Talk:2019–20 UEFA Europa League

3QR

I have no idea how to fix this as y'all have overcomplicated these articles with those funny hashtag templates which I can't find anywhere, but the draw for the 3rd qualifying round has tons of errors. For example it should be match 10 vs match 32, match 35 vs AEK Athens, match 27 vs match 30, Austria Wien vs match 28... I'm sure there are more. If someone could check the whole thing against this source it would be great. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 14:28, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Third qualifying round's graph contains massive errors and even misses at least one match up. Can someone please fix this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:1C03:3901:7000:E536:CAAE:92FA:895E (talk) 15:18, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Looks like it's been fixed now. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 17:27, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Boldface teams

It appears that from Preliminary Round down, the teams that are still in the Competition are boldfaced. Is it possible to do that above that section, in the Qualified teams for 2019–20 UEFA Europa League (by entry round) sub-section? This will enable a quick snapshot to see how teams are faring based on their "level" or when they entered the tournament. Thanks.

2019–20 UEFA Europa League group stage

For future article 2019–20 UEFA Europa League group stage, please use Q65132731 wikiitem. --Brateevsky ^{(talk to me)} 09:19, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Wolfsburg/Wolfsberg

There has recently been some edit warring, especially between PeeJay2K3 and IP address 80.183.57.38, over whether VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC should only be listed as Wolfsburg and Wolfsberg, respectively, and I would like to start a discussion so that we can come to a consensus on the matter. In my opinion, we should stick to the full names, as German (and Austrian) clubs are usually not referred to by city name only. This opinion is supported by the German football task force's WP:KARLSRUHER guideline, which, despite just being an essay, is currently widely followed, e.g. in 2019–20 Bundesliga and 2019–20 Austrian Football Bundesliga, as well as prior Champions/Europa League season articles. However, I am open to hearing other opinions and hope that we can reach an agreement. Phanto1999 (talk) 12:28, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

If previous seasons' Champions League and Europa League articles use the clubs' full names, that is because someone has changed them in the last couple of days. Furthermore, WP:KARLSRUHER is an essay, not a guideline. In situations where there is no possibility of confusion, there is no point in using the clubs' full names, even German clubs. I'm not even sure what would make them so special anyway. In English media, VfL Wolfsburg are usually referred to only as Wolfsburg. Wolfsberger AC has only just come into the general knowledge of most English-speaking football fans, but even this early in their notable history, they're usually referred to only as Wolfsberg; the only reason why they wouldn't be is because Wolfsburg are also in the Europa League this season, and since they are only one letter different, it might make sense to disambiguate, but there's generally no need to do so. – PeeJay 15:45, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

I would go with the full names per the Bundesliga articles and KARLSRUHER. Kante4 (talk) 16:26, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Again, WP:KARLSRUHER is just an essay and no one has yet given any good reason to follow it. It certainly doesn't accurately represent the way the English-language media typically refer to German clubs, it's just one editor's opinion about the way they like to do so. – PeeJay 18:37, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

I agree that there may not usually be a need to use the full names for disambiguation purposes, but I think that it would be good if club names were displayed identically across Wikipedia. For example, if a reader looks at 2018–19 Bundesliga, sees that VfL Wolfsburg qualified for the Europa League, and follows the adjacent link to see how they did there, they may be confused because there is no "VfL Wolfsburg" there, only a "Wolfsburg". Also, even the English-language media follow this "special" case for German teams, as evidenced by this CNN article or the BBC's Europa League tables, which use the full names for German clubs including Wolfsburg but nonetheless use shortened names for most other clubs. Phanto1999 (talk) 16:37, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I agree that consistency between pages is helpful, but if a reader is having trouble working out that the Wolfsburg referred to in this article is the same one from the 2018–19 Bundesliga article, I would question how qualified they are to even be reading Wikipedia. So what I would like to know is, why should we go with long names for clubs from German-speaking countries and not from anywhere else? – PeeJay 18:37, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

I agree that "VfL Wolfsburg" should be used, as these names reflect the most common usage. In England, the team names are often shortened, so "Liverpool" and "Chelsea" are therefore used. In Germany, the extended club names are most commonly used, as explained in WP:KARLSRUHER. This is reflected in English sources, such as in the aforementioned links and ESPN, hence why "VfL Wolfsburg" should be used on Wikipedia. The same style is also used for Swedish club names. S.A. Julio (talk) 20:03, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

I think you need to raise this at WT:FOOTY. – PeeJay 21:03, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

I'd read VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC when I find these two teams when I have to edit something. It's commonly used.--80.183.57.38 (talk) 21:15, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Where would you read that? Please provide sources when you make claims like that... – PeeJay 07:45, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

In everything article on this Encyclopedia where VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC are in, I would find VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC. Sources are not important, it's just a commonly used for these two teams. I don't insist anymore, don't worry.--80.183.57.38 (talk) 13:29, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Except that's not the case. In all the UEFA articles, they're referred to as Wolfsburg and Wolfsberg. – PeeJay 15:29, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

UEFA also use "Bayern", "Man. United", "Man. City", "Tottenham", "Dortmund", "Paris", etc. for the sake of brevity. S.A. Julio (talk) 17:48, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

I'm not talking about UEFA's website, I'm talking about our articles about UEFA competition seasons. – PeeJay 01:04, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

That may have been the case for a large portion of season articles, but full names have been used consistently since 2017–18, and UEFA Cup seasons in the 1980's show a very inconsistent usage of full and shortened names. Phanto1999 (talk) 09:23, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

