Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 34

This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Football. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 30

←

Archive 32

→

Ghost goal: an original research?

Hi, I would suggest you to pay more attention on this article, because it looks like an original research. I think that the term "ghost goal" didn't come out in 2005 (as stated in the current version), for two reasons: 1) none of the present references confirm this fact (they talk about a dubious goal in the 2005 UEFA Champions League semifinal match between Chelsea and Liverpool, but they didn't state that the term "ghost goal" was coined for the first time after that event); 2) one of the most famous ghost goal (not reported in the article) was scored by Geoff Hurst in the 1966 World Cup final, so I suppose that the term was already used 43 years ago (if not more previously). --Mess (talk) 16:33, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

It seems "phantom goal" is a more popular term in the earlier references Spiderone (talk) 17:25, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Is this even worthy of an article? Dancarney (talk) 11:35, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd support a merge to goal (sport) if only that weren't such a mish-mash of an article. Really, it's amazing how many articles on basic footy terminology are so little maintained. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 18:40, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Not much worth merging, and the term is not in general use. I'd say send it to AfD. Incidentally, in Germany they use the word "Wembley-tor", which as entered the wider vocabulary for perceived injustice. Oldelpaso (talk) 19:47, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

2nd opinion needed

If a league is notable this doesn't automatically make all players notable does it? Surely if there is no proof that a league is professional then we must take it as being semi-pro. This is the argument. Spiderone (talk) 08:27, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

We have articles for every league (but not every division) in the English pyramid, down to the Bristol Downs Football League: we do not hold that the players at this level are notable. Kevin McE (talk) 09:01, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Lierse S.K.

Is the club sing song really needed in the article? I thought that was silly! Govvy (talk) 18:03, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Gilberto

The article could do with a few more people watching it as Gilberto move hasn't been confirmed by any official source in England. Govvy (talk) 00:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Shock! Horror!

Having received my One United (Man Utd supporters club) membership pack today, I slotted the enclosed DVD into my computer just now to watch the documentary on the club's Carrington training facility. However, not one minute into the film, I noticed something rather odd; a portion of the narration had been lifted verbatim from the final paragraph of our own article on the centre! Granted, they changed one figure mentioned in the text, but I assume that was fact-checking on their part. Nevertheless, as I continued to watch, I compared the rest of the narration to our article and noticed some marked similarities, such as items being listed in the same order in both, and the use of identical terminology. So anyway, this is clearly a violation of the GFDL rights of the contributors to that article, and I will be following it up further. – Pee Jay 23:11, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

This is not the first time. A few days ago I found at the AFA website a copy paste of the List of foreign Ligue 1 players, which took me months to build, with the help of other editors. Here]. Only some diacritics were added...--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:09, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

My first draft article on Andy Hessenthaler, an article much changed since, was posted almost without alteration on Dover Athletic's website when he became their manager. Kevin McE (talk) 18:29, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

But of course, WP is not reliable for many people.^^--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:02, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I've seen my words pop up in a couple of places too, it's quite entertaining. Perhaps I should have gone into journalism? BEVE (talk) 13:04, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, this has been the main reason wy did I insisted in the past in correcting some situations: Like the one putting Ratomir Dujković as "Croatian" in the Foreign Serie A players list(when he is an ethnic Serb, born in Yugoslavia, in a town that is today in Croatia). I was not exagerating when I´ve said that many journalists may use Wikipedia as a source for info. If they see it in some wiki list as Croat, they wan´t doubt about saying he´s Croat, even if he really isn´t. The other day I´ve seen a really unbelivable news on the B92 (the main Serbian independent news agency): it said: "Rigobert Song is about to sign for Vojvodina, says the Wikipedia". I couldn´t beleve it ! Specially becouse I´ve noteced that some anonime guy put that info in the club page a day earlier. I thout that was some fanatic, but never expected to go that far, as being anounced as a news. It was unthrue at the end... I think that even players managers discouvered the power of wikipedia, so they use it to create speculations. FkpCascais (talk) 17:12, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I´m saying this becouse I´ve noteced that much of what is being written here is used out there as information, statistics or research. Even plagiate, or almost, in the cases you´ve mentioned. For instance, my lists of foreign players in Serbia, have been used in many forums becouse this days it´s a hot topic there. There was a great debate about this issue becouse the Serbian Football federation issued, 2 days ago, a low restricting the number of foreign players in clubs. Some guys were giving the link to the lists, others just mention it, and others use it to number the foreign players that each club had. But I have a question for you guys. If, for instance, I write a sequence of words from my list in the google search, I will find like at least five exact copies of it under other titles. Isn´t all the material that we write here of "free" use for others? FkpCascais (talk) 19:27, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

There are many mirror sites of wikipedia.--Latouffedisco (talk) 09:03, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

If a researcher use Wikipedia as a source, he's simply not a researcher. It's not our problem. --necronudist (talk) 10:20, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

You're right Christian.--Latouffedisco (talk) 19:34, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Euro 2008

I've just noticed today that UEFA has decided to change their site structure so that none of the match reports that are linked in the Euro 2008 articles are available. I've spent some time trying to dig them up on the site, but no such luck. Ideas and suggestions, anyone? Madcynic (talk) 13:41, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Avoid linking to them and discourage others from doing so. UEFA are so bad about changing their URLs (which are supposed to work permanently) that I'd barely consider the website a reliable source. That said, thankfully we can {{wayback}} them in most cases. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:48, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Peter Läng

Can an admin please recreate the article on Peter Läng; according to a (poor) Google translation of this site, I think he made his international debut for Thailand in June. Cheers, Giant Snowman 14:31, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Thailand didn't play in June. [1] [2]. Perhaps he played in the July 18 game v Pakistan?--ClubOranje^T 05:31, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, apparently so (to answer my own question) [3], although this wouldn't count as WP:RS.--ClubOranje^T 05:34, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

City of Manchester Stadium FAR

I have nominated City of Manchester Stadium for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Happy Editing, Aaroncrick (talk) 06:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Dinamo vs. Dynamo

As I've noticed the naming of articles about the clubs named Dynamo/Dinamo is not consistent while imho it should be because the word means the same everywhere. Wherever the article is named "Dinamo", it is named that way in the club's own country as well (e.g. Dinamo Tirana, Dinamo Zagreb). On the other hand, many clubs with Wikipedia articles named "Dynamo" are actually in their countries written as "Dinamo", most oftenly in Cyrillic (e.g. Dynamo Moscow-->Russian Wikipedia article, Dynamo Kyiv-->Ukrainian Wikipedia article), where the letter "и" represents Latin "i". There is even one Dünamo (Estonian club JK Dünamo Tallinn). Of course, there are also clubs actually named "Dynamo", mostly in English-spoken countries (e.g. Carolina Dynamo), or even in some other countries that explicitly name the club "Dynamo", although they come from non-English countries (e.g. Dynamo Dresden, Dynamo České Budějovice).

What I wanted to point out is that there is no "pattern" in naming the clubs. Now, will there be any naming consensus (for example naming all clubs "Dynamo", because this is, after all, an English Wikipedia and we should use English wherever we can, as per WP:ENGLISH), or should we name all clubs according to their name in their own language? SonjiCeli (talk) 21:17, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I think the usage of i or y should be according to the convention of the particular clubs, not on a wiki-wide basis. It's an interesting point though as to why there are the different English-versions for different countries, and maybe for some clubs this could change over time. If there is a pretty even split between versions for a particular club then I suggest their 'home-language' version should apply (this would of course not apply to those with Cyrilic alphabet names unless they also had an official Latin/Roman spelling as well). Eldumpo (talk) 21:48, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with User:Eldumpo. There is no need to make a Wiki-wide change for consistency's sake. If a club is referred to as "Dynamo" in the English-language media, then we should use that, and likewise for those known as "Dinamo" or even "Dünamo". – Pee Jay 22:05, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, sometimes it's hard to tell. For example, Dynamo Moscow is reffered to as "Dinamo" here in uefa.com article, which is pretty much one of THE English-language media relevant for that question. However, their official website is named fcdynamo.ru but says Dinamo Moskva on the home page. All this is saying that Dynamo should be moved to Dinamo (only the name of the website is being written Dynamo). But I know what would happen if I try to move it now. Some users even tried to redirect Dynamo to Dinamo, but got reverted immediately. Therefore, if the changes should be made according to...let's say...everything, they most likely won't because they were named that way in the first place and, thereby, aren't supposed to be changed. SonjiCeli (talk) 23:09, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I think throuout history, all clubs have beeb named "Dinamo", exepting East-Germans (Dynamo Berlin and Dynamo Dresden). In the Ukranian Dynamo Kiyv case, I think the change happend in 1992 becouse they wanted to differ from the Russian Dinamo Moskva. I didn´t knew that Dinamo Moskva also followed that tendency, but I think it´s for "fashionable" reasons only. There are the Houston Dynamos as well. I agree treating each club separatelly. FkpCascais (talk) 23:46, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

That is not the case. The reason Dynamo Kyiv is used because it is the English transliteration of the team from Ukrainian. Динамо = Dynamo. The letter "и" gets tranliterated as "y". Brudder Andrusha (talk) 22:04, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

What is all the fuss about? If the club comes from a country which uses a derivative from the Latin alphabet, use the native spelling. If the club comes from a country which uses a derivative from the Cyrillic alphabet, use one of the romanization tables. It's as simple as that. This ruling applied would lead to "Dinamo Minsk", "Dinamo Moskva" and "Dynamo Kiev", for example. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 22:36, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

The team is known as Dynamo Kyiv in transliterated English and UEFA also agrees. Thank you very much.... Brudder Andrusha (talk) 01:32, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

The BBC (which, let's face it, is the primary influence on en-WP's footy naming conventions) is now using Dinamo, so I would expect a gradual migration as time passes. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 00:08, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Reporting massive change of birth country by anon.

I have to report to the administrators that some anonim user Special:Contributions/92.37.24.4 is massively changing the country of birth in the players infoboxes from SFR Yugoslavia to Bosnia and Herzegovina. Since Bosnia exists as country only since 1993, all players born before should have written SFR Yugoslavia as country of birth. At least that´s the case for all ex-Yugoslavia players. FkpCascais (talk) 23:55, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I have noticed a little of this war-like change and reversions. But I wasn't sure of the correct policy to go by. Govvy (talk) 00:20, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Revert all. Standard for wikipedia is country at the time of birth, not now. Think about it, Caesar was not born in Italy, for instance.--Latouffedisco (talk) 08:42, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I Reverted all. I don't care much if it is written on passports etc..., this is just historically incorrect.--Latouffedisco (talk) 08:56, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Read this by the way Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Country of birth.Cheers.--Latouffedisco (talk) 08:58, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

A different IP did all the Croatian ones this morning too. Filip, best option is to assume good faith, revert the edits and advise the user on their talk page, as User:Latouffedisco has done. Sometimes they simply don't realise, so until they have been told, they are not actually doing anything wrong.--ClubOranje^T 09:22, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Reporting massive change of birth country by Latouffedisco.

This user is changing birth countries by his opinion. There are no rules about this and there is even a discussion about this. I think this user should be warned.

He even wrote he don't care about passports - so why is he solving this problem here - go to European Parliament and convince them to change passports... Amir delic (talk) 13:04, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

This issue has been reported by fellow editor User:FkpCascais just above, and the general consensus about country of birth is to use the country at the time of birth. As you reverted my edits, I will not again revert yours, but probably someone else will. The best way is AGAIN discussing about this issue. Ah, of course, you can warn me for my misconduct, but I don't think people at WP:FOOTY agree with you. And no, Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia don't automatically follows passports. We should not re-write history.--Latouffedisco (talk) 13:13, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

And you even reported me to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism without warning me. Very funny, "This user is changing birth countries by his opinion". This is exactly what you have done, isn't it ?--Latouffedisco (talk) 13:19, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I wrote as it in passport AND as players tell themself (I've seen a lot of interviews where they all state they were born in Bosnia and Hercegovina (but you keep changing this fact)--Amir delic (talk) 13:27, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Dear "Mr.Amir Delić", some time ago I also used to intervene as I liked in every pages I feeled like, becouse I consider myself a very well aware person about all the problematics in ex-Yugoslavia, and also quite objective. But things don´t work this way around here. For instance: I made a page about a player (Jan Podhradski) that was born in Vojvodina in 1917. I put that he was born in Serbia, but a fellow wikipedian correct it to Austro-Hungary. I asumed (wrongly) that since in a few months that territory was going to be declared as joining Kingdom of Serbia, in 1918, I could put it that way, but no! I fully agree in putting the country of birth in the day that place(village,town,city) belonged, even if next day changed hands by some treaty.

So, dear Mr.Amir, for much that you may hate SFR Yugoslavia,(I hate it too beleve me), if those players, just like you, were born in the territory of the SR Bosnia and Herzegovina before its independence, those players, as you, were born in a country called SFR Yugoslavia, like it or not.

The only possibility that I see, so we could come to a consensus, is that we can put in the "city of birth" the city, followed by the SR (republic), and in the country we must stay with SFR Yugoslavia. It would look like this: (exemple:town of Gacko): City of birth: Gacko, SR Bosnia and Herzegovina; Country of birth: SFR Yugoslavia. Anyway, if it is before 1992 it will be SR Bosnia and Herzegovina and not the current state of Bosnia and Herzegovina. I will also ask you to ,please, put this issues here for debate before making massive changes, since this wikipedia is not yours or mine, OK? FkpCascais (talk) 20:06, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

This looks like a sensible way of proceeding for the former Soviet territories. Hopefully all involved parties can agree that this is a suitable solution to an emotive issue. King of the North East 09:15, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanx for your comment King..., but for your info, Yugoslavia was NOT former Soviet territory, not even Warsaw pact... And there is already a consensus here. FkpCascais (talk) 10:57, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Conveniently not remebering the name of the country where you were born is not an encyclopedic fact. If you and those players you´re saying, have doubts about the name of the country you´ve born, I can help you. FkpCascais (talk) 20:47, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Latouffedisco is doing the right thing... we reached an agreement time ago to keep the nations of birth at the time of birth. Do you think Hannibal was born in Tunisia? --necronudist (talk) 09:38, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I will second that - the country of birth, pre-1992, was Yugoslavia. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 09:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanx you all guys, but everything is the same, this guy changes all and reverts as well. I can´t do anything. Can´t you block him? FkpCascais (talk) 10:54, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Like you said (in offensive way on my talk page) that you don't give a f*ck what a I think why should I give a f*ck what you think? I wrote what ACTUAL SOCCER PLAYERS talk about themselves (they all say they where born in Bosnia and Hercegovina) AND what is ACTUALLY in their passports. You just revert my edits whitout even checking what I edited (and reverted some other things - not just place of birth). I edit only Miralem Pjanic page (and even wrote he was born in former SFR Yugoslavia) and after that you want me to be banned - you are funny guy...Amir delic (talk) 14:19, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Calm down this is not the place for a second Yugoslav war. Amir, do you really think players opinions should be followed ? Did they studied history, went to universities, wrote phD etc... so their opinion and their work would be reliable ? I don't think so, for most of them. Cheers.--Latouffedisco (talk) 14:50, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanx dear Mr.Amir, I try to be as funny as I can, in this grey world... Please don´t change my words. What I´ve said is that I dont give ***** to what some paper says. The thing here is not what some footballers say or not. The thing here is to put the correct "Country of birth". I wanted to bane you becouse, obviously, on purpose or not, you seem to NOT know what the word Country in that context means. Do you know what it means? P.S.:(Little help) It´s not Country , from peasant countryside... FkpCascais (talk) 20:19, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, sorry, I´m being funny again (or not...). Do you agree, and all other "soccerwikiholicpedians", to do it like I sugested before: To put:(Exemple:City of birth:Split,SR Croatia ; Country of birth:SFR Yugoslavia ; I´m talking, obviously, about the people born in the territory of SFR Yugoslavia during its existence, between 1945-1992. For people being born before (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) or after (all new countries), we do it differently, depending on the case. OK(again!)? FkpCascais (talk) 20:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Cascais and I think that adding the specific republic (which was at the time Yugoslavia's internal administrative category) is redundant. The fact that someone was born in Zagreb or Belgrade and that these are in today's Croatia or Serbia can be mentioned somewhere in the article, without cluttering up one's infobox. This is also a big problem with Croatian players, the number of anonymous editors who keep changing the "SFR Yugoslavia" to "Croatia" in the infobox is astonishing. It seems a lot of people have a problem with this, even more so when Bosnians are in question (some editors ara amazingly adamant in claiming that Miroslav Blažević is Bosnian because he was born in Bosnia, even though he holds a Croatian passport, spent his whole playing career in Croatia, listed everywhere as being Croatian and even ran in Croatian presidential and local elections and is currently member of the Zagreb municipal government. How people can be so stubborn beats me. Timbouctou (talk) 20:51, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm...I founded a practical difficulty. When I tryed to put in the infobox Mostar,SR Bosnia and Herzegovina , it mekes the infobox larger, so it´s not practical. Forget it... Timbouctou is right. Its redundant. If someone wants to know where that place is, he can go by the city. But please, more independent (non ex-Yu people,he seems to think we like SFRY) explain to this Almir wy are we right. Or don´t bother... FkpCascais (talk) 22:03, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Professionality of the V-League

Just going through the PDF that recently came up in an AfD to get some leagues set one way or another on the professionality lists for us to consult. Currently, the V-League is listed as fully professional, with this as the source. [4] However, the PDF indicates that the V-League does not meet requirements for fully professional rosters. [5] The question is which source do we go with? It seems that the PDF source is much more credible; however, do we want to err on the side of inclusivity? matt91486 (talk) 00:46, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I would certainly go with the PDF, it's more in-depth and I'd say the source is more reliable. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 08:58, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Weymouth fixtures

Just found this article and I think it should be PRODded but just checking on here. --BigDom (talk) 09:50, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Giant Snowman 09:51, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Either that, or expand – pending that a semi-pro team is considered noteworthy enough to have a season article. I'm fine with either solution. Besides that, Weymouth F.C. could probably need some clean up as well... --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 10:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

The precedent set by Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gateshead F.C. season 2006–07 would suggest otherwise. If it was renamed to something like Weymouth F.C. season 2009–10 (in keeping with other such articles) and as long as it is well referenced (together with the fact they're also playing in a 'national' league), the consensus would probably be to keep it. To be honest, I'm not particularly fussed either way. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 10:33, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, looking back at the Gateshead AfD, there could be a case for keeping the article, and renaming it as Bettia suggested. However, it needs VAST improvement and some reliable sources to portray its notability. Giant Snowman 11:14, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't know about non-league, but publishing Premier League and Football League fixtures without a license is a breach of copyright, so best to avoid adding domestic league fixtures altogether. A season article would be OK though I guess. --Jameboy (talk) 12:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Non-league fixtures are able to be reproduced without seeking permission, the late Tony Kempster mentioned something about it on his old site when questioned why his non league pages had fixtures and not the premiership. Uksam88 (talk) 13:13, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Assuming this (or any other fixture list) is copyrighted, I suppose starting with a blank table and just filling in the results as they are played would be okay, right? Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 13:55, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Anthony Clark and Ashford Town

