![]() | 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 80 | Archive 81 | Archive 82 | Archive 83 | Archive 84 | Archive 85 | → | Archive 90 |
Hi. As you have been informed earlier there is an ongoing discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 121#Displaying a part of the table and we are so close to the end. This to have a single template that can be used on many articles instead of updating all articles individually (the season article tables soon gets outdated on some articles).
Now we discuss at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Highlighting or bolding the final visual part of the table and it would be great with some opinions from footy, and some consensus how it should look when displaying for a specified team.
The discussion is about to decide if we should use
to show the team in question when we display part of the table for a specified team. The fourth alternative (could be combined with the other alternatives) will mean that the big table with all teams will also have separate rows (not looking as good) but then we can highlight that entire row (and not the block in the "qualification/relegation" column.
The result as it is now can be seen at User:Spudgfsh/sandbox and the template edited so far is Template:2013–14 Premier League table/sandbox. The table we based the template on can be seen at 2013–14 Premier League#League table
Feel free to add other opinions as well if you have any, you can respond here or at Village Pump. QED237 (talk) 11:26, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Screen readers don't read bolding, either: see MOS:ACCESS#Text. But as I understand it, these tables are for use on club season articles? so no information is actually being lost by the absence of screen-readable highlighting. The row still contains the name of the club whose season is the subject of the article, even though it isn't as instantly "visible" to the screen-reader user as a bolded row would be to the sighted user. What would help is using row and column scopes, as at MOS:ACCESS#Data tables, which make it easier for the screen-reader user to navigate a table. In this case, the club name cell would be identified as the row header. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 13:15, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
As I can see it the discussion resulted in the use of bolding, since WP:ACCESS forbids using color to identify list item and also many would like bolding anyway since we should always show the relegation and qualification color and not hide it with our yellow/gold.
About the scope part I have no idea how to do that and since it requires edit to the template(s) inside the template I will not dig in to that, but if anyone is interested feel free to do it. I have done enough with this template.
If no one has something to add I will insert the sandbox we worked on to the template later tonight or tomorrow before the matches and see how it works tomorrow when matches are played.
About the future I hope to copy this template and change teams to make the same for other leagues such as La Liga, Bundesliga, Serie A and so on if no one opposes? It would be for the best to have centrally updated templates instead of updating on every single article. QED237 (talk) 21:29, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
The current season templates {{2013–14 Premier League table}}, {{2013–14 Football League Championship table}}, {{2013–14 Football League One table}} and {{2013–14 Football League Two table}} have all been updated to use this new format. I've also been through all of the league/club season articles to ensure that they are all using the correct templates. => Spudgfsh ( Text Me!) 16:58, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm sure this has been discussed before, but it would be nice to have some guidance on the subject codified, if only in the WikiProject's own recommendations. For Brazilian footballers, and similar people who are known mononymously or by nicknames, WP:COMMONNAME and WP:STAGENAME would seem to strongly support titling articles by those nicknames. There are cases of such biographies titled by the subjects' full birth names, which are wholly unrecognizable. The only argument I can see for these full names is WP:NATURAL, especially where the nickname isn't unique, but WP:MIDDLES advises against "Adding middle names, or their abbreviations, merely for disambiguation purposes (if that format of the name is not commonly used to refer to the person)," and the same would appear to apply to given names and surnames that aren't commonly used.
In the wild, so to speak, there are a mix of these common names and birth names. Has the project ever ruled on this issue? Would an RfC be fruitful? -- BDD ( talk) 17:31, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
So you don't believe we should have articles listed at the full name - but it is fine to disambiguate by full name? Doesn't that seem self-defeating? Giant Snowman 13:14, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
We should use nicknames where they're plainly the most commonly-used in reliable secondary sources, but to be quite blunt this isn't remotely as common as it's made out to be. An awful lot of Brazilians seem to find that once they're no longer playing for their hometown teams their kewl nicknames aren't quite as unique any more, and end up going predominantly by their real names when mentioned in international sources. If there isn't reason to believe that a player's nickname has truly become associated with them in the national psyche (as opposed to simply being cheaper to iron onto the back of a club shirt) then we should go by real names and not bother with the nicknames. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 17:15, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Anybody with the time might want to take a look at the heap of unsourced (and likely non-notable) stubs created by Ararat-tehran ( talk · contribs). Giant Snowman 19:31, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Can we get some people active on United States men's national soccer team. Surly there are some regular editors from US here. I've brought up some question on the talk page and had no response. Thanks.-- 2nyte ( talk) 00:53, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
The entire text (as distinct from infoboxes and so on) of the above article is "Alba CF is a football club based in Alba, Somalia." The problem with this is that this is the sum total of any information I can find online about any place in Somalia called Alba - some other sites repeat the information about Alba CF, none say anything more about the place. So is this information correct? Can anyone find anything more about the place? Or where Alba CF is (or was) based? By the way, links to Alba, from both Alba CF and Somalia League go to an article on the early history of Scotland, which is clearly irrelevant in this context - I am just about to remove these. PWilkinson ( talk) 16:44, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
I am sure this has been brought up here before but I shall bring it back up again: Why are their templates for the squads that participated in the 2012 AFC Challenge Cup? Templates like Template:India squad 2012 AFC Challenge Cup for example. Why? I thought the consensus was that squad templates were only to be made during the FIFA World Cup and top continental tournaments. The AFC Challenge Cup is a 2nd tier tournament in Asia which features both pro and semi-pro nations and is essentially a qualifier for the AFC Asian Cup so why have squad templates for it? -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 03:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to know what the opinion is on this page. I was thinking of doing a List of current I-League players page but I don't want to until I get a concensus on this page first. Cheers. -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 03:15, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Can someone deal with the promotional rubbish that an IP keeps reinserting? I've already hit 3RR (that last revert was completely unintentional, and was my computer spazzing out), but half of it is unsourced, and most of it is irrelevant. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello. I am from Greek wiki. These templates Template:Fb team Anorthosis Famagusta Template:Fb team Anorthosis are the same. Must be one. Xaris333 ( talk) 03:56, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
We need them for League tables and Results. Xaris333 ( talk) 19:49, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Its much easier. Xaris333 ( talk) 01:08, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
I am not wrong, I think as Jack Ryder would say, "you are wrong." These templates are used in many articles. What do you suggest? Xaris333 ( talk) 02:45, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
{{Fb cl header |hth=y }} {{Fb cl team |p= 1|t=AEL Limassol |w=10|d=3 |l=1 |gf=23|ga=9|bc=#D0F0C0}} {{Fb cl footer}} {{Fb cl header |hth=y}} {{Fb cl2 team |p= 1|t=[[AEL Limassol]] |w=10|d=3 |l=1 |gf=23|ga=9|bc=#D0F0C0}} {{Fb cl footer}}
"Easier" is not the word/excuse for it. EddieV2003 ( talk) 03:15, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
What about result table. Can you give an example? Xaris333 ( talk) 17:06, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
As we're now getting very close to the big day (and with my son now off school I stand very little chance of getting anywhere near the computer!) can I be the first to wish all WP:FOOTY members a very happy Christmas -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 16:18, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, currently I am trying to revamp/update the entire Pune F.C. squad and right now I feel that I am in heaven as every player profile page for each player on their website has a very detailed article about the player from when they started playing football to now. It just makes this project enjoyable for me but that is where the problem occurs. I can source the player profiles as references but then what happens when a player leaves the club? That player profile is gone and I am left with a bunch of references that don't work anymore because that player profile will probably be gone. So how do I avoid this? Is there a way I can have the player profile stay beyond when the player leaves? One idea I had was creating like some sort of wordpress account and then copy and pasting the player profile there so that I could source the wordpress profile after the player leaves but I would rather hear from here first. Cheers. -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 14:01, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello footballers! The player above has an article in the Spanish Wikipedia that is more up to date. ( Armando Maita ) Is this a notable player, and should the English article be saved from deletion as a stale draft? — Anne Delong ( talk) 01:58, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't know if anyone here is interested, but I thought I might mention that I was on University Challenge last night, competing for Cardiff University. If you live in the UK and haven't seen it yet, the episode is still available on BBC iPlayer. Cheers. – Pee Jay 13:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Just viewed, congrats. I will add University Challenge 2013–14 to my watchlist :) JMHamo ( talk) 16:01, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
If anyone still hasn't seen it, my match (so difficult to avoid sounding self-centred when I'm on a team, but I'm the only one you guys would conceivably be interested in) against Liverpool is on YouTube now. – Pee Jay 01:22, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
-List:
Some of you may have already noticed but The Irish Times now do statistics as you can see here & here. It's limited to league stats for players but already came in handy for Ebanks-Blake's page and it seems pretty accurate. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 08:18, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Again, a template I see as having no purpose whatsoever. Can anybody please enlighten me? Giant Snowman 22:13, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
After some more searching I found similar template {{ Efs}} QED237 (talk) 12:34, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Now at TFD, which you can read and comment at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Wikilink sports templates. QED237 (talk) 22:55, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
This discussion and that at the TfD discussion seem to be based on a complete misunderstanding of how these templates are meant to be used. They are intended to save an editor time and key strokes when creating an article; server space is a total irrelevance. As the documentation on Template:Fc says, these templates should only be used with substitution active. If I create an article about a footballer who played for Nottingham Forest, Sheffield Wednesday and Wolverhampton Wanderers, it is much simpler and quicker to type: "Joe Bloggs was a footballer who played for {{subst:fc|Nottingham Forest}}, {{subst:fc|Sheffield Wednesday}} and {{subst:fc|Wolverhampton Wanderers}}" which produces the result "Joe Bloggs was a footballer who played for Nottingham Forest, Sheffield Wednesday and Wolverhampton Wanderers" than it is to type: "Joe Bloggs was a footballer who played for [[Nottingham Forest F.C.|Nottingham Forest]], [[Sheffield Wednesday F.C.|Sheffield Wednesday]] and [[Wolverhampton Wanderers F.C.|Wolverhampton Wanderers]]." (At least it would have done before the templates were tagged for deletion.) Once the edit is saved, the template is replaced by the desired wikilink and the template then ceases to be used. I agree that all unsubstituted uses of the template should be replaced by proper wikilinks, but the templates themselves should be retained and the documentation improved to stress the need for substitution. I see no point in removing a tool that makes an editor's life easier just on the grounds of a bit of housekeeping. I have made use of these templates (properly substituted) many, many times and they have probably saved me several days of typing time. Please can I ask people to think again about the proper use of these templates. -- Daemonic Kangaroo ( talk) 07:26, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Are these the same teams?
