Talk:2017 FIFA Confederations Cup

African qualification

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

New discussion was created years later. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 18:36, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

---

Is it confirmed that the 2017 African Cup of Nations will decide who goes go to Confederation Cup? There IS a 2015 African Cup of Nations... If so, where is the reference? Nitroxium (talk) 16:44, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Non-free file problems with File:SochiOlympicsStadium.jpg

File:SochiOlympicsStadium.jpg is non-free and has been identified as possibly not being in compliance with the non-free content policy. For specific information on the problems with the file and how they can be fixed, please check the message at File:SochiOlympicsStadium.jpg. For further questions and comments, please use the non-free content review page. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 08:44, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

European qualification

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

What happens if Germany and Russia meet in the Final of Euro 2016? There is no match for the third place at European championships. 91.57.36.147 (talk) 20:25, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

The article currently says: "If Russia or Germany win the UEFA Euro 2016, the runner-up will also qualify for the 2017 FIFA Confederations Cup as Russia and Germany already qualified. If both Russia and Germany contest the UEFA Euro 2016 Final, the better placed beaten semi-final team will qualify" - but is there an official reference for that statement? Can FIFA not consider giving the berth to Argentina, the 2014 World cup runners-up, to avoid introducing a third-placed team and a third UEFA representative to the tournament? I'm tagging the statement with a {{cn}}. --Theurgist (talk) 17:20, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Probably Argentina then, we'll see. -Koppapa (talk) 11:06, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Why would that probably be Argentina? It is the European ticket that is to be given and Argentina is not in Europa. I don't think UEFA would agree if FIFA takes that spot away from them. I don't think there are already rules for it, but i guess UEFA either will make up a 3rd place play-off (as they did with other tournaments where a 3rd place needed to be assigned) or FIFA just invites the best non-qualified UEFA-member in the ranking (currently Belgium) or the best non-qualified UEFA-member on the last World Cup (Netherlands) 213.124.185.10 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:24, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

2016 Copa America

Do we have a citation for the winners of 2015 going in rather than the winners of the centenary edition in 2016? 81.99.247.253 (talk) 18:24, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

The winners of the Copa América Centenario did not qualify. This doesn't matter anyway as Chile, the winners of both 2015 and 2016 editions, already qualified. Jd02022092 (talk) 23:31, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

European list of teams

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Either it is for the Confederations Cup, so Gibraltar cannot definitely not qualify, or it is Euro 2016 so they (in theory) could qualify so they should be listed as they are not yet eliminated. Which is it? Red Jay (talk) 08:25, 13 July 2015 (UTC)@

This list is for the Confederations Cup: no Russia (host), no Germany (World Cup winner), no Gibraltar (not FIFA's member), no Serbia (eliminated). GAV80 (talk) 08:43, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the reason the note that they can't qualify for the Confederation Cup is still valid is because they can still qualify for Euro 2016. The lists on this page are the remaining teams that could qualify to represent their confederation. GAV80 listed the other teams that are not on the list and why. It is not a comprehensive list for Euro 2016, that is at the Euro 2016 article. It is just like when Mexico is invited to play in Copa America, they are still a valid participant in the tournament but can't represent CONMEBOL in this cup so you don't list them but put a note stating why even though they are still alive in the competition they are not on the list. I hope that makes sense. Chris1834 Talk 12:18, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Euro 2016 spot

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Topic became irrelevant during UEFA Euro 2016, when Russia was eliminated in the group stage. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 18:36, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

---

What is the source for the following edit..... If Russia or Germany win Euro 2016, the best-placed FIFA member not yet qualified will take the spot

There is no reference to this on FIFA.com.

Also, what is meant by 'the best-placed FIFA member'? Is this a reference to FIFA Rankings?