Does anyone have any knowledge/source as to which Ashford Town (Kent or Middlesex), Anthony Clark played for? Cheers, --Jimbo^[online] 15:13, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

According to this report he signed from "Ryman Division One side Ashford Town". As far as I can tell, the Kent team were in this division at the time, whilst the Middlesex team transferred striaght from the Southern League to the Premier Division. In conclusion, it looks like Kent. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 15:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah thanks, must have missed that source. I tend to use Non-League Daily a lot for references with non-League players. --Jimbo^[online] 18:21, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion Log and AfD list pages

I notice that the list of AfD's at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Football and Wikipedia:WikiProject Football#Nominations for deletion and page moves are not the same e.g. no 15 July entries are listed at the former. I guess this is down to individual editors and others not hanging the appropriate tags to them, but is there some way of setting things up so that the same AfD's are listed at both locations automatically? Eldumpo (talk) 20:47, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Leagues infobox

I've been working on translating a few of the lower league articles over of late, and I've noticed a weird thing with the leagues infobox. If you were to look at Denmark Series you'd notice that it reads "levels" on the pyramid instead of "level." This makes sense for articles on league systems, but no sense at all for individual leagues. I've never had any experience editing infobox forms, so I'm not sure if I were to make the change in the parent if it would disrupt everything else or not, but would it be possible to correct to have parameters for level or levels? Or would that be too confusing in the end and not worth the grammatical fix? matt91486 (talk) 22:53, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Champions League and Europa League play-off rounds

User:KyleRGiggs has responded to the wording of the UEFA Champions League regulations by insisting that the qualifying phase and play-off round of that competition are completely separate. He is therefore intent on creating separate articles for both phases, despite the consequence that we will end up with a separate article for a single round of the competition. While I do not refute the fact that the two phases are entirely separate, as defined in the competition regulations, my suggestion is that the articles be merged and that the article title reflect this; hence, instead of having 2009–10 UEFA Champions League qualifying phase and 2009–10 UEFA Champions League play-off round, we would merely have 2009–10 UEFA Champions League qualifying phase and play-off round. This solution would be vindicated by the fact that this page at UEFA.com states that "as from the 2009/10 season onwards, there will be four qualifying rounds (including a play-off round)". A similar situation is also in existence for this season's UEFA Europa League. I bring this issue here as a form of dispute resolution, so as many opinions as possible would be extremely welcome here. – Pee Jay 18:59, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you, the play-off round and the early qualifying rounds are all part of the same qualifying process for the group stages (ie the competition proper). Jmorrison230582 (talk) 19:16, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Thirded. No need to separate the qualifying rounds unless the size of those articles becomes too big to load smoothly. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 19:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Well. Subarticle is not a problem. But I need to clarify that the result would affect the main article section arrangement. Someone keeps making that section into the qualifying phase. I can accept the subarticle with both parts, but the fact is - those two parts are not the same. Raymond Giggs 03:57, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the Play-off round should not be a subsection to the qualifying phase. Under the old UEFA Cup format, there was never any question that the first round (i.e. the one before the group phase) was part of the competition proper. It seems to me that the play-off round is simply a renamed version of the same thing. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:45, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Books on football grounds

Do any of you guys have books on football grounds? I'm working with The Rambling Man on trying to get Carrow Road to FA, but we're short on good source material. If someone has such a book, I'd be really glad for some scans of pages, either placed online or emailed to me. --Dweller (talk) 13:47, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

This might be a good time to point out Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Booklist (see also User:Oldelpaso/Sources). Between us, myself, PeeJay and Jameboy have various editions of Simon Inglis' The Football Grounds of Great Britain. Despite its age, it is still the definitive tome for the history of League grounds. Oldelpaso (talk) 14:02, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, magnificent. Could one of you with a relatively recent edition oblige? --Dweller (talk) 14:08, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

You have mail. Oldelpaso (talk) 15:10, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much! --Dweller (talk) 15:29, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

On a side note, that list of books is fantastic. However, as it's listed alphabetically by author, it's quite hard to search by topic. Perhaps it should be organised by club or period or whatever, like the links page is. Giant Snowman 14:10, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

EPL Fantasy League

A reminder that a fantasy league for wikipedians has been set up 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) 13:52, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Erton Fejzullahu

Three goals in two games for FC Copenhagen at age 17? Really? This guy definitely exists, but have his stats been exaggerated? Giant Snowman 15:02, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't seem implausible on a Roy of the Rovers level, after all Alan Shearer scored a hat-trick on his pro debut at age 17 -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:04, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

True, but it still seems odd, especially as he then left FC Copenhagen (having shown such skills) to join a second-division Swedish side! At least Shearer stayed at Southampton after his dream debut. Giant Snowman 15:11, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Just looked on playerhistory.com and it makes no mention of him making any appearances for FC Copenhagen. Mattythewhite (talk) 15:14, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

That must have happend in a pre-seasonal friendly match. (FkpCascais)

There is no entry for this person at resol.dr.dk, which means he never played in the Danish league. Jogurney (talk) 16:58, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Here is Fejzullahu's Copenhagen stats: He never played an official match for the club and played only a single friendly match. ka la ha 17:20, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks everyone, I have updated tha article accordingly. Giant Snowman 18:07, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Satellite views of football grounds in articles

I presume that the Google Earth images are copyright and cannot be used in articles, but can we link to them? I found this brilliant one of the former site of The Nest. --Dweller (talk) 15:32, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

The official Google view on this matter. Giant Snowman 15:37, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

It would then appear that, since Google does not allow the images to be used for commercial purposes, that they may not be used on Wikipedia. IIRC, for an image to be uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, it has to be released under a licence that allows commercial usage. – Pee Jay 16:48, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Category:Lists of footballers playing for a foreign country

We have this category that includes mainly the lists of foreign players playing in different countries or leagues, and lists of players of other nationalities playing for different NT´s. For the leagues lists, shouldn´t we name it "Category:Lists of footballers playing IN a foreign country", and leave the NT lists in this category? FkpCascais (talk) 13:47, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

This sounds sensible. However Category:Lists of footballers playing for a foreign country should be renamed Category:Lists of footballers playing for a foreign national football team. It would be a clearer title.--Latouffedisco (talk) 17:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Why is it sensible? I agree with your proposal for a name for the NT lists, I only think that would be more correct to put the foreign players lists in a category "...playing IN a foreign countyr" unstead "...playing FOR a foreign country". The foreign players don´t play FOR the country where they play, they play IN that country. That "error" I noteced an already long time ago. What you think? Can we do it? FkpCascais (talk) 19:43, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you, I used "sensible" in the sense of "fair". Quite ambiguous, I aknowledge. Cheers.--Latouffedisco (talk) 09:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Is this one of those uncomfortable "arbitrary definition of what constitutes 'other countries'" situations again? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:16, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I don´t think so. Its pure grammar issue. My English is far from perfect, but for the foreign players lists, it would be more precise to say IN. Simple. FkpCascais (talk) 17:52, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Stoke City managers

This user has created all the missing Stoke City managers. They look OK, but one thing I want to check is William Rowley (footballer). He writes that he played for Vale, yet I find no mention of him. Apparently also won two England caps. Can someone please check up on that?--EchetusXe (talk) 21:32, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps he has made a mistake and got him mixed up with Bill Rowley? Who happens to have played for Port Vale and England. Infact alot of the data seems to be the same and probably suggest they are the same person.Uksam88 (talk) 21:39, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Excellent observation. Thanks.--EchetusXe (talk) 23:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Championnat National

Is the French Championnat National fully-pro? It's not mentioned here...Giant Snowman 15:47, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

French wiki: "C'est le niveau le plus élevé auquel peuvent participer les équipes amateurs." (It is the highest level at which amateur teams may compete.) So, no, it is not. Madcynic (talk) 15:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Merci! Giant Snowman 15:54, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Many of the teams in the Championnat National are professional though, so their players still pass WP:FOOTYN. If the team has played in Ligue 2 in the last two seasons, they are still professional. BigDom 16:16, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes and no - yes that players who have played in Ligue 2 in the past are notable, and no that players playing for professional teams in the Championnat National are notable. As it isn't a fully-pro league, any player who has ONLY played in the Championnat National or at a lower level fails WP:ATHLETE. Giant Snowman 16:31, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, since I posted this I've found out from User:ChrisTheDude that WP:FOOTYN isn't policy so I realise that the bit I said about the players in a pro team being notable is wrong. Bigdom 16:38, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

BigDom is right. To be precise, National is controled by the FFF (=French FA, which also controls the national teams) whereas Ligue 1 and Ligue 2 are controlled by the LFP (=the league). Sometimes, some people talks about the fully-professionalization of the championnat national. Pro teams are currently Amiens, Gueugnon, Libourne, Reims and Troyes. This year, the amazing team of Luzenac has been promoted. The village has 700 inhabitants!--Latouffedisco (talk) 17:42, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Latouffedisco, I heard about Luzenac being promoted. According to foot-national.com this was thanks to the efforts of a number of local farmers which is fantastic. BigDom (talk) 17:49, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Very interesting. This is clearly a nice story.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:08, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

I like how their stadium has a capacity of 1,000, while the village itself is only 700! Giant Snowman 10:11, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Billy Hunter

Looking at some managers template, I often found a guy named Billy Hunter who coached Turkey national football team, Galatasaray, FC Lausanne-Sport, Netherlands national football team. Is this Bill Hunter (footballer) or William Hunter (footballer born 1888) or another guy? Any clues?--Latouffedisco (talk) 17:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

According to the Turkey article it was from 1924 to 1926. So it couldn't have been been Bill.--EchetusXe (talk) 20:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

So it could be the second one. The article is quite pathetic at the moment. Does anyone know more about him? It looks like we're facing a new football pioneer on the continent.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:04, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

~~On a similar note, is the Tom Bradshaw who managed the Dutch national team in 1913 Thomas Bradshaw? - the dates look promising. Giant Snowman 10:16, 23 July 2009 (UTC)~~

Ignore me, Thomas Bradshaw died in 1899! Giant Snowman 10:17, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

After a quick look at allfootballers.com (I don't have an account), I found a Tom (TD) Bradshaw whose career started in 1986 and ended in 1907.--Latouffedisco (talk) 11:41, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

First French player in England

The articles on Georges Crozier and Eugène Langenove (coincidentally both created by me!) both claim that the respective player was the first player to play in England. The former played for Fulham between 1904 and 1905, while the latter played for Walsall in 1922. While Crozier played a good 18 years earlier, Langenove's claim is backed by by The Independent. Can anyone clarify? Cheers, Giant Snowman 19:22, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't quite understand the issue? Crozier has the FFF as a source, so there is a source for that too - and a Guardian thing to back that up, including a reference to a book. HTH. Madcynic (talk) 20:23, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the Guardian link - I've sorted it out. I think Crozier was the first French player to play in England at any level (he played in the Southern Football League according to the Guardian), while Langenove looks like to have been the first French player to play in the Football League. Giant Snowman 20:50, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

There it is Snowman.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:02, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Taylor Graham Nationality

We got a bit of a problem here. Taylor Graham who was born in the United States made 3 apps. for Puerto Rico before FIFA declared him ineligible to play for Puerto Rico. So does that mean is his nationality is the United States or is it still Puerto Rico? – Michael (talk) 15:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

If FIFA says he was ineligible to play for Puerto Rico, then his sporting nationality, which presumably is what you're asking about, can't possibly be Puerto Rico, and would be that of his country of birth. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:57, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, to me it doesn't really make any sense because nationality is dependent on where he or she played their international ball at. Unless he earns a call up by the United States, I'm not sure it should be the US at this point. – Michael (talk) 16:07, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I would typically agree that the caps for PR dictates the flag going in. However, he is now ineligible to play for PR. If FIFA says he cannot claim PR I don't see how we can. Maybe less important for our needs, he was also born in CA. Both combined make it seem like common sense to use the US flag now.Cptnono (talk) 16:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Whatever his most recent status is for sporting nationality is what makes most sense to me, which seems to be US nationality. Yukata Ninja (talk) 00:23, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree. If users are interested in historical information about his international career, they'll find it in the article about him, but everywhere else that shows an indicator of his nationality should reflect his current status, not his historical status. --SkotyWA^Talk|_Contribs 01:27, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

When you look at the last section on Wikipedia:Manual of Style (icons), here's what you'll run into on the first 2 parts of it.

Flags should never indicate the player's nationality in a non-sporting sense; flags should only indicate the sportsperson's national squad/team or sporting nationality.

Where flags are used in a table, it should clearly indicate that the flags represent sporting nationality, not nationality, if any confusion might arise.

So I think we should leave Taylor Graham as it is, if you don't think so please explain why? – Michael (talk) 01:53, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

I understand sporting nationality as the team the player could play for today if he were to play for a national team. FIFA has ruled him ineligible for Puerto Rico, so his sporting nationality would be USA. Is there a definition of sporting nationality somewhere? Yukata Ninja (talk) 05:24, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Graham is not eligible to play for Puerto Rico. Unless FIFA changes it's mind, he will never have another cap for Puerto Rico. Placing a Puerto Rican flag next to his name would only be correct if there was any possibility that he would have another cap for Puerto Rico. He won't. He is only eligible for caps with the US team going forward. Therefore the US flag is what belongs next to his name right now. --SkotyWA^Talk|_Contribs 05:56, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

In the MOS section on flags for sportspeople it states: "If these rules allow a player to represent two or more nations, then the eligibility rule that is most apt should be applied; most often it is the place of birth." There is no evidence that Graham has ever been ineligible to play for the US (his place of birth), so we can assume that at one time he was eligible to represent two nations (US and Puerto Rico). However, that is no longer true as FIFA has ruled him ineligible to represent Puerto Rico. Therefore, based on the MOS, it must now be the case the "most apt" eligibility rule should apply which indeed would be his place of birth in this case. --SkotyWA^Talk|_Contribs 06:17, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Does this also apply with Kupono Low because FIFA also botted him. – Michael (talk) 19:00, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Putting either flag down doesn't tell the whole story, so put neither. Better say nothing, than mislead. Leave the whole story for the article, rather than try and make a oversimiplified binary "decision" on his nationality for the sake of some colourful decoration. Knepflerle (talk) 20:18, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

I was rethinking this since "flags represent sporting nationality" lends some credit to the use of PR. It could still be argued that US is appropriate for several reasons but keeping the flag out all together might be the simplest fix. It would certainly prevent any confusion for the reader which should be a high priority.Cptnono (talk) 07:33, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Out of interest, Mikemor92, where are you intending to place the flag in Graham's article? I hope it's not in the infobox, as that would be inappropriate use of a flagicon. – Pee Jay 09:27, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

A-men. For the five millionth time, If there is any doubt whatsoever, then explain the situation in the article text and stop squabbling over labels. End of story. We have this discussion literally every month. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 18:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Mikemor92 doesn't mention anything about a flag - that was brought in midway through the conversation. User:Thumperward is right though. Explain in simple terms as part of the text. - fchd (talk) 18:26, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Mikemor92 began this conversation to hopefully help us make a final decision on which flag was appropriate for Taylor Graham when he's listed as part of the squad on the Seattle Sounders FC page. Right now he has the Puerto Rican flag. I believed the US flag made more sense (based on my reasons above) and reverted User:Mikemor92's edit... twice. I whole heartedly agree that this isn't worth squabbling over. I think User:Mikemor92 was looking for more "official" guidance from the WikiProject when he started this conversation. --SkotyWA^Talk|_Contribs 04:46, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I don't see anyway to use either and that looks to have some support. Would it look too silly to have no flag next to his name? We could also put in a comment using  (the thingamajig that only shows up in the edit summary) as a heads up to editors unfamiliar with the situation. Here's to hoping he will get a US cap and then we don't have to worry about it anymore. I think having a handful of pixels without a flag might keep the article more stable.Cptnono (talk) 07:36, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

List of multi-sport athletes

I have just created a List of multi-sport athletes; if anyone wants to populate it with footballers who played other sports, or other athletes who tried their hand at football (i.e. Beefy!), then please go ahead! Cheers, Giant Snowman 15:13, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Danny Ainge, Tony Meola... but if you consider also college experience, it's a neverending list... Almost every US athlete played at least a couple of sports before becoming a pro. --necronudist (talk) 09:13, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Check out Category:Sportspeople of multiple sports for similar lists. I think this might be a case of duplication Djln--Djln (talk) 14:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Leroy Lita

please add this to your watch lists lots of ip vandalism. Jimmy Skitz's Answer Machine 11:29, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Has now been semi-protected for one week. --Jimbo^[online] 13:10, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Nice to see "He enjoys peanut surfing and has been spotted jumping puddles on numerous occasions" locked in.--EchetusXe (talk) 00:23, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Viacheslav Aliabiev

A user has moved the page on Viacheslav Aliabiev, even though that spelling looks to be the common name, and is used by his old club Shatkhar Donetsk. Can an admin please move it back to Viacheslav Aliabiev? Thanks, Giant Snowman 13:51, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Ignore that, I've managed to somehow move it over the redirect...although I'm sure only admins could do that. Oh well, all's well that end's well! Giant Snowman 14:02, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

You are able to move pages back as a non-admin if the redirect page has not been edited (i.e. has an edit history beyond the move listing)--ClubOranje^T 00:48, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

2009 Copa Sudamericana

As is typical for continental tournaments, us users create sud-pages for various round (like for a group stage). I would like to do the same for the 2009 Copa Sudamericana, but I'm not sure how exactly to approach it for this tournament since it is essentially one big single-elimination tournament. My best idea would be to do one for the First Stage, one of the remaining stages, and one for the Finals. Any suggestions? Digirami (talk) 21:24, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

If you are intent on creating sub-pages, I would suggest creating one article for the First Stage and the Round of 16 and another article for the quarter-finals, semi-finals and final. – Pee Jay 21:36, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Surely it's more logical for the knockout stages to be grouped together Eldumpo (talk) 13:10, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

The point is that the whole thing is a knockout tournament, so a split is needed. – Pee Jay 14:01, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, getting my competitions's confused. Thought this had a group stage first - did it used to? Eldumpo (talk) 14:42, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

The Copa Sudamericana has never really had a group stage. Digirami (talk) 10:22, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

WARNING: League Two has become semi-pro...

