Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 35

This 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.

Archive 30

←

Archive 33

→

Carlisle United 2-1 Plymouth Argyle (1999)

Is this match notable or not? Doesn't look to be to me, but perhaps someone older with a batter knowledge of football could enlighten me... Giant Snowman 10:47, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I would say the match isn't notable of itself. There was a memorable moment in the game, ie the last minute goal by goalkeeper Jimmy Glass that kept Carlisle in the Football League (and relegated Scarborough). Content probably should be upmerged to Jimmy Glass, Football League season, Scarborough or Carlisle United articles, if it isn't there already. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 10:58, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I thought as much. I've PRODded it. Cheers, Giant Snowman 11:08, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

The author has removed the PROD (quelle surprise), so I've sent it to AfD. Giant Snowman 11:50, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Wasn't there a more recent example where a SUBSTITUTE keeper did exactly the same thing?--EchetusXe 13:06, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

The article has been deleted, any idea why? 8lgm (talk) 16:19, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

The sole author requested its deletion on the afd => speedy deleted under G7. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 16:59, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Date format in {{footballbox}}

What is the preferred format for the date and time when using the {{footballbox}}? I've seen several formats for both, and I think we should be consistent when it comes to that. Digirami (talk) 09:21, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Date should be in the format used in the rest of the article, i.e. either international 16 August 2009 or U.S. August 16, 2009. Per MOS:DATE. The 2009-08-16 format should only be used in lists/tables for space-saving reasons, which doesn't apply in the footballbox. Time per WP:MOSTIME, 24-hour clock would seem more appropriate, i.e. 19:45, and I'd assume we'd use local time rather than UTC. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:34, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. One small addition, though: When using local time, attach the local time zone to the time. For example: 20:45 UTC+2, 19:45 UTC+1, 19:00 UTC-4, and so on. User:Soccer-holic

Just look at the time/date stamp on your (~~~~) Signature, should be the same as that. Govvy (talk) 18:38, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Err, Govvy... that is exactly what is not used for 99,9 percent of the articles. ^.^ Take a look at 2010 FIFA World Cup qualification - UEFA Group 4 for example. Any formatting used there should also be okay for other articles. Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 18:48, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I have seen a fair share of articles that put the UTC time-zone in parenthesis, and a fair share who do not. I think with parenthesis is better. Digirami (talk) 19:30, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Soccer-holic, what do you mean not used 99.9% of the time? For the football articles the format is normally UTC dd-month-year and the article example you provided is the same and a bad example to use as he is asking about how to use it in the template. Not the article itself. And in the template it has been common process to have what is matching the signature. Plus which UTC zone +2, +3 ect. Govvy (talk) 22:30, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

We could be in a typical case of "lost in interpretation" because I interpreted your timestamp comment in terms of "Use something similar to '18:48, 16 August 2009 (UTC)'". I was solely referring to the (mandatory?) addition of UTC when giving a time. Whether the UTC has to put in parentheses or not might be a matter of personal taste, as WP:MOSDATE seems not to say a word about this. Anyway. As it seems that we basically meant the same, and before the fly has fully been converted into an elephant, we should better stop here. ^.^--Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 13:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Jackie Wright (footballer)

I'm looking for confirmation that Wright, who was a coach at Tranmere Rovers after his retirement, is the same person who went on to become their manager. - Dudesleeper / Talk 15:02, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

John Rudge's playing career

Was not doubt long and boring. I am only able to write the bare bones of the boring mid-table finishes of his boring clubs. Quite the contrast to the lengthy details on his management career at the fabulous Port Vale and time as Director of Football at the other club in Stoke-on-Trent.

So if someone could add some details of his fifteen years in the Football League as a player it would be most appreciated.--EchetusXe 19:33, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

MLS Cup templates

Should these templates be nominated for deletion? Black 'n Red 16:51, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Some clubs' articles would become template central if something like that was created for every competition. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 16:57, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I will say you'll come up against significant resistance from US based sports editors. American athletes generally have templates for each championship season. Visual consequences be damned. matt91486 (talk) 03:45, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

They should go in my opinion, as I suggested earlier. Giant Snowman 08:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not supporting or opposing at this point, but these types of templates have been very common in other North American sports leagues. Examples: Template:Super Bowl XLIII, Template:Los Angeles Lakers 2008–09 NBA champions, Template:2008 Philadelphia Phillies. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 13:05, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

This is a difficult situation, since I don't think that our Project should override the US Sports Projects, but nor do I think that theirs should override ours. Obviously it is the custom within American sports to give a navbox to championship teams, but we seem to have agreed that only current club squads and senior national team competition squads should be given one. However, since the MLS Cup is not the premier competition for football clubs worldwide, unlike the Super Bowl, the NBA Play-offs, the Stanley Cup or the World Series are for American football, basketball, ice hockey and baseball respectively, I think we should probably get rid of the aforementioned MLS Cup navboxes. – Pee Jay 13:32, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Thierry Henry not listed in France's squad in 1998 FIFA World Cup Final

Why is he not listed in the squad? He was on the bench according to his bio and was an important part of the team even though he didn't play that game.

Because the entire French squad was on the bench for that game, there's no point listing every single one of them, only the ones who came on. – Pee Jay 20:37, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

~~I disagree. I think information such as this ought to be included...~~ Madcynic (talk) 21:11, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

You really think that all 23 squad members need mentioning? Not only is that a massive waste of space, but it's also unnecessary as the teams' squads can be found in the tournament squads article, e.g. 1998 FIFA World Cup squads. – Pee Jay 21:35, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

~~AFAIR not all 23 squad can be in the match squad and also we are talking about the article for the final, not for some minor league match.~~ Madcynic (talk) 22:29, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

From the FIFA World Cup regulations Article 26, section 7 "All 23 players shall be named on the list of players for each match (11 selected players and 12 substitutes). Up to a maximum of three of the substitutes may take the place of the selected players at any time during the match." Nanonic (talk) 22:46, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Nanonic is absolutely right. Unless a player is injured or suspended, every member of the tournament squad is named in the matchday squad, so naming all 12 players who were on the bench just seems like overkill to me. – Pee Jay 22:48, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Pedant's corner: Laurent Blanc wouldn't be listed because of Bilic's cheating in the semi-final. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 05:47, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd keep mention down to those who played an active part in the match and omit the substitutes; we're aiming for summary-style. Knepflerle (talk) 10:08, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I retract my previous comments in light of new knowledge. Madcynic (talk) 11:44, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Floribert N'Galula

According to the article he has never made a professional appearance. Why does he have a page if this is the case? Also there is inconsistency over the use of N'Galula and Ngalula. Spiderone (talk) 08:33, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

He's not on the VI website, which probably means he didn't play for Sparta. He fails WP:ATHLETE & WP:GNG, so PROD the article. Giant Snowman 08:40, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Jay Emmanuel-Thomas

Arsenal youngster Jay Emmanuel-Thomas today signed on loan for Blackpool, and he is expected to go straight into the squad for the home game against Derby County tomorrow. At the moment he doesn't have an article, but it is quite likely that Ian Holloway will play him at some point in the game, even if as a sub. So, I have created the article in my sandbox until he makes his pro-debut. ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 17:08, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

One was deleted by AfD a few months ago at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jay Emmanuel-Thomas, might be worth asking an admin to userfy you a copy in case there's anything useful in it. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:14, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I've asked the Admin who closed the AfD. ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 17:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Mass creation of new articles about third-tier Russian footballers

WP:FPL lists the Russian Second Division as fully-pro (without any sources), and I can see that it is part of the professional league structure in Russia. However, my concern is that the teams in this third-tier league are in desperate financial troubles (many have folded or withdrawn already this season) and I doubt that it is fully-pro in the sense that we typically use (all players are paid a living wage), just that it is not amateur. The reason this is a concern is that one user has apparently created articles for every single player in this level for 2009 (and there are more than 50 clubs). Fortunately, he or she has provided at least one source to each article which verifies the player's existence, vital and playing statistics. However, this represents a huge amount of new articles on players that I suspect do not meet WP:ATHLETE which will be difficult to maintain/update. What do you think we should do? Can anyone confirm with this level is actually fully-pro? Jogurney (talk) 20:30, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, after further investigation, I have learned that the user is creating articles on all players in the division, but it is still a work in progress. Jogurney (talk) 20:33, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Kit help for 1. FC Magdeburg

Could someone help me adding the new kit for 1. FC Magdeburg? I've tried by using the existing templates, but I didn't find a working combination. Kit can be found here. Thanks in advance. Madcynic (talk) 11:53, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I've had a go, how does it look? Giant Snowman 08:55, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Away looks good, but home has only two blue stripes and that white hoop for the sponsor logo ought to be included, no? Thanks for the effort though. Madcynic (talk) 10:27, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

OK, I've added a potentially better kit design. But you're gonna struggle to get a design that includes the sponsor's logo I'm afraid, they're not allowed (or at least encouraged) as far as I'm aware. Cheers, Giant Snowman 11:03, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Of course, the sponsor logo should not be included, but the white hoop that is the background of the logo ought to be, I think. Also, sadly, this one still isn't accurate, I think someone has to make a new pattern. Something along the lines of "two_blue_stripes" or some such, you know? Coz the kit has no blue sides. But again: Thanks for the effort. Madcynic (talk) 11:47, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Alas, I don't know how to create new kits, just how to use existing ones - sorry I can't help! Giant Snowman 12:11, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I think I've got it now - but I left out the sponsor hoop. Madcynic (talk) 11:22, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Need an assist

Yeah, another Yank showing her complete lack of knowledge of real football. :)

Cuckfield Rangers is in division 2 of the Mid-Sussex Football League. Where does this fall on the scale of importance -- does it make them a local team that plays for beer? Close to a national level team? I'm trying to decide if there's any chance of notability. Thanks!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:22, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Aww Hell no. They aren't even as high as Cuckfield Town! They need three promotions before they warrant an article.--EchetusXe 00:41, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Very very low level indeed - PROD it -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks much!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:31, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

State level clubs notable?

Are clubs that play at a state level automatically notable? This is the AfD in question. The Sikkim team looks to fail WP:GNG and hasn't competed at a national level. It has also never won the Santosh Trophy, the only competition it competes in. Spiderone (talk) 08:29, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Delete it based on lack of significant coverage instead and you might have better luck. A quick look at keywords in google will show that there is some coverage so maybe the article needs a little care instead of deletion.Cptnono (talk) 12:32, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Season article task force invitation

The season article task force, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of league, cup, club, and national season articles, is looking for members. If you would like to participate, join by visiting the task force page. Thanks!

