Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 33

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

→

Archive 40

Alois Eisenträger

Has anybody ever heared of this player, Alois Eisenträger? Is the article a hoax? Its got plenty of book references. EA210269 (talk) 05:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

He's definitely for real - he made over 200 appearances for Bristol City. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 05:26, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Interessting story, I have to say! EA210269 (talk) 07:06, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

A variation on the theme was Erich Schaedler, who was the son of a German POW and played for Scotland. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 15:48, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

John Wark

I don't hang about these pages too much these days, but thought you might like to know that one of my least favourite players of all time, the mustachiod one, is now at FAC.

Would welcome some of your expert opinions. --Dweller (talk) 10:22, 17 June 2009 (UTC) Full disclosure: I'm a Canary

Germany U21 Squad Euro 2009 template

Are youth templates notable? If not, does someone fancy taking {{Germany U21 Squad Euro 2009}} to TfD? Cheers, GiantSnowman 11:50, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Footballers who committed suicide category

Surely this is a trivial intersection? Jmorrison230582 (talk) 15:49, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Its just a part of Category:Sportspeople who committed suicide.--EchetusXe (talk) 21:09, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I think it's an interesting category. GiantSnowman 11:53, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

There is an official guideline that covers exactly this kind of problems at Wikipedia:Overcategorization, which also mentions of 'grouping people by trivial circumstances of their deaths' as trivial kind of categorization, and therefore not particularly encyclopedic. --Angelo (talk) 12:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Moussa Dembélé

Just wondering, is there any kind of tag that can be added to this article?, it's very poorly written and not in good nick, I don't know anything about this lad to do a clean-up but it's a bad article at the minute. Prem4eva (talk) 19:39, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

It is a concern. It's also vandalised frequently. I might try and rescue it someday Spiderone (talk) 15:56, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

German women's national football team

This above article has recently been moved to its current title which is not quite in line with our naming conventions. This was done, at least the talk page at the article suggests, to help achieve FA status. While some members of the project have expressed their opinions on the talk page itself, I fear the issue might not gain enough attention there. How should this WP react to an FA that does not adhere to its own MoS? Opinions, ideas? Madcynic (talk) 20:26, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

AFAIK this is a case of treating an FA review as a set of commandments rather than just that: a review by another editor. I'm fine with exceptions where they genuinely make sense (for instance at All Blacks, which will eventually return to its sensible title), but this one isn't at all exceptional and just makes the project look slapdash. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 22:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Looks like the page has been moved back now. As a sidenote, Chris, what's wrong with having the article about the New Zealand national rugby union team at New Zealand national rugby union team? – PeeJay 23:14, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME says it should be at All Blacks, although for consistency of convention I'm not unhappy with a redirect as per current.--ClubOranje^T 01:19, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME also says that Italy national football team should be at Azzurri or that Brazil national football team should be at Seleção, but never mind... – PeeJay 01:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

One day false equivalence shall not rear its ugly head in COMMONNAME debates. I live in hope. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 01:42, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Looks like you have moved the page, and you did so in disregard of the discussion on the article's talk page. Also, you didn't really move the article back; it had been at German women's national football team every since it got featured. Anyway, the entire naming convention of this Wikiproject appears to be in violation of official Wikipedia policy, namely WP:NAME, since it advocates page titles that are both grammatically questionable and not the topic's common English-language name. EnemyOfTheState_|talk 02:29, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

What's the best way to address that, do you think? Is it to bring the matter up here with a view to changing the overall consensus on how we name national team articles, or is it to rename them piecemeal? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 07:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Relatives in infobox?

Rugby player infoboxes have a parameter for famous relatives - fathers, sons, uncles, brothers etc. that also played the sport. What are people's views on these in football? [Cue a barrage of replies like "No chance!" and "Get lost!"...] GiantSnowman 12:18, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

No chance! Get lost! (repeat ad nauseam). But seriously: No. Mentioning these in the prose is okay, anything beyond that seems silly to me. Madcynic (talk) 12:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Tbh, I don't think these even belong in rugby infoboxes, let alone football ones. The rugby one even includes the player's school/university/occupation/spouse. Anyway, if you wouldn't expect to find it listed in the PFA Footballers' Who's Who, I don't think it should be in the infobox. – PeeJay 13:46, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

They don't. End of story. Probably best taking that discussion to the rugby folks though. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:29, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

The cricketer infobox (see Template:Infobox_cricketer_biography) also has spaces for relations. My problem is that if you create an article about someone who has played both cricket and football, the infoboxes are generally too long unless you can find a lot to write. Often with early players, it's not possible to expand the text in a useful, meaningful and reliable way, with references, so that there remains a lot of white space. The latest article I created was about a professional cricketer who played three first-team matches for Southampton - see Victor Norbury. If I add a football infobox as well as the cricket one, they will be far longer than the text. Is it permissible to not use the duplicated field (personal details) so that the infoboxes are more manageable? -Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 15:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I think they have that parameter in cricketer infoboxes because it is easy to source from cricinfo's player profiles, which list first class cricketer relatives in the main body of information (eg Ian Chappell) Jmorrison230582 (talk) 20:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey 'Snowman, just me, but I suggest having a look at List of association football families of note and refer to Ken Armstrong (footballer born 1924) for the prose side of things. I'm not convinced the infobox is the place to put this sort of thing. ps, No chance! Get lost! :-)--ClubOranje^T 09:24, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

football.co.uk

Is football.co.uk a reliable source? I'm trying to get Kisnorbo to a GA but I can't prove that it's reliable. Spiderone (talk) 15:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Nominated English football champions as FLRC

I have nominated List of English football champions for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OdinFK (talk • contribs) 19:39, June 5, 2009

United States Confederations Cup templates

Should Template:United States squad 2009 FIFA Confederations Cup be deleted? Since Template:United States Squad 2009 FIFA Confederations Cup was created a day earlier. Go here to discuss.

Ukraine national football team 1992

Is this the sort of article that we should have on Wikipedia? Isn't this just too much in terms of unnecessary data. I could understand listing all of the national team's results, broken down by decade, but appearance/goals info for each player?! – PeeJay 18:04, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, there's also this one. – PeeJay 18:11, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Any relevant info should be merged into the 'History' section of the national team article, and then these two articles should be deleted. GiantSnowman 18:56, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I also forgot to mention that there are Ukraine season articles up to 1996 too. – PeeJay 19:49, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

My original suggestion remains :P GiantSnowman 20:50, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

We've got whole categories of season articles for clubs (Example: Category:Football (soccer) clubs 2009-10 season), why can't there be a season article for a national team? Surely they are just as noteworthy! EA210269 (talk) 03:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Before you start deleting like a typical admin, why dont you confer with the wiki group that update Ukrainian Football and/or the original author who provided all the details and work effort?Brudder Andrusha (talk) 00:27, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Wartime guest players in World War I

As far as I was aware, wartime guesting didn't happen in WWI. However, Chesterfield's Roll of Honour confirms that Sheff Utd player Jimmy Revill guested for them in WWI, while James McCrae guested for Clyde, Rangers & West Ham according to Ye Olde Tree & Crown. So, are these two sources incorrect, or just me :) ? GiantSnowman 14:29, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

The Who's Who of Sheffield United says that Revill guested for Sutton Town and New Hucknall Colliery during the war but doesn't mention Chesterfield. It also gives conflicting details of his death to the one on the Chesterfield site, suggesting he was only injured in France and died in hospital back in England from his wounds. Bladeboy1889 (talk) 12:00, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

According to the Commonwealth War Graves Commission, Revill died on 9 April 1917 and was buried at Bethune - see [1]. Do you have a date of birth for him - if so, I'll try to put together an article. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 13:10, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Just you, sorry :-) My BCFC book lists wartime players with a star against guests, and there are plenty. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 14:42, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Likewise, Southampton had several - about a dozen at a rough count. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 14:58, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

"Hi, you may be unaware that the Scottish League continued through the First World War, so McCrae wasn't a wartime guest for his Scottish clubs" - Struway2 on my talk page... GiantSnowman 15:09, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Oi... "I'll rephrase that :-) They were official league appearances, though the registration rules may have been rather more fluid than in peacetime..." - also Struway2 on your talk page 4 minutes after the other post. And last time I looked, Chesterfield, West Ham, Birmingham and Southampton weren't in the Scottish League. (Tongue-sticking-out smiley) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:09, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Haha, I ws just checking! Keeping you on your toes, y'know...GiantSnowman 16:25, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Brendan Rodgers vandalism

The article on Brendan Rodgers is undergoing a fair bit of light vandalism - POV segments about his abilities (or lack of) as a manager, from what appears to be bitter Watford fans. Can people keep an eye if possible? Cheers, GiantSnowman 15:05, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I have asked for the page to be protected at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. GiantSnowman 15:55, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

UEFA Champions League brackets

As a new template has been introduced, please help for change the unsuitable bracket template in UEFA Champions League i.e. before 2002-03 season as the Final has held for one leg only. The new template introduced is Template:8TeamBracket-2legsExceptFinal Raymond Giggs 14:25, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Messi's importance

Is Lionel Messi a mid importance or a high importance? Surely he's world class enough to be high. Spiderone (talk) 15:22, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry too much about it, the importance classification isn't really used for anything significant. Oldelpaso (talk) 07:03, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

International transfer windows

FIFA status stated that international transfer windows (summer) should normally last for 12 weeks. As summer transfer windows normally end at 1 September, the player contract seems normally end at 30 June, let them able to be free before the windows open. And the point is, when Spanish transfer windows does not open until 1 July, should we change the player club, likes Kaka transfer has "completed". someone start ass edit war on Raúl Bobadilla current club, said that his new club is effective in July so should not change the infobox. Matthew_hk tc 16:26, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm of the opinion that far too much time is devoted to attempting to stop people from updating team information which will be current in two weeks' time anyway. If a transfer has been confirmed, then we should just let people edit and leave it at that. The only time there's a genuine problem is where people are editing based on rumour or pending agreements which might not happen. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:41, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

19th Century Scottish Clubs

I'm looking for some help regarding creating/editing/disambiguating articles related to 19th Century Scottish Clubs.

I'm currently working on creating articles on Scottish Cup seasons (eg. Scottish Cup 1876–77), and have found that there is very little information on the early participants (which there are many!). Furthermore, (possibly unrelated) clubs have similar names, and I am sure some links direct to these pages rather to the actual club. Moreover, there is little information on the evolution of some of these clubs to a present-day club (for example, Ayr Thistle merged to form Ayr F.C., and merged again to Ayr United F.C.).

I'm looking for help with people with knowledge of this era to help clean up existing articles, create new articles, and disambiguate some of the links.

Does anyone have any idea of good resources for this niche? Macarism (talk) 16:32, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm waiting for this to arrive, so I might be able to pitch in with Ayr... Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 22:10, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Historical Kits has a few bits & bobs about Victorian teams, could be helpful for creating a stub at least. GiantSnowman 15:56, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

The The Scottish Football Historical Archive has a good Club Directory.

Thanks for the advice so far, particularly the SFHA site! - I notice that site has been suggested by someone who also works on these articles too! Macarism (talk) 13:17, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Coaching duties

Hi there teammates, happy week all!

Matter of discussion, infobox notes on coaching spells. My doubt is: when is it merited to note that a player is coaching a team? In my views, either as a head or assistant manager, it should only be noted from the U21 sides upwards (club or country).

However, check this case: should it be noted that the player is head coach of the U-17? I think not, but have not touched it, before the end of this "discussion". I do think it should only be noted in storyline, not INFOBOX. What are your views?

Attentively, VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 02:57, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

As he is only a youth-team coach for his club, this does not meet the requirements to be included in the infobox. The Infobox instructions say: Please do not list positions other than team manager (such as assistant or coach positions, or director of football roles where this role is not considered managerial) unless that position is a significant part of the person's career. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 04:26, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Dutch-Caribbean football

I edit a lot of CONCACAF articles, and there are, as I'm sure some of you know, several countries in the Caribbean whose primary or official language is Dutch – Aruba, Netherlands Antilles (Curaçao, Bonaire, Sint Eustatius, Saba and Sint Maarten), and Suriname. A lot of football articles related to those nations are in serious need of improvement, and in many cases there are important articles that are stubs or have not been created. Being that the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba are each a dependency of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, should those football articles be tagged "Netherlands=yes" in {{Football}} on talk pages? I realize that Suriname is no longer a territory or dependency, but what about pre-independence (pre-1975) Surinamese football articles? JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 15:17, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Dual sport infobox?

A number of early footballers also played cricket and rugby; any thoughts on adding parameters to the Football Biography 2 infobox to include such details? GiantSnowman 17:16, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I think that's unnecessary cluttering of the infobox. Not sure though. Madcynic (talk) 18:34, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not talking LOADS of info - just years, club & caps. GiantSnowman 18:47, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I second GiantSnowman's suggestion. Some Brazilian football players are also former futsal players, so a dual sport infobox would be very useful. --Carioca (talk) 18:59, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah, but there we have it, then. Cricket, rugby, futsal - all possible "second" sports with as far as I can tell different requirements as to what the infobox should look like, no? Madcynic (talk) 19:02, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Not really. Futsal would have the same info as football; rugby has caps & points rather than apps & goals; and for cricket, we can just include tests or something. I'm only talking basic info here. GiantSnowman 19:14, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Many Irish players who stayed in Ireland to adulthood will have played Gaelic Football (less often Hurling) to a high level. But the issue of level in the second sport would be my fear for this feature: Craig Phillips (hope there is no-one by that name) reaches notability by virtue of his occasional performances for Macclesfield, but his local paper in Congleton then digs out the fact that he played for Cheshire U14 Hockey team, or that he was fastest U11 breast-stroker at Biddulph Dolphins Swimming Club, and an editor insists on adding it. Kevin McE (talk) 19:38, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I would say that only senior appearances should be included. GiantSnowman 19:42, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Whilst this might seem like a good idea, it assumes that the football infobox is most important. For many players, however, football was a diversion from their main sporting career such as cricket. It's a pity that the creators of the various infoboxes couldn't get together to agree a standard layout, to avoid repeating basic info; ideally it should be possible to combine the football, cricket, rugby etc. infoboxes into one for multi-sportsman (& women). --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 21:43, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Or upmerge them all into {{Infobox person}}? Nanonic (talk) 00:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

An unified template is possible, I suppose, but you'd always have people who would warrant even more merging (athletes who are also scientists et cetera). For now, making sure that infobox templates look consistent means we can easily include more than one in an article if need be. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Speaking as a member of this and the cricket WikiProject, it's a very bad idea for cricket, as the cricket infoboxes are enormous and every cricketer who played in a major game should have a cricket infobox. --Dweller (talk) 10:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

For your information, the cricket infobox works really well as a primary or a secondary infobox - it has been coded (primarily by me) so that if necessary the personal information can be omitted entirely, so that it just slots under another infobox. If the infoboxes for other sports (football etc) could be coded so that any information which is likely to be duplicated can be omitted without breaking stuff, then which ever is the primary sport can include the personal (duplicate) information, and the secondary sport can omit it. Here is one example cricket (secondary) in action: Rob Andrew; (there may be others, but I can't remember where they are). Denis Compton would be an example of the reverse. If the football infobox could omit the name/place of birth etc (i.e. start as "playing position: outside left") then what you hope to achieve will work, without the need for a super one-box-fits-all solution.—MDCollins (talk) 02:45, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I have edited the infoboxes on the Denis Compton and Victor Norbury (see earlier discussion) articles to delete the duplicated personal information - my initial thoughts are that perhaps the cricket and football boxes should have headings something similar to the rugby one on the Rob Andrew article, e.g. "Cricket career", "Football career". Also can they be coded so that they have the same width? --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 03:54, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Current sport template removed - Why?

The 2009 FIFA Confederation Cup is a sporting event which runs from June 14 until June 28. Shouldn't the following template be in the article until its completion???

{{current sport}}

Please leave my post as originally entered.

Or are the admins only instituting their own guidelines for the editing of this article?Brudder Andrusha (talk) 18:06, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

As far as I understand it, {{current sport}} is intended only to be used when the event is happening at this very moment, not just from its start date to its end date without exception. There are no Confederations Cup matches being played right now, so the template should not be added. That's my understanding of the documentation anyway. – PeeJay 19:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

That seems a very narrow interpretation to me, presumably of the phrase '"This template is for articles which involve an article about an evolving current sports-related event which is either changing rapidly or about which understanding is rapidly evolving. This is an advisory to readers that the article may be incomplete and subject to change."' The Confederation Cup is underway in S Africa: it started just over a week ago and finishes next weekend: that seems current to me, whether or not a match is being played at this instant. We have thousands of articles out there saying "Albert Rimmington is an English footballer currently playing for Hobbleton Rovers", and we don't delete the currently at 4:50 every Saturday afternoon, only to replace it at 3pm the following week. Kevin McE (talk) 19:52, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Kevin's take, personally. Information can rapidly change outside of game time as well. matt91486 (talk) 21:34, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

When the whistle is blown for the end of the game there is alot of editing still going on. Standings, reports, statistics, references added etc. To me it looks like that the admins are trying not have this template shown because it gives them leeway to strike out editors who are doing in progress edits.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 22:28, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Paranoia setting in much? First, I'm not an admin. Second, I removed the template as I was following the example of User:Conti, who has removed a lot of "current" templates from articles recently. Oh, and User:Conti is an admin, so take it up with them. – PeeJay 23:06, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

The only paranoia is the inconsistancy that you subject other editors. During the previous ECLeague and UEFA Cup season the updates were correct and did not deter the final posting. As far as Conti removing current templates - Maybe he should be here to answer these questions. But AFAIC the 2009 FIFA Confederation Cup is a {{current sport}} and should be displayed as such.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 01:20, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I should also mention that we should not add live scores to articles as Wikipedia is supposed to report things that have happened and that can be referenced. We are not a news service, i.e. things should only be added here once they have become news/part of history. If, for example, we reported a goal being scored in the 25th minute of a match, but it was abandoned a minute later, we would be incorrect as that goal would not show up in official records. Hope I'm making myself clear. – PeeJay 23:30, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

And in that case the wiki editors would surely update the entry correctly and provide references if necessary when it is available. Or do you doubt the ability of those who want to contribute here?Brudder Andrusha (talk) 01:20, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Template talk:current sport#Adding & applying guidelines. Rettetast (talk) 05:35, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Adding live scores

From the article history of the 2009 Confed Cup, I suspect this is the nub of the matter that lead to this thread. Brudder Andrusha has been one of the people enthusiastic to post live updates of scores; PeeJay2K3 has been resolutely trying to ensure that such ephemeral details are held back until the match is over. I have sympathy for PJ's position: I also used to try to keep it blank until the final whistle until I was advised here (prob in archive around time of 2006 WC if anyone really wants to look it up) that it was probably a futile task. But the problem remains of goals being added and then deleted as the ref spots the linesman's flag (I've seen it happen), of trying to turn Wikipedia into something it is not, and the increased likelihood of double entry of goals into stats tables. The principle obviously applies to other sports: do we know how they handle it? It seems to me that either we give in trying to hold back the updates, or we try to get it raised to a policy of which a reminder can be placed pre-emptively on articles likely to be subject to premature edits. In the latter case, we might end up with something like this:

24 June 2009

20:30

Spain	v	United States
	In progress

Free State Stadium, Bloemfontein

rendered thus: {{footballbox |date=24 June 2009 |time=20:30 |team1={{fb-rt|ESP}} |score= |report='''''In progress'''''<!-- Do not post updates until fixture is over, as per WP:WAITFORWHISTLE --> |team2={{fb|USA}} |goals1= |goals2= |stadium=[[Free State Stadium]], [[Bloemfontein]] |attendance= |referee= }}

It would be good to get this sorted once and for all, so that whatever is decided, edit wars are avoided in the 2010WC. Thoughts? Kevin McE (talk) 06:49, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

As I said above, while it annoys me personally when people clamour over each other to make articles current to that very minute it doesn't actually harm the encyclopedia. We waste energy in trying to prevent people from doing it. The only issue is that minute-by-minute updates don't, by their nature, get accompanied by reliable secondary sources (as the match reports haven't actually been written yet). Might as well officially discourage it while acknowledging that it will happen and just letting it be. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Seems like a good idea.--EchetusXe (talk) 10:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

These area (during an event that is in progress) is a center of interest for contributors to Wikipedia. By the very nature of Wiki and that it attracts folks for the confirmation of knowledge is a blessing in disguise. Things get done here and the post event cleanup of adding references, correction of formats, syntax is just another extention of the desire by most contributors to get it right here. Hence by having the {{current sport}} template through the duration of the sport means that output like the following is understood that it is in progess and that edits will follow to confirm the actuality of the post.