...at least for another week or two - according to the City website Bradford's new striker James Hanson, who is turning professional after signing from semi-pro Guiseley, has to work his notice at the Co-op! Giant Snowman 08:22, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

League Two wasn't fully-professional two seasons ago when Dave Rainford still worked as a PE teacher at a sixth form college! --Jimbo^[online] 08:46, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Right, lets start sending these blighters to AfD!--Vintagekits (talk) 08:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

If you can find anyone who has had an article created on the basis of claims of playing in this league this season, more than 2 weeks before it starts, please do! Kevin McE (talk) 08:56, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

And two seasons ago also when Davey Rainford was putting kids through their paces! I'll have a look.--Vintagekits (talk) 14:47, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Or here is a radical thought, how about we stop deleting articles that aren't factually inaccurate and concentrate on building a better encyclopedia Paul Bradbury 21:31, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

If we could adequately protect living people from damage caused by unsourced crap inserted into our unmaintainable, barely-watched articles, that would be an excellent idea! – Toon 21:37, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I assume there is a basis for this argument on an Afd somewhere?--EchetusXe (talk) 08:41, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Pre Season Squad Numbers

Old chestnut! Do we have an existing 'rule of thumb' or even a 2009-10 view on whether there is any validity in all these revised squad numbers which have been reassigned during all these pre-season friendlies. I thought the convention was that the status quo applied in theory at least until the club (websites) published their squad lists and numbers, but some (most) I know are a bit tardy on this and the club shops appear to become the oracles as they sell their new kits. Meanwhile there seems to be a rash of IP's changing all the numbers on the multiple club and player sites. Tmol42 (talk) 21:25, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Wait until the club website officially announces the league registered club numbers. Giant Snowman 09:42, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I've got sick of IPs entering any old numbers for Hibs, so I have just blanked the whole squad list (which is consistent with what the official website is saying). Jmorrison230582 (talk) 16:17, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Halásztelek FC

Take a gander at this club in Hungary. It looks so unorganized and sloppy. The magyar version of this article is far better than the English version. Should we list this article (I mean the English version of the article) up for deletion? it's not a notable club. Rakuten06 (talk) 23:09, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Wouldn't it make far more sense to try to get the Magyar version of the article translated into English? matt91486 (talk) 23:48, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah but it's not a notable club since it played in Hungarian County League, which by Wikipedia rules of notability, it's not a notable football league around the world. Rakuten06 (talk) 00:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

It does say that it won the league though, which implies that it was promoted. With the article as it is, it's hard to tell if it qualifies for notability or not, but the translation would presumably make that clear. matt91486 (talk) 05:15, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Whrere in "Wikipedia rules of notability" does it say that because a team plays in the Hungarian County League they're not a notable team? Only the general notability guidelines can dictate that, and if there is sufficient coverage in the reliable sources, they can be notable if they play at that level, or if there isn't the coverage they can be non-notable if they play much higher. - fchd (talk) 06:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I think it would be the best way to find out the notability is to translate the article from Magyar into English then we can determine whether it was considered notable and a stub at the same time or non-notable and listed for deletion? Rakuten06 (talk) 20:45, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Navbox width

There is an editrequest on {{Football_box_start}} to change the width from 60em to 100%, just like most other navboxes. I figured you guys should talk it over a bit first. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 09:57, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Bradford City pre-war players help

I've finally managed to get rid of all the redlinked players at Bradford City A.F.C.#Former players. The last few players were all pre-1945 players - soo Neil Brown was no help - and as I don't own any pr-war players books, previously I've relied on Peanut4's extensive City library. However, with his apparent disappearance from Wikipedia, I was wondering if anyone else could help improve the articles on the following players, and make them less Bantam-centric:

Joe Hargreaves - English, played for Bradford 1912-1924.
Jimmy McLaren - Scottish, played for Bradford 1923-1927.
Harold "Harry" Peel - English, played for Arsenal & Bradford 1926-1936.
Charles "Charlie" Storer - English, born 1891, played for Bradford & Hartlepool 1913-1925.
Billy Watson - Scottish, played for Bradford 1920-1931.

Thanks in advance, Giant Snowman 10:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I've got Joyce's pre-war league player records book, I should be able to get you some stuff out of that when time allows..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:51, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Cheers Chris, much appreciated. Giant Snowman 11:00, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Contacting a Flickr user

I'd love to use some of these images on Wikipedia, but would need the creator to amend the copyright license.

Does anyone know how to contact Flickr users? --Dweller (talk) 14:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Much like here, if you sign up to the site you can send email messages to other members. If you have a user ID for any of the legion of other sites owned by Yahoo you can sign in using that. Oldelpaso (talk) 14:12, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Useful, thanks. --Dweller (talk) 14:16, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Nationality at Aiden McGeady and James McCarthy

Just a heads-up that some eyes on the aforementioned articles would be nice due to continual nationalist POV-warring. The discussed consensus is at Talk:James McCarthy#Nationality; the antagonist should not be unknown to many active in this community (nor those involved in articles on recent Irish history). Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:52, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Ha, how did I guess who it was...Giant Snowman 10:03, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

All this fuss over two Scottish-born Ireland international footballers.--EchetusXe (talk) 13:12, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

They're not "Scottish-born", they're "Scottish", at least insofar as this matters to anyone except a selector for a national football association. Avoiding potentially misleading adjectives and labels entirely in this situation is so obviously the right solution here that it defies belief that consensus to do so still has to be fought on a case-by-case basis. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:27, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Are they feck! To play for Ireland you need to hold an Irish passport. Despite what the bigots in Scotland say - they are Irish! - infact they choose Ireland over Scotland - thats makes them uber-Irish!--Vintagekits (talk) 09:13, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Both are still British subjects to my knowledge, so at best they are both. Anyway, it looks like this is going to have to go to an RfC. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

"British subjects" - "to my knowledge" - forgive me whilst I attempt to catch my breath! They both purposefully choose not to play for a British "country" and the traitor choose to play for those stinking potato picking Paddies - is that what annoys you so much?--Vintagekits (talk) 10:48, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Requests for Comment raised

As there's been insufficient participation in the above discussion to be able to show concrete consensus, I've raised two RfCs, located here and here.

Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD input

Can I please urge WP:FOOTY members to get more involved in deletion discussions; AfDs on the following articles have received only one or two votes (including my own!) over a number of days:

And that's only the tip of the iceberg! Other discussions such as that on Niall Walsh are going to result in an article on a non-notable player being kept, due to a lack of input from established Project members. Thanks in advance, Giant Snowman 13:32, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm interested in others' interpretations of the Niall Walsh (Irish footballer) one. He fails ATHLETE, so we're left with WP:N. Plenty of RS references to him, but I personally don't believe any of them pass the "trivial". Appreciate someone telling me where I'm wrong on this... --Dweller (talk) 18:19, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Well like you, I think he still fails WP:N; the references are majorly trivial. Giant Snowman 18:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Hhhhhmmmmmm!! the sweet scent of canvassing!.--Vintagekits (talk) 10:15, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:CANVAS states "it is acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, but messages that are written to influence the outcome rather than to improve the quality of a discussion compromise the consensus building process and may be considered disruptive." Have I notified other editors about ongoing debates? Yes. Have I told them how to vote? No. Giant Snowman 10:18, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I think you need to make yourself aware of the section on Campaigning within canvassing.

"Campaigning is an attempt to sway the person reading the message with wording and tone loaded with bias. While this may be appropriate to a personal discussion, to canvass with such messages is completely unacceptable." - do you seriously think that stating
"Other discussions such as that on Niall Walsh are going to result in an article on a non-notable player being kept, due to a lack of input from established Project members." is a unbiased referal to a discussion or basically telling "established Project members" - how to !vote? Think carefully because my next step is ANI.--Vintagekits (talk) 10:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Once again, I didn't tell them how to vote. I simply said that an article I felt wasn't notable was going to be (wrongly) kept, and that established members of this project don't seem to be voting on ANY relevant discussions. However, if that was misconstrued, then I apologise. You can still report me if you want. Giant Snowman 10:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Misconstrued? Dont make me laugh. It was blatant canvassing with a non neutral messege. And since you havent owned up to it then, yes, I will be reporting it.--Vintagekits (talk) 10:50, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Owned up to what? - I wasn't canvassing, I was encouraging editors to join in a discussion. And as for your petty tattle-tailing, I'm more than happy to defend myself against any ridiculous accusations you want to make. Giant Snowman 10:57, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

If you encouraged them to engage in the discussion that would be fine but like it states in the capmaigning section it is not appropriate to "attempt to sway the person reading the message with wording and tone loaded with bias".--Vintagekits (talk) 11:03, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

What biased wording have I used? If you point it out to me, and I see my error, I'll happily delete it and apologise. Giant Snowman 11:06, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

"European competitions" sections

Several UEFA domestic league articles host such a section in past and present, for example Croatia and Belgium for this year or Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia for last year.

Question #1: Are those sections "allowed" in league season articles or are they a repetition of already available info on the respective UEFA competition articles?

Question #2: If those sections are legit, how should the information be presented? More precisely: Should the match-ups be listed competitions in the order of the draw, should the domestic team always be listed second or should the dom team even be listed first? --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 23:19, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

If I´m allowed to say, I didn´t do that section, but I like it becouse that way you can see beside the National Championship, what teams that season played in the euro cups (it allways makes it a little bit harder for those tams due to surplus of matches) and how well did they get that season. I hope those sections be allowed becose of this. For the second question, I would be in favour of putting the order of the matches as they were played. FkpCascais (talk) 23:34, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

I would say it's OK. This is a kind of "zoom" on the results of teams from X country.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:07, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

As for Question 1, I don't see why sections like these shouldn't be allowed. I suppose it could be argued that the same info could be found on Euro competition articles, but presenting it this way may save a lot of browsing to a person interested to see how teams from a country X did in a certain European season. It serves as a nice indicator how strong the league is, and I know I needed that kind of info a lot in the past. As for the formatting question, I tried a lot of formats practicing on Prva HNL articles and what I came up with in the end is the domestic team always listed second" format because IMO it's the most practical way of presenting that kind of info (for example, see Prva HNL 1998–99 and all subsequent Prva HNL seasons). I know some people will insist on listing matches in the order they were played, but I consider it irrelevent as the purpose of the Euro competitions subsection is simply to offer an overview of teams in Europe. In case somebody wants to see the results in the order they were played, one can always click on the competition/round link which is already listed before each fixture. Formatting it like this makes it look messy with the flags and everything, so I guess If you want to insist on listing matches chronologically we should lose the flags, but I'd rather keep the flags because they are a valuable piece of information themselves :-) Timbouctou (talk) 22:40, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Seconding Timbouctou. I agree they are useful as per arguments mentioned above. I also think the other countries' clubs should come first, together with the flags. However, I wouldn't apply it for the group stages. When we talk about UEFA Cup, there were only four matches so imho it is pretty relevant to know which games you played home, and which away. As for Europa League and Champions League groups, we have two matches between the same opponents listed separately, so I think we also need to distinguish home from away legs.

Now there will be users who will think why would we list the groups' matches on home-and-away basis, when you can just click the link above for the competition and see if you are interested, but: a) it would not look nice to see two flags in a row from the same country and it would confuse the occasional readers, b) order of matches and where you played which leg is less relevant in qualifying rounds than in group stages, imho. SonjiCeli (talk) 11:49, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Using Belgium as an example, I wouldn't expect to find European results in Belgian First Division 2009–10 as it would seem to be outside the scope of the article, but if the article was something like 2009–10 in Belgian football I think it would be OK. --Jameboy (talk) 18:48, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:ATHLETE and football

Judging by the way some of these afd discussions are going, perhaps this needs to be revisited. I also found this interesting source when looking for proof that the Scottish leagues are fully pro.[6] Judging by this report, any player who played exclusively in Scottish football during the early 80s would fail WP:ATHLETE, because there were at least a few semi-pro teams in the top division. Yet I doubt that anyone would seriously contend that a Scottish top division player wasn't notable, particularly in a time when Scottish clubs were regularly reaching the latter stages of European competitions (eg Aberdeen won the Cup Winners Cup and Super Cup two years later). Jmorrison230582 (talk) 16:14, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I presume you mean the Irish debacle? If we as a project make a one-off exception - i.e. say that if a player has played a league game in the FAI Premier Division, they become notable - then I will support that. However, this could set a bad precedent for players in other top-flight semi-pro leagues...it's a tricky one. Giant Snowman 16:33, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

It certainly would set a bad precedent - we can't have one rule for one league and another for the rest just because the supporters of that league just happen to be more vociferous here on Wikipedia. Until WP:ATHLETE is amended or removed with something more specific like WP:FOOTYN, we must apply it equally to ALL leagues or not at all. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 06:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

In a related issue, was the Football League First Division fully pro for all of its duration?The Hack 07:42, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

As far as I know, the Southern League Premier Division was fully pro at the turn of the 20th century, so off the top of my head I would say it's pretty likely that Football League Div 1 was fully pro for all (if not most) of its history. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 09:21, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I've never understood why we don't just use FOOTYN. It's a complete nonsense trying to use ATHLETE for football players. BigDom (talk) 07:46, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Basically, when FOOTYN was finalised, some editors took a bunch of AfDs on Conference players to DRV quoting it and were told in no uncertain terms that projects are not authorised to create their own notability guidelines -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:56, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

So how could we go about incorporating FOOTYN? I assume it would be a matter of going over to WT:BIO and raising the issue there? It does seem rather daft that PORNBIO is readily accepted but more sensible project guidelines like ours aren't. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 08:20, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I think, to be honest, the opposition to it came about because non-footy editors took exception to people using its creation as a cue to overwhelm DRV with every single Conference player who'd ever had his article deleted. Maybe if we'd been a bit more softly softly catchy monkey they might not have viewed it the same way -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:27, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Maybe its time that the five or six same members of the FOOTY Project didnt take it upon themselves to make their mind up for the whole project with respect to what is notable and what is not.

As for "I doubt that anyone would seriously contend that a Scottish top division player wasn't notable" - talk about stinking of hypocrisy!--Vintagekits (talk) 08:34, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Vintagekits, you can't talk. You go round PRODding articles such as Serge Makofo and Magnus Okuonghae who have played professionally, then on AfD you try and defend players who have never played a game. BigDom (talk) 09:04, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Since when is that no mark league the top level of football in that country?--Vintagekits (talk) 09:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

The English lower leagues are of a higher quality than the Irish leagues, and they are certainly not a "no mark league". Giant Snowman 09:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

cough*bullshit*cough* --Vintagekits (talk) 09:31, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Watch out for a lot of PRODs on League Two players coming from Vintagekits if we can judge by the last comment here. BigDom (talk) 09:28, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Damn right - lets see if these sticklers for adherence to their beloved WP:ATHLETE are true to their word or just persistantly pushing a British bias!--Vintagekits (talk) 09:31, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Even though you persistently push an Irish bias? Giant Snowman 09:34, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually I think that that is just your perception of any editor that doesnt have their head up the hole of any player that has played in the 27th level of English football. Thankfully the community agrees with me that "the FOOTY Project crew" are out of step with with regards this issue.--Vintagekits (talk) 09:38, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

As I said on your talk page, ANY player - regardless of nationality - that doesn't meet notability requirements should be deleted. So if an English player who has ONLY played in the Conference has an article, it should be deleted, as it is not a fully-pro league - just like the Irish Premiership! Giant Snowman 09:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

So if there was a part time player playing in the English or Scottish premiership then you would !vote delete on his team mates or not?--Vintagekits (talk) 09:56, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

But there ARE part-time players in the English & Scottish Premierships - if one wants to be pedantic, then apparently 'full-time' players are also male models, company spokesmen etc. And no, in the extremely unlikely event that ONE semi-pro player joined the EPL, I wouldn't say it was a semi-pro league, and players would still meet WP:ATHLETE. However, there isn't one part-time player in the Irish Premiership - there are many, and it is DEFINIETELY a semi-pro league! Giant Snowman 10:03, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Its beginning to start to smell like bullshit to be honest. Being a model for an hour ever week or giving a talk is different then a player actually holding down a full time job and playing football on the weekend. So how many players would have to join the league before it tips the scale in your mind. It's really funny the level of inflexibility you show when imposing WP:ATHLETE during the AfD's on Irish players but you seem to gain flexibility for English players - strange that! biased? never! How very dare you!--Vintagekits (talk) 10:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

You seem to have gone quiet! Not willing to actually commit yourself eh!?--Vintagekits (talk) 11:18, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Haha, sorry, didn't see your reply! Um, to be honest, I don't KNOW how many part-time players there would have to be for a pro league to be considered semi-pro - but can anyone answer that? I agree that WP:ATHLETE is flawed, but until it is changed or WP:FOOTYN is accepted by the wider community, it's all we have for sports players. WP@N does trump it, but unfortunately not in the AfDs we have been debating. Regards, Giant Snowman 11:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

GiantSnowman, don't tell him that about the Conference or I'll be removing his PRODs forever! Players in the conference who have previously played professionally can still have articles. BigDom (talk) 09:47, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Good point, I've reworded it accordingly. Cheers, Giant Snowman 09:53, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem, BigDom (talk) 09:54, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

We have this discussion every week. The GNG overrides any other consideration when it comes to notability. Players who have played in the top two flights of the Scottish Football League (and now in the SPL and the top flight of the SFL) are notable because nobody is capable of doing so without receiving oodles of coverage from multiple reliable independent sources. There is no other consideration. Were the Conference to be shown to receive the same kind of coverage that the top flight of the SFL does (and frankly, these days the two operate on comparative budgets and with comparative crowds half the time) then there wouldn't be a question of Conference players being non-notable. The same applies to the Irish leagues, or the Macedonian leagues, or whatever. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:07, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the Conference receives plenty of coverage, especially in the Non-League Paper. Almost certainly more than League Two. TV status is the same, or it was until Setanta went belly-up, more coverage of the Conference National than Leagues One and Two. - fchd (talk) 12:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Has anyone noticed that we have at least one Good Article on a player who has never played at a fully-professional level.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:42, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

At least two. --Jimbo^[online] 15:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Any player who can be demonstrated to have received significant non-trivial coverage by multiple reliable sources is notable, end of story. If people simply made that comment in any silly WP:ATHLETE-driven AfDs we wouldn't need to have this debate. WP:ATHLETE should be a guideline to say that "this player has played at a level where it is undisputable that he has been covered to a great enough extent to warrant an article", with anything below that falling back to the GNG. The important thing is the coverage by reliable sources, not what someone's bleeding tax code is. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Historic average gates

Anyone know of an RS so I can complete the 2 missing years in this section: Carrow_Road#Average_attendances_since_2000? Thanks --Dweller (talk) 15:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Or even better, ones going back further, so I could get something like this made? --Dweller (talk) 15:43, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Soccerbase will have the individual match attendances going back to 2000, but I don't believe they're shown all on one page, so you'd have to go into each match individually and work out the average manually. And I've no idea how you'd reference that :-P -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:48, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Not sure about the R, but here's an S. Finding someone with a full stack of Rothmans might be the best bet. Oldelpaso (talk) 15:57, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Kristof Van Hout

...puts Crouchy to shame. Google this guy to see just how tall he is...Giant Snowman 15:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Hum, the goalpost is too small for him!--Latouffedisco (talk) 17:15, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

No match for this guy.--EchetusXe (talk) 22:04, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Hariss Harun

Notice some vandalism in the player's page, but not sure how to revert the vandalism. CLearly the youngster can't have that many goals and caps, let alone assist which nobody can verify. Please help. Frankie goh (talk) 07:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

destroying 2009 Peace Cup

This guy is still trying to merge and delete the article about ongoing competition 2009 Peace Cup giving various absurd reasons. As an editor I have always seen/edited results of a lot of football competitions from World Cup to King's Cup and now I am being persuded that the match 'results' should not be in Wikipedia. It's so hard to be here in Wikipedia editing articles. Whatever I add is said to be a problem. Updating scores is bad? As a football fan it was fun to see and update the competition results for the last few years and now it's so difficult. rokengalan (talk) 06:58, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

There are four types of critic: contrarians, sadists, nuts and bastards. Use reverse psychology on the first type, try to find other victims for the second type and hope he loses interest in you, for the fourth type you must accommodate their opinions and change your writings. As for the third type, your only hope is hope they get arrested in real life before they make you lose the will to live. Good luck diagnosing your problem. Of course I won't be getting personally involved in this issue in case it is type number 2 and you convince him that I am a suitable target for unwarranted abuse.