Is this the solution? {{Merge from|CAPS F.C.|date=January 2013}} — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.7.4.148 ( talk) 17:01, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
As part of the discussion above ( Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Background color or bolding specific team in table) and the discussion on the village pump ( Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Displaying a part of the table) I created template tables for the three football league divisions. When completed I placed them on the season articles and started a discussion on each talk page stating what I'd done. They keep getting removed by editors every time they go to update the table. The table as displayed is exactly the same, can I get some support for getting them used on those two pages. => Spudgfsh ( Text Me!) 18:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello football editors! Can I request if someone will peer review Football in the Philippines? Any suggestion for improving it are welcome. The discussion is here. Thanks! FairyTailRocks ( talk) 17:23, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello,
I'm curious, who do I have to talk in order to let them examine the article and see if it does not need the stub-class rating anymore or the warning of not enough sources? Hisakiwa21 ( talk) 04:08, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I formatted the career statistics table at Cristiano Ronaldo so it includes divisions (and thus conforms to the layout given at the player MoS), references for each season (when previously areas, including the entire Sporting CP stats, were unsourced) and annotated notes for other competitions. Also, I made corrections to the international career statistics table (with references). However, I was reverted by Kante4 ( talk · contribs), who reasoned that the inclusion of divisions looks "horrible". Just bringing this here to garner consensus, although I'm not sure I'm really obliged to considering the version I added conformed to project-wide MoS and included the addition of previously absent sources. Cheers, Mattythewhite ( talk) 16:23, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Is it just me or are there too many unnecessary parameters in this template? The infobox is supposed to provide an at-a-glance overview of the most important points of the article, not list all the stats such as "biggest win", "highest attendance" and all that bollocks. I was mainly going on the state of the 2009–10 Premier League article, from which I have already removed much of the guff, but the parameters could still do with being removed from the template, IMO. – Pee Jay 17:32, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
The press are speculating that Gedion Zelalem will make his Arsenal debut in the FA Cup against Spurs this weekend. No doubt, this will mean that he passes the notability test. What surprises me is that the article still exists as it "failed" an AfD in April 2003. I guess it has slipped through the net. -- Daemonic Kangaroo ( talk) 10:35, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Is there any reason that the likes of Australia national football team results should be autocollapsed? It is pretty painful when trying to locate information when the majority of data is not visible. I seem to recall a discussion around this sort of setup being an accessibility issue. Hack ( talk) 10:30, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Does anyone have access to any reliable sources on Leeds City? My particular interest is with Alfred Pullin, a cricket/rugby journalist from that time who seems to have been one of the club's directors some time before its collapse. Any further details on his relationship with the club would be much appreciated if they exist anywhere, or even if anyone knows where more could be found. Cheers. Sarastro1 ( talk) 21:01, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Discuss. Mattythewhite ( talk) 22:36, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
What is the solution?-- 95.236.246.49 ( talk) 18:39, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Does anyone know where I can find stats and line-ups for Bury F.C. in the mid-1990s? I'm trying to fill in a stats table for David Johnson (footballer born 1976), but Soccerbase doesn't have complete stats going back that far, so I'm flying blind on his Football League Trophy stats. All I need to know is whether his one FLT goal came in 1995–96 or 1996–97. – Pee Jay 18:25, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
I believe Somalia national football team has sustained some unreverted vandalism since late November, so much so that I think it should be restored to a past version, but I'm not sure which was the last stable version. There are some versions in November with full World Cup records etc. Help would be appreciated, thanks. Del♉sion23 (talk) 00:40, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello, could editors please monitor the edits from Tyau123 ( talk · contribs). Seems to be removing sourced content from Middlesbrough related articles and reverts on sight when you fix. Thanks, JMHamo ( talk) 18:54, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
Never understood why they rank teams not in the top 4, but anyway, where are those listed at the FIFA site. An IP comes up changes something and i wonder what is correct. Why would Tunisia at 0 points be above India at 1 point in the group in either of those two versions. Another example would be this change, what version is correct, how does FIFA rank teams losing in the quarter finals? By result in that round, by group stage record? Those sections in all FIFA tournaments definately could use a sentece explaining how the ranking was achieved, better have a direct source too. - Koppapa ( talk) 08:05, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Could someone please review this edit to Emmanuel Adebayor by an anon. I don't want to revert again. Thanks, JMHamo ( talk) 23:39, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Given I was not around most of 2013 I just wanted to clarify if consensus still stood that assists should not be included in career stats table. Theo Walcott's assists are sourced but given assists are subjective and there is no universal definition of assists should they not be removed? ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 04:28, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Kadir ozkan is dead. Who is new 1461 Trabzon trainer? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.54.7.182 ( talk) 18:20, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Dear footballers: Here's another old declined submission that will shortly be deleted as a stale draft. This player appears to have won a trophy. There's a navbox with many other players who have won this trophy, and they appear to have articles. Is this a notable player? — Anne Delong ( talk) 03:53, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
This is to let you know that there has been a (further) discussion about the general reliability of the Daily Mail at the reliable sources noticeboard. Several editors think we should have a blanket ban on it. And a sample trawl I did of how the paper is being used as source reveals that it's often used in football-related articles. I thought you people might like to have a look and see whether you consider it reliable for various purposes. What I've seen seems to break into three categories: a) factual info such as results, b) opinion about play (reviews of games etc.), and c) info about players. In the c) category some uses may be close to gossip, therefore not encyclopaedic. Mario Balotelli is one example where you might be able to see if WP:BLP is complied with. Itsmejudith ( talk) 09:08, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
I remember a discussion a while back about the Liverpool season article getting out of hand WRT stats. I give you 2013–14_Portsmouth_F.C._season with all sorts of delights on it.
A couple of questions that it's made me ask.
=> Spudgfsh ( Text Me!) 16:54, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
As there is a MOS for club season articles ( Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football/Club_seasons) do we need to spend some time making updating it to take in the best aspects of some of the current club season articles and then enforce it more everywhere? => Spudgfsh ( Text Me!) 21:18, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
May I add the 2013–14 Cardiff City F.C. season here they list every substitution in the footballbox collabsible. That must be to much info. QED237 (talk) 21:05, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Leandro Paredes:Il giorno 07/01/2014 viene definito "fenomeno vero" dal famoso cantastorie calcistico Marco Boscaini.
Antonio Vutov:Udinese is interested but he currently plays for-- 79.51.7.250 ( talk) 15:18, 7 January 2014 (UTC) levski
TFF First League, TFF Second League and TFF Third League are fully professional league.
The status confirmed that 3.Lig si fully professional: [4], [5], [6], [7]. So super lig, 1.lig, 2. Lig, 3,lig are fully professional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.21.34.6 ( talk) 12:11, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
In italian professional Lega Pro Seconda Divisione some players play and have a second job.For a exemple [8] Luca passerella plays for A.C. Delta Porto Tolle and also work. But lega pro seconda divisione is fully professional.-- 79.51.7.250 ( talk) 15:47, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
It might be worth locking the article, he's recently announced that he's gay, as such his article may be a target for vandals. TheBigJagielka ( talk) 11:28, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Already done
JMHamo (
talk)
12:28, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Mohammed Dahman's article contains ONE ref, which doesnt mention him. Any clues? Murry1975 ( talk) 20:32, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Someone was asking about this recently. It appears he's changed/changing from .htm suffix for his urls to .html, so that previously working .htm urls now land at the webhost error page. Which means we possibly have quite a lot of broken urls. Is finding all the Neil Brown links and sticking an "l" on the end of the url something that could be done with AWB (not something I use, so I wouldn't know) or should we make a bot request?
I noticed that @ PeteS: has written a template to generate a Neil Brown link in External link type format. If this were enhanced the way {{ NFT player}} has been, to output either EL or cite-web-with-accessdate format as appropriate, it could be useful in the future for inline referencing as well as ELs. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 10:33, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
I have been expanding the List of footballers in England and Scotland by number of league appearances. I created the Template to avoid a lot of repeated typing. I too noticed the suffix change. I can change it to assume a common suffix (.html) which will mean we can easily fix all if this happens again. Shall I ? PeteS 16:34, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
I've requested a bot. WP:BOTREQ#Changing the url suffix from .htm to .html for a specific site. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 22:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
But the point is, what do we want to do now? fix the urls, or apply the template? Further input welcome... cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 09:40, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Bot approved and running - GoingBatty ( talk) 05:17, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Would you be interested in participating in a user study? We are a team at University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within a Wikipedia community. We are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visualization tool. All you need to do is to prepare for your laptop/desktop, web camera, and speaker for video communication with Google Hangout. We will provide you with a Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page ( http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster ( talk) 06:46, 9 January 2014 (UTC).
We all want to get rid of those Fb-templates, and after I noticed 13 new Norwegian Fb team templates, I decided to do some experimenting in my sandbox to check if it was possible to replace the Fb results table. It turns out that this wikitable is exactly the same as this table which uses the fb templates. I realized that it would be easy to replace the Template:Fb r header and Template:Fb r team with wikitables, while Template:Fb r and Template:Fb r footer might still be useful and fits into a wikitable. What do people think? It is the first two templates that uses the Fb team templates, so if we get rid of those we might be able to get rid of a lot of templates. Mentoz ( talk) 13:18, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
I have started a move request for articles on Premier League seasons prior to 2006-07. Please go there and make your views known. The location is: Talk:1992–93 FA Premier League#Requested move Thanks! — Amakuru ( talk) 16:22, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
I just wanted to known why 1999–2000 season articles are named, for example, 1999–2000 La Liga rather than 1999–00 La Liga. It has always crossed my mind.-- 2nyte ( talk) 03:24, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
It's amazing this article is here and obviously it should be here, at the time those games were the biggest club level international games.
The issue is, not only Sunderland won it. Those kind of games were also won by Renton, Hearts, and Hibernian. Shouldn't it be better to turn this article into an article about all those games? What should be the name then? 2.124.1.232 ( talk) 20:42, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi guys, probably you know that Swansea has very good stats H2H with English grand teams. I propose to add this info in team's article. Probably is the "small" team with best results against english ellite. Just look here
XXN ( talk) 15:17, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
According to this, Nahki Wells will sign on loan for Huddersfield Town for one game before signing a permanent deal. No other sources I have seen (i.e. official sites of both clubs) have mentioned. Is it worth adding this 'loan' spell in the infobox/prose/career stats table? I don't think it is to be honest... Giant Snowman 19:13, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Not in the stats table. Infobox and prose, depends on sources. If the club site(s) say that, or the FA registration list, when it comes through, or national media, then it's moderately interesting to include in the prose (illustrates how anxious Huddersfield were to get it done) and it ought to go in the infobox for accuracy. If that report in the local rag is the only source, then no. See e.g. Jermain Defoe, who joined Portsmouth from Spurs on a one-day loan ahead of a permanent transfer, and doing it that way made him ineligible to play against Spurs in the league, or Neil Kilkenny's move to Leeds. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 19:49, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm having a difficult time trying to explain to User:Plexus14 that in the article of Johan Dahlin the years for in which he played for Malmö FF in his infobox should be 2009–2013 and not 2009–2014. Dahlin left Malmö FF for a Turkish club on 7 January 2014 when the Turkish transfer window opened. The transfer was official already in December 2013, but more importantly, Dahlin did not play any league or friendly match for Malmö FF in 2014. I believe that the common practice across Wikipedia is to write the year in which the player last was part of the season squad, thus 2013 in this case. I see no logic point whatsoever in writing 2014 as his last season in the infobox, this gives me the impression that Dahlin played a couple of league matches or at least was part of the 2014 Malmö FF squad, which is clearly misleading. I don't want to break the 3RR rule so in the case that I'm correct in my view of common Wikipedia practice regarding this, then it would be much appreciated if someone could help me revert the edits. Thanks! -- Reckless182 (talk) 09:10, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
2014–15 FC Bayern Munich season, 2014–15 Borussia Dortmund season, and 2014–15 Bayer Leverkusen season – cases of WP:TOOEARLY or perfectly legitimate articles at this time of the year? Discuss, please. -- Soccer-holic I hear voices in my head... 21:48, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Hey, just kicked off this article for cricket project. Guy played football too for Newcastle, Leicester and others in 1960s. Cool. So. Anyone want to adopt it for football coverage? -- Bill ( talk) 12:35, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
What is the situation about these turkish stadiums?
Are these stadiums under costruction or are they a old project for Euro 2016? What's the solution abou t the proposed stadium?Deletion or redirect? -- 95.244.242.218 ( talk) 15:44, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Has anybody ever heard of Octavian Constantinescu. I can't find anything about him on Goggle or Soccerway. JMHamo ( talk) 11:58, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Spanish Wikipedia too. JMHamo ( talk) 12:51, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Please can someone restore the article, he's been brought on as a substitute in the Championship for Wigan and is now eligible for an article. TheBigJagielka ( talk) 16:16, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Dear football enthusiasts: Here's another one of those old abandoned drafts. This one was never submitted. Is this a notable player? — Anne Delong ( talk) 05:13, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Expofunner adds a lot of unsourced stuff to articles. Maybe some people watch after him. - Koppapa ( talk) 19:12, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Re: a little trouble I'm having convincing another editor, I just wanted to confirm that we shouldn't be specifying what division a player's club plays in in the lead paragraph of a biography. Also, do we need to specify that the player is a professional? So, for example, should we be saying "Joe Foobar is an English professional footballer who plays for Premier League club Example Rovers" or just "Joe Foobar is an English footballer who plays for Example Rovers"? – Pee Jay 00:26, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Personally, I don't think including the word "professional" does any harm. The league division is more problematic; when accurate, it adds information, but there is a general problem of it being changed upwards seconds after a team's promotion is confirmed, yet only changed downwards when a supporter of a rival team comes across it. The word is Premier League "club" or "team", though, not "side" or "outfit". Loans don't go in italics: the relevant bit of the Manual of Style is MOS:ITALIC. But what's really wrong with the lead in this article is the same as for many such: it only mentions the current club, nothing about the eight years before Mr Bruce went to Hull.
