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 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Further to my post above [1] regarding the realities of the sourcing in this article, given the outcome, it seems reasonable to consider pruning the list of those entries that don't in any way present any evidence of being fully pro (e.g. Colombia, Egypt, Serbia, Switzerland), and which only have reference to 'professional'. Whilst anyone is able to delete any entries that do not meet the list's own inclusion criteria I thought it useful to seek views on the matter. In the longer term it would be better if we could produce a list of notable leagues that did not have to rely on references to 'fully pro'. Before any entries are removed consideration should be given as to whether the reference should be placed elsewhere e.g. the league or FA page. Eldumpo ( talk) 07:48, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Let's just clarify this. The prevailing consensus at the moment is that it is the list which is correct and the wording which is wrong. So let's stop wasting time quibbling over whether such-and-such a league is "fully professional" for the moment, as that isn't the thing that needs remedied here. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 08:58, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Like I also explained above I think some quality criteria would in my opinion be more useful than changing the notability criterias. But if we really want to find an agreement to differentiate between leagues where one appearance is enough and where 5/10/x appearances are enough this only could work when the first step is to agree on some indicators like TV and stadium spectator statistics and economical factors. So for example we could agree:
For the remaining leagues we could look for good values in two or three of our indicator criteria.
Example: Two of the following criteria must be met to be a league which makes notable after 1 appearance - one of the following criteria must be met to be notable after 5/10/x appearances:
-- Blanc98 ( talk) 21:21, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
National Women's Soccer League will start playing in spring of 2013. It'll be a fully professional league. So I propose to include it on list.-- SirEdimon ( talk) 16:37, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
They yet to have a official site, but every women's soccer site in the world reported this. The salaries will be paid by the USSF, the Canadian Soccer Association (CSA) and the Mexican Football Federation. Here's the official description of the league:
"Description U.S. Soccer will play a major role in organizing and running the league to ensure a business model with a focus on sustainability.
U.S. Soccer will subsidize the salaries of up to 24 U.S. Women’s National Team players while the Canadian Soccer Association will do the same for up to 16 Canadian players and the Federation of Mexican Football will do the same for up to 12 Mexican players."
Here some sites: http://equalizersoccer.com/2012/11/21/eight-teams-to-start-new-womens-pro-soccer-league-in-2013/ http://www.ussoccer.com/News/Womens-National-Team/2012/11/Cheryl-Bailey-Named-Executive-Director-of-New-Womens-Soccer-League.aspx http://www.nj.com/soccer-news/index.ssf/2012/12/on_soccer_new_womens_pro_leagu.html
Is there enough or we have to wait till they release an official site?-- SirEdimon ( talk) 17:03, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
The league will be fully professional. The federations will only help to pay the salaries and will only pay the national team players salaries. Thus the league can have a high level soccer. And they can prevent a possible failure. PS: I'm here only looking for advice about this question, I know we have months, but I want to be ready.-- SirEdimon ( talk) 21:56, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Sorry to re-hash an old topic of conversation, but the Israel Football Association (IFA) refers to the Premier League and Liga Leumit as professional leagues. It would be a bizarre thing to state that the leagues are "fully professional" in Hebrew. This is more Wikipedia semantics than anything else. In an effort not to create an edit war, can we please weigh in on this issue?
Ahead of the 2011/12 season, the IFA decided to restructure the three top tiers to go from 3 professional leagues to two. Growing the top two divisions and abandoning the 3rd tier for a regional system. As such, the two should be recognized by Wiki as professional as that is how the IFA defines them. - NYC2TLV ( talk) 03:09, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Recently the former K-League of South Korea split into 2 leagues... the K League Classic which is now the tier 1 league and the K League which is the 2nd tier of South Korean football. Their is promotion/relegation between the two leagues. I can not prove it now but hopefully someone can take the time to do some research to prove that the new K League is fully-professional. Cheers. -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 06:03, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Just noticed the Irish leagues are not present anywhere in this list at the moment, and there's no active discussion about them. The name of the governing body suggests a fully-pro league: but can someone find any sources proving or disproving this? Lukeno94 ( talk) 22:28, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
First division league of Gambia. Can't find anything to indicate if it is or isn't fully professional. -- Walter Görlitz ( talk) 05:54, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
This league appears to have been added despite lacking any consensus to do so; the only discussion I can find in archives here is this. The cite on the project page is, in any event, both vague and primary, and it is not clear that the vague requirement listed even apply to this league. If anyone disagrees, could you please provide argument and sourcing to explain how this league is fully professional? -- Hobbes Goodyear ( talk) 01:18, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Croatian First League (women's football)#professional?. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 12:13, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
I was hoping to get some opinions on the value of dead links as sources. Obviously they should be replaced with functional ones wherever possible, but failing that what happens with leagues whose entries were once reliably sourced, but the links in question have gone dead? Specifically, I'm thinking about the Icelandic league which was recently removed from the list of non-fully-pro top flights. The source listed with it once pointed to an article by the Iceland Tourist Board describing the league as semi-pro. It seems silly to me to have to remove the list, when the only thing that's changed is the structure of the tourist board website. Your thought? Sir Sputnik ( talk) 00:49, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Article in The Herald (Glasgow) this month: "Financial concerns will dictate decisions, though, and Herald Sport also understands that one other SPL club has considered maintaining a small core of full-time professionals but otherwise employing part-time players." 176.253.108.55 ( talk) 20:59, 20 March 2013 (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 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Further to my post above [1] regarding the realities of the sourcing in this article, given the outcome, it seems reasonable to consider pruning the list of those entries that don't in any way present any evidence of being fully pro (e.g. Colombia, Egypt, Serbia, Switzerland), and which only have reference to 'professional'. Whilst anyone is able to delete any entries that do not meet the list's own inclusion criteria I thought it useful to seek views on the matter. In the longer term it would be better if we could produce a list of notable leagues that did not have to rely on references to 'fully pro'. Before any entries are removed consideration should be given as to whether the reference should be placed elsewhere e.g. the league or FA page. Eldumpo ( talk) 07:48, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Let's just clarify this. The prevailing consensus at the moment is that it is the list which is correct and the wording which is wrong. So let's stop wasting time quibbling over whether such-and-such a league is "fully professional" for the moment, as that isn't the thing that needs remedied here. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 08:58, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Like I also explained above I think some quality criteria would in my opinion be more useful than changing the notability criterias. But if we really want to find an agreement to differentiate between leagues where one appearance is enough and where 5/10/x appearances are enough this only could work when the first step is to agree on some indicators like TV and stadium spectator statistics and economical factors. So for example we could agree:
For the remaining leagues we could look for good values in two or three of our indicator criteria.