Additional note: The current primary goal is to create guidelines for each of the four season article categories listed above. Discussion participation welcome! --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 12:14, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

More opinions needed

If you have the time:

*Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Houcine Zaidoune

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meshal Hameed

*Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mubarak Al Bloushi

I will, of course, withdraw as usual if new evidence is found that makes me look like a fool. Spiderone (talk) 08:49, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

What is the problem here? These are professional leagues. They are not the caliber of many Western European sides but they are still professional. I have never seen such a pretentious attitude towards sport in countries that are considered less significant on a world stage, non English speaking, and in several cases full of brown people. I'm not trying to make anyone sound racist or classist but I am trying to figure out how teams that can qualify for the UEFA Champions League or the AFC Champions League can not be considered as playing in professional leagues. Unless they are amateurs not making an income there is no argument besides the historical mean of the skill required to play in the league. Maybe the guidelines need to be changed to several levels of the English leagues are acceptable but none from Morocco? Maybe editors should try harder or at least give other editors the chance to create articles on subjects that do not receive as much coverage in English sources. Go read FC Dinamo Tbilisi#Eurocups Record and argue that players from FC Dinamo Tbilisi are not noteworthy. Unless they qualified as a nonprofessional club who gained access to the cup through their cup system's placement of teams in the tournament there is 0 argument on them being "professional". Also take a look at FIFA Club World Cup if you have more questions on the professionalism of football in lesser known countries. Tunisia isn't exactly a powerhouse but one of their teams has received some credit from the main international governing body of the sport. I think the true concern here is stubs that need clean up. It is inappropriate to base an argument for deletion based on notability when it is clearly OK per the current guidelines. Ask the creator to move it into userspace until it is a viable article or ask to change the rules before requesting deletion based on what is already in the guidelines. I need a wikibreak/beer. I am livid over this right now. Cptnono (talk) 05:55, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

If the articles don't contain proof that the subject is notable, on what basis do you suggest they be kept?The Hack 06:30, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

My concern isn't the notability of the subjects but the argument posed on several of the discussion pages that notability is not meant because the players are in leagues that editors do not believe are professional when they clearly are. If the player plays in a professional league it meets WP:AHLETE so the argument against these players' inclusions needs to be based on lack of significant coverage or the poor quality of the articles. I did vote delete on at least one of them. Gulverd Tomashvili is a shoo in if an editor wants to look for sources. Cptnono (talk) 07:07, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Being a man of colour myself I would not dare be racist. I simply added these articles because no evidence is given that they pass WP:ATHLETE or WP:GNG

Throwing "brown people" out there was bad form on my part. It does come across as some sort of elitism that some editors are asserting that the top flight Kuwati or Moroccan leagues are not professional. I think I am more concerned with editors using professionalism as a concern when it is simply a lack of finding coverage from certain countries around the globe.Cptnono (talk) 08:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Well if throwing these afds out here means that the articles will be improved then it's not bad. One of the main criticisms of football articles is that the notability criteria is too generous in comparison to other Wikiprojects. Spiderone (talk) 08:45, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Editors (I assume new or IPs in this case) should be asked to put it in a user subpage and improve it. Notability is notability. Garbage articles are garbage articles. It is a shame that it has been confused and used as a reasoning to delete articles. It smacks of wikilawyerism. Ask or assist the new contributors to fix these articles before putting it in the main space. Using notability guidelines to remove poor content that is in all reality notable is pure laziness. "It is shit so it is deleted" is at least honest.Cptnono (talk) 08:56, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, do we want to set a precedent that only clubs from leagues from nations with highly rated coefficienties as being notable? That might be something to consider but that could lead to clubs from Scotland being not noteworthy enough for Wikipeida. Since it came up: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues#Guideline check Cptnono (talk) 09:07, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Someone unintentionally made my point for me and this needs tyo be followed or changed if it is a concern: "All leagues whose members are eligible for national cups are assumed notable. All leagues that are a country's highest level are assumed notable (per WP:FOOTY/Notability) Stop being sad about poor articles and fix them. Deletion is not always needed.12:46, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Firstly, WP:FOOTYN was rejected by the community and is not policy. Also, the sentence you quote refer to notability of leagues, not players, so I don't see its relevance in this debate....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:52, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Chris, WP:FOOTYN is being incorrectly quoted as a reason for deletion at an AFD, I assume this is why it's cropped up here. This refers to the attempted deletion of a number of Dinamo Tblisi players, when if WP:FOOTYN had been adopted, and assuming that Dinamo are professional, I don't think there would have been anything other than 'speedy keep' responses. For the wider community, does anyone have any proof one way or the other regarding the Georgian League and professionalism. 8lgm (talk) 13:03, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. People bring up stuff in a deletion discussion when the real concern is crappy articles. If we start focusing on the root of the problem (poorly written stubs) things might be less of a concern. Fix the articles or ask the editor who made them to put them into a user subpage before full-on inclusion to get them up to par.Cptnono (talk) 13:08, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion this goes beyond crappiness or the colour of the player's skin. These are articles which fail to prove notability. An AFD is entirely appropriate. If you feel you can add something, you are free to edit the articles to bring them to an acceptable level.The Hack 14:19, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Crappy articles are most definitely a problem in this project. IPs and non-FOOTY-Project-affiliated editors begin a lot of those articles. That's a major way that WP works, and we can't and shouldn't get in the way of that. We need to both improve articles that need it as well as try to reign IPs and "rogue" editors into the project. It's hard to have an article improvement drive when there are 237,536 new stubs created every day. Ya know? Placing stubs on subpages isn't the answer, but neither is a blanket racism card. It's tough, but we need to do our best to get everyone on the same page. If we need help on sourcing whether a league is professional or not (in order to determine notability) then maybe we should try to communicate with footy editors on non-English WPs that could source it for us even when there is not an English source. When looking for verification and you can't find any, Google Translator may translate awkwardly, but it still gets the message across. We need sources – this is an encyclopedia after all. If nothing is available in English then we need them any way we can get them. You can't say the certain leagues "clearly are" professional when there is no source, but neither can you say that it isn't professional. Sources are necessary to make a definitive statement one way or the other. Don't forget to assume good faith. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 16:17, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Strangest disambiguation ever........?

Mario Mendez(futbolista panameño) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:57, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Should be Panamanian footballer Spiderone (talk) 15:59, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Has been moved to Mario Méndez (Panamanian footballer), but why not simply Mario Méndez (footballer)? --ClubOranje^T 10:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Mario Méndez already exists and is about a footballer, so that dab would not be very helpful..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

How about you move Mario Méndez to Mario Méndez (Mexican footballer), turn Mario Méndez into a disambig, and turn Mario Méndez (footballer) into a redirect? Giant Snowman 10:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

How about disambiguating them by year of birth, rather than nationality? Big Dom 11:19, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

We do tend to use nationality in the first instance, reserving DOB only for multiple players of the same nationality. -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:25, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Nathan Porritt

Can someone recreate Nathan Porritt. It's a redirect at the moment but I'm sure it had some content about him once upon a time. He finally made his debut tonight for Darlo. 91.106.111.101 (talk) 00:03, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Done, just had to undo the redirect - if someone can update it with the debut information soon that would be good. Camw (talk) 01:08, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I've updated the article. Cheers, Giant Snowman 10:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Single marking article

This is sort of continuing from a previous discussion. On the Man-to-man marking and Zonal marking articles I have requested a merge to an article such as Marking (association football) to allow the word "marking" to be used in articles without talking about a specific type of marking and besides there isn't enough to warrant separate articles. For example: "Nirmal Chettri was marking well for the whole game" would link to a disambiguation page at the moment. Spiderone (talk) 08:44, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

"Nirmal Chettri was marking well for the whole game" would be subjective commentary, and better suited to a match report in a newspaper than an encyclopaedia. Kevin McE (talk) 10:07, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

"Fred Example was well-known for his marking skills" would be acceptable if sourced, though..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:42, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Scottish Third Division 2009–10

Just wondering if someone could make Scottish Third Division 2009–10 look like the previous season's article, as I'm not that active anymore and I got confused :( Thank you. SummerHoliday 16:34, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

The Football League records

I am surprised to see no article on The Football League records, let alone a section on the main article detailing youngest & oldest players, record attendances, record games etc. Anyone with more knowledge & time than me fancy starting one? Giant Snowman 18:50, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Well we already have Football records in England which cover quite a bit of it. Nanonic (talk) 19:09, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh right, cheers. Giant Snowman 19:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of Juventus F.C.

Juventus F.C. has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:02, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

File:CONCACAF - Gold Cup.svg

I'm sure images like this one keep on appearing, and I'm sure we keep on deleting them...is this one any different? If not, anybody want to do the honours for me? Cheers, Giant Snowman 19:24, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Christian Tiboni

Could someone keep an eye on Christian Tiboni? Several IP editors seem keen on undoing my edits, which seem perfectly legitimate to me. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 19:34, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Red Link Recovery football links

The last few red links located here on one of our pages have to do with youth football, there are pages for footballers with the same names, but it is unclear if they are the same individuals. If there is anyone here that can help it would be appreciated. EmanWilm (talk) 22:39, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Done.—MDCollins (talk) 23:45, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Much appreciated EmanWilm (talk) 23:48, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of Bristol Rovers F.C.

Bristol Rovers F.C. has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:09, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The Premiership's first red card

Apparently it went to Micky Adams. Any reliable source on this?--EchetusXe 20:21, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Adams was sent off on 19 August 1992 for Southampton at Queens Park Rangers. This was Southampton's second match in the Premiership, which had kicked off a few days earlier. I don't know if that was the First red card in the Premiership, but if not it was pretty damn close. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 22:14, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, cheers. Confirms what the source says.--EchetusXe 00:49, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I believe Niall Quinn of Man City was sent off on the same day as Adams but not sure who was first. --Jameboy (talk) 19:07, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, can Orange be considered a reliable source? That page has at least one incorrect fact, as it says that Manchester United have never been in the lowest division in the league, but they were in Division Two when there were just two divisions. --Jameboy (talk) 19:25, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The match report says that Adams was sent off in the 90th minute, so if Quinn was also sent off that evening, he may well have been first. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 19:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

this article from the Indie says Adams was in injury time and Quinn was in the 25th minute. Was this before they started moving the start times all over the place? Nanonic (talk) 20:00, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Brentford F.C.#Notable players

I would refer people to Talk:Brentford F.C.#Notable players, looking for any knowledgeable Brentford supporters to provide the required information and where it has been published. The whole article needs shortening as there is a lot of irrelevent information. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 13:27, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Notable players sections, where there is no clear basis of inclusion/exclusion, are an abomination. More power to those on the talk page for that article who are trying to establish some criteria. I'd be inclined to drop the underage internationals, only keep those who got full/wartime/amateur era caps while at the club, and allow any club hall of fame or statistical leaders. An enquiry on an active fans' message board will often yield results, and a source. Kevin McE (talk) 13:50, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I think if these "notable players" lists are to be included they should be more like the list found on the article for Bristol Rovers F.C., where a reason for them being notable is clearly defined. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 15:55, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Brace issue

How do we define what a brace is in an article? In Sunil Chhetri I linked to Wiktionary but this is still not ideal since readers don't know which definition to look at. Spiderone (talk) 17:05, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Why not just say "Two" instead of having the article be needlessly obtuse? Nanonic (talk) 17:21, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Indeed - it's unnecessarily jargony. Just say "two goals" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

FAO Admin

Can an admin restore Ed Upson and Shane O'Connor (footballer) as per their appearances in the Football League Cup. --Jimbo^[online] 09:22, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Done. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 09:33, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Javier Saviola

Could somebody take a look at the edit history of Javier Saviola? A new user is making radical changes to the stats in that article, and I have no idea if they're correct or not. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 20:26, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The changed stats accumulate the total appearances for the respective clubs, including domestic and international cup appearances. I have reverted it for now. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 21:10, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Blackburn Olympic F.C./archive1

This FAC's gone a bit stagnant, would anyone else be able to take a look, even if it's to point out loads of things that need changing.........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:03, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Today's chosen AfDs

These AfDs are in serious danger of not reaching a consensus:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahmed Matar - 2 Delete 1 Keep
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Guidetti - 1 Delete
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qaed Sadir - 3 Delete 2 Keep
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nikoloz Phirtskhalava - 2 Delete 2 Keep
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Salah Ben Djoudi Benabdellah - 1 Delete
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nitichai Chamchoi - 1 Delete
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pollawat Thongkao - 1 Delete
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prompong Kansumrong - 1 Delete
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alif Paoh-ji - 1 Delete

Spiderone (talk) 08:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

The ones with only one !vote will almost certainly be relisted..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:43, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes but I'm trying to see if anyone here has an opinion because relisting sometimes doesn't solve it. Spiderone (talk) 08:59, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

allfootballers.com (or similar) query

Could anyone with access to allfootballers.com, or something similar, let me know if either the full first name or the playing position is recorded of a P. Edwards, who came on as sub in two Football League Trophy matches for Gillingham in 1984.......? Cheers!!!!! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

According to allfootballers.com it's Paul Edwards Midfielder born in Eastbourne. Nothing in Rothmans about him. Cattivi (talk) 10:39, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

That's awesome, cheers. That's sufficient for what I need. Thanks once again -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:56, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of Charlton Athletic F.C.

