second period being a 2013 only? Koncorde ( talk) 01:27, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
After being reverted by User:Kante4 at Dani Ceballos, i was then informed by them that it had been decided (apparently after consideration in the Gareth Bale article) to reinstate honours where a given player is not even part of the matchday squad. We agreed that it would be best to bring the "situation" here.
Can someone please inform me where is the (new) logic in that? Attentively -- Quite A Character ( talk) 20:14, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
User:Kante4, can you please bring more light into the thread? I honestly do not know what to answer User:EchetusXe. -- Quite A Character ( talk) 12:03, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Somehow it's not listed at Bale anymore, but there was a discussion sometime (i am pretty sure...). Kante4 ( talk) 14:51, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Someone added the 2005 supercup to the Lionel Messi article also, despite him not playing in it at all. Shouldn't that be removed? SteamingStars ( talk) 15:07, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.
Portals are being redesigned.
The new design features are being applied to existing portals.
At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{ Transclude lead excerpt}}.
The discussion about this can be found here.
Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.
On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.
Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.
So far, 84 editors have joined.
If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.
If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.
Thank you. — The Transhumanist 07:38, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
I don't know why, but there is some bug were the portal template will affect the reflist template and stop the reflist from splitting into columns. One example is Newcastle United F.C., can someone good with templates have a look thanks. Govvy ( talk) 17:15, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
This is only my second pre-season as an editor so I'm not certain what is accepted and what isn't. A few editors have been reverted for unsourced changes to these persons: Eduardo Berizzo, Cristian Ganea, Ander Capa. Are these club updates with photos sufficient as a source to change their clubs now, although the players were apparently due to move at the end of June? I'm happy to wait but it seems unfair to revert the changes if the information is actually considered to be accurate? Crowsus ( talk) 17:58, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
It seems that the official FA profiles of English international players no longer exist. On most articles of English youth or senior international players there is a link in the external links section to an FA profile, but none seem to be working. Considering this is the source for youth international stats this is a bit of a problem... -- Stuart1234 ( talk) 13:33, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
I was wondering if we could make a project page with a list of sources that shouldn't be used on football articles. Govvy ( talk) 14:09, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
User:SLBedit is removing all the vice captain information from the squads on club articles, there was no consensus or talk regarding removing this information. I like to know who the vice captains are on club articles, I feel this is useful information being removed and this feels very disruptive. I was going to restore all his edits, but I thought this would border on warring with him. Would appreciate some help, cheers. Govvy ( talk) 11:56, 2 June 2018 (UTC)