![]() | 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 84 | Archive 85 | Archive 86 | Archive 87 | Archive 88 | → | Archive 90 |
Hi.
As some of you may have seen there is a minor content dispute at Premier League Golden Glove regarding the order of lists in sections "Awards won by nationality" and "Awards won by club". Therefore I am asking for input from this community/project so that we can form some sort of consensus for this article and similar articles.
The main issue is wheter we should sort the list alphabetically or chronologically when teams/nationalities has the same amount of wins. To me I find alphabetically better since it will make it easier for readers to read and find their team and listing things alphabetically is more natural. The other editor says chronological, I guess because he finds it most natural and new winners should be added at the bottom.
We have both provided other featured articles to support our order, with the other editor claiming his FL trupms the other ones since it is most recent. I dont understand how one article trumps the other and have not found anythingt in FL criteria saying special order of lists so I fail to see how that matters.
Articles with alphabetical order:
Articles with chronologal order:
Articles with hybrid order:
I am sure there are more examples of both orders being used so I am asking for input in this article and similar ones (this should be the same on all articles above for a start). What do you say?
(@ Bloom6132: Lets put the namecalling aside and sort this matter as humans, as I said before I do take responsibility for my part in this dispute. I am not going to tell you what to do (you do as you like) but I suggest we both stay out of this discussion and let FOOTY decide this dispute for us and what order to use. Of course you should feel free to respond to my edit if you feel like I provided false information but I tried to keep it neutral so that FOOTY can decide. Nothing good will come out of this if this becomes an other thread of us fighting).
So, What do you say? Alphabetical order or chronological order? QED237 (talk) 22:56, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
The purpose of the list is important as to what order things are listed in. If a specific order aids in the understanding of the topic (eg listing winners of the golden glove in date order) then not only should that order be used but it should be clear that it is being used. When a specific order doesn't aid the understanding of a topic (eg listing a summary of winners in date order) then it should not be used. Where there are no other orderings that aid the understandability of a topic then alphabetical order will aid the understanding of the topic as it is the default order that people expect. With regards to the "awards by nationality" and other summary tables being ordered by date it makes no sense to me. You are specifically taking out the date order by summarising the table and then ordering them by date.
On a separate issue I don't see the value of these summary tables to the articles in question (specifically the ones on Premier League Golden Glove) where the information that they provide is just as easily gleaned from the main table. => Spudgfsh ( Text Me!) 16:13, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
This article doesn't fit naming conventions, surely........? -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 11:00, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Notable? -- Edgars2007 ( talk/ contribs) 16:03, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, can anyone provide a reliable source that gives Fabio Possagno's appearance data for A.S.D. Portogruaro in the Lega Pro Prima Divisione? The only source I can find is Transfermarkt, which is of course not a WP:RS. Cheers, Mattythewhite ( talk) 14:31, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
I live near Portogruaro and when the team was playing in Serie B and Lega Pro i usually go to the stadium Stadio Mecchia and i can say that he has not made his professional debut with Portogruaro.
Tuttocalciatori confirm it because there aren't Fabio Possagno profile on the website.
In italy he has not made his fully professional debut(just Eccellenza and Promozione), in england i don't know, Are Salisbury and Sutton fully pro?-- Lglukgl ( talk) 21:58, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Interesting situation with the Jack Barmby article that brings up a topic we discussed here not too long ago: this season, Barmby was on loan from Manchester United to Hartlepool United, thus indicating that his senior career had begun. However, he was released by Manchester United at the end of this season and picked up by Leicester City, who have explicitly stated that Barmby will be part of their youth/reserve team next season, indicating that his youth career is not over. We therefore have the odd situation whereby the infobox in his article shows that his youth and senior careers overlap and contain different clubs (his spell at Hartlepool United could hardly be considered part of his youth career). Opinions (@ GiantSnowman:)? – Pee Jay 18:08, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Are you looking to recruit more contributors to your project?
We are offering to design and print physical paper leaflets to be distributed at Wikimania 2014 for all projects that apply.
For more information, click the link below.
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (
talk)
15:11, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Have a look at missing country flags at A.C. Milan First team squad removed by a script - It looks silly IMO. I know this was discussed before (probably at length), but I am unsure of the outcome.. could someone please remind me if there was consensus reached? Thanks, JMHamo ( talk) 23:46, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
It seems that the editor in question has done it to numerous French and Italian club articles, and is continuing to do so this morning. This is going to take quite a lot of work to put right if anyone wants to help. Number 5 7 08:09, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Let me state more precisely the problem as I see it which is at least two-fold: The crux is the notion of "representative nationality" 1/When playing for a given club, the players NEVER represent their own countries. If anything, they are playing for the 'nation' of their adopted clubs. The players may represent their countries outside of the club's games, but that's not relevant except in the player bios. 2/And assuming that the player in AC Milan may be a Japanese national say, and flags are in use, unless you know all the players and their national squads, it's impossible to tell if the player only has that as a nationality, or is a capped international. -- Ohc ¡digame! 08:48, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
I am sorry to say, but flags for players in club articles are indeed usefull. Anyone can see the major football websites and will confirm all use flags. FkpCascais ( talk) 01:48, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Here follows a cross posting from Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons for information only. The relevant discussion on flags belongs there and not here. -- Ohc ¡digame! 08:05, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
I would like to apologise for the length of this treatise, as it seems I am the person who, through this compliance drive, seems to be at odds with the footballing community that I need to state my arguments firmly and comprehensively for the record.
Wikipedia's goal is to supply encyclopaedic information about each and every notable subject. We try to write concisely, provide content that is relevant and with due weight, and avoid digression and coatracking. The problem of indiscriminate and excessive use of flag icons in article space is akin to the excessive wikilinking on en:wp five years ago.
In a way, it's rather unfortunate that flags are not subject to copyright concerns that cover most other imagery because they would not be so overused. Today, I see that flag icons are being used primarily because they can, and is justified by some flimsy test of relevance notwithstanding provisions in MOS:FLAG:
"Flag icons may be relevant in some subject areas, where the subject actually represents that country, government, or nationality – such as military units, government officials, or national sports teams. In lists or tables, flag icons may be relevant when the nationality of different subjects is pertinent to the purpose of the list or table itself.
Words as the primary means of communication should be given greater precedence over flags and flags should not change the expected style or layout of infoboxes or lists to the detriment of words."
The use of flags (or should I say "abuse") to sex up the article is mostly gratuitous and a violation of the guideline – most of the time, the flags are used in lieu of nation. Yes, accessibility is an issue, and it is a concern stated in MOSFLAG:
"The name of a flag's country (or province, etc.) should appear adjacent to the first use of the flag icon, as virtually no readers are familiar with every flag, and many flags differ only in minor details. Nearby uses of the flag need not repeat the name, although first appearances in different sections, tables or lists in a long article may warrant a repetition of the name, especially if the occurrences are likely to be independently reached by in-article links rather than read sequentially. Use of flag templates without country names is also an accessibility issue, as it can render information difficult for color blind readers to understand. In addition, flags can be hard to distinguish when reduced to icon size."
The vast majority of readers would not be able to identify more than a quarter of these flags using visual cues alone; just as many would be unable to identify all the countries by the ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 codes. Putting both together could result in a higher pass mark.
It is acknowledged in this proposal, currently still under discussion, that the use of flags in sport is in violation of MOSFLAG, and that it should be changed because they will continue to be used "like it or not". Such an argumentation represents disruption, and is anti-consensual in that it was not won through honest intellectual discussion of the merits or otherwise of doing so, but through a fait accompli. The current scale of usage of flags, whether using an excessively liberal interpretation of the guideline, or through people simply being used to seeing them plastered everywhere (like dates were once blanket linked globally) is in defiance of MOSFLAG. That these flags may have persisted in football articles for years is about as relevant as the spam and assorted copyright violations that have also persisted for years across our encyclopaedia. But let all be reminded that local consensus can never supplant general consensus. Football is not the only project in Wikipedia, and the global recommendation is meant to balance the needs of the various constituencies and stakeholders within the encyclopaedia. The implementation of their removal of same is execution of the consensus that exists.
Without even starting to talk about players' nationalities, it is easy to find examples of overuse: there is the indiscriminate flagging of presidents, managers [1] and physiotherapists [2]. I have even seen flags used to indicate location of stadia where some international matches are played. There is also cruft like the dual citizenship – not only would such be of little utility, it adds a level of confusion that one would need to clarify with a coatrack about how/why they would represent one country and not another. I don't believe anyone has ever contested the relevance of nationality to the athlete in question, so nobody would see the problem with the use within the relevant biography. However, none of this specific use of any flag for a given player's passport nationality in club articles is of direct relevance to the club. The crux is the notion of "representative nationality" When playing for a given club, the players NEVER represent their own countries. If anything, they are playing for the 'nation' of their adopted clubs. The players may represent their countries outside of the club's games, but that's not relevant except in the player bios. Nationalities of players in a club context is thus rarely relevant in individual cases.
Playing for a national team is a huge honour and privilege reserved for the talented few, yet we see flags used in a significant quantity of articles far beyond what I believe is optimal. Flags are currently most often [ab]used to indicate players' legal nationalities and not of any country that they actually represent. Even if some of these are national squad members, there is no encyclopaedic need to create laundry lists of these cases. Much is made of the "usefulness" argument. But usefulness is determined more by pertinent analysis than the mere presence of raw data, of which this flag usage is an example. People, teams, buildings, and works are notable because they are different or stand out in some way. If they only conform to expectation, or to some mould or stereotype, this is by definition non-notable. The same would apply to the notability or uniqueness of information given. To be truly useful information and less confusing for readers, the nationality issue in an article should be mentioned as an exception and not by default.
If the notion of "representative nationality" has been followed, the implication is that the player has been capped for his/her country. But that is often fallacious: assuming for example that the player in AC Milan is a Japanese national say, and flags are in use, it's impossible to tell if the player only has that as a nationality, or is a capped international, unless you know all the players and their national squads. As this example suggest the flag indicates passport nationality, as most of the players in this squad, if not all, never played for any country team. And how this information can be useful in a club article is a mystery to me. If anything, the perverted usage of flags makes it potentially misleading of the state of affairs. In a globalised world, players are pursuing their careers abroad in increasingly large numbers. Sportsmen and women may play in countries other than the one they were born in or whose nationality they adopted, and there is really nothing significant in the possibility or likelihood that a player may be called up for play in their national teams. Talented players are much sought after in the richer leagues, such as the Premier League or Bundesliga. All clubs these days have put in various measures to manage national call-ups, including contract provisions and squad redundancies.