I have started a discussion at WT:FOOTY with a link to this discussion so that we can get a few more opinions on the matter, but it currently seems as if the full names are favored. Phanto1999 (talk) 22:46, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Just to point out, Wikipedia does not operate on a simple "most votes wins" system, and so far I haven't seen any good arguments for following WP:KARLSRUHER. – PeeJay 01:04, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Yes, but several sources that use the full names have been supplied, even in situations when other countries' team names are shortened, while your only argument so far seems to be that "it's always been like that", while not supplying any sources that would back up your point of view. Phanto1999 (talk) 09:23, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

That's not been my argument at all. Besides, here are a couple of sources that back up what I'm saying: The BBC only seems to use full names in article titles, while they use just "Wolfsburg" throughout the body of their articles; Soccerway do the same, establishing the club's full name before reverting to just "Wolfsburg" in the fixture list, as do The Guardian; Soccerbase use just "Wolfsburg" consistently, although the header of the page uses "Wolfsburg FC", which is clearly wrong; even the Bundesliga themselves use just "Wolfsburg" throughout this article, with no mention whatsoever of "VfL". Perhaps it should be the case that we only need to use the club's full name once near the top of the article before reverting to the short name; after all, once you've established which team you're talking about, there's no need for unnecessary textual clutter. – PeeJay 07:29, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

First of all, the BBC and the Guardian actually follow WP:KARLSRUHER, since "in article prose, a shortened name can be used, once the proper name has been established, to make the text flow more easily"; however, this should not apply to this article, since a) tables are not prose, and b) the tables are also transcluded on other articles like 2019–20 K.A.A. Gent season, where the full name isn't previously established. Furthermore, Soccerbase seems to generally use shortened names, also referring to "B Munich", "B Dortmund" or "Mgladbach"; also, they seem to be unreliable altogether when it comes to team names, since they also refer to "Wolfsburg FC" as you mentioned. Finally, there seem to be a lot more sources that use the full names, e.g. Fox Sports, The Telegraph or BT Sport, just to name a few. Phanto1999 (talk) 09:15, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

But in 2019–20 K.A.A. Gent season there is no ambiguity about which team is being referred to. I'm afraid you're just not making much sense here, and I'm going to wait for other users from WT:FOOTY to contribute. – PeeJay 13:54, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

The main argument here isn't ambiguity, it's that most of the given sources either just use the full names or use shortened versions only in prose and after the full names have been established, which contradicts your initial argument that "in English media, VfL Wolfsburg are usually referred to only as Wolfsburg". I hope that we can get a few more reactions so that we can come to a consensus. Phanto1999 (talk) 15:41, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Which is why I said only a couple of comments above that perhaps we can refer to each club by its long name at the first usage if necessary. The thing is, it usually isn't necessary, so why would we do it? – PeeJay 19:29, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

I'd add the VfL and AC here to better differentiate teams here. -Koppapa (talk) 17:32, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

When I was talking about differentiating between teams, I was talking about the example of Hamburger SV vs VfL 93 Hamburg; you couldn't refer to either of those as just "Hamburg" in an article where they are both mentioned, so obviously you need the full name to establish the subject and then once the identities are defined, you can use abbreviations. VfL 93 Hamburg have never played in Europe, so we could conceivably argue that there is no need ever to refer to "Hamburger SV" in a UEFA competition article. Wolfsburg and Wolfsberg are already sufficiently differentiated from each other by the fact that they spell their names differently. – PeeJay 07:29, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

I do not really care for Wolfsburg, but Wolfsberger AC should be used for sure, as Wolfsberg as the football club name is simply wrong. If you want shorter version use WAC. You cannot simply replace club's name with a city name. Ludost Mlačani (talk) 10:33, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

What do you mean? "Wolfsberger AC" is exactly like "Hamburger SV", for which we use "Hamburg" all the time, so why can't we replace "Wolfsberger AC" with "Wolfsberg"? Sources do it all the time (see here, here, here, here and many more). – PeeJay 22:05, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, those sources are wrong. Wolfsberg could be ATSV Wolfsberg. Wolfsberger AC is simply Wolfsberger AC. Calling it Wolfsberg is the same as calling Grazer AK Graz or OFK Beograd Belgrade. Ludost Mlačani (talk) 11:27, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

How are they wrong? They've determined that you don't need to refer to those clubs by their full names because there are no competing clubs they could be confused with. I agree with you that Grazer AK and OFK Beograd should be called those names because they could easily be confused with Sturm Graz or Red Star Belgrade if you used the short names, but ATSV Wolfsberg is so far below Wolfsberger AC in the Austrian football pyramid that there is unlikely to be any confusion. – PeeJay 14:59, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Caption of "multiple clubs from one city" in Russia

@The Replicator, thanks for explanation. It's a problem mostly for 2019–20 UEFA Europa League article, than 2020–21 UEFA Champions League, because in CL mulpiple clubs are only from Madrid, London, Manchester, Porto/Lisbon and sometimes, Moscow (in EL more pairs). I think it's better use this version if it possible, because we use all "space" in European Russia, the north-east of it. Anyway, what about to do the caption into 2 or 3 columns? In Russia (I live there) we haven't professional clubs on the north of European Russia — on the map it's near Murmansk or Arkhangelsk or Vorkuta. All clubs in Russia in Premier League are in Moscow, SPb, south of Russia, Urals and Volga Region. In 2000s and 2010s FC Rubin Kazan plays in CL/EL, see FC Rubin Kazan#Seasons. It will be a problem now if Rubin plays in 2019–20 UEFA Europa League. Thanks. --Brateevsky ^{(talk to me)} 09:44, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

@Brateevsky: You're welcome. I think the only club that may disturb this procedure is in fact Rubin Kazan, but they have not qualified for UEFA in the most recent years. In such a case, two columns to the north of European Russia would be definitely an option. The Replicator (talk) 15:47, 16 August 2020 (UTC)