24 June 2009

20:30

Spain	0 – 0	United States

Free State Stadium, Bloemfontein

rendered thus: {{footballbox |date=24 June 2009 |time=20:30 |team1={{fb-rt|ESP}} |score=''0 – 0'' <!-- Game is in progress: Enjoy! --> |report= |team2={{fb|USA}} |goals1= |goals2= |stadium=[[Free State Stadium]], [[Bloemfontein]] |attendance= |referee= }} Brudder Andrusha (talk) 10:49, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

And why would a visitor to the page know that italicised scores mean that the game is in progress? We should be providing what is useful to the reader, not catering to a "center of interest for contributors". Kevin McE (talk) 17:12, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

On the left hand side of the infobox is the scheduled time of the game. If the game is in progress then the scoreline would set apart information that is has concluded or yet to start. How do you propose to differentiate the two instances. In either case the information of italic information is proving something useful and supposedly (99.99999...%) correct and at the same time not slapping the contributor on the wrist because they are to eager to post... Or do you want even more information so as not to confuse? Like...

24 June 2009

20:30

Spain	0 – 0	United States
	In progress [note 1]

Free State Stadium, Bloemfontein

• ^1 Italics indicate that the game is in progress

rendered thus: {{footballbox |date=24 June 2009 |time=20:30 |team1={{fb-rt|ESP}} |score=''0 – 0'' |report='''''In progress''''' [[#fn 1|''^{[note 1]''}]] |team2={{fb|USA}} |goals1= |goals2= |stadium=[[Free State Stadium]], [[Bloemfontein]] |attendance= |referee= }} *{{fnb|1}} Italics indicate that the game is in progress Brudder Andrusha (talk) 18:50, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:American soccer players by state

Is this appropriate? Seems like a triple intersection to me (American people, Football (soccer) players and People from [state]). We don't have Category:Footballers from County Durham or Category:Footballers from Gwynedd, so what makes Category:Soccer players from Alabama and Category:Soccer players from New Jersey any more appropriate? – PeeJay 23:08, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

What a great waste of resources. - Dudesleeper / Talk 23:11, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Having the categories, or me complaining about them? :-P – PeeJay 23:19, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Most US states are orders of magnitude bigger than the entire United Kingdom, for one thing. If they're reasonably sourced then let them be. If they aren't then they can be deleted on that basis. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry: I can't let that pass. The only relevant measure is population, and precisely zero states have a population bigger than that of the UK, 1 has a population more than half that of the UK, and 4 are not outnumbered by at least 4:1. If you are looking for a country of which that statement can be made (more than half the states have at least twice the population) then it would appear that you are thinking of Lesotho. Kevin McE (talk) 15:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Huh. So let's just assume that I said "Scotland" instead of "United Kingdom", as we sub-divide plenty of athlete categories between the home nations. Plenty of states with a greater population than Scotland. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:14, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Its just a part of the larger Category:American sportspeople by state.--EchetusXe (talk) 10:32, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not a triple intersection because People from [state] is a subset of American people. --Jameboy (talk) 12:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

It could still be considered a trivial intersection though (WP:OVERCAT#Intersection by location). I guess it depends whether you consider Category:American soccer players (1,125 pages, avg. 22.5 members per subcategory if all were subcategorised by state) to be large enough to warrant subcategorisation, and if it does then whether "by state" is the most useful way to do it. --Jameboy (talk) 20:54, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Ridha Antar

Some guy has moved the page for Roda Antar, former FC Koeln player, a couple of times, first to Reda Antar and then to Ridha Antar. Can someone confirm the correct spelling is Roda?The Hack 10:02, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I can't confirm the correct spelling, but FIFA, Sky and ESPN spell him Roda, so per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names) his name would seem to be Roda. And I see from Talk:Ridha Antar that the suggested new spelling is because of the name's Arabic spelling and pronunciation; on the English WP, there's no justification for moving him to someone's Roman-alphabet version of the Arabic transliteration of his name. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:09, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

The article should be moved back to Roda Antar, that is the common spelling. GiantSnowman 17:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Question on Ref Desk

Can anyone confirm or refute what I wrote at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous#FIFA_tiebreakers? --Dweller (talk) 10:40, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

confirmed at refdesk 2009_FIFA_Confederations_Cup#Tie-breaking_criteria Article 23.6 in the referenced document.--ClubOranje^T 11:05, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Dario Vujičević nationality

At least four (!) different nationalities for this chap are mentioned in various soucres:

• Croatian - the FC Twente article has a Croatian flag icon.
• Bosnian - Voetbal International & Soccerway
• German - Irish Times, although it says he was born in Croatia.
• Dutch - Goal.com

The Dutch Wiki article desribes him as Bosnian, yet has him in the 'Croatian footallers' category. The German Wiki article describes him as German and born in Germany!

Can anyone shed any light on this? Cheers, GiantSnowman 13:28, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

His club lists him as born in Bosnia, which probably isn't any help. – Toon 13:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Haha, now we have four different nationalities and three different birth places! GiantSnowman 13:37, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

This Google-translation discusses people not wanting to play for Bosnia-Herzegovina despite being eligible, and describes Vujicevic as Sarajevo-born but having said he wants to play for Croatia. Sarajevo's now in Bosnia, though I wouldn't like to offer an opinion on what country it was in when Vujicevic was born there. The goal.com page just isn't filled in, and they default to Dutch rather than blank. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:57, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I assume, based on the above, that he is a Bosnian Croat. If he was born in Sarajevo in 1990, he was born in Yugoslavia like Edin Dzeko. пﮟოьεԻ 57 14:11, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Is it getting into anyone's skulls yet why "such and such is an Xian footballer" is a construction to be avoided if at all possible? (that goes double, of course, if any of the Balkan nations are involved.) Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:17, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Let's make this clear: he was born in Sarajevo, Bosnia (that is why some sources define him as Bosnian); his family then moved to Gronau, Germany during the Yugoslav War (that is why some source claim he is German); and now he plays for FC Twente, Netherlands. However, he declared himself for Croatia: [2], so he should be listed as Croatia, at least in terms of sports nationality. --Angelo (talk) 14:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Has he played any international games? No? Then he doesn't have a sports nationality. End of story. Honestly, the amount of grief caused by this ridiculous insistence on labelling people as being of one nationality or the other is unreal. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

If he's declared himself as Crotian, then that's what he is. GiantSnowman 17:12, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Crotian? You jest? How about just a Croat.... Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:00, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

No, it doesn't, not any more than it makes Aiden McGeady Irish. If someone says "I will play for the Xian national team" then we should write "such-and-such plays for the Xian national team", not "such-and-such is Xian". That is of course unless he's actually said that he is Croatian (my Dutch isn't really up to ascertaining that from the source). Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 20:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

In the provided source in Dutch (coming from FC Twente official website), he confirms he declared himself for Croatia after he had talks with the Croatian federation. So we should list him as Croatian in terms of football nationality, especially if such choice comes after having reached an agreement with the local federation. Also, he states he does not really feel German, and his parents are Croatian (father) and Serb (mother) respectively, so I think he has the right to define himself as Croatian. --Angelo (talk) 21:01, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Unless he has specifically described his nationality as Croatian (not his "footballing nationality") then we should repeat precisely what is sourced. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:53, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

He is Croatian by his father, and he has Croatian nationality, and both things are sourced and confirmed directly by the subject in an interview. Is that enough? --Angelo (talk) 21:59, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Probably, yes. In that case, there was never any doubt as regards this thread. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 23:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Capital letters or not capital letters?

Hi, everybody. I’ve a little disagreement here with Filipão on how we should write Dutch names. I couldn't find any previous discussion on this matter, so I post it here. I think we should write them with capital letters since that’s how we begin phrases in English. But, on the other hand there’s Filipao’s opinion, that since the name goes without capital letters, it should be written like that. I’m not interested in any editing war on this, since I think it quite a minor difference, so if no one here supports my point of view, I’ll let Filipao’s opinion. But I think this is something that should be clear for future similar cases. Thanks.Ipsumesse (talk) 16:25, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Ipsumesse, you are indeed correct. It would be "Ruud van Nistelrooy", but "Mr. Van Nistelrooy". – PeeJay 16:43, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes It's Ruud van Nistelrooy, Mr. Van Nistelrooy and also Mr. R. van Nistelrooy. It's different for people from Belgium (nearly always capital letters)Cattivi (talk) 06:02, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Nomination for the least efficient presentation of information award

There are many tables around like this:

World Cup record
Year	Round	Position	GP	W	D*	L	GS	GA
1930	Did not enter	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
1934	Did not enter	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
1938	Did not enter	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
1950	Did not qualify	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
1954	Did not qualify	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
1958	Quarter-finals	7/16	5	1	3	1	4	4
1962	Did not qualify	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
1966	Did not qualify	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
1970	Did not qualify	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
1974	Did not qualify	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
1978	Did not qualify	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
1982	Did not qualify	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
1986	Did not qualify	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
1990	Did not qualify	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
1994	Did not qualify	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
1998	Did not qualify	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
2002	Did not qualify	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
2006	Did not qualify	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
2010	Qualification	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Total	1/18	1 Quarter-final	5	1	3	1	4	4

22 lines to present bare results from matches played in the course of 11 days. Does this have any real advantage over the alternative?:

• 1930 to 1938 - Did not enter
• 1950 to 1954 - Did not qualify
• 1958 - Quarterfinals
• 1962 to 2006 - Did not qualify

Thoughts? Kevin McE (talk) 18:54, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Kill with fire, for the flagcruft as much as for anything else. Ideally we should only present information in a table if it cannot be presented clearly in a more prosaic format. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 20:23, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I agree, a complete waste of space. GiantSnowman 20:25, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Do I get a bonus point for guessing that this table refers to Wales? пﮟოьεԻ 57 20:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Haha, definitely! GiantSnowman 22:50, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Giovani Dos Santos

User:Bruninho is adding FC Barcelona B stats to Giovani Dos Santos, it was removed last time having been classed as reserve team statistics. But the guy seems to keep reverting it back. As a project a few said to have it removed as they can't be promoted or play full competition football in Spain. But I can't find the conversation in the project history to show him. Some help needed on the situation please. Govvy (talk) 20:18, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

While Barca B are techically a reserve side for Barcelona, they compete as a professional team in the same pyramid as the A team. If he's played full games for them then they should be listed. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 20:22, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I concur with Chris - Barcelona B actually play in the pyramid, so his stats are senior appearances. пﮟოьεԻ 57 20:43, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

But last time it was said that Segunda División B 2006-07 Group 3, other players don't get recognised or get given stats, why Gio? Also they can't get promoted, play in the cups, and should reserve football even in the league structure should be recognised when it's equivalent to non-league? Govvy (talk) 20:49, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean "don't get recognised"? If you're referring to articles on players being deleted, that's because they don't pass WP:ATHLETE if the only play at that level, but I don't see why appearances at that level (and they are league appearances) don't count once they move up to something higher. I certainly include non-League stats for players who have gone on to play in the Football League where I can find them. пﮟოьεԻ 57 21:07, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. If they only ever play for Barcelona B, or a club at the same level of the Spanish pyramid, then they shouldn't have an article anyway. Once they become eligible for an article, then their stats at all senior levels should be included. --JonBroxton (talk) 21:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, if they have an article by playing in one of the top two divisions, their stats for any teams count if they're in the pyramid, even in the Tercera División, etc. matt91486 (talk) 04:31, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Just as a related matter, User:Bruninho has a really bad case of WP:OWN when it comes to anything related to Barcelona. I have repeatedly attempted to cleanup several pages, notably Albert Celades, and the piping of the team as Barcelona instead of FC Barcelona, but he reverts any change on sight, despite the link piping being agreed upon by this group. He also never engages in any discussion... probably because he doesn't speak English. --JonBroxton (talk) 20:52, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Regarding Bruninho, looks like he knows English to quote his last edit note on Gio "Spanish reserve team in the league is not like the English league.Their departures are official". But I didn't really understand that. Govvy (talk) 21:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

This has been an issue for a long time. Normally we just ask Vasco to talk to him, but if he's really not willing to play by our rules on en-WP then further action may need to be taken. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 00:01, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Naming convention inquiry

So I have been a little curious lately to some naming conventions this project has. For example, the NFL (and pretty much every major sports league except football) names their season like this: 2009 NFL season; but for football league seasons, we use this convention: Premier League 2008–09.

Why is that? How did that convention, which obviously isn't isolated to league seasons (like cups, continental tournaments, and team seasons), get started? I've tried looking and I can't find the answer in the archives. Thanks. Digirami (talk) 21:03, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

The NFL used to run from September to December, so it made sense for it to be called after the year it starts in, even though it now runs into the following year. The English football season runs from August to May, and even when it first started it ran from autumn (September-ish) of one year to spring (March-April) of the next, so it makes sense for it to be called after the year range it covers. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 21:13, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I think Digirami is referring to the placement of the year and adding of "season" rather than 2009-10? On that I'm gonna guess it's a split with American usage/European usage. chandler 21:17, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

sorry, not very bright tonight, must be past my bedtime :-( cheers, Struway2 (talk) 21:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Very good question, Digirami. For matches or single-year tournaments we seem to put the year at the front (2006 FIFA World Cup, 2007 FA Cup Final), but for split-year competitions or seasons the years go at the end. It just "looks right" is all I can think of. On a related note, why is it Arsenal F.C. season 2008–09 et al, not Arsenal F.C. 2008–09 season? --Jameboy (talk) 21:27, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Well not really, Allsvenskan 2009 and other leagues that only span one season. chandler 21:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Well if it was a difference between American usage and European usage, wouldn't an English rugby league season (2008–09 Guinness Premiership) follow the same pattern? Or a French one (2008–09 Top 14 season)?

As for it looking better... I dunno. It looks odd, especially since the years are adjectives and they go in the front grammatically. Digirami (talk) 22:18, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I've disagreed with this naming convention for ages. For the longest time, the FA Cup Final articles were located at "FA Cup Final [year]" until I got them all changed to "[year] FA Cup Final" for the simple reason that no one says "Did you see the FA Cup Final 2009?"; they would say "Did you see the 2009 FA Cup Final?" A similar argument could be made for league seasons, in that conventional speech would tend to put the year before the name of the competition, e.g. the 2008–09 Magners League (to cite a rugby union example that exists here on Wikipedia). It's all well and good saying that we do things a certain way because that's the convention, but if we don't ever examine the conventions then we'd be doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over again. – PeeJay 22:22, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I would be in favor of changing the naming conventions to the "[year(s)] competition" format (ditto for team seasons). Adding "season" at the end is debatable, and if used, should apply to league seasons. Digirami (talk) 00:39, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

On the other hand, no one really says "Remember the 1973-74 season?" anyway. Mostly people I know refer to the results, suh as titles or "when we were almost relegated" or something. So I don't think there's much to be made off this argument. Madcynic (talk) 09:46, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I think people would be more likely to say "Do you remember the 1992–93 Premier League?" than "Do you remember the Premier League 1992–93?", so there's more to be made of the argument than you might have thought. – PeeJay 10:01, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Claudio Lopez

Some over-zealous editor created a re-direct page for Claudio López, and moved the original player page to Claudio López "El Piojo", which completely ignores the naming convention for footballers. I moved the page again to Claudio López (footballer) and left the editor a note - but we now have a double re-direct situation with dozens and dozens of links to Lopez's article having to go through "El Piojo". Anyone know how to fix this easily? --JonBroxton (talk) 05:25, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand. The only page that links to Claudio López "El Piojo" is this one... Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:27, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually the article could be easily moved under Claudio López instead. Currently, Claudio López is a disambiguation page for two subject, the Argentine footballer and a Catalan philanthropist in the early 1900s whose name is "Claudio Lopez Bru" with only three pages linking to it. --Angelo (talk) 09:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Daniel Sturridge

Can you please keep an eye on the Daniel Sturridge page please (and possibly semi protect it). It is getting a lot of IP related vandalism and IP related transfer speculation. Thanks Paul  Bradbury 10:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Jack Mahon and Jack Mahon

Mega long shot I realise, but does anyone have any source that confirms that these two players were father and son? It seems highly likely given that Jack the younger was born in Gillingham at a time when Jack the elder was playing for the Gills, but I haven't found a source that actually confirms it..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:23, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Sebwe "brothers"

Kelvin Sebwe is only a month younger than his "brother" Dionysius Sebwe; so either they're not actually brothers, or Daddy Sebwe was playing around...anyone know the craic here? GiantSnowman 12:49, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

The external link in Dionysius Sebwe gives his year of birth as 1969, not 1972. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:06, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Cheers. Ha, schoolboy error on my part! I'm not thinking straight today, degree results day...GiantSnowman 13:27, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

How did you do? or aren't they out yet? cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:29, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

They're not out yet, and the waiting is killing me :( GiantSnowman 13:30, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

2:1! Been out drinking ever since...GiantSnowman 21:13, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Djibril Cissé

FYI, there's been a lot of editing and vandalism recently on this article, due to an announcement. I semi-protected the page for 24hrs. You may want to review it for accuracy, etc. Cenarium (talk) 16:48, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Michael O'Neill (footballer)

The above article has been moved to football manager, which goes against the naming conventions - could an admin please reverse this? Jmorrison230582 (talk) 18:35, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I've moved him back, but I'm not an admin. Wouldn't it let you move it? cheers, Struway2 (talk) 19:24, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I was under the impression that you need admin rights to move the page history back across. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 21:09, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Only once someone had edited the redirect (which means its history cannot be overwritten). пﮟოьεԻ 57 21:18, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

David Icke

The David Icke article contained a football infobox, but this was removed and I was wondering what people felt on the issue. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 16:58, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd say that given that his personal details are in the main infobox, the article doesn't really need another box to display one youth club and one senior club. But whoever removed the box should have transferred its information into a couple of sentences in the early career section, not just discarded it. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:12, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

He made 37 league appearances or something for Hereford, and it should be mentioned. GiantSnowman 21:12, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Done Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 04:38, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

FA Cup Categories

I was thinking it might be useful to add some or all of the below FA Cup categories (assuming they don't already exist). What are people's views on this - a good idea or over-categorisation?