Some have stated the discussion within certain countries as to the mix of foreign players (too few, too many, etc) as an argument for including flags in individual club articles. I would say that the sensible way of handling it would be to include elements affecting the entire game globally in a country in Football in country or Country league articles. There, they can be referred and link to from individual club articles where there is discussion of particular relevance to the latter. Putting pretty splodges of colour into individual club or season articles is just plain lazy and indiscriminate throwing together of information without letting it create encyclopaedic value. And it isn't a substitute for explaining the implications or controversies that have been taking place. Any element affecting the overall composition of a club can be included in the form of a summary or an analysis table in the relevant club or season article. There should not be any general need to deal with individual players' nationalities within the text of any given article except for the biography on that individual. -- Ohc ¡digame! 04:51, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi There is a slight problem with the current Cypriot season in which there seems to be no final score for the last game of the season between APOEL and AEL Limassol, the two teams are fighting for the league's title. However, the final match between them occurred on Friday 17th May, over a week ago, and on both the Cypriot FA, and UEFA website there is no answer to whom won the league, which will affect who will qualify for the two Champions League places, one in the Champions Route, the other through the League route.
I would be grateful for some suggestions on where to look for the winner. Hesky10 ( talk) 14:17, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I'm MYS77.
I have a question: other user ( Lglukgl) created a page about the Passo das Emas stadium, but it was simply redirected to Luverdense.
Have the stadiums a notability guideline or we can assume the list of Fully professional leagues as a guideline? (Also in the notability page there's nothing about the stadiums).
Cheers, MYS 77 talk with me ☺ 23:21, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello ,
Can somebody tell me some rules about the stadium?
Why Estádio Waldomiro Pereira is notable? Why Passo Das emas is not notable?
I don't understand the rule.-- Lglukgl ( talk) 23:43, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
So it happens every transfer window, but users get the urge to change teams for players who have agreed to moves, but haven't officially joined their new teams yet. David Luiz, [[ Marc-André ter Stegen]] and Alen Halilović are three I've edited in the last few days. Unless I'm overstepping by reverting changes, could I get help with those pages? Thanks. Mosmof ( talk) 15:21, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
FYI, if you check this version and scroll down to the very bottom, you will notice that managerial career boxes are not appearing. this is due to the added complexity of passing the navboxes through {{ navboxes}}. however, I was able to fix it by switching to {{ collapse top}}/{{ collapse bottom}}. it's possible we can reduce the complexity of the {{ navboxes}} template (started a thread), but until that happens ... 198.102.153.1 ( talk) 16:17, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated Central Coast Mariners FC for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Bencherlite Talk 19:05, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
There is an ongoing move discussion for the Gambrinus Liga, which will cease to be called the Gambrinus liga at the end of the season (after Saturday) due to a new sponsorship deal. Discuss and your opinions are welcomed at the talk page. Thanks, C 679 09:57, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello,
The page mentioned is having too much vandalism only because of a rumour of transfer. Can someone block it, please?
Cheers, MYS 77 talk with me ☺ 16:33, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
I am not sure if I am going to the right place (I should probably ask an admin), but I came across Fadhil Haji Majo ( talk · contribs) that added his own webpage (or at least it seems like it) to articles like Gareth Bale, Neymar, Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi. Then I saw his userpage that to me is promotional and he compares himself to Messi with "strong legs and fast feets" and so on. He also links to his facebook, twitter and webpages. Is that allowed? QED237 (talk) 12:29, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Isn't Colombia national football team results (2000–19) article a violation of WP:NOTNEWS. Kingjeff ( talk) 20:50, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
An editor has changed the subject's name from Steven Beitashour to "Steven Mehrdad Beitashour" which includes his Persian name. The only source for the Persian name, Mehrdad, is an Iranian interview. I can't verify its reliability. The editor has offered three sources for the full name at Talk:Steven Beitashour: a Facebook fan page, transfermarkt (everyone's most favourite unreliable source) and one from scoresway.com. I don't know where it gets its information. A bit of assistance would be appreciated. The editor also removed a CN tag when I added it to request info and no ref was supplied. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 01:40, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Is it even necessary for all of its stages having an article? I posted there a question in the talk page but no one yet answered. I just want to say this ahead of time if maybe someone will nominate it for deletion. Fairy Tail Rocks 05:30, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
FYI - I have nominated the footballer by ethnicity category ( Category:Association football players by ethnic or national origin) for deletion. Please contribute to the discussion here. Thanks. SFB 11:18, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
I was wondering around when I saw Neftchi Baku PFK graded as A-class. I'm not sure why it deserves to be graded like that since it doesn't have a GA review first or an A-class review like most WikiProjects do. Can someone take a look and/or reassess the article? Thanks! Fairy Tail Rocks 12:29, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
The question is on the title.-- FCNantes72 ( talk) 11:02, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, in the early rounds of the CECAFA Cup, 2 points were awarded for a win, 1 for a draw, 0 for a loss. Can I use this template with the CECAFA Cup? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 14:05, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
|wpts=2
to achieve this -
97rob (
talk)
14:28, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
|wpts=2
would have to be used for {{
Fb cl3 team}} -
97rob (
talk)
14:30, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
|wpts=two
on the navbar will change the points explantaion.
1973 CECAFA Cup still calculates as three points for a win in the group stages, but the section using fb cl3 seems correct. -
97rob (
talk)
15:13, 1 June 2014 (UTC)|wpts=two
(in words) will change the description -
97rob (
talk)
15:19, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I think that given the massive media coverage of the controversies, and the information unearthed in today's Times, a separate article should be started. Anyone else agree? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 11:13, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
On italian speaking wikipedia we must writing again the article, we need a lot of help: if there is somebody speaking italian it would be fantastic.. In italian: in pratica il problema è che ci sono dei grossi problemi nel modo in cui è stata compilata la voce e se non riusciamo a risolverli la voce non può rimanere in vetrina.. We need also some help about article about Napoli's team, if you have some books about the team.. -- 93.64.241.68 ( talk) 13:24, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Template:Atlantic Coast Conference Men's Soccer Freshman of the Year navbox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Jrcla2 (
talk)
14:27, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Please visit the
College men's soccer seasons by year multi-TfD nomination to participate. Thank you.
Jrcla2 (
talk)
14:38, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
His biography [4] says that he is the son of an international footballer. A candidate may be Ian Gardiner, but the dates of death don't tally. Any ideas who this may be? Jmorrison230582 ( talk) 14:12, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. The Toulon Tournament is a competition for under-20s, right? I'm a bit confused, as it seems that the English team playing is the under-21s, coached by the under-21s coach but without some of the 22-year-olds. On Wikipeda, players, such as James Ward-Prowse, have been given "caps" for the under 21s, but shouldn't that technically be for the under 20s? BBC website calls them under 20s, but the squad on Wikipedia is at England national under-21 football team, whereas IMHO the same squad should be at England national under-20 football team. What are your opinions on the matter? -- Foro Reto34 ( talk) 11:08, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Today I read an article on the longest-ever football game in Germany, the 153 minute long final of the 1914 German football championship and expanded the article accordingly. The source article states that it is the longest ever game in Germany. What would be the longest-ever game world wide and also per country? Could we find reliable sources to create a list of those? Does anybody know? Or is there an article already? Calistemon ( talk) 12:33, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Being booked in a fully-pro match without being on the pitch is valid enough for creation? (Ex.: Yeray Gómez was booked in a match between Mallorca and RM Castilla, but was on the bench). Cheers, MYS 77 talk with me ☺ 19:43, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
My intention was create Joselu and Roldan but there are five Joselu in Europe and about Roldan my intenction was create Roldan but there is a redirect called Roldan about Roldan Santa FE. so : Roldan Sabadell because sabadell is the club of the debut Joselu Almeria becuase Almeria is the most important team in his career. -- Lglukgl ( talk) 19:52, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
So currently there is this new club in India for the Indian Super League called Kerala Blasters. Most reports have resorted to calling the team just 'Kerala Blasters'. However some reports have the name as 'Kerala Blasters FC' or 'Kerala Blasters Football Club' but the grand majority seem to be heading towards 'Kerala Blasters'. Supposedly Sachin Tendulkar, the owner of the team, said in a quote the team with FC in it. Personally I feel the official name is just 'Kerala Blasters' without FC and that those adding it are just doing so because the media and overall population believe almost every team should have some sort of FC or SC in it. That may sound harsh and ridiculous but that is my opinion at least on this. Any help would be appreciated. -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 23:55, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
I will need an admin to change it from Kerala Blasters → Kerala Blasters FC (Not F.C. just FC). Cheers. -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 00:45, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Apart from flags, I've also noted many cases that breach WP's policies and guidelines. I'd like now to bring the focus to the inclusion of laundry lists in club and season articles.
We've never climbed a mountain just because it's there. We include information that is notable and relevant, and just because something is verifiable or sourced to a reliable website doesn't necessarily warrant inclusion. However, I notice that football articles have morphed into magnets of just that sort of detail.
Editors have systematically included lists of all and sundry individuals involved with the club, from club officers down to vice presidents, board members, assistant managers, physiotherapists, boot boys. In the vast majority of cases, these individuals are not notable. But seems this is there just because the club's website credits them. Such would constitute indiscriminate information of little or no encyclopaedic value. Having to go around and remove this is a pain because it shouldn't be there in the first place. What's worse is having to battle with editors who fiercely resist their removal, and refuse to engage in any discussion. -- Ohc ¡digame! 01:29, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
There appear to be a large number of other football club articles with such a disposition. Examples include MUFC, Real Madrid, Borussia Dortmund, Ajax, Sparta. These are some of the world's best-known clubs, with a higher proportion of notable individuals on board, and every team member is listed irrespective of their individual notability. Naturally this percentage declines as we reach the lower registers of a given country's football leagues, yet these positions are all listed – press officer, masseur, kit man etc. Should we not restrict ourselves to the "key positions" only – Chairman, Manager, Head coach? -- Ohc ¡digame! 07:49, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
( ←) Based upon the Man Utd page I suggest that the following club positions should be listed as standard for all clubs:
Any other prominent member of staff at the club that is notable in their own right may also be listed, otherwise they should be omitted. I don't know of any non-primary/non-business sources that care to go into detail beyond this, which is a good indication that anything outside the above positions is going far beyond the remit of a general overview of the topic. SFB 20:48, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Anybody out there that masters Italian as well as English that can reach out to this guy? He does not seem to understand the WP guidelines at all, much as myself and User:MYS77 have tried to explain them to him.
Creates page after page after page of poor content and verifiability (there, MYS77 can vouch for it much better than me), some players are created because "they will be notable one day". The "pièce de resistance", creating an article that's half player name/half team name (i.e. Joselu Almeria)!
I believe this has much to do with his level of English (which i feel borders 0 with all due respect, my Hungarian or Swedish is 0 most definitely), hence i ask if a kind soul could try to collaborate with Lglukgl in his native language, because i (and MYS77, he confirmed this to me today) have run out of bullets.