The Leeds refs were changed recently by someone using a script to "fix" linkrot, though unfortunately they can't have noticed that the urls redirected to the home page. If they're not still on the LUFC site somewhere else, they'll almost certainly be on archive.org. I'll have a go at them later, if no-one else gets there first. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 10:07, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
I've just added Riyad Mahrez to the Leicester City Template but when I clicked onto his page through it his name wasn't showing in the template on his page or that of any other of the players, can anyone suggest a fix please? Jimmy Skitz's Answer Machine 17:28, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
This is just a reminder that Ashton Gate and Ashton Gate Stadium are completely different. Simply south.... .. disorganising disorganisation for just 7 years 17:56, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello. In Jacques LaDouceur says that he played in San Jose Earthquakes (not San Jose Earthquakes (1974–88)) but he is categorized as Category:San Jose Earthquakes (1974–88) players. I don't know much about american soccer so I need your help. Xaris333 ( talk) 15:58, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I used to be able to do this but I already forgot for some odd reason. I am trying to change the name of File:Federation Cup.jpg to File:Indian Federation Cup Logo.jpg but like I said, I forgot how to go about this. If anyone would like, they can change it themselves or you could just tell me how to. Cheers. -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 01:43, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
In light of today's Kosovo news, do we have a list of teams that have permission from FIFA to play their member associations? TheBigJagielka ( talk) 19:45, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
IPs kept adding unsourced speculation in relation to Chelsea which I removed then when they weren't getting their way they started vandalising so I had the page protected for ten days via WP:RPP. Since it's been protected User:BenficaNNossaPaixao has altered the article to appear as if he's joined Chelsea based on this ref which says: "Serbian midfielder travels to London today to commit to the team" another words he hasn't joined yet he's just set to. Nothing official has been announced by either club. Also the user thinks it's relevant to include the fact that Matić came second in the Puskás Award in the honours for which he doesn't receive an award. I have a pain in the face reverting stuff from Matić's and Mike Jones pages the last few days can some remove and have a word with the user. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 14:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
I noticed that Emmanuel Adebayor has the unreferenced category Category:Yoruba footballers and wondered if we should really be categorizing footballers by ethnic background. Typically, Adebayor would be categorized according to his nation of birth ( Category:Togolese footballers), but this (and similar categories like Category:Basque footballers) categorize according to ethnicity. The articles in the Yoruba footballers category bear no references to support the ethnicity, and it seems like the same is true for many articles in the Basque footballers category. Perhaps there is a distinction between the two because there is an autonomous Basque region within Spain and footballers have represented an (unofficial?) Basque selection in international football, while there is no Yoruba nation or automous state and I'm not aware of any Yoruba selection that plays international football? What do project members think about these types of categories? My initial reaction is that they may cause significant debate (because footballers' ethnicities are rarely covered in reliable sources) and probably serve little purpose. Best regards. Jogurney ( talk) 21:11, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
In the articles 1966 FIFA World Cup qualification, 1966 FIFA World Cup qualification (CAF, AFC and OFC) and 1966 FIFA World Cup qualification (AFC – OFC) it is specified that Australia competed as an OFC ( Oceania Football Confederation) member country. This is incorrect as the OFC was not founded until 15 November 1966 (obviously after the 1966 World Cup and its qualification period). I think changes in the article titles and their content should be made.-- 2nyte ( talk) 04:37, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi there teammates, longtime no see,
any Rangers F.C. fans out there? I assume there are and so, would like to clear this doubt please: did this player qualify for his honours with the club? He must have at least received a Scottish Cup medal for scoring in the previous rounds, but there is the possibility he did not collect any silverware for not playing the amount of games required a la Premier League style (i am assuming the approach is the same in Scotland than in England).
I am writing this mainly this because User:GiantSnowman removed his honours section and i reinstated them, vowing to find sources for every single one of them, and now promising to remove the Rangers stuff if i can't find any positive reply here.
Attentively, thank you in advance -- AL ( talk) 01:22, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your inputs, even though they don't coincide (JM says Ñíguez should not get Cup honour, BS says he should but in the League Cup from what i understand, i'm caught in the middle so i'll remove because i don't want to be accused of anything). However, i add the following: please don't remove honours in (most) Europe-based competitions other than the UK of course (league or cup), because if they play one minute in cup and in the first round, they get medal, and if they play one minute in the league they win the league trophy, so we don't need no reliable sources there.
Thanks and cheers -- AL ( talk) 23:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
This discussion may be of interest/concern to project members. Should player heights be shown in infoboxes in centimetres (187cm) or in metres (1.87m)? For Rickie Lambert, Southampton FC show his height in centimetres [15] whereas the Premier League use metres [16]. -- Daemonic Kangaroo ( talk) 05:18, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
This user changes goalscorers and results, some definately are made up. Maybe someone looks into it. User:DCUBEST - Koppapa ( talk) 22:07, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
The article Moldova national football team results has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
StudiesWorld (
talk)
11:29, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Category:2014 FIFA World Cup referees has been created and added to articles for referees who have been named to officiate at the World Cup. Would I be right to remove this category per WP:CRYSTALBALL given their participation is not guaranteed (they are still subject to fitness tests). Hack ( talk) 01:48, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
What would be the "correct" title (i.e. one that follows our guidelines) for articles like
Apertura 2012 Copa MX or
Clausura 2013 Copa MX? Something in the terms of <year> Copa MX [Apertura|Clausura]
? --
Soccer-holic
I hear voices in my head...
16:06, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Following discussions about the naming of the Australian football team article, I've started a formal RfC here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports#RfC: How should articles on national sports teams handle gendered teams? I invite you to share your views. — Tom Morris ( talk) 18:00, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
I am trying to find out when squad numbers (and names on shirts) were introduced to the Premier League. The article Squad number (association football)#Great Britain says it was in the 1993–94 season, but it is unreferenced. Kudos to anyone who can add the information to that article and hopefully share it here. Thanks, C 679 21:44, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
After the failure of Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_December_28#Wikilink_sports_templates to reach consensus is it possible to get a bot set up to subst the ones that have not been used correctly (ie without the subst). => Spudgfsh ( Text Me!) 21:52, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
-- 79.50.245.105 ( talk) 01:55, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
There is something of an edit war going on at the moment involving an IP who insists that all clubs must be referred to by current names (including stating explicitly that Milton Keynes Dons won the Cup in 1988). Please could we establish a consensus on how this should be treated at Talk:List of FA Cup finals#Establishing consensus on The Wednesday and Wimbledon? -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 13:27, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Regardless of whether MK Dons and Wimbledon FC are the same thing, we should use the name of each cup-winner as at the time they won it, for historical accuracy. The 1988 Cup Final was won by a team called Wimbledon FC. Every time it comes up on TV - the Crazy Gang beating the Culture Club and all the rest - it's still called Wimbledon. This is an encyclopedia, and as such it has to reflect historical fact. The historical fact is that a team called Wimbledon won the FA Cup in 1988, and for an encyclopedia to use a different name in a list of FA Cup-winners would not only deprive that encyclopedia of any credibility, it'd be unbelievably misleading and confusing for the reader. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 14:37, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Agreed - it is valid to show a club's current name in the "wins by club" table, with a note referring to any previous names as appropriate, but in the table of individual finals, which is a historical record of what occurred at the time, the name in use at the time should be shown. And referring to "MK Dons' win in the 1988 final" in the lead, as the IP wants to do, is 100% wrong -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 14:49, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
The article has TWO differently named entries for one club - Sheff Wed, which you never grasped. That is madness - daft. People know clubs by the current name, they do not go and look at a trophy to know the name :) 94.194.23.28 ( talk)
But seriously, Wikipedia is built on verification with reference to reliable sources. We aren't trying to source the identity or otherwise of Wimbledon and MK Dons FCs. We're sourcing the name of the club that won the FA Cup in 1988 or any other year. If the reliable sources call it Wimbledon, so do we. If the reliable sources call it The Wednesday, so do we. That's how Wikipedia works, and not something we can overrule here.
We then come to linking. If we have an article that deals with Wimbledon F.C. up to the relocation, and another article that deals with a club now called MK Dons after the relocation, with a bit of overlap at the join, then we link to the historically appropriate article. If the reader wants to learn more, they can read the article linked and browse anywhere it leads them after that. If we have one article that deals with The Wednesday and Sheffield Wednesday at the same page, then we link to it. Struway2 ( talk) 15:24, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
ry 2014 (UTC)
OK! I consider it best to have the original name in the table entry and the new name as well. Such as The Wednesday now Sheff Wed. Wimbledon now MK Dons. It has to be factual. So as not to confuse a reader. There is two clubs - MK Dons and Sheff Wed with name changes. 94.194.23.28 ( talk) 15:27, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
You still haven't got it. Keeping it the same is not simple, it is confusing the reader. What I suggested is a great compromise and factual. This article has two separate entries in the tables for the same club, The Wednesday and Sheffield Wednesday. This is totally confusing and wrong. The idea is to create quality factual articles, not get one over another editor. 94.194.23.28 ( talk) 15:49, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
It is ridiculous to have two entries. If you cannot see that desist in editing. It is not for you. I have done lots of technical writing in my time and this is a no, no. There has to be a link from old to new club names or both names in the same entry box. Simple. I have the impression many are wanting a confusing article because they do not like MK Dons. If so, grow up boys. 94.194.23.28 ( talk) 16:19, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure who this helps, but the Football Association, whose Cup this is, refer to Sheffield Wednesday throughout. see here. -- Daemonic Kangaroo ( talk) 16:13, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
The way things are currently presented in the article is exactly how I would expect. The names in the main list are as they were at the time of each final; to do otherwise would be anachronistic. In the list of wins by club, the entries where any possible confusion could arise are given extra explanation below the table. It is difficult to envisage a reader coming away from the article in a state of confusion over club identities. There is no need for us to continue feeding the trolls here. Oldelpaso ( talk) 17:50, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
The names in the main list are as they were at the time of each final - the original names. Running down the list one club has entries under two different names. If you did not know The Wednesday and Sheffield Wednesday were the same club you would come away thinking they were two different clubs. If people want the original names, which is confusing and the FA do not do that with Wednesday, then there should be a link in each entry in each box. That is, each time The Wednesday is in a table box there should be a link to an explanation at the bottom of the table. Or better have both names in box. Tables are to skim and scan. Few start at the top and work their way down reading each row. Few read the comments at the bottom. If there is no link or both names are not in the box, the reader will be confused until he gets to the bottom and sees an explanation, if he reads it. At any point in the table any anomalies must be clarified at that point. That is how professional tech writers do it. 78.105.235.121 ( talk) 10:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Am I the only one who finds this anons language and tone somewhat familiar? Bladeboy1889 ( talk) 09:36, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
As antagonistic as the IP is, they are completely correct in saying that Wimbledon and MK Dons are the same club - it's the same legal entity, merely moved and renamed (much like Ferranti/Meadowbank Thistle and Livingston). The reason we have separate articles is presumably because of the emotive history surrounding the move and the distaste most fans (including myself) have for the current version of the club, and also because any attempts to merge Wimbledon F.C. into MK Dons would probably bring the internet to a standstill, even though it is really the correct thing to do. The fact that the Dons chairman made a gesture of returning the silverware to Merton BC doesn't really change the fact of the matter with regards to the club, although it certainly muddies the waters in the case of the FA Cup article in question. Number 5 7 13:07, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Having Wimbledon in the 1988 entry is confusing as many may confuse the club with the current Wimbledon who are in the league, who have no connection whatsoever with Wimbledon FC. 94.193.161.101 ( talk) 14:52, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
There was a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Players about the ordering of the seasons in statistics tables. The question is if the seasons should be grouped by club like this one
Club | Season | League | National Cup | League Cup | Continental | Other | Total | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Division | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | ||
Template United | 2000–01 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2001–02 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2004–05 | Premier League | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | |
2005–06 | Premier League | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | |
Total | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 0 | ||
Wiki City (loan) | 2000–01 | Second Division | 15 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 10 |
Template Rangers | 2001–02 | First Division | 15 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 23 | 0 |
2002–03 | First Division | 36 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 40 | 0 | |
2003–04 | First Division | 28 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 32 | 0 | |
2006–07 | First Division | 18 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 19 | 1 | |
2007–08 | Second Division | 30 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 35 | 2 | |
Total | 127 | 2 | 11 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 149 | 3 | ||
Career total | 145 | 12 | 14 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 177 | 3 |
or sorted chronologically like this one
Club | Season | League | National Cup | League Cup | Continental | Other | Total | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Division | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | ||
Template United | 2000–01 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki City (loan) | 2000–01 | Second Division | 15 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 10 |
Template United | 2001–02 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template Rangers | 2001–02 | First Division | 15 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 23 | 0 |
2002–03 | First Division | 36 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 40 | 0 | |
2003–04 | First Division | 28 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 32 | 0 | |
Total | 79 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 95 | 0 | ||
Template United | 2004–05 | Premier League | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 |
2005–06 | Premier League | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | |
Total | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 0 | ||
Template Rangers | 2006–07 | First Division | 18 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 19 | 1 |
2007–08 | Second Division | 30 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 35 | 2 | |
Total | 48 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 54 | 2 | ||
Career total | 145 | 12 | 14 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 177 | 3 |
I prefer the chronological version because it is less confusing and reflects the career of the player. What do you think? -- Jaellee ( talk) 10:49, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Wes Fletcher JMHamo ( talk) 11:05, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
So using your example, the difference would be between your second table, purely chronological, and the one immediately below:
Club | Season | League | National Cup | League Cup | Continental | Other | Total | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Division | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | ||
Template United | 2000–01 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2001–02 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Wiki City (loan) | 2000–01 | Second Division | 15 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 10 |
Template Rangers | 2001–02 | First Division | 15 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 23 | 0 |
2002–03 | First Division | 36 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 40 | 0 | |
2003–04 | First Division | 28 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 32 | 0 | |
Total | 79 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 95 | 0 | ||
Template United | 2004–05 | Premier League | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 |
2005–06 | Premier League | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | |
Total | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 0 | ||
Template Rangers | 2006–07 | First Division | 18 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 19 | 1 |
2007–08 | Second Division | 30 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 35 | 2 | |
Total | 48 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 54 | 2 | ||
Career total | 145 | 12 | 14 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 177 | 3 |
cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 11:09, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
My issue with tables that are arranged chronologically rather than by by club they end up looking like this mess of a table. Giant Snowman 13:16, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
