Talk:2026 FIFA World Cup

Who do 1st Play ?

As 1st Places can play up to 5 3rd Place teams and since 8 teams can qualify, therefore the chances 2 or all 5 teams in 3rd teams entering into last 32, that we have a chart/table to say this team will play that team; 3rd Places of A B C D F could all qualify, so who would play 1st E, C D and F also can face I alongside G and H, who do they face. Jamestwice. Jamestwice (talk) 15:08, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

@Jamestwice: That will be added to the article if/when FIFA decides to publish it. There are 495 possible combinations of third-place teams that will advance to the group round, so the table will likely be very long. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 15:52, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

What I mean is you could have winners going down and third place going across, with 1 2,1 3,2,1 4,3,2,1 5,4,3,2,1

Jamestwice Jamestwice (talk) 15:57, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Until FIFA publishes the third-place table, any tables created by editors would have to be removed as original research. Even then, we should probably just provide a link to the table since it would likely contain 495 entries (see the math below). — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 17:14, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Agree, wait until FIFA publish how this will work. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:54, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

And I imagine at some point, FIFA will publish a table for this, a bit like the one for the current Euro 2024: [1]. At that point, we could point out there is a table, but copying the detail of it would be way too much detail (the UEFA Euro one has 15 combinations, the FIFA World Cup one would have lots more as there's more groups). Joseph2302 (talk) 06:41, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

I know we have duplicated the table for 24-team tournaments in the past, e.g. the 2019 FIFA Women's World Cup, because there are only 15 possible combinations of advancing 3rd-place teams ($_{6}C{_{4}}={\tfrac {6!}{4!2!}}={\tfrac {6*5*4!}{2*1*4!}}=3*5=15$). I absolutely agree that duplicating the table for this tournament would be unwieldy at best since there are 495 possible combinations of advancing 3rd-place teams ($_{12}C{_{8}}={\tfrac {12!}{8!4!}}={\tfrac {12*11*10*9*8!}{4*3*2*1*8!}}=11*5*9=495$) and that a reference to the published table should suffice. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 15:09, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Table or Charts

This what I meant on who go first https://1drv.ms/w/c/2445ff2e99b133ed/EQKEnckBab5BgSj7gCajUdcBR2XTwudSmPDP3CC-BdSiNw?e=dGYcbh Jamestwice Jamestwice (talk) 11:16, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on July 6 2024

In the 4th paragraph of the Venues section, please update FedExField to Commanders Field, the stadium of Washington D.C. 189.133.124.30 (talk) 06:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

 Not done While your reference does support that FedEx has dropped the naming rights, it does not state what the stadium will be called in the meantime. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 12:40, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

References

The training sites

New info please Josedanielcardona16 (talk) 16:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

 Not done It's not clear what you're requesting. 1995hoo (talk) 16:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Country flags at the infobox

The current note in the code is: "Do not add flags to country parameters as per WP:INFOBOXFLAG."

I don't think it's problematic to insert the national flags at this position. This highly relevant information is made clear by the corresponding flags. In my opinion, the points from WP:INFOBOXFLAG are not applicable in this case because they do not create any ambiguity and there are only three flags. Bildersindtoll (talk) 22:51, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Bildersindtoll. Please read MOS:INFOBOXFLAG carefully. Flag icons should not be added to fields such as country / nationality in infoboxes. Annh07 (talk) 14:15, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

While I agree that the flags are unnecessary and I don't understand why some people are so obsessed with adding them at every opportunity, I think MOS:INFOBOXFLAG can certainly be read as allowing for their use in World Cup articles. It says, in part, "Situations where flag icons may be used in infoboxes include: … Representing the nationality of participants in sporting events where this practice is otherwise common, such as at the FIFA World Cup or Olympic Games … ." Given that the host countries are also participants, there's a reasonable argument to be made that the three host countries for 2026 fall within the scope of that sentence, although my gut tells me it was intended to mean something other than what it actually says. But, with that said, I really do not see what benefit flags would supposedly add. If a reader is unfamiliar with the US, Canada, and Mexico, does anybody really think adding a flag is going to make a difference? 1995hoo (talk) 21:00, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

The meaning of "the nationality of the participants" refers either to the individual players (i.e. Lionel Messi) or to the representative national teams (i.e. Argentina). The national teams of the host nations are indeed participants, but it is the nation that is hosting and not the team. Does this clear things up, or did I only muddy the waters? — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 19:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

As I said before, I don't see the point in including the flags at all. But user "Bildersindtoll," who started this particular discussion, is far from the only user I've seen who's wanted to add them for the host countries, so that makes me think that maybe the guidance might need to be clarified in some way. I follow what you're saying, but I suspect there may be other people for whom the distinction is too subtle. (I work in the legal profession, for what it's worth, so subtle distinctions are right up my alley. But some of the writing and edit-warring I sometimes see on Wikipedia leads me to suspect that subtleties are not something a lot of people appreciate!) 1995hoo (talk) 21:00, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Greenland

Why Greenland is gray (not a FIFA memeber)? Greenland is part of Denmark. Dejudicibus (talk) 09:42, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Most likely because they have their own "national" team that does not compete in FIFA events. 1995hoo (talk) 11:34, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, exactly that. Greenland has its own football team which isn't part of FIFA. The map is of football countries rather than actual countries. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:07, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

BTW, to expand a bit on the point Joseph2302 makes, consider how participation in the World Cup and other international sporting events doesn’t track political countries. For example, England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland have their own teams that compete in the World Cup despite all being "part of the United Kingdom." Looking at the Olympics, one example of a participant that is not an independent country is Puerto Rico, which is a US territory—indeed this past Saturday the US team played Puerto Rico in the final preliminary-round game, and in 2004 the US suffered an embarrassing loss to Puerto Rico in the preliminary round. I think it’s eminently reasonable for the map to reflect however the relevant sport's governing body (or the IOC, for Olympic purposes) views the participants in terms of what "countries" are relevant. (It’s not unusual for the word "country" to be avoided in certain international contexts because of the problem of Taiwan's status, for what it’s worth.) 1995hoo (talk) 21:34, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

"Mexico 2026" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Mexico 2026 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 22 § Mexico 2026 until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

"Canada 2026" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Canada 2026 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 22 § Canada 2026 until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)