P.S. Both users mentioned here have been notified of this discussion. Attentively -- AL ( talk) 00:26, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Hey. I created a Danish football club. It is Hadsund BK. It would be nice if one of you would drop by. This a previously known footballer namely Ebbe Sand. Look also just past the talk page and see if it is the right template I inserted. Thanks in advance. -- Søren 1997 ( talk // contributions) 19:18, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
In Asian leagues, there are qoutas for foreign players for a particular team. So we make a separate table for the foreign players in the league article like 2013–14 I-League. As per as MOS:FLAG#Use of flags for sportsperson, in many articles the flags have been removed from places like manager, captain etc. But in the MOS only, as it says, "flags should only indicate the sportsperson's national squad/team or representative nationality", so dont you think in the foreign players table of these league articles, these flags should be present? RRD13 ( talk) 07:29, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello all. I've just been working on Scott Loach who has signed for Rotherham from the Tractor Boys today, and was about to complete the update by fixing his career totals table when I discovered what a bitch that is. Using Soccerbase etc, it's really easy to update season by season, but the totals is a nightmare. I was wondering if there was scope, or if anyone knew someone who could code up a totals line which did the maths for us? The Rambling Man ( talk) 15:26, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I am wondering how to show the international career stats for Diego Costa who has played for two national teams.
With one national team we do something like (note it is made up numbers in all tables):
Spain national team | ||
---|---|---|
Year | Apps | Goals |
2010 | 1 | 2 |
2011 | 4 | 1 |
2012 | 10 | 5 |
2013 | 12 | 3 |
2014 | 8 | 3 |
Total | 35 | 14 |
For two national teams we can either just list them above eachother...
Brazil national team | ||
---|---|---|
Year | Apps | Goals |
2010 | 1 | 2 |
2011 | 4 | 1 |
2012 | 10 | 5 |
Brazil Total | 15 | 8 |
Spain national team | ||
Year | Apps | Goals |
2013 | 12 | 3 |
2014 | 8 | 3 |
Spain Total | 20 | 6 |
International Total | ||
Total | 35 | 14 |
... or make it look like club statistics. What is the best? QED237 (talk) 00:56, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Can someone take a look at {{ 2014–15 Football League Championship table}}. It's not producing the table slices properly but I can't work out why.
see
{{2014–15 Football League Championship table|team=NOR}}
cheers => Spudgfsh ( Text Me!) 11:29, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, how far down the tier with this do we go? Could I create a 2014-15 Kingstonian F.C. season article if I wanted? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 12:07, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
So, that's probably been debated ad infinitum. Question is, was there any consensus on either, such that an article like Home United FC has been and should be redirected? LRD NO ( talk) 09:16, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Where a proper noun that includes terminal punctuation ends a sentence, do not add a second terminal punctuation mark.
cheers,
Struway2 (
talk)
13:54, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Could we get a few eyes on Red Star Belgrade for MoS, layout and other issues please? Walter Görlitz ( talk) 23:53, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Please refer to
this discussion about whether the fullname
parameter of the {{
Infobox football club}} template should be Melbourne City Football Club or Melbourne City FC where this is confusion about how this parameter should be used (e.g., whether to use a full legal name and, if so, what this means, e.g., a business name, company/association name, trade mark, etc.). Please feel free to join the discussion there. —
sroc
💬
01:35, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
This Berlin based club doesn't exist anymore in this kind. The article itself also gives a hint "The merger will go ahead on 01/07/2013 and the new club will be called FC Viktoria 1889 Berlin Lichterfelde-Templehof e.V.". The new club qualified for the German Cup. I'm not exactly skilled in merging club articles... Thanks! -Lemmy- ( talk) 06:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Done
Giant
Snowman
18:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
{{ Livescores editnotice}} Would anyone like to comment? Walter Görlitz ( talk) 00:24, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Any more comments or is it time to put it to use at 2014 FIFA World Cup (as a start) and then perhaps more articles? Feel free to comment both here and at the template talk. All constructive suggestions on the template and how it visually should look is appreciated both here and at the template talk. General comments as well. QED237 (talk) 20:49, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
There is nothing wrong with having an article-specific, one-off edit notice about 'live updates' for the duration of the tournament if that is the consensus on the article talk page. Giant Snowman 15:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
"One-off" means it should not be put into widespread useage - yet. Giant Snowman 09:30, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi folks. I noticed all the Melbourne City players who were at the club last season when it was still Melbourne Heart had their infoboxes altered so it said they were two separate clubs (e.g., see infobox of Patrick Kisnorbo - separate entry for Melbourne Heart & Melbourne City). I went and changed this so it just had one entry under the name "Melbourne City", as I thought this was protocol for when a club changes names (e.g. Roger Espinoza and Kei Kamara - both at Sporting KC before and after the name change from Kansas City Wizards, their infoboxes just have one entry under "Sporting Kansas City"). However all my edits were reverted by User:Simione001 for the reason "Melbourne City FC only came into existence this year. You shouldn't be changing the infobox of their players to indicate that they have been playing for City before the club even existed." Are they correct on this, or is what I did right? — Limabeans ( talk) 05:40, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
If it's a simple name change, then I don't see the problem with current players having only "City" in the infobox. However, if it's a new club, then there should be a split. Number 5 7 08:07, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
The infobox/article should reflect the name of the club that the person was playing for at the time; if the same club simply changes name then we should use the current name. Former players should have 'Melbourne Heart', current and future players should have 'Melbourne City'. Giant Snowman 11:53, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I don't know if this is the right place to ask this question, but can anyone confirm, if a player has played for a league club in the FA Cup, does that make them eligible for an article?? Stew jones ( talk) 20:52, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, in the 1997–98 season at User:Matty.007/sandbox/List of Kingstonian F.C. seasons, I can't get Leworthy's goals to format such as at my guide, List of Margate F.C. seasons. Please can someone fix this? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 18:49, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Recently the "Honours" section of Mathew Ryan was deleted entirely on the grounds that it was unreferenced. Is this the appropriate action? Very few players have any references in their honours sections, let alone every honour being referenced - it would seem excessive to delete these all? Macosal ( talk) 03:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
The honours section should be fully and explicitly referenced as per WP:V and WP:BLP. Giant Snowman 09:27, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
GiantSnowman has again removed the club honours section from Mathew Ryan. How are we supposed to reference club honours? Additionally, I have found no other article where the club honours section is referenced, even on feature articles.-- 2nyte ( talk) 08:46, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Disagree strongly that 'unsourced' or 'citation needed' tags simply state "here is a problem, let's do nothing about it". I've come across a few in football related articles, and DID do something about it (found and added references). Simply deleting material that is unsourced but uncontentious (and not obvious nonsense), without giving editors the opportunity the find references, is tantamount to vandalism. ShugSty ( talk) 14:14, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Unfortunately it seems this same issue has again cropped up, this time re Fernandão and again re GiantSnowman. Unfortunately I'm unaware of how the system works but the general opinion here appears to be that the "unsourced" tag should be used? If anything, it seems like the user has a personal problem with the "unsourced" tag, which 1. should be brought up on the relevant talk page and 2. does not give a user the right to bypass what remains a valid part of the editing system. Can we aim for a consensus here to avoid the removal of potentially thousands of honours sections without giving editors a chance to source what are uncontroversial sections? Macosal ( talk) 11:46, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
To try and clarify things and open the discussion back up in the hope of achieving consensus: I have two main issues with the direct deletion of unreferenced honours sections, both of which can be found at WP:V#Responsibility for providing citations:
Further to these, WP:V#Responsibility for providing citations states "When tagging or removing material for lacking an inline citation, please state your concern that there may not be a published reliable source for the content, and therefore it may not be verifiable". It would seem that this is being given little weight when many of the honours deleted can doubtlessly be supported by easily accessible reliable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macosal ( talk • contribs) 14:10, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
@ Walter Görlitz: if you feel my editing is " disruptive to the highest degree and the epitome of non-cooperative editing" then I would invite you to report me, although I would say that your argument of "editor removed unreferenced content about a living person" will not get very far. I am abiding by WP:BLP, nothing more and nothing less. I also don't have a clue how this is "non-cooperative editing"...? I've already suggested you raise the matter at BLPN, that has not yet been done as far as I'm aware. Giant Snowman 09:11, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Not that reason has helped so far, but it's clear that a number of editors disagree with your interpretation of BLP and so, consensus is that you stop removing the material. I don't know if consensus is that you tag it, but that would be my advice. Please don't forget that several of the editors are very experienced and view the removal of this information as unproductive. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 16:35, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
No, it's certainly not off-topic - it was a deliberately ludicrous example to demonstrate to you that you cannot simply assume that a player has won a winner's medal (and the subsequent honour), either because a) he was a squad member and/or b) he played X amount of games that season. Wikipedia relies on reliable sources to verify claims, not guesswork and assumptions. Giant Snowman 14:03, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
The "some reason(s)" why deleting this content is a bad idea have been stated repeatedly, and by several people, and you (for the avoidance of doubt: GiantSnowman) have completely failed to address these. You've completely failed to demonstrate that this is good practice - all you've said are variations of "because it says so" (it doesn't) and "because I can". You've shown a lack of understanding of the policy, of the subject (criteria for winners' medals are extremely rare outside the UK), and of Wikipedia itself. It seems like you have no interest in making Wikipedia an informative and collaborative place, merely in blindly enforcing rules, and it's this attitude that leads you to misuse these rules so much, to the detriment of Wikipedia. ArtVandelay13 ( talk) 17:37, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
This section is crazy long so I won't read it all, but just speaking on personal experience and seeing similar discussions in the past. Removing contentious material has usually been said to be material that is potentially libelous, defamatory, otherwise detrimental to the BLP. I know that WP:BLP in particular calls out that that is what is meant by contentious. Something like whether or not they won an award is not likely to be any of those things. I would also suggest for something as minor as statistics or awards, the person wanting to delete the material has a small burden to atleast try to source it before just removing it. - DJSasso ( talk) 17:59, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
"the person wanting to delete the material has a small burden to at least try to source it before just removing it" - I couldn't agree more. The editor in question has made a huge positive contribution to football articles in Wikipedia, but appears to have a narrow-minded, borderline obsessive, approach to this matter. FFS - we have seveal paragraphs here arguing over what contentious means (without any hint of irony either!) ShugSty ( talk) 10:24, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Your opening statement of "it would seem excessive to delete these all"? Giant Snowman 12:53, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
For the record the outcome of the other thread has been the establishment of User:Macosal/BLP, where sections for deletion will be tagged and listed for one month before deletion. People should feel more than welcome to help out. Macosal ( talk) 00:29, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Is John Neeskens the son of Johan Neeskens or not? I've seen claims and counter-claims.