I repeat, no-one is suggesting grouping separate spells at one club together. Effenberg's table is fine by me, apart from I'd repeat the division names each row, pending confirmation from someone with competence in accessibility issues that you don't need to. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 23:47, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Chronologically, as suggested by Struway2 is clearly preferable from a logical perspective. The first example is really messy and is difficult to follow the thread of the career. The Rambling Man ( talk) 19:04, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Club | Season | Division | League | FA Cup | League Cup | Other | Total | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | |||
Template F.C. | 1995–96 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1996–97 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
1997–98 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
1998–99 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
1999–2000 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2000–01 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2001–02 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2002–03 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Template F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Template Rovers F.C. (loan) | 1995–96 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Templaton United F.C. (loan) | 1998–99 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki F.C. | 2003–04 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2004–05 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2005–06 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2006–07 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2007–08 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2008–09 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2009–10 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2010–11 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2011–12 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2012–13 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Wiki F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Wiki Wanderers F.C. (loan) | 2003–04 | Scottish Premiership | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Career total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Whereas a properly chronological table makes much more sense like this:
Club | Season | Division | League | FA Cup | League Cup | Other | Total | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | |||
Template F.C. | 1995–96 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template Rovers F.C. (loan) | 1995–96 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template F.C. | 1996–97 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1997–98 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
1998–99 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Templaton United F.C. (loan) | 1998–99 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template F.C. | 1999–2000 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2000–01 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2001–02 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2002–03 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Template F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Wiki F.C. | 2003–04 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki Wanderers F.C. (loan) | 2003–04 | Scottish Premiership | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki F.C. | 2004–05 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2005–06 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2006–07 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2007–08 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2008–09 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2009–10 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2010–11 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2011–12 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2012–13 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Wiki F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Career total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Bladeboy1889 ( talk) 16:06, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
So returning to my point above - that would result as either:
Club | Season | Division | League | FA Cup | League Cup | Other | Total | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | |||
Template F.C. | 1995–96 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template Rovers F.C. (loan) | 1995–96 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template F.C. | 1996–97 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1997–98 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
1998–99 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Templaton United F.C. (loan) | 1998–99 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template F.C. | 1999–2000 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2000–01 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2001–02 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2002–03 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Loan total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Template F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Wiki F.C. | 2003–04 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki Wanderers F.C. (loan) | 2003–04 | Scottish Premiership | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki F.C. | 2004–05 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2005–06 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2006–07 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2007–08 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2008–09 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2009–10 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2010–11 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2011–12 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2012–13 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Loan total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Wiki F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Career total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
or
Club | Season | Division | League | FA Cup | League Cup | Other | Total | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | |||
Template F.C. | 1995–96 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template Rovers F.C. (loan) | 1995–96 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template F.C. | 1996–97 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1997–98 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
1998–99 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Templaton United F.C. (loan) | 1998–99 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template F.C. | 1999–2000 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2000–01 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2001–02 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2002–03 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Wiki F.C. | 2003–04 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki Wanderers F.C. (loan) | 2003–04 | Scottish Premiership | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki F.C. | 2004–05 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2005–06 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2006–07 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2007–08 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2008–09 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2009–10 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2010–11 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2011–12 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2012–13 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Loan total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Template F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Wiki F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Career total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Both of which I believe are preferable to the seemingly random table here. My point is, the reality of a player who leaves a club on loan is just that - he physically leaves and then comes back again. To ignore that to show an uninterrupted spell at one club simply to allow cells in a table to be merged appears to me to be ignoring reality - the very thing Wikipedia is supposed to reflect. Yes - where a player spends a lot of time on loan the table won't look as elegant - maybe even a mess - but then that reflects a players career at that point - a bit messy. Bladeboy1889 ( talk) 09:18, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello again, football fans! Here's another article up for review. Any opinions? — Anne Delong ( talk) 12:57, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Another football submission at Afc! Is this a notable competition, and should the name be changed to "Scottish Summer Cup (football)" ?
Is this subject notable? Where he plays now, Segunda División B (if that, box shows he has only played thus far for the reserves, in the REGIONAL leagues), does not confer any notability, and i have the gut feeling (i could be wrong though) that Lega Pro Seconda Divisione is not professional as well.
Attentively, thank you very much in advance -- AL ( talk) 17:36, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
I recently created Muamer Tankovic, but Mattias321 ( talk · contribs) moved the article so that the surname is spelt Tanković. I've not seen one source that spells it Tanković. The Swedish FA site doesn't use Tanković or any other sources I found, so shouldn't Tankovic be used? JMHamo ( talk) 17:05, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
It's 100% correct, all Yugoslavians (and the nationalities that stemmed from the former country) have that accent in "c". Cheers -- AL ( talk) 17:13, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Also, most players of Balkan ethnicity who grew up in Western European countries don't use diacritics in their names, even on shirts, for no other reason than following the spelling in their passports/ID documents. 109.173.211.121 ( talk) 20:34, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
On his profile on Fulham official website, the spelling is Tanković. // Mattias321 ( talk) 08:42, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Sorry my bad, was only trying to help. But great teamwork overall, kudos to you all! -- AL ( talk) 20:49, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
In this edit, User:Eckerslike added Template:Fc to Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, which would cause AnomieBOT to subst all existing and future transclusions of the template. However, since the template currently has over 100 transclusions, the bot will not subst it without it being added to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force.
If this template should be automatically substed by the bot, please add the template to that page (or submit an {{
edit protected}} request if you don't have an admin handy). You might also place {{
subst only|auto=yes}}
on the template's documentation page instead of adding the category directly. If there is not consensus for the template to be substed, please revert the edit linked above. Thanks. (I am not watching this page for replies; please
ping me or post at
User talk:Anomie or
User talk:AnomieBOT if there are any questions)
Anomie
⚔
23:02, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
I'd suggest this article, I can't create it because my english is illegal.. 151.12.11.2 ( talk) 13:48, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Should lists of notable players within club articles be deleted or tagged ?
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/Fenix_down
( League Octopus 13:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC))
Hi, saw this so thought I might as well comment as it is about my editing. I used to tag such lists, but have stopped doing so because the manual of style seemed pretty clear about things and very few of the lists ever got the required inclusion criteria. Personally, I would say that a list of all players with a wikipedia article is not necessary. The link to the category by definition suffices and such a list would not only become unmanageable over time as every player, but would suggest that a player playing for a low league team who then played one game in a fully professional league but would not otherwise pass NFOOTY is more notable than a player who spent their whole career at the club making hundreds of appearances but did not do sufficient to pass NFOOTY of GNG.
Using the example you highlighted first, of the two players on that list, one of which merely was there as a youth player, never making a first team appearance and the other made only 34 league appearances according to their articles. Why would they be called out separately? Why are they specifically notable players at that club just because they have a WP article? To me it seems like both of them actually accomplished very little while at the club.
Additionally, being foreign is not necessarily something that makes a player notable beyond basic WP notability? If the notion of foreign players at a specific club has garnered significant reliable coverage then by all means discuss it, but a random list of players simply because they are of a different nationality strikes me as OR, the editor effectively saying, "these players are foreign, therefore they are inherently more notable than those who are not".
Happy to undo my edits if people disagree and won't remove any more until there is more discussion here. Fenix down ( talk) 16:00, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
To answer LO's questions above:
1. A consistant approach is being followed as the
Manual of Style clearly states that lists of famous / notable players without clear inclusion criteria should be avoided. Removing such lists is in line with the manual of style.
2. Happy to tag, wait and remove, but I have previously done this to hundreds of articles and seen only a fraction of 1% of them ever altered. To be honest, a list like
the one noted above that contains no inclusion criteria whatsoever is straight
OR and should be challenged immediately, it can always be added back if clear inclusion criteria are provided.
3. See comment above, I provide a clear edit summary and link to the manual of style indicating what is required, better to remove then add back with inclusion criteria than have it sitting around with a tag for a random amount of time. 2 months seems excessive, a watched page with active users should be dealt with within a week. I used to leave tags on pages for one month, then remove.
4. Clear guidance is already provided at the manual of style, the lists removed from finnish club articles have only been those lacking any form of inclusion criteria, or those that have just been "foreign players" (why should someone's nationality make them specifically notable at a given club unless there has been significant coverage on foreign players at a particular club? We don't have lists of "black players" or "left-handed players")or something so vague as to be no use to a reader. As such, the second example
here is fine. I have not removed any lists with inclusion criteria. A previous discussion here did not result in any consensus on unfirom criteria and I have taken the view since then that any list with some for of inlcusion criteria can stay unless consensus says otherwise. Whether a given set of inclusion criteria is satisfactory is outside the scope of this discussion, this only concerns lists completely lacking criteria.
5. I presume by "category lists" you mean
this? I have no issue with a link to the player category for a given club under the current squad. I can see how this could be useful and to me is probably the best way around any accusations of OR.
I would welcome people's thoughts on this. Should we have lists of players with WP articles at club pages? SHould we have lists of "notable players" with no clear inclusion criteria. The MoS seems clear, but happy to have debate. Fenix down ( talk) 08:45, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
The approach I took to this (in Peru national football team) was to avoid lists and use the section ("notable players") to discuss the team's traditional style (as exhibited by its notable former players) and mention only a few truly remarkable individuals (according to reliable sources). The actual list, List of Peru international footballers, is elsewhere (and, as expected, terrible in quality).-- MarshalN20 | Talk 15:00, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template_talk:Height#rfc_97AACED to determine if height should be displayed in metres or centimeters.— Bagumba ( talk) 04:43, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Looks like we've got an Indonesian IP mega-vandal at the moment, see Special:Contributions/110.137.208.170. I've just fired the rollback on every single one of their edits, which are unsourced at best, and obvious hoaxes/vandalism at worst. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:49, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
I was going to nominate List of foreign Scottish Premiership players for deletion as i cant see why being foreign would make you specifically more notable than another player who is Scottish in the same league. However i then found List of foreign Premier League players which was kept after an AFD in 2007. Just wondering what current opinion is. Blethering Scot 00:35, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
The achievements of Claudio Pizarro at the Bundesliga are notable precisely because he is foreign. Hence, being foreign in a league does boost notability. Whether this should be the case or not is a good question, but it doesn't remove the fact that it is notable.-- MarshalN20 | Talk 16:59, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Right here at Wikipedia: FIFA rankings of the AFC. Allthough all editions link to a source i doubt they are useful here. What are your thoughts? - Koppapa ( talk) 17:19, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello again, football fans - one more old stale draft eligible for deletion - is this a notable player, and should the article be kept? — Anne Delong ( talk) 12:37, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello, could someone please review Mohamed Salah as my edit has been reverted. The transfer has not been completed IMO, and even the official Chelsea site says "The move is subject to the Egyptian international agreeing personal terms and completing a medical examination."... Thanks, JMHamo ( talk) 21:35, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
It would be great if any of you could take the time to review the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Peru national football team/archive4 FA nomination. If passed, the article would serve as a strong model for other national team articles (and to rework the somewhat outdated Scotland nft FA-class article), which are bound to get much traffic once the World Cup starts.-- MarshalN20 | Talk 07:22, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm having trouble reconciling the birth details of Daniel Hurst, who played around the turn of the 20th century. Few sources mention exactly when or where he was born, but the ones that do say he was born in Cockermouth on 2 October 1876. However, a user who claims to be related to Hurst has emailed me with copies of his birth certificate, marriage certificate and his entry in the 1911 census; the birth certificate claims that Hurst was born on 9 November 1876 at (very specifically) 5 Hayton Square, Workington. Even if the birth certificate is right and proper, how do I cite it without access to my own copy, not just one that was emailed to me? – Pee Jay 10:19, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Andy says he is this subject's father, and says the DOB is incorrect - it should be 18 October 1993 and not 2 December 1994. I have no reason to doubt him, but almost every source uses the latter date. Further help at the article talk page would be appreciated so we can resolve this. Giant Snowman 18:38, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Is there a standard editnotice which can be placed on the talk page of a player when that player is negotiating a transfer, but has not yet signed for the prospective new club? This is in relation to current threads at Talk:Michael Essien, and recent threads at Talk:Juan Mata (there have been several others in the past). The anon editors simply do not grasp the idea of reliable sourcing, and got so abusive at Talk:Juan Mata that I unwatched if completely. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 14:19, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
I am unsure (or have forgotten) where I'm supposed to file bot requests, but is there a good reason that most subcategories of Category:UEFA European Championship, like this one and this one, should still be using a title that the main article is no longer using following a move discussion of over eight months ago? -- Theurgist ( talk) 10:06, 27 January 2014 (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 80 | Archive 81 | Archive 82 | Archive 83 | Archive 84 | Archive 85 | → | Archive 90 |
Hi. As you have been informed earlier there is an ongoing discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 121#Displaying a part of the table and we are so close to the end. This to have a single template that can be used on many articles instead of updating all articles individually (the season article tables soon gets outdated on some articles).