Umarghdunno (talk) 01:38, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Best place FIFA member means the FIFA member who achieves the best finish in Euro 2016. Eg. if Russia won and defeated England in the Final England would go. FIFA member is in there because countries who aren't FIFA members, such as Gibraltar, can enter the European Chmapionships. If Russia beat Gibraltar in the final Gibraltar couldn't go because it's a FIFA competition, one of the Semi Finalists would. I don't know how they'd determine which one though. 92.239.86.107 (talk) 17:48, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

And there is no reference a all that it works that way!--Je suis blocked by Darkwind 13:11, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, it's best to remove until things clear out. -Koppapa (talk) 14:05, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Gibraltar is FIFA member in the mean time. And what happens if the EURO 2016 final is Russia vs Germany? Tvx1 19:26, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Irrelevant question now, since Russia has been knocked out. – PeeJay 21:10, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

There was no Cameroon in the draw

In the draw, the team from Pot 2 that was drawn in position B1 was presented as "Champion of Africa", because its identity was not known at the time and would be determined later. It would therefore be inaccurate and misleading to directly list "Cameroon" in the Draw section; the team would be best described as "Champion of Africa" or something similar, with a footnote explaining that it was eventually determined as Cameroon. Please discuss before reverting yet again.

Besides, Cameroon's position in the FIFA Rankings as of 24 November was 65th, not 64th as it says in the version you're restoring. --Theurgist (talk) 10:40, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

I feel you are being unduly nit-picky, and that it is not inaccurate and misleading to directly list Cameroon in the Draw section. There is sufficient referenced text in the prose in this section that accurately describes the situation that unfolded. Matilda Maniac (talk) 10:51, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Broadcasters

What is going on with random IPs and users randomly adding new broadcasters to the table? Did these networks ACTUALLY confirm their intent to broadcast this tournament?

@Qed237: @GAV80: and @SuperJew: I know you're part of a group that edits football-related articles. Your stance on these edits? Jd02022092 (talk) 02:41, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

My take is that there is a reference column on that table for a reason. If broadcasters who are not in the FIFA media rights list are added without a source, they should be removed. Equineducklings (talk) 03:21, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Equineducklings - the info should be referenced. Personally when people add unreferenced things I try myself to search the internet to see if it's referencable and if so add the reference, though I also understand automatic reversion of addition of unreferenced content. --SuperJew (talk) 08:43, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit Request #1 on 17 June 2017

the six holders of the FIFA wrong:confederation right:CONTINENTAL championships Afshin.loni (talk) 09:15, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. In English, the terms "continental championships" and "confederation championships" seem used about as frequently as each other and synonymous. The championships are awarded by the continental confederations, making this also approximately synonymous. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:11, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit Request #2 on 17 June 2017

In the broadcasting rights section...

I have one to add: TDM ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TDM_(Macau) ) is the broadcaster that got the rights to Macau, as you can see in this list: http://www.onlinefreefootball.com/2017/06/watch-russia-vs-new-zealand-fifa.html In fact, I'm in Macau watching the match Russia-New Zealand, in that network in this exact moment... Rodrigodematos (talk) 15:33, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done Jd02022092 (talk) 00:36, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

 Note: Marking as answered. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:11, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Host qualification

Qualification for Russia is listed as "2018 FIFA World Cup hosts". That is actually not correct. It should just say "Host", since they qualified as hosts of this tournament itself. Compare: Qatar will not participate in 2021 FIFA Confederations Cup, unless, of course, they qualify as winner of 2019 AFC Asian Cup, or 2018 FIFA World Cup, which seems unlikely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.230.35.228 (talk) 19:52, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

The only reason we prefer to keep Russia listed in the manner you described is for consistency reasons; Germany, South Africa, and Brazil were listed similarly for the 2005, 2009, and 2013 cups respectively. Qatar was simply stripped of hosting rights for the 2021 Confederations Cup as the weather in the country would not be suitable for a competition in the summer. A similar reason forced the 2022 FIFA World Cup to the end of that year instead of in June/July as it's normally held. Jd02022092 (talk) 20:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

That is the point. Qatar was not stripped of their qualification as a separate issue, but simply don't qualify as hosts. The consistency you are referring to, is flawed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.199.137.82 (talk) 07:51, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