TheBigJagielka ( talk) 12:31, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Can someone delete this page? Again, this user created a player who isn't a fully-pro footballer. According to Soccerway, he played a match for Deportivo de La Coruña's first team, but this never happened. According to BDFutbol (a much more reliable source, he only played for the reserve team). See here to confirm. Cheers, MYS 77 ✉ 22:54, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
The following individuals who are in the scope of this project are showing to be alive on the English wiki, but deceased on another language wiki:
Please help to find reliable sources to confirm if these individuals are alive or dead, or correct any mis-categorization on the relevant foreign-language article(s). Please see WP:LIVINGDEAD for more info and raise any issues on the talkpage. Thanks. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 18:08, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
I've noticed that there are comments in articles like 2014 FIFA World Cup Group A that refer to WP:LIVESCORES. WP:LIVESCORES is a section of a snooker-specific page, and refers to a discussion that apparently only had 3 participants. I don't think it is appropriate for a page related to soccer to refer to that section. It also seems wrong for a generic-sounding redirect like "WP:LIVESCORES" to link to a page just about snooker, but maybe that is a discussion for another place. Anyway, if this wikiproject also has a consensus that live scoring isn't appropriate (which seems to be the case), then I think there should be a page or section written specifically about live scores on soccer pages (e.g., WP:FOOTY/LIVESCORES). Also, while I'm writing this, I thought I would mention that I personally think live scoring on Wikipedia is fine, and also think that WP:NOTNEWS doesn't have any relevance to the discussion. WP:NOTNEWS says that if news sources just report routine information like scores, that isn't enough to make a subject notable. WP:NOTNEWS doesn't suggest that articles shouldn't be kept up to date with the latest information, instead only saying that the latest information should be treated similarly to other information. If a soccer-specific page like WP:FOOTY/LIVESCORES is written, I would encourage it not to refer to WP:NOTNEWS as justification, as that seems to me to be a misunderstanding of the WP:NOTNEWS policy. Calathan ( talk) 21:12, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I forget where the right place to report this is but there is an edit war developing at Ryan Burge. I believe the IP is Ryan Burge himself but since the "war" started his version of events have been reported so are now sourced.-- Echetus Xe 09:25, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
In Asian leagues, since there are qoutas for foreign players, we always make a foreign players table in the league article, like the one I created in 2013–14 Iran Pro League. But for the past few days, some editors and IPs are removing this table and claiming that this table should not be present as it was not there in the previous league articles, whether is it mandatory to put such tables and others. Please drop in your suggestions, I mean whether this table should be kept, removed etc. RRD13 ( talk) 09:06, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Sorry to burden everyone with this WP:LAME argument, but since the discussion at Talk:James Wilson (footballer born 1995) isn't getting anywhere, which of these is preferable:
I won't bore you with which one I think is better because a) you can see it at the article talk page, and b) it really doesn't matter what I think, but can someone please help settle this debate? – Pee Jay 22:02, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
1 or 2 - I personally prefer a comma, I know others don't, but I think we can agree that club should come before position. I'd also add "professional" in there as as that is his claim to notability i.e. "James Antony Wilson is an English professional footballer who plays for Manchester United as a striker." Giant Snowman 15:25, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Talk:Jonathan de Guzmán#Free-kick specialist? It's not clear if the subject is or isn't but there's a statement on the article that claims this. Guidance and discussion would be appreciated. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 01:12, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated the article and its associated page(s) as AfD as it does not seem to meet notability as per WP:FOOTY. Any input would be appreciated. LRD NO ( talk) 06:29, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
I noticed the other day that lineup SVGs seems to sometimes stick out from the end of the written lineups, leaving a gap before the man of the match/assistant referees section. I had a look at the code, and I've found a possible solution to this. It would need to be implemented on a wide range of articles, so I've brought it here, rather than just staying with the previous discussion which can be found at Talk:2014 FIFA World Cup Group A#Lineup svgs. I've placed a copy of a current usage, as well as my proposal (which can probably be tidied up slightly more if we're going to use it), at User:97rob/FootballMatchSVGs. - 97rob ( talk) 17:14, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Which criteria for the transfer deal is done? I once warned by someone for 3RR due to "edit war" on some players that completed the medical but not sign anything (or vice versa could happen, such as Aly Cissokho) Would transfer windows alleged not yet open is a criteria to say the transfer is not completely done, such as in Cesc Fàbregas. (it is difference from transfer done AFTER the deadline).
In Serie A i knew the date the contract filed to the league office (which the date on official transfer list on the web) usually had a time tag with the club announcement (usually earlier)
While in Premier League the transfer windows starts at the end of last season ( Season – the period commencing on the date of the first League Match on the fixture list of the League’s first team competition and ending on the date of the last)
To sum up, how to avoid unnecessary edit war on transfer? Matthew_hk t c 05:51, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Davykamanzi ( talk · contribs) has been making changes to {{ Infobox football biography}}, I have reverted and ask that they actually explain how these changes will impact our articles, please join in the discussion at Template talk:Infobox3cols#Big problem. Giant Snowman 18:43, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
These are not even used on the World Cup articvle, are they? - Koppapa ( talk) 21:02, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Can you please participate to this debate here ? -- Fayçal.09 ( talk) 19:36, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
For those who remember the last few interactions, Gibson Flying V changed the height parameter on Julian de Guzman from m to cm. I reverted and opened a discussion at Talk:Julian de Guzman#1.70 m = 170 cm. Would any admins care to support a topic ban? Walter Görlitz ( talk) 05:45, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, is there a guide how to make field diagram showing the starting lineups, such as this [14]? How do people make these?-- 2nyte ( talk) 14:38, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi there...just noticed on the Euro 2016 qualifying page that the South American national team Chile are listed in Pot 2.
/info/en/?search=Euro_2016_qualifiers#Seeding
Just thought it was best to bring it to someones attention. Hope this helps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rwmb1980 ( talk • contribs) 19:08, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Category:Association football chairmen and investors mixes two things, and therefore has two parents: Category:Association football executives and Category:Sports owners. It seems to me that it would be better to separate these.
Also, the members of Category:Directors of football clubs in England are mostly named "XXX F.C. directors and chairmen". Chairmen are always directors, so this is unnecessarily long; it would be sufficient to name the category "directors", i.e. omit "chairmen".
I therefore suggest that the football categories be split to "investors" and "directors".
This was floated at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_April_12#Category:Middlesbrough_F.C._chairmen_and_executives but needs a central discussion here. – Fayenatic L ondon 22:08, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
An editor keeps reverting superfluous material into the Mexico national football team article. I have raised the issue there in a couple of discussion topics (please see [15]). Feel free to contribute at Talk:Mexico national football team. The nature of the issue revolves around two topics: (1) Is the 2012 Olympic victory of Mexico's youth squad relevant to the article about the senior side, (2) Is there a source that supports the idea that there are only three major international football tournaments, and that these are the World Cup, the Olympics, and the Confederations Cup? Regards.-- MarshalN20 Talk 21:02, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
An IP-shifting anon is reverting referenced material and it needs some additional editors watching. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 07:48, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
I have redirected it, but have been reverted. Some outside input is welcome. Oh, I should probably clarify that I'm talking about the 2014 Faroe Islands Cup Final ;-) Fram ( talk) 06:54, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Dear football experts: Here's an AfC submission that is up for review right now. Is this a notable football person? — Anne Delong ( talk) 14:49, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
I created an article under the name of IFFHS best clubs of the 20th century, we can see an example of this page in my draft page here. However the user GiantSnowman proposed that it be deleted and merged with the article IFFHS, we can see the deletion debate here. So after the sudden removal of the page, I was surprise but I respected the decision and I decided as agreed to merge (add) what it was removed in the IFFHS page. But I was surprise for the second time because the same user GiantSnowman removed it !!, we can see his act here. IFFHS is a notable organisation and it contributions are agreed by all the international institutions so what this notable organisation published about IFFHS best clubs of the 20th century is normally agreed in Wikipedia. We can see the second debate about this deletion in the IFFHS article's talk page here. Fayçal.09 ( talk) 17:21, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Lugnuthemvar ( talk · contribs) has been edit warring on several North American articles using association football rather than piping as [[association football|soccer]], and doing it badly I might add. Could someone please review the edits and possibly offer some advice? Walter Görlitz ( talk) 17:07, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
Alper Tursun isn't notable enough to have a page in here. Also, the page is so poor that if it wasn't here it wouldn't be any great loss.
Can someone delete it? Thanks, MYS 77 ✉ 00:33, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
An editor has been making changes to the football squad template documentation today, mostly in relation to the flags debate, which I have disputed. It would be good to have some third party input to review whether those changes are consistent with the outcome (or lack of one) of the debate. Thanks, Number 5 7 11:11, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Replied elsewhere to this wikiproject canvassing. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 12:14, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
The football magazine The Blizzard (magazine) article has been nominated for deletion. An editor has removed over 50,000 characters from the article and nominated it for deletion. Surely we can keep it? TheBigJagielka ( talk) 12:10, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
See Talk:Estádio do Maracanã#Requested move to Maracanã Stadium June 2014 for a requested move for Estádio do Maracanã to Maracanã Stadium. Hey mid ( contribs) 17:05, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Pleas note: This is an updated version of a previous post that I made.
Hi all,
My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.
One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.
This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:
• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film
• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.
• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.
• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____
• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost
The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014
For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (
talk)
16:23, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I have a couple of questions:
Thanks, Mat ty. 007 18:00, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Someone has been moving, through a bot and seemingly without discussion, the category ASSOCIAÇÃO ACADÉMICA DE COIMBRA PLAYERS to...COIMBRA ACADEMIC ASSOCIATION PLAYERS, 200% wrong move, ACADÉMICA DE COIMBRA PLAYERS would be acceptable, but not this...
It would be like changing REAL BETIS FOOTBALLERS to ROYAL BETIS FOOTBALLERS or, even "better", REAL SOCIEDAD FOOTBALLERS to ROYAL SOCIETY FOOTBALLERS. If the move is finally (and duly!) aborted and the ACADÉMICA DE COIMBRA possibility is embraced, please move also the manager category, which also was "hit" with the new title COIMBRA ACADEMIC ASSOCIATION MANAGERS.
Attentively -- AL ( talk) 22:45, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the input. Strangely enough, i am Portuguese and never thought about the students' union "case". But the move is still totally wrong. -- AL ( talk) 22:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you Number57 - I've requested speedy moves to revert the changes. Jogurney ( talk) 23:23, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Is the Georgian Premier League not a fully professional league? Came here through Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giorgi Gvelesiani, I was sure it was (since the article says it is a professional league), and it seems a bit off that players that have played in the Europa League are considered non-notable. Thanks – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 07:03, 26 June 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 84 | Archive 85 | Archive 86 | Archive 87 | Archive 88 | → | Archive 90 |
Hi.