Now we discuss at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Highlighting or bolding the final visual part of the table and it would be great with some opinions from footy, and some consensus how it should look when displaying for a specified team.
The discussion is about to decide if we should use
to show the team in question when we display part of the table for a specified team. The fourth alternative (could be combined with the other alternatives) will mean that the big table with all teams will also have separate rows (not looking as good) but then we can highlight that entire row (and not the block in the "qualification/relegation" column.
The result as it is now can be seen at User:Spudgfsh/sandbox and the template edited so far is Template:2013–14 Premier League table/sandbox. The table we based the template on can be seen at 2013–14 Premier League#League table
Feel free to add other opinions as well if you have any, you can respond here or at Village Pump. QED237 (talk) 11:26, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Screen readers don't read bolding, either: see MOS:ACCESS#Text. But as I understand it, these tables are for use on club season articles? so no information is actually being lost by the absence of screen-readable highlighting. The row still contains the name of the club whose season is the subject of the article, even though it isn't as instantly "visible" to the screen-reader user as a bolded row would be to the sighted user. What would help is using row and column scopes, as at MOS:ACCESS#Data tables, which make it easier for the screen-reader user to navigate a table. In this case, the club name cell would be identified as the row header. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 13:15, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
As I can see it the discussion resulted in the use of bolding, since WP:ACCESS forbids using color to identify list item and also many would like bolding anyway since we should always show the relegation and qualification color and not hide it with our yellow/gold.
About the scope part I have no idea how to do that and since it requires edit to the template(s) inside the template I will not dig in to that, but if anyone is interested feel free to do it. I have done enough with this template.
If no one has something to add I will insert the sandbox we worked on to the template later tonight or tomorrow before the matches and see how it works tomorrow when matches are played.
About the future I hope to copy this template and change teams to make the same for other leagues such as La Liga, Bundesliga, Serie A and so on if no one opposes? It would be for the best to have centrally updated templates instead of updating on every single article. QED237 (talk) 21:29, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
The current season templates {{2013–14 Premier League table}}, {{2013–14 Football League Championship table}}, {{2013–14 Football League One table}} and {{2013–14 Football League Two table}} have all been updated to use this new format. I've also been through all of the league/club season articles to ensure that they are all using the correct templates. => Spudgfsh ( Text Me!) 16:58, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm sure this has been discussed before, but it would be nice to have some guidance on the subject codified, if only in the WikiProject's own recommendations. For Brazilian footballers, and similar people who are known mononymously or by nicknames, WP:COMMONNAME and WP:STAGENAME would seem to strongly support titling articles by those nicknames. There are cases of such biographies titled by the subjects' full birth names, which are wholly unrecognizable. The only argument I can see for these full names is WP:NATURAL, especially where the nickname isn't unique, but WP:MIDDLES advises against "Adding middle names, or their abbreviations, merely for disambiguation purposes (if that format of the name is not commonly used to refer to the person)," and the same would appear to apply to given names and surnames that aren't commonly used.
In the wild, so to speak, there are a mix of these common names and birth names. Has the project ever ruled on this issue? Would an RfC be fruitful? -- BDD ( talk) 17:31, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
So you don't believe we should have articles listed at the full name - but it is fine to disambiguate by full name? Doesn't that seem self-defeating? Giant Snowman 13:14, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
We should use nicknames where they're plainly the most commonly-used in reliable secondary sources, but to be quite blunt this isn't remotely as common as it's made out to be. An awful lot of Brazilians seem to find that once they're no longer playing for their hometown teams their kewl nicknames aren't quite as unique any more, and end up going predominantly by their real names when mentioned in international sources. If there isn't reason to believe that a player's nickname has truly become associated with them in the national psyche (as opposed to simply being cheaper to iron onto the back of a club shirt) then we should go by real names and not bother with the nicknames. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 17:15, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Anybody with the time might want to take a look at the heap of unsourced (and likely non-notable) stubs created by Ararat-tehran ( talk · contribs). Giant Snowman 19:31, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Can we get some people active on United States men's national soccer team. Surly there are some regular editors from US here. I've brought up some question on the talk page and had no response. Thanks.-- 2nyte ( talk) 00:53, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
The entire text (as distinct from infoboxes and so on) of the above article is "Alba CF is a football club based in Alba, Somalia." The problem with this is that this is the sum total of any information I can find online about any place in Somalia called Alba - some other sites repeat the information about Alba CF, none say anything more about the place. So is this information correct? Can anyone find anything more about the place? Or where Alba CF is (or was) based? By the way, links to Alba, from both Alba CF and Somalia League go to an article on the early history of Scotland, which is clearly irrelevant in this context - I am just about to remove these. PWilkinson ( talk) 16:44, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
I am sure this has been brought up here before but I shall bring it back up again: Why are their templates for the squads that participated in the 2012 AFC Challenge Cup? Templates like Template:India squad 2012 AFC Challenge Cup for example. Why? I thought the consensus was that squad templates were only to be made during the FIFA World Cup and top continental tournaments. The AFC Challenge Cup is a 2nd tier tournament in Asia which features both pro and semi-pro nations and is essentially a qualifier for the AFC Asian Cup so why have squad templates for it? -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 03:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to know what the opinion is on this page. I was thinking of doing a List of current I-League players page but I don't want to until I get a concensus on this page first. Cheers. -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 03:15, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Can someone deal with the promotional rubbish that an IP keeps reinserting? I've already hit 3RR (that last revert was completely unintentional, and was my computer spazzing out), but half of it is unsourced, and most of it is irrelevant. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello. I am from Greek wiki. These templates Template:Fb team Anorthosis Famagusta Template:Fb team Anorthosis are the same. Must be one. Xaris333 ( talk) 03:56, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
We need them for League tables and Results. Xaris333 ( talk) 19:49, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Its much easier. Xaris333 ( talk) 01:08, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
I am not wrong, I think as Jack Ryder would say, "you are wrong." These templates are used in many articles. What do you suggest? Xaris333 ( talk) 02:45, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
{{Fb cl header |hth=y }} {{Fb cl team |p= 1|t=AEL Limassol |w=10|d=3 |l=1 |gf=23|ga=9|bc=#D0F0C0}} {{Fb cl footer}} {{Fb cl header |hth=y}} {{Fb cl2 team |p= 1|t=[[AEL Limassol]] |w=10|d=3 |l=1 |gf=23|ga=9|bc=#D0F0C0}} {{Fb cl footer}}
"Easier" is not the word/excuse for it. EddieV2003 ( talk) 03:15, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
What about result table. Can you give an example? Xaris333 ( talk) 17:06, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
As we're now getting very close to the big day (and with my son now off school I stand very little chance of getting anywhere near the computer!) can I be the first to wish all WP:FOOTY members a very happy Christmas -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 16:18, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, currently I am trying to revamp/update the entire Pune F.C. squad and right now I feel that I am in heaven as every player profile page for each player on their website has a very detailed article about the player from when they started playing football to now. It just makes this project enjoyable for me but that is where the problem occurs. I can source the player profiles as references but then what happens when a player leaves the club? That player profile is gone and I am left with a bunch of references that don't work anymore because that player profile will probably be gone. So how do I avoid this? Is there a way I can have the player profile stay beyond when the player leaves? One idea I had was creating like some sort of wordpress account and then copy and pasting the player profile there so that I could source the wordpress profile after the player leaves but I would rather hear from here first. Cheers. -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 14:01, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello footballers! The player above has an article in the Spanish Wikipedia that is more up to date. ( Armando Maita ) Is this a notable player, and should the English article be saved from deletion as a stale draft? — Anne Delong ( talk) 01:58, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't know if anyone here is interested, but I thought I might mention that I was on University Challenge last night, competing for Cardiff University. If you live in the UK and haven't seen it yet, the episode is still available on BBC iPlayer. Cheers. – Pee Jay 13:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Just viewed, congrats. I will add University Challenge 2013–14 to my watchlist :) JMHamo ( talk) 16:01, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
If anyone still hasn't seen it, my match (so difficult to avoid sounding self-centred when I'm on a team, but I'm the only one you guys would conceivably be interested in) against Liverpool is on YouTube now. – Pee Jay 01:22, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
-List:
Some of you may have already noticed but The Irish Times now do statistics as you can see here & here. It's limited to league stats for players but already came in handy for Ebanks-Blake's page and it seems pretty accurate. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 08:18, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Again, a template I see as having no purpose whatsoever. Can anybody please enlighten me? Giant Snowman 22:13, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
After some more searching I found similar template {{ Efs}} QED237 (talk) 12:34, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Now at TFD, which you can read and comment at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Wikilink sports templates. QED237 (talk) 22:55, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
This discussion and that at the TfD discussion seem to be based on a complete misunderstanding of how these templates are meant to be used. They are intended to save an editor time and key strokes when creating an article; server space is a total irrelevance. As the documentation on Template:Fc says, these templates should only be used with substitution active. If I create an article about a footballer who played for Nottingham Forest, Sheffield Wednesday and Wolverhampton Wanderers, it is much simpler and quicker to type: "Joe Bloggs was a footballer who played for {{subst:fc|Nottingham Forest}}, {{subst:fc|Sheffield Wednesday}} and {{subst:fc|Wolverhampton Wanderers}}" which produces the result "Joe Bloggs was a footballer who played for Nottingham Forest, Sheffield Wednesday and Wolverhampton Wanderers" than it is to type: "Joe Bloggs was a footballer who played for [[Nottingham Forest F.C.|Nottingham Forest]], [[Sheffield Wednesday F.C.|Sheffield Wednesday]] and [[Wolverhampton Wanderers F.C.|Wolverhampton Wanderers]]." (At least it would have done before the templates were tagged for deletion.) Once the edit is saved, the template is replaced by the desired wikilink and the template then ceases to be used. I agree that all unsubstituted uses of the template should be replaced by proper wikilinks, but the templates themselves should be retained and the documentation improved to stress the need for substitution. I see no point in removing a tool that makes an editor's life easier just on the grounds of a bit of housekeeping. I have made use of these templates (properly substituted) many, many times and they have probably saved me several days of typing time. Please can I ask people to think again about the proper use of these templates. -- Daemonic Kangaroo ( talk) 07:26, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Are these the same teams?