Clubs that have reached the FA Cup Final

Footballers who have won the FA Cup

Footballers who have played in FA Cup Final

Footballers who have scored in an FA Cup Final

FA Cup winning captains

Thanks. Eldumpo (talk) 07:30, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

• I'd say it's overcategorisation. It will open the floodgates for all other minor tournaments as well. --Jimbo^[online] 21:32, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

National team yearly articles?

Are the following national team yearly articles notable;

• Sweden national football team 1991 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 1992 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 1993 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 1994 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 1995 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 1996 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 1997 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 1998 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 1999 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 2000 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 2001 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 2002 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 2003 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 2004 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 2005 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 2006 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 2007 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Sweden national football team 2008 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

--Jimbo^[online] 22:26, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Not in my opinion. The vast majority of the matches covered are friendlies, and therefore probably unimportant/non-notable. If Sweden managed to get to the finals of a major tournament (World Cup or European Championships) in any of those years, any useful info should be used to create Sweden at the 1994 FIFA World Cup or Sweden at UEFA Euro 2000 (example titles). – PeeJay 22:34, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Disagree. If that is not important then Chelsea F.C. season 2007–08 is not important as well... But that would not work well with those that are Englysh-centric.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 22:43, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Utter rubbish. Chelsea's season is absolutely chock-full of competitive matches (60+, I believe), whereas national teams only play about 15 matches a year, and only a handful are competitive. The two are not comparable. – PeeJay 22:52, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Your tone is extremely offensive. I see that all those matches are competitive in respect that players are vying for positions within the team. The team is not a bunch of amateurs but a representation of the National Team. Also just because a team plays 60+ matches or 2 makes no difference in whether the article exists or not. What needs to be done with the articles is references and an introduction that is acceptable by Wiki standards. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 23:48, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I think you've misunderstood the meaning of the word "competitive" in this context. If Chelsea's season was made up of 55 friendlies and five league matches, would it still be notable? Of course not. It would make much more sense to make an article about Chelsea's involvement in said hypothetical six-team single round robin league and disregard the friendlies as they're just not important. – PeeJay 00:06, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

First of all you offensively belittle me by what you think as to what I understand. You're thinking is quite wrong in applying what a "competitive" match is? A friendly international is a competitive football match just because it was not played to garner 3 points or advance to the next round of a knockout competition. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 00:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid you are wrong. A friendly is not regarded as a competitive match for precisely the reasons you mention, regardless of the atmosphere in which it was played or the attitude adopted by the players. Kevin McE (talk) 06:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

And I disagree with you. A "friendly international match" is far more competitive and noteworthly than two local pub teams.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 12:16, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

You're right that a friendly international is more noteworthy than a game between two pub teams, but it's still not a competitive fixture. The match may be played in a competitive spirit, but if it's not part of a competition then, by definition, it's not a competitive match. – PeeJay 16:40, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Again, you seem to forget that Friendly Internationals are competitive because FIFA counts the results and coefficients are accumulated for wins and ties. Hence the governing body of the game regards these games far more importantly than your interpretation. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 17:01, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Can you win a trophy for winning friendlies? No, so friendlies aren't competitive. End of. – PeeJay 17:06, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

By increasing FIFA Coefficient points by winning a Friendly International teams can improve their standing when distrubuted in pots for future tournaments. Hence, again IMO Friendly Internationals are more important than your interpretation. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 18:16, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

The more you keep disagreeing doesn't make you any more right... – PeeJay 19:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Of course I'm right. Its just that you can't accept anyone who disagrees with you. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:58, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

*blows whistle* It is beginning to get ugly. Save your personal discrepancies for your talk pages and try to participate in a constructive way instead. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 20:33, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Too late for that, Wikipedia:WQA#PeeJay2K3, which wasn't needed in my opinion. Uksam88 (talk) 21:13, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Consensus is certainly on PeeJay2K3's side here. Brudder Andrusha do you have a Reliable Source indicating that friendly matches are deemed to be "competitive"? National team matches are certainly split between "competitive games" and "friendlies" in the UK at least. - fchd (talk) 19:22, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

They are also split by FIFA, but they do have meaning. See the reference section below. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:44, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) In the form those articles currently are I'd say no. These are just lists of matches in an sports almanac style, which should violate WP:NOT#ALMANAC. The person behind this stuff, User:Darius Dhlomo, has also created quite a bunch of articles for several nations, including the Netherlands, Estonia, Kazakhstan and Ecuador. And the question about notability has nothing to do with being "English-centric" - the information can easily be included in an article named "1994 in Swedish football" or similar. Any stand-alone article for national team matches only would create a redundancy. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 22:55, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with user Soccer-holic, which points out that this results should be posted on the "(year) in Swedish football" articles, since that's where other national teams results are usually post it, examples:2008–09 in Argentine football or the 1993–94 in Scottish football, but am puzzle by the last one, since it contains a link to this article: Scotland national football team results and fixtures, should this type of article be the answer or just another problem?--Bocafan76 (talk) 00:14, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Sounds sensible. In the majority of cases, I think converting to a redirect to "Season in countryish football" would be appropriate. Oldelpaso (talk) 07:58, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Just as a cautionary note: the creator of those articles, Darius Dhlomo (talk · contribs), is extremely prolific in sports almanac -like content (almost 120,000 edits) but virtually silent with respect to collaborative work (115 total talk page edits, about 1 per every thousand article edits). I doubt you'll get any input from him when generating consensus. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 00:31, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

References for validity

Reference: The following is the link to the FIFA website where the ranking of importance of international games and how coefficient points are calculated in the rankings table. Friendly Internationals, as expected are the lowest but nonetheless have a value in calculating those coefficient points. The adjustment by FIFA was in July 2006. FIFA/Coca-Cola World Ranking Schedule Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:36, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Reference: The exact calculation of FIFA Coefficient is in the following pdf. Examples in the pdf explain how many coefficient points were gained from an Friendly International i.e. Brazil v. Argentina (3 September 2006) How are points calculated in the FIFA World Ranking? Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:42, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Exeter City honorary director dies

As you all will no doubt have heard, Exeter City F.C.'s former honorary director Michael Jackson has died at the age of 50, the BBC has reported. Very talented man, extremely weird, but I hope he will rest in peace. – PeeJay 23:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

• And related to that, just a note that I have semi-protected Michael Jackson (footballer) for 24 hours as he (as have some other namesakes) got a little spillover from the news of the late Mr Jackson's death. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:38, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Jackson dead, Spector jailed, Westlife alive and free. 2009 is a bad year for music. Jackson is the most talented musician to die since Johnny Cash back in 2003. In 2005 it was Richard Pryor, 2006 it was Steve Irwin, Mr Jackson will almost certainly prove to be 2009's most famous victim.--EchetusXe (talk) 00:24, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Am listening to some Fats Domino now. Michael Jackson has died of natural causes and Fats Domino is still alive and well (as far as I know). Who could have predicted that one eh? 50 years old and his heart couldn't take it, I guess with all the stresses and strains in his life he would be more vulnerable to a sudden death like that.--EchetusXe (talk) 00:29, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Pete Burns

Can't help thinking the reporter had a brain fart here. Is it 'Referee Jones' or 'P. Burns'? Answers on a postcard in respect of this article please.--EchetusXe (talk) 00:15, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I think I'll go with Soccerbase's W.C.Burns.--EchetusXe (talk) 00:48, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Antonio Olmo

Is working with adding soruces to the Antonio Olmo article, was wondering if any of these links [3], [4], [5] are seen as reliable? --> Halmstad, Charla to moi 01:17, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

The Voetbal International link is definitely notable, it's my prime source for Dutch football. Dunno about the other two though...GiantSnowman 01:31, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

John Webb (footballer)

I've managed to trace this chap's career from 1969 to 1977...then there's a blank until he re-emerges in Canada between 1980 and 1982. So, does anyone know what he did between 77 and 82? And after 82 as well? Cheers, GiantSnowman 02:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

www.allfootballers.com shows him playing for "Bolzen (Belgium)" after Tranmere Rovers - no more detail, I'm afraid. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 04:30, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Cheers! GiantSnowman 12:43, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

He signed for MVV in October 1976, he also played for MVV in 1977-78, 78-79 and 79-80 He played for Bilzerse VV 1983-86 Cattivi (talk) 10:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Cattivi - do you have a source for his Dutch career? GiantSnowman 12:43, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

You can find it in online newspaper archives like this one [6] Cattivi (talk) 13:09, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately I can't read Dutch...GiantSnowman 13:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

He apparently joined MVV Maastricht in October 1976, as the source from Cattivi states: "Engelsman voor MVV" (An Englishman for MVV), being signed from U.S. club Chicago Sting. --Angelo (talk) 13:17, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the link Angelo! GiantSnowman 13:53, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Bolzen is an error, a misspelling of Bilzen. A source for that is this site: [www.bsdb.be ] you need to register but it's free. Cattivi (talk) 13:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

bsdb says 1983-86 Bilzerse VV (3e klasse B). --necronudist (talk) 16:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

There's only 5 weeks between his last appearance for Tranmere and his first for Chicago Sting, Bilzen was a small amateur club at that time (level 5) Cattivi (talk) 13:47, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Hulk (footballer)

I'd revert the vandalism but what's the point? I suspect it's a vandalism account. Spiderone (talk) 15:31, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

The point, is that if we notice misinformation in any article, but particularly in biographies of living people, it's important to remove it. It's probably just someone messing about, I've reverted and given them a gentle warning. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:49, 26 June 2009 (UTC)#

Yes but sometimes that means the mods don't see the vandals. Spiderone (talk) 15:50, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

WP:BLP says that "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." (their bolding) If the vandalism's bad, then anyone can report it at WP:AIV, the diffs are still in the history so the admins can see what was done. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:57, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

J. League 2009 Topscorer rankings

I've been looking at quite some league pages on wikipedia and a big majority of them feature a Topscorer ranking, yet the J. League 2009 doesn't. I've checked at previous editions of the League (J. League 2008 for example) and they do feature such a ranking. So I was wondering if those rankings only get added after the season is finished, or because nobody wasn't interested in making one yet. If it's the latter, I'd be willing to make it if I can find out how to do it. Rhand007 (talk) 16:35, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

It's probably better to wait for the season to finish, to ensure accuracy. If you plan to update after every game or whatever, but miss a game, the information would be incorrect. GiantSnowman 16:53, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I would use the official website of the J. League as a source, and they update it frequently so accuracy shouldn't be a problem. Rhand007 (talk) 16:58, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Should be fine then, as long as you use something like Correct as of... or Last updated... to show when the table was last updated. GiantSnowman 17:06, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Wesley & Nol de Ruiter

Are Wesley (born 1986) and Nol de Ruiter (born 1940) related? - both footballers and both involved with FC Utrecht, the former as a current player and the latter as a former manager. It could be a long shot though, as nothing is mentioned on either of the Dutch Wiki pages...cheers, GiantSnowman 21:11, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think they are closely related Cattivi (talk) 10:52, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks for checking! GiantSnowman 11:00, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

D.C. United

I'm looking for one of the many editors that have been involved in the numerous FA class articles on a Premiership team. For the last month, I've been trying to get an American team article, D.C. United, to be somewhat presentable compared to its UK counterparts. I'm asking for such an editor to look over D.C. United not as an American team article, but compared to current FA team articles, perhaps Norwich City F.C. or Aston Villa F.C., which I used as my examples. I put D.C. United up for GA, and this could be used to review it, but any advice is appreciated! Understand that this is more than just a request for a single team. Major League Soccer team articles are consistently lower quality, and there's yet to be one GA or even FA. I'd like to get a start on one that could be used as a template for the others.--Patrick «» 22:55, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

References =publisher

I was looking at the publisher tag on references on different pages, but mainly on Spurs articles, but no one is using any main uniform, I mean people put the url, or a full newspaper name, or BBC Sport, bbc.co.uk

What I am trying to say is, shouldn't we have a set way to have the |=publisher tag displayed? So which should it be, name or url? Govvy (talk) 10:17, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Also for official club pages, use the club name or the url? Govvy (talk) 10:17, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion, it should be the actual publisher, not the URL. So I use "The Times", "BBC Sport", or "Bradford City A.F.C. official website" as publisher. GiantSnowman 10:20, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Best to use names rather than urls. For club websites, use publisher=Tottenham Hotspur F.C., for BBC Sport pages, use publisher=BBC Sport. Newspapers are different in that the name of the newspaper goes in the work= parameter, so you'd use work=The Times; that makes it appear in italics, where the publisher doesn't. For major newspapers, you wouldn't normally put the publisher as well. Have a look at the template documentation at {{Cite news}} or {{Cite web}}, see if it helps at all. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:28, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Does playing at the Maccabiah Games merit an article?

Um, that's it basically. If a player represented their nation at the 2005 Maccabiah Games - the "Jewish Olympics" - then would said player, regardless of any club notability, be worthy of an article? Cheers, GiantSnowman 13:25, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Not at all. I actually had the chance to play at the Maccabiah in field hockey (but one of my friends, who had only ever played ice hockey before did), so it really isn't that big a deal. пﮟოьεԻ 57 13:32, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Haha, OK thanks. Out of interest, why didn't you play? GiantSnowman 13:35, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I didn't find out about it in time, so couldn't be registered - I was later told that if they'd known about me, I'd have been in the Israeli team (as they only had about 6 players who'd actually ever played the sport before, and I had played it at school), even though I wasn't Israeli or Jewish :) пﮟოьεԻ 57 16:29, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Heh, my Uncle got a medal in the 150 metres years ago in the games, it would be good to have articles on the games, I don't think you would need player articles know. Govvy (talk) 14:43, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Jamie Clark MLS stats por favor

This souce confirms that Jamie Clark played in 20 consecutive games for the San Jose Earthquakes during the 1999 season; however, I am struggling to find his stats for ALL 2 1/2 season he played in MLS - can anyone help? Cheers, GiantSnowman 15:01, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Tried MLSnet? Nanonic (talk) 21:38, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I searched the site earlier, and nothing came up...odd. Thanks though! GiantSnowman 21:45, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

FA Youth Cup Finals of the 1970s

Many of the squad lists of this article are incomplete - some have numerous player ommisions, some have surnames only, and one features a grand total of two players! Anyone got a resource to fatten up the squads? GiantSnowman 19:04, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Association football penalty shootouts

Discussion moved to Category talk:Association football penalty shootouts#Necessity and name of this Category jnestorius^(talk) 00:49, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Nicos Jiapouras

Can somebody find reliable sources as the existence of this guy? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 23:57, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Other than mirror sites, I can't find anything. Worthy of deletion in my eyes. GiantSnowman 00:20, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

FC Bavois

Could someone with a bit more knowledge of Swiss soccer have a look I considered a prod due to notability concerns but decided to ask here for more experienced eyes thanks. BigDunc^Talk 21:00, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it is a notable club.--Latouffedisco (talk) 08:18, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I would say they are notable as (judging by the Swiss FA's website) they've just been promoted to the 1.Liga (level 3 in the Swiss pyramid). However, if they haven't been promoted and would still be playing in the 2.Liga (Amateur Liga) next season, I wouldn't be so sure. Anyone else have an opinion on this? Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 08:22, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

The Swiss League system spans over eight steps in total, with only the Super League and Challenge League being professional (and even the CL only to a limited degree). If I would compare it to the English and German systems, this club would possibly play somewhere around level five to seven in England and level four to six in Germany.

A German team is considered notable by Wikipedia:WikiProject German football standards is considered if it has played at the Oberliga level (currently fifth-tier, has been higher in the past) or higher in at least one season in its history. English teams are deemed notable if they are (or have been) in a single-digit level, if I'm correct. So, to sum it all up, we could allow First League team articles, but definitely not below this level. The same would go for Austria and teams in its third-level Regionalliga.

Edit: As you can see by following the link above, most of the First League teams have their own articles anyway, so this should be good to go. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 11:02, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Trying to check the history of this club, but looks like they have never played upon the third level.--Latouffedisco (talk) 18:04, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Just had the major brainwave (!) of looking at their website - they have indeed been promoted. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 11:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Gordon Smith

I created the page Gordon Smith (footballer born 1954 in Partick) as there was already a Gordon Smith (footballer born 1954). Is the best thing now to move the latter's page to '...born in Kilwinning' in order to be able to differentiate between the two? Eldumpo (talk) 22:20, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Nononono. The article you created should be moved to Gordan Smith (full back) or Gordan Smith (defender); the existing article should be moved to Gordan Smith (striker) or Gordan Smith (forward). Regards, GiantSnowman 22:31, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

That doesn't work, as the much more notable Gordon Smith (footballer born 1924) was also a forward. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 10:36, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Then disambig the two forwards by date of birth - Gordon Smith (forward born 1924) and Gordon Smith (forward born 1954). GiantSnowman 10:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Or Gordon Smith (footballer born July 1954) and Gordon Smith (footballer born December 1954). Whatever you do is going to be messy, just make sure they're all clearly differentiated on the disambiguation page :-) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:46, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, month would be better than position actually. GiantSnowman 10:52, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Archiving of talk topics

Can someone check if the current archive is too full to take any more subsections or the archive bot has a malfunction (and delete this thread afterwards)? Given that the bot collected everything older than 10 days, it is well overdue... Thanks, Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 00:29, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

See User talk:Misza13#Archiving Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:55, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Thanks for the link... --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 12:37, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

See it's done it now. Only 49 threads older than 10 days... :-) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:25, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Maps on tournament articles

Articles on international tournaments nearly all carry a map, usually colour coded to show either the stage each team reached or which group they were in for the opening stage. There are often problems with these over consistency and the provision of a key, but a new "feature" has been unveiled on the 2009 FIFA Confederations Cup: the map with superimposed flags. I have my own opinions on this, but in the interests of preserving fair discussion, I will simply point out that somebody is trying to establish a vote on the matter here, where some of you may wish to participate. Kevin McE (talk) 07:59, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Help on FK Senica needed - do we have an expert on Slovak soccer among us?