Charlton Athletic F.C. has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 12:09, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I noticed an error with the action1date parameter of Template:ArticleHistory. I fixed it for the Charlton Athletic talk page and have reported the issue on the template talk page, but you may all wish to check your FA, FL, GA and peer-reviewed articles to see if they have erroneous milestone dates that need fixing. I guess it may need either a template fix or bot fix if it is a widespread problem. --Jameboy (talk) 22:27, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

David Hamilton

I'm currently writing an article on the footballer David Hamilton here. The source from the Guardian said that he has two brothers who also played football, but I can't seem to find out who they are. Just wondered if anyone would be able to shed some light on this? Cheers, Big Dom 18:04, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

There's an Ian Hamilton who played for Darlington from 79 to 82, which makes him about the right age and part of the country. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 18:33, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Just looked on allfootballers.com and Ian Hamilton was also born in South Shields, so I'll try and find a source to confirm that they are brothers. Big Dom 18:42, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Club Atlético Lanús squad template

I have never, ever, EVER seen the template formats used in {{Club Atlético Lanús squad}}, can someone explain to me why it is as it is please? Cheers, Giant Snowman 20:06, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

As I recall, something similar was postulated as a way of having one template for both the squad list in the club article and the navbox for each player's page. Didn't realise it had actually been created though. – Pee Jay 20:10, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I've notified King of the North East, who created {{Fs2}} back in December, of this discussion. Giant Snowman 20:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I know most of the Argentine Primera Division is using it already, as well as some teams in Uruguay and Ecuador. I would use it myself, but the navbox version doesn't looks so great, and I don't see the need for the coach to appear in list form. Plus, it is not entirely clear how to use it when you have teammates with the same last name since you won't be able to tell who is who in the navbox mode. I'm also lost on how to use it on teams with Brazilian players, who go by their nicknames, but their article title is their real name....

The whole idea is great, but it needs to be improved, and/or explained better. Digirami (talk) 00:21, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, {{Club Atlético Lanús squad}} as it appeared at the start of this discussion was broken, I have now fixed the errors so that the squad list renders properly. I have removed the "as of" date from the navbox from the fs2 template. There are still a few minor problems with the template.

The main one being that in order to differentiate between players on the same team with the same second name/identify Brazilian players, we need to add an optional parameter |navbox display= A. Cole / J. Cole/ Hulk / whatever

The 2 main reasons I made Fs2 is to stop the squad lists & navboxes displaying contradictory information (a constant problem in the non-anglo leagues) and to ease the workload during transfer windows.

Previously we needed to do 5 edits in order to update:

Update player article
Remove from previous club navbox
Remove from previous club squad list
Add to new club navbox
Add to new club squad list

Now 3:

Update player article
Remove from previous club Fs2 template
Add to new club Fs2 template

I did announce Fs2 on here some time ago but nobody responded, I'm not around that much anymore but I'll keep my eye on this discussion. If anyone has any ideas/comments please let me know. Regards King of the North East 11:54, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Template documentation

I have done some work here to explain the functions of the template. Please take a look. Regards King of the North East 13:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Excellent! Now to get my favorite team's squad into that template. Thanks! Digirami (talk) 07:55, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Potential notability of players in semi-pro but top level leagues

Right, this is beginning to sound like a broken record...as anyone who has been following AfDs over the past few months will know, our friends over the Irish Sea believe that every player to play in the League of Ireland is notable, even though it is not a fully-professional league, something that WP:ATHLETE dictates is a must for notability of sportspeople. Therefore can we, as a WikiProject, please come to some kind of sensible agreement that players playing in certain semi-pro but top level leagues are indeed notable enough. What leagues would be exempt from WP:ATHLETE could be determined in two ways:

UEFA coefficient - if we say any player playing in a semi-pro, but top level, league within the top 10/15/20/25/30 (delete as applicable) is notable.
Another potential guideline could be to include/exclude the league of any nation(s) which have/haven't participated in the Group Stages of the Champions League (helpful map located here).

Obviously, there would be equivalent guidelines for other continents. So, what are people's thoughts, feelings, opinions, grievances etc.? Giant Snowman 14:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

What about the top level of countries that have played in the World Cup.--Vintagekits (talk) 14:59, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I think that puts too much weight on the national team. For example, I wouldn't want to see semi-pro, top-level leagues of nations like Canada (even though I am Canadian!), Zaire, UAE etc. become exempt. Giant Snowman 15:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes but aren't we already criticised for being too lenient with notability? Spiderone (talk) 15:56, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I would say we should be tougher on lower league players to make up for it.--Vintagekits (talk) 16:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

This AfD illustrates the leniency that we've seen recently. A 3rd division Thai player, that's 2 divisions below professional. Spiderone (talk) 16:07, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

That argument doesn't bear much scrutiny. It disregards the popularity of lower league professional football in some countries, particularly England and (to a lesser extent) Germany. By most metrics (ie attendance, revenues) the second level of English football is in the top five leagues in Europe.[1] Then even when you go down to the third, fourth and even the fifth levels, there are attendances and revenues greater than many top level leagues. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 18:27, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

If editors would worry more about significant coverage guidelines this wouldn't even be a concern. That being said, a professional is a professional. If the player makes his living as a footballer it should meet WP:ATHLETE guidelines. Adding a coefficient standard could lead to huge concerns down the line (Scotland). I don't see reasoning to make it group stage instead of qualifying for UEFA other than to cull the herd. Get to the root of the concern instead of over tinkering with the guidelines in a reactionary fashion. Some articles just don't have available sources and need to be expanded, merged into another one, or deleted.Cptnono (talk) 06:02, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Please note that WP:ATH does not 'dictate' that playing in a fully professional league is a 'must' for notability. Therefore people are free to keep articles which don't fall into that category in any case. Whilst I like the idea of having some extra criteria (given the way a lot of people use the ATH guideline) would it not fall foul of ATH. I don't think the 2 points listed (or using WC finals) are a good way to come up with categorisation. How about editors being more reasonable about the Irish and other leagues? Eldumpo (talk) 11:34, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Kyle Wilkie nationality

English or Scottish? I can't find any sources either way...Giant Snowman 17:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Playerhistory says Scottish - not too sure how accurate it is though. --Jimbo^[online] 17:41, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Cheers Jimbo, much appreciated. Giant Snowman 17:49, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

A newly created Soccerbase profile also says he is Scottish. Giant Snowman 23:46, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Luis Ángel Landín

This doesn't seem to make any sense, you look at Landín's page, it says that Morelia sold him to Cruz Azul and the infobox says that he was loaned to Cruz Azul from Morelia. And now this says that he is with the Houston Dynamo on Loan from Cruz Azul. That makes absolutely no sense at all, so is he actually on loan from Cruz Azul or he loan from Morelia? – Michael (talk) 19:55, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Valencia CF & Fairs Cup

An(y) anonymous user(s) is (are) deleting info and references provided by registered users in Valencia CF and Fairs Cup articles. UEFA not recognize Fairs Cup as UEFA Cup-Europa League / UEFA club competition, see:

UEFA Cup: All-time finals - UEFA.com

Fairs Cup: "The UEFA Cup replaced the Inter-Cities Fairs Cup in the 1971/72 season. The list of finals from that competition are listed below, but please note that the Fairs Cup is not considered a UEFA competition, and hence clubs' records in the Fairs Cup are not considered part of their European record. [...]
NOTE: The Inter-Cities Fairs Cup also took place from 1955 to 1971 but not as an official UEFA competition."

The official statistics provided by UEFA are available only in UEFA competitions, see:

Legend: All-time statistics - UEFA.com

"UEFA club competitions: These are the official statistics considered valid for communicating official records in UEFA club competitions defined as the European Champion Clubs' Cup, the UEFA Champions League, the UEFA Cup Winners' Cup, the UEFA Europa League, the UEFA Cup, the UEFA Super Cup (from the 1973 competition), the UEFA Intertoto Cup and the European/South American Cup. Matches in the Inter-Cities’ Fairs Cup and the 1972 Super Cup are included only for information purposes as these competitions were not held under UEFA auspices."

Valencia have won 2 Fairs Cup and 1 UEFA Cup, not 3 Fairs Cup/UEFA Cup. --Dantetheperuvian (talk) 01:05, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

What's the problem? The Fairs Cup is the predecessor to the UEFA Cup and UEFA regognizes it at the source "The UEFA Cup replaced the Inter-Cities Fairs Cup in the 1971/72 season. The list of finals from that competition are listed below, but please note that the Fairs Cup is not considered a UEFA competition, and hence clubs' records in the Fairs Cup are not considered part of their European record."

Simply fix it to say won x Fair Cups, y UEFA, z ... Having it in a saparate paragraph belittles the win to some readers which is made evident by the IPs edits. Put the two "runners up/not the best" cups next to eachother and let the wikilinks explain the rest.Cptnono (talk) 05:12, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, I would reccomend striking the three teams to win 5 whatever line out all together since this could be out of date someday (CHRON guideline?) and isn't needed anyways. We already know that the club is third most succesful and don't need to qualify it by mentionin the pther teams. Tightening it up might be a good thing and prevent future confussion.

Cptnono (talk) 05:26, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

If UEFA considers Fairs Cup and UEFA Cup/Europa League different tournaments (and Supercopa de España and Copa Eva Duarte are different competitions according RFEF.es), should be counted separately.--Dantetheperuvian (talk) 17:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

The anon user is clearly the indefblocked User:Fadiga09 who was previously blocked a number of times for edit-warring over this same issue (i.e. [2]) and I have blocked the IP for block evasion. Such edits by a banned user can always be reverted. Black Kite 11:29, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

All-Time Club Performance player stats box

This table is inserted in a number of player articles and I find it hard to sometimes see which club a player was at in a given season as there are no line markings between the clubs. Is anyone else having the same problem, and can it be fixed? The player I just noticed it for is Nicky Maynard but I have seen it on others previously. Is that table a template? Eldumpo (talk) 10:18, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't see a problem on that page - there's a line between the clubs when I look at it. Big Dom 10:30, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Dean Ashton retirement

Can this be mentioned on his page yet or do we need a reliable source like BBC first? Spiderone 17:28, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I presume this is about the Sunday Mirror story. Generally, if it has only appeared in red-tops it doesn't go in. Oldelpaso (talk) 17:36, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Nothing mentioned by the Beeb, or West Ham's official site. Giant Snowman 17:43, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Best to wait for an official announcement, I think. The Mirror is not a reliable source for footballing stories imo. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 17:50, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Possible fake footballer article.

I happen to stumble across a potentially fake footballer article yesterday. Before attempting to get this deleted (which I don't know how to do by the way), can someone check out any of the statements found in the article? Or even if they guy exists? I tried last night with no success. Thanks in advance. Digirami (talk) 18:45, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

No player called Momed Al Hawasi played in World Cup Qualification for Saudi Arabia, as confirmed by FIFA. I'll suggest it as a hoax and try and get it speedied. Giant Snowman 18:51, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Ludovic Sané

I removed a PROD from this article as it was saying that the player had never played a professional game, however the infobox says he has played 5 games for Bordeaux. I can't find any sources to back this up, though. Before I delete it, can anyone else produce a source? Black Kite 21:18, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

L'Équipe says here that on 28 April 2009, he received his first selection for Bordeaux's matchday squad, but according to the Ligue de Football Professionel and L'Équipe, he hasn't yet got on the pitch. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 21:32, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Combining of lower level leagues

I've got a couple lower level Spanish leagues on my watchlist, and I noticed yesterday that User:ZZ86 had begun to unilaterally merge leagues without any discussion that I've seen here or on the league pages on my watchlist. I thought I'd see if I had missed some discussion on this. I personally find it confusing and of no real benefit to combine, especially in the formats that he has listed with infoboxes scattered around the page and would prefer they be reverted to separate articles once again. Divisiones Regionales de Fútbol in Ceuta and Melilla and Divisiones Regionales de Fútbol in Extremadura are the examples I had marked, but there may well be more. Thoughts? matt91486 (talk) 01:50, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

If the divisions warrant an article, they should be kept separate. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 05:20, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

If we could get a consensus on this, could an admin rollback the changes? matt91486 (talk) 18:00, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

As an update, no response from the user, and he doesn't seem to have a history of interacting with other users. So if no one else has any thoughts and any of you admins want to take restoring the original league pages on, I guess we can be done with this blip. matt91486 (talk) 06:35, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Maurice "Joe" Connor

I've created a stub on Maurice "Joe" Connor, an early 20th century player who played internationally for Ireland, as well as in England for Arsenal, Gillingham and Brentford, amongst others. Any info on this character would be much appreciated. Thanks, Giant Snowman 20:59, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

There is an article about him on "Northern Ireland's Footballing Greats" at [3]. You'll see that it disagrees with some of the details you've included, such as his full name and place of birth. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 05:27, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm - those details were added by Jimbo from the Michael Joyce book...I'll let him know. Giant Snowman 10:42, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

The official Gillingham centenary history book lists him as "M.J. Connor" and gives his birthplace as Lochee, both of which match Joyce -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:24, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I notice now that the NIFG page has a note at the moment specifically debunking the above details. Is NIFG even a reliable source.........?