However, looking at the thing I see that you are being buffeted for putting in 'Routine news coverage'. My advice would be to write about a talking rabbit who makes a serious of monologues on the topic of peace. Try to confuse your opponent, act even more irrationally than him, that tends to scare people away.--EchetusXe (talk) 01:25, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

- Introducing EchetusXe - Type 3 critic, talking the talk, walking the walk, living the dream... Shall I send you some men in white coats? and in case you need it.. ;-)--ClubOranje^T 06:20, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Your mean.--EchetusXe (talk) 08:40, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

It looks like he is perfectly willing to unilaterally merge the article without consensus, so we generally should keep an eye on the articles at hand. matt91486 (talk) 00:44, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Obviously, every little item about a relativity small tournament is not noteworthy enough for inclusion. However, if sources say "so and so won" or "so and so scored", it seems appropriate to add it to a table, list, or tournament diagram. I personally prefer prose over any of those but see no problem with including minor information that improves the overall understanding for the reader. Random example not based on any truth and chosen randomly: If Eric Lichaj sprains his ankle on the flight over it probably isn't worthy of inclusion. If he scores plays and scores instead, it should get a little football icon in a drop down table. I don't know the line for what is and what is not worth of inclusion so please let me know if there is a previous conversation regarding that! I said my thoughts at the merger discussion for this article in particular. I would recommend that anyone take a look at 2009 Peace Cup and Talk:Peace Cup#Merger proposal since your experience would be helpful in the appropriate direction to take or merge this article.Cptnono (talk) 06:36, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Are there enough articles on this subject to justify an Outline of football?

Here's a discussion about subject development you might find interesting.

The Transhumanist 00:10, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

P.S.: See Wikipedia's collection of outlines at WP:OOK.

I started one in January at User:Nanonic/test2 if anyone wants to take it over. Nanonic (talk) 12:15, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe so. To me, most of important articles exist, but should probably be improved.--Latouffedisco (talk) 17:59, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Jorge Torres

There seems to be two articles about the same footballer: Jorge Torres and Jorge Torres Nilo. Which one should be deleted?Ricardoread (talk) 04:42, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

None. Jorge Torres redirected to Jorge Torres Nilo with relevant content merged. Admin may wish to merge history. --ClubOranje^T 08:12, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Professionality of Asian football leagues

Further to the discussion above on the V-League, would this document from the AFC be sufficient to prove the fully-pro status of the various Asian leagues? In particular the criteria under section 10 Number of players under professional contract in the top team of each club.The Hack 05:42, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I personally think it should be - at least for those rated A (fully pro) and D (definitely not fully pro) in section 10 - the leagues rated B and C probably not as they are not specific about the status of the leagues currently. I've used the PDF as a source in a couple of AFD debates so far and it has been accepted by participants. Camw (talk) 05:49, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I've used it in those cases already to put those definite leagues in our project list. matt91486 (talk) 00:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Category:Clubs that have played in the UEFA Champions League group stage

Is this category appropriate? Apparently, it is based on Category:Premier League clubs, but I don't see any correlation between the two competitions that would necessitate this new category. – Pee Jay 08:23, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it is suitable. Teams are members of leagues, and then take part in cup competitions. Imagine if we had Category:Clubs that have played in the FA Cup! Dancarney (talk) 15:35, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Martin Buchan

Martin Buchan was club captain of Manchester United up until 1982 when he was succeeded by Ray Wilkins. The article on Buchan gives Sammy McIlroy as his successor as club captain in 1979. The article on Manchester United gives the correct details. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.106.220.19 (talk) 16:09, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Talk:1929 American Cup

I was hoping to get some opinions on the above talk page. I do realize that there may not be very many people here that are working on US soccer history however any input is appreciated. Libro0 (talk) 07:29, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I am considering making a page called American Soccer Association Cup and have the 1929 American Cup page either deleted or redirected to it. Libro0 (talk) 18:04, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Multiple articles on US/Canada teams

Hi, I have been recently tidying up the Soccer in Canada and United States categories. While doing this I have noticed that several teams/clubs ( e.g Toronto Blizzard, Fort Lauderdale Strikers, Vancouver Whitecaps and Seattle Sounders) have several articles divided on the basis of what league they played in or if they changed ownership. While I agree that sometimes the connections can be more vague, this situation seems a bit ridiculous to me. I believe there is a strong case for merging some of these articles. I can’t say I’ve ever noticed teams from other countries, having separate articles when they changed leagues or ownwership. Does anybody else have an opinion on this ? Djln--Djln (talk) 13:16, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe there should be one only article per soccer franchise, with the article title being the name that the club last played under. Giant Snowman 13:31, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Maidstone United F.C. (1897) / Maidstone United F.C. and Airdrieonians F.C. / Airdrie United F.C. are two examples from Blighty. Depends on the specifics of the reformation I suppose. If they're just franchises with no real continuation then I don't see a problem with separate articles, and indeed it would probably be wrong to try to tie them together just because they happened to have the same name. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:34, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I was referring more to teams which have stayed the same but moved location and changed names, such as the Fort Lauderdale Strikers, which began as the Washington Darts and became the Miami Toros and then the Miami Gatos. Three articles for one team which played by four different names = not efficient. Giant Snowman 13:38, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't we have two articles for England's own Franchise F.C.? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:50, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Haha, I was wondering how long it would take for someone to bring that up! British football and American soccer are so different, and the abomination that is MK Dons is by far an exception to the norm. We also have to remember that Wimbledon fans don't see MK Dons as a continuation of the team, whereas I suspect Yankee soccer fans in the 70s did (or didnt care!) Giant Snowman 14:17, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I think if a franchise has relocated and changed its name then there should be separate articles to avoid confusion. However I was focusing on a different point. In the case of Toronto Blizzard, if u read the articles it seems that they are the same team with the same ownership that just changed leagues. By that logic the Gretna Green that played in the English league system should be treated as a different team to the one that played in the Scottish League. Djln --Djln (talk) 15:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

With the Sounders in particular: they are different teams. There was never any possibility of promotion or relegation. Also, the teams are not the same in a business sense (when the previous ones ended they ended). Things that make USL and MLS teams similar (besides being from Seattle even though the USL team played the last season in a suburb instead): MLS team eventually did sign a few guys from the previous team after trials, the the owner of the previous team is a minority owner in the MLS one, the name was originally supposed to be something else but fans wrote it in during a vote to have some tradition in the city and since the other names were garbage. I liked watching both teams. I don't know that much about the NASL version since I was off by a couple years. I do know that they had great crowds (considering not being sanctioned by FIFA and having broadcasting concerns) along with more international players than the USL. I am actually surprised at how short the USL page is but if it were expanded it would probably make more sense than merging. I am sure if it was profitable, the lower league Sounders would have stayed in existence but it probably did not make sense to compete with an MLS franchise. This is interesting because cities with similar population or metro region in England would support many more teams at various levels. It is just different here than in other countries.Cptnono (talk) 07:15, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

The answer is probably a case by case one.--Latouffedisco (talk) 09:47, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

suggestion of deleting Selvin Bonifacio Zepeda

Found Selvin Bonifacio Zepeda to be a duplicate of Zelvin Bonifacio Zepeda a mispell of the real name? A redirect might be good.--Xaiver0510 (talk) 15:58, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Redirected. Needing sources to prove national team appearance --ClubOranje^T 09:17, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Admin requested

Can an admin speedy delete the redirect Grimsby Town F.C. season 2009–10, under WP:CSD G6 so that Grimsby Town F.C. season 2009-10 can be moved under that name. It seems as though the redirect has been set up the wrong way round. Cheers, --Jimbo^[online] 08:04, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:30, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

... And moved. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:36, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Bloemfontein Celtic

May I ask you to help with translation of some african nick-names into English or German.

Bloemfontein Celtic - Phunya Sele Sele. What does it mean? --Mswahili (talk) 15:17, 29 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mswahili (talk • contribs)

From what I can gather from this dictionary it means something like Piecing Dawn in Sesotho. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 13:21, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Jesus! I cannot translate it from English to Russian - it's too difficult and too much meanings in dictionary. May ask you to explain it thanks to more words, may be synonims etc.?--Mswahili (talk) 13:32, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

This is what I got:

phunya: 1. pierce; 2. strike the surface of water, plash; 3. pioneer

Number of results found for 'Sele': 4

selê: dawned, became light
-šele: foreign, different, strange
šele: 1. here (it) is; 2. out of the common
sele: that yonder

My suggestion of piercing dawn was my best guess. Hope this helps. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 18:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Small-sided football.

Is it possible to make it so that if somebody were to search for "small sided football" they would automatically be re-directed to "Five-a-side Football", as this article seems to cover most of the basics for the small sided variations of the game. I can't see a way of doing this easily.Alistair 84 (talk) 13:04, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Not a problem - the page Small sided football and Small-sided football both redirect to the one on 5-a-side. Cheers, Giant Snowman 13:09, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Just a suggestion on the same page, would it be a good idea to have a whole section in the acrticle relating to the difference in rules between small-sided games and full 11-a-side games. Currently these rules are set out in the main part of the article and I cannot edit them. To have it's own section would allow people to contribute by adding any specific new rules they have come across during play. Let me know if this is not a good idea.Alistair 84 (talk) 13:19, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

You can edit the introduction of the article - you will find a 'edit this page' tab at the very top of the page. Regards, Giant Snowman 13:21, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Template:Crystal Palace F.C. squad

I know we usually use the colours of the kit a particular team is adopting for the current season, but this makes my eyes hurt! Surely there's some sort of accessibility guideline against this use of colouring? Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 19:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

In the article appears Latin Cup and Fairs Cup: "unofficial competition" In the first case its correct but in the second one not.

WP:ACCESS? ^^ Anyway, just reverse the colors as seen here for a minor improvement. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 19:47, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Fairs Cup in "International club competition records"

Hi! I think that in this article should appear the fairs cup as an official competition and should appear in the final table. Inter Faris Cup is NOT an UEFA Competition bur IS an Official competition, later I reach primary sources (FIFA, Clubs official site, LFP etc etc) that credit the officialdom of the competition and the approval of its regulation on the part of the FIFA:

[7]: UEFA.com, Milan AC "The 2004 FIFA Club World Cup NEITHER IT APPEARS because it isnt organized by UEFA, its organized by FIFA (Though the Intercontinental Cup was organized by UEFA), Inter Faris Cup is an FIFA competition (not UEFA).

[8]: FIFA official site (Inter Faris Cup appear) (Copa de Ferias in castellano)

FIFA regulated de competition in the 1955 FIFA London Cogress, its president Sir Stanley Rous delivered the Trophy each yer betwenn 1958-1971, in this year UEFA assumes the competition organization. [9]

[10]

"There was some pressure on FIFA to expand the Fairs Cup from but President Sir Stanley Rous was opposed to the idea believing that it would devalue the competition."

FIFA is the supreme organ of the world football.

Official Site FC Barcelona:

[11]:

"414 partidos y 11 títulosEn el palmarés internacional del Barça, el total de títulos conseguidos se sitúa en once, repartidos de la siguiente manera: cuatro Recopas de Europa, tres Copas de Ferias, dos Copas de Europa y dos Supercopas de Europa."

"Antes de la final contra el Internacional de Porto Alegre, el Barça ha disputado hasta 414 partidos de competición oficial en competiciones internacionales, repartidos entre las competiciones de la Copa de Europa (ahora Liga de Campeones), Recopa, Copa de la UEFA, Copa de Ferias, Supercopa de Europa y Copa Intercontinental o Mundial de Clubs. Eso hace que el FC Barcelona tenga un promedio, en toda su historia internacional, de 1.93 goles por partido."

[12]:

"Este jueves se cumplen cincuenta años de la conquista de la primera Copa de Ferias, el primer título internacional oficial ganado por el Barça."

Official Site Real Zaragoza:

[13]

Official Site Valencia FC:

[[14]]

Official site spanish league:

[15]

"FCB palmarés (honours): 3 UEFA Cups (inter fairs cups)"

Also Valencia FC and Real Zaragoza profile.

A cordial greeting everyone. --Sporting1905 (talk) 20:47, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

HONOURS

Hello teammates,

after having asked an individual user, and getting ZERO response (don't think it's very polite, but that's another story), i bring the subject to the project:

I have seen, last week, in several Valencia CF players, the addition of unofficial honours to players: friendly tournaments, etc. Is that "legal"? I think only official honours should be conveyed, nothing else.

Another two related questions: in Esteban Granero, i saw a junior honour was inserted, i think that's wrong two, am i right? The second issue is the "runner-up" question. I think at least in domestic and UEFA cups it should be mentioned, as medals are indeed handed to defeated team. In what other situations (if any) should it be mentioned?

Ty very much in advance, attentively,

VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 21:04, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Vasco. As I´m doing some players pages, I left the honours issue to the end, but you have bring this up in a perfect time for me. I have seen many things regarding honours issue, and I noteced that it varies from region to region. What I think on doing, in the players I edited, is to include in the honours only the official titles.

Teams: national Championship winners (here I think it should include only Champions, not runners-up), and Regional (in Europe case UEFA) club competitions Champions and runners-up (loosing finalists). And National Cup and League Cup too (only winners).

For players honours I touth including: League top-scorer, if a player is part of the best 11 of the Championship, best Cup scorer, and I think that´s it. Oh! Of course, and if he is part of some World Cup or Confederations National team winner.

I don´t agree in putting tounaments records or youth years records. If that seems important it should be mentioned in the text.

I hope more people give their touths. Abraço. FkpCascais (talk) 23:00, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

On the first point, I don't think that friendly tournaments should be added to honours sections since they have little by way of official status. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Wembley Cup

As suggested on the article that there might be one every year, wouldn't it be more sensible to rename the article to 2009 Wembley Cup? Govvy (talk) 09:17, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

If this is to be an annual pre-season tournament then I think it should be kept to one article for the whole history of the tournament, with only results for each year being kept. I would refer people to the conversation higher up the page regarding Pre-season Friendlies.Alistair 84 (talk) 10:01, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Bobby Robson RIP

Sky News has reported Robson's death. Please keep your eyes peeled on the article for the usual crap while it evolves during this time. Cheers all. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Very sad to hear that news, the man's a legend. The article's semi-protected for a few days, that ought to keep it clean. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 10:11, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

It'll help, but the article is featured (for the time being) so all contributions will need to be assessed and reworked if possible to comply with WP:WIAFA. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:12, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Not many people manage to crash Wikipedia with their death. True legend. R.I.P.--EchetusXe (talk) 13:39, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Sir Thomas Lipton Trophy

There are big mistakes in that post, Miles Barron, trainer at West Auckland wrote himself about the second edition of the trophy, you can read at http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/features/columnists/memories/darlington/4311859.A_weekend_in_Italy_would_have_been_an_enormous_adventure/

Juventus beat Zurich 2-0 West Auckland beat Torino 3-2

In the final the scorers for West Auckland were: Moore (who also scored one goal in the semi-final), Appleby, Rewcastle, Dunn, then again Moore and again Dunn.

A celebration friendly have just been played, Juventus "Primavera" (youngsters) beat West Auckland 7-1. http://www.campioni.cn/it/internal.php?news_code=53867&cat_code=88

I'm not good in editing, and I'm not good in English, can anyone please edit that post? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.161.132.64 (talk) 23:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

North Road (stadium) FAC

This article is facing the possibility of failing its Featured Article nomination due to a perceived "slightly pompous texture". It has been suggested that the article requires a thorough copyedit, which I don't seem to have been able to procure at the Peer Review stage. Since I'm the principle contributor to the article, it would be inappropriate for me to give it the fine-tooth combing it needs, so I would appreciate it if someone from this WikiProject would do it for me. As far as I can tell, only a few kinks need ironing out, so any changes would only need to affect the style and not the content. Thanks. – Pee Jay 21:37, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Anyone? – Pee Jay 09:43, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Nicolas Hibst

I've just created the Nicolas Hibst article but I can only find the date of birth on playerhistory.com and I haven't got an account so I was wondering whether anyone who has an account could just put that on for me. I've got the stats from his clubs' official websites so they don't need updating. Thanks, Big Dom 14:26, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

12 October 1915. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 14:30, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, Big Dom 14:37, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Matty, any chance you could get me Henri Burda's DOB as well? Big Dom 15:16, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem. 4 January 1926. Mattythewhite (talk) 15:21, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Diego Orduña

Is this player notable to have an article? He hasn't made his professional debut in the first team, he is the third goalkeeper. Black 'n Red 23:31, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

No, he isn't. I can see you have PRODded the article already, so I have taken it to AfD. Regards, Giant Snowman 10:10, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Galatasary

Multi-sports club Galatasaray had its main article at Galatasaray S.K., with an article on it's football team at Galatasaray S.K. (football team). User:Tessio has now moved Galatasaray S.K. to Galatasaray S.K. (sports club) with no discussion, leaving Galatasaray S.K. as a redirect. Should I put in a requested move back to the original, or is this a contender for a speedy undoing? Dancarney (talk) 10:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Move it back - the "S.K." in Galatasaray's name translates as "sport club", so the article is basically now saying "Galatasaray Sports Club (sports club)"! Giant Snowman 14:47, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

A user that has uploaded a few images

I suspect the images uploaded by User:Ronaldo gjk for players such as Ronaldo, C. Ronaldo, Kaká and Benzema (which is a GAN) aren't free. Can someone check just to make sure? Spiderone (talk) 15:21, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

They aren't licenced, have no sources and can be speedied under F4 (no source), F6 (no licence) or even F9 (blatant copyvio). If you're unsure still, you can list them on WP:PUI for further investigation. Nanonic (talk) 15:34, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

The Cristiano Ronaldo photo was definitely stolen from Goal.com, and I have tagged it as such. – Pee Jay 15:37, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

OK, I've also warned the user for vandalism to Serbia national football team. Spiderone (talk) 15:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I have deleted all the images as they were all blatant copyright violations. I have warned the user that he will be blocked if he uploads any more copyvios. Woody (talk) 21:23, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Ronaldo

Sorry to be a berk but can someone with rollback privileges revert all the silly edits to Ronaldo? I'd do it myself but it would take hours. Spiderone (talk) 15:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

You know you don't need to revert each individual edit. Just open up the last good version, click "Edit this page" and save. Easy peasy. – Pee Jay 16:07, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Never thought about doing that. I'll do so next time. Spiderone (talk) 16:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Comanche (mascot)

Not notable, surely? It's bad enough that he gets approximately the same amount of coverage in the Wycombe Wanderers article as the first 98 years of the club's history, but he surely doesn't merit his own article........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:00, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Worth a passing mention on a season article, but certainly nothing more. Giant Snowman 21:00, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Redirected to the section in the club article, but ... meh. Black Kite 21:07, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Shane O'Connor (footballer)

Resolved

Shane O'Connor (footballer) needs to be deleted per the result of the afd. (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shane O'Connor (soccer)) Jmorrison230582 (talk) 10:11, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Template:Super League Greece 2009-10

This template is surely too much? --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 14:55, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Replace it with a template called 'Football in Greece 2009-10', based on the English equivalent.--EchetusXe 18:50, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Help with a map in a league season article.