As some of you may have seen there is a minor content dispute at Premier League Golden Glove regarding the order of lists in sections "Awards won by nationality" and "Awards won by club". Therefore I am asking for input from this community/project so that we can form some sort of consensus for this article and similar articles.
The main issue is wheter we should sort the list alphabetically or chronologically when teams/nationalities has the same amount of wins. To me I find alphabetically better since it will make it easier for readers to read and find their team and listing things alphabetically is more natural. The other editor says chronological, I guess because he finds it most natural and new winners should be added at the bottom.
We have both provided other featured articles to support our order, with the other editor claiming his FL trupms the other ones since it is most recent. I dont understand how one article trumps the other and have not found anythingt in FL criteria saying special order of lists so I fail to see how that matters.
Articles with alphabetical order:
Articles with chronologal order:
Articles with hybrid order:
I am sure there are more examples of both orders being used so I am asking for input in this article and similar ones (this should be the same on all articles above for a start). What do you say?
(@ Bloom6132: Lets put the namecalling aside and sort this matter as humans, as I said before I do take responsibility for my part in this dispute. I am not going to tell you what to do (you do as you like) but I suggest we both stay out of this discussion and let FOOTY decide this dispute for us and what order to use. Of course you should feel free to respond to my edit if you feel like I provided false information but I tried to keep it neutral so that FOOTY can decide. Nothing good will come out of this if this becomes an other thread of us fighting).
So, What do you say? Alphabetical order or chronological order? QED237 (talk) 22:56, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
The purpose of the list is important as to what order things are listed in. If a specific order aids in the understanding of the topic (eg listing winners of the golden glove in date order) then not only should that order be used but it should be clear that it is being used. When a specific order doesn't aid the understanding of a topic (eg listing a summary of winners in date order) then it should not be used. Where there are no other orderings that aid the understandability of a topic then alphabetical order will aid the understanding of the topic as it is the default order that people expect. With regards to the "awards by nationality" and other summary tables being ordered by date it makes no sense to me. You are specifically taking out the date order by summarising the table and then ordering them by date.
On a separate issue I don't see the value of these summary tables to the articles in question (specifically the ones on Premier League Golden Glove) where the information that they provide is just as easily gleaned from the main table. => Spudgfsh ( Text Me!) 16:13, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
This article doesn't fit naming conventions, surely........? -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 11:00, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Notable? -- Edgars2007 ( talk/ contribs) 16:03, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, can anyone provide a reliable source that gives Fabio Possagno's appearance data for A.S.D. Portogruaro in the Lega Pro Prima Divisione? The only source I can find is Transfermarkt, which is of course not a WP:RS. Cheers, Mattythewhite ( talk) 14:31, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
I live near Portogruaro and when the team was playing in Serie B and Lega Pro i usually go to the stadium Stadio Mecchia and i can say that he has not made his professional debut with Portogruaro.
Tuttocalciatori confirm it because there aren't Fabio Possagno profile on the website.
In italy he has not made his fully professional debut(just Eccellenza and Promozione), in england i don't know, Are Salisbury and Sutton fully pro?-- Lglukgl ( talk) 21:58, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Interesting situation with the Jack Barmby article that brings up a topic we discussed here not too long ago: this season, Barmby was on loan from Manchester United to Hartlepool United, thus indicating that his senior career had begun. However, he was released by Manchester United at the end of this season and picked up by Leicester City, who have explicitly stated that Barmby will be part of their youth/reserve team next season, indicating that his youth career is not over. We therefore have the odd situation whereby the infobox in his article shows that his youth and senior careers overlap and contain different clubs (his spell at Hartlepool United could hardly be considered part of his youth career). Opinions (@ GiantSnowman:)? – Pee Jay 18:08, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Are you looking to recruit more contributors to your project?
We are offering to design and print physical paper leaflets to be distributed at Wikimania 2014 for all projects that apply.
For more information, click the link below.
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (
talk)
15:11, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Have a look at missing country flags at A.C. Milan First team squad removed by a script - It looks silly IMO. I know this was discussed before (probably at length), but I am unsure of the outcome.. could someone please remind me if there was consensus reached? Thanks, JMHamo ( talk) 23:46, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
It seems that the editor in question has done it to numerous French and Italian club articles, and is continuing to do so this morning. This is going to take quite a lot of work to put right if anyone wants to help. Number 5 7 08:09, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Let me state more precisely the problem as I see it which is at least two-fold: The crux is the notion of "representative nationality" 1/When playing for a given club, the players NEVER represent their own countries. If anything, they are playing for the 'nation' of their adopted clubs. The players may represent their countries outside of the club's games, but that's not relevant except in the player bios. 2/And assuming that the player in AC Milan may be a Japanese national say, and flags are in use, unless you know all the players and their national squads, it's impossible to tell if the player only has that as a nationality, or is a capped international. -- Ohc ¡digame! 08:48, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
I am sorry to say, but flags for players in club articles are indeed usefull. Anyone can see the major football websites and will confirm all use flags. FkpCascais ( talk) 01:48, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Here follows a cross posting from Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons for information only. The relevant discussion on flags belongs there and not here. -- Ohc ¡digame! 08:05, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
I would like to apologise for the length of this treatise, as it seems I am the person who, through this compliance drive, seems to be at odds with the footballing community that I need to state my arguments firmly and comprehensively for the record.
Wikipedia's goal is to supply encyclopaedic information about each and every notable subject. We try to write concisely, provide content that is relevant and with due weight, and avoid digression and coatracking. The problem of indiscriminate and excessive use of flag icons in article space is akin to the excessive wikilinking on en:wp five years ago.
In a way, it's rather unfortunate that flags are not subject to copyright concerns that cover most other imagery because they would not be so overused. Today, I see that flag icons are being used primarily because they can, and is justified by some flimsy test of relevance notwithstanding provisions in MOS:FLAG:
"Flag icons may be relevant in some subject areas, where the subject actually represents that country, government, or nationality – such as military units, government officials, or national sports teams. In lists or tables, flag icons may be relevant when the nationality of different subjects is pertinent to the purpose of the list or table itself.
Words as the primary means of communication should be given greater precedence over flags and flags should not change the expected style or layout of infoboxes or lists to the detriment of words."
The use of flags (or should I say "abuse") to sex up the article is mostly gratuitous and a violation of the guideline – most of the time, the flags are used in lieu of nation. Yes, accessibility is an issue, and it is a concern stated in MOSFLAG:
"The name of a flag's country (or province, etc.) should appear adjacent to the first use of the flag icon, as virtually no readers are familiar with every flag, and many flags differ only in minor details. Nearby uses of the flag need not repeat the name, although first appearances in different sections, tables or lists in a long article may warrant a repetition of the name, especially if the occurrences are likely to be independently reached by in-article links rather than read sequentially. Use of flag templates without country names is also an accessibility issue, as it can render information difficult for color blind readers to understand. In addition, flags can be hard to distinguish when reduced to icon size."
The vast majority of readers would not be able to identify more than a quarter of these flags using visual cues alone; just as many would be unable to identify all the countries by the ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 codes. Putting both together could result in a higher pass mark.
It is acknowledged in this proposal, currently still under discussion, that the use of flags in sport is in violation of MOSFLAG, and that it should be changed because they will continue to be used "like it or not". Such an argumentation represents disruption, and is anti-consensual in that it was not won through honest intellectual discussion of the merits or otherwise of doing so, but through a fait accompli. The current scale of usage of flags, whether using an excessively liberal interpretation of the guideline, or through people simply being used to seeing them plastered everywhere (like dates were once blanket linked globally) is in defiance of MOSFLAG. That these flags may have persisted in football articles for years is about as relevant as the spam and assorted copyright violations that have also persisted for years across our encyclopaedia. But let all be reminded that local consensus can never supplant general consensus. Football is not the only project in Wikipedia, and the global recommendation is meant to balance the needs of the various constituencies and stakeholders within the encyclopaedia. The implementation of their removal of same is execution of the consensus that exists.
Without even starting to talk about players' nationalities, it is easy to find examples of overuse: there is the indiscriminate flagging of presidents, managers [1] and physiotherapists [2]. I have even seen flags used to indicate location of stadia where some international matches are played. There is also cruft like the dual citizenship – not only would such be of little utility, it adds a level of confusion that one would need to clarify with a coatrack about how/why they would represent one country and not another. I don't believe anyone has ever contested the relevance of nationality to the athlete in question, so nobody would see the problem with the use within the relevant biography. However, none of this specific use of any flag for a given player's passport nationality in club articles is of direct relevance to the club. The crux is the notion of "representative nationality" When playing for a given club, the players NEVER represent their own countries. If anything, they are playing for the 'nation' of their adopted clubs. The players may represent their countries outside of the club's games, but that's not relevant except in the player bios. Nationalities of players in a club context is thus rarely relevant in individual cases.
Playing for a national team is a huge honour and privilege reserved for the talented few, yet we see flags used in a significant quantity of articles far beyond what I believe is optimal. Flags are currently most often [ab]used to indicate players' legal nationalities and not of any country that they actually represent. Even if some of these are national squad members, there is no encyclopaedic need to create laundry lists of these cases. Much is made of the "usefulness" argument. But usefulness is determined more by pertinent analysis than the mere presence of raw data, of which this flag usage is an example. People, teams, buildings, and works are notable because they are different or stand out in some way. If they only conform to expectation, or to some mould or stereotype, this is by definition non-notable. The same would apply to the notability or uniqueness of information given. To be truly useful information and less confusing for readers, the nationality issue in an article should be mentioned as an exception and not by default.
If the notion of "representative nationality" has been followed, the implication is that the player has been capped for his/her country. But that is often fallacious: assuming for example that the player in AC Milan is a Japanese national say, and flags are in use, it's impossible to tell if the player only has that as a nationality, or is a capped international, unless you know all the players and their national squads. As this example suggest the flag indicates passport nationality, as most of the players in this squad, if not all, never played for any country team. And how this information can be useful in a club article is a mystery to me. If anything, the perverted usage of flags makes it potentially misleading of the state of affairs. In a globalised world, players are pursuing their careers abroad in increasingly large numbers. Sportsmen and women may play in countries other than the one they were born in or whose nationality they adopted, and there is really nothing significant in the possibility or likelihood that a player may be called up for play in their national teams. Talented players are much sought after in the richer leagues, such as the Premier League or Bundesliga. All clubs these days have put in various measures to manage national call-ups, including contract provisions and squad redundancies.