FK Inter Bratislava, former Slovak Superliga champions and recently promoted team from the Slovak First League, have recently "merged" with fourth-division side FK Senica (it was one of those "playing license for money" deals, similar to the one of Poland's Polonia Warsaw last year). However, the merger did not went through without complications. The new club intended to play under its Senica name, but forgot to file in time for the change. As a consequence, the 2009–10 season will be played as Inter Bratislava, but this is pretty much the only thing left from the old club. However, the recently created article for Senica is currently in, let's say, a pretty blank state. So, is there anybody out there who can help to expand the article? I would have done it myself but I don't know jack about Slovak soccer... --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 17:02, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Steve Evans (footballer born 1962)

What do people reckon with what's going on at the Steve Evans (footballer born 1962) article? An editor feels it is appropriate for unsourced and possibly libel content to be included and remove my MoS compliant and formatting edit. Thoughts? Mattythewhite (talk) 17:32, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I made a reasonable compromise. The editor clearly has a grudge against Evans and would prefer it if the article portrayed him as some sort of ogre. Maybe he is, but all negative statements must be sourced and verified.--EchetusXe (talk) 18:06, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

A lot, and i mean a lot, seem to hold a personal grudge against Steve Evans over his actions in non league football. He is particularly vilified on this forum. Having also met the bloke i can safely say he's not the nicest. Then again, being a York fan Matty you probably know about him already. I'd be inclined to ask for a long term semi-protect because as we are approaching pre-season and no doubt Evans will make some silly comment in the media to raise his profile once again. Uksam88 (talk) 18:38, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Confguide...who don't they slate on there? ;-) --Jimbo^[online] 20:50, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

One must presume the editor feels that Stephen Fry's article must read 'Stephen John Fry (born 24 August 1957) IS A CONVICTED FRAUDSTER and an English actor'.--EchetusXe (talk) 01:19, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Tony Rodwell

If someone with access to a Rothmans book or something similar would check Rodwell's league stats for Blackpool, I'd appreciate it. I have two different goals totals (19 in Roy Calley's Blackpool F.C. book and 17 in Neil Brown's list, despite this including two subsequent seasons), which is causing me some frustration. A hat-trick he scored in 1991–92 was expunged from the record books at the end of the season, but that doesn't explain the two-goal discrepancy. - Dudesleeper / Talk 02:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

www.allfootballers.com has: 1990-91 43+2 (7), 1991-92 40 (8), 1992-93 19+1 (1), 1993-94 28 (1), 1994-95 7+2 (0), Total 142 (17) --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Scottish junior footballers

User:Salty1984 has created a Category:Junior footballers. I think this is a reasonable category, but I think a name like Scottish Junior Football Association players would be more accurate. Please comment and move the category if there is a consensus to do this. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 14:03, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd have no problem with a Category:Scottish Junior Football Association players. The wording on the current Category:Junior footballers page, for "players who have played at junior level in the United Kingdom, mainly in the SJFA", is a bit imprecise. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:21, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

To people not in the know, 'junior football' is probably the same as 'youth football', and so the category should be renamed to avoid such confusion. GiantSnowman 21:14, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I have started a discussion here. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 20:27, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

User:Mastershevchenko

Looks like we've got another hoax artist on our hands. Can everyone keep an eye out for this joker? He seems to be involved with User:Greekskii too. – PeeJay 10:28, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

CAF Champions League 2009 - First round

Should this article (and others like it) be merged to the main season article? Jmorrison230582 (talk) 18:59, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Following on from this AfD, it looks like people think such articles should exist. Personally, I disagree, but if it must remain, I think that CAF Champions League 2009 - First round should be merged with CAF Champions League 2009 - Second round, and that the same tournament's group stage and knockout stage (semi-finals and final) should have their own articles too. And as you can see by those redlinks I just put in, I also think that the dash should be removed from the article titles. – PeeJay 20:34, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Fully professional leagues and WP:Athlete

Please consider responding to the below talk page link. Thanks. Eldumpo (talk) 21:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues#Definition of Fully Pro League

Darius Vassel

Hi could you please keep an eye on the Darius Vassel article, or semi-protect it. It is getting a lot of vandalism (some rascist) most of it in a foreign language (I assume Turkish) and a lot of transfer speculation. Thanks Paul  Bradbury 13:55, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Briefly semi'd. Not sure what it is about Turkish IP editors. The slightest whiff of a transfer rumour involving a Turkish club sparks a frenzy of anon edits claiming the supposed transfer has already happened. Left unchecked I swear articles for every club in Turkey would end up listing about 400 supposed players by the end of the close season. Oldelpaso (talk) 22:17, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

It certainly doesn't help that ankaragucu have put a picture of him on their official website [7] wearing all their scarves etc, but in the wording it only says they are in talks, (I don't speak turkish but with google translate you get the jist) Prem4eva (talk) 23:42, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Meh. Again, I think we spend far too much time trying to head people off from doing this when in most cases the material could just be left for a few days until it's factually accurate. Fair enough if it's just rumours, but when a player is literally wearing a club's scarf at a photo shoot it seems like a waste of effort to go reverting good-faith edits which report the new club just because the ink hasn't dried on his contract. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:02, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

The curse strikes again. Nothing can ensure that a rumour becomes fact quite like me semiprotecting an article (Google News came up with no results other than goal.com prior to protection). Oldelpaso (talk) 12:44, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Association football during World War II

I have added a section to this article for Former players killed in action, which needs populating if any one cares to do so. At present, it is rather Southampton-centic, as that is my interest. Cheers. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 15:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC) _{(feeling rather depressed at the current state of the Saints)}

Now there are three from Southampton and three from Port Vale.--EchetusXe (talk) 00:36, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I think, in its current form, to make it a resonably complete article, it would become rather large. From a Germany-specific point of view, football didn't really stop during the war (see: Gauliga), but as things progressed, became more and more affected. The list of Former players killed in action from Germany would be a very long one, too. You might want to make the article into a country-specific one, like English association football during World War II. EA210269 (talk) 05:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think there's any need for country-specific sub-articles; however, there could be a case for a List of footballers killed during World War II. GiantSnowman 13:13, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

No need for country specific articles, create a list of the footballers and link to it from the article. Madcynic (talk) 13:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Any admins about???

Please could you have a look at pages Alex MacDonald (footballer) and Alex MacDonald (footballer born 1990). Looks to me as if (born 1990) was moved to (footballer), then the editor had second thoughts and cut'n'pasted it back. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:04, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Looks like two of us are/were trying. I started but I conflicted with Oldelpaso. I'll let them finish off. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:13, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Done. Oldelpaso (talk) 10:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

thanks both. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:36, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

{{0}}

I believe the {{0}} template is meant to be used like this example, rather than this example, right? I don't appear to be explaining very effectively the use of the template to User:Earl CG. Mattythewhite (talk) 08:33, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Save a lot of trouble if the infobox automatically right-aligned the apps and goals in tidy columns underneath the headers so we didn't have to use the things at all :-) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

It'd be nice, but it would mean even more reformatting of every single infobox instance to split appearances and goals into two attributes. If this is desirable then it would be best to get it into footybio2 before it's widely deployed. This will also mean having to take {{infobox3cols}} to four columns, which is doable enough but will take a while. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

That wasn't meant to be a formal proposal, just a comment on the aggravation of having to write the {{0}}s and the potential for stylistic differences. But if people were in favour of it, and you/someone were prepared to put in the work, it'd be much appreciated, at least by me. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:36, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

You are not alone Struway2. I'm not 100% clear on how that all works, but maybe just right align them as a pair would at least reduce the amount of {{0}} required (only needed between the two)--ClubOranje^T 00:41, 2 July 2009 (UTC), rather than before the caps as well.--ClubOranje^T 00:41, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I've commented on this below, but suffice to say that this piqued my curiosity enough to work on it; it's now live. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:39, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Player infobox

Am I correct in saying that the consensus now is to use the second infobox (ie the one that uses separate codes for each club) rather than the first infobox (ie the one that you have to use breaks to separate each stint). I have twice reverted edits by User:BigDom to Steven Fletcher (footballer) and don't wish to escalate an edit war if there is no consensus on the matter. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 17:16, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Correct, {{Infobox Football biography 2}} is the one we should use for accessibility reasons. GiantSnowman 17:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe it is preferred for the new infobox to be used. His argument that the old infobox should be used as the rest of the Burnley players do doesn't really make any sense to me; how is that relevant to this individual article? Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 17:20, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Consistency is good, but the simple answer here is that eventually a bot will be converting all the old ones over anyway, so having the odd updated box for now only results in temporary inconsistency (and means that in the interim a few of our articles are more accessible to blind or partially-sighted readers). Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:58, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

By the way, when will the bot convert all infoboxes; this subject was already treated here, and everyone agreed with this...So, what's the news? Cheers.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:19, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I've rolled out a new change in the last few minutes which allows goals and appearances to use their own, right-aligned columns; again this will require some testing in the field before it's ready to be deployed. The first instance in the wild is at Kris Boyd; if anyone finds any problems please let me know. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:12, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

(indent)Just the right align when no caps known for first club as mentioned at your talk, refer Jeremy Christie. I can get around it by putting in a dash or something, but left misaligned for now so you can see the issue --ClubOranje^T 11:24, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Checking for this in the template code would mean having to predicate the section headers on whether any one of the 39 allowed clubs had a goals column. For now, the best solution would be to just hack it in the article with a dash. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Question regarding appropriateness of certain pages

I'm not familiar with football articles, so I thought I'd ask here: are the existence of the pages Thailand FA Cup 2009 Qualifying Round, Thailand FA Cup 2009 First Round and 2009 Thailand FA Cup Final appropriate as they currently are? The first two appear only to be competition schedules and score reports, while the last currently contains almost no information as it describes a match not yet taken place. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 20:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

The first two pages should be merged into the main article, probably by using Template:footballbox collapsible instead of the regular Template:Footballbox. The final page is not a problem per se, but it definitely needs references and a little more information. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 21:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

While we're at it - Thai Premier League 2009 Fixtures & Results and Thai Division 1 League 2009 Fixtures & Results surely should not be kept either, given that we do not allow such articles for any other league? --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 00:00, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

(EDIT) Not to mention Thai Division 2 League North Eastern Region 2009 Fixtures & Results, Thai Division 2 League Northern Region 2009 Fixtures & Results, Thai Division 2 League Central & Eastern Region 2009 Fixtures & Results, Thai Division 2 League Bangkok & field Region 2009 fixtures and results and Thai Division 2 League Southern Region 2009 Fixtures & Results. Anyone willing to PROD or AfD those beauties? --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 00:13, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

My initial thought is that these separate articles should all be merged into a single season article for the entire league, as we do for the major non-leagues (see Southern Football League 2008-09, for example). Any thoughts? Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 10:04, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

No need to merge here. The actual league season articles are Thai Premier League 2009, Thai Division 1 League 2009, Thai Division 2 League North Eastern Region 2009, Thai Division 2 League Northern Region 2009, Thai Division 2 League Central & Eastern Region 2009, Thai Division 2 League Bangkok & field Region 2009 and Thai Division 2 League Southern Region 2009. Every article of those includes a results table, so this section is sufficiently covered. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 10:30, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

(EDIT) A merger of the five third-tier season articles into one would be useful, though. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 10:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

FYI, all seven Fixtures & Results articles have been listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thai Premier League 2009 Fixtures & Results. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 12:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Harassment of updates in Europe Liha

This individual continues disallow entries citing reliable courses:

Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to UEFA Europa League 2009–10 qualifying rounds. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. – PeeJay 18:07, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Live updates are taken from sources such as minute-by-minute http://www.uefa.com/competitions/uefacup/fixturesresults/round=2000033/match=2000508/report=mbm.html.

I believe that until the match report is up on UEFA's site the info from the minute-by-minute is good enough to be post on WP. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 18:28, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Links were not being provided for live updates, and therefore they were unsourced. Nevertheless, I still believe that live updates are inappropriate as there is always the possibility of a match being abandoned before its conclusion, which would void the goals up to that point and make the data in the article incorrect. In my opinion, updates should not be made until the final match report is added to the UEFA website, as it is at that point that the result is official. I hope I'm not the only one who feels this way. – PeeJay 18:52, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with PeeJay on this; wait until a match is over before adding any info. Controversial goals - was it an own goal? which striker got the final touch? etc. - are normally not sorted out until after the match has been finished for a while. GiantSnowman 19:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Disagree: I fail to see how links to UEFA minute by minute information is not reliable and not worthy of being posted on WP. Secondly although the link is for the report - the is absolutely no information in the References section for any of these reports. Also why are these links there for the second leg when the second leg is yet to be be played - in fact its 7 days away? If its a report of the post game result it should not even be there. Yet its already on the WP page (as a reliable source). Thirdly - why are controversial goals really a problem? Don't you think there are capable editors who will question the goal or information associated with it and check the official report. I think the issue here is more of control and power and who does rubber stamping of what goes on the page. Not so surprising that the individual handing our WP:Yellow Cards was against the Europa League qualification round entry itself. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Again someone has nicely added the goalscorers without changing the score in the remaining live games... Seems a shame that the our field marshal wants to play sanitary policeman.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:39, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and I don't think there is a need to report scores before a match is complete. Often times, the match tracker initially reports the wrong goal-scorer or time and things need to be changed after the match report is final. It's just totally unnecessary. Jogurney (talk) 19:44, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Luckily, other areas of WP don't agree with your idea of finality before updating information. I spent a nice week with the folks updating Wimbledon and there was never any problems discussed with up to date scores. Nor any superhyper admin type imposing his authority. Also in non sport events I was involved with a bit updating of Cyclones and hurricanes, which don't end in 90 minutes and if wasn't for updates that would be done (with the references) through the lifetime of the event then quality of those updates would be quite poor because after the event the amount and quality of that information entered is of diminished consideration.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

The real question is why you honestly think it's worth your time to update Wikipedia with information which will be out of date in minutes. It is of no value to readers, as nobody thinks "oh, that match is on just now, I must check what the current score is on Wikipedia". Someone will certainly be along after the match to update the result. Rather than attacking other editors for "imposing authority" or whatever, think about whether you might be able to come up with a better use for your time. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 20:29, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I think Wikipedia is an excellent source of information, especially when I want to find out more information about a goalscorer after he has scored because invariably a link exists. I also noticed that a lot of the players who scored today have no entries for them. Maybe you also have a lot of time to spare because you could fill up some of the holes here on WP. However, how I use my volunteer time on WP is my perogative and if I want to spend it on Europa League qualifiers, for better or worse thats my choice. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 21:49, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

You are right, Wikipedia is an excellent source of information. However, it is not intended to be a primary source of information, and all additions must be accompanied by a reliable source (obviously people often ignore this rule, but that doesn't preclude the rule's existence). Furthermore, again you are right that it is entirely up to you to decide what you do with your time on Wikipedia. However, there are strong suggestions here that your time would be better spent on other tasks, and you would be well advised to follow those suggestions. By the way, why, in god's name, would you choose to look up live scores on Wikipedia ahead of UEFA.com or the BBC (or equivalent)? – PeeJay 21:58, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Obviously you have never been behind a firewall which blocks such sites. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 00:22, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Agree. I used to give minute to minute updates for every game as well, but ever since Sweden vs Belarus in which Elm's goal got reversed to an own-goal I've changed my opinion. Problem sometimes is that reports get updated really slow (in the Copa Libertadores for example). Rhand007 (talk) 02:04, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Sébastien Faure (footballer)

Does playing in the Coupe de la Ligue make him notable? Spiderone (talk) 17:00, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I would say yes - he played in a pro comp for a pro team, against pro opposition. GiantSnowman 17:30, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I would say yes, as it is a fully professional competition.--Latouffedisco (talk) 17:33, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Ian Black(s)

Ian Black (footballer born 1960) is the father of Ian Black (footballer born 1985). Does anyone know if Ian Black (footballer born 1924) is a third generation in the footballing dynasty? GiantSnowman 18:40, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I demand that if that is the case then Black refer to himself as Ian Black III in all future interviews (in the third person of course). Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 19:50, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't seem very likely given that the eldest Ian Black was from Aberdeen and was still playing in southern England at the time the second Ian Black was born. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 20:42, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

My Southampton reference books are usually fairly good at giving details of other family members who played professional football, and there is no mention of any family in the article for the oldest of this trio. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 21:48, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks for checking for me. GiantSnowman 21:57, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Infobox Football biography 2 update

Hey folks,

Just a heads-up to note that I've now rolled out a new version of {{Infobox Football biography 2}} which uses separate columns for appearances and goals. This finally allows us to right-align those columns and obviate the need to hack in padding using {{0}} and the like. The documentation has been updated to match. If you find any problems then either dive in and fix them or let me know. As usual, any feature suggestions before we make the big switch to using this as the default footybio template are much appreciated. Cheers! Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Chris, I've maybe fixed the issue regarding alignment with no first caps parameter with this coding in the sandbox. Could you please review and implement if you agree. Not sure it is 100%, but it saves needing the non-breaking space, and doesn't seem to affect the existing cap(goals) versions unduly. --ClubOranje^T 12:54, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Seems fine to me - feel free to sync it. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:07, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

That was quick... thought you said it was doable but would take a while :-) well done Chris and ClubOranje. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:25, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I feel that folks wont use it unless it is the predominant infobox. Most folks who add new players hack from a work area that had the original template or use something that used as a template. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 15:03, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I know - the actual work in making this the default will be done by a bot. This is an early heads-up so that early adopters can help out with testing the new version; there's already been enough uptake that all existing issues have been resolved. I'm trying to take this as slowly as possible to ensure a pain-free transition, considering that tens of thousands or articles will be impacted. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:07, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

When the bot DOES eventually replace all football infoboxes with {{Infobox Football biography 2}}, will {{Infobox Football biography}} be deleted to stop it being used again? GiantSnowman 16:26, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, for consistency.--Latouffedisco (talk) 16:40, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd imagine that once the bot has done its job, infobox 2 will be moved to the main location. пﮟოьεԻ 57 19:02, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I tried the new version on Paddy Kennedy, a newly created article, and it looks great. Well done guys. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 10:32, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Just noticed this infobox on Michael Owen. It looks like there's one too many spaces between the apps and goals. 91.106.107.148 (talk) 21:44, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

And there are huge horizontal spaces when viewed on the iPhone (I'll take a screenshot later), which renders the text too small to view without zooming, but at least the appearances and goals are aligned, which was a big problem on that medium. - Dudesleeper / Talk 13:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

The new infoboxes also shift down the main text about two or three lines compared to other articles. 91.106.114.178 (talk) 22:52, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Template:Huddersfield Town current squad

Does anyone know what the need for this teamplate is? Surely the Huddersfield Town current squad can be updated aptly through the main article? Mattythewhite (talk) 13:07, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

It's transcluded in a couple of places, including the 2009-10 season article so I guess the editor(s) in question only want to keep one set of facts in one place. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:11, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Tbh, there shouldn't be any need to transclude it onto the 2009-10 season article. Why don't they just have a squad statistics table, which would include all squad members anyway? – PeeJay 13:33, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea, perhaps it's a good idea to contact the editor who created the template? I don't see that it's doing any harm mind you... The Rambling Man (talk) 14:58, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

For the same reason, I've added a problem at the bottom of the page, it won't work to transclude it on the current season page. In five years time, you'll have all the wrong players on the Huddersfield Town 2009-10 page then. 91.106.114.178 (talk) 22:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Premier League & LMA Managers of the Year

Hello all. I'm looking for someone with some reliable sources as to who won each of these titles each year. I can dig a few up electronically but the FA Premier League website is a nightmare and most of the historic awards pages seem to have disappeared up their own .... Any help (or pointers to help) would be very handy, cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:58, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe the Nationwide (ex-News of the World) Annual lists all the LMA winners, I'll check when I'm at home -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