In this particular case, it's very much a reliable source, because of who the new information comes from. George Glass, cited by NIFG as the source of the corrections, is on the editorial board of the IFFHS (see http://www.iffhs.de/?c02bc4ac1398c433ccdd52b9b95405fdcdc3bfcdc0aec70aeeda083f11 and other pages) and his "specialist subject" is early Irish football. If he's researched the player in question, I'd take his research as more reliable than, with respect, that of club historians who, where they have no solid info of their own, copy from ~~each other~~ "reliable sources" just like we do. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 20:36, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd say his birth name is correct as per Joyce, and his birth details are correct as per NIFG. Giant Snowman 09:39, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

For any particular reason? I'd have thought the new name would come as a package with the new birth date and place. If Joe Connor the Irish international wasn't born in Lochee, Scotland, then I don't really see how he can still be the Maurice whateveritis Connor who was born in Lochee, Scotland. As to the article itself, you'd do best adding a footnote pointing out the various reliable sources. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:10, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Corinthians Memorial - Hall of Fame

{{Corinthians Memorial - Hall of Fame}} - yay or nay? Giant Snowman 13:51, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Yay.--EchetusXe 17:17, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Wait - yay to deleting it, or yay to keeping it? Giant Snowman 17:41, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm shocked by the number of red links in that; we should try to fill those even if the template goes. matt91486 (talk) 17:59, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Yay, its worth keeping.--EchetusXe 21:26, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

This hall of fame isn't even mentioned in the Corinthians article, which makes me think that it doesn't warrant its own template. Dancarney (talk) 23:02, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

On a similar note, is it worth keeping {{Port Vale F.C. Player of the Year}}? – Pee Jay 23:06, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I believe so.--EchetusXe 23:34, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

And apart from the fact that you created that navbox, what is your basis for saying that it should be kept? – Pee Jay 23:36, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Recent transfers

"For recent transfers, see List of MLS transfers for the 2009 season has been added to MLS club (not season) articles. It isn't a huge deal either way to me but I have seen some back and forth edits on it and wanted to see what people thought. My only concerns with inclusion is if it doesn't get updated and it could be considered season specific. However, itt also provides info on the current squad which is of course listed. Any thoughts?Cptnono (talk) 08:17, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, it is common practice to give a link to the most recent league transfer list at the main article of the club and to list any transfers involving a concrete team on the respective season article. Listing season transfers for a particular team is also done in a similar way for NHL and MLB teams. It would probably be the best to stick to that scheme. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 09:28, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Fixed wikiling above. Thanks for the tip!Cptnono (talk) 09:36, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Follow-up: I poked around a handful of footy featured articles and did not see a link to recent transfers. Is this a US thing being implemented or did I just look at the wrong articles?Cptnono (talk) 09:41, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Upon your follow-up, I made further investigations, and to my surprise, the English, French, Italian, Russian or Spanish top-level clubs either have no links to transfer lists at all or point to the specific club season articles. Germany seems to be the only UEFA top-6 league which includes general transfer list links for its top-level clubs. In any case, you are safe with listing club transfers in corresponding club season articles.

A closer look on the items in Category:Football transfers summer 2009, which currently features 34 articles, reveals that those lists are linked with other articles in a very limited way only. Where is the point in having general season transfer period lists when those are not linked in relevant articles? --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 10:42, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Earlier it was "For recent transfers, see List of MLS football transfers summer 2009". I proposed a deletion on that page, so I obviously was the one who changed it to "For recent transfers, see List of MLS transfers for the 2009 season". Was that not necessary? – Michael (talk) 23:22, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Progress update on season article guidelines

The season article task force of this project is currently discussing content guidelines for season articles at its talk page.

Up to now, proposals for league season article contents have been collected and are now being discussed. While there seems to be broad consensus on most parts, some items like the technical realization of league and results tables (usage of fb templates vs usage of modified templates including plain markup vs usage of conventional wikitables) or the appearance of goalscorer lists (German/Italian list format vs English table format) are still up for discussion. If you want to voice your opinion, be bold and do so on the task force talk page!

Regarding cup, club and national season articles, no discussion has yet been started. Especially the cup and club season articles could use some guidelines, so if you have ideas, propose them on the task force talk page! --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 11:00, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

fb templates

I was looking at the fb templates that are used to create league tables (and other types of tables) in some articles. While the idea seems a good one (to standardise league tables and make it easier to create them), the implementation leaves a lot to be desired. I say this with all due respect to the creator(s), as my knowledge of template syntax is extremely limited, but it is more the overall structure than the low-level coding that I have an issue with. Templates are supposed to make things easier, but when you have to create and maintain thousands of templates such as Template:Fb round2 2009-10 UCL PO and Template:Fb team Beaconsfield SYCOB, there is something badly wrong. If we are to use such a template system, then we should get some template experts to properly parameterise it so it isn't so unwieldy. Until then, if I create a league table in an article I am working on, I will be using a wikitable. --Jameboy (talk) 11:05, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

See also discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Season article task force#League table and results table sections. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 11:11, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

OK, I hadn't seen that, thanks. I'll copy my comment over there to keep the discussion in one place. --Jameboy (talk) 11:30, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Argentine Women's Football League

Does anyone know the name of the Argentine Women's Football League? --Carioca (talk) 22:05, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Chelsea edit war

I have noticed that the Chelsea page has had literally hundreds of edits in the last week or so, a very high percentage of which appear to be undoings. Does anyone think this might need some level of protection? I also noticed that the kits in the infobox are a bit too detailed, and may be infringing on copyight by including adidas logs, but I imagine that making a change at the moment wouldn't last too long.Dancarney (talk) 22:55, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Mostly one editor and a dynamic IP having a WP:LAME edit war about the club crests. I blocked the editor for 72 hours (it's his second edit-warring block in two weeks) and semi'd the article for the same time. Black Kite 23:05, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

FC Barcelona (and other Spanish clubs) & Spanish Supercup

The Eva Duarte Cup is a predecessor of the Spanish Supercup, but are not a same tournament like European Cup and Champions League, see RFEF.es. FC Barcelona have won 8 Spanish Supercups (record alongsideReal Madrid), not 12.--Dantetheperuvian (talk) 22:13, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

If so, be BOLD and change it, and back it up with references.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:27, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

User:90.194.217.153

Just to bring 90.194.217.153 (talk · contribs) to attention, whose plethora of disruptive edits and rude edit summaries are getting quite annoying. Mattythewhite (talk) 13:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Report them at WP:AIV; they seem to be ignoring all warnings. Giant Snowman 13:39, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Agree, I took him to task last week for his abuse relating to Sébastien Bassong, he backed off but looks like he is now overdue a block for his behaviour today.Tmol42 (talk) 13:51, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

He's been blocked for 48 hours; but watch him come back in 2 days and start it all over again...Giant Snowman 13:55, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Looks like he may have been right about Sol Campbell, but still, that was disruptive behaviour on his part. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 14:42, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

In fairness, I reckon most people here have suspected Campbell would sign for County for days; the point is, we have waited until a WP:RS was found - he edited based on hearsay. However, Campbell's move to County was nothing compared to this edit, where he declared Arsenal this season's Premuier League champions because "no one else scored 6 this season" ! Giant Snowman 14:51, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

New templates

Howdy fellow project members. I created two templates: {{Czechoslovak First League top scorers}} and {{Gambrinus liga top scorers}}. Feel free to kill some red links. - Darwinek (talk) 15:08, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

List of professional sports leagues

This article makes some pretty out-there claims to professional leagues in football i.e. Ireland, Northern Ireland, Finland are ones that I can see off the top of my head. Does anyone with time & knowledge fancy adding/removing appropiate leagues, and adding reliable sources? I'd do it myself but I'm about to head off to a music festival! Giant Snowman 15:27, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

United States soccer pyramid

The American soccer pyramid article has been moved to United States soccer pyramid, by a user without leaving a comment as to why. Just wanted to get some sort of consensus on this, as American seemed a bit more logical considering there are a number of non-USA clubs from Canada, Puerto Rico and Bermuda. Or is this more of a case like the English football league system where the majority rules as such? --Jimbo^[online] 18:50, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

US seems to be more accurate, there is a Canadian soccer pyramid as well (the top two teirs are the same as the US, but the rest are different). Paul Bradbury 19:22, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Jermaine Jones controversy

Jones courted controversy in 2004 for an interview for popular sports magazine Sport-BILD. When asked whether there were gay footballers in the Bundesliga, he said "hopefully not."

In March 2007, Jones announced on the official Eintracht bulletin board that he would not extend his contract expiring at the end of the 2006–07 season. This enraged many Eintracht supporters, as Jones cancelled a contract negotiation with chairman Heribert Bruchhagen a few days before because his advisor was on a sudden journey to Brazil. In October 2006, he already had defended himself for turning down a contract offer, underlining he wanted to stay after all the management of the Eagles had done for him during his injuries.

In March 2009, Jones claimed "It doesn't make any fucking difference what the Schalke fans think at the end of the day" in response to jeering by supporters.

What do we need this on the page for? – Michael (talk) 02:35, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

It's all encyclopedic and if properly sourced, I don't see what the problems are. matt91486 (talk) 04:40, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

The foul language on the page. Too me, it's unaccaptable to put on here. – Michael (talk) 05:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

If those are the words he used, who are we to try to "sanitise" his language. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:21, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Please see WP:NOTCENSORED. Maybe given too much weight but his language is OK on Wikipedia.Cptnono (talk) 06:35, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, profanity in a direct quote is Jones' decision, and Wikipedia is just relaying the quote. matt91486 (talk) 06:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Not being censored is all well and good, but have a look at what WP:PROFANE says; does the language enhance the article? Giant Snowman 14:54, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

And does a single throwaway comment like that even a mention in an encyclopaedic article at all? I think not, regardless of the language used. - fchd (talk) 15:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

This doesn't enhance the article at all. The point of his statement could be used without the direct quote. In fact, the whole section seems rather unimportant altoghether to me. So he has said and done stuff that has upset his various clubs' respective supporters. Big deal. A lot of players have done that in a lot of different sports. How is that encyclopedic? I think the whole section should be taken out. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 14:36, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Can an image be added to Andrés Escobar?

Unfortunately I can't find a free image of Andres Escobar but can a non-free image be used instead since he died a long time ago? Surely the heavy restrictions only apply to people who are still alive. I see Ernie Cooksey uses a non-free image since a free alternative is unlikely to ever be found. Spiderone 16:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

For example, would this picture [4] of his own goal add value? Spiderone 16:33, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Probably enough if this goal is enough developed in the article so that the fair use of this image would be correct. You will have to prove this particular image adds value to the article.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:30, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Notability of Spanish second division

User Wajeehj (talk · contribs) is creating a string of very short articles about footballers in the Spanish second division. Am I right to think that this does not meet WP:ATHLETE? JohnCD (talk) 09:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

If you mean Segunda División, then that is listed as fully professional (with a source) on the list of fully pro leagues linked at the top of this page, so the players would pass WP:ATHLETE. Having said that, though, the quality of the articles is universally horrendous, with no formatting at all, and one (Javier Monsálvez Carazo) which simply consists of a reiteration of the guy's name -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:50, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Of course, in order to pass WP:ATHLETE, they have to actually play at this level - simply being on a team's roster without making any first team appearances isn't enough. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 09:53, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

That means the typical "currently plays as a midfielder at FC Cartagena" is at least an assertion of notability, so there are no grounds for deletion. Maybe somebody will improve the articles... JohnCD (talk)

I have warned the editor not too create more of these unreferenced sub-stubs. We have more than enough unreferenced BLPs than we are able to handle already. Rettetast (talk) 10:12, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

David Cornell

Can an admin please re-create the article for David Cornell as he made his debut for Swansea in the League Cup on Tuesday. Link here. Kosack (talk) 23:19, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Done. Black Kite 23:32, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Kosack (talk) 23:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't there be a glossary?

