Talk:Viva World Cup

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Viva World Cup article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Removed citation request

I've removed the request for a citation on the NF-Board teams that have indicated their desire to take part in the ELF Cup. This is covered in the article cited earlier in the paragraph (and, indeed, that citation was initially placed at the end of the paragraph to cover the whole controversy. Superlinus 07:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Failure?

4 teams in the tournament and 1 of them didn't show up? Pity, wish those 4 teams were in the ELF Cup so we had a bigger event instead of 1 big and 1 really unnotable. 3 team tournament, not really exciting.

It's certainly not the best, but there were mitigating circumstances. I think the NF-Board's refusal to punish Northern Cyprus (though to what extent that punishment would have any effect, I don't know) is admirable. Remember, it was the KTFF and the Northern Cypriot government who made a mess of this, with the running of the ELF Cup. I can understand why Greenland and Tibet took part in the ELF Cup but I'm disappointed they did so, especially as neither have made the semi-finals, while a FIFA-affiliated team have. Superlinus 09:03, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If NF-Board chose to punish TRNC, they would've simply quit the federation. Unfortunately, NF-Board hasn't been as effective as it's been hoped to, certainly not anywhere near FIFA. What've they even done for being a transfer point for NF-Board teams going onto FIFA? I doubt a single VIVA World Cup would've worked, simply put teams don't have the resources to show up to a country thousands of miles away. All NF-Board event costs should be met by the organization, teams are just too poor (except some notable exceptions) to handle it. And for a FIFA-affiliated team making it to semi-finals, that just shows that NF-Board football has to get better, does it not? Either way, Crimea defeated a FIFA side to qualify to the semi-finals -- and they're not even in NF-Board! They should definitely sign up, seeing as they're a good team that beat an NF-Board side (Tibet) and a FIFA side (Tajikistan) to qualify.

Any idea of what sort of attendances these matches attracted? Internet news on the event seems very hard to find.

Another question — does anybody know what were the 'visa problems' that the Southern Cameroons team had? Again I can find no info on the web. If it was a case of official discrimination, it might be very relevant to the Southern Cameroons article. Scolaire 22:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Micronations

This sounds like a Soccer Cup of non-recognised/non-independent countries, proposed countries, and Micronations. It would be a good marketing strategie for them if they just decided to take such rut at all. A lot of people would enjoy watching a Soccer Cup with teams like New Afrika, Palestine and Tibet. Luckily they would even get Scottland and South Brazil on their board. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.24.8.88 (talk) 17:20, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split?

Should this be moved to VIVA World Cup 2006?--Someguyudontknow 21:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moved? No. The article about the competition takes preference over the article about an individual season. But if we can find enough information to give the VIVA World Cup a decent article without all the stuff about 2006, then it should definitely be split, especially since VIVA World Cup 2008 has been announced, as of a month ago or so. Falastur2 22:21, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this artical should be split up as suggested.Moses (talk) 20:54, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK...so...I split...Stanza13

Splitted! someone know how I can add images? Stanza13 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stanza13 (talk • contribs) 15:31, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The First Competition Match

The First Competition Match is noticed twice in the scheme, be it differently. Should be fixed. 88.211.132.72 21:22, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relationship to the ConIFA World Cup

Are the Viva World Cups still taking place? If so, how are they different to the ConIFA World Football Cup? If not, then have they been supplanted? I think the answers to these questions should appear in the article. 2A02:8109:9340:136C:8CB1:CFCD:8297:438A (talk) 00:29, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Jenks24 (talk) 10:42, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Viva World Cup → VIVA World Cup – VIVA World Cup is sanctioned by the N.F.-Board. Its website says the VIVA World Cup. Sawol (talk) 06:00, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose please show that "VIVA" is an acronym, per MOS:CAPS, MOS:TM , as the non-all-caps form also exists in the wild, it should keep using that, unless it is an abbreviation. -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 06:39, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"VIVA" is like "FIFA". "VIVA" is used against "FIFA" in linguistic playfulness. Anyone knows the relation between f and v. This doesn't mean wiktionary:viva. Sawol (talk) 14:47, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nominator and official site. It's a trade mark. NickSt (talk) 10:09, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per MOS:CAPS and MOS:TM. VIVA isn't an acronym. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:05, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per MOS:CAPS and MOS:TM. "Official" names (and "official" idiosyncratic capitalizations) matter little with respect to WP:AT. A stronger case could be made if usages in reliable sources of the term "VIVA" were demonstrated, but that hasn't been done. Xoloz (talk) 03:56, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.