Is this the solution? {{Merge from|CAPS F.C.|date=January 2013}} — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.7.4.148 ( talk) 17:01, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
As part of the discussion above ( Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Background color or bolding specific team in table) and the discussion on the village pump ( Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Displaying a part of the table) I created template tables for the three football league divisions. When completed I placed them on the season articles and started a discussion on each talk page stating what I'd done. They keep getting removed by editors every time they go to update the table. The table as displayed is exactly the same, can I get some support for getting them used on those two pages. => Spudgfsh ( Text Me!) 18:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello football editors! Can I request if someone will peer review Football in the Philippines? Any suggestion for improving it are welcome. The discussion is here. Thanks! FairyTailRocks ( talk) 17:23, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello,
I'm curious, who do I have to talk in order to let them examine the article and see if it does not need the stub-class rating anymore or the warning of not enough sources? Hisakiwa21 ( talk) 04:08, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I formatted the career statistics table at Cristiano Ronaldo so it includes divisions (and thus conforms to the layout given at the player MoS), references for each season (when previously areas, including the entire Sporting CP stats, were unsourced) and annotated notes for other competitions. Also, I made corrections to the international career statistics table (with references). However, I was reverted by Kante4 ( talk · contribs), who reasoned that the inclusion of divisions looks "horrible". Just bringing this here to garner consensus, although I'm not sure I'm really obliged to considering the version I added conformed to project-wide MoS and included the addition of previously absent sources. Cheers, Mattythewhite ( talk) 16:23, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Is it just me or are there too many unnecessary parameters in this template? The infobox is supposed to provide an at-a-glance overview of the most important points of the article, not list all the stats such as "biggest win", "highest attendance" and all that bollocks. I was mainly going on the state of the 2009–10 Premier League article, from which I have already removed much of the guff, but the parameters could still do with being removed from the template, IMO. – Pee Jay 17:32, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
The press are speculating that Gedion Zelalem will make his Arsenal debut in the FA Cup against Spurs this weekend. No doubt, this will mean that he passes the notability test. What surprises me is that the article still exists as it "failed" an AfD in April 2003. I guess it has slipped through the net. -- Daemonic Kangaroo ( talk) 10:35, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Is there any reason that the likes of Australia national football team results should be autocollapsed? It is pretty painful when trying to locate information when the majority of data is not visible. I seem to recall a discussion around this sort of setup being an accessibility issue. Hack ( talk) 10:30, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Does anyone have access to any reliable sources on Leeds City? My particular interest is with Alfred Pullin, a cricket/rugby journalist from that time who seems to have been one of the club's directors some time before its collapse. Any further details on his relationship with the club would be much appreciated if they exist anywhere, or even if anyone knows where more could be found. Cheers. Sarastro1 ( talk) 21:01, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Discuss. Mattythewhite ( talk) 22:36, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
What is the solution?-- 95.236.246.49 ( talk) 18:39, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Does anyone know where I can find stats and line-ups for Bury F.C. in the mid-1990s? I'm trying to fill in a stats table for David Johnson (footballer born 1976), but Soccerbase doesn't have complete stats going back that far, so I'm flying blind on his Football League Trophy stats. All I need to know is whether his one FLT goal came in 1995–96 or 1996–97. – Pee Jay 18:25, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
I believe Somalia national football team has sustained some unreverted vandalism since late November, so much so that I think it should be restored to a past version, but I'm not sure which was the last stable version. There are some versions in November with full World Cup records etc. Help would be appreciated, thanks. Del♉sion23 (talk) 00:40, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello, could editors please monitor the edits from Tyau123 ( talk · contribs). Seems to be removing sourced content from Middlesbrough related articles and reverts on sight when you fix. Thanks, JMHamo ( talk) 18:54, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
Never understood why they rank teams not in the top 4, but anyway, where are those listed at the FIFA site. An IP comes up changes something and i wonder what is correct. Why would Tunisia at 0 points be above India at 1 point in the group in either of those two versions. Another example would be this change, what version is correct, how does FIFA rank teams losing in the quarter finals? By result in that round, by group stage record? Those sections in all FIFA tournaments definately could use a sentece explaining how the ranking was achieved, better have a direct source too. - Koppapa ( talk) 08:05, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Could someone please review this edit to Emmanuel Adebayor by an anon. I don't want to revert again. Thanks, JMHamo ( talk) 23:39, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Given I was not around most of 2013 I just wanted to clarify if consensus still stood that assists should not be included in career stats table. Theo Walcott's assists are sourced but given assists are subjective and there is no universal definition of assists should they not be removed? ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 04:28, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Kadir ozkan is dead. Who is new 1461 Trabzon trainer? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.54.7.182 ( talk) 18:20, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Dear footballers: Here's another old declined submission that will shortly be deleted as a stale draft. This player appears to have won a trophy. There's a navbox with many other players who have won this trophy, and they appear to have articles. Is this a notable player? — Anne Delong ( talk) 03:53, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
This is to let you know that there has been a (further) discussion about the general reliability of the Daily Mail at the reliable sources noticeboard. Several editors think we should have a blanket ban on it. And a sample trawl I did of how the paper is being used as source reveals that it's often used in football-related articles. I thought you people might like to have a look and see whether you consider it reliable for various purposes. What I've seen seems to break into three categories: a) factual info such as results, b) opinion about play (reviews of games etc.), and c) info about players. In the c) category some uses may be close to gossip, therefore not encyclopaedic. Mario Balotelli is one example where you might be able to see if WP:BLP is complied with. Itsmejudith ( talk) 09:08, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
I remember a discussion a while back about the Liverpool season article getting out of hand WRT stats. I give you 2013–14_Portsmouth_F.C._season with all sorts of delights on it.
A couple of questions that it's made me ask.
=> Spudgfsh ( Text Me!) 16:54, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
As there is a MOS for club season articles ( Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football/Club_seasons) do we need to spend some time making updating it to take in the best aspects of some of the current club season articles and then enforce it more everywhere? => Spudgfsh ( Text Me!) 21:18, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
May I add the 2013–14 Cardiff City F.C. season here they list every substitution in the footballbox collabsible. That must be to much info. QED237 (talk) 21:05, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Leandro Paredes:Il giorno 07/01/2014 viene definito "fenomeno vero" dal famoso cantastorie calcistico Marco Boscaini.
Antonio Vutov:Udinese is interested but he currently plays for-- 79.51.7.250 ( talk) 15:18, 7 January 2014 (UTC) levski
TFF First League, TFF Second League and TFF Third League are fully professional league.
The status confirmed that 3.Lig si fully professional: [4], [5], [6], [7]. So super lig, 1.lig, 2. Lig, 3,lig are fully professional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.21.34.6 ( talk) 12:11, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
In italian professional Lega Pro Seconda Divisione some players play and have a second job.For a exemple [8] Luca passerella plays for A.C. Delta Porto Tolle and also work. But lega pro seconda divisione is fully professional.-- 79.51.7.250 ( talk) 15:47, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
It might be worth locking the article, he's recently announced that he's gay, as such his article may be a target for vandals. TheBigJagielka ( talk) 11:28, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Already done
JMHamo (
talk)
12:28, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Mohammed Dahman's article contains ONE ref, which doesnt mention him. Any clues? Murry1975 ( talk) 20:32, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Someone was asking about this recently. It appears he's changed/changing from .htm suffix for his urls to .html, so that previously working .htm urls now land at the webhost error page. Which means we possibly have quite a lot of broken urls. Is finding all the Neil Brown links and sticking an "l" on the end of the url something that could be done with AWB (not something I use, so I wouldn't know) or should we make a bot request?
I noticed that @ PeteS: has written a template to generate a Neil Brown link in External link type format. If this were enhanced the way {{ NFT player}} has been, to output either EL or cite-web-with-accessdate format as appropriate, it could be useful in the future for inline referencing as well as ELs. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 10:33, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
I have been expanding the List of footballers in England and Scotland by number of league appearances. I created the Template to avoid a lot of repeated typing. I too noticed the suffix change. I can change it to assume a common suffix (.html) which will mean we can easily fix all if this happens again. Shall I ? PeteS 16:34, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
I've requested a bot. WP:BOTREQ#Changing the url suffix from .htm to .html for a specific site. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 22:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
But the point is, what do we want to do now? fix the urls, or apply the template? Further input welcome... cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 09:40, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Bot approved and running - GoingBatty ( talk) 05:17, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Would you be interested in participating in a user study? We are a team at University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within a Wikipedia community. We are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visualization tool. All you need to do is to prepare for your laptop/desktop, web camera, and speaker for video communication with Google Hangout. We will provide you with a Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page ( http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster ( talk) 06:46, 9 January 2014 (UTC).
We all want to get rid of those Fb-templates, and after I noticed 13 new Norwegian Fb team templates, I decided to do some experimenting in my sandbox to check if it was possible to replace the Fb results table. It turns out that this wikitable is exactly the same as this table which uses the fb templates. I realized that it would be easy to replace the Template:Fb r header and Template:Fb r team with wikitables, while Template:Fb r and Template:Fb r footer might still be useful and fits into a wikitable. What do people think? It is the first two templates that uses the Fb team templates, so if we get rid of those we might be able to get rid of a lot of templates. Mentoz ( talk) 13:18, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
I have started a move request for articles on Premier League seasons prior to 2006-07. Please go there and make your views known. The location is: Talk:1992–93 FA Premier League#Requested move Thanks! — Amakuru ( talk) 16:22, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
I just wanted to known why 1999–2000 season articles are named, for example, 1999–2000 La Liga rather than 1999–00 La Liga. It has always crossed my mind.-- 2nyte ( talk) 03:24, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
It's amazing this article is here and obviously it should be here, at the time those games were the biggest club level international games.
The issue is, not only Sunderland won it. Those kind of games were also won by Renton, Hearts, and Hibernian. Shouldn't it be better to turn this article into an article about all those games? What should be the name then? 2.124.1.232 ( talk) 20:42, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi guys, probably you know that Swansea has very good stats H2H with English grand teams. I propose to add this info in team's article. Probably is the "small" team with best results against english ellite. Just look here
XXN ( talk) 15:17, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
According to this, Nahki Wells will sign on loan for Huddersfield Town for one game before signing a permanent deal. No other sources I have seen (i.e. official sites of both clubs) have mentioned. Is it worth adding this 'loan' spell in the infobox/prose/career stats table? I don't think it is to be honest... Giant Snowman 19:13, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Not in the stats table. Infobox and prose, depends on sources. If the club site(s) say that, or the FA registration list, when it comes through, or national media, then it's moderately interesting to include in the prose (illustrates how anxious Huddersfield were to get it done) and it ought to go in the infobox for accuracy. If that report in the local rag is the only source, then no. See e.g. Jermain Defoe, who joined Portsmouth from Spurs on a one-day loan ahead of a permanent transfer, and doing it that way made him ineligible to play against Spurs in the league, or Neil Kilkenny's move to Leeds. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 19:49, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm having a difficult time trying to explain to User:Plexus14 that in the article of Johan Dahlin the years for in which he played for Malmö FF in his infobox should be 2009–2013 and not 2009–2014. Dahlin left Malmö FF for a Turkish club on 7 January 2014 when the Turkish transfer window opened. The transfer was official already in December 2013, but more importantly, Dahlin did not play any league or friendly match for Malmö FF in 2014. I believe that the common practice across Wikipedia is to write the year in which the player last was part of the season squad, thus 2013 in this case. I see no logic point whatsoever in writing 2014 as his last season in the infobox, this gives me the impression that Dahlin played a couple of league matches or at least was part of the 2014 Malmö FF squad, which is clearly misleading. I don't want to break the 3RR rule so in the case that I'm correct in my view of common Wikipedia practice regarding this, then it would be much appreciated if someone could help me revert the edits. Thanks! -- Reckless182 (talk) 09:10, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
2014–15 FC Bayern Munich season, 2014–15 Borussia Dortmund season, and 2014–15 Bayer Leverkusen season – cases of WP:TOOEARLY or perfectly legitimate articles at this time of the year? Discuss, please. -- Soccer-holic I hear voices in my head... 21:48, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Hey, just kicked off this article for cricket project. Guy played football too for Newcastle, Leicester and others in 1960s. Cool. So. Anyone want to adopt it for football coverage? -- Bill ( talk) 12:35, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
What is the situation about these turkish stadiums?
Are these stadiums under costruction or are they a old project for Euro 2016? What's the solution abou t the proposed stadium?Deletion or redirect? -- 95.244.242.218 ( talk) 15:44, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Has anybody ever heard of Octavian Constantinescu. I can't find anything about him on Goggle or Soccerway. JMHamo ( talk) 11:58, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Spanish Wikipedia too. JMHamo ( talk) 12:51, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Please can someone restore the article, he's been brought on as a substitute in the Championship for Wigan and is now eligible for an article. TheBigJagielka ( talk) 16:16, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Dear football enthusiasts: Here's another one of those old abandoned drafts. This one was never submitted. Is this a notable player? — Anne Delong ( talk) 05:13, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Expofunner adds a lot of unsourced stuff to articles. Maybe some people watch after him. - Koppapa ( talk) 19:12, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Re: a little trouble I'm having convincing another editor, I just wanted to confirm that we shouldn't be specifying what division a player's club plays in in the lead paragraph of a biography. Also, do we need to specify that the player is a professional? So, for example, should we be saying "Joe Foobar is an English professional footballer who plays for Premier League club Example Rovers" or just "Joe Foobar is an English footballer who plays for Example Rovers"? – Pee Jay 00:26, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Personally, I don't think including the word "professional" does any harm. The league division is more problematic; when accurate, it adds information, but there is a general problem of it being changed upwards seconds after a team's promotion is confirmed, yet only changed downwards when a supporter of a rival team comes across it. The word is Premier League "club" or "team", though, not "side" or "outfit". Loans don't go in italics: the relevant bit of the Manual of Style is MOS:ITALIC. But what's really wrong with the lead in this article is the same as for many such: it only mentions the current club, nothing about the eight years before Mr Bruce went to Hull.