How would I go about explaining what marking is in the Kakha Kaladze article? Since it isn't noteworthy enough for its own article wouldn't it be ideal to have a list of definitions of all the commonly used football terms like "brace" that also don't have articles? Spiderone (talk) 12:18, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

It is mentioned on the Marking disambiguation page (6th bullet point: "in football (soccer), assigning a defender to a certain offensive player"). Not a dictionary and all that but maybe further mention of the term in Association football could be useful in the assumption that some readers might need a hand with the term..Cptnono (talk) 12:27, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

We have articles on man-to-man marking and zonal marking but strangely not one on marking.. Nanonic (talk) 12:35, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

So fix the Wikilinks/redirects or merge them?Cptnono (talk) 12:41, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Not only we have such articles, but also a 'zona mista' paragraph into Catenaccio#Zona mista. However "zona mista" (Italian for "mixed zone") is actually a variant of man-to-man marking, so it would be suited better into an article like man-to-man marking or Marking (association football). --Angelo (talk) 08:39, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd vote to merge the two marking articles, plus add a bit of a description, to make a general "Marking" article. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 14:12, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

How do I go about requesting this merge? Spiderone (talk) 15:08, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I occasionally use wiktionary links in such situations, which can be created by putting wikt: in front of a wikilink and then piping, e.g. one-two or giant-killing. Oldelpaso (talk) 14:10, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I've been WP:BOLD and I've created Marking (association football), an article that is actually the merge of man-to-man marking and zonal marking. --Angelo (talk) 23:25, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Are stages of a competition, and final positions, proper nouns?

In the 2006 World Cup (for example), did Sven lead England against his native Sweden in group B or in Group B?

Was the card-fest between Portugal and Netherlands in the Second Round, or the second round?

Was it a Quarterfinal, or a quarterfinal, between Germany and Argentina that went to penalties? (There again, it could have been a quarter-final, a Quarter-Final, a Quarter-final, a quarter final, a Quarter final or even a Quarter Final, but please not a quarter-Final or a quarter Final)

Did Zidane get sent off in the Final, or in the final?

Were the Azzurri the Winners, or merely the winners?

I'm fairly sure they were neither Runners Up nor Runners-Up, but were France Runners up, or runners up, and in either case (in two senses of the word) do they get a hyphen?

Did the hosts beat Portugal to get third place, Third place, or Third Place?

Thoughts, and if possible references to MoS, policies or previous consensus, please? Kevin McE (talk) 11:55, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd say from popular useage they were proper nouns i.e. Group A, Second Round, Final etc. Giant Snowman 12:01, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I would say lower case for everything above, with semi-final and quarter-final hyphenated, though there is a case for capitalising a single match that has a widely recognised name, e.g. 2006 FIFA World Cup Final. --Jameboy (talk) 16:04, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. If the tournament's official website (or the site of the tournament's organiser) treats the round names as proper nouns, then so should we. To do otherwise, would count as OR, wouldn't it? – Pee Jay 16:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I've always hyphenated Semi-Final (because I don't treat "Semi" as a word in itself), but not Quarter Final. For upper/lower case, I'd refer back to the Primary Sources and go along with what is used there. - fchd (talk) 16:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, quarter-final and semi-final should always be hyphenated (at least in British English). – Pee Jay 16:15, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

It's not hugely important just as long as it's consistent within the article. Something I need to do with articles I'm working on. Spiderone (talk) 16:17, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Just checked my trusty Collins (British) Dictionary, and it gives, horribly, quaterfinals as a single word and no alternatives. I still like the two separate words though! - fchd (talk) 17:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

To add more, I believe it is quarter-finals in BrE, and quarterfinals in AmE. It is either a hyphenated, or it's one word, never two. And I think rounds could be capitalized in certain situations, but I'm not 100% on that. But stuff like winner/champion/runner-up (they are plural in BrE, I think, and runner-up always has a hyphen) are not capitalized. Digirami (talk) 16:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah: I thought this one would have lots of personal variation, but little by way of confidence as to which is right. Can I further muddy the waters by suggesting that sometimes the word is used as a defining noun (the 2009 FA Cup Semi-final), sometimes as a descriptive noun (the two teams met again in the semi-final) and sometimes as an adjective (he is particularly remembered for his semi-final hat-trick). Kevin McE (talk) 18:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Triple huzzuh to Kevin for the wonderful set of examples, regardless of the outcome. I would just like to chime in that in AmEng, the word is never hyphenated, but capitalization varies. I think this is certainly something we should try to get a handle on project-wide to present a more uniform look to articles. 69.135.191.49 (talk) 23:14, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Live scores

Can I remind everyone that the posting of live scores to articles is contrary to Wikipedia policy, since Wikipedia is not a news service. Even if you don't do it yourself, I implore you all to revert any additions of live scores to articles, particularly if the changes are made without reference to any sources. – Pee Jay 21:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Pot calling the kettle black? Mate, I watched you make numerous changes to the 2009 FA Community Shield article while the match was in progress. I'm not saying I disagree with you about adding live scores, just that you should lead by example. Jhantor (talk) 14:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Irrelevant. You obviously weren't watching me revert the Champions League qualifying phase article last night. – Pee Jay 15:27, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

You may be correct in terms of policy, but I don't see the point of continually reverting to remove the scores. I used to be of the same opinion as you, but now really cannot be bothered when there are so many users who do this. Surely we've all got more constructive things we can be doing? - fchd (talk) 15:49, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I suppose, then, that this message is more of a call for people not to start adding live scores. You don't have to revert, but as long as you don't help break the rules, that's fine. – Pee Jay 15:55, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

"Don't help break the rules". You just told me that this was irrelevant. Jhantor (talk) 01:51, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Actually, after re-reading What Wikipedia Is Not, there is no prohibition about things like live scores. I still can't see the point myself, but that's not really relevant! - fchd (talk) 07:20, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I don't have a problem with live scores being added, as long as they're done correctly. I just don't like the hypocrisy of some users. And, I, too, feel it is not a breach of What Wikipedia Is Not. The way I understand the policy, simply reporting match results is as much a violation as posting live scores. Jhantor (talk) 08:42, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

If you're watching/listening to a match, why do you want to spend time updating Wikipedia? --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 16:06, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, quite! – Pee Jay 16:10, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I use to do reverts more, but now I just wait a few hours or so for these vandals to go away so I can fix articles now. Govvy (talk) 18:42, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

They usually add the right scores. It's not worth the effort to delete the live updates. Just add the match report and other correct and specific data afterwards. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 19:04, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

My turn to throw my hat in the ring. There is this pesky line in the Not News section that says "breaking news should not be emphasized or otherwise treated differently from other information". Live scores is breaking new, and we treat it differently from other information by italicizing it. Digirami (talk) 01:32, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Color for drawn matches in Results tables

If there are no objections, I will change the background color for drawn matches in the results boxes of league season articles from white to a light yellow in order to get a better separation between actual draws and blank cells. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 12:37, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Please don't. If anything get rid of the colours for home/away wins, as they affect the readability of the page. - fchd (talk) 13:29, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree with fchd, if anything, just take the colours out citing WP:ACCESSIBILITY. Woody (talk) 13:37, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Upton Park riots

I have started the article about the incident at Upton Park, under the title 2009 Upton Park riot. I would greatly welcome some help in sourcing background, reaction, match details and team line-ups. 03 md 16:35, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Why is it not the Boleyn Ground riots? Spiderone 08:35, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

A lot of the trouble happened in the vincity of Upton Park around the train station. --Jimbo^[online] 14:01, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Isn't this a case of WP:NOT#NEWS? пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 10:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't know which the precedents are, I could find 2008 UEFA Cup Final riots, I heard the Upton Park riots being described as "the worst in Britain for 30 years", if this is true, they would've been worse than the UEFA Cup ones and perhaps at least equally notable? cha ndl er 10:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

They always say the worst for xxx years, whether it is or it isn't. You could compare Millwall 2002, for instance. Personally, I think it is a bit soon to start writing about what happened outside Upton Park. At the moment, it's just a news story with associated media hysteria. Struway2 (talk) 11:01, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Agree with you. This is a clear case of WP:RECENTISM and WP:NOTNEWS, so I would say the case is merely worth a reference in the Carling Cup 2009–10 and West Ham United F.C. season 2009–10 articles. --Angelo (talk) 11:59, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Or include somewhere in East London derby. --Jimbo^[online] 14:01, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Eduardo diving row

I'm surprised that the info keeps getting removed because many reliable sources have commented on it. [5][6][7][8] Surely to ignore something like this would be bias towards Eduardo. Spiderone 12:05, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Paul Dickov

please keep an eye on this, i added a source saying he is set to join derby on loan, people are now using that source to say the move is complete, this is incorrect to can you help me keep the article accurate. Jimmy Skitz's Answer Machine 17:40, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

This is precisely why you should only add finalised moves, loan or otherwise. For transfer rumours and players "set to join" other clubs, people can turn to their news outlet of choice, not wikipedia. Madcynic (talk) 20:50, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Category:English football chairmen and investors

Within this category, most of the subcats (but not all, but that's a separate issue) are of the form Footown F.C. directors and chairmen, which doesn't match the parent cat. I'd also be pretty certain that many of the sub-cats contain people who never invested in the clubs (I'm pretty sure Brian Moore did not sink any of his money into Gillingham to get a seat on the board in the 1980s), so they are in a parent category to which they don't rightly belong. So should the title of the parent cat be changed......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:00, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, we need a standardized title for all of those in that category.--EchetusXe 12:56, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Uniforms and squad lists

When is it ok to have the squad list and uniforms of a team in an article (besides the World Cup, continental finals, and one off important matches)? I was looking at the 2009 Canadian Soccer Championship, and it seems too much have the squad lists and uniforms of the teams in this article. Digirami (talk) 22:33, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Giovani Dos Santos

I noticed a recent addition to his article is sort of a cross over of fan talk from BBC's 606 blog/comments. Should this type of information be considered Wiki material or not? I thought this was very borderline and was thinking of removing it. Some thoughts please. Govvy (talk) 10:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I've reverted it. Message boards are not reliable sources. Oldelpaso (talk) 10:54, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, so all other message boards I should removal as well I take it, I have sometimes seen a few around I haven't removed, but I have forgotten where they are and on what articles. I will remove them next time I see them. Govvy (talk) 11:12, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

MLS Cup templates

With regard to this discussion, a TfD has been set up and could do with some more contributions from WP:FOOTY members. To avoid accusations of canvassing, I am not suggesting that anyone !vote in a particular way, only that you should !vote. – Pee Jay 23:12, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Ancestry

Is it just me that finds edits like this? a bit unneccessary? I think, if something lacks citation, and it's uncontroversial, then all you need to do is ad a {{cn}} tag. To me, the idea that someone named Giuseppe is of Italian descent seems fairly uncontroversial, and yet scores of German footballers are having their heritage removed from their WP pages. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 08:34, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons.

–Jimmy Wales Jimmy Wales (2006-05-16). ""Zero information is preferred to misleading or false information"". WikiEN-l electronic mailing list archive. Retrieved 2006-06-11.