I will need to ask for assistance or backup from @GAV80, PeeJay2K3, S.A. Julio, and Qed237 in the matter. I still maintain the fact that the Confederations Cup hosting rights are awarded to the following year's World Cup hosts, and that Qatar is an exception per the weather pattern in that region. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) 18:31, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

I don't know if there's anything official that says the hosting rights for the Confederations Cup are automatically awarded to the hosts of the following World Cup, but regardless, I think we need to divorce the two ideas in the table listing the qualified teams. It should be sufficient to say Russia qualified for this tournament as hosts of this tournament, and leave the 2018 World Cup out of the equation. Any chance anyone could go back and change all the other Confederations Cup articles to match? – PeeJay 18:38, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) 18:45, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorting players

Re: this edit, was there ever a discussion about how players should be sorted in any list? I've been used to sorting players by the nation they represented, then alphabetical order. Jd02022092 (talk) 23:53, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

The best decision, imho. We use the same rule in Russian Wikipedia (according indeed to Russian alphabet). --Brateevsky ^{(talk to me)} 17:18, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Yep, I think sorting by country then alphabetically works the best. That way you have all the scorers from one country together, which is useful for statistical analysis. – PeeJay 17:37, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

I'd like to revisit this issue, and ask @Mediocre Legacy to explain his side of the issue. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) 18:28, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

I've recently seen the alphabetical format in a lot of articles, and I feel it's just an easier way to identify the top scorers by name, with their nation being a secondary concern. Mediocre Legacy (talk) 14:36, 24 June 2017 (EST)

Mediocre Legacy is correct. I spotted the same order in 1962 FIFA World Cup and 2010 FIFA World Cup among other European and South American competition articles as he mentioned on his talk page. My apologies for thinking these edits were disruptive or tests. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) 00:07, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Assists?

I'd like to question the inclusion of assists in this article. I don't see 2013 FIFA Confederations Cup listing assists outside the statistics page, so why include them here? jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) 20:31, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

@S.A. Julio: I notice you were the one that added the assists to the page before I took them off on the basis I described above. May I ask what made you include them in this article? jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) 03:03, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

34 goals after group stage, not 33

34 goals after group stage, not 33 in statistics theme

"There have been 33 goals scored in 12 matches, for an average of 2.75 goals per match." that's

why can 't i correct it? change it, if not me! it's 34 goals, hey??/!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramirez2387 (talk • contribs) 17:21, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done. Also, if it helps, whenever a semi-protected article needs editing and you can't edit it, you can refer to WP:SEMI for instructions on what to do. Typically, a user needs a certain amount of lifetime edits to be able to edit semi-protected articles. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) 02:30, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Massive FAN ID Ban

Guess, this should be added as well into FAN ID section. Many spectators willing to attend 2017 FIFA Confederations Cup games have had their FAN IDs cancelled just few hours prior to the first game of the tournament with tickets and the related accommodations already prepaid. Most of those didn’t have any criminal or administrative record related to the football violence and haven’t been listed in the blacklist of violent football fans either. Still no explanation from the organizers and the authorities has followed so far.

Here are the sources (Russian): https://www.championat.com/football/article-275656-futbolnyh-huliganov-ne-pustili-na-kubok-konfederacij-v-rossii.html and https://life.ru/t/%D1%81%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%82/1018332/diesiatki_rossiiskikh_fanatov_lishieny_prava_posieshchieniia_kubka_konfiedieratsii — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petr011 (talk • contribs) 07:16, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

 Note: Adding request template for user. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) 17:17, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Partly done: used different source to confirm that there is RS coverage of such complaints. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:54, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Seeking consensus: Overlink

It has come to my attention that the link to the article for Russia is consistently being removed from this article per WP:OVERLINK, and I'd like to reach a consensus on behalf of @Walter Görlitz on whether or not this change should be applied to all tournament articles. Thanks! jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) 02:26, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

That's not entirely true. I remove links to every country where needed. Check my edit history and look for OVERLINK. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:30, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

There is no need to reach a local consensus on an editing guideline as it's already been done. And for the record, check the world cup articles. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:38, 30 June 2017 (UTC)