Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Women's football task force/Archives/2021/November
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
New(ly) FPLs
Hey folks, starting from this season the Japanese WE League and the Spanish Primera División are WP:FPL, which means many players/coaches can now satisfy WP:NFOOTY. I've been gradually working my way through the red links, and it would be great to have folks joining (and not have to worry about arguing AfDs)! Also the Brazilian league has been FPL since 2019 so there's a lot of missing coverage there as well. Seany91 (talk) 08:47, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- Great work Seany91! :) Hopefully I'll have some time in the next few weeks to help out a bit too. To everyone creating new articles, try to make them more than a few sentences and give them some content :D Good onya legends! --SuperJew (talk) 08:53, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- Well yes Seany except the fact remains that WP:FPL is complete nonsense. We still run the risk of creating all these articles and then the handful of crackpots over there decide the leagues don't meet the criteria they dreamed up after all – as happened previously with the Damallsvenskan. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 01:21, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
- If there are sources which confirm the fully-professional status then they should be treated the same as the men's leagues - quick discussion on WT:FPL followed by inclusion to the FPL list. Daz, please stop with the personal attacks, and if you have sources saying Damallsvenskan is fully-pro then please provide them and it can be added. GiantSnowman 12:30, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
- I agree with you Daz that FPL is rather nonsense, and you know I've advocated for scrapping it (or have a separate notability standard for woso) in the past. But in the meantime these FPLs have been confirmed there and I don't see why we shouldn't also use it when it does benefit woso coverage on WP. Seany91 (talk) 14:09, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- Well yes Seany except the fact remains that WP:FPL is complete nonsense. We still run the risk of creating all these articles and then the handful of crackpots over there decide the leagues don't meet the criteria they dreamed up after all – as happened previously with the Damallsvenskan. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 01:21, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
October 2021 at Women in Red
Special event:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 01:34, 29 September 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
AfD of interest to the task force
Hi all, For any users who didn't see the notice on WIR or WP:FOOTY, bringing to attention here that there is an open AfD for 16 women footballers. Anyone who wants to go contribute their thoughts there or at WIR, please do so. --SuperJew (talk) 09:29, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- Something needs to be done about this, I don't know what can be done but something needs to be done. Over the years, I have tried to assume good faith about the implementation of this guideline, but can't deny that it has some negative impacts on closing content gap for even the most high level women players at club level. It's a shame that uncapped star players in the 2021 CAF Women's Champions League will be deleted even if they have decent coverage. The AFD looks like it will be a keep, rightfully so. HandsomeBoy (talk) 11:29, 8 October 2021 (UTC)