I have been working on the map in the Primera División Argentina 2009–10 article and could could some help with the map. Due to the large number of teams in the Greater Buenos Aires area (13), I have put two maps in the article. Even with two maps, showing the locations of the teams in the GBA is difficult, especially for those on the southern end near the River Plate. Can anyone offer any trick to the maps that I could use to put labels to the existing locations? Thanks in advance. Digirami (talk) 16:05, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll take a shot at it right now. Take a look at the top of the hour. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 22:15, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Done - this baby was even worse than I thought. By the way, always refer to the stadium by their official names, not their nicknames, and try to squeeze in a little more text in the "Format" and "Club information" sections if possible. And on a closer look - why do Independiente and Racing have different capacites listed although they are playing at the same barn? :-) Cheers, Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 23:32, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, dude. As for the table and the information in it, it wasn't my doing, just the italicization. My goal for this article was just to set it up for future editors. Digirami (talk) 01:03, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Didier Drogba recent edits

Are they vandalism or helpful? The editor seems to be changing the club statistics a lot. Spiderone (talk) 16:54, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Looking at the total changes it seems to be good-faith corrections. The changes are mainly from expanding out the table to include more competitions. The only think that could be said is that they might have tried using a sandbox to make the table or used the show preview button given the sheer number of edits in the page history. Regards, Woody (talk) 18:37, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Proposed removal of Historical Counts

I propose we remove the "Historical Counts" section within Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Assessment#Statistics. I don't really see that this section added much value even when it was being updated, which it hasn't been since September 2007. If people really want to delve into the project's historical article stats, it's all there in the historical versions of Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Football articles by quality statistics. --Jameboy (talk) 23:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll remove these in 14 days time if there are no objections here before then. --Jameboy (talk) 15:27, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Mickey Walker's father

Anyone know the identity of Mickey Walker's dad, who played for Doncaster Rovers? If it's any help, he was born c. 1922...Giant Snowman 12:58, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

An interview with Walker confirms c.1922 by saying his father was 81 in 2003 and then INFURIATINGLY I get a google result saying "Former Rovers player and father of assistant coach Mickey Walker has died ..." linking to http://mobile.doncasterroversfc.co.uk/page/NewsIndex/0,,10329,207,00.html but can't find anything on that page. There must be something in the 300 odd pages of news there that relates to it but unfortunately I haven't seen it yet. Also, there is a little bit more on Walker's career here. Nanonic (talk) 15:17, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Got it! Mickey Walker Sr. Nanonic (talk) 15:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

That's great, thanks very much! Does anyone know if he made an appearance in the Football League? - according to that source, he played for Doncaster, York and both Bradfords - if so I'll create a stub at Mickey Walker, Sr. He never played for Bradford City, and doesn't appear for any of the other teams at Neil Brown's post-war database. Cheers, Giant Snowman 16:00, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Three Michael Walkers in my copy of Canon League Players' Records 1946-1984, but they were all born in the 1940s or 50s. One can only assume that, despite reportedly being on the books of all those clubs, he never played in the league -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:45, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for checking Chris. I don't suppose one of the Michael Walker's mentioned happens to be the Walker of this section? And if so, do you have a DOB or any info not already in the article? Cheers, Giant Snowman 19:49, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Born 10 April 1945 in Harrogate. I'll try and remember to check back and add a bit more (eg he also played for some other clubs) but I have to log off now...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:52, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Dashes or hyphens for football players with no squad number

I have been encountering some problem with the usage of dashes for players who did not get any squad number yet from their club. Some article eg. Real Madrid, Sevilla FC uses emdash (—), some uses endash eg. Man Utd, AS Roma (–), while some other articles eg. FC Barcelona, Juventus uses two hyphen symbol (--) & some leave it blank eg. Everton FC, AC Milan. I think it should be standardized and a rule on it should be created. What do you think about it? Which type of dashes do you prefer for usage? I think emdash should be used as it has width which equals to two numbers and wouldn't leave any spaces on the left-hand side of any squad number column Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 20:09, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I always use emdash wherever possible; I think it looks the neatest. Giant Snowman 20:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I must say I always used the two hyphens when I used to update squad lists and boxes but that seems to be becoming less common. I don't really update these things much any longer but I think I would agree with you both that an em-dash should be used. Big Dom 20:55, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Can someone create a rule about it so that it can be standardized ? Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 04:49, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd prefer to see it left blank, failing that the two hyphens is the next best. - fchd (talk) 06:06, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:MOSDASH recommends avoiding double-hyphens altogether. I think in this situation, my personal preference would be emdashes. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 09:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

A dash is maybe okay for squad lists, though only because WP:ACCESS says that we shouldn't be leaving the first column of a given table blank. In infobox templates it should always be left blank. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:57, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, now we just need someone who can add this thing up on the project page. Can someone help me out on this matter ? Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 11:32, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Phillip McCloy

I'm looking for informations about this guy, Phillip McCloy Scottish international footballer in 1920's. He could have managed Stade Rennais F.C. in 1932/33, the first name is missing but he is referred as "Scott" in references. Any clues ? The article is currently in a stub state and not very precise. Cheers guys. (As you can see it is very hard to find informations about pre-WWII French football.)--Latouffedisco (talk) 18:28, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes it's the same one Born in Uddington ca April 1896 died 1972 2 caps 1918-1925 Ayr United 248 league matches 8 goals also Clyde loan in 1918-19 (1 match) Manchester City 1925-1930 147 league matches 1930-31 Chester City 34 league matches Cork City, Stade Rennais, Workington, Kidderminster HarriersCattivi (talk) 09:45, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Cattivi, your interventions here are always very helpful. I'm gonna improve this article quickly. Cheers.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:04, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Play-off finals

An editor has asked at Talk:2009 Football League Two play-off Final/GA1 why our articles on play-off finals have a capital letter on "Final" but not on "play-off" - any ideas..........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:51, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 33#YYYY Division playoff Final. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:06, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Irish league stats needed for player

Jason Kabia played for Cork City, Galway United, Waterford United, Kilkenny City and Cobh Ramblers in the 90/00s. Does anyone have any details i.e. dates/apps for him? Cheers, Giant Snowman 14:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

English non-league stats needed for player

Gary Ingham played for Gainsborough Trinity, Shepshed Charterhouse, Goole Town, Maltby Miners Welfare, Stalybridge Celtic, Leek Town, Belper Town and Frickley Athletic over the past 25 years. Does anyone have any details i.e. dates/apps for him? Cheers, Giant Snowman 14:17, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

The official Stalybridge Celtic site has him down as having made 127 appearances but thats about it, doesn't give a season by season break down. It does however have a basic biography as well. Uksam88 (talk) 15:33, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much, I've updated the biography accordingly. Thanks again, Giant Snowman 15:47, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Just 19 appearances for S.P. Steels apparently, but again no real breakdown -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:55, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Cheers for that. Annoying that neither source tells us how many apps were in which spell...Giant Snowman 15:59, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I suspect that both also combine league and cup games, so would be of no use for the infobox anyway. Obviously the info can be mentioned in the prose, though -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:23, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Article alerts

This page doesn't look to have been updated since the end of July...Giant Snowman 14:31, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

The bot hasn't done a run since then it seems. Nanonic (talk) 16:59, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Question

Where do I find the style conventions that talk about when to use "soccer" or "football" and how to properly clarify uses of "football" that are not meant to imply American football? Readin (talk) 18:15, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

"Soccer" should be used when writing about competitions in, or players from, countries where they call the sport by that name. Otherwise "football" or "association football" should be used -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:43, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Except that there is a very grey line regarding what some countries call the sport. For the record, New Zealand Football (formerly New Zealand Soccer) went through a re-branding process some years ago as an alignment to general international practice, and while soccer is still used, football is becoming more prevalent and officially recommended. Some argue that soccer has always been used, but looking back at history shows 'xxx AFC (association football club) for most club names. New Zealand articles should generally use "football (soccer)" or simply "football" ([[Association football|football (soccer)]] as a piped link). There is generally no conflict as the other codes in New Zealand are referred to as Rugby Union (or simply "Rugby") and Rugby League (or simply "League" colloquially). --ClubOranje^T 00:40, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I can leave the articles I was wondering about alone. Readin (talk) 14:53, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Premier Development League teams -> Youth Career

I was looking at some US national team players who played in the Premier Development League and noticed that pretty much all of them have their PDL teams listed under "senior career." The PDL is an amateur league, the entire point of it is so that NCAA players have a league to play in during the offseason that keeps their college eligibility intact. Shouldn't PDL teams then be considered part of a player's youth career? Eightball (talk) 05:09, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I think this is yet another example of how wildly different the US sports "model" is from the rest of the world. "Youth career" is generally used elsewhere in the world to refer to clubs which a player played for prior to the age of 18, as most players turn pro at that age and therefore begin their "senior" career. The number of professional footballers outside the US who attended college could probably be counted on Jerry Garcia's fingers. Non-US editors probably wouldn't consider a player's college career, when he can presumably have been anything up to 22 years old, as part of his "youth" career. Having said all that, though, I don't know how to address it. A project-wide switch to something like "Pre-professional career"/"Professional career" would probably be seen as heavy-handed considering it's only US players that have an issue...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:59, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I know it's a weird situation but I just wouldn't consider an amateur team to be part of a player's senior career. There's really no reason to make any major changes, just shift where the team is listed. Eightball (talk) 22:14, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

For US players, it's easiest to use their college playing as their youth career and use the amateur teams as a senior career, even if its somewhat hard to reconcile logically. matt91486 (talk) 00:03, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

No, absolutely not. The PDL is a senior amateur league, not a youth league - players in the PDL include everyone from high school seniors to current college players, to current and former professionals, including some who have participated in this year's World Cup qualifiers for their countries (see Mike Randolph, Happy Hall, Brent Whitfield, Kashif Siddiqi etc.). Consider the PDL to be the equivalent of the English non-league system: not professional, but certainly more than high school/college. --JonBroxton (talk) 00:41, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

The NCAA most certainly does not consider it to be more than college if they allow players to make part in it without losing their eligibility. I'm sorry but it just appears incredibly misleading to me. Charlie Davies didn't start his career at Westchester Flames. They were simply a part of his youth development, something to do while BC wasn't playing. It doesn't make any sense to list them alongside Hammarby when they are very obviously part of his college days. Eightball (talk) 04:31, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

PDL teams have absolutely nothing to do with players' college careers. Some players play for PDL teams while they are at college. Some players play for PDL teams before they to to college. Some play for PDL teams during their professional careers like they would any other club - like Mike Randolph, Warren Ukah, Willie Sims, or Ely Allen. Some players play for PDL teams after they have finished their professional careers, like Eric Wynalda or Jurgen Klinsmann. NCAA colleges do impose some limitations on PDL teams to maintain their collegiate eligibility, yes, but PDL teams are absolutely categorically NOT youth teams. They are competitive senior adult teams playing in a nationwide amateur league. --JonBroxton (talk) 06:00, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

You can say whatever you want about the league but it's still ridiculously misleading to list a PDL club someone played for to stay in shape during the offseason next to a Ligue 1 side. Eightball (talk) 18:40, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

It's not misleading at all, for the reasons Jon has outlined above. Giant Snowman 18:44, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Not the make this more confusing for anyone, but Brigham Young University's Cougars soccer team plays in the PDL, not the NCAA like all other college soccer teams. :) I'm not trying to sabotage anyone in this conversation. Let it be known that I completely agree with Jon, even prior to this conversation. It is not rediculous. For example, any MLS player or European or whomever could suit up for any PDL team if he felt like it, but he could never join an NCAA soccer team because he's already made money as a professional in the sport. It is a senior-level, amateur league. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 19:12, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

No more or less ridiculous than listing a 7th-level English non league amateur team alongside a Premier League team, as is the case on Matt Duke's biography. --JonBroxton (talk) 05:52, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Shit, sorry about making this discussion longer than it should be. In my last message I meant to say something like, "I guess you're right, but," and apparently left that out entirely. Anyway, it's obvious that Jon is correct but the message I was trying (and failing) to convey was that I wish there was a better way to list PDL teams. To be quite frank, what I'm asking for is impossible, so it'd be best if we just forgot this ever happened. Eightball (talk) 06:21, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Daniel Hurst (footballer)

Daniel Hurst (footballer) a new article about an English player who has only played in the Northern Premier League and Conference North. I tried nominating it for speedy deletion but that didn't work. Any chance someone could AfD it as I don't know the procedure? Unless Prod is relevant? Thank you.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 12:48, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I've added a PROD. Mattythewhite (talk) 12:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 13:11, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

For what it's worth, installing Twinkle from the Gadgets section of Preferences reduces taking an article to AfD to three clicks. I can't understand how anyone could live without it. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:30, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Those of us with loyalty to IE manage fine without it thank you very much... ;) Giant Snowman 19:19, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Name of the Paraguayan league.

I am having some trouble determining the right (and by right, I mean official) name of the Paraguayan league (the common name of the league is the Primera División no doubt about that, and should remain as the title of the article and any season because it is the common name). According to the statues of the APF (if you can read Spanish, see article 9), the top league is the "División de Honor de la APF", but this season's regulations has no mention of "División de Honor", but rather "División Profesional". I have no idea what to go with. I'm leaning toward "División de Honor" because it is one of the top professional leagues in Paraguay, so it would be strange to just refer to one as just professional. Any idea/help? Digirami (talk) 23:03, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Display problems with Navbox

I've encountered a problem that causes the {{Navbox}} to display improperly on only a select few pages such as 2010 FIFA World Cup qualification - UEFA Group 6 and CONCACAF Champions League 2009–10 Preliminary Round. {{CONCACAF Champions League 2009–10}} displays properly for me on all other pages on which its used. It seems to me that the problem stems from the usage of {{Footballbox}} because whenever I remove only the footballboxes from the page then the navboxes display properly, but that doesn't make any sense to me. Does anyone know what is going on? I can't figure it out. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 11:48, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

"A problem" can basically mean anything. Can you provide more details on what exactly looks wrong on these pages? :-) --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 12:08, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure I can, sorry. The link to Hide/Show the box does not display, and there's a thicker/wider whitespace above and below each group as well as above the title bar than there ought to be. I hope that explains my viewing issue. I've checked it on my PC as well as my iPhone so I'm fairly sure it's not a computer-specific issue to my own computer. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 13:16, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

The error results from missing </div> tags. It happens when an user who is not experienced in HTML adds only opening <div> tags in front of the respective {{footballbox}}. It's kind of a similar problem like the one attached to the UEL qualifiying article (see above)). Just add the missing closing tag at the end of each footballbox, and everything will be okay. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 13:30, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh, thanks. That's great to know. :^) JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 14:13, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

{{Footballbox}} connected to <div>

Since the topic seems to affect more articles than originally thought:

When adding a <div> HTML tag in front of a {{Footballbox}} so that it can be directly accessed from another article, make sure that </div> is put immediately after the footballbox as well in order to avoid any displaying errors.

The <div> and </div> basically work like a pair of regular brackets in mathematics. If the closing end is missing, the browser will not display other items correctly. So, please check any pages which use this syntax combination on missing </div> tags in order to avoid errors! --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 13:45, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Have you checked if it's the same user every time? If so, it might be worth a personal heads-up. Knepflerle (talk) 13:52, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I doubt that a single person is responsible for all this, but I'll check nevertheless. The technique has been used all over WP:FOOTY-affiliated sites, especially on high profile detailed articles like the WC qualifying groups or the Champions League articles, for quite a while now, so it would be pretty hard to determine patient zero. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 14:14, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I believe it is also possible to put <div name="Manchester United v Liverpool"/>, is it not? – Pee Jay 14:48, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

It works (I think it works in all browsers, but can't be sure), and is how I do it cha ndl er 14:58, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't be surprised if this resulted from the wiki using a updated version of HTML Tidy, the package that has automagically fixed errors like this in the rendered page since 2004. Nanonic (talk) 15:08, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Kit help with Histon F.C. article?

Dear fellow wikipedians, just wondering whether someone would be willing to change the kit templates on the Histon article? The ones currently on there are wrong, here are the new kits. [16] Thanks. Jazza5 (talk) 16:55, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I've had a go for you - do they look OK? Giant Snowman 17:04, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Anyone willing to have a go at the Grays Ath kit? I'm useless with the template. Cheers, --Jimbo^[online] 19:28, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I've had a go, what do you think? Giant Snowman 19:45, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Nice one, close enough, a lot better than what I could do. Thanks. --Jimbo^[online] 23:57, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Conviction of Michael Shields - Image use

User:Jw2035 removed an image showing a banner in support of Shields' release from the article on grounds of privacy of the house residents. Thus, I cropped the image just to focus on the banner itself. However, Jw2035 believes that the image now violates WP:NPOV as it is in support of Shields. Of course, having the image there is a way of visually documenting the movement to release Shields, and is not meant to be a persuasion for Shields' case. Should the image be restored to demonstrate the "Free Michael Shields" effort? Or should we delete all NPOV images? Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{Join WikiProject Athletics!} 20:41, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

It is a fact that there is a campaign: that fact can be usefully illustrated by the illustration of the banner. NPOV can be maintained by having the banner pic at a sensible size and impartial caption, which is the case here. Kevin McE (talk) 06:54, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

2009–10 UEFA Europa League qualifying phase and play-off round

Take a look at 2009–10 UEFA Europa League qualifying phase and play-off round, especially at the bottom of the page. The display error seems to be the result of an exceeded maximum number of transcluded templates. Therefore, and because of its size (currently 140k), it would probably be the best to split up the article into 2009–10 UEFA Europa League first and second qualifying round and 2009–10 UEFA Europa League third qualifying round and play-off round (or similiar names) – if the objections against such a split (e.g. no separate articles for each qualifying round) are not too big. If they are, we need to come up with another solution. Comments, ideas? --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 15:10, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

The vast majority of those templates are the flags, and aren't necessary in the first place. Splitting the article so that it can be decorated with flags is the tail wagging the dog.

A couple of points:

the first time we use a flag, we are supposed to include the name of the country (see WP:MOSFLAG). This is not occurring on these articles
words or abbreviations are generally preferred to flag icons, for accessibility reasons - people using screen readers/the colour-blind/etc can't access all the information
when the club is being mentioned for the fifth time on the page, do we still need to have the nationality indicated?
we shouldn't be writing 140k pages when a much smaller one will convey the same information, just in the name of pretty decoration. Not everyone in the world accessing wikipedia has broadband.