Example: Two of the following criteria must be met to be a league which makes notable after 1 appearance - one of the following criteria must be met to be notable after 5/10/x appearances:
-- Blanc98 ( talk) 21:21, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
National Women's Soccer League will start playing in spring of 2013. It'll be a fully professional league. So I propose to include it on list.-- SirEdimon ( talk) 16:37, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
They yet to have a official site, but every women's soccer site in the world reported this. The salaries will be paid by the USSF, the Canadian Soccer Association (CSA) and the Mexican Football Federation. Here's the official description of the league:
"Description U.S. Soccer will play a major role in organizing and running the league to ensure a business model with a focus on sustainability.
U.S. Soccer will subsidize the salaries of up to 24 U.S. Women’s National Team players while the Canadian Soccer Association will do the same for up to 16 Canadian players and the Federation of Mexican Football will do the same for up to 12 Mexican players."
Here some sites: http://equalizersoccer.com/2012/11/21/eight-teams-to-start-new-womens-pro-soccer-league-in-2013/ http://www.ussoccer.com/News/Womens-National-Team/2012/11/Cheryl-Bailey-Named-Executive-Director-of-New-Womens-Soccer-League.aspx http://www.nj.com/soccer-news/index.ssf/2012/12/on_soccer_new_womens_pro_leagu.html
Is there enough or we have to wait till they release an official site?-- SirEdimon ( talk) 17:03, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
The league will be fully professional. The federations will only help to pay the salaries and will only pay the national team players salaries. Thus the league can have a high level soccer. And they can prevent a possible failure. PS: I'm here only looking for advice about this question, I know we have months, but I want to be ready.-- SirEdimon ( talk) 21:56, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Sorry to re-hash an old topic of conversation, but the Israel Football Association (IFA) refers to the Premier League and Liga Leumit as professional leagues. It would be a bizarre thing to state that the leagues are "fully professional" in Hebrew. This is more Wikipedia semantics than anything else. In an effort not to create an edit war, can we please weigh in on this issue?
Ahead of the 2011/12 season, the IFA decided to restructure the three top tiers to go from 3 professional leagues to two. Growing the top two divisions and abandoning the 3rd tier for a regional system. As such, the two should be recognized by Wiki as professional as that is how the IFA defines them. - NYC2TLV ( talk) 03:09, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Recently the former K-League of South Korea split into 2 leagues... the K League Classic which is now the tier 1 league and the K League which is the 2nd tier of South Korean football. Their is promotion/relegation between the two leagues. I can not prove it now but hopefully someone can take the time to do some research to prove that the new K League is fully-professional. Cheers. -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 06:03, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Just noticed the Irish leagues are not present anywhere in this list at the moment, and there's no active discussion about them. The name of the governing body suggests a fully-pro league: but can someone find any sources proving or disproving this? Lukeno94 ( talk) 22:28, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
First division league of Gambia. Can't find anything to indicate if it is or isn't fully professional. -- Walter Görlitz ( talk) 05:54, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
This league appears to have been added despite lacking any consensus to do so; the only discussion I can find in archives here is this. The cite on the project page is, in any event, both vague and primary, and it is not clear that the vague requirement listed even apply to this league. If anyone disagrees, could you please provide argument and sourcing to explain how this league is fully professional? -- Hobbes Goodyear ( talk) 01:18, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Croatian First League (women's football)#professional?. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 12:13, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
I was hoping to get some opinions on the value of dead links as sources. Obviously they should be replaced with functional ones wherever possible, but failing that what happens with leagues whose entries were once reliably sourced, but the links in question have gone dead? Specifically, I'm thinking about the Icelandic league which was recently removed from the list of non-fully-pro top flights. The source listed with it once pointed to an article by the Iceland Tourist Board describing the league as semi-pro. It seems silly to me to have to remove the list, when the only thing that's changed is the structure of the tourist board website. Your thought? Sir Sputnik ( talk) 00:49, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Article in The Herald (Glasgow) this month: "Financial concerns will dictate decisions, though, and Herald Sport also understands that one other SPL club has considered maintaining a small core of full-time professionals but otherwise employing part-time players." 176.253.108.55 ( talk) 20:59, 20 March 2013 (UTC)