The Leeds refs were changed recently by someone using a script to "fix" linkrot, though unfortunately they can't have noticed that the urls redirected to the home page. If they're not still on the LUFC site somewhere else, they'll almost certainly be on archive.org. I'll have a go at them later, if no-one else gets there first. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 10:07, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
I've just added Riyad Mahrez to the Leicester City Template but when I clicked onto his page through it his name wasn't showing in the template on his page or that of any other of the players, can anyone suggest a fix please? Jimmy Skitz's Answer Machine 17:28, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
This is just a reminder that Ashton Gate and Ashton Gate Stadium are completely different. Simply south.... .. disorganising disorganisation for just 7 years 17:56, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello. In Jacques LaDouceur says that he played in San Jose Earthquakes (not San Jose Earthquakes (1974–88)) but he is categorized as Category:San Jose Earthquakes (1974–88) players. I don't know much about american soccer so I need your help. Xaris333 ( talk) 15:58, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I used to be able to do this but I already forgot for some odd reason. I am trying to change the name of File:Federation Cup.jpg to File:Indian Federation Cup Logo.jpg but like I said, I forgot how to go about this. If anyone would like, they can change it themselves or you could just tell me how to. Cheers. -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 01:43, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
In light of today's Kosovo news, do we have a list of teams that have permission from FIFA to play their member associations? TheBigJagielka ( talk) 19:45, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
IPs kept adding unsourced speculation in relation to Chelsea which I removed then when they weren't getting their way they started vandalising so I had the page protected for ten days via WP:RPP. Since it's been protected User:BenficaNNossaPaixao has altered the article to appear as if he's joined Chelsea based on this ref which says: "Serbian midfielder travels to London today to commit to the team" another words he hasn't joined yet he's just set to. Nothing official has been announced by either club. Also the user thinks it's relevant to include the fact that Matić came second in the Puskás Award in the honours for which he doesn't receive an award. I have a pain in the face reverting stuff from Matić's and Mike Jones pages the last few days can some remove and have a word with the user. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 14:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
I noticed that Emmanuel Adebayor has the unreferenced category Category:Yoruba footballers and wondered if we should really be categorizing footballers by ethnic background. Typically, Adebayor would be categorized according to his nation of birth ( Category:Togolese footballers), but this (and similar categories like Category:Basque footballers) categorize according to ethnicity. The articles in the Yoruba footballers category bear no references to support the ethnicity, and it seems like the same is true for many articles in the Basque footballers category. Perhaps there is a distinction between the two because there is an autonomous Basque region within Spain and footballers have represented an (unofficial?) Basque selection in international football, while there is no Yoruba nation or automous state and I'm not aware of any Yoruba selection that plays international football? What do project members think about these types of categories? My initial reaction is that they may cause significant debate (because footballers' ethnicities are rarely covered in reliable sources) and probably serve little purpose. Best regards. Jogurney ( talk) 21:11, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
In the articles 1966 FIFA World Cup qualification, 1966 FIFA World Cup qualification (CAF, AFC and OFC) and 1966 FIFA World Cup qualification (AFC – OFC) it is specified that Australia competed as an OFC ( Oceania Football Confederation) member country. This is incorrect as the OFC was not founded until 15 November 1966 (obviously after the 1966 World Cup and its qualification period). I think changes in the article titles and their content should be made.-- 2nyte ( talk) 04:37, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi there teammates, longtime no see,
any Rangers F.C. fans out there? I assume there are and so, would like to clear this doubt please: did this player qualify for his honours with the club? He must have at least received a Scottish Cup medal for scoring in the previous rounds, but there is the possibility he did not collect any silverware for not playing the amount of games required a la Premier League style (i am assuming the approach is the same in Scotland than in England).
I am writing this mainly this because User:GiantSnowman removed his honours section and i reinstated them, vowing to find sources for every single one of them, and now promising to remove the Rangers stuff if i can't find any positive reply here.
Attentively, thank you in advance -- AL ( talk) 01:22, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your inputs, even though they don't coincide (JM says Ñíguez should not get Cup honour, BS says he should but in the League Cup from what i understand, i'm caught in the middle so i'll remove because i don't want to be accused of anything). However, i add the following: please don't remove honours in (most) Europe-based competitions other than the UK of course (league or cup), because if they play one minute in cup and in the first round, they get medal, and if they play one minute in the league they win the league trophy, so we don't need no reliable sources there.
Thanks and cheers -- AL ( talk) 23:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
This discussion may be of interest/concern to project members. Should player heights be shown in infoboxes in centimetres (187cm) or in metres (1.87m)? For Rickie Lambert, Southampton FC show his height in centimetres [15] whereas the Premier League use metres [16]. -- Daemonic Kangaroo ( talk) 05:18, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
This user changes goalscorers and results, some definately are made up. Maybe someone looks into it. User:DCUBEST - Koppapa ( talk) 22:07, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
The article Moldova national football team results has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
StudiesWorld (
talk)
11:29, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Category:2014 FIFA World Cup referees has been created and added to articles for referees who have been named to officiate at the World Cup. Would I be right to remove this category per WP:CRYSTALBALL given their participation is not guaranteed (they are still subject to fitness tests). Hack ( talk) 01:48, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
What would be the "correct" title (i.e. one that follows our guidelines) for articles like
Apertura 2012 Copa MX or
Clausura 2013 Copa MX? Something in the terms of <year> Copa MX [Apertura|Clausura]
? --
Soccer-holic
I hear voices in my head...
16:06, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Following discussions about the naming of the Australian football team article, I've started a formal RfC here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports#RfC: How should articles on national sports teams handle gendered teams? I invite you to share your views. — Tom Morris ( talk) 18:00, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
I am trying to find out when squad numbers (and names on shirts) were introduced to the Premier League. The article Squad number (association football)#Great Britain says it was in the 1993–94 season, but it is unreferenced. Kudos to anyone who can add the information to that article and hopefully share it here. Thanks, C 679 21:44, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
After the failure of Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_December_28#Wikilink_sports_templates to reach consensus is it possible to get a bot set up to subst the ones that have not been used correctly (ie without the subst). => Spudgfsh ( Text Me!) 21:52, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
-- 79.50.245.105 ( talk) 01:55, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
There is something of an edit war going on at the moment involving an IP who insists that all clubs must be referred to by current names (including stating explicitly that Milton Keynes Dons won the Cup in 1988). Please could we establish a consensus on how this should be treated at Talk:List of FA Cup finals#Establishing consensus on The Wednesday and Wimbledon? -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 13:27, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Regardless of whether MK Dons and Wimbledon FC are the same thing, we should use the name of each cup-winner as at the time they won it, for historical accuracy. The 1988 Cup Final was won by a team called Wimbledon FC. Every time it comes up on TV - the Crazy Gang beating the Culture Club and all the rest - it's still called Wimbledon. This is an encyclopedia, and as such it has to reflect historical fact. The historical fact is that a team called Wimbledon won the FA Cup in 1988, and for an encyclopedia to use a different name in a list of FA Cup-winners would not only deprive that encyclopedia of any credibility, it'd be unbelievably misleading and confusing for the reader. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 14:37, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Agreed - it is valid to show a club's current name in the "wins by club" table, with a note referring to any previous names as appropriate, but in the table of individual finals, which is a historical record of what occurred at the time, the name in use at the time should be shown. And referring to "MK Dons' win in the 1988 final" in the lead, as the IP wants to do, is 100% wrong -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 14:49, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
The article has TWO differently named entries for one club - Sheff Wed, which you never grasped. That is madness - daft. People know clubs by the current name, they do not go and look at a trophy to know the name :) 94.194.23.28 ( talk)
But seriously, Wikipedia is built on verification with reference to reliable sources. We aren't trying to source the identity or otherwise of Wimbledon and MK Dons FCs. We're sourcing the name of the club that won the FA Cup in 1988 or any other year. If the reliable sources call it Wimbledon, so do we. If the reliable sources call it The Wednesday, so do we. That's how Wikipedia works, and not something we can overrule here.
We then come to linking. If we have an article that deals with Wimbledon F.C. up to the relocation, and another article that deals with a club now called MK Dons after the relocation, with a bit of overlap at the join, then we link to the historically appropriate article. If the reader wants to learn more, they can read the article linked and browse anywhere it leads them after that. If we have one article that deals with The Wednesday and Sheffield Wednesday at the same page, then we link to it. Struway2 ( talk) 15:24, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
ry 2014 (UTC)
OK! I consider it best to have the original name in the table entry and the new name as well. Such as The Wednesday now Sheff Wed. Wimbledon now MK Dons. It has to be factual. So as not to confuse a reader. There is two clubs - MK Dons and Sheff Wed with name changes. 94.194.23.28 ( talk) 15:27, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
You still haven't got it. Keeping it the same is not simple, it is confusing the reader. What I suggested is a great compromise and factual. This article has two separate entries in the tables for the same club, The Wednesday and Sheffield Wednesday. This is totally confusing and wrong. The idea is to create quality factual articles, not get one over another editor. 94.194.23.28 ( talk) 15:49, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
It is ridiculous to have two entries. If you cannot see that desist in editing. It is not for you. I have done lots of technical writing in my time and this is a no, no. There has to be a link from old to new club names or both names in the same entry box. Simple. I have the impression many are wanting a confusing article because they do not like MK Dons. If so, grow up boys. 94.194.23.28 ( talk) 16:19, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure who this helps, but the Football Association, whose Cup this is, refer to Sheffield Wednesday throughout. see here. -- Daemonic Kangaroo ( talk) 16:13, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
The way things are currently presented in the article is exactly how I would expect. The names in the main list are as they were at the time of each final; to do otherwise would be anachronistic. In the list of wins by club, the entries where any possible confusion could arise are given extra explanation below the table. It is difficult to envisage a reader coming away from the article in a state of confusion over club identities. There is no need for us to continue feeding the trolls here. Oldelpaso ( talk) 17:50, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
The names in the main list are as they were at the time of each final - the original names. Running down the list one club has entries under two different names. If you did not know The Wednesday and Sheffield Wednesday were the same club you would come away thinking they were two different clubs. If people want the original names, which is confusing and the FA do not do that with Wednesday, then there should be a link in each entry in each box. That is, each time The Wednesday is in a table box there should be a link to an explanation at the bottom of the table. Or better have both names in box. Tables are to skim and scan. Few start at the top and work their way down reading each row. Few read the comments at the bottom. If there is no link or both names are not in the box, the reader will be confused until he gets to the bottom and sees an explanation, if he reads it. At any point in the table any anomalies must be clarified at that point. That is how professional tech writers do it. 78.105.235.121 ( talk) 10:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Am I the only one who finds this anons language and tone somewhat familiar? Bladeboy1889 ( talk) 09:36, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
As antagonistic as the IP is, they are completely correct in saying that Wimbledon and MK Dons are the same club - it's the same legal entity, merely moved and renamed (much like Ferranti/Meadowbank Thistle and Livingston). The reason we have separate articles is presumably because of the emotive history surrounding the move and the distaste most fans (including myself) have for the current version of the club, and also because any attempts to merge Wimbledon F.C. into MK Dons would probably bring the internet to a standstill, even though it is really the correct thing to do. The fact that the Dons chairman made a gesture of returning the silverware to Merton BC doesn't really change the fact of the matter with regards to the club, although it certainly muddies the waters in the case of the FA Cup article in question. Number 5 7 13:07, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Having Wimbledon in the 1988 entry is confusing as many may confuse the club with the current Wimbledon who are in the league, who have no connection whatsoever with Wimbledon FC. 94.193.161.101 ( talk) 14:52, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
There was a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Players about the ordering of the seasons in statistics tables. The question is if the seasons should be grouped by club like this one
Club | Season | League | National Cup | League Cup | Continental | Other | Total | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Division | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | ||
Template United | 2000–01 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2001–02 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2004–05 | Premier League | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | |
2005–06 | Premier League | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | |
Total | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 0 | ||
Wiki City (loan) | 2000–01 | Second Division | 15 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 10 |
Template Rangers | 2001–02 | First Division | 15 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 23 | 0 |
2002–03 | First Division | 36 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 40 | 0 | |
2003–04 | First Division | 28 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 32 | 0 | |
2006–07 | First Division | 18 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 19 | 1 | |
2007–08 | Second Division | 30 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 35 | 2 | |
Total | 127 | 2 | 11 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 149 | 3 | ||
Career total | 145 | 12 | 14 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 177 | 3 |
or sorted chronologically like this one
Club | Season | League | National Cup | League Cup | Continental | Other | Total | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Division | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | ||
Template United | 2000–01 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki City (loan) | 2000–01 | Second Division | 15 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 10 |
Template United | 2001–02 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template Rangers | 2001–02 | First Division | 15 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 23 | 0 |
2002–03 | First Division | 36 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 40 | 0 | |
2003–04 | First Division | 28 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 32 | 0 | |
Total | 79 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 95 | 0 | ||
Template United | 2004–05 | Premier League | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 |
2005–06 | Premier League | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | |
Total | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 0 | ||
Template Rangers | 2006–07 | First Division | 18 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 19 | 1 |
2007–08 | Second Division | 30 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 35 | 2 | |
Total | 48 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 54 | 2 | ||
Career total | 145 | 12 | 14 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 177 | 3 |
I prefer the chronological version because it is less confusing and reflects the career of the player. What do you think? -- Jaellee ( talk) 10:49, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Wes Fletcher JMHamo ( talk) 11:05, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
So using your example, the difference would be between your second table, purely chronological, and the one immediately below:
Club | Season | League | National Cup | League Cup | Continental | Other | Total | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Division | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | ||
Template United | 2000–01 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2001–02 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Wiki City (loan) | 2000–01 | Second Division | 15 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 10 |
Template Rangers | 2001–02 | First Division | 15 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 23 | 0 |
2002–03 | First Division | 36 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 40 | 0 | |
2003–04 | First Division | 28 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 32 | 0 | |
Total | 79 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 95 | 0 | ||
Template United | 2004–05 | Premier League | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 |
2005–06 | Premier League | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | |
Total | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 0 | ||
Template Rangers | 2006–07 | First Division | 18 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 19 | 1 |
2007–08 | Second Division | 30 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 35 | 2 | |
Total | 48 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | 54 | 2 | ||
Career total | 145 | 12 | 14 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 177 | 3 |
cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 11:09, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
My issue with tables that are arranged chronologically rather than by by club they end up looking like this mess of a table. Giant Snowman 13:16, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