I'd suggest changing the "Teams" list at the top of the article to include the flag and country name (per WP:MOSFLAG), and after that using either a text abbreviation or the country name in words. Knepflerle (talk) 08:33, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

This will lead to inconsistancy of entries. Previous group stage and qualification have flags. So what now? Who is going to go edit to have the same style? The separation of different stages of qualification would alleviate such mass accumulation of bytes. The main article is 2009–10 UEFA Europa League and whats the problem of having a page for each qualification stage? Brudder Andrusha (talk) 11:36, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Brudder - if you're valuing "consistency" more highly than the ability for the page even to display correctly, you've lost sight of the goal - there's no point having a consistent article no-one can read. Many other editors would also value accessibility of information to those using screen-readers and those in locations with slow connections over "consistency" and prettiness, too. Priorities, please. Knepflerle (talk) 13:21, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

The admins should of had the foresight that adding 4 qualification rounds of first leg/second leg information into one page was going create ooooodles of bytes. I don't think I lost sight of how I would like to see the pages display the result information. My sight has been perplexed with the tackiness and inconsistancy of what is being displayed so that ALL the information is one place - <sarcasm /on> because its only qualification stuff and really should not be here on WP in the first place.... <sarcasm /off> If the branches from the main pages were 2009–10 UEFA Europa League first qualification round, 2009–10 UEFA Europa League second qualification round, 2009–10 UEFA Europa League third qualification round, 2009–10 UEFA Europa League playoff round then we wouldn't be discussing about the overkill of data. But that would not suffice folks here WikiProject Football because there would be a movement made to somehow curtail this kind of growth. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 13:55, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I have removed the flags on teams in single match reports (which are definitely not needed because the country is already listed in the overview table for each round), but no improvement in sight. A little further investigation revealed that the article also uses the deprecated {{fnb}} template. Test edits have shown that the content will be correctly displayed if this temp is not being used. Since there were similar problems with a flurry of references at List of German football transfers summer 2009, I wouldn't be surprised if the referencing templates do their share of the damage as well. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 12:03, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Good detective work on the formatting problem. The question remains how much of this formatting we should use at all, bearing in mind questions of article size and accessibility. Knepflerle (talk) 13:21, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Ha, found the problem and fixed it! Missing HTML knowledge of the page creator is to blame here, as every <div>-Tag was left WITHOUT the mandatory closing </div>-Tag. Please make sure that this is fixed at every corresponding page as well! --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 21:48, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I still contend that an article about the qualifying phase of these competitions is unnecessary – I'm not even a fan of the FA Cup qualifying rounds articles – and the very fact that this article has gone over its template transclusion limit only lends support to the arguments I used in the article's AfD discussion. – Pee Jay 09:07, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I reckon its more of a problem because you have to police the articles so no one is putting information there is not rubber stamped by you. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 11:36, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

What's that supposed to mean? I hardly ever check the info that goes into those articles any more, simply because of the sheer volume of edits that go on there. – Pee Jay 00:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Something gone amiss with you? You revel in giving yellow cards to folks who are updating 30+ games in real time.... Brudder Andrusha (talk) 11:33, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Steven Caulker

Can an admin restore Steven Caulker as he has made his debut today. Thanks. Govvy (talk) 15:02, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

And restore an old version of Chris Fagan or Christy Fagan / Christopher Fagan if they are better articles (under the Chris Fagan name). Cheers, --Jimbo^[online] 15:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

DOB for Steve Williams of Bradford City please

Steve Williams has made his professional debut for Bradford City today, so I'm gonna create an article for him. However, disambiguating could be a problem as three other players by that name already exist, and I don't know his DOB. This article says he is 22 - but that means he could have been born in either 1986 or 1987 - and his City official profile doesn't gave a DOB. Can anyone help please? Cheers, Giant Snowman 15:48, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

5-0 defeat at Notts County. Nice time for a debut.--EchetusXe 16:12, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

A terrible result, true. Not for Sven though...and hey, it could be worse, I could be a Norwich fan! Sorry Dweller! Every cloud and all that...Giant Snowman 16:18, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Or a York fan, conceding two daft goals in the last few minutes at one of the promotion favourites... Mattythewhite (talk) 16:26, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I have created a basic article at Steve Williams (defender), and will move it to the (footballer born 198?) when a birth date is found. Cheers, Giant Snowman 16:33, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Dean Winnard

Can someone please recreate the Dean Winnard article as he made his debut for Accrington today.[17] Big Dom 17:02, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Abougrisha, Abugreisha, or something else?

I noticed we have articles on three rather famous Egyptian footballers (who may or may not be related): Aly Abo Greisha, Mohamed Abougrisha and Mohamed Salah Abo Greisha. I believe that their surnames (if there is such a thing in Arabic) are identical, but they might have been transliterated to English differently. The second one played at the 2009 Confederations Cup and is listed on FIFA.com at Abougrisha. The first one is usually listed as Abugreisha (even at FIFA.com). Perhaps it doesn't matter, but I was hoping we could agree on a common transliteration of their surname and move them accordingly. Any thoughts? Jogurney (talk) 20:44, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I think "Abou Greisha" is the most common spelling of this surname. Spiderone (talk) 12:19, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Mohamed Abougrisha recently played in the 2009 FIFA Confederations Cup and FIFA lists his name as "Abougrisha".[18] Perhaps this could be a reference for the names. — Martin tamb (talk) 08:32, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

But I just realize that on his profile page.[19] FIFA mentions his name as "Abogrisha". — Martin tamb (talk) 08:35, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Abougrisha sounds more correct. The "Abou" prefix is more commonly used eg. Abou Diaby. Spiderone (talk) 08:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Anyone got any articles...

that they want to be a GA? I can help. Spiderone (talk) 08:22, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

You looking for anything in particular? You wanna work on something that is not quite a GA or you prepared to start on the ground up with something?--EchetusXe 16:07, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't matter too much just as long as there's sources and it's a player. Is there anything here where loads of editors work together to improve an article? Spiderone (talk) 16:47, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Right, if you want a random player, take your pick from those I've created. Giant Snowman 16:49, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Most of those seem to be as good as they could ever be. David Wetherall looks close to a GA, I might try and improve that. Spiderone (talk) 17:03, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I think Wetherall was going to be one of Peanut4's next projects actually, so it would be a good choice. Giant Snowman 17:13, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Chris Fagan. --Jimbo^[online] 21:31, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Ricki Herbert - lots of source info available.--ClubOranje^T 00:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Liga I 2010–11

Liga I 2010–11 clearly should not exist (at least not now) because of WP:CRYSTAL. Is it possible to speedy it and if so, under which category? --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 13:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

It's not eligible for speedy deltion according to WP:NOTCSD, which says that because WP:CRYSTAL is a part of WP:NOT, it cannot be speedied. You'll have to PROD I'm afraid. Giant Snowman 13:18, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for the quick reply! --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 14:14, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

db-a3, NO CONTENT. Forget CRYSTAL for now, Article has no content other than a rephrase of the title, an empty wikitable and some internal wikilinks. Worst case is an admin won't agree, in which case prod, which, when it gets contested, wastes everyone's time at AfD, which we all know will get snowballed under the CRYSTAL argument --ClubOranje^T 01:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Player heights

For some time now, I've been reverting anonymous edits to the Adel Taarabt article which involve changing the player's height in the infobox. The height given there is referenced to the player's profile on his club website and the anonymous editor doesn't provide an alternative reference. The same editor seems to be doing to same to many articles about Moroccan footballers (or European footballers of Moroccan ancestry). For example, the same IP address (82.252.207.199) that has edited the Taarabt article changed the height of Nabil Dirar. When I found a source for Dirar's height and corrected it, it was once again changed. The problem is that it's hard to track all of this since the IP address changes regularly (either that, or it's more than one editor). I doubt that this is vandalism as such. Perhaps the editor has an alternative source that they are using but not specifying. Anyway, this is just a note to make people aware of this and to suggest that we keep a collective eye on Moroccan player articles. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:49, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Justin Thompson

According to his infobox, this guy made 97 league appearances between 2006 and 2007 - surely that can't be right? Giant Snowman 16:51, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Signing in January 2006 and departing in December 2007, one could make 97 appearances in all competitions, but solely in the league no.

"Thompson, 26, appeared in 53 matches (49 starts) for Worcester City during the 2006-07 season and scored four goals. A five-year pro, Thompson has split his career with both English and USL First Division sides. Thompson started his career with the English club Bury in 2003 and has since played for Hornchurch (2004-05) and Worcester City (2005-06, 2006-07). In his two seasons with Worcester City, Thompson made 97 appearances and scored five goals." [20]

It would seem that he was present at Worcester from 2005 to 2007, making 97 appearances in all competitions.--EchetusXe 17:00, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I suspected as much. I've removed the stats from the infobox accordingly. Cheers, Giant Snowman 17:07, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Try here. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:17, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Cheers Struway, that's a great site, much appreciated! Giant Snowman 17:40, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

UEFA Euro 1992

I don't have much knowledge about this competition, so can anyone verify whether this statement is correct or not? Cheers. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{Join WikiProject Athletics!}

Looks to be a case of WP:POV to me. Giant Snowman 17:15, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Pre season friendlies

Perhaps I'm showing my age, but to me, regardless of sponsorship, TV coverage and pretentious titles, pre-season tournaments (Wembley Cup, Audi Cup etc...) are no more than friendlies, and as such of zero significance. To many editors (often unregistered, and to judge by the quality of grammar and spelling, I suspect largely kids on school holidays) they seem to be of an importance only just below that of the World Cup. So how far do we consider them encyclopaedically relevant? Do they deserve:

articles? (I would rather not, but the press are all over anything the large clubs do, so there is enough coverage that I am unlikely to win this one)
recognition as a player's debut?
inclusion in playing statistics? (obviously not in the infobox, which is domestic league only, but tables in articles)
prose description in player's articles?
inclusion in summary of season articles for clubs?
inclusion in summary of season articles such as Football in Fooland in 1768?
inclusion in honours sections for clubs?
inclusion in honours sections for players?

There is a problem, I fear, of consistency, both in terms of players from the current high profile era to less hyped times, and of saying that Carlos Kickaball made his debut for Melchester Rovers in a league match against Heckingbridge Town in a league match in August 200¶, while displaying the fact that he played for them against Spartak Dorado in the Tescburys cup three weeks earlier. Kevin McE (talk) 10:26, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion, they are encyclopaedically relevant, but only insofar as to recognise a match played in a friendly as the player's debut (albeit not his competitive debut). I'm not too fussed about friendly tournaments having articles, provided that there is enough non-trivial third-party coverage (to satisfy WP:N). I don't even mind them being included in clubs' season articles. I would, however, object to seeing the Audi Cup listed under Manchester United's honours if they beat Bayern later today, just as I would object to listing it in any of the players' honours sections or in their stats tables. Stats tables should be for competitive appearances only. – Pee Jay 10:32, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I would say that when it comes to listing awards in player/team articles that we should only list those actually awarded by a federation. For general content, we don't currently discriminate against friendlies; they just happen not to dominate articles because they're largely irrelevant. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:49, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

If a friendly is to be noted as establishing a debut, then I would suggest that at least 75% of our player articles are wrong, as countless trial appearances, youngsters' run-outs with the first team as the ninth second half sub, new signings getting their first game in front of few hundred holiday-makers, etc. How are we to allow this with any regard for consistency stretching back several years? Kevin McE (talk) 10:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

If a club has listed the pre-season cups in the honours section of their matchday programme would it then be appropriate to list them in the club's honours list on Wikipedia, if such a list exists for that article?Alistair 84 (talk) 13:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Inclusion in club season articles only IMHO, and extremely briefly at that. No credible source includes pre-season friendlies in player or club statistics. Of course, if Carlos Kickaball he broke his leg in a pre-season friendly, or did something else with far-reaching effects, then by all means it should be mentioned. But routine pre-season matches are of no consequence. No publication attempting to take itself seriously would, five years down the line, describe a friendly as a player's debut for a club. Oldelpaso (talk) 13:35, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Have we traditionally regarded the Charity/Community Shield as sufficiently competitive to count as a debut? Kevin McE (talk) 10:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, definitely. The Community Shield is a competitive match, and certainly not merely a pre-season friendly. I would say it carries similar weight to the UEFA Super Cup. – Pee Jay 15:29, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Should friendlies be included in biggest win and loss in infoboxes?Cptnono (talk) 12:28, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Biggest win and loss aren't in the infobox....?? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:37, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

They are in Major League Soccer, see documentation. And friendlies shouldn't count for the infobox: if it's an MLS-specific parameter, it has to refer to MLS games. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 12:46, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Sorry for not being clearer. I was under the impression that an exhibition/practice game shouldn't merit but it is also my local team that was on a losing side. I'll keep this in mind if it goes the other way in the future.Cptnono (talk) 12:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Herta BSC

User:Sir Sputnik has recently created the category Category:Hertha BSC players, but we already have Category:Hertha BSC Berlin players. He's also going through Hertha's players changing Hertha Berlin links to Hertha BSC. --Jimbo^[online] 15:44, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't see a problem here at all since the main article of the club is named Hertha BSC. Any associated articles or categories should therefore also carry "Hertha BSC" in their names. If there are now two categories for the same group of players, merge them under "Category:Hertha BSC players". As for the link changes - bypassing redirects is almost never a bad thing. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 15:52, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but articles/categories/templates should be renamed accordingly - Sir Sputnik shouldn't be creating new ones! Giant Snowman 16:00, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, he is going about it arse about face.--EchetusXe 23:20, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

My apologies if I have caused any problems. I was unaware that categories could be moved seeing as there is no move function at the top of the page. It is as Soccer-holic has already said, the article for the club is at Hertha BSC so the category should be there also. Furthermore the name Hertha Berlin is ambiguous since BSC is not the only Berlin football club to carry the name Hertha. –Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:22, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Easter Island football team

A club side representing the Easter Islands made its debut in the Copa Chile 2009, as this article confirms. Is this enough for an article, and if so, under what name? Selección Rapa Nui, as they are listed on the cup article page? Giant Snowman 09:39, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I would say it is sufficient as they have appeared in a national cup competition, and yes I guess under the name you suggest Eldumpo (talk) 09:53, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

It would be Easter Island national football team Spiderone (talk) 12:18, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

But it's not a national team; it's a club side. I suppose it's be the equivalent of Monaco, representing Monaco in France. Giant Snowman 12:36, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I would have thought it was like Monaco national football team, since they can't sign players that don't come from Easter Island - Spiderone (talk) 12:49, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, it's probably half-way in between a club and a national team. In that case, could an admin please recreate this article that was deleted in this AfD? Giant Snowman 12:53, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

There is an article on the Spanish wikipedia under Selección de fútbol de la Isla de Pascua. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 12:56, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The website of the Asociación Nacional de Fútbol Profesional, the Chilean FA, lists the result as CF Rapa Nui 0-4 Colo Colo, so CF Rapa Nui would seem appropriate. It is a club (CF=club de fútbol), no claim in the Spanish articles that it is a representative team of an association, so I would suggest that it is entirely inappropriate to describe it as a national team: does Spiderone have a source for saying that they cannot chose non-islanders (although geographically it would be unlikely) Kevin McE (talk) 13:03, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

CF Rapa Nui sounds like the best option to me. If there's no further suggestions I'll create an article there. Giant Snowman 13:08, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Done. Giant Snowman 09:43, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

New player article

The same user who created Daniel Hurst (footballer), a player who has only played at semi-pro level, has now created Michael Taylor (footballer) who on the article states he played 10 games for Carlisle United. I checked on Soccerbase and he is listed on there, so that is ok. However, this article Shaun Beeley has also been created. Beeley apparently was only ever a reserve team player at Oldham Athletic and has since then it seems played non-league football. Should this be a PROD? Thank you.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 20:08, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Do you think this player warrants an article?--EchetusXe 20:25, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd say Chris Iwelumo warrants an article. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:35, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Seems like a "near miss" to me.... I take it a PROD is ok then :) ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 21:09, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Iwelumo's miss was a perverse pleasure to me. What with him being an ex-Stokie and all.--EchetusXe 22:26, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Since i used to know Shaun Beeley i can safely say he hasn't played in the league, and chances are i doubt he ever will...Uksam88 (talk) 20:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Template:USSR-footy-bio-stub

Fix this template please. Regards, Аурелиано Буэндиа (talk) 00:11, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

What's wrong with it? Nanonic (talk) 00:19, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I think that it will be more better if the ball will be under Hammer and sickle, not in the left. - Аурелиано Буэндиа (talk) 10:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with the template on my computer. I assume it is just rendering incorrectly on your PC. – Pee Jay 11:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Looks fine on mine too -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:44, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

What browser do you use? Me - Firefox 3.0.13. - Аурелиано Буэндиа (talk) 17:26, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you should try updating your browser then. I'm using Firefox 3.5.2 – Pee Jay 17:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Blackburn Olympic F.C. Peer Review

Resolved

I've just taken this article to FAC, but I can't remember how to close the PR, and for some reason WP:PR is firewalled out here at work (even though WP as a whole isn't) - could someone refresh my memory of how to close a PR.........? Cheers!!!! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

It says:

Edit the [[Wikipedia:Peer review/ARTICLE NAME/archiveN]] page where the peer review discussion is taking place, and replace {{Peer review page|topic=topic name}} with {{subst:PR/archive}}.
Replace the {{peerreview}} tag on the article's talk page with {{oldpeerreview|archive=N}}, where N is the number of the peer review discussion page above (e.g. 1 for /archive1).

cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Nice one Stru, cheers! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:44, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Participation in TfD discussions requested

We currently have two TfD discussions dealing with league season templates which could use more participation. The templates in question are Template:La Liga 2006-07 and Template:Super League Greece 2009-10, the respective TfD discussions can be found here and here. The outcome of these might have project-wide consequences, so eager discussion participation is desired. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 09:47, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Paulo César

Does anyone know if Paulo César Carpegiani or Paulo César Lima is the same Paulo César that played in the NASL during the 1981 season? Thanks, Giant Snowman 12:30, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Simple. Paulo César Lima [21].--Latouffedisco (talk) 13:02, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Cheers! Giant Snowman 13:04, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Umaglesi Liga playoffs

Umaglesi Liga playoffs. AfD, PROD...? Note: this stuff isn't featured in regular season articles. SonjiCeli (talk) 21:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Merge the content to the respective articles of each season, then PROD this article. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 21:37, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Bot error

It appears that Xenobot (talk · contribs) has screwed up while standardizing some stub templates. See for instance this edit. The bot omitted one word in a category. As a result, just about 400 articles and templates were added to Category:European football club instead of Category:European football club stubs. I can't clean this up on my own. Please help. 94.212.31.237 (talk) 21:29, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I think I've fixed it. – Pee Jay 21:38, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Any interest in a "League and cup season article task force"?