That would be treat-tastic. Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:37, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Just to confirm, I do indeed have the complete list from 1993-2008 (at least, I presume that's the complete list). I'll send it to you, along with the ref, when I have a bit more time. Right now I'm being forced to go to Ikea :-P -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:57, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

ARGH! Ikea - good luck. And thanks! The Rambling Man (talk) 09:54, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Jan Podhradski

Hi wikisoccerholics, I´ve been on small hollydays, and I really tried to stay away from editing but it was hard and, I must say I´ve missed you all! I hope you are all right and full of energy to make and improve many more good soccer articles in the new season that is starting. I would like to make one about a player that is a little bit peculiar. His name is Jan Podhradski , he was born in 1917 in a town of Kisač, in the region of Vojvodina, north Serbia, in a slovak family. He started playing in a local club, then in 35/36 played for SK Vojvodina, but he became famous when he came to Belgrade to play in BSK,playing 3 seasons and winning one national Championship in 38/39. He get one cap for the Kingdom of Yugoslavia national team in a friendly in 1938. With the start of the german invasion of Yugoslavia, in 1941, he and his family moved to his parents motherland Slovakia, where he continued his career playing for SK Bratislava from 1941 untill his retirement in 1947. In the meantime, he played 4 times for the slovak national team that existed during the war period. My question is:how are you guys dealing with this kind of national teams that existed in short periods of time, and I´m not sure if were recognised by FIFA or UEFA? Should I consider him a slovak INTERNATIONAL player? FkpCascais (talk) 20:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

If he played for an incarnation of the Slovakian national team, then yes, of course mention it. However, mention that he only played in unofficial games. GiantSnowman 22:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok, but what about categorization? He is certainly Yugoslav International player but also Slovak International player. I´m asking this becouse I´m not sure if in the "Category:Slovak International players" should be also included the players that represented that incarnation of Slovak national team. And also, for list purposes, if I categorize him as Slovak, and I´m writting the international capped players in bold letters, should I also "bold" him? FkpCascais (talk) 03:17, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't know if you have this link [8] which can help you. And if I remember well (I'm not sure, can anyone confirm that ?) Slovakia matches during WWII are not recognized by FIFA. But he did play for them...So, it should be mentioned, but the category "Category:Slovak International players", maybe not.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:50, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I have the link, that´s where it mentions (in the last sentence) that he had 4 caps for Slovakia, and I´ve confirmed it viewing many websites with international games from that period. I also remembered our conversation about doble international players, and since in this case he played only one game (friendly) for Yugoslavia, and afterwords played 4 (more and more recent) friendlies (same level of importance) for Slovakia, I´ve remembered including him in my lists and maybe making a short article about him. FkpCascais (talk) 22:06, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Players positions

I must say that I find too many players articles where is not mentioned the players position. Many say only in the infobox if the player was a goalkeeper,defender,middlefilder or striker, but there are articles without even that information. Shouldn´t that be one of the most important issues in players articles? FkpCascais (talk) 20:50, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it should. If you find an article like that then by all means correct it. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 00:47, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanx Chris, I´ll try my best, but I also wanted to remember younger editors not to forget it. FkpCascais (talk) 22:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

U.S. Soccer crest

On a completely different note, is anyone else having trouble seeing the U.S. Soccer crest on United States men's national soccer team? For some reason, the crest image no longer works in the article despite the image itself not having any problems I can see. Can someone help? Is there a coding error that is simply being overlooked? AfterMayAndIntoAugust (talk) 19:04, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I've fixed it. The wrong parameter name was being used. :-) – PeeJay 19:13, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Category:The Football League managers

So is this being abandoned or what?--EchetusXe (talk) 15:20, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't say so, as the PL, Serie A and La Liga categories are filled. On the other hand, the Bundesliga category is underpopulated as well. Let's fill 'em up... --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 15:26, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Guadeloupe - 2009 CONCACAF Gold Cup

I have reverted the flag of Guadeloupe to the French flag since Guadeloupe is a French colony. The local flag is unofficial and here @ WP we have to be neutral and attempt to be precise.

However, folks that are coming without login are starting to continually vandalize this.

Can some admin semi-protect this page for the duration of the tournament??? Thanks. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 15:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not seeing anything that warrants protection. Oldelpaso (talk) 15:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Me neither, OP seems to have only made one edit in regards to it. Any protection would be over kill. Uksam88 (talk) 16:15, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I've done three reverts in 24hrs. Also look in Talk:2009 CONCACAF Gold Cup Brudder Andrusha (talk) 17:59, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Ethiopian Premier League Teams

I'm wondering: Why is it hard to find links that provide everything for a Ethiopian club football team? I'm an American but I'm interested in other countries' teams.

Rakuten06 (talk) 21:09, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

It's hard because there's hardly any info available for Ethiopian teams, full stop. – PeeJay 21:17, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

It's hard to discover info available for Central/Eastern African teams?? There's barely info on DR Congo's clubs! Rakuten06 (talk) 21:23, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

African football in General doesn't receive nearly as much coverage in the West as European football does. It's sad but it's true. GiantSnowman 22:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Football League Two 2008–09

As a result of the template at the bottom of Football League Two 2008–09 being changed every year, it's now unusable at the bottom of the aforementioned page. Either it needs deleting or another solution needs coming up with. I don't know if it's the same with other divisions or the same problems are there too. 91.106.114.178 (talk) 22:40, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

And see my comment above about Huddersfield. 91.106.114.178 (talk) 22:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Do you mean the Football League Two Teamlist template? It's not needed, the clubs are already listed and linked on the map, on the league table and the results grid. - fchd (talk) 05:31, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Olympiacos F.C.

The article on Olympiacos F.C. needs quite an overhaul in order to get aligned to the Manual of Style. Note: Prepare for red-white blindness when opening the site, especially further down. Any takers? --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 15:14, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

They also have two season's articles for this season (2009–10);

• Olympiacos F.C. season 2009–10 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Olympiacos F.C. season 2009-10 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

The one with the figure dash is slightly better than the one with the endash; albeit a bit over the top. Can an admin delete the first one under WP:CSD G6 and G10, and then move the second one to the endash title, creating a redirect from the old name. Cheers, --Jimbo^[online] 20:14, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Done. Don't fancy doing the squad template though. Did most of the A-League last year and it took forever... пﮟოьεԻ 57 20:30, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Whenever I try to introduce some semblance of MOS compliance I get reverted. Does anyone else want to bring some input? Oldelpaso (talk) 18:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Since at the moment this has essentially become a disagreement between myself and User:Tube69, some third party input would be most beneficial, particularly regarding the current squad template. Oldelpaso (talk) 10:25, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Did the squad templates. It seems like Tube69 develops some WP:OWN issues in this particular case. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 11:35, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

And trying it again. I've left a WP:OWN-warning on his talk page. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 10:51, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Matteo Guardalben

I receved from User:Matthew hk an ugly warning where he ask me not to add unsourced or original content and...if I do so again he´ll block me from edditing...bla,bla,yada-yada, I think you all senior wikipedians know the message. The problem is that, as I´m reserching the foreign players in Yugoslavia, I remembered that in 2006/07, FK Zemun playing in the Serbian Superliga announced that will bring on loan the senior italian goalkeeper Matteo Guardalben. As I still didn´t find the complete datas of the serbian superliga seasons, I don´t have the exact number of games that he played for the club, but I added that info(that he was loaned to FK Zemun in part of that season) to his page. I finded this information in the next external sources: worldfootball.net [9] , weltfussball.de [10] , transfermarkt.co [11] , spox.com [12] , sport1 [13] , jelenfudbal (the serbian superliga unofficial website) [14] ,these are the more important ones, but there are much more, just make a google search ( matteo guardalben zemun ) and you´ll see. Guardalben was also shown as part of the squad of FK Zemun in 2006-2007 old club wiki pages, and was also listed in the current FK Zemun wiki page as a former player until some weeks ago was his name deleted by matthew hk... Matthew hk sended me some old club Vicenza website news page where says that Guardalben had surgery that year so he didn´t played, and explicitelly said that Guardalben played in Zemun must have been a joke. Well, I´m not saying Matthew is wright or wrong, or did Matteo get or not to play in FK Zemun, I don´t really know, becouse I haven´t been in Serbia that year and I didn´t watch any FK Zemun game that season. My question to you, dear soccerholicpedians, are:

• 1:-Does anyone know if Guardalben get to play to FK Zemun, and how many games he played, if he did? Was he loaned to FK Zemun?
• 2:-Can all this websites be wrong?
• 3:-Can this websites be considered non-reliable? Specially Weltfussball/Worldfootball and Transfermarkt, that I touth and used as a pretty reliable source, until now?
• 4:-If I added this info in the players page, citing the external source from one of this websites (Weltfussball or Transfermarkt, I can´t remember wich one I used), can MatthewHK consider them non-reliable, delete them and send me the thretening message warning me that if I insist I´ll be blocked from editing here?

I greatfully thank in advance all opinions from you wikipedians. FkpCascais (talk) 22:18, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

So if you have sources that confirms Guardalben SIGNED for FK Zemun, and Matthew has sources confirming that he never PLAYED for FK Zemun, then we can probably safely confirm that he signed but didnt make an appearance! GiantSnowman 22:28, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

On the other hand, eufo.de (yet another German portal for players, squads and stuff oO) lists him on Vicenza Calcio as joined at the beginning of the season. Guardalben's article at the Italian wiki (English "googlelation") also says something about a "career-threatening injury", yet it does not cite any sources. Is someone of our Italian contributors able to clear the mess by referencing a non-online source? --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 22:48, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

All that the eufo.de website proves is that Guardalben signed for Vincenza at the beginning of the 2006/07 season. If we look at Weltfussball, it shows that he then moved to Zemun a few months AFTER that, before returning to the parent club at the end of the season...GiantSnowman 23:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanx both for helping me clarify this strange situation. If it comes to be uncertain, it would be the major massive error I´ve ever seen in various football websites. But, it´s still hard to beleve, since the majority of this websites are German, wich are well known as being very reliable and perfectionist. There must be something in this story... I clearly remember a friend at that time telling me about it, and all this websites saying it... Maybe you are right Snowman, but in that case it should be mentioned in his page as FK Zemun(loan) 0 (0) , right? On the other hand there is no place that says that he didn´t play before or maybe after the injury. Anyway, it´s still not 100% clarified if he did or not have some conection to the club. FkpCascais (talk) 03:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

As I already told to FkpCascais, Guardalben DIDN'T play/joined/signed for Zemun. --necronudist (talk) 10:12, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

P.S.: Weltfussball, Worldfootball and Transfermarkt are absolutely unreliable. --necronudist (talk) 10:13, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect. Weltfussball and Transfermarkt are rather reliable when it comes to German football. Naturally, the more you move away from Germany, the more unreliable it gets, but that would be true of almost any source: Moving away from its focus means introducing doubt. Madcynic (talk) 12:33, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

We aren't talking about Germany. --necronudist (talk) 12:15, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I was just pointing out the flawed use of the word "absolutely" in your statement. No offense meant. Madcynic (talk) 15:34, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

And if your list only players who played in Serbian Superliga, and not those who were part of the squad, then you should remove this guy.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:41, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, I disagre about Transfermarkt and Weltfussball. They have been very reliable 99% of the time, and they show a, very rare info, if a player played 1/2, 1 or from what month until what month/year the player played, and for my case, reserching serbian liga, that info is very important becouse the winter transfer moves are very active there. Also, Serbian league has many import/export bussines with German leagues, so it is quite close market to german football reality, just like the rest of central and yugoslav europe. For Necronudist, who defends playerhistory website, I must say that I find it very incomplete ( even in recent seasons and I dont even have to mention the more old ones) and I finded some players completely wrong. Erwan, I´ve changed the criterium in my lists for some time now. I´m including all players that were part of the squads, becouse for many seasons I can´t (for time being) know how many games they played, only the squad lists. So if Guardalben was LOANED (not played/joined/signed) should be included, if not, obviously not. FkpCascais (talk) 22:27, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

You keep discrediting people like a good old Communist. "You are with me? Your lists are great!" "You are against me? Oh, you're good for nothing!". That's pretty childish. I've never defended playerhistory. You would better think about giving a reason to keep the list. For me, it should be deleted and you should keep working on that on your sandbox. Usually, only complete works (or as complete as possible) are published. --necronudist (talk) 12:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh and, my English isn't good, but TO JOIN should cover also loans. And, however, HE HAS NEVER SEEN THE CITY OF ZEMUN EITHER FOR WORK, BIRTHDAYS, WEDDINGS OR HOLIDAYS. Is this better? --necronudist (talk) 12:25, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Guardalben never played and signed for Zemun; by the way in the 2006-07 campaign with Vicenza he had a serious skull injury in training that left him out of the pitch for the rest of the season. I have also had a look at La Gazzetta dello Sport's archive [15] and there is no track of Guardalben having ever played for Zemun. --Angelo (talk) 12:25, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Zemun goalkeepers who played in the league in 2006-07: Bosko Borenovic 1 sub, Sasa Misic 7 starts, Radovan Radakovic 14 starts, Igor Stefanovic 9 starts +1 sub, Nemanja Supic 2 starts 2 subs Cattivi (talk) 13:19, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

You won't find exact transfer dates on sited like weltfussball and transfermarkt they often just radomly pick a month.. Nemanja Supic is an example ot that Cattivi (talk) 14:07, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Take it easy Necronudist. You have lot of complexes, don´t you? I just need something more than your words, ok? EXTERNAL SOURCES, not "he didn´t play becouse some necronudist told me"...

Thanx Angelo and Cattivi, that is the kind of info´s I need. FkpCascais (talk) 18:41, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Cattivi, where you´ve finded those infos? Are there earlier seasons? I have the squad lists, without the thed number of games,starts and subs. FkpCascais (talk) 19:11, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

The source of the stats is the European Football Yearbook, there are ca. 20 volumes/seasons now. Cattivi (talk) 21:12, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

The Browns of Argentina

Quite a footballing dynasty: six Argentine international players – five brothers (Alfredo, Carlos, Eliseo, Ernesto and Jorge) and their cousin (Juan Domingo) – as well as two non-international players – Diego and Tomás – who won championships with the Alumni Athletic Club. At least one brother – Carlos Carr Brown – played at some point in the UK (see here for confirmation), but can anyone find out details for his British career, and maybe the other Browns? Cheers, GiantSnowman 22:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

What about José Luis Brown? Spiderone (talk) 08:44, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

There's no mention of José Luis being a relation to any of the other Browns in any of the articles I've read about them. GiantSnowman 09:21, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

No Carlos Carr Brown has ever played in the Football League. Given that the source simply says "he played in Great Britain" that could easily refer to non-league or amateur football.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Being of Scottish heritage, maybe he played in the Scottish league? GiantSnowman 10:04, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

PNG better than SVG if the logo is copyrighted ?

Months ago I've created this File:Luton Town.svg to replace the PNG version logo for Luton Town F.C., suddenly yesterday user Jappalang changed it back to PNG. The reason for the change can be found here – Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Luton Town F.C./archive1. As far as I know it violates WP:Logo & NFCC. As for now I've changed the article logo back to SVG, please do correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks. Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 10:16, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Our rule on fair use basically says that we can't use SVG replicas for fair use images because SVG's resolution-independence means they're never "low resolution". As such, we have to use deliberately low-resolution derivatives instead. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:29, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Then, Wikipedia should change all the thousands football SVG logo to PNG for the fair-use rationale, not to Luton Town logo only. Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 10:38, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Please refer to Manchester City F.C. & Everton F.C., just want to show you some example of many Featured Article football club that uses SVGified logo Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 11:01, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Depends on whether the logo is copyrighted or not I suppose. Using svg format is essentially a master copy of the logo, anyone that finds it here could reproduce it for nearly any purpose they could imagine. Using png limits the ability to reproduce the logo. Bemasher (talk) 11:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Jappalang knows his onions when it comes to image issues. Both Manchester City and Everton went through FAC some time ago, and the logo image has been changed about in both since then, so its entirely possible that it needs adjusting in them (I'm not enough of an image expert to know whether this is the case). Oldelpaso (talk) 14:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

That an article has previously passed FA does not mean it is faultless. What you did there (reverting an image which doesn't fall under fair use back into an article despite having had the reason for its removal explained) can be seen as a copyright violation; please don't do that again. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 16:36, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Copyright violation? There is no rules on wiki that said so. On the matter on the fair use rationale, it doesn't reach any concrete consensus yet. There are thousands of SVGified logo in the english wikipedia itself, if you want to revert LTFC, you should then revert the others too. Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 16:06, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't want to see all the hard work done by fellow wikipedia graphic designers and SVGifier go to waste. This thing must be solved ASAP, it includes thousands of articles Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 16:57, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

In response to this discussion, I've nominated File:Man Utd FC .svg for deletion. The discussion can be found here. – PeeJay 18:22, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

You should have nominated this logo File:CONCACAF logo.svg uploaded in SVG by you first for deletion before you nominate File:Man Utd FC .svg. Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 16:16, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

You may notice on my talk page that I was asked to fix that logo by another user, so don't go pointing the finger at me. That was before this issue even came under discussion anyway. – PeeJay 20:10, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't want to see all the hard work done by fellow wikipedia graphic designers and "SVGifier" go to waste. This thing must be solved ASAP, it includes thousands of articles. Today, you can revert LTFC, but tomorrow you would not know what would happen. I do not want this matter to be repeated in the future Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 16:57, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

And when did Wikipedia release a policy about SVG logos not being permitted? According to the image policy, fair-use images should be limited and that includes vectorization. SVG logos outweighs PNGs in so many ways. Like all fair-use images, a raster should be deleted immediately to keep the copyright limited. Another example is that the SVGs should not render no larger than necessary in the file page. Again, that is to protect the copyright status of the logo. If the SVG is identical to the PNG, there is absolutely no utter to keep it away and waste the graphist's time. ZooFari 17:52, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

This isn't really a football issue, so this discussion should probably continue somewhere else, but I'm not sure where. The nearest I can find to a specific policy is this: "if it's a Fortune 500 logo, is it tagged "{{PD-self}}" or some other equally impossible option? It may be annoying for a requester to have the image they wanted improved deleted, but we all have to follow WP:C." ([16]) There's nothing specific on the WP:C that I can see. What worries me, is that I don't want this policy grey-area to become an excuse for people who don't, for whatever reason, approve of the widespread uptake of the SVG standard to have an excuse to go around WP deleting them. Quite apart from deleting people's hard work unnecessarily. If there are some images that must never be SVGed, then everybody should very clearly be able to tell which ones they are, and a clear policy should be published as to why and which, for all to see. If that hasn't happened, and we need to ask a few people's 'expert' friends to decide for us, then I don't think anyone should be reverting SVGs to PNGs on this basis or off their own bat. --Nigelj (talk) 18:56, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I've started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Image use policy#File:Man Utd FC .svg about this issue. Comments would be appreciated. – PeeJay 20:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

While this is not explicitly stated in current image policy (as vectors aren't specifically mentioned), I would be of the opinion that an SVG logo violates fair use. Fair use states that Logos uploaded to Wikipedia must be low resolution and no larger than necessary. Image resolution is a term that only applies to raster images as it is concerned with pixels, so that alone should indicate that fair use is restricted to images in raster format. Either that, or that Wikipedia's policy on fair use requires some re-wording to account for vectors (which I'd imagine it does, but until that occurs it's all we have to work with).