My siblings and I have names uncontroversially synonymous with Irish, Spanish, Italian, Dutch, German, English and French, yet only one of those nationalities actually applies to our family. My offspring have names which belie their heritage. Yes, it seems uncontroversial, but prove it--ClubOranje^T 09:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

As said above, it's not possible to extrapolate ancestry from someone's name, particularly from just their given name. And descent, nationality and citizenship aren't uncontroversial: see Talk:Giuseppe Rossi and Talk:Stan Lazaridis, to name but two. We're not supposed to add any information to living people without a reliable source, let alone possibly contentious personal info. And re the categories, WP:BLPCAT says "Each article must state the facts that result in the use of the category tag, and these facts must be sourced." cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:18, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

This "Is he Greek or Macedonian?" thing also exists on Robert Stambolziev to a certain extent. Loads of people have names that are foreign to their nationality such as Jose Baxter, Roberto Hilbert and Antonio Bryan plus all those Brazilians with names like Schumacher, Muller and Lincoln. Spiderone 15:18, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

There is a huge difference between asserting ancestry through a last name and holding citizenship. Citizenship is both interesting biographically but has caused concerns over what country a kid is going to represent. Australia and Scotland's Bradden Inman (Newcastle) is an example. Reina comes up with many hits on a google news search as Italian in the summary section. These are all pay-per-view. He is also noted as German and Italian at some stats based sites[9] but these could be based off of Wikipedia depending on how long that edit stood. For some players it may be controversial but I think editors should be searching for sources in this case which is why the tag exists.Cptnono (talk) 10:27, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Beechlawn Rovers

Knowledgeable eyes, especially those of anyone familiar with the Irish football scene, would be welcome on this supected hoax article. Please comment on the article talk page. JohnCD (talk) 21:20, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Blatant hoax, whoever made up that Irish Independent article couldn't be bothered to find out how to spell "Bordeaux", and all the external links are to forums and free domain name pages. -- Big Dom 21:30, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks; maybe not quite blatant enough for G3, so I've PRODded it. JohnCD (talk) 22:21, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Think thats the second time that hoax has been made.--EchetusXe 00:53, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

It is indeed. A similar initial version of Beechlawn Rovers F.C. was created some months ago and was prodded as hoax/nn. While the prod was extant, and following comments at its talk page, the creator and/or an IP editor removed most of the drivel, reducing the article to one about a genuine but totally non-notable parks team. Which was then deleted as non-notable when the prod expired. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 07:50, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, and an AFC in March 2008 read: "Beechlawn Rovers was a football club based in Coolock in Dublin which was formed in 2004 by a group of friends from the locality who payed football every week in the local park, Beechlawn Green. The club existed for 3 years, until it folded in May 2007." That's probably a true description; despite that AFC being declined, Beechlawn Rovers Football Club got in and was deleted per WP:CSD#A7. The hoaxer is certainly persistent. JohnCD (talk) 08:08, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Look at the dates. [10] 91.106.100.15 (talk) 10:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that image has been transparently faked from this genuine one used in the Irish Independent article. JohnCD (talk) 10:36, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Pronunciation

A user recently added IPA pronunciations for a bunch of English league clubs. However many of them are plain wrong, so I simply removed the most obvious ones. On second thought, it might actually be useful to have the correct IPA pronunciation of these particular names, as they are the ones most likely to be mispronounced. So maybe someone who actually knows IPA could correct what needs to be corrected in this user' list of edits (see my edits for the ones I removed). Bohdan80 (talk) 11:32, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Fenerbahçe S.K.

Can somebody please have a look at Fenerbahçe S.K., a large serie of IP changes the squadlist just based on roumers. --> Halmstad, Charla to moi 04:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

WAFU

I have created new pages:

I could do with some help finding and adding information!! :)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBigJagielka (talk • contribs) 22:48, 8 July 2009

Is this really neccessary?

Are the contents of this Category:20th-century male football (soccer) players really neccessary? It looks like overcategorisation again with the sub categories being quadrouple intersections of C20th-male-football player-position. King of the North East 14:30, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Blimey, I never realised there were only seven 20th-century male football (soccer) defenders. How long would it take to populate those categories? And what exactly would the point be? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Agree, the creator of this has not limited their imagination to football take a look at their catalogue of recent work[11].Tmol42 (talk) 14:40, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

He/she also created an article on Tom Boric separate from the one on Paul Diamond even though they are the same person, which is clearly against policy -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:49, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I believe similar categories exist for basketball players (I know because I created an article for Jonathan Spector's grandfather Art Spector yesterday!), and I have to say it seemed like overkill to me! – Pee Jay 19:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I've nominated these categories for deletion. The discussion has been started here. – Pee Jay 21:36, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Controversial list

Should we trust this list of professional leagues? It's completely unsourced and contains leagues that we know aren't professional such as Vietnam, Bangladesh and Finland. Spiderone 08:15, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Just slap {{Unreferenced}} on the whole list or {{Unreferenced section}} on the specific section. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 09:11, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I've done that now. I've also removed a couple of dubious ones. Spiderone 15:05, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

According to Football in Algeria it is planned to be fully professional by 2010. This isn't sourced but if anyone can find one it might be important to add to the two different lists and related articles.Cptnono (talk) 01:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Player nationalities

A quick query about national flags in the squad section of team articles: As I understand it if a player is born in a particular country, has lived in that country his whole life and has not been capped by another nation then his birth nation should be the country indicated on the squad list. I've reverted edits made by ip editor 86.134.95.215 (talk • contribs • info • WHOIS), who has been changing Jo Kuffour's nationality to Ghanaian on the Bristol Rovers squad list, presumbly because he has trained with the Ghanaian national team, but has not been capped.

Unfortunately the user is unwilling/unable to engage in any discussion about the subject, so I'm just looking for a little bit of reassurance here that I am in the right, or is the consensus that being called up to a national squad is enough to define his nationality? These little colourful rectangles are more trouble than they are worth! :-) — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 13:46, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Hrmm, an interesting one. WP:FLAGBIO says

"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."

which doesn't indicate what you should put then if a player hasn't played for a national team or declared a sporting nationality. I'm tempted to say leave it blank, but I'll wait for someone else to chime in. Nanonic (talk) 14:24, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

If Kuffour has trained then with the Ghana team, then the intention seems to have been for him to eventually play with the national team. Even though that never materialised, Ghana is his sporting nationality. Giant Snowman 15:11, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I would agree with The Snowman. And that is not just because one of my earliest memories include watching that film.--EchetusXe 21:58, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the input, I'll go ahead and revert my previous revert! — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 08:41, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I also agree. He is Ghanian. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 15:08, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I would disagree: he still has the option of playing for (at least) two countries. Until he represents one of them, there is no representational grounds for determining his nationality. It is arguable that it is WPCrystalballing to say that he will be any more describable as a Ghanaian footballer than any other English-born player with family roots there. Kevin McE (talk) 17:01, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

AfDs at risk

These afDs don't have enough votes to reach a conclusion:

Spiderone 12:46, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Russell Saunders--EchetusXe 17:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

FAO Administrators

Could you please restore Joe Cobb (footballer) and Richard Martin (footballer) as they made senior appearances in the Football League Trophy tonight as per [12] and [13]. Cheers, --Jimbo^[online] 20:28, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Done and done. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 21:42, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Paco Clos help

Various IP users insist, despite my polite words, to not pipe club names on this article i.e. it should be [[FC Barcelona|Barcelona]] and not [[FC Barcelona]]. Can an admin semi-protect please as it has been going on for days now and is getting annoyinf & boring. Thanks, Giant Snowman 08:34, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Celta de Vigo squad

{{Celta de Vigo squad}} isn't appearing properly on players' article, and neither myself nor Vasco can for the life of us work out why. Can anyone else take a quick look please? Cheers, Giant Snowman 09:34, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

One of the lines was missing a set of curly brackets. I've fixed it now. – Pee Jay 09:46, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks. Giant Snowman 11:41, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Ditto. --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 14:56, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Footballers in Spain by club

The standard naming convention for player categories is "Wikipedia F.C. players" - Category:Arsenal F.C. players Category:AS Monaco FC players, Category:Juventus F.C. players etc. But take a look at Category:Footballers in Spain by club - is there any the player categories for Spanish clubs are "footballers" as opposed to "players"? Giant Snowman 15:56, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Many nations use the "footballers" naming convention, most often because the nation has mult-sport clubs, where football is just one of many sports, and using "players" doesn't properly disambiguate among football, basketball, or any other sport players for the club. Jogurney (talk) 16:45, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

True, but what about purely football teams such as Real Madrid Club de Fútbol? Giant Snowman 16:50, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

There is Real Madrid Baloncesto.--Latouffedisco (talk) 17:22, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand why there are categories like Real Madrid CF footballers (or any category with FC or CF and footballer in the same name). It seems redundant and probably should be changed. Jogurney (talk) 17:53, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Because [[Category:Liverpool footballers]] could equally validly be understood as meaning players with a connection with the city, not the club of the same name? Kevin McE (talk) 18:11, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. I meant that the better alternative was Clubname FC players or Clubname CF players. Jogurney (talk) 18:12, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

That had occurred to me just after I sent it: I have just edit-clashed with you as I came back with a deletion and the edit-note "del my own: he meant why "footballers" rather than "players", not why "Liverpool F.C.", not "Liverpool" (I hope)". Sorry Kevin McE (talk) 18:16, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that there are cases where even a different sport club uses the FC: Exemple FC Porto hockey team is not called HC Porto but FC Porto. FkpCascais (talk) 20:44, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Admin action needed

I discussed this a bit earlier up on the page (Combining Lower Level Leagues heading), but User:ZZ86 has been combining lower-level Spanish leagues in awkward ways. I was hoping that an admin could roll back the combined articles into the old ones that already existed. matt91486 (talk) 06:32, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Beare

An "H. Beare" played for Blackpool between 1920 and 1926, according to my club-history book, making 169 league appearances and scoring 112 goals. Thing is, he isn't listed in Michael Joyce's Football League Players' Records 1888 to 1939 book. There's an article on George Beare, who, strangely, isn't included in the former book but is in Joyce's. The only thing I can think of is that the surname of "H." is misspelled and he appears elsewhere in Joyce's book. Any help would be appreciated. - Dudesleeper / Talk 22:19, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Someone with access to allfootballers.com could bring up a list of all the players that played for the club in each season between 1920 and 1926, and check for someone with a name similar to Beare. Try Mattythewhite, I think he has an account...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:07, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I've had a look at www.allfootballers.com, but I'm afraid I've drawn a complete blank. There was no-one with a name anything like "Beare" listed between 1920 and 1926. The only player I could see who played through all those years was Billy Benton. The only "Beare" on the website is George Beare. Sorry, I can't help more. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 12:19, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

The player you're looking for is Harry Bedford (169 matches 112 goals). His name is missing on page 377 of the Complete Record of Blackpool book, and his stats were added to H. Beare. H. Beare is G. Beare (typing error G is next to H) Cattivi (talk) 17:59, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I did think that it might be Harry Bedford but looking things up at work is not easy. As you can see, the figures match precisely. Give that man a barnstar. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 18:51, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

That's the most impressive thing I've seen yet on Wikipedia. Excellent work, Cattivi! - Dudesleeper / Talk 22:30, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Plus, I'm slightly embarrassed I hadn't noticed Bedford's omission in the seventeen years I've had the book. I definitely would have before two decades was up, natch... - Dudesleeper / Talk 22:33, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Charlie Bicknell stats

Does anyone have Charlie Bicknell's league stats for his spell at Chesterfield? Thanks, Giant Snowman 11:29, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Chesterfield F.C. (an Excel file). cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:38, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Cheers! Giant Snowman 12:24, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Denaldin Hamzagic

Moved from Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 12:22, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Why can't I create an article on footballer Denaldin Hamzagic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vjecnobordo (talk • contribs) 19:19, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

It is the consensus of the community that Mr Hamzagic does not meet the inclusion criteria for an article in the encyclopedia. See the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denaldin Hamzagic. You may also wish to familiarise yourself with the inclusion criterion for athletes at WP:Athlete and the general notability criterion at WP:Notability. Kind regards, --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 19:49, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Interestingly, Mr. Hamzagic has recently signed with FK Sarajevo (a professional club) and has already played for the team in the UEFA Europa League. Would probably pass WP:ATHLETE now. As a football manager would say: "The boy done good". Fribbler (talk) 21:53, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, might well pass WP:Athlete although the deleted article was about a Denaldin Hamzagic who had been living in the USA since 1999 and was with New England Revolution in the Major League Soccer so I'm uncertain whether this is the same chap. This conversation would probably be best over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football; I'll move it across. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 12:19, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I've moved this conversation from the Administrator's noticeboard as it's not really an admin matter. Would someone like to follow this up and help out Vjecnobordo? --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 12:22, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

According to this site, it is the same guy and he has played in the UEFA Europa League...The Hack 12:50, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand why Dado Hamzagic can't get an article, but players like Irfan Lusnickic who hasn't even signed a pro-contract gets one?!? Hamzagic has played a major role during the qualification process in Uefa Europa League. I have even watched the game against Helsingborg live in the stadium, and he was the one who made the last penalty, which lead FK Sarajevo to the next round...--Vjecnobordo (talk) 03:35, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of Hull City A.F.C.

Hull City A.F.C. has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 15:21, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll have a stab at fixing the issues if nobody minds, I've got family connections with the Tigers............ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:25, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Club wikilinks

Hi there teammates,

i would like to pose a question that's been puzzling me for the last months: are there any guidelines on how club names (its wikilinks that is) should be presented? I have seen (some i should say WITNESS) various edit wars going on about this and, since i do not wish to be part (at least intentionally) of another, i have this doubt...

My approach is, especially for large names, the following: i display the club's full name (it's informative and 100% harmless) - for example Figueirense Futebol Clube in storyline, then link hidden in box, only showing FIGUEIRENSE. Some folks go and compress the name also in storyline. For what i have seen, in thousands of player pages edited/visited, there seems to be no pattern, with some even showing clubnames in full in infobox, although i think the latter is merely an "accident".