Is there enough interest within this project to found such a task force? Its scope would be:

Creating a (as much as possible) uniform article format for league season articles in compliance with the Wikipedia:Manual of Style
Creating a (as much as possible) uniform article format for cup season articles in compliance with the MoS
Maintenance of those articles

--Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 11:27, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Count me in. I'd be glad to help when/if we create the task force. SonjiCeli (talk) 13:11, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, I expected you to be in. :-) Unfortunately, two people might not be enough to found a task force. Given the plethora of league and cup season articles, guidelines on what to include and what not would definitely be of use. Especially the cup season articles are usually in a rather sorry and partially confused state. So - are there any more people out there who would like to join? --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 12:47, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Maybe Rougue or some contributor currently maintaining his/her domestic league/cup? SonjiCeli (talk) 13:53, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm happy to support any initiative which means we can avoid some of the more egregious problems we have in some recent articles. Knepflerle (talk) 13:56, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd be happy to help with this. Someone needs to create the remaining Football League Cup season articles, after all! – Pee Jay 14:50, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

We definitely need some guidelines as to how much info should be included - the Scottish Cups, for example Scottish League Cup 2008-09, have hidden football-boxes displaying results from the early rounds, while in England they are not included. Count me in - I'd be happy to help having been involved in the initial stages of creating FA Cup and League Cup articles. 03 md 16:39, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I guess you can count me in, too. Rougue1987 (talk) 16:51, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Interest is obviously there, and the multiple responses seem to represent consensus. If there are no objections, I will create the Task force page later today. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 12:59, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I would also involve club season articles into it, they also represent a part of our articles that definitely need some sort of standardization. --Angelo (talk) 13:19, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

@Angelo: Done, see also below and on the task force page. So again, if you would like to contribute, please join! --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 22:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Question about Hong Kong FA Cup and Hong Kong League Cup article series

While populating Category:2008-09 domestic football (soccer) cups, I discovered that Hong Kong FA Cup 2008-09 was played in 2009 only. The same happens to occur with any previous HK FA Cups, as well as for any Hong Kong League Cup season article. Should those articles thus be moved to 2009 Hong Kong FA Cup and similar article names, or are those cup seasons officially referred to by their current titles? --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 23:53, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

No - like in Britain, the Hong Kong domestic seasons runs from summer/autumn 08 to spring/summer 09. Therefore the article on the domestic cup should remain at 08-09, as it is the cup for the 08-09 season. Giant Snowman 11:57, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Non-English language football associations

There seems to be quite a lot of articles about national football associations that are written in some language other than English, particularly in Africa, but also in North America and Oceania. Seeing as the contents of Category:CONMEBOL were recently moved to English language titles, shouldn't we do the same for the rest? – Pee Jay 09:00, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Use whatever spelling is commonly used for them in English-language sources. Translate the titles into English if there is evidence that English-language texts do so. Knepflerle (talk) 09:37, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Is PJ's suggestion that, for example, Federação Angolana de Futebol should be moved to Angolan Football Federation? Is there evidence that this is normal usage? The Federação Angolana de Futebol is an entity that exists: Angolan Football Federation is a description of that entity based on a translation on that name, but in many cases there will be nothing authoritative about such a translation. A redirect seems justifiable, but not a move of the article unless there is real evidence that a particular translation bears authority. Kevin McE (talk) 09:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree - with the relevant authority being common usage in English. This is why official names are not necessarily supported but common names are. WP:USEENGLISH is clear on not inventing English usage. Knepflerle (talk) 10:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

One question though, in English sources, wouldn't the probability of ALL foreign FAs being called "FAs"? No matter the native name, for example the Swedish Football Association is not wrong in anyway, "förbund" is correctly translated to association, but it could also be translated, perhaps more correctly as the Swedish Football Federation. Still I don't think you'll ever see anything but "Swedish FA" or "Danish FA" (Dansk Boldspil-Union, sort of "the Danish Ball Sports Union") etc in the English press, right? cha ndl er 10:43, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

So Fédération Française de Football would become French Football Association?The Hack 02:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

No, "Fédération Française de Football" would become French Football Federation, as it already is. – Pee Jay 08:06, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

But on what basis is it there? Are there multiple significant sources in English calling it that, or is it simple a translation? And, returning to the initial post of the thread, what about the Federação Caboverdiana de Futebol, which is presumably referred to rather less frequently in English language sources? Kevin McE (talk) 08:32, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Hungarian National Championship I 2009–2010 (Detailed) - what to do?

How should we deal with Hungarian National Championship I 2009–2010 (Detailed)? I was hesitating on an AfD entry because we also have this and this, among others, which probably could take an influence on the discussion. Any opinions? --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 20:02, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

WTF?! "Detailed" is probably an understatement for that article. I say it should be deleted for the simple reason that Wikipedia is not a sports almanac. We don't just lump stats together to create an article. See WP:IINFO for more. In fact, WP:IINFO would probably be a good argument for the deletion of the Champions League and Europa league qualification articles. – Pee Jay 20:11, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Tell the creator to split it into separate season articles for each team. That present format will never work. Four games in and its killing my 10 meg connection.--EchetusXe 23:43, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

And the odds of the creator being bothered to maintain it at that level of detail for the entire season? Survey says......no chance -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:01, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, done. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 11:48, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Paolo Di Canio

I think an administrator needs to revert Paolo Di Canio back to this last good edit. A load of IP users have just been trashing his page in the last week. Big Dom 08:04, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

There you go matey, all done. It's on my watchlist now - if I see any more IP vandalism, I'll semi-protect for a little while. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 08:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Cheers, Big Dom 09:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Navboxes acting weird

Can somebody look at Denmark national football team#Titles and fix the navboxes? I cannot myself find the error. ka la ha 08:54, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

That's an odd one. I tried switching the "fb" codes to "football box" and although it worked in preview, it still displayed incorrectly when saved so I reverted my own edit. I noticed the the national team template has "fb" and "inner fb" code embedded within it. I'm not too familiar with template code, but would that something to do with it? Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 09:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Is it anything to do with the problem discussed at #Display problems with Navbox and the following section (above)? cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Maybe. It seems wrapping the template in a separate "fb start" / "fb end" combo works here. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 09:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

The error had indeed something to do with the div-tags used for navigation within the WCQ section. PeeJay fixed the little bugger. However, the tags are useless for the article, as clicking on any result in the results table opens up the WCQ UEFA Group 1 article, so I removed them altogether now.

On another note - what is the rationale behind having the WCQ in the article? It just seems a little weird to me since it is comparable to having current league season stuff on club team articles... --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 11:35, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Professional players to non-senior clubs

I will refer users to the article page for Micky Hazard, a former professional player who has, in retirement, signed to play for a non-senior football club. I added the information about his signing to his Post-retirement section but another user added the club to his senior career section in the infobox. This is prompting the question, should appearences/goals for non-senior clubs be included in statistics for players. I would say thay should not be included for two reasons;

The clubs themselves and the leagues to which they are affiliated have no articles and therefore do not have much importance in the grand scheme of football.
These statistics may prove problematic to obtain as even local newspapers do not always carry this information.

Your thoughts please.

Alistair 84 (talk) 11:29, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with the club being listed in the infobox. Yes, apps and goals almost certainly won't be available, but then this info generally isn't available even for clubs in leagues like the Isthmian League, and nobody would suggest that we leave those clubs out of a player's infobox....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:37, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

This is true, but teams in leagues down as far as county level still have "senior" status. Below this they are more often than not only given "Intermediate" status, along with the reserve teams of many non-league clubs. In my example for Micky Hazard, Dunton Green are only an intermediate club, and as such should perhaps not be included in his senior stats. Alistair 84 (talk) 12:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

My understanding is that "senior" in the infobox is being used in the sense of "as an adult" rather than what county FAs in England define as "senior status" (of which I believe there is no consistent definition anyway). Obviously if a former pro turned out for the Dog & Duck in a Sunday league that wouldn't go in, but I'd say teams in Saturday leagues are alright. That's just my opinion, mind...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't see the problem with having non-senior club listed in an infobox, even for former professional players. Something similar also happened in Italy with Stefano Tacconi (who returned out of retirement to join a Seconda Categoria club at the age of 51) and Massimiliano Cappioli (who joined an Eccellenza club after five years of retirement). --Angelo (talk) 12:20, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

With the general concensus being that amature clubs should remain in players' infoboxes I now agree that this should remain as it is. Just as long as it is kept consistent across all players in the future (where known). Alistair 84 (talk) 12:37, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure Angelo and I constitute general consensus, other editors may yet disagree........ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:41, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Yup, I agree with Chris & Angelo. Giant Snowman 12:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

If you can find reliable stats, I think they should be included.The Hack 12:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Any admins about?????

Someone's just done a cut-n-paste move of James O'Shea to Jay O'Shea. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:29, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I reverted it back to the previous state. The move might be controversial, if you can find a consensus in the article talkpage then I'll move it. --Angelo (talk) 13:32, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'd never heard of the lad till he was signing for Birmingham. Recent Irish press reports call him Jay rather than James; English ones call him James, but then the English press probably hadn't heard of him either :) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:52, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Charity Shield Articles pre-1993

I was looking to start creating the back catalogue of Charity Shield articles for pre-1993, as they are sporadic at best. However, I am struggling to find links with teams/information for many of the games. I'm more than happy to do the work for the article creation, but any help with game information would be very much appreciated. Thanks, --Eastlygod (talk) 14:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Fred Ford (football manager)

Anyone see any compelling reason why this shouldn't be moved to Fred Ford (footballer)...........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:41, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Nope - go for it! Giant Snowman 15:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

When other organisations copy Wikipedia articles

for their own website, aren't they supposed to acknowledge their source in some way? I was vaguely thinking about improving the playing career section of the Colin Todd article, which has about one line of prose for every 100 matches played, and happened to look at his profile with Darlington F.C., his current employers. Which is word-for-word the same as the prose of the Wiki page. So I thought, oops, somebody's been copyvio'ing, and looked back in the page history to find that the current version hasn't really changed since before Todd joined Darlington. Nice to have our work appreciated, but..... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:24, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks or all the pertinent information. List them on the alphabetical list of sites and if you feel strongly about it e-mail them to say that they are in breach of copyright and are being a very naughty boy!. Hope this helps, Regards, Woody (talk) 17:52, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I've listed it on the alpha list, but haven't gone as far as emailing them. Thanks for the info, Struway2 (talk) 20:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Be sure to tag the page itself with {{reversecopyvio}} so that nobody goes and speedies it after coming to the same conclusion you did. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 20:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I haven't seen that template before, thanks for pointing it out. Woody (talk) 20:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I take it as a compliment.--EchetusXe 23:24, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Article creation

Louis Almond made his debut for Blackpool this evening in the league Cup. He does not have an article as he is still a second year scholar with the youth team and apart from pre-season has not been in the first team. With making his debut he has obviously now been added to the first team squad. So, should an article be created for him yet or not with him making his professional debut? ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 21:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's a fully pro competition so he passes WP:ATHLETE, so he can have an article. Big Dom 21:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I just wasn't sure.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 21:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem Big Dom 22:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Hughie Gallacher

The tragic decline of this footballer is always going to be a difficult topic for us to handle, but the article itself suffers from being continually edited by family and friends. We really need more eyes on it if possible, especially this part. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 20:16, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Put that he was taken in a relative rather than taken into care.--EchetusXe 23:01, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

The season article task force...

...looks for new members. The task force is aimed at creating a unified layout for league, cup and club season articles and maintaining those articles on a regular basis. If you are interested in becoming a contributor, be bold and and sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Season article task force! --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 21:47, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

On a related note, I created a basic infobox template a while back for use in national season articles (such as 2009–10 in English football): Template:Infobox football country season. I'd appreciate suggestions on additional parameters for the template (before it starts getting rolled out in a big way) at the Template's talk page. --Jameboy (talk) 01:01, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Alan Martin

We have two articles for the same player, Alan Martin (footballer born 1989) and Alan Martin (Scottish footballer). I think that the second one should be merged to "footballer born 1989" as this is the standard method of disambiguation, rather than nationality. Big Dom 10:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I have redirected (Scottish) to {1989), and copied over any new info. Giant Snowman 10:59, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Just found a similar problem. There is a page called Alan Martin (footballer born 1923) but it is only a redirect to the article Alan Martin (English footballer) but because the "1923" already exists, I can't move the "English footballer" there. Big Dom 20:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

An admin will be able to move it over a redirect for you. Giant Snowman 09:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

There's a lot of page history on all four of those pages mentioned, I don't know if there's been any cut-n-paste moves gone on in there at any point, but it might be an idea if an admin had a look at all of them. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:29, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

All looks in order. Oldelpaso (talk) 09:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, just me getting confused again, then... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:44, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

An easy subject to get confused about. We could have done a history merge but there would have been a couple of truncated edits: the afd closing being one. As it is I have placed {{R from merge}} on the redirect and {{copied}} on the page it was copied to. Everything should be fine now. Regards, Woody (talk) 10:18, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Wilamtres grande, Hurstville ZFC

Before I prod these, anyone more familiar with football in Australia fancy checking in and seeing if they can be salvaged? The bio in particular is dodgy, especially as it came into existence (with the wrong capitalisation, edited solely by a new user with the same name as the article) about four hours before it was linked to from Pie & Bovril... Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 23:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

The player, I would say no chance. The club are competing in the 3rd tier of the NSW State League (which itself comes below the national league) and have spent a couple of seasons in the second tier - the second tier stuff generally gets local newspaper coverage but I'm not sure how easily it could be found. Camw (talk) 00:34, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

rumour generator... almost taggable as "unremarkable person". Obvious autobio of non notable. Where is that PROD already? --ClubOranje^T 01:22, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

- PROD on the player quickly removed without edit summary by an IP, so to AfD it goes...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Edit war

Help me out with this edit war I'm involved in - {{Austria Squad 2008 UEFA Euro}} should be red, right? Because red was their home kit for that tournament, and is for the forseeable future. White/black are their old colours, so should be reflected on older templates, but the user seems to think the 2008 should be white as well, because it's traditional. His argument is that if this is the case, then Brazil's pre-1954 templates should be white, because they didn't wear yellow until then. I didn't know this, but I agree. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 08:24, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I think the colour of the templates should be the generally regarded 'home kit' of the team at the time, but that if perhaps a 'one-off' kit was used for a single tournament it doesn't necessarily mean that the template colour should be changed. Eldumpo (talk) 08:30, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

See colour of the bikeshed. It doesn't matter to the reader, so there's no need to fuss over it. Knepflerle (talk) 09:53, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Colour and identity are not trivial in sport, though. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 10:20, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Whether we colour a template white or red when both colour are associated with the topic is a trivial matter - sport article or otherwise. Knepflerle (talk) 10:47, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I think historical squad & manager templates should reflect the sporting colours of a country, as opposed to n individual national kit, for uniformity and aesthetics. Giant Snowman 10:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Santacroce Black African

I have a disagreement with another user. Fabiano Santacroce is a black player and I have sources to prove it. I don't know whether his father is Black Italian or if his mother is Afro Brazilian but surely it is enough evidence to categorise him as such. His skin colour has been notable and even his infobox shows clearly that he's black. Lippi himself implies that calling him up helps combat racism. Spiderone (talk) 08:34, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

His "descent" doesn't belong in the lead. Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies)#Opening paragraph, "Ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability.". The player is notable for being a footballer, not for being descended from black Africans. If it was me, I'd move his parentage and upbringing to a Personal life section, the lead's supposed to be a summary of the article. As for categories, per WP:BLPCAT, "Each article must state the facts that result in the use of the category tag, and these facts must be sourced." I didn't see a source for the player being of Black African descent, only for his being black, which isn't the same thing. His skin colour is reliably sourced and is mentioned where it's relevant in the international career section together with Lippi's quote, which is nice. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:22, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Origin of Hasney Aljofree

I am 100% certain this is not an English name. It is either African or Polish. If someone knows what origin this surname has, then please tell me because I've already added the origins of other bizarre surnames of English footballers such as Tom Taiwo and Paul Konchesky although I failed with Nicky Deverdics who is Hungarian (hence his middle name). Spiderone (talk) 15:15, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Definitey not Polish, it hasn't got enough Z's in it -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:19, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Searching the census doesn't reveal much [22] Spiderone (talk) 15:21, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Looking through Facebook the only Aljofree's I can find are related to him! So good luck with that.--EchetusXe 15:29, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

He did once wear Superman underwear[23], so Krypton is not out of the question...The Hack 15:31, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Haha, genius. I've always been curious about this myself. Why not message one of the Aljofree's on Facebook, and see if they can enlighten you...? Giant Snowman 15:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Misspelling it "Aljofri" comes up with a bunch of Malaysians. I'm guessing that's his origin but I won't add it since I don't have a source. Never mind. [24]

FIFA and artificial surfaces

An editor who came across like a proponent for FieldTurf (maybe COI or could be just a sports fan) was making some contributions and created two new articles regarding the FIFA ratings of artificial surfaces (FIFA Recommended 2-Star and FIFA Recommended 1-Star). My initial reaction was to propose a merger into the main artificial turf page but I wanted to see if there were any thoughts on expanding the pages, putting this info in other pages I didn't think of, creating a single article for them, or anything else.Cptnono (talk) 15:39, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, go ahead and merge the info. Giant Snowman 15:45, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Homophobia in association football

I have started a new article on Homophobia in association football, as I feel the subject deserves world-wide coverage - something which Homosexuality in English football can't cover. However, unsurprisingly, the article in its current state focuses on Justin Fashanu. So, does anyone know of any non-British gay footballers, or instances of homophobia in non-British football? I remember reading about a gay professional from Norway (or maybe Denmark) who came out, but I can't remember his name...Giant Snowman 13:24, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't really want to sound annoying, but I think an article on such topic is just a piece of original research and, therefore, against Wikipedia guidelines. --Angelo (talk) 13:33, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

How is it original research? - I have included a number of references from reliable sources! Giant Snowman 13:40, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

The title suggests a topic that easily falls into original research. What you are mentioning with sources is only a number of homophobia cases, that could fit well with a different title like "List of homophobia cases in association football". But a subject like "Homophobia in association football" is much broader, and require more thorough discussion that could easily become original research. I hope you can get my point. --Angelo (talk) 13:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I kinda see your point. Would you suggest a different title then? Giant Snowman 14:01, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

That might be a solution, but only if coupled with a set of constraints to decide which cases are actually notable to be mentioned, otherwise it might easily become a potentially unmanageable list; keep in mind that in several countries, including Italy, defining someone a "homosexual" is a widely diffuse form of abuse, regardless - and despite - of its meaning. --Angelo (talk) 14:08, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

How about I move it to Homosexuality in association football? - perhaps having 'homophobia' in the title immediately suggests negative connotations. Giant Snowman 14:09, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion, it just depends on the kind of article you want to make. If the article aims to be a list of homophobia cases in the game, then "List of homophobia cases in association football"; if you want to make a list of confirmed homosexuality cases in football (which might however be inappropriate per WP:NOTDIR #1: "Lists or repositories of loosely associated topics"), then replace the "homophobia" word with "homosexuality". If you want to do something different, another name can be discussed (and, in that case, using the homophobia word might easily acquire a negative and WP:POV connotation). --Angelo (talk) 14:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I want it to be more than just a "list of footballers, straight or gay, who have been the victims of homophobia" or anmything like that. I want it to delve into deeper issues than that. So I've moved the page because, as you say, "homophobia" has negative associations, and there are many positives in gay football, such as the Gay Football Supporters Network and their associated football league for gay players & teams. Giant Snowman 14:31, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I would imagine a good source might be a journal like Soccer in Society.The Hack 13:44, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Do you have access to any copies? Giant Snowman 13:45, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

You could do a scholar search on google which will usually get you an extract and description of the article. If you give me the edition number I can track down a full copy...The Hack 13:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

This may have something, according to Google Scholar. Giant Snowman 14:02, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I remember reading about a player in South America who was widely "accused" of being gay and wound up attacking a rival team's ball boy who was shouting such abuse at him. Unfortunately that's as much detail as I can remember right now......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:47, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I know that Thiago Neves Augusto was sent off for attacking a ball boy, is this who you're thinking of? A quick google search doesn't have any mention of "gay" insults being the cause...Giant Snowman 13:51, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Graeme Le Saux was frequently abused despite being "straight". Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 13:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Might be some stuff worth including here -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:59, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks guys, as ever. Giant Snowman 14:01, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

In his autobiography, Gazza claims never to have met a player he knew, or even suspected, to be gay, nor to have encountered any homophobia in dressing rooms. I dunno if this is relevant at all? Full citation could be provided if required...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

A quote & reference would be ace Chris! Giant Snowman 14:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem, I'll get on it when I'm next on WP at home as opposed to in the office...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:46, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

You might want to look at Richarlyson Barbosa Felisbino and Eudy Simelane...The Hack 14:59, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

That's great, cheers! Giant Snowman 15:12, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I re-wrote Homosexuality in English football. It could still do with being added to, but it it has all the famous examples in there. On the Sol Campbell issue, wasn't his brother chucked out of University for beating up a guy who called Sol gay or something?