If you were to make some attempt to apply the concept of image resolution to a vector format like SVG, the only conclusion you could possibly come to is that SVG images have "infinite resolution". This would fairly clearly be a complete violation of the restriction to images of low resolution.

I'm personally generally vehemently opposed to copyright paranoia in any form, but I don't really think there's very much ambiguity in the statement "Logos uploaded to Wikipedia must be low resolution". Resolution means raster only. Even if you disagree with that, low still means vectors are out. _ɹəəpıɔnı 20:52, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Question Is the logo in question from 1885? It appears to be so and, despite the fact it is certainly trademarked, it is a free image. — BQZip01 — ^talk 00:28, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

No, the 1885 is the date of formation of the club. Most UK football clubs change their badges/crests/logos occasionally and this Luton one has only been in use a couple of years. - fchd (talk) 05:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, commercial interests mean asserting control over copyrights and trademarks for merchandising purposes is probably one of the main reasons for clubs making such changes. Oldelpaso (talk) 07:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

If it is a new trademark, then copyrights apply accordingly. Just checking to see if a simple solution had been overlooked. — BQZip01 — ^talk 15:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Please refer to Wikipedia talk:Image use policy#File:Man Utd FC .svg for further discussion.

Cattermole's AS Levels

You can't do Further Maths without doing Maths. On Lee Cattermole's early life it says he had 5 A grades but I think this might be vandalism. Any thoughts? I can't find proof. Spiderone (talk) 17:01, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I've deleted a lot of personal stuff for which I can find no convincing sources which precede the info being added. There is a recent Mirror article which backs up the staying on at school thing, but I suspect that's sourced from Wikipedia rather than the other way about. If he's on your watchlist, insist on sources before any of it's added back. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:54, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

You can do Further Maths without doing Maths, i did Further Maths AS/A Level without doing Maths along side of it. Uksam88 (talk) 13:51, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Still, there would probably be a source out there somewhere if Cattermole really did get 5 A's Spiderone (talk) 15:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Football Fakes

I saw this programme on Sky Three tonight, and wondered if an article ought to be written about the programme's subject, Alessandro Zarelli. He already has mentions in Bangor City F.C. and Peter Davenport's articles, but I wondered if a proper article would be appropriate. – PeeJay 00:16, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

For those of without Sky Three, who is Zarelli? GiantSnowman 11:28, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I also saw it last night; I was quite annoyed when he rang them up and called them "sons of bitches", the sod. Not sure if he's particularly notable though. All I can find on the BBC is this one report. Mattythewhite (talk) 11:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Alessandro Zarelli was The Greatest Italian Footballer Ever - According To Him. There is also a BBC version... --ClubOranje^T 11:39, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Smalltime conman, only of interest to Sky (or anybody else) because it was football clubs that he was trying to con. Don't see him as remotely notable, meself. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:40, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I suppose it is similar to Ali Dia, but of course he is notable (for both the athlete guideline and the amount of subsequent publicity) because he actually played for Southampton. In this guy's case it didn't work, so I don't see how he is (or will be) notable. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 11:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Even though he fails WP:ATHLETE, he passes WP:N due to media coverage. Worth an article in my mind. GiantSnowman 12:41, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Though i can't find the article's online, but some main stream newspapers have reported on Zarelli. I used to work with Davenport and he kept everything in relation to him and had to show me....Anyway when i added to Davenport's article about Zarelli a few months back i managed to find another source which is possibly notable enough. Problem is though is that some news sources spell it Sarreli as opposed to Zarelli, Davenport though always seemed to spell it Zarelli. Uksam88 (talk) 13:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

{{TwoLegResultFb}}

User:Verwolff has created this template in order to utilise the obscene number of templates in Category:Fb templates. He applied it to the UEFA Champions League and UEFA Europa League articles this morning, something to which I vehemently object. I'm sure a few of you know my position regarding these templates, but to reiterate, I am in extreme opposition to them, and I just hope we can come to some resolution that will result in their eradication. – PeeJay 09:37, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

First of all, the change was brought up undiscussed, which is never a good thing to do. As for a possible solution - take a look at the article for this year's Slovak Superliga, more exactly its league and results tables. Could this be the base for a compromise for both camps (template-lovers and template-haters)? Note that all of the used temps there were already existent.

The reason for the change, by the way, is the f***ed up naming for the FK Senica/FK Inter Bratislava merger. Any "correct" implementation of the fb team templates would have led to a new temp for this season, and to another one for 2010-11.

Personally, I have switched my stance from "template-lover" to undecided. As useful as the temps might be, they have significant flaws if leagues change their teams like underwear or if teams change names every couple of seconds. On the other hand, the average human being corresponds more to key-value pairs than to "unstructured code", so I wouldn't completely abolish them. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 10:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you Soccer-holic in this matter that the template was not up for discussion and examples given here on the WikiProject_Football page and a consenus was drawn on inclusion or not. The terms of inclusion shouldn't based on whether some field-marshall likes it or not. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 15:56, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Instead of continuously responding in a sarcastical way to the behavior of other persons, you should rather contribute on a topic-related level. If you have a personal problem with other contributors, then deal it out with them and leave the other members out of this. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 17:16, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't like the fb template system personally, furthermore I object to templates created without documentation. --Jameboy (talk) 22:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Template request

Hi! Any chance someone can create a template like this, but with all rounds being two legs (including the final)? We have something like that in the pt.wiki, if that helps. Thanks in advance. Regards, --Carioca (talk) 18:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Kits

I miss in the English wiki the shirt kit included in the German wiki: "_blackhorizontal". The problem is that I can't work with this kit in other wikis. How can this kit be adapted to all Wikis? I have the same problem with the socks kit "_black_hoops_color"-Lemmy- (talk) -Lemmy- (talk) 22:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Gabriel Obertan

I suggest someone protect this so anonymous IPs don't keep adding "he will sign for Man Utd" or some rubbish like that. It's been non-stop all day Spiderone (talk) 16:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Looks like it's been done. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:10, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

North Road (stadium) FAC

Hey guys, North Road (stadium) is up for promotion to FA status. The discussion (which can be found here) has had a couple of comments already, but it won't pass without at least four "Supports". I hope I can count on you guys to leave your comments. Cheers. – PeeJay 23:18, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

We allowed to support it?--EchetusXe (talk) 04:39, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

FAC it always looking for more reviewers. Anyone can comment on an FAC, but if you've been a contributor to the article etc. you should declare that. Don't just turn up and write Support because you want another football article to be an FA. Read it thoroughly and give it a decent appraisal, checking whether it meets the criteria at WP:WIAFA. Constructive criticism is the name of the game, making sure the article is the best it can possibly be. Oldelpaso (talk) 08:23, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Kevin Moores

We've got a Kevin Moore (footballer) (born 1958) and a Kevin Moore (English footballer). I'm hoping someone can bring up a date of birth for the latter so that we can disambiguate both articles according to their subject's year of birth. Thanks in advance. - Dudesleeper / Talk 23:38, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Kevin Moore (English footballer) was born on 30 January 1956 - I've amended his article to include this (and his full name). There is a third Kevin Moore, born 20 October 1957, who played for Shrewsbury Town in the 1970s. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 03:38, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I've created an article on 1957, moved the other two to 1956 and 1958, and fixed redirects, and updated the disambiguation page. GiantSnowman 18:34, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Good work. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 20:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Galatasaray

I've been trying to make some improvements to the Galatasaray S.K. page but am encountering some difficulties. I've been trying to make the page comply with the MOS, get rid of excess image usage, sort out POV and dodgy English, etc, etc. Unfortunately, every time I try this User:Ozanozan will undo it without leaving an edit summary. I've tried leaving a couple of messages on their talk page (and tried to get a discussion going on the article's talk page) but any time anyone leaves anything on their talk page they just blank the page and ignore the message. I'd appreciate other editors having a look in at what's going on and/or suggest what I can do. Cheers. Dancarney (talk) 14:08, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Just continue, I've had these problems with Messi but eventually they get bored and give up or get banned Spiderone (talk) 16:00, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

And ping one of our friendly admins if you're still having problems. Every comment every lefvt for that user was a wsrning or rebuke of some sort, so I wouldn't worry too much if he was escorted off the premises. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:34, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Disambiguating when a namesake plays another code of football

If there is a pre-existing Bob Robertson (American footballer), or a Bob Robertson (Australian footballer), or a Bob Robertson (Gaelic footballer), what do we call a soccerist called Bob Robertson, given that those other sports are colloquially and regionally known as football? And if there are two exponents named Bob Robertson of what we usually call football, one of whom is from Canberra, what do we call the Australian who plays Football to distinguish him from the Australian Footballer? Kevin McE (talk) 12:35, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

In regions where we let the national team articles away with "soccer", go with "soccer player". Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:43, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

But do, for example, Americans always use (American footballer) as the disambiguator, or do they simply use (footballer) at least some of the time? Because if so, and there is already Bob Robertson (American footballer), then an American typing Bob Robertson (footballer) might reasonably be expecting to read about a Californian linebacker rather than Hartlepool's occasional left back. Kevin McE (talk) 13:15, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Americans appear to use (American football) rather than footballer, or else playing position: see e.g. category:Denver Broncos players. Australians use all combinations, see e.g. category:Australian players of Australian rules football. Don't know what one would do with the Australian soccer player needing to be dabbed, perhaps you should ask at the Aussie rules project what they'd do. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:34, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

How about Bob Robertson (association footballer)? I've seen that used several times. – PeeJay 14:20, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Is this a purely hypothetical exercise, or is there a particular point of concern here? I'm all for consistency, but I'm also very wary about making rules for the sake of making rules. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:49, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I was wanting to move an article away from Sergei Yuryevich Ivanov (which is not going to conform to commonname in any English speaking milieu), and became aware of Sergey Ivanov (American football). However, I then stumbled across Sergei Ivanov (footballer born 1980), so the solution for the 1984 born Sergei Yuryevich suggested itself. At that stage I considered it as a matter of clarifying the principle rather than resolving the situation. Kevin McE (talk) 18:24, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

On Australian rules footballers - names are usually disambiguated as (Australian rules footballer). There doesn't appear to be an Australian consensus on soccer players. Usually if the person has played the majority of their football in Europe they are usually (footballer) but it's a bit haphazard in its application...The Hack 02:25, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Steve Benitez

Has Rafa got a brother called Steve? Seems coincidental that Steve Benitez managed to win Danny Blanchett a surprise trial at Liverpool?--EchetusXe (talk) 14:14, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

"Steve" isn't a very Spanish-sounding name. Plus I think the article would have mentioned the fact that they are brothers. GiantSnowman 14:26, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Could have been an alias. I still like to think Rafa has a kung-fu fighting brother in London. --EchetusXe (talk) 15:12, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Maybe he moonlights as "an accomplished therapist," to pay for the grooming of his facial hair. GiantSnowman 15:15, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Nah, this Pendekar Steve guy looks pretty badass.--EchetusXe (talk) 15:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Bit of a self-publicist, as well. The various articles quoted on this messageboard don't mention his role in Blanchett's career at all. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Seems to have had a big impact on his career, how big I don't know. I must admit when I read "After some tough negotiations between Steve Benitez, Barry Fry, and the 'Boro Chairman'" I thought "**** off". Now he is a kung-fu fighting footy agent? Though I suppose he could have developed a relationship with Blanchett and over time become his mentor, therapist and agent with contacts at Liverpool. Don't know exactly how 'tough' the negotiations were though, maybe he delivered a roundhouse kick to old Barry Fry. Maybe the only thing Steve did was go Blanchett on a light jog one time, who knows?--EchetusXe (talk) 15:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

While were at it; there is a 'Daniel William Blanchett', registered in Brent, London in June 1987. No sign of any other Daniel Blanchett. However Soccerbase gives his birth date as 12 March 1988, something added to the article in September 2007 by an anonymous IP.--EchetusXe (talk) 15:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Unless there's any public corroboration for the findmypast date, we have to stick with secondary published sources for personal details of living people. See WP:WELLKNOWN, the para after the examples. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, never read the Wikipedia manual but I figured there was nothing we could do, however it does then raise the question of why are we assuming his middle name is indeed 'William'?--EchetusXe (talk) 15:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

playerhistory, apparently. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, nice one.--EchetusXe (talk) 16:01, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Ian James Wong

If there is only one person saying delete does that mean it will be kept? Spiderone (talk) 16:38, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

It'll most likely be re-listed -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:42, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Two now thanks to PeeJay - can we get some more input from WP:FOOTY members please? The AfD can be found here. GiantSnowman 17:03, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Well just as long as a consensus is reached, re-listing or no re-listing, it's OK with me Spiderone (talk) 17:08, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

FLRC for List of top-division football clubs in CONMEBOL countries

I've nominated this list for removal from featured status as since we revised the criteria, it now needs some work to comply with requirements. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:20, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

MLS articles and templates linking to club season articles rather than club articles

Hey, I just thought I would bring up a seemingly glaring irregularity regarding MLS season articles. It appears that rather than linking to the club articles from the various standings, they have taken to linking to the club season articles. I was wondering what should be done about this, as it seems to vary from established practice literally everywhere else within the project. AfterMayAndIntoAugust (talk) 01:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Oops! forgot to link to the articles and templates. 2009 Major League Soccer season, Template:2009 Major League Soccer Eastern Conference table, Template:2009 Major League Soccer Western Conference table, and Template:2009 Major League Soccer season table. AfterMayAndIntoAugust (talk) 01:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Join the discussion Here where it was discussed at the time- I should also mention that you should make an attempt at creating a user page before you become accused or assumed to be a sock of a very easily identified blocked user.These templates have been very well discussed and defended, you should maybe get ready for a fight if you don't find the rulings to please you. Morry32 (talk) 02:36, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I didn't realize this was a big deal, I was just wondering why something not done anywhere else in football/soccer articles was done in this case. As for the other stuff, I don't know what you're referring to. AfterMayAndIntoAugust (talk) 03:51, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Turns out this user was once again the before mentioned blocked user's sock puppet, anyone want to remove this? Morry32 (talk) 23:30, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

EPL Fantasy League

So, unless it is kept hidden somewhere, we don't have our own English premierships fantasy league for next year. You can sign up at this website.

Sign up, pick your team, and join the league. To join the league, you'll need to type/paste in the code.

The code for joining is as follows.

• 40867-13018

Cheers, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 03:21, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Is it cool if we post our teams, or do we have to keep that secret?--EchetusXe (talk) 11:20, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

You can post your team if you want. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:03, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

GK: Sørensen
DF: Lescott, Faye, Carragher, Ćorluka
MF: Young, Arshavin, Davies, Neville
FW: Rooney, van Persie
Subs: Jääskeläinen, Woodgate, Zamora, Fletcher

Worldbeaters.--EchetusXe (talk) 17:43, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Non-league matters

Following on from the sad death of Tony Kempster, a new website has been set up by members of his site's forum. It's still a work in progress, but when it's up and running it should be a good source of information to use on non-league club articles. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 11:24, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I didn't know he had died. His website was an awsome place to get information on non-league English football. I'm sorry to hear he's gone! EA210269 (talk) 12:03, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately I can't see the new site being readily accepted as a reliable source. Tony was widely acknowledged as an expert on all things non-league, but I can't see the "army of volunteers" who will be running the new site being viewed in the same way....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

The information will be sourced in exactly the same manner as it used to be with Tony, i.e. from Primary sources, and continuously peer-reviewed. It should be no more or less reliable, or indeed "Reliable" than Tony's site was. - fchd (talk) 12:33, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I can think of one army of volunteers who have managed to come up with something which is surprisingly accurate most of the time. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:24, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not for a moment suggesting that the info on the new site won't be accurate, but if an article were to get taken to FAC which used the new site as a source, I can see the sourcing "gurus" there questioning what makes a site organised by a bunch of fans a reliable source. Tony himself, as a columnist in the non-league papers and widely referred to in print and online media, easily passed WP:SPS, but if FAC regulars questioned the credentials of the guys running the new site, I don't think "they're the regualrs off Tony's old forum" would really pass muster. That's all I'm saying...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

We can cross that bridge when we get to it. Considering that we regularly accept stats from sources which have no peer review whatsoever simply based on past accuracy, I don't think this will be a big problem. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:56, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Changes to popular pages lists

There are a few important changes to the popular pages system. A quick summary:

• The "importance" ranking (for projects that use it) will be included in the lists along with assessment.
• The default list size has been lowered to 500 entries (from 1000)
• I've set up a project on the Toolserver for the popular pages - tools:~alexz/pop/.
  • This includes a page to view the results for projects, including the in-progress results from the current month. Currently this can only show the results from a single project in one month. Features to see multiple projects or multiple months may be added later.
  • This includes a new interface for making requests to add a new project to the list.
  • There is also a form to request a change to the configuration for a project. Currently the configurable options are the size of the on-wiki list and the project subpage used for the list.
• The on-wiki list should be generated and posted in a more timely and consistent manner than before.
• The data is now retained indefinitely.
• The script used to generate the pages has changed. The output should be the same. Please report any apparent inconsistencies (see below).
• Bugs and feature requests should be reported using the Toolserver's bug tracker for "alexz's tools" - [17]

-- Mr.Z-man 23:57, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Leicester City F.C.

I've just listed it at WP:GAN, if people could help me to ensure its meets the criteria, which i think it does I'd appreciate it, also I've put a minor requestion on the article's talk page for help with the kits in the info box. Jimmy Skitz's Answer Machine 12:01, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

can someone that knows how add a light blue sash on the away strip, I can't find a list of the codes in order to add it myself. Jimmy Skitz's Answer Machine 09:35, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Match template

In my opinion on Template:Fb match we should add an optional parameter: competition, followed by friendly, Champions League match, league, cup, whatever. What do you think? -Lemmy- (talk) 20:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I think the template should be deleted, along with all other "Fb" templates, but that's by the by. – PeeJay 21:06, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

PeeJay, the question was about adding an optional parameter, not about anything else. If you want all of the fb templates to be deleted, then take them to TfD, it's as simple as that. Your ceterum censeo mentality about those is beginning to get really annoying.

As for adding the parameter, I would oppose it. The template is crowded enough already. By the way, if you like to use a collapsible template, I would propose to use {{Footballbox collapsible}} instead of {{Fb match}}, simply because it has more features. If you want to see it in action, take a look, just to name one example, at 2009 New England Revolution season, and also take a look at its documentation. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 21:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

It sort of exists in {{Fb match2}} (but its design is completely different) chandler 21:14, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for all your comments! Fb match2 and the Footballbox collapsible don't look like alternatives to me because they lack of some details. I think the (optional) competition parameter would complete the box as the most detailed one. -Lemmy- (talk) 14:27, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

If nobody opposes my proposal from above, I will add the competition parameter tomorrow. -Lemmy- (talk) 17:32, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

World Cup articles

Looking at the list of articles by number of pageviews, the high number of Confederations Cup-related articles got me thinking about next year's World Cup. Since general interest in the World Cup is probably an order of magnitude higher than the Confed Cup, pages relating to it will be among the most popular across the whole of Wikipedia. With that in mind, I was thinking of starting a drive to get as many WC related articles as possible to GA or FA. Last time around, FIFA World Cup appeared on the main page on the opening day of the tournament after a group of us got it to FA. What should we aim to get on the main page on 11 June 2010? Oldelpaso (talk) 07:17, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

How about the FIFA World Cup Trophy article or that of one of the previous World Cup tournaments? 1930, 1966, 1986, 1998 or 2006 would be my suggestions. – PeeJay 13:09, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Pageview stats

After a recent request, I added WikiProject Football to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Popular pages.