Some have stated the discussion within certain countries as to the mix of foreign players (too few, too many, etc) as an argument for including flags in individual club articles. I would say that the sensible way of handling it would be to include elements affecting the entire game globally in a country in Football in country or Country league articles. There, they can be referred and link to from individual club articles where there is discussion of particular relevance to the latter. Putting pretty splodges of colour into individual club or season articles is just plain lazy and indiscriminate throwing together of information without letting it create encyclopaedic value. And it isn't a substitute for explaining the implications or controversies that have been taking place. Any element affecting the overall composition of a club can be included in the form of a summary or an analysis table in the relevant club or season article. There should not be any general need to deal with individual players' nationalities within the text of any given article except for the biography on that individual. -- Ohc ¡digame! 04:51, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi There is a slight problem with the current Cypriot season in which there seems to be no final score for the last game of the season between APOEL and AEL Limassol, the two teams are fighting for the league's title. However, the final match between them occurred on Friday 17th May, over a week ago, and on both the Cypriot FA, and UEFA website there is no answer to whom won the league, which will affect who will qualify for the two Champions League places, one in the Champions Route, the other through the League route.
I would be grateful for some suggestions on where to look for the winner. Hesky10 ( talk) 14:17, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I'm MYS77.
I have a question: other user ( Lglukgl) created a page about the Passo das Emas stadium, but it was simply redirected to Luverdense.
Have the stadiums a notability guideline or we can assume the list of Fully professional leagues as a guideline? (Also in the notability page there's nothing about the stadiums).
Cheers, MYS 77 talk with me ☺ 23:21, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello ,
Can somebody tell me some rules about the stadium?
Why Estádio Waldomiro Pereira is notable? Why Passo Das emas is not notable?
I don't understand the rule.-- Lglukgl ( talk) 23:43, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
So it happens every transfer window, but users get the urge to change teams for players who have agreed to moves, but haven't officially joined their new teams yet. David Luiz, [[ Marc-André ter Stegen]] and Alen Halilović are three I've edited in the last few days. Unless I'm overstepping by reverting changes, could I get help with those pages? Thanks. Mosmof ( talk) 15:21, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
FYI, if you check this version and scroll down to the very bottom, you will notice that managerial career boxes are not appearing. this is due to the added complexity of passing the navboxes through {{ navboxes}}. however, I was able to fix it by switching to {{ collapse top}}/{{ collapse bottom}}. it's possible we can reduce the complexity of the {{ navboxes}} template (started a thread), but until that happens ... 198.102.153.1 ( talk) 16:17, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated Central Coast Mariners FC for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Bencherlite Talk 19:05, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
There is an ongoing move discussion for the Gambrinus Liga, which will cease to be called the Gambrinus liga at the end of the season (after Saturday) due to a new sponsorship deal. Discuss and your opinions are welcomed at the talk page. Thanks, C 679 09:57, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello,
The page mentioned is having too much vandalism only because of a rumour of transfer. Can someone block it, please?
Cheers, MYS 77 talk with me ☺ 16:33, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
I am not sure if I am going to the right place (I should probably ask an admin), but I came across Fadhil Haji Majo ( talk · contribs) that added his own webpage (or at least it seems like it) to articles like Gareth Bale, Neymar, Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi. Then I saw his userpage that to me is promotional and he compares himself to Messi with "strong legs and fast feets" and so on. He also links to his facebook, twitter and webpages. Is that allowed? QED237 (talk) 12:29, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Isn't Colombia national football team results (2000–19) article a violation of WP:NOTNEWS. Kingjeff ( talk) 20:50, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
An editor has changed the subject's name from Steven Beitashour to "Steven Mehrdad Beitashour" which includes his Persian name. The only source for the Persian name, Mehrdad, is an Iranian interview. I can't verify its reliability. The editor has offered three sources for the full name at Talk:Steven Beitashour: a Facebook fan page, transfermarkt (everyone's most favourite unreliable source) and one from scoresway.com. I don't know where it gets its information. A bit of assistance would be appreciated. The editor also removed a CN tag when I added it to request info and no ref was supplied. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 01:40, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Is it even necessary for all of its stages having an article? I posted there a question in the talk page but no one yet answered. I just want to say this ahead of time if maybe someone will nominate it for deletion. Fairy Tail Rocks 05:30, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
FYI - I have nominated the footballer by ethnicity category ( Category:Association football players by ethnic or national origin) for deletion. Please contribute to the discussion here. Thanks. SFB 11:18, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
I was wondering around when I saw Neftchi Baku PFK graded as A-class. I'm not sure why it deserves to be graded like that since it doesn't have a GA review first or an A-class review like most WikiProjects do. Can someone take a look and/or reassess the article? Thanks! Fairy Tail Rocks 12:29, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
The question is on the title.-- FCNantes72 ( talk) 11:02, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, in the early rounds of the CECAFA Cup, 2 points were awarded for a win, 1 for a draw, 0 for a loss. Can I use this template with the CECAFA Cup? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 14:05, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
|wpts=2
to achieve this -
97rob (
talk)
14:28, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
|wpts=2
would have to be used for {{
Fb cl3 team}} -
97rob (
talk)
14:30, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
|wpts=two
on the navbar will change the points explantaion.
1973 CECAFA Cup still calculates as three points for a win in the group stages, but the section using fb cl3 seems correct. -
97rob (
talk)
15:13, 1 June 2014 (UTC)|wpts=two
(in words) will change the description -
97rob (
talk)
15:19, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I think that given the massive media coverage of the controversies, and the information unearthed in today's Times, a separate article should be started. Anyone else agree? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 11:13, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
On italian speaking wikipedia we must writing again the article, we need a lot of help: if there is somebody speaking italian it would be fantastic.. In italian: in pratica il problema è che ci sono dei grossi problemi nel modo in cui è stata compilata la voce e se non riusciamo a risolverli la voce non può rimanere in vetrina.. We need also some help about article about Napoli's team, if you have some books about the team.. -- 93.64.241.68 ( talk) 13:24, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Template:Atlantic Coast Conference Men's Soccer Freshman of the Year navbox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Jrcla2 (
talk)
14:27, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Please visit the
College men's soccer seasons by year multi-TfD nomination to participate. Thank you.
Jrcla2 (
talk)
14:38, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
His biography [4] says that he is the son of an international footballer. A candidate may be Ian Gardiner, but the dates of death don't tally. Any ideas who this may be? Jmorrison230582 ( talk) 14:12, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. The Toulon Tournament is a competition for under-20s, right? I'm a bit confused, as it seems that the English team playing is the under-21s, coached by the under-21s coach but without some of the 22-year-olds. On Wikipeda, players, such as James Ward-Prowse, have been given "caps" for the under 21s, but shouldn't that technically be for the under 20s? BBC website calls them under 20s, but the squad on Wikipedia is at England national under-21 football team, whereas IMHO the same squad should be at England national under-20 football team. What are your opinions on the matter? -- Foro Reto34 ( talk) 11:08, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Today I read an article on the longest-ever football game in Germany, the 153 minute long final of the 1914 German football championship and expanded the article accordingly. The source article states that it is the longest ever game in Germany. What would be the longest-ever game world wide and also per country? Could we find reliable sources to create a list of those? Does anybody know? Or is there an article already? Calistemon ( talk) 12:33, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Being booked in a fully-pro match without being on the pitch is valid enough for creation? (Ex.: Yeray Gómez was booked in a match between Mallorca and RM Castilla, but was on the bench). Cheers, MYS 77 talk with me ☺ 19:43, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
My intention was create Joselu and Roldan but there are five Joselu in Europe and about Roldan my intenction was create Roldan but there is a redirect called Roldan about Roldan Santa FE. so : Roldan Sabadell because sabadell is the club of the debut Joselu Almeria becuase Almeria is the most important team in his career. -- Lglukgl ( talk) 19:52, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
So currently there is this new club in India for the Indian Super League called Kerala Blasters. Most reports have resorted to calling the team just 'Kerala Blasters'. However some reports have the name as 'Kerala Blasters FC' or 'Kerala Blasters Football Club' but the grand majority seem to be heading towards 'Kerala Blasters'. Supposedly Sachin Tendulkar, the owner of the team, said in a quote the team with FC in it. Personally I feel the official name is just 'Kerala Blasters' without FC and that those adding it are just doing so because the media and overall population believe almost every team should have some sort of FC or SC in it. That may sound harsh and ridiculous but that is my opinion at least on this. Any help would be appreciated. -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 23:55, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
I will need an admin to change it from Kerala Blasters → Kerala Blasters FC (Not F.C. just FC). Cheers. -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 00:45, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Apart from flags, I've also noted many cases that breach WP's policies and guidelines. I'd like now to bring the focus to the inclusion of laundry lists in club and season articles.
We've never climbed a mountain just because it's there. We include information that is notable and relevant, and just because something is verifiable or sourced to a reliable website doesn't necessarily warrant inclusion. However, I notice that football articles have morphed into magnets of just that sort of detail.
Editors have systematically included lists of all and sundry individuals involved with the club, from club officers down to vice presidents, board members, assistant managers, physiotherapists, boot boys. In the vast majority of cases, these individuals are not notable. But seems this is there just because the club's website credits them. Such would constitute indiscriminate information of little or no encyclopaedic value. Having to go around and remove this is a pain because it shouldn't be there in the first place. What's worse is having to battle with editors who fiercely resist their removal, and refuse to engage in any discussion. -- Ohc ¡digame! 01:29, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
There appear to be a large number of other football club articles with such a disposition. Examples include MUFC, Real Madrid, Borussia Dortmund, Ajax, Sparta. These are some of the world's best-known clubs, with a higher proportion of notable individuals on board, and every team member is listed irrespective of their individual notability. Naturally this percentage declines as we reach the lower registers of a given country's football leagues, yet these positions are all listed – press officer, masseur, kit man etc. Should we not restrict ourselves to the "key positions" only – Chairman, Manager, Head coach? -- Ohc ¡digame! 07:49, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
( ←) Based upon the Man Utd page I suggest that the following club positions should be listed as standard for all clubs:
Any other prominent member of staff at the club that is notable in their own right may also be listed, otherwise they should be omitted. I don't know of any non-primary/non-business sources that care to go into detail beyond this, which is a good indication that anything outside the above positions is going far beyond the remit of a general overview of the topic. SFB 20:48, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Anybody out there that masters Italian as well as English that can reach out to this guy? He does not seem to understand the WP guidelines at all, much as myself and User:MYS77 have tried to explain them to him.
Creates page after page after page of poor content and verifiability (there, MYS77 can vouch for it much better than me), some players are created because "they will be notable one day". The "pièce de resistance", creating an article that's half player name/half team name (i.e. Joselu Almeria)!
I believe this has much to do with his level of English (which i feel borders 0 with all due respect, my Hungarian or Swedish is 0 most definitely), hence i ask if a kind soul could try to collaborate with Lglukgl in his native language, because i (and MYS77, he confirmed this to me today) have run out of bullets.