I repeat, no-one is suggesting grouping separate spells at one club together. Effenberg's table is fine by me, apart from I'd repeat the division names each row, pending confirmation from someone with competence in accessibility issues that you don't need to. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 23:47, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Chronologically, as suggested by Struway2 is clearly preferable from a logical perspective. The first example is really messy and is difficult to follow the thread of the career. The Rambling Man ( talk) 19:04, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Club | Season | Division | League | FA Cup | League Cup | Other | Total | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | |||
Template F.C. | 1995–96 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1996–97 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
1997–98 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
1998–99 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
1999–2000 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2000–01 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2001–02 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2002–03 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Template F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Template Rovers F.C. (loan) | 1995–96 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Templaton United F.C. (loan) | 1998–99 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki F.C. | 2003–04 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2004–05 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2005–06 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2006–07 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2007–08 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2008–09 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2009–10 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2010–11 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2011–12 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2012–13 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Wiki F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Wiki Wanderers F.C. (loan) | 2003–04 | Scottish Premiership | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Career total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Whereas a properly chronological table makes much more sense like this:
Club | Season | Division | League | FA Cup | League Cup | Other | Total | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | |||
Template F.C. | 1995–96 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template Rovers F.C. (loan) | 1995–96 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template F.C. | 1996–97 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1997–98 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
1998–99 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Templaton United F.C. (loan) | 1998–99 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template F.C. | 1999–2000 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2000–01 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2001–02 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2002–03 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Template F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Wiki F.C. | 2003–04 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki Wanderers F.C. (loan) | 2003–04 | Scottish Premiership | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki F.C. | 2004–05 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2005–06 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2006–07 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2007–08 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2008–09 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2009–10 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2010–11 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2011–12 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2012–13 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Wiki F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Career total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Bladeboy1889 ( talk) 16:06, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
So returning to my point above - that would result as either:
Club | Season | Division | League | FA Cup | League Cup | Other | Total | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | |||
Template F.C. | 1995–96 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template Rovers F.C. (loan) | 1995–96 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template F.C. | 1996–97 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1997–98 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
1998–99 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Templaton United F.C. (loan) | 1998–99 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template F.C. | 1999–2000 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2000–01 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2001–02 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2002–03 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Loan total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Template F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Wiki F.C. | 2003–04 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki Wanderers F.C. (loan) | 2003–04 | Scottish Premiership | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki F.C. | 2004–05 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2005–06 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2006–07 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2007–08 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2008–09 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2009–10 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2010–11 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2011–12 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2012–13 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Loan total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Wiki F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Career total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
or
Club | Season | Division | League | FA Cup | League Cup | Other | Total | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | Apps | Goals | |||
Template F.C. | 1995–96 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template Rovers F.C. (loan) | 1995–96 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template F.C. | 1996–97 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1997–98 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
1998–99 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Templaton United F.C. (loan) | 1998–99 | League One | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Template F.C. | 1999–2000 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2000–01 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2001–02 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2002–03 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Wiki F.C. | 2003–04 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki Wanderers F.C. (loan) | 2003–04 | Scottish Premiership | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Wiki F.C. | 2004–05 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2005–06 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2006–07 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2007–08 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2008–09 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2009–10 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2010–11 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2011–12 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
2012–13 | Premier League | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Loan total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Template F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Wiki F.C. total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Career total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Both of which I believe are preferable to the seemingly random table here. My point is, the reality of a player who leaves a club on loan is just that - he physically leaves and then comes back again. To ignore that to show an uninterrupted spell at one club simply to allow cells in a table to be merged appears to me to be ignoring reality - the very thing Wikipedia is supposed to reflect. Yes - where a player spends a lot of time on loan the table won't look as elegant - maybe even a mess - but then that reflects a players career at that point - a bit messy. Bladeboy1889 ( talk) 09:18, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello again, football fans! Here's another article up for review. Any opinions? — Anne Delong ( talk) 12:57, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Another football submission at Afc! Is this a notable competition, and should the name be changed to "Scottish Summer Cup (football)" ?
Is this subject notable? Where he plays now, Segunda División B (if that, box shows he has only played thus far for the reserves, in the REGIONAL leagues), does not confer any notability, and i have the gut feeling (i could be wrong though) that Lega Pro Seconda Divisione is not professional as well.
Attentively, thank you very much in advance -- AL ( talk) 17:36, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
I recently created Muamer Tankovic, but Mattias321 ( talk · contribs) moved the article so that the surname is spelt Tanković. I've not seen one source that spells it Tanković. The Swedish FA site doesn't use Tanković or any other sources I found, so shouldn't Tankovic be used? JMHamo ( talk) 17:05, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
It's 100% correct, all Yugoslavians (and the nationalities that stemmed from the former country) have that accent in "c". Cheers -- AL ( talk) 17:13, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Also, most players of Balkan ethnicity who grew up in Western European countries don't use diacritics in their names, even on shirts, for no other reason than following the spelling in their passports/ID documents. 109.173.211.121 ( talk) 20:34, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
On his profile on Fulham official website, the spelling is Tanković. // Mattias321 ( talk) 08:42, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Sorry my bad, was only trying to help. But great teamwork overall, kudos to you all! -- AL ( talk) 20:49, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
In this edit, User:Eckerslike added Template:Fc to Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, which would cause AnomieBOT to subst all existing and future transclusions of the template. However, since the template currently has over 100 transclusions, the bot will not subst it without it being added to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force.
If this template should be automatically substed by the bot, please add the template to that page (or submit an {{
edit protected}} request if you don't have an admin handy). You might also place {{
subst only|auto=yes}}
on the template's documentation page instead of adding the category directly. If there is not consensus for the template to be substed, please revert the edit linked above. Thanks. (I am not watching this page for replies; please
ping me or post at
User talk:Anomie or
User talk:AnomieBOT if there are any questions)
Anomie
⚔
23:02, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
I'd suggest this article, I can't create it because my english is illegal.. 151.12.11.2 ( talk) 13:48, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Should lists of notable players within club articles be deleted or tagged ?
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/Fenix_down
( League Octopus 13:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC))
Hi, saw this so thought I might as well comment as it is about my editing. I used to tag such lists, but have stopped doing so because the manual of style seemed pretty clear about things and very few of the lists ever got the required inclusion criteria. Personally, I would say that a list of all players with a wikipedia article is not necessary. The link to the category by definition suffices and such a list would not only become unmanageable over time as every player, but would suggest that a player playing for a low league team who then played one game in a fully professional league but would not otherwise pass NFOOTY is more notable than a player who spent their whole career at the club making hundreds of appearances but did not do sufficient to pass NFOOTY of GNG.
Using the example you highlighted first, of the two players on that list, one of which merely was there as a youth player, never making a first team appearance and the other made only 34 league appearances according to their articles. Why would they be called out separately? Why are they specifically notable players at that club just because they have a WP article? To me it seems like both of them actually accomplished very little while at the club.
Additionally, being foreign is not necessarily something that makes a player notable beyond basic WP notability? If the notion of foreign players at a specific club has garnered significant reliable coverage then by all means discuss it, but a random list of players simply because they are of a different nationality strikes me as OR, the editor effectively saying, "these players are foreign, therefore they are inherently more notable than those who are not".
Happy to undo my edits if people disagree and won't remove any more until there is more discussion here. Fenix down ( talk) 16:00, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
To answer LO's questions above:
1. A consistant approach is being followed as the
Manual of Style clearly states that lists of famous / notable players without clear inclusion criteria should be avoided. Removing such lists is in line with the manual of style.
2. Happy to tag, wait and remove, but I have previously done this to hundreds of articles and seen only a fraction of 1% of them ever altered. To be honest, a list like
the one noted above that contains no inclusion criteria whatsoever is straight
OR and should be challenged immediately, it can always be added back if clear inclusion criteria are provided.
3. See comment above, I provide a clear edit summary and link to the manual of style indicating what is required, better to remove then add back with inclusion criteria than have it sitting around with a tag for a random amount of time. 2 months seems excessive, a watched page with active users should be dealt with within a week. I used to leave tags on pages for one month, then remove.
4. Clear guidance is already provided at the manual of style, the lists removed from finnish club articles have only been those lacking any form of inclusion criteria, or those that have just been "foreign players" (why should someone's nationality make them specifically notable at a given club unless there has been significant coverage on foreign players at a particular club? We don't have lists of "black players" or "left-handed players")or something so vague as to be no use to a reader. As such, the second example
here is fine. I have not removed any lists with inclusion criteria. A previous discussion here did not result in any consensus on unfirom criteria and I have taken the view since then that any list with some for of inlcusion criteria can stay unless consensus says otherwise. Whether a given set of inclusion criteria is satisfactory is outside the scope of this discussion, this only concerns lists completely lacking criteria.
5. I presume by "category lists" you mean
this? I have no issue with a link to the player category for a given club under the current squad. I can see how this could be useful and to me is probably the best way around any accusations of OR.
I would welcome people's thoughts on this. Should we have lists of players with WP articles at club pages? SHould we have lists of "notable players" with no clear inclusion criteria. The MoS seems clear, but happy to have debate. Fenix down ( talk) 08:45, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
The approach I took to this (in Peru national football team) was to avoid lists and use the section ("notable players") to discuss the team's traditional style (as exhibited by its notable former players) and mention only a few truly remarkable individuals (according to reliable sources). The actual list, List of Peru international footballers, is elsewhere (and, as expected, terrible in quality).-- MarshalN20 | Talk 15:00, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template_talk:Height#rfc_97AACED to determine if height should be displayed in metres or centimeters.— Bagumba ( talk) 04:43, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Looks like we've got an Indonesian IP mega-vandal at the moment, see Special:Contributions/110.137.208.170. I've just fired the rollback on every single one of their edits, which are unsourced at best, and obvious hoaxes/vandalism at worst. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:49, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
I was going to nominate List of foreign Scottish Premiership players for deletion as i cant see why being foreign would make you specifically more notable than another player who is Scottish in the same league. However i then found List of foreign Premier League players which was kept after an AFD in 2007. Just wondering what current opinion is. Blethering Scot 00:35, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
The achievements of Claudio Pizarro at the Bundesliga are notable precisely because he is foreign. Hence, being foreign in a league does boost notability. Whether this should be the case or not is a good question, but it doesn't remove the fact that it is notable.-- MarshalN20 | Talk 16:59, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Right here at Wikipedia: FIFA rankings of the AFC. Allthough all editions link to a source i doubt they are useful here. What are your thoughts? - Koppapa ( talk) 17:19, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello again, football fans - one more old stale draft eligible for deletion - is this a notable player, and should the article be kept? — Anne Delong ( talk) 12:37, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello, could someone please review Mohamed Salah as my edit has been reverted. The transfer has not been completed IMO, and even the official Chelsea site says "The move is subject to the Egyptian international agreeing personal terms and completing a medical examination."... Thanks, JMHamo ( talk) 21:35, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
It would be great if any of you could take the time to review the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Peru national football team/archive4 FA nomination. If passed, the article would serve as a strong model for other national team articles (and to rework the somewhat outdated Scotland nft FA-class article), which are bound to get much traffic once the World Cup starts.-- MarshalN20 | Talk 07:22, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm having trouble reconciling the birth details of Daniel Hurst, who played around the turn of the 20th century. Few sources mention exactly when or where he was born, but the ones that do say he was born in Cockermouth on 2 October 1876. However, a user who claims to be related to Hurst has emailed me with copies of his birth certificate, marriage certificate and his entry in the 1911 census; the birth certificate claims that Hurst was born on 9 November 1876 at (very specifically) 5 Hayton Square, Workington. Even if the birth certificate is right and proper, how do I cite it without access to my own copy, not just one that was emailed to me? – Pee Jay 10:19, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Andy says he is this subject's father, and says the DOB is incorrect - it should be 18 October 1993 and not 2 December 1994. I have no reason to doubt him, but almost every source uses the latter date. Further help at the article talk page would be appreciated so we can resolve this. Giant Snowman 18:38, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Is there a standard editnotice which can be placed on the talk page of a player when that player is negotiating a transfer, but has not yet signed for the prospective new club? This is in relation to current threads at Talk:Michael Essien, and recent threads at Talk:Juan Mata (there have been several others in the past). The anon editors simply do not grasp the idea of reliable sourcing, and got so abusive at Talk:Juan Mata that I unwatched if completely. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 14:19, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
I am unsure (or have forgotten) where I'm supposed to file bot requests, but is there a good reason that most subcategories of Category:UEFA European Championship, like this one and this one, should still be using a title that the main article is no longer using following a move discussion of over eight months ago? -- Theurgist ( talk) 10:06, 27 January 2014 (UTC)