Can someone tell me if there any proper steps on "conducting" this matters, please? Attentively,

VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 17:23, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, it should always be [[FC Barcelona|Barcelona]] / [[Arsenal F.C.|Arsenal]] and not [[FC Barcelona]] / [[Arsenal F.C.]]. Giant Snowman 17:31, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

The only case I'd use the full name in the body of the article is in a sentence like "Smith was born in Middlesbrough and joined hometown club Middlesbrough F.C. in 1968", to distinguish the place from the football club when both appear close together. In general I'd agree with GiantSnowman. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:43, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Club categories

If a player played for, say, Scunthorpe & Lindsey United, should he be included in Category:Scunthorpe United F.C. players? Scunthorpe & Lindsey United F.C. redirects to Scunthorpe United F.C., but I thought it best to check. - Dudesleeper / Talk 23:21, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

If it's the same club, which it is in this instance, then yes. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:30, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Stephen O'Halloran: grey area

Stephen O'Halloran is currently being added and removed to the Aston Villa squad list about once a week for quite a while. His contract with Villa ran out in the summer as far as I can work out but that is not official and he has not been officially released by the club. The 2009–10 press release from Villa about squad numbers omitted him ("Squad Numbers 2009-10". Aston Villa F.C. Retrieved 2009-09-02.) as does the UEFA squad list. ("Aston Villa FC". UEFA. Retrieved 2009-09-02.) The Aston Villa main squad list though does still list him and that is generally what is used to determine the squad list and squad numbers.("Squad list". Aston Villa F.C. Retrieved 2009-08-20.)

So, what I am asking is whether he should be in the main Aston Villa F.C.#Current squad list? What do you all think? Woody (talk) 10:17, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

As it appears the AVFC website squad list has been updated to include this season's purchases (apart from that fat bloke that got stuck in the Premier League's fax machine yesterday) and O'Halloran's still in it, I'd assume he was still a squad member until officially announced otherwise. In terms of citing reliable sources, I don't see what else you can do. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:39, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I think leaving it for now is the best solution - alternatively, as a Villa fan, I sure hope we didn't release him. matt91486 (talk) 16:40, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, it just got a bit more complicated. James Collins has just been given O'Halloran's squad number (29). They haven't updated the main squad list yet so we will see whether O'Halloran drops off it. If so, then we would have to update the articles accordingly. Woody (talk) 15:41, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Player seasons in infoboxes

Hi. I have been wondering the best way of showing exactly the seasons in wich a certain player has played in a certain club. With players that have played entire seasons in different clubs I find no questions, but the ones that changed clubs in the winter break, I do have questions. In the players pages I have been starting, I have followed a policy of indicating the SEASONS that a player spended in a certain club, not calendar YEARS. But that makes perhaps some confusion with editors that not edit that way, couse you can find players that have played ;Exemple:

Osasuna 2002-2005
Espanyol 2004-2006

This way, I´m indicating that a player have played the season 2004-2005 in both clubs. What I see in majority of cases is a "random chousing" of to what team to atribute that season, so it would "wrongly" be indicated. Exemple:

Osasuna 2002-2005
Espanyol 2005-2006

In cases players played for half season I usually find only one year written Exemple:

Chelsea 1997-1999
Sunderland 2000
Tottenham 2000-2003

But here you can´t really see what half season that player played in Sunderland, was it in 1999-2000 or 2000-2001 ? So, I have been putting (Ex: if it was in 1999-2000, 1999-(2000), indicating in brackets the part he played of that season).

Chelsea 1997-2000
Sunderland 1999-(2000)
Tottenham 2000-2003

This question is mainly concerning seasons in central and south european style seasons, that are played from summer to summer. In many American, african or some scandinavian or eastern countries, where seasons start in February or March, and end before the end of the year, this is not a problem. For some players that played many half seasons the infobox looks pretty confusing having many time only one year indicated and sometimes the same year repeated 3 or 4 times. Any thoughts? FkpCascais (talk) 21:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

My understanding is that the years in the player infoboxes are always Calendar Years - seasons are irrelevant. Thus a player who joins a club (say on loan) in January until July 2009, the infobox would simply say "2009". Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 21:34, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure it used to say somewhere, perhaps it does, but the dates are supposed to show when the player was contracted to the club, regardless of when (or if) he played for them. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 21:41, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I´m not saying played, like played in field, I´m saying played, as you ment, under contract. The player doesn´t even need to "play", he can have Ex: Sunderland 1999-2000 0 (0) . ´My question is if I can put 1999-(2000) for the case he played (was in the club) since January 2000 until July 2000, by this indicating exactly what half season he was in that club, instead of putting simply 2000 only. What about the first exemple? FkpCascais (talk) 04:31, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I misunderstood. If it's necessary, I think the only clear way round it would be to include the months, to say "Sunderland 2000 (Jan-Jul)". But personally, I don't think it is necessary. Sometimes we try to fit too much detail into the infobox when it's really supposed to just give a basic outline of the player's career and the detail belongs in the article itself. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:02, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, but, can I do, in the pages I make, the naxt way of putting the years:

Exemple:(completely random clubs) an player that has played:

Osasuna - between summer 1992 until January 1995
Espanyol - between January 1995 until summer 1997
Chelsea - between summer 1997 until January 2000
Sunderland - between January 2000 until summer 2000
Tottenham - between summer 2000 until summer 2003

The usual way of doing it it would look like this in the infobox:

Osasuna 1992-1995
Espanyol 1995-1997
Chelsea 1997-1999
Sunderland 2000
Tottenham 2000-2003

This way you miss the half season that a player played in Espanyol(between January 1995 until summer 1995, that belongs to the season 1994-95), and the half season in Chelsea (between summer 1999 until January 2000), and the time spend in Sunderland wan´t bee defined by season. By my way it would look like:

Osasuna 1992-1995
Espanyol 1994-1997
Chelsea 1997-2000
Sunderland 1999-(2000)
Tottenham 2000-2003

This way, I´m indicating that the player has played the season 1994-1995 in both Osasuna and Espanyol (like he really did), without having to choose to what club should I give him that season, and, I´m not missing the half season of 1999-2000 that he played in Chelsea. This is not easy to explain, but is quite simple and more accurate. Thanx. FkpCascais (talk) 17:27, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I think that in the infobox it should be years of transfer, but it should be explained in the main article when a player joined/left a team. Giant Snowman 17:37, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I know, I´ve been allways trying to do it in the text, but there are so many articles without a text... The most complete information about a players career I still find, in many non star players cases, in the infoboxes... My point is that many times, because of "years continuation logic", in the cases of, in my exemple, Osasuna and Espanyol cases, the infobox would look in this two possibilities:

Osasuna 1992-1994
Espanyol 1994-1997

This way missing the half season in Osasuna (from summer 1994 until January 1995), and giving the impression he played the entire season 1994-95 in Espanyol, or

Osasuna 1992-1995
Espanyol 1995-1997

this way missing the half season in Espanyol (from January 1995 until summer 1995), giving the impression he played the entire season 1994-95 in Osasuna. By my way:

Osasuna 1992-1995
Espanyol 1994-1997

I´m, I think, more close to the thru, because I´m indicating that the player played in Osasuna in the seasons: 92-93, 93-94 and 94-95 (even if it was half, only until winter break), but it is thru; and in Espanyol in the seasons 94-95 (also half, but he did play) 95-96 and 96-97. But I have been corrected in some cases, people put some year forward or back, so there would be continuation in the years. This gets more important when a player played, exemple, from summer 1995 until December 1996 (playing one and a half seasons) and putting the total league caps and goals in only 1995-1996 period would look like he played very much in only one season, and by my way it should be put 1995-1997, since he played the first half of the 96-97 season. I´m sorry bothering everyone so much with this. FkpCascais (talk) 19:39, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

To me, this is a good idea. However, It would be useful to add a footnote at the bottom of infobox templates. This is a major issue as players tend to more and more half seasons...So It need a consensus.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:16, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. I think we should stick to calendar years, with any explanation kept to the article text. To do otherwise would be confusing. As in the above example, if you see that someone's Osasuna career "ended" in 1995 and their Espanyol career "began" in 1994, surely that is quite confusing! – Pee Jay 10:32, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree with PeeJay - the example where a player seemingly finished playing for one club in 1995 but debuted for his next one in 1994 looks ridiculous -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:47, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Thirded - one club ending in 95 and the next starting in 94 is far too confusing! Giant Snowman 11:10, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Count me on PeeJay's side on this one. Confusing and unnecessary. -- Alexf^(talk) 11:37, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, thanx a lot for your opinions, but I still find a question here. Many times we only know that a certain player moved to another club in midle of, let´s say, 1994-95 season, but without knowing was it in December 1994 or January 1995 (it´s the same anyway), so we still have to "randomly" choose to what club to atribute that season, so it will have yours "years continuation" logic. By my way, it may look confusing, but it´s more correct since, in the exemple, the player played in Osasuna in the seasons: 1992-93, 1993-94 and 1994-95, thus 1992-1995, and not 1992-1994; and in Espanyol, in 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97, thus 1994-1997, so it would be correct. And seasons in football do mather, more than calendar years, I think... FkpCascais (talk) 15:51, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Article and piped names of certain Mexican clubs

I was hoping to get a discussion started on the proper article location and piped names of certain Mexican clubs, namely those affiliated with universities in Mexico. The three clubs I had in mind, were Pumas (associated with Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México or UNAM), Tecos (associated with Universidad Autónoma de Guadalajara or UAG), and Tigres (associated with Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León or UANL). There doesn't seem to be a consistent way to refer to these clubs, either on WP or in the real world, but I was hoping that we could get a better guideline that could be used in all Mexican league articles, as well as CONCACAF articles, with all of your help.

Pumas is currently at Club Universidad Nacional, Tecos is currently at Estudiantes Tecos, and Tigres is currently at C.D. Universitario de Nuevo León. UNAM is currently at National Autonomous University of Mexico, UAG is currently at Universidad Autónoma de Guadalajara, and UANL is currently at Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León.

We could either move those articles to consistent positions, or move them to basically what we decide on for a piped link name, but that brings up a different issue.

The question I would like to have answered is which format is preferred for piped names, as I think we should try to use a similar format for all three teams:

1. Pumas, Tecos, and Tigres
2. UNAM, UAG, and UANL
3. U.N.A.M., U.A.G., and U.A.N.L.
4. Pumas UNAM, Tecos UAG, and Tigres UANL
5. Pumas U.N.A.M., Tecos U.A.G., and Tigres U.A.N.L.
6. UNAM Pumas, UAG Tecos, and UANL Tigres
7. U.N.A.M. Pumas, U.A.G. Tecos, and U.A.N.L. Tigres

That seems to cover all of the options, but any further suggestions, like leaving the articles more or less where they currently are, are also a possibility. Any thoughts? Thanks in advance if you even made it this far. – Football.Fútbol.Soccer 03:40, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I prefer option 1 for simplicity and because it matches common usage, but that will only work as long as the club "nicknames" remain easily identifiable. I thought at one point there may have been two Tiburones football clubs from Veracruz (one in the Primera and one in Primera A) so this might become a problem in the future. Jogurney (talk) 03:52, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

The problem with #1 is that we can't use that as the article name. Which would you prefer out of 4, 5, 6, and 7? Those, we could presumably use as an article name, with either the University name piped out of the short name used for tables, brackets, etc., or included in the link, meaning we could leave the link unpiped. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Football.Fútbol.Soccer (talk • contribs) 04:03, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I don't really mind where the article is located although option 4 is easiest and closest to common usage. The piped names are more important and I believe option 1 is the best for those. Jogurney (talk) 04:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I have been using option 4 , simple and complete, but 6 is also "usuable". FkpCascais (talk) 04:39, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Where should the article be located? – Football.Fútbol.Soccer 04:51, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Keep them as they are. Pumas, Tecos, and Tigres are nicknames because they are the mascots and not part of the official name (although I don't know what a Teco is). UAG did the smart thing and incorporated Tecos into the new club name: Club Deportivo Estudiantes Tecos. So that article name is fine and most correct in that case. The problem with using just UNAM and UANL for the other is that they are also the acronym for their respective universities, you're still going to need disambiguation for them. Club Universidad Nacional is fine, and so is C.D. Universitario de Nuevo León. Do not use incorporate the mascot either, since other clubs who do not have the mascot as part of the official name (this leaves US clubs out), might want to do that, like Club América, who might want to incorporate Aguilas to the name. Digirami (talk) 21:30, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Tecos are owls. I agree with most of what you're saying, except for the fact that those names are not exactly straightforward for someone who would want to find Pumas, Tecos, or Tigres, but that is what redirects are for. My question remains, however, how would you prefer to pipe these clubs in tables, brackets, etc.? – Football.Fútbol.Soccer 22:28, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I vote for solution number 4 for using in infoboxes, etc. FkpCascais (talk) 23:02, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah. See for me, búhos are owls.