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr.Z-man 20:31, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Those are interesting, thanks. Camw (talk) 05:08, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I see that well-known Irish footall hero Liam Neeson is doing well at number 32..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Much better than Rod Stewart at 63! --Jimbo^[online] 09:12, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Lest us not forget Drew Carey at 175, a shocking show of how football forgets it's legends Prem4eva (talk) 10:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Does Ronaldo's ego need any more boosting? Jmorrison230582 (talk) 11:13, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I also found these very interesting. Would be good to see the same info over a full year, over five years etc. I have begun assessing/re-assessing those marked as "Stub" or "Unassessed" - there can't really be many (if any) stubs in that list, given the page hits they are getting. --Jameboy (talk) 19:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

A bit annoying that none of 'my' articles are up there but I'll keep trying. I think it's difficult to actually make articles such as Cristiano Ronaldo and Kaká GAs because of the sheer popularity. Spiderone (talk) 16:01, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

YYYY Division playoff Final

Hi I asked Mr Hall of England about this but got no response so I wonder if someone here might know. These pages were moved from "YYYY Division playoff final" -> "YYYY Division playoff Final". This goes against what I would have expected our naming policies would suggest. "Final" would be uppercase if it was the matches official title, but in that case surely Playoff would be capitalised too. I'd have thought it should either be "... playoff final" or "...Playoff Final", but I'd be interested to hear people's opinions. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 15:36, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd guess he moved them because playoff articles, e.g. Football League Championship play-offs, had playoff uncapitalised, and football finals articles, such as 2009 FA Cup Final, had Final capitalised, so he'd find it logical to combine the two established methods. Personally, I'd have both uncapitalised. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:53, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Think I agree with Struway. Mr Hall has used precedent, albeit in a slightly strange way. If we were to change these, I think any policy or guideline would need to consider consistency across all "...Final" articles, not just play-offs. --Jameboy (talk) 18:17, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Probably a good idea, and I would suggest that most need to be changed to "...final". However, there are some that should remain capitalised, such as "YYYY FA Cup Final". – PeeJay 19:56, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Why? What's the difference between a cup final and a play-off final? - fchd (talk) 20:44, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Is the "FA Cup Final" not treated as a proper noun? – PeeJay 21:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Probably, but we don't go by the official title - we go by common use. I'd far rather that we avoided capitalising terms just because a given association wants to stick a trademark on them. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 18:20, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Agim Cana or Agim Canaj?

There seems to be some confusion over the surname of Agim Cana. Since he's the father of Lorik Cana it would seem his surname is Cana but a search of "Agim Canaj" comes back with quite a bit more than "Agim Cana" Spiderone (talk) 09:33, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

They are two different people. Agim Cana is the person described in the article Agim Cana, a former-Yugoslavian footballer who played for Prishtina and then abroad, and is the father and agent of Lorik Cana.[18][19] Agim Canaj is an Albanian footballer who played for Dinamo Tirana[20][21] and became a manager,[22] until recently of Dinamo Tirana.[23] cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:33, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, so it looks like I was right to move the page Spiderone (talk) 08:51, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Fortuna Babelsberg

Is anyone who has excellent knowledge of Landesliga Brandenburg-Nord (VII) will please help me edit this article but sometimes I thought that Fortuna Babelsburg is a stub since it doesn't have a stadium section (I added it) or players section (It doesn't require numbers since it's not a Bundesliga football club. Please? reply back to my talk page if you are interested... Rakuten06 (talk) 14:50, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Tables

Hello I'm editing 2009 Peace Cup Andalusia, and somebody (User:Hrafn) keeps deleting the match tables saying they are 'routine sporting announcements' with no depth of coverage. Then all the tables for upcoming events (incl. 2010 world cup, euro) should be deleted?

rokengalan (talk) 15:45, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Why are tables needed when no matches have been played yet.......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:56, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

But..isn't that what has been done by you editors? eg. 2010 FIFA World Cup#Matches. i'm confused. -- rokengalan (talk) 16:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Personally I don't think any article about a tournament which hasn't taken place yet should show tables with zero in every cell. It's completely pointless IMO -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:12, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

"# It needs additional references or sources for verification. Tagged since July 2009.

1. It needs sources or references that appear in third-party publications. Tagged since July 2009.
2. It may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail which may only interest a specific audience. Tagged since July 2009.
3. Its introduction provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject. Tagged since July 2009.
4. It seems to contain embedded lists that may require cleanup. Tagged since July 2009.
5. It lacks information on the notability of the subject matter. Tagged since July 2009.
6. It may contain improper references to self-published sources. Tagged since July 2009."

That is absurd. There is no excessive detail and the article is littered with references. goal.com is a "self published source"? err, wrong. Notability is ascertained from the main Peace Cup article. There is no clean-up required of the venue list. These "issues" are a nonsense. Kill them with fire.

Tables are standard, the games are scheduled and all teams are accounted for. Here. It is standard practice to input tables, how many matches have been played is an irrelevance.

Get rid of those unsightly tags.--EchetusXe (talk) 17:02, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

What is "standard" is for us to include tables when there have actually been matches played. Doing so before just encourages people to fill articles with meaningless boilerplate. Unsurprisingly, that's what most of that artcile is just now. Tables are a reasonable way of presenting factual information; they are a poor way of presenting no factual information. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 18:11, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

The factual information presented is as follows: no games have been played, there are three teams in the group and what teams they are, not to mention which country each team is from. All of this can be clearly understood by merely glancing at the table, rather than having to read chunks of text. Each table therefore presents four key pieces of factual information.

Meanwhile what do these tags add to the article? An opinion that the article is crap. No factual information is revealed whatsoever. Yet this eyesore is stuck at the top of the article. No less than 177 words telling the reader that someone has read the article and doesn't like it. Presumably the reader is looking at the '2009 Peace Cup' article for information on the '2009 Peace Cup', and not to take part in a debate on whether the article (which the reader has not even read yet) is very good or not.

Perhaps the article is 'boilerplate' because a ball hasn't been kicked yet. Rather than what you seem to be suggesting, that these tables are somehow encouraging people to add meaningless trivia.--EchetusXe (talk) 19:27, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Once upon a time we discouraged articles which consisted of nothing more than lists of results or fixtures which had simply been transposed from one primary source or another. Allowing articles to consist of essentially nothing more than skeletons of such doesn't help with that. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 20:01, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Well it should either be nominated for deletion or treated the same as any other article of its type. This guy failed to get the Peace Cup article deleted and now has some sort of vendetta against its sister articles. An article will remain nothing more than a skeleton if key information such as this is removed.--EchetusXe (talk) 20:19, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

And that's the argument which should have been used in the AfD. I've got better things to do with my time than go nominating articles which will eventually be recreated, but the point is that we shouldn't be encouraging people to fill out huge skeleton articles full of empty tables the minute a competition is announced precisely because it leads to them being stat dumps. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 22:11, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

UEFA Plaque

Is there an actual award called "The UEFA Plaque"? It's mentioned at UEFA#The UEFA Plaque, and linked on {{UEFA club competition records}} and elsewhere. It seems UEFA did present a plaque to Juve in 1987 to mark their having won all three main UEFA competitions; but that doesn't mean it's a permanently available award. Discussion at Talk:European Champion Clubs' Cup#Sure this is correct? has produced the unhelpful response "Google or RSSSF are not a holly Bible". jnestorius^(talk) 16:36, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Gremio kit

Is anybody able to rustle up better versions of kits for Grêmio then these current over-detailed ones? I can't find suitable templates. Cheers. Dancarney (talk) 12:13, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

You can use this image for Grêmio's home kit. --Carioca (talk) 19:33, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Ta. Didn't look in the non-transparent section. I've just made the away kit plain white - no pattern - for now. Dancarney (talk) 12:12, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Plain's all you need really. GiantSnowman 12:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

List of Belgian First Division seasons

What about this? Keep and expand or delete? IMO delete (if it doesn't get really expanded), mostly because everything can be found in this template. Anyway, have your say. SonjiCeli (talk) 22:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Definitely keep and expand. If List of Premier League seasons can be filled with relevant info, I don't see why this list can't be too. – PeeJay 22:10, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Keep, for the reasons Peejay mentioned. Lists like this act as a nice summary of info and a handy index to the relevant articles. Does need a lot of work though, admittedly. --Jameboy (talk) 19:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Should we have links to team stores?

I found that the article for Federación Mexicana de Fútbol Asociación has a link for the team store in the U.S. I wonder if that is proper for an encyclopedia, and thought I should ask before deleting it. Thanks. Openskye (talk) 01:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

More links than content on that page. Most deleted per WP:LINKS. --ClubOranje^T 02:45, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Openskye (talk) 12:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Village pump discussion on number of football articles and suggestion of creation of WikiSports

See Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#42,000 soccer player articles and other statistics Nfitz (talk) 03:54, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

This guy (EconomistBR) has already expressed in the past his hatred for football and sports in general.--Latouffedisco (talk) 07:01, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, he starts a new discussion about twice a year bleating about how many articles there are on footballers and how it is ruining WP. The discussions never go anywhere and you'd think he'd have got bored by now....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

It all stems from this AfD which didn't go his way and led to some major league dummy-spitting. As far as this 'stub watch' of his is concerned, I would respond with just one word - meh. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 10:22, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Anyone who brags about how many articles he has deleted should be ignored out of hand.--EchetusXe (talk) 11:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

6 is hardly a brag; it's embarrasing! Poor guy...GiantSnowman 12:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm getting bored of this guy, we've already given him some arguments in the past. He is a bit stubborned and feel superior.--Latouffedisco (talk) 17:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Steve Williamses

Can an admin please move Steve Williams (goalkeeper) to Steve Williams (footballer born 1983)?; other Steve Williamses are located at Steve Williams (footballer born 1958) and Steve Williams (footballer born 1974). Cheers, GiantSnowman 10:47, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

'Tis done, good sir -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:18, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Far too kind! GiantSnowman 11:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Why are these players notable?

Why are all the players for the clubs Al-Ittihad (Tripoli), JS Kabylie, USM Alger and Cotonsport Garoua notable? It doesn't say they're professional. I say this because I plan to put all non-notable players up for deletion. Spiderone (talk) 16:44, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I had a quick look at Al-Ittihad (Tripoli). A number (but not all) of the players are apparently internationals (have taken part in the Africa Cup of Nations, for example) or have taken part in the Olympics so there is probably a presumption of notability there. The Libyan Premier League is not fully professional so the rest won't meet WP:Athlete and will have to rely on the general notability criterion for inclusion (few seem to have significant coverage in independent reliable sources though). --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 17:54, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Les Dennis' dad

I'm watching a TV show with Les Dennis on talking about his childhood, and he said his dad Leslie played as an inside forward for Blackburn Rovers, Tranmere Rovers and Liverpool in the 1930s...does anyone know if he played a first-team game? GiantSnowman 18:08, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

"My dad, Leslie Heseltine, couldn’t have been more different. He was always known in Garston as ‘the quiet man’ or ‘Rusty’, because of his red hair.

He was an accomplished sportsman, including a champion swimmer. He played football for Liverpool Schoolboys, South Liverpool, Tranmere Rovers, Blackburn Rovers and, on January 31, 1935, signed a contract with my beloved Liverpool FC."

One would imagine he saw first team action with either one or both of the Rovers.--EchetusXe (talk) 18:18, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

No Leslie Heseltine in Football League Players' Records 1888 to 1939 or PFA Premier and Football League Players Records (1946-2005). Mattythewhite (talk) 18:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

How about a 'Leslie Dennis'; the article on Les Dennis has Heseltine as his middlename, not surname. GiantSnowman 18:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Nope, no Leslie Dennis in either. This interview shows Dennis is actually only his middle name. Mattythewhite (talk) 18:39, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Cheers for checking; his dad was clearly one of the countless players who never made the grade. GiantSnowman 18:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

User:MaloneyW.F.C

This user has been on a spree creating articles for Weymouth players, none of whom seem to have played in a fully professional league. Haven't got time to take any action at the moment, but someone may wish to look into it..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I'll have a look at the articles and take any PROD/AfD action if needed. GiantSnowman 11:43, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, I've PRODded five players and added an existing AfD (Scott Brice) to the WikiProject's list. GiantSnowman 11:58, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

He's also been creating articles such as Weymouth F.C. Trailists 2009 - 2010 and Weymouth F.C. Reserve Team 2009 - 2010 that I've PRODded today. BigDom (talk) 20:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Acadamy Graduates

I have a question/idea and I thought I would ask for guidance here before editing anything. I was wondering what people thought about adding some kind of marker in squad lists on team articles if that player was an acadamy graduate of the club in question. The reason I ask is I think this is pertinant information that isn't captured at that level, however I am also keenly aware of things like bolding all international players which is not really of any value. Any thoughts Paul  Bradbury 22:24, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

IMO this is the same as bolding an international player, and should therefore be avoided. If people want to know if a player has come from the youth team, then all it takes is a single click on the player in question to see his career history. Cheers, GiantSnowman 09:19, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Galatasaray admin move

User:Ozanozan has moved Galatasaray S.K. to Galatasaray Sports Club, but he has edited the redirect page to make a move back impossible without admin intervention. Furthermore, he didn't move the talk page with the article, so now we have Talk:Galatasaray S.K. and Talk:Galatasaray Sports Club. Could an admin please move Galatasaray Sports Club back to Galatasaray S.K. and merge the histories of the two talk pages? Thanks. – PeeJay 09:23, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Looks like it's been done. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 09:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Fixture of upcoming competition

Fixture tables(match sections) of upcoming competions such as this and [24] are NOT ENCYCLOPAEDIC so it should be deleted? This user again deleted the whole table for the matches in 2009 Peace Cup. Please see Talk:2009 Peace Cup. This matter has been once discussed above.

If an article that is purely or mostly based upon such information IS NOT ENCYCLOPAEDIC , I'm sure that a lot of match tables in many articles, and even entire articles like 2010 FIFA World Cup, Wembley Cup, 2009 FIFA U-20 World Cup must be removed, which is absurd.

-rokengalan (talk) 13:13, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Philip Hughes (Northern Ireland footballer)

User:Vintagekits moved this article from Philip Hughes (Northern Irish footballer) to Philip Hughes (Northern Ireland footballer) today. Just thought I'd mention it here as it seemed a bit odd to me and I wondered if the move ought to be reverted. – PeeJay 20:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it shouldn't have been moved. However, this is a perfect example of why I don't like using nationalities in titles; in my opinion he should be moved back to Philip Hughes (footballer born 1964), and the other player moved to Philip Hughes (footballer born 1981). GiantSnowman 21:00, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Can you explain why it shouldnt have been moved? "Northern Irish" is not a nationality.--Vintagekits (talk) 11:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

But it is though - people say "I'm Belgian / Swiss / English / Irish / Northern Irish" not "I'm Belgium / Switzerland / England / Ireland / Northern Ireland" don't they? GiantSnowman 11:47, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually in Northern Ireland they dont - they say they are Irish or British! Now explain why it should have been moved.--Vintagekits (talk) 23:08, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Northern Irish people themselves may describe themselves as "Irish", but almost anyone else referring to a Northern Irelander will say that they are "Northern Irish" to differentiate them from someone from the Republic of Ireland. – PeeJay 23:30, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

If you know anything about the north you would know that the term "Northern Irish" is avoided at all costs by "both sides" - less than a 1/4 of the population would ever refer to themselves as "Northern Irish" - its a completely POV term and should be avoided.[25]--Vintagekits (talk) 00:00, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

How does that affect how people from other countries refer to people from the north? The term may not be used in any part of Ireland, but if a large proportion of the rest of the world uses it then that seems like a fairly large majority that does. – PeeJay 00:04, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

O Really I dint realise - thanks for pointing that out! sheesh!--Vintagekits (talk) 01:20, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I assume by your glib response that you've conceded this argument then... – PeeJay 01:32, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Of course you have won - you just said it havent ya - you could have said "fact!" at the end and then it would have been beyond doubt! - its as good as a source in the BBC!

Well this is clearly a pointless discussion if you've decided not to take it seriously any more! – PeeJay 01:47, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Well your post tagged "00:04, 17 July 2009" is complete original research and without any foundation - where am I supposed to go from there?--Vintagekits (talk) 02:02, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Seems like both varieties are widely used.--EchetusXe (talk) 21:02, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

The user has moved a significant number of (Northern Irish footballer)s to {Northern Ireland footballer) today, not just that one. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 21:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Makes sense with the category being renamed 'Association footballers from Northern Ireland'. My county shows 15 for (Northern Ireland footballer), 8 for (Northern Irish footballer) and even 2 for (Irish footballer). Seems like moving them to the birth year would be best.--EchetusXe (talk) 21:07, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Yep, birth year absolutely here. *mutters something about football nationalities again* Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:10, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

K, I've moved them to 1964 and 1981 and updated the disambig page. GiantSnowman 09:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Juventus coach picture

Hi Is it possible to add a picture for the new Juventus head coach Ciro Ferrara? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MK1122 (talk • contribs) 23:49, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Only if someone happens to have a free (un-copyrighted) picture of him available -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:56, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Shaun Pejic

User:Pejic49 has changed the height of Shaun Pejic to a value that disagrees with the given source. I bring this up as I would assume this user is the subject himself or a relative. Mattythewhite (talk) 15:28, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Nothing unusual there; men always exaggerate by a couple of inches.--EchetusXe (talk) 15:34, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Druids F.C.

This club was one of the top clubs in Wales in the Victorian era and had many notable matches, including entering the FA Cup. Currently Druids F.C. redirects to Elements Cefn Druids A.F.C., but as far as I can see the present club has no connection with the 19th C club other than having co-opted their name. Can anyone confirm? And, assuming there is no formal connection, would the original club merit an article...........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:25, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

As far as I know, there is a lineage from Druids through to the current club, after a number of mergers through the decades. - fchd (talk) 06:46, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Egyptian Premier League?