P.S. Both users mentioned here have been notified of this discussion. Attentively -- AL ( talk) 00:26, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Hey. I created a Danish football club. It is Hadsund BK. It would be nice if one of you would drop by. This a previously known footballer namely Ebbe Sand. Look also just past the talk page and see if it is the right template I inserted. Thanks in advance. -- Søren 1997 ( talk // contributions) 19:18, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
In Asian leagues, there are qoutas for foreign players for a particular team. So we make a separate table for the foreign players in the league article like 2013–14 I-League. As per as MOS:FLAG#Use of flags for sportsperson, in many articles the flags have been removed from places like manager, captain etc. But in the MOS only, as it says, "flags should only indicate the sportsperson's national squad/team or representative nationality", so dont you think in the foreign players table of these league articles, these flags should be present? RRD13 ( talk) 07:29, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello all. I've just been working on Scott Loach who has signed for Rotherham from the Tractor Boys today, and was about to complete the update by fixing his career totals table when I discovered what a bitch that is. Using Soccerbase etc, it's really easy to update season by season, but the totals is a nightmare. I was wondering if there was scope, or if anyone knew someone who could code up a totals line which did the maths for us? The Rambling Man ( talk) 15:26, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I am wondering how to show the international career stats for Diego Costa who has played for two national teams.
With one national team we do something like (note it is made up numbers in all tables):
Spain national team | ||
---|---|---|
Year | Apps | Goals |
2010 | 1 | 2 |
2011 | 4 | 1 |
2012 | 10 | 5 |
2013 | 12 | 3 |
2014 | 8 | 3 |
Total | 35 | 14 |
For two national teams we can either just list them above eachother...
Brazil national team | ||
---|---|---|
Year | Apps | Goals |
2010 | 1 | 2 |
2011 | 4 | 1 |
2012 | 10 | 5 |
Brazil Total | 15 | 8 |
Spain national team | ||
Year | Apps | Goals |
2013 | 12 | 3 |
2014 | 8 | 3 |
Spain Total | 20 | 6 |
International Total | ||
Total | 35 | 14 |
... or make it look like club statistics. What is the best? QED237 (talk) 00:56, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Can someone take a look at {{ 2014–15 Football League Championship table}}. It's not producing the table slices properly but I can't work out why.
see
{{2014–15 Football League Championship table|team=NOR}}
cheers => Spudgfsh ( Text Me!) 11:29, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, how far down the tier with this do we go? Could I create a 2014-15 Kingstonian F.C. season article if I wanted? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 12:07, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
So, that's probably been debated ad infinitum. Question is, was there any consensus on either, such that an article like Home United FC has been and should be redirected? LRD NO ( talk) 09:16, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Where a proper noun that includes terminal punctuation ends a sentence, do not add a second terminal punctuation mark.
cheers,
Struway2 (
talk)
13:54, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Could we get a few eyes on Red Star Belgrade for MoS, layout and other issues please? Walter Görlitz ( talk) 23:53, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Please refer to
this discussion about whether the fullname
parameter of the {{
Infobox football club}} template should be Melbourne City Football Club or Melbourne City FC where this is confusion about how this parameter should be used (e.g., whether to use a full legal name and, if so, what this means, e.g., a business name, company/association name, trade mark, etc.). Please feel free to join the discussion there. —
sroc
💬
01:35, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
This Berlin based club doesn't exist anymore in this kind. The article itself also gives a hint "The merger will go ahead on 01/07/2013 and the new club will be called FC Viktoria 1889 Berlin Lichterfelde-Templehof e.V.". The new club qualified for the German Cup. I'm not exactly skilled in merging club articles... Thanks! -Lemmy- ( talk) 06:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Done
Giant
Snowman
18:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
{{ Livescores editnotice}} Would anyone like to comment? Walter Görlitz ( talk) 00:24, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Any more comments or is it time to put it to use at 2014 FIFA World Cup (as a start) and then perhaps more articles? Feel free to comment both here and at the template talk. All constructive suggestions on the template and how it visually should look is appreciated both here and at the template talk. General comments as well. QED237 (talk) 20:49, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
There is nothing wrong with having an article-specific, one-off edit notice about 'live updates' for the duration of the tournament if that is the consensus on the article talk page. Giant Snowman 15:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
"One-off" means it should not be put into widespread useage - yet. Giant Snowman 09:30, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi folks. I noticed all the Melbourne City players who were at the club last season when it was still Melbourne Heart had their infoboxes altered so it said they were two separate clubs (e.g., see infobox of Patrick Kisnorbo - separate entry for Melbourne Heart & Melbourne City). I went and changed this so it just had one entry under the name "Melbourne City", as I thought this was protocol for when a club changes names (e.g. Roger Espinoza and Kei Kamara - both at Sporting KC before and after the name change from Kansas City Wizards, their infoboxes just have one entry under "Sporting Kansas City"). However all my edits were reverted by User:Simione001 for the reason "Melbourne City FC only came into existence this year. You shouldn't be changing the infobox of their players to indicate that they have been playing for City before the club even existed." Are they correct on this, or is what I did right? — Limabeans ( talk) 05:40, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
If it's a simple name change, then I don't see the problem with current players having only "City" in the infobox. However, if it's a new club, then there should be a split. Number 5 7 08:07, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
The infobox/article should reflect the name of the club that the person was playing for at the time; if the same club simply changes name then we should use the current name. Former players should have 'Melbourne Heart', current and future players should have 'Melbourne City'. Giant Snowman 11:53, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I don't know if this is the right place to ask this question, but can anyone confirm, if a player has played for a league club in the FA Cup, does that make them eligible for an article?? Stew jones ( talk) 20:52, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, in the 1997–98 season at User:Matty.007/sandbox/List of Kingstonian F.C. seasons, I can't get Leworthy's goals to format such as at my guide, List of Margate F.C. seasons. Please can someone fix this? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 18:49, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Recently the "Honours" section of Mathew Ryan was deleted entirely on the grounds that it was unreferenced. Is this the appropriate action? Very few players have any references in their honours sections, let alone every honour being referenced - it would seem excessive to delete these all? Macosal ( talk) 03:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
The honours section should be fully and explicitly referenced as per WP:V and WP:BLP. Giant Snowman 09:27, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
GiantSnowman has again removed the club honours section from Mathew Ryan. How are we supposed to reference club honours? Additionally, I have found no other article where the club honours section is referenced, even on feature articles.-- 2nyte ( talk) 08:46, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Disagree strongly that 'unsourced' or 'citation needed' tags simply state "here is a problem, let's do nothing about it". I've come across a few in football related articles, and DID do something about it (found and added references). Simply deleting material that is unsourced but uncontentious (and not obvious nonsense), without giving editors the opportunity the find references, is tantamount to vandalism. ShugSty ( talk) 14:14, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Unfortunately it seems this same issue has again cropped up, this time re Fernandão and again re GiantSnowman. Unfortunately I'm unaware of how the system works but the general opinion here appears to be that the "unsourced" tag should be used? If anything, it seems like the user has a personal problem with the "unsourced" tag, which 1. should be brought up on the relevant talk page and 2. does not give a user the right to bypass what remains a valid part of the editing system. Can we aim for a consensus here to avoid the removal of potentially thousands of honours sections without giving editors a chance to source what are uncontroversial sections? Macosal ( talk) 11:46, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
To try and clarify things and open the discussion back up in the hope of achieving consensus: I have two main issues with the direct deletion of unreferenced honours sections, both of which can be found at WP:V#Responsibility for providing citations:
Further to these, WP:V#Responsibility for providing citations states "When tagging or removing material for lacking an inline citation, please state your concern that there may not be a published reliable source for the content, and therefore it may not be verifiable". It would seem that this is being given little weight when many of the honours deleted can doubtlessly be supported by easily accessible reliable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macosal ( talk • contribs) 14:10, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
@ Walter Görlitz: if you feel my editing is " disruptive to the highest degree and the epitome of non-cooperative editing" then I would invite you to report me, although I would say that your argument of "editor removed unreferenced content about a living person" will not get very far. I am abiding by WP:BLP, nothing more and nothing less. I also don't have a clue how this is "non-cooperative editing"...? I've already suggested you raise the matter at BLPN, that has not yet been done as far as I'm aware. Giant Snowman 09:11, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Not that reason has helped so far, but it's clear that a number of editors disagree with your interpretation of BLP and so, consensus is that you stop removing the material. I don't know if consensus is that you tag it, but that would be my advice. Please don't forget that several of the editors are very experienced and view the removal of this information as unproductive. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 16:35, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
No, it's certainly not off-topic - it was a deliberately ludicrous example to demonstrate to you that you cannot simply assume that a player has won a winner's medal (and the subsequent honour), either because a) he was a squad member and/or b) he played X amount of games that season. Wikipedia relies on reliable sources to verify claims, not guesswork and assumptions. Giant Snowman 14:03, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
The "some reason(s)" why deleting this content is a bad idea have been stated repeatedly, and by several people, and you (for the avoidance of doubt: GiantSnowman) have completely failed to address these. You've completely failed to demonstrate that this is good practice - all you've said are variations of "because it says so" (it doesn't) and "because I can". You've shown a lack of understanding of the policy, of the subject (criteria for winners' medals are extremely rare outside the UK), and of Wikipedia itself. It seems like you have no interest in making Wikipedia an informative and collaborative place, merely in blindly enforcing rules, and it's this attitude that leads you to misuse these rules so much, to the detriment of Wikipedia. ArtVandelay13 ( talk) 17:37, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
This section is crazy long so I won't read it all, but just speaking on personal experience and seeing similar discussions in the past. Removing contentious material has usually been said to be material that is potentially libelous, defamatory, otherwise detrimental to the BLP. I know that WP:BLP in particular calls out that that is what is meant by contentious. Something like whether or not they won an award is not likely to be any of those things. I would also suggest for something as minor as statistics or awards, the person wanting to delete the material has a small burden to atleast try to source it before just removing it. - DJSasso ( talk) 17:59, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
"the person wanting to delete the material has a small burden to at least try to source it before just removing it" - I couldn't agree more. The editor in question has made a huge positive contribution to football articles in Wikipedia, but appears to have a narrow-minded, borderline obsessive, approach to this matter. FFS - we have seveal paragraphs here arguing over what contentious means (without any hint of irony either!) ShugSty ( talk) 10:24, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Your opening statement of "it would seem excessive to delete these all"? Giant Snowman 12:53, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
For the record the outcome of the other thread has been the establishment of User:Macosal/BLP, where sections for deletion will be tagged and listed for one month before deletion. People should feel more than welcome to help out. Macosal ( talk) 00:29, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Is John Neeskens the son of Johan Neeskens or not? I've seen claims and counter-claims.