I think I will pop over to the LGBT Wikiproject and see if they are willing to contribute.--EchetusXe 15:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I've already logged a request on the LGPT WikiProject's talk page. But good work on the England page! Let's try and get a wider view on the issue though... Giant Snowman 15:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Your Norwegian guy btw.--EchetusXe 15:21, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Yep, he's the guy I was thinking of, cheers. Giant Snowman 15:29, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

But there, you've now got an article about Hompohobia in English football, not Homosexuality in English football. Although it's not a great article, something about [[[Stonewall F.C.]] and various quasi-reprensentative teams would add some balance. - fchd (talk) 17:18, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I've added info about Stonewall FC, and the Gay Football Supporters Network. Giant Snowman 17:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

In France, Olivier Rouyer is the best known gay footballer. He came out last year, ways after his playing career. See this link from the largest gay magazine in France.--Latouffedisco (talk) 16:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Giant Snowman 16:48, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

And Jorge José Emiliano dos Santos although iirc he always denied it. Nanonic (talk) 22:20, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

And Facing the Bogey: Women, Football and Sexuality, Women’s Experiences of Sexuality Within Football Contexts (all from the LA84 archives) and Lily Parr for the female point of view. Nanonic (talk) 22:46, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

And Boys being boys in the dressing-room helps to keep homosexuality in football's closet, Gay Pride and football prejudice, Gays, football's last taboo, Homosexuality in football is real and a whole lot more via a google search for homosexuality in football. Nanonic (talk) 22:52, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

"...it’s a common norm that if you want to introduce anything new in the market, youths are the best age group to start with." Didn't realize homosexuality was a "new" thing!--EchetusXe 00:45, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Not sure if this is of any use for the Homosexuality in English football article or not, but an example of how it seems that homophobic chanting by fans at games has not been seen as important an issue as racist chanting, was at the Blackpool vs Preston North End match in 2008. Both sets of fans ended up chanting abuse at each other, taunting each other as fans do all over. However, this was some Blackpool fans chanting "I'd rather have a tower than mosque" (aimed at Preston having a sizeable Asian minority) while some Preston fans chanted, "You're just a town full of queers" (aimed at Blackpool having a sizeable gay village). And whilst the racist chanting was widely condemned with two arrests made on suspicion of racist behaviour and with Blackpool chairman Karl Oyston saying that anyone found chanting racist abuse would be prosecuted and banned from Bloomfield Road, there was little criticism made of the homophobic chanting, as if it was somehow perceived not to be as important. There are reliable sources for this. And of course some saw it as "just banter".♦Tangerines♦·Talk 00:39, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Add to the 'by the fans' thing next with the Brighton-bashing.--EchetusXe 00:45, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Wow. Just realized I typed complete nonsense there. Still, you know what I mean :)--EchetusXe 00:46, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Ha ha, aye, I know what you meant! That's an area in which I am an expert, typing nonsense...♦Tangerines♦·Talk 00:53, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I now remember Eduardo Berrizo quote. Hilarious when you've seen him playing for Marseille...--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

"stares at one's bum with desire, and even gets emotional when you are naked" is an amazing quote. What was he like at Marseille? Running away from his teammates when he scored a goal in genuine fear?--EchetusXe 11:49, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

You might want to take a look at Jermaine Jones. He apparently made a homophobic remark when asked if there were any gay footballers. Spiderone (talk) 12:17, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

If only he had scored a goal...This guy was desastruous, and this quote is probably an excuse for his playing level...--Latouffedisco (talk) 18:09, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Capello manager statistics

Hi, I was going to make some changes to the Fabio Capello's manager statistics and use {{WDLtot}} at the bottom because the numbers didn't sum up correctly. But looking into this I found the current statistics differ from those on Soccerbase and I was wondering if anyone might know any reasons for this before I go and completely redo these stats. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 21:38, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Helpful reasons, or just reasons? Roma, because Soccerbase are only counting from 2001 rather than 1999. In general, because of the standard Soccerbase disclaimer "Only games with a date in the database counted here". They only count the competitions that they include, and what they include isn't made transparent, or even consistent. And because it contains errors. And because the stats table on Fabio Capello probably contains errors, and doesn't say what competitions it includes, and doesn't refer to any reliable published sources, like it should do. hope this helps :-) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 07:59, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Some afds at risk of no consensus

These Afds are at risk: Panushanth, Muaad, Ali Abdul and Ahmed Spiderone (talk) 12:28, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Fret not - they have been relisted, which allows for another week of discussion. Giant Snowman 12:59, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Benfica website hacked or malfunctioning, leading to hoax transfer "news"

While investigating the veracity of an edit to Martin Petrov, I found out that Benfica's website is currently allowing fake transfer news to be created, so treat anything claiming a transfer to Benfica as suspicious, particularly if there's a link like this involved. Oldelpaso (talk) 14:49, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

This one fooled a few, while it lasted :-) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 14:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Delving a bit deeper with Babelfish, it seems that the intended purpose for the page is a marketing campaign where they send links to fans with their name on it. Unfortunately from our point of view it is also a hoaxer's dream. Probably won't stop me emailing a few to mates as wind-ups though... Oldelpaso (talk) 14:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Co-Ownership in Italian football article?

I was wondering if anyone had any/enough sources on this subject to help create an article, or at least a section in the Transfer (football) article? It's an interesting transfer concept, yet I cannot find a single source explaining the history/rules of it. Any help would be appreciated. --Eastlygod (talk) 15:19, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I had tried to write an article on this subject a couple of years ago, but I got stuck when it came to finding sources. All I could find was references to the co-ownership system as used in the Football Manager games. – Pee Jay 15:22, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Here's an article by Gabriele Marcotti referring to Adriano's co-ownership by Parma and Inter and the concept in general.

So Inter enter into a co-ownership agreement with Parma in exchange for £4 million. Under the terms, he moves to the Serie A rivals, who pay his wages. Should there be a dispute over where he plays, it would be settled by sealed bids. It’s a bit like a trial separation, but one in which, if you’re willing to pay enough money, you can get your spouse back (cynics might say it’s a bit like real life).

Adriano flourishes at Parma, scoring 23 goals in 34 Serie A starts over the next 18 months. He becomes the hottest commodity in European football. Inter realise that they have made a terrible mistake and come crawling back. But he doesn’t come cheap. Because of the co-ownership agreement, they have to shell out £13.5 million to buy Parma’s half. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 16:30, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Corresponding term to "caps" for referees?

This is probably more a vocabulary and possibly even a dumb question, but... National team players are credited with caps. What is the corresponding term for referees in international matches? --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 00:27, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Appointments?The Hack 05:18, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

There isn't really a corresponding term, since referees aren't usually remembered for the number of matches they have refereed. – Pee Jay 08:09, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd concur with that. The only sport where I can recall the number of appearances by a referee (or equivalent) being marked is cricket, where it was recently noted that Rudi Koertzen was umpiring in his 100th test match. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 12:06, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

A big no no

{{MLS Cup 2000}}, {{MLS Cup 2001}}, {{MLS Cup 2008}} - can someone take these to TfD please, as I'm at work and shouldn't really be editing...there's probably some for the other years as wellm but these are the ones that have been added to articles on my watchlist. Giant Snowman 08:31, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

International non-internationals

What I mean by that is players who have been called up to a national team but haven't actually played; are said players notable? I want to PROD Aaron Mooy but thought I'd check first...Giant Snowman 11:29, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Just AfD it and let the people decide.......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:32, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

He has appearances for the non-senior Australia sides and is currently signed to a club in the English top flight. I would say that this player is notable.

If in the future there are players in the world who are not notable for doing anything other that being called up to a full international squad then they perhaps do not deserve a full article of their own, but perhaps merit a mention somewhere. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 12:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Youth caps do not confer notability (as infinity previous AfDs have shown), and in order to meet WP:ATHLETE guidelines, he has to actually play for his club side - something he is yet to do. AfD it is then...Giant Snowman 12:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

The AfD can be found here. Cheers, Giant Snowman 12:26, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

What's with the height problem?

I just had to fix this problem on Messi and Gourcuff but why is this happening all the time? It only affects {{convert|1.69|m|abbr=on}} and not {{height|m=1.69}}. What is the point in having the height in the first format anyway? Spiderone (talk) 12:10, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I never use the first format, there was a similar problem at Nick Blackman which I have sorted. Giant Snowman 13:53, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

How to fix?

How best to fix the improperly cased page Neil mann? I would simply move it to Neil Mann, but that already exists. Cheers, BEVE (talk) 13:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I have moved it to Neil Mann (footballer) for you, and will add a hatnote at the Aussie rules player. Giant Snowman 13:54, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Wasn't sure if that was the way to go, since they are both footballers, kind of. BEVE (talk) 14:03, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I've added a hatnote at the English one as well, as Neil Mann (footballer) is a reasonable search term for an Aussie rules player. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 14:33, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Good thinking! Giant Snowman 14:34, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Neil Mann (footballer) shouldn't have a hatnote back to Neil Mann because he's already disambiguated with the (footballer) in the article name. --Jimbo^[online] 15:01, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

He should in this case, because Neil Mann (footballer) is an ambiguous title and a reasonable search term for an Aussie rules player. Per WP:DAB#Disambiguation links, Users searching for what turns out to be an ambiguous term may not reach the article they expected. Therefore any article with an ambiguous title should contain helpful links to alternative Wikipedia articles or disambiguation pages, placed at the top of the article using one of the templates shown below. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:08, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

But if a user is searching for Neil Mann the footballer, they'll come across the Aussie rules player first. Both Neil Mann's in this case seem as equal in notability so perhaps Neil Mann should be turned into a DAB page and the other Neil Mann moved to Neil Mann (Australian rules footballer). --Jimbo^[online] 15:13, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan. I'll let you do the moving/redirecting/DABing, unless you can't be fussed. Giant Snowman 15:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Done! --Jimbo^[online] 15:25, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Well done! One thing you may have forgotten is that when we move a page and then make the old name into a dab page, we have to fix the incoming links manually. Which is one reason why I'm keener on hatnotes than making dab pages :-) Like, there were quite a few pages which before the move, correctly linked to Neil Mann the Aussie, which needed to be changed to link to the new name. I think they're all done now, cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Derby County Kit Help

Hi wikipedians, would anyone be willing to change the home and away kits on the Derby County article? The ones currently shown are last seasons and I have no idea how to update. Here are the new kits. [25] Ignore the keepers kit in green on the right. Thanks. --Animaly2k2 (talk) 16:04, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

The new away kit is strikingly similar to Port Vale's new away kit. So I just copied that one. There was some small difference on the sleeves, which I accounted for.--EchetusXe 16:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I've amended both kits slightly, as per Historical Kits. Giant Snowman 16:45, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Jack Mandley

His grandson - also named John, bid me thanks for writing his article.

I was wondering if you gents could enlighten me on his adventures at Aston Villa and beyond? Any information you could provide would be most graciously received.--EchetusXe 00:24, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I've added his stats to the infobox - there is a very comprehensive Aston Villa player database at [26]. Cheers. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 05:15, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks. From regular football at one of the countries top clubs to a non-league outfit in just one season. Still in his mid 20s. A most unusual decline.--EchetusXe 09:59, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

The Cheshire League was the strongest league in its area back then and of course there was no Division Four back then, so it's probably equivalent to a player nowadays moving from the Premier League to League Two, which is admittedly still unusual. I'd also remove the POV-ish description of Altrincham as "lowly" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:19, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

With the maximum wage in force then, he might well have earned more by working for a living while playing semi-pro with Altrincham than by being in a big club's reserves or a medium-size club's first team. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Quick props to Daemonic Kangaroo. Good find.Cptnono (talk) 08:11, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Non-free images

This user has been adding many non-free images. What can I do about it other than just removing them (which I have done with some)? [27] Spiderone (talk) 15:30, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Files, section F9. Unambiguous copyright infringement seems to cover it. Tag with {{db-imgcopyvio}} and follow the instructions. I'll do File:Adem Ljaijic Serbia.jpg, and if it hasn't been deleted by the time you see it, you can copy the process. Or failing that, perhaps a passing admin might want to delete the lot, save us the bother of tagging them :-) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:29, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I have deleted them all. Thanks for the note. Rettetast (talk) 08:10, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Move request for Frauen DFB Pokal

I have added a move request for Frauen DFB Pokal to be moved to DFB-Pokal (women). Any input is welcome on the talk page. Madcynic (talk) 11:23, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Should these articles be using the German "DFB Pokal" when English-speakers would say something like "German Cup"? FWIW the DFB use "DFB Cup" on their English site.[28] The Hack 12:54, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

BBC Online announces free video clips of highlights for Football League matches

This sounds great --Dweller (talk) 14:31, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Sadly, while they might be free, they aren't actually free, which means we can't use them. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Still nothing wrong with using them as citation/linking too. Govvy (talk) 18:32, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Note that those can only be viewed with an United Kingdom IP address. Any other countries are unfortunally blocked (at least Germany is). --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 18:36, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

The articles are not blocked, just the videos on them are. But that might change for Europe in the future. Govvy (talk) 22:18, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Fans forums

I just wanted to get a general consensus amongst for the inclusion of fans forums in external links sections of football club pages? I always thought they shouldn't be there as per WP:ELNO 10 & 11. --Jimbo^[online] 23:10, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I leave it in because they tend to get quite shirty if they're not included.

I don't know but, when trying to register on 'One Vale Fan' a few months ago I was told I 'did not meet membership requirements'. Wondering why this was the only thing I can come up with was the little 'personal bio' I wrote that "I write all things Port Vale on Wikipedia!".--EchetusXe 00:49, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't include them, per WP:ELNO as suggested, and on grounds of equity and practicality: if you include one, what argument can you use against including all the rest... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 07:47, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Depending on the club, I would include them. They already exist on a number of articles. As long as their numbers are restricted in each article and have merits, they should be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MadDogRDFC (talk • contribs) 20:44, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Fan forums should be never included, they represent a huge and blatant failure of Wikipedia guidelines at WP:EL. I also share Struway2's point about the counter-effects of creating exceptions to such guideline. --Angelo (talk) 20:46, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Stating the are on other articles doesn't justify inclusion as per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. --Jimbo^[online] 21:18, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Problem at the moment is that WP:ELNO 10 & 11 are up for debate at the moment and a suggestion that sites with merit may be allowed through. If we limited it to the top two fans forums for a club, there might be a compromise. To qualify they must prove to have merits and be the most used. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MadDogRDFC (talk • contribs) 21:08, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

How can you monitor what the the top two forums of any club are? --Jimbo^[online] 21:17, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

You can find some good information on forums as a fan but Wikipedia isn't here to take the place of Google. Adding forums expands the external links list and there are countless points of argument as to which ones could be included (site a has x amount of registered users, site b has y amount of traffic, site c adds news, site d presents news this way while site e presents it that way, site f looks best, etc)Cptnono (talk) 21:30, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

By requiring them to submit their traffic levels as a requirement to be added. If it proved it is higher than one of the others or both, than the lower one gets removed. In essence it keeps it updated. At first, unless we get a lot of applicants, initially a first come, first served basis could exist if a club has less than two. It could then fall under WP:ELMAYBE, points 3 & 4. The problem at the moment is we have a number of clubs, mainly big clubs with links to their messageboards, and others that don't which means that we need this clear across the board.--MadDogRDFC (talk) 21:25, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Some Wikipedia articles are better than other since editors simply care enough to make adjustments. Editors should already be removing them as the guidelines read but fail to do so. People can use Google themselves to see what sites receive traffic. The thought of requiring editors to email sites or have them run the data for their preferred site and not another causes to many concerns.Cptnono (talk) 21:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

My argument would be with traffic. If its been visited regularly compared to others, it warrants inclusion. We may need to take into account the content, but the best sites should get the highest volume of traffic.--MadDogRDFC (talk) 21:38, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Are we talking unique users or general traffic (Not always the same)? What if the one with the highest amount of traffic requires registration or installs adware? Can it be argued that it is primarily a social networking platform (especially if there is not news/properly vetted news)? To me it is a simple case of not providing needed information and the concerns arising from inclusion cause even more concerns.Cptnono (talk) 21:50, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

You misunderstand my point. The editors do not e-mail, it is a requirement of the editor who wishes to add a fan's forum link to an article that has already got to prove that its level of travel is higher, from an an independendent source. On each discussion page, we keep the level publish for the current two as they were upon adding until someone comes up with a better one. If it checks out as higher traffic, then we add it. --MadDogRDFC (talk) 21:42, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Enforcing guidelines is already hard enough. Asking editors to keep a constant eye out on traffic, regardless of how it is found, seems too much.Cptnono (talk) 21:52, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Not if done properly. I've just removed a large number of Manchester United fan's forums links. Editors need to buck up a bit given that is a major article. To keep an eye on traffic every so often is not too much to ask. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MadDogRDFC (talk • contribs) 21:58, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Given that there are 1,000+ clubs in England alone I think it is a pretty big ask. --Jimbo^[online] 22:04, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Depends. On the Premier Leagues, it may be, but with smaller sides down the pyramid, it shouldn't be problem since most will have just the one forum. I still think it can work if done properly. As I said, someone hasn't being doing their job on the Manchester United wikipedia article and that was spammed with fan's forums on it. This isn't a big ask if done properly. We could semi protect the club pages to help the matter as well. Either way, editors need to start doing their job's properly. --MadDogRDFC (talk) 22:21, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Any more thoughts on this? It looks to me to be a violation of WP:ELNO (both #10 and #11) and WP:NOT (sections WP:NOTBLOG and WP:NOTLINK). Adding "one" fan site per NOTLINK causes too many concerns that limit what this project is about and our ability to monitor, identify, and correct potential problems (I don't want a 2 day discussion on why Newcastle Mad is more or less relevant to this project than Tynetalk). I would love to find some consensus on this so any changes that occur in the future can point to a footy related preference for related content.Cptnono (talk) 10:25, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Per Angelo, forums and fansites should not be present in external links full stop. This is an encyclopedia, not a links directory. Oldelpaso (talk) 10:39, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

If consensus is to not utilize these sources I would like to propose adding this to the project's MOS.Cptnono (talk) 04:39, 17 August 2009 (UTC)