Is the Egyptian Premier League professional? It is not on this list and yet on an Afd for William Mensah an appearance in this league makes him notable. I also believe that the Algerian Championnat National isn't pro so Nassim Boukmacha, for example, should go. Spiderone (talk) 07:44, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

This is a tough one. The article itself states that it's a professional league but provides no source, and I haven't found anything on Google to confirm this one way or another. I guess trawling through the club websites is the next step - let's just hope they're all in English! Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 08:49, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

The Algerian first division is only semi-pro.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:13, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

And I'm right in saying semi-pro isn't good enough? Spiderone (talk) 10:19, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Not as far as the players are concerned, no - only the teams themselves are notable. On the Egyptian front, I'm not having much luck. I've found a news story that suggests the league is semi-pro, but I'm not convinced about its reliablity. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 10:24, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll put in a few Afds just to test the water then Spiderone (talk) 10:42, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm only finding articles that are stating players "started their professional career with 'insert team' in the Egyptian Premier League." This is in English though, I'm sure if someone has an understanding of Arabic they'll have more success in finding sources. Borgarde (talk) 12:07, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I found [26] and [27]. I think it proves that the league isn't professional as the only players mentioned in the second source are abroad. Spiderone (talk) 10:32, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for doing further research. I think the first link casts doubt on whether the league should be considered fully-pro (at least in past years), but I'm not sure I understand it completely. I consider the second link to be just a listing of popular or star players, because it clearly omits pro players like Abdel El-Saqua. Jogurney (talk) 15:38, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Also, the CAF website suggests the Egyptian Premier League is professional here. Jogurney (talk) 16:23, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

It suggests it, but it's not definitive either way, since it could be semi-pro with that implication. Does anyone read Arabic that could possibly find it in an Arabic-language source? matt91486 (talk) 15:47, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion question/comment

As a generally non-editing user of Wikipedia i've recently been watching and trying to understand the deletion process within football articles. Whilst I can see that you have a set of guidelines, I don't quite understand how some of the deletion comments on AfDs can really be anything other than of the 'if it's an AfD I'm going to type delete' nature. For example, one user managed to suggest deletion on 8 articles within the space of five minutes recently. Quite how that user could have even looked at all for whether they really were non-notable and type (or copy and paste) in that time beats me. Instead, they type 'Delete per nom....' and leave their mark. If you have a few people who do this without bothering to check, then is there really any point in others contributing, because the consensus will always be with those who type delete regardless. I don't understand at all the move to delete as many articles as possible (is there a competition between you to see who can delete the most?). Personally as an encylopedia I feel that Wikipedia would benefit more on articles being improved than the efforts spent on deletion (I am aware of the irony here given the length of my comment).8lgm (talk) 13:21, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

The user who contributed to 8 AfDs in 5 minutes was me, so it's only right I respond. I DID look at all the articles actually, and I did it before I contributed to ANY discussion. Judging that they all failed in the same way, it was then simply a case of copy & pasting the same argument "non-notable footballer who fails WP:ATHLETE" onto all of the AfDs - hence the speed. Thanks, GiantSnowman 13:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I have been contributing to more football-related AfDs recently, and I don't think this is a problem. The closing admins always look at the reasons for the !votes, and if only one person does a google search to find that the footballer played in a pro league, they will weight that more heavily that the delete !votes which claim he did not play in such a league. Jogurney (talk) 14:17, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

All articles should be non-notable until proven to be notable. Feel free to comment on any Afds I make so we can get a clearer consensus. Spiderone (talk) 15:06, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

My attitude is that it is better to delete articles that have no sourcing or are for athletes that never played at all. Deleting sourced articles about athletes that have played and achieved some degree of success (e.g., more than just one season of play) is far less important (how much do these articles harm the project?). I realize that some articles may fail WP:ATHLETE and WP:N at the moment, but often WP:N can be satisfied when someone with the time and language skills comes along to provide enough WP:RS to satisfy the general guideline. Jogurney (talk) 16:25, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

People have different opinions. I think sometimes arguments in favour of keeping can be weak especially in the case of trivial mentions and players never playing professionally. Spiderone (talk) 17:27, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I don't think it would be a huge loss to WP if many of those articles are deleted. That said, "fully pro league" is not as much of a bright-line test as I would hope. The evidence provided to establish that a league is fully pro or semi pro often hinges on one news article that may or may not be accurate (I know the decision on the Mexican Primera A did). Jogurney (talk) 17:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Defunct Scottish football clubs template

54 clubs in Category:Defunct Scottish football clubs. 11 clubs in {{Defunct Scottish football clubs}}

Is there any logic to this?--EchetusXe (talk) 20:27, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

No. Either populate the template, or delete it. I'm cool with either. GiantSnowman 21:23, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Do we really need a template linking clubs whose only common characteristic is that they were Scottish and don't exist any more? There's already a template for former members of the Scottish League, which works as it's a defined group. "Defunct Scottish clubs", however, suggests that it would cover all Scottish clubs, from any level, which have folded, which it clearly doesn't, and which would be of limited use anyway....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:21, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I can see one major club missing from that template...  GARDEN  says no to drama 16:51, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

No, we don't. Feel free to take it to TfD. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 18:38, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

HBS Craeyenhout

A Dutch sportsteam based in The Hague that fields teams in football, hockey & cricket. At the moment it's nothing more than a stub. Does the football section, which was a major force in Dutch football in the early 20th Century (winning a couple of league titles & cups, contributing international players), merit its own article or not? GiantSnowman 13:20, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I would say yes, given that some of its players appeared in some World Cups.--Latouffedisco (talk) 17:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe that it should. There may not be enough information on it available now, but wouldn't a Dutch team with similar accomplishments in the 1990s be notable enough? JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 17:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

How should we name it then? HBS Craeyenhout FC? HBS FC? GiantSnowman 17:37, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I would name it HBS Craeyenhout (football).--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:11, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

(football club) is the standard disambiguator if we are going that way. I'll create a stub in a while. GiantSnowman 14:06, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Lists of sponsors, etc.

I've noticed that quite a few football club articles have extensive lists detailing the various sponsors, etc. that have deals with a club. I find these sections really irritating, and they just don't seem to be encyclopaedic. However, I'm not sure what rationale would be applicable to get rid of these - or am I plain wrong? Dancarney (talk) 15:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

You're not wrong, mate. I recently deleted a list of sponsors from the Manchester United F.C. article as it was not complete, it did not have any inclusion criteria stating why the named sponsors had been picked and I felt that a full list of the club's sponsors would have been unnecessary. The club's main sponsorship deals should be mentioned, by all means, but only in prose form with an appropriate reference. – PeeJay 23:14, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't even think the "main sponsors" really need a mention, they're so transient. - fchd (talk) 06:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Is there an appropriate policy that could be cited, though? Dancarney (talk) 11:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Ryan Flynn

Could an admin recreate this article? He has played (and scored) tonight for Falkirk in a European tie against Vaduz. Quite notable because it is their first goal in Europe. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 19:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I've restored the secon-to-most-recent version, as the most recent consisted entirely of the following; "RYAN FLYNN IS A SCOTTISH FOOTBALLER, HE HAS PLAYED THREE COMPETITIVE GAMES IN THE ENGLISH CONFERANCE FOR WREXHAM, THUS MAKING HIM NOTABLE ACCORDING TO WIKI GUIDELINES, SO WOULD FOLKS STOP DELEATING THIS PAGE!!!" Feel free to edit away to show how he now meets the rquirements -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:50, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!! Jmorrison230582 (talk) 20:08, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Surely the Europa League is not a fully-professional league, therefore he still doesn't pass WP:ATHLETE? If however it is deemed to be so, then it follows that the players for the Irish clubs (both North & Republic) etc. will pass under the same criteria. - fchd (talk) 06:48, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:FOOTYN exapnds on that to allow cup games between professional teams; as Falkirk and Vaduz are both fully professional, I don't see the problem. He's also received substantial coverage in Scotland since he moved back to Falkirk on loan. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 07:41, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

His spell with Hereford in the 2007-08 season should also be added to the article (even though he didnt play due to injury). Bigmike (talk) 17:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Torric Jebrin

Has he played for Ghana or not? There seems to be a disagreement. I think if it weren't for the number of sources he wouldn't even have a page. Spiderone (talk) 08:40, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Dunno about Ghana - I'd say probably not though - but he never played for Zulte Waregem, as confirmed by Voetbal International. GiantSnowman 08:56, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Coaches and managers

Currently we have one single article, Coach (sport), which attempts to cover the US use of "coach" and the UK use of "manager" all in one article. However, what if an editor writing about a UK club wanted to refer to both its coach (in the UK sense) and its manager? Both terms would have to link to that same article, which would be highly confusing. Any thoughts.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:32, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Maybe create an article called something like Management (association football) or Staff (association football), which can have seperate sections for manager, assistant manager, coach, physio, scout etc., detailing what different roles there are and what they do. GiantSnowman 11:52, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes and it would need a bit of expansion to warrant a separate article but finding sources shouldn't be a problem. Spiderone (talk) 12:09, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I've usually linked manager to head coach, rather than coach (sport), because the two positions are more analogous. Indeed, some clubs in Britain do term their "manager" as head coach (usually clubs that still operate with that director of football system). Continental clubs normally do the same, as they usually have a directeur sportif. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 14:41, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Wolverhampton Wanderers kit

Can anyone whose skilled in these matters, have a go at their two new kits?

http://www.wolves.co.uk/javaImages/d1/1c/0,,10307~5840081,00.jpg http://www.wolves.co.uk/javaImages/ce/1c/0,,10307~5840078,00.jpg

Many thanks Wolvesweb (talk) 14:57, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

A potentially better depiction of the kits can be found on the fantastic Historical Kits website, could make it easier for someone (not me, I lack the talent I'm afraid!) to update the kits. Cheers, GiantSnowman 15:08, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Right, I think my lack of talent has shown itself - I've done a VERY basic update, if anyone can better it then please go ahead! Cheers, GiantSnowman 15:15, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Formal petition to change the naming conventions

I would hereby like to make a formal petition to change the naming conventions of seasons and yearly competitions to have the year placed in the front of the name of the competition/league as per typical rules of English grammar, ex: 2009 Copa Libertadores, 2008-09 Premier League, etc. The addition of "season", as found in other sporting examples such as 2008–09 NBA season, could be considered, but if decided to be used, should be added to league seasons, i.e. 2008-09 Premier League season, but not 2009 Copa Libertadores season.

I know this would affect A LOT of article, but it makes more sense this way, and it far more practical when placing the articles' title in the prose of other articles. Digirami (talk) 22:20, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

• Support - I also agree that it should be "2008–09 Premier League season", but not "2009 Copa Libertadores season". – PeeJay 23:26, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Too inconsistant - Either both are ok or none. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 18:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Well one is a league, the other is tournament. The idea, if accepted, would be to have "season" added just to league seasons, and not annual tournaments. Digirami (talk) 21:53, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - I dont see the reason for having to add season to article titles, it will also be "harder" to find uncategorised articles, such as searching for prefixes. chandler 23:40, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Redirects would still be in place for the articles, so searching for the old prefixes shouldn't be a problem. Regardless, the proposed changes would bring us in line with WP:COMMONNAME, which is more important. Do people actually search for "Premier League 2008-09" instead of "2008-09 Premier League"? – PeeJay 23:43, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
    • I think most search "Premier League 2008-09", which is the most usage format I see on the net [28] for example (just google search "Premier League 2008-09 " vs "2008-09 Premier League"). chandler 00:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
      • Well the most common usage would go along the lines of "2008-09 Premier League", not "Premier League 2008-09" because heck that's how people talk and it goes with the rules of grammar (adjective, being the year, in front of the noun, being the league/competition name). Adding season to the end is a purely optional idea for now, but I primarily strongly petitioning on having the year in the front. Digirami (talk) 05:38, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Other examples in WP, and some of them not sports related are as follows: 2008–09 Australian region cyclone season, 2009 Atlantic hurricane season, 2009 Kentucky Derby. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 15:47, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

• Weak support According to the naming convention we should use the most easily recognizable name. I'm not a native speaker, but you tell me "200x league season" is the format everybody expects. If that's so we should obviously use that name, too. On the other hand creators of articles have some degree of freedom in naming them and as everybody would recognize "League season 200x", I find this somewhat academic. OdinFK (talk) 07:42, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
  • You could argue back at me and tell me that this is what piping links is for, but changing the article titles to "200x league season" would make it easier to link to these pages from other articles, without needing to pipe; so it's not as academic as you might think. – PeeJay 11:04, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

• Support The year should be in front of the tournament/competition name. - Martin tamb (talk) 05:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
• Comment Please include the name of international competitions on this discussions, most of them have the year in front of the tournament (such as: 2006 FIFA World Cup, 2009 FIFA Confederations Cup), but some have the year after the tournament name (such as: Copa America 2007, UEFA Euro 2008). I could agree that Euro 2008 is the common name, but imo Copa America should be 2007 Copa America. - Martin tamb (talk) 05:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Oh yes, I forgot about the European Championships; those should definitely stay at "UEFA Euro [year]". – PeeJay 07:30, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • In case anyone wonders, best option for the Copa America tournaments is 2007 Copa America format. The reason why the year appears in the end in the logo is because the year, as the adjective, goes after the noun in Spanish and Portuguese. But in English, you would still say 2007 Copa America. Digirami (talk) 07:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
• Support putting the year(s) first, it makes a lot more sense that way except for ones like UEFA Euro 2008. I have no opinion on adding season to the end of domestic leagues. MTC (talk) 06:35, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

• Comment The respective Wikipedia guideline is Wikipedia:Naming conventions (numbers and dates), more exactly Wikipedia:Naming conventions (numbers and dates)#Events recurring at regular intervals. There is stated that either "2009–2010 Premier League" or "Premier League (2009–2010)" would be a correct format. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 13:30, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Maybe it would make sense to retain that flexibilty after all. "2009–10 2nd Fußball-Bundesliga" for example is an awful title. But is "Ligue 2 (2009–10)" intrigueing? I think not, numbers following each other always look bad and aren't very well readable either. If both forms are correct as of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (numbers and dates)#Events recurring at regular intervals why not let the editors have that bit of flexibility to create sensible names? OdinFK (talk) 13:55, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • So "Ligue 2 (2009–10)" would be correct, but "Ligue 2 2009–10" wouldn't? That makes sense. However, the parentheses are awful, so should the prevailing format be "2009–10 Ligue 2 season"? – PeeJay 14:01, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
    • There should be no prevailing format, but felxibility, as per OdinFK. Madcynic (talk) 14:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
      • I like consistency very much, too. All I'm saying here is that we should not have to use awful names just because there is a doctrine to always use one very specific format. Actually for some of the German football seasonal articles I would still like to know how to name them "correctly". Correctly here meaning in a way, that a native speaker would not find totally awkward. A guideline would definitely be helpful here. I find it important to make this a guideline, not a doctrine, though. OdinFK (talk) 14:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
        • Make sense to who, exactly? A native German speaker, or an native English speaker? If anything, the title has to first make sense to an native English speaker since this is the English Wiki. We could incorporate the German name in the prose, but not the title.

I think it would be better to NOT have the years in parenthesis. This leave the option of further disambiguation open should it be needed. Could you imagine if we have Primera Division (Spain, 2009–10) and Primera Division (Argentina, 2009–10)?! (This is a hypothetical situation). Now that would look awful! The prevailing format should be [year] [competition] because it is the one that by far makes the most sense to English readers. Digirami (talk) 15:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose I do not believe we need another policy that is a special case of established Wikipedia policy, such as we already have with the notability and national team naming conventions. (See Soccerholic's comment above for explanation) Madcynic (talk) 15:59, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I think we may have gotten a bit lost along the way, but this petition is not about changing/adding policy. This is about getting existing articles (such as UEFA Champions League 2009–10) moved to more appropriate titles (such as 2009–10 UEFA Champions League) and then applying the new conventions to future articles. Sorry if you were confused. Consider this a massive requested move. – PeeJay 16:21, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Excuse me, but does the heading say "request to change the naming conventions" or not? Maybe a convention is not a policy, but what you suggest looks like a change in policy and hence I uphold my comment. Madcynic (talk) 16:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
      • Well that's just heading to open a discussion. The reality is that we needed to have a formal request to change this practice/policy/convention (whatever you call it) because had a user, like myself, decided to do this change single handedly, it would have caused an uproar in this project and amongst users and we would have been back here discussing that instead. Digirami (talk) 17:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
    • For the Champions League article, I disagree moving them. UEFA official refers the season after the competition. Such as we cannot move UEFA Euro 2008 to 2008 UEFA Euro. Raymond Giggs 05:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
      • Are you sure about that? It quite clearly says in this article "2009/10 UEFA Champions League". – PeeJay 09:44, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support for consistency with the rest of the project. For Chandler's argument that it will make pages harder to find, I would argue that our convention makes pages easier to find using my search bar's autocomplete. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 19:46, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

• Support we need to bring the convention into line with every other sporting project on Wikipedia. Make it so.--EchetusXe (talk) 15:22, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

(summary...?) It seems that the majority of input is in favor of putting the year in front. How should we go about this effectively due to the large number of articles this will affect? Digirami (talk) 00:46, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Are there any more opinions on this? I don't think nine opinions are quite enough to form a proper consensus. Do User:Struway2, User:ChrisTheDude or User:Richard Rundle have anything to say on this issue? – PeeJay 15:47, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd support the change, I think it flows better. A magazine article would say, for example, "Man Utd won the 2008-09 Premier League", not, "Man Utd won the Premier League 2008-09" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:50, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support year or year range going first, by English language common usage, so long as there are redirects from the other way about. Don't see the need to add the word "season", wouldn't object to it though. There will be exceptions in naming style, like Euro 2008, but that's still consistent with WP:COMMONNAME (except we seem to call it UEFA Euro 2008, which no-one else does who isn't being paid to, but that's by the by :-) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:18, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support - The MLS season pages are already named this way. We had quite a debate on the matter beforehand, so we didn't stray from the "european football standard" for naming these pages without talking about it first. Glad to see these article names won't be different any more. --SkotyWA^Talk|_Contribs 15:19, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, I've made the first changes by moving all of the Premier League season articles to the new format. There's a lot of redirects to fix, but I suppose we can get a bot to do the rest for us. – PeeJay 22:56, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

How do you get a bot to do that? Digirami (talk) 20:56, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Make a request at Wikipedia:Bot requests. I suggest doing this one competition at a time, btw, just to try to avoid any mistakes. – PeeJay 21:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Late wade in with a comment While I support this initiative as a concept as I am all for consistancy, I think it is another one of those things which you wonder how much it is worth the effort because there is always someone wanders by who thinks it should be different again and throws up a COMMONNAME or ENGVAR argument or some such, much as has happened for the very nice convention of having "Xion national football team" which is not nearly as nice these days with 10% of them being "Xion national soccer team". Too many people take guidelines too literal and argue back and forth, without actually reading the rational provided to show why the policy / guideline is there in the first place. Take the national teams example above - most of the world call it football, and would easily adapt to a convention, but even if not, a redirect from the soccer option would help all find it happily, which is the intent of the policy, but no, we have to have some different (Australia I see is now Australia national association football team just to be even more different). The commonname and engvar arguments shouldn't even apply here, simple COMMONSENSE should. All national teams, leagues, competitions, squad templates etc should simply follow consistent naming systems.<end rant> --ClubOranje^T 01:19, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

The initiative is based on English language usage and practicality. It is much more common, and grammatically correct, to say "2009-10 Premier League" than "Premier League 2009-10", therefore making it easier to put article titles in prose. That's the point of this in a nutshell. Digirami (talk) 07:10, 19 July 2009 (UTC)