TheBigJagielka ( talk) 12:31, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Can someone delete this page? Again, this user created a player who isn't a fully-pro footballer. According to Soccerway, he played a match for Deportivo de La Coruña's first team, but this never happened. According to BDFutbol (a much more reliable source, he only played for the reserve team). See here to confirm. Cheers, MYS 77 ✉ 22:54, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
The following individuals who are in the scope of this project are showing to be alive on the English wiki, but deceased on another language wiki:
Please help to find reliable sources to confirm if these individuals are alive or dead, or correct any mis-categorization on the relevant foreign-language article(s). Please see WP:LIVINGDEAD for more info and raise any issues on the talkpage. Thanks. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 18:08, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
I've noticed that there are comments in articles like 2014 FIFA World Cup Group A that refer to WP:LIVESCORES. WP:LIVESCORES is a section of a snooker-specific page, and refers to a discussion that apparently only had 3 participants. I don't think it is appropriate for a page related to soccer to refer to that section. It also seems wrong for a generic-sounding redirect like "WP:LIVESCORES" to link to a page just about snooker, but maybe that is a discussion for another place. Anyway, if this wikiproject also has a consensus that live scoring isn't appropriate (which seems to be the case), then I think there should be a page or section written specifically about live scores on soccer pages (e.g., WP:FOOTY/LIVESCORES). Also, while I'm writing this, I thought I would mention that I personally think live scoring on Wikipedia is fine, and also think that WP:NOTNEWS doesn't have any relevance to the discussion. WP:NOTNEWS says that if news sources just report routine information like scores, that isn't enough to make a subject notable. WP:NOTNEWS doesn't suggest that articles shouldn't be kept up to date with the latest information, instead only saying that the latest information should be treated similarly to other information. If a soccer-specific page like WP:FOOTY/LIVESCORES is written, I would encourage it not to refer to WP:NOTNEWS as justification, as that seems to me to be a misunderstanding of the WP:NOTNEWS policy. Calathan ( talk) 21:12, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I forget where the right place to report this is but there is an edit war developing at Ryan Burge. I believe the IP is Ryan Burge himself but since the "war" started his version of events have been reported so are now sourced.-- Echetus Xe 09:25, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
In Asian leagues, since there are qoutas for foreign players, we always make a foreign players table in the league article, like the one I created in 2013–14 Iran Pro League. But for the past few days, some editors and IPs are removing this table and claiming that this table should not be present as it was not there in the previous league articles, whether is it mandatory to put such tables and others. Please drop in your suggestions, I mean whether this table should be kept, removed etc. RRD13 ( talk) 09:06, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Sorry to burden everyone with this WP:LAME argument, but since the discussion at Talk:James Wilson (footballer born 1995) isn't getting anywhere, which of these is preferable:
I won't bore you with which one I think is better because a) you can see it at the article talk page, and b) it really doesn't matter what I think, but can someone please help settle this debate? – Pee Jay 22:02, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
1 or 2 - I personally prefer a comma, I know others don't, but I think we can agree that club should come before position. I'd also add "professional" in there as as that is his claim to notability i.e. "James Antony Wilson is an English professional footballer who plays for Manchester United as a striker." Giant Snowman 15:25, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Talk:Jonathan de Guzmán#Free-kick specialist? It's not clear if the subject is or isn't but there's a statement on the article that claims this. Guidance and discussion would be appreciated. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 01:12, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated the article and its associated page(s) as AfD as it does not seem to meet notability as per WP:FOOTY. Any input would be appreciated. LRD NO ( talk) 06:29, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
I noticed the other day that lineup SVGs seems to sometimes stick out from the end of the written lineups, leaving a gap before the man of the match/assistant referees section. I had a look at the code, and I've found a possible solution to this. It would need to be implemented on a wide range of articles, so I've brought it here, rather than just staying with the previous discussion which can be found at Talk:2014 FIFA World Cup Group A#Lineup svgs. I've placed a copy of a current usage, as well as my proposal (which can probably be tidied up slightly more if we're going to use it), at User:97rob/FootballMatchSVGs. - 97rob ( talk) 17:14, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Which criteria for the transfer deal is done? I once warned by someone for 3RR due to "edit war" on some players that completed the medical but not sign anything (or vice versa could happen, such as Aly Cissokho) Would transfer windows alleged not yet open is a criteria to say the transfer is not completely done, such as in Cesc Fàbregas. (it is difference from transfer done AFTER the deadline).
In Serie A i knew the date the contract filed to the league office (which the date on official transfer list on the web) usually had a time tag with the club announcement (usually earlier)
While in Premier League the transfer windows starts at the end of last season ( Season – the period commencing on the date of the first League Match on the fixture list of the League’s first team competition and ending on the date of the last)
To sum up, how to avoid unnecessary edit war on transfer? Matthew_hk t c 05:51, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Davykamanzi ( talk · contribs) has been making changes to {{ Infobox football biography}}, I have reverted and ask that they actually explain how these changes will impact our articles, please join in the discussion at Template talk:Infobox3cols#Big problem. Giant Snowman 18:43, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
These are not even used on the World Cup articvle, are they? - Koppapa ( talk) 21:02, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Can you please participate to this debate here ? -- Fayçal.09 ( talk) 19:36, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
For those who remember the last few interactions, Gibson Flying V changed the height parameter on Julian de Guzman from m to cm. I reverted and opened a discussion at Talk:Julian de Guzman#1.70 m = 170 cm. Would any admins care to support a topic ban? Walter Görlitz ( talk) 05:45, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, is there a guide how to make field diagram showing the starting lineups, such as this [14]? How do people make these?-- 2nyte ( talk) 14:38, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi there...just noticed on the Euro 2016 qualifying page that the South American national team Chile are listed in Pot 2.
/info/en/?search=Euro_2016_qualifiers#Seeding
Just thought it was best to bring it to someones attention. Hope this helps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rwmb1980 ( talk • contribs) 19:08, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Category:Association football chairmen and investors mixes two things, and therefore has two parents: Category:Association football executives and Category:Sports owners. It seems to me that it would be better to separate these.
Also, the members of Category:Directors of football clubs in England are mostly named "XXX F.C. directors and chairmen". Chairmen are always directors, so this is unnecessarily long; it would be sufficient to name the category "directors", i.e. omit "chairmen".
I therefore suggest that the football categories be split to "investors" and "directors".
This was floated at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_April_12#Category:Middlesbrough_F.C._chairmen_and_executives but needs a central discussion here. – Fayenatic L ondon 22:08, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
An editor keeps reverting superfluous material into the Mexico national football team article. I have raised the issue there in a couple of discussion topics (please see [15]). Feel free to contribute at Talk:Mexico national football team. The nature of the issue revolves around two topics: (1) Is the 2012 Olympic victory of Mexico's youth squad relevant to the article about the senior side, (2) Is there a source that supports the idea that there are only three major international football tournaments, and that these are the World Cup, the Olympics, and the Confederations Cup? Regards.-- MarshalN20 Talk 21:02, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
An IP-shifting anon is reverting referenced material and it needs some additional editors watching. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 07:48, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
I have redirected it, but have been reverted. Some outside input is welcome. Oh, I should probably clarify that I'm talking about the 2014 Faroe Islands Cup Final ;-) Fram ( talk) 06:54, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Dear football experts: Here's an AfC submission that is up for review right now. Is this a notable football person? — Anne Delong ( talk) 14:49, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
I created an article under the name of IFFHS best clubs of the 20th century, we can see an example of this page in my draft page here. However the user GiantSnowman proposed that it be deleted and merged with the article IFFHS, we can see the deletion debate here. So after the sudden removal of the page, I was surprise but I respected the decision and I decided as agreed to merge (add) what it was removed in the IFFHS page. But I was surprise for the second time because the same user GiantSnowman removed it !!, we can see his act here. IFFHS is a notable organisation and it contributions are agreed by all the international institutions so what this notable organisation published about IFFHS best clubs of the 20th century is normally agreed in Wikipedia. We can see the second debate about this deletion in the IFFHS article's talk page here. Fayçal.09 ( talk) 17:21, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Lugnuthemvar ( talk · contribs) has been edit warring on several North American articles using association football rather than piping as [[association football|soccer]], and doing it badly I might add. Could someone please review the edits and possibly offer some advice? Walter Görlitz ( talk) 17:07, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
Alper Tursun isn't notable enough to have a page in here. Also, the page is so poor that if it wasn't here it wouldn't be any great loss.
Can someone delete it? Thanks, MYS 77 ✉ 00:33, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
An editor has been making changes to the football squad template documentation today, mostly in relation to the flags debate, which I have disputed. It would be good to have some third party input to review whether those changes are consistent with the outcome (or lack of one) of the debate. Thanks, Number 5 7 11:11, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Replied elsewhere to this wikiproject canvassing. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 12:14, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
The football magazine The Blizzard (magazine) article has been nominated for deletion. An editor has removed over 50,000 characters from the article and nominated it for deletion. Surely we can keep it? TheBigJagielka ( talk) 12:10, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
See Talk:Estádio do Maracanã#Requested move to Maracanã Stadium June 2014 for a requested move for Estádio do Maracanã to Maracanã Stadium. Hey mid ( contribs) 17:05, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Pleas note: This is an updated version of a previous post that I made.
Hi all,
My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.
One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.
This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:
• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film
• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.
• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.
• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____
• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost
The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014
For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (
talk)
16:23, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I have a couple of questions:
Thanks, Mat ty. 007 18:00, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Someone has been moving, through a bot and seemingly without discussion, the category ASSOCIAÇÃO ACADÉMICA DE COIMBRA PLAYERS to...COIMBRA ACADEMIC ASSOCIATION PLAYERS, 200% wrong move, ACADÉMICA DE COIMBRA PLAYERS would be acceptable, but not this...
It would be like changing REAL BETIS FOOTBALLERS to ROYAL BETIS FOOTBALLERS or, even "better", REAL SOCIEDAD FOOTBALLERS to ROYAL SOCIETY FOOTBALLERS. If the move is finally (and duly!) aborted and the ACADÉMICA DE COIMBRA possibility is embraced, please move also the manager category, which also was "hit" with the new title COIMBRA ACADEMIC ASSOCIATION MANAGERS.
Attentively -- AL ( talk) 22:45, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the input. Strangely enough, i am Portuguese and never thought about the students' union "case". But the move is still totally wrong. -- AL ( talk) 22:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you Number57 - I've requested speedy moves to revert the changes. Jogurney ( talk) 23:23, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Is the Georgian Premier League not a fully professional league? Came here through Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giorgi Gvelesiani, I was sure it was (since the article says it is a professional league), and it seems a bit off that players that have played in the Europa League are considered non-notable. Thanks – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 07:03, 26 June 2014 (UTC)