As far as I'm concerned, Pumas and Tigres are nicknames to the clubs, and are not part of the official name of the club. So they should not be part of the clubs' name in bracket and tables. The name in brackets and tables should be some form of the official name, preferably UNAM, UANL (mainly because using Universidad Nacional and Universidad de Nuevo León is a bit big, but its not wrong either). Estudiantes Tecos is a seperate case. The official name of the club now is Club Deportivo Estudiantes Tecos, so use Estudiantes Tecos. But that is only for the current use of the name. Any mention of that club in tables and brackets prior to this summer should be UAG. Digirami (talk) 23:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

We really should use Pumas and Tigres in tables, etc. because that is the WP:COMMONNAME of the clubs. Look at mediotiempo.com, reforma.com, etc. and you will see this is true in Mexico as well. I agree that we can leave the article names as is (so long as there are redirects so the typical user can find them). Jogurney (talk) 00:54, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay so we should probably move Estudiantes Tecos to C.D. Estudiantes Tecos, which should be piped as Estudiantes Tecos, correct? I say that because we should be consistent with C.D. Guadalajara, C.D. Saprissa, et al. – Football.Fútbol.Soccer 01:17, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

(reindent) You do not have to do that with Estudiantes Tecos. Take Boca Juniors for example. The article name is not C.A. Boca Juniors because Boca Juniors is the common name.

But at the same time, there is a problem with using commonname. Common names vary greatly. Take Colombian club Santa Fe Corporación Deportiva. You take one look at its official name, and you would think the common name is Santa Fe. But, its old name, Independiente Santa Fe, is probably the most common name of the club. Still, Independiente Santa Fe should not be used in tables, brackets, etc, unless it is referring to the club in the past prior to the name change. Or take Liga Deportiva Universitaria de Quito. There are nine variations of it's name, and all are pretty common: Liga de Quito, LDU Quito, LDU de Quito, la Liga, LDU (Q), LDU, in addition to any variation that can incorporate initials. But you stick to one that most correct.

Still it gets worse with Mexican clubs because clubs are referred by the nicknames so commonly. But, just because their nickname is the most common doesn't mean it should be used, mainly because it is a nickname. Tables, brackets, etc, should have some form of the official name. Plain and simple. Digirami (talk) 01:55, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, if you ask me Boca Juniors should be moved to the name you mentioned. Manchester United is infinitely more common than Manchester United F.C., but there you go. We should attempt to use the full name of the club, especially when there is something as common as C.D., F.C., C.A., C.F., or any linguistic variation on those abbreviation, at least in the article title. – Football.Fútbol.Soccer 21:55, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

There was a discussion about that in Boca Juniors talk page. All English (or all British if I'm not mistaken) clubs have a naming convention to incorporate F.C. or A.F.C. into the article name. For everyone else, we use the most common name which isn't ambiguous. If the most common name is ambiguous, then you add junk like C.D., C.A., etc. Digirami (talk) 00:07, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

And it has to be the common name of the official name. Digirami (talk) 00:08, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Tell that to Real Madrid C.F., F.C. Internazionale Milano, C.D. Guadalajara, and any other number of clubs. – Football.Fútbol.Soccer 01:37, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Options 4 and 6 seem like the best options considering that these nicknames are heavily used, and to avoid confusion the university initials are added. On a side note, I noticed a brief mention of the C.A. Boca Juniors naming. I was wondering why they haven't done that to the River Plate article, because typing Club Atlético River Plate is annoying, especially the time wasted getting the é. C.A. River Plate would be so much easier to handle.--MicroX (talk) 04:04, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Remember that Real Madrid has professional sports teams in basketball and also reserves. Real Madrid can refer to any one of those, in addition to the football club, but in order to keep things clear, Real Madrid C.F. refers to the senior footbal team, with a redirect from Real Madrid since the probability that someone searching for Real Madrid is searching for the football team is high. The C.D. was added to C.D. Guadalajara to disambiguate it from the city from which the team is from. As for F.C. Internazionale Milano... I can't explain that 100%. But if I had to guess, it would be because Inter can refer to several sports teams (like Internacional) and also because Inter Milan is not used in Italy. Besides, F.C Internazionale Milano is essentially an appropriate short form of its official name.

As for River Plate. There is an Argentine football project. Perhaps in there, they decided that the best way to disambiguate clubs with very common names for clubs, such as River Plate, was to just use the full club name. Maybe because the official name is used more often than C.A. River Plate. Obviously there are exceptions, like Estudiantes de La Plata, but they are few and far.

I think we need to stop voting on any of the options listed above. Obviously, each clubs' article name need to be taken in consideration individually. Estudiantes Tecos is fine as it is, and so is UNAM. After looking at the Spanish page for UANL, a move to incorporate Tigres in the title is not far off IF someone can prove, through a viable source, that the full official name of the club is "Club Tigres de la Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León". Digirami (talk) 06:20, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Relavance - opinion needed

Hi, could someone give me an opinion whether this bit of information is relevant for the Filippo Inzaghi article? As I said here I think that this completely irrelevant for an encyclopedia, but I'm afraid Stt13 and I can't agree on this. So I would like to know what others think. --Jaellee (talk) 21:22, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Seems trivial at best to me. – Football.Fútbol.Soccer 23:09, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Negative. Very obscure. - Dudesleeper / Talk 23:10, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for you answers. The user Stt13 referred to the Ryan Giggs article where Ryan Giggs is mentioned in a The Simpsons episode (which has quite limited relevance in my opinion) but at least The Simpsons are widely known (in contrast to an obscure movie). --Jaellee (talk) 08:30, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Notability of Greek Vyzas F.C. players

Hello football fans! I'm trying to resolve the problem with current squad of Vyzas F.C. I'm not sure with notability of those third league players, in my opinion they surely fails WP:PEOPLE. On the other hand, Greek Gamma Ethniki is a professional league. Can you help me, please? This discussion could be helpful. Thanks. --Vejvančický (talk) 10:12, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

It's professional as you can see here so yes they are notable as they pass WP:ATHLETE. Spiderone 12:18, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Spiderone. --Vejvančický (talk) 12:36, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

David Wetherall image needed

If anyone has an image of David Wetherall lying around somewhere then can they please upload it? Also does anyone know anything about his personal life? He's old enough to have one. Spiderone 12:23, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

He has kids I think, I remember seeing a picture of him with them in the match programme at Stuart McCall's testimonial. When I get home I'll dig it out and let you know. Giant Snowman 12:46, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I've noticed that the Wetherall article says he's in the English Football Hall of Fame but the article for the hall of fame doesn't. Which is correct? Both are sourced well. Spiderone 16:05, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

The Wetherall article is wrong. Someone must have misunderstood the source, which refers to his induction into Show Racism the Red Card's Hall of Fame. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:17, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I've had a look in the Stuart McCall programme and I can't find that picture; it must have been somehwere else I saw it - sorry! Giant Snowman 16:22, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, thanks anyway Spiderone 16:25, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Albert Pape

I've nominated this article for a DYK entry, but I'm not 100% sure about the hook. Could people please make any comments they may have at Template talk:Did you know#Albert Pape? – Pee Jay 21:46, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Josh Magennis

As a youth player, Magennis played as a goalkeeper but changed his position prior to turning professional. A user has recently continued to add goalkeeper to the positions list in his infobox despite messages on the talk pages of both the article and the user. I was following the examples of articles such as Petr Cech and Tom Heaton who also played in different positions before turning professional.

Could someone please tell me if I am correct in what I am doing and if so what should I do next to stop it being added as the user has ignored any message I have left. Thanks. Kosack (talk) 23:43, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Since his goalkeeping played a significant role in his development and early team selection it makes some sense. It also looks like he is noted as available as a second string keeper. The infobox is there to "support the article and provide a quick synopsis of important facts". I understand it could also cause confusion, though. Does having it mentioned in the infobox improve or detract from the article? The article does nee more info on his striking if it is available since the discussion looks to have crept in. Cptnono (talk) 00:01, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

The infobox should be for primary position only. However, certainly mention in the prose that he began as a goalkeeper before being converted to a striker, as long as it is reliably sourced. Every player will have played in more than one position before finding the one they excelled at, so to have goalkeeper in Magennis' infobox sets a poor precedent. Regards, Giant Snowman 00:07, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. Kosack (talk) 00:38, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

The instructions for the Infobox Football biography 2 say "{{{position}}} — The player's most common position (as a player). If a player is known for playing in multiple roles then the author should elect which is the most significant and explain the point more fully within the article." Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 04:27, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

List of league apps

The article on Stuart McCall says that "He played a total of 763 league games during his career, the 12th highest of all British footballers", which got me to thinking that it could be useful to have an article which lists players (of all nationalities) by number of league apps in England & Scotland. But I can't for the life of me think of a succinct & suitable title - can anyone help? Cheers, Giant Snowman 21:19, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

"100 Players with highest league appearances in the Football League".

I dunno. Now you said it I can't think of a descent title. Anyway, when it is created then players who have all their appearances with one club should be highlighted somehow.--EchetusXe 22:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Good suggestion, but I wouldn't want it to just be the football league though; I feel it should also include the Premiership, the SPL & the Scottish league - basically any apps that appear on a webiste such as Neil Brown's. Giant Snowman 08:36, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I can't think of a decent title, either. I was going to suggest that, as lists such as List of Aston Villa F.C. players includes all those with 100+ apps, then a similar name could be used, such as List of Football League players, but we'd need to cover both Football League and Premier League apps plus potentially apps made during spells in Scotland and potentially other countries too. I'm stumped, frankly........... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:44, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Here's a couple of suggestions:

List of footballers in England and Scotland by league appearances

List of footballers in England and Scotland by number of league appearances

Giant Snowman 09:08, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Both of those seem to suggest that the list would only include current players, though...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:14, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Isn't it a kind of listcruft to pick out the English and Scottish leagues and stitch them together? Jmorrison230582 (talk) 10:52, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Not necessarily listcruft, but what's the point of joining England and Scotland, while omitting say Wales & NI? Also "league appearances" should technically include appearances in things like the Southern League, Football Conference... You'd be left with an article something like "list of footballers by combined apeparances in the Premier League, FootbalL League, Scottish Premier League and Scottish Football League" - fchd (talk) 11:00, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Effectively it would be "List of footballers by appearances in fully professional leagues in the UK", although obviously that's a stupid title -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:03, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Reliable sources such as Neil Brown / Allfootballers only include England (Prem/Football League) & Scotland (SPL/SFL) and so should we. Giant Snowman 11:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Annuals such as the Nationwide (ex-News of the World) also have lists of the top XXX players by apps in those four leagues combined -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:24, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

RSSSF describes league appearances as "domestic championships", can anyone mould that into a better title? Giant Snowman 11:42, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

It's interesting to note that 4 of the top 5 on the RSSSF list are goalies. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 11:47, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Right, seeing as the title remains a problem, I have created a sandbox, so please feel free to add to it. For now it only has a couple of players with more than 300 league apps, but if you want to change this (400/500 apps perhaps, to stop it getting super-long) or the format, then please suggest so on the talk page. Cheers, Giant Snowman 14:49, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Won't this require constant updating? It'll also get complicated when players get relegated to the Conference with their club. I hope this works though, I'd certainly use the page. Spiderone 17:15, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

We could have two seperate tables - one for current players, and one for former players. Giant Snowman 17:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Trying to keep a current players list both synchronised and up to the minute would be a waste of time. People will update their pet player, ignore the rest, ignore any "date of last update" and ignore sources, just like they do with infoboxes. Most of the "Lists of Template F.C. players" have a date at which the figures were correct, and are only updated from time to time, not every game, which is what I'd suggest you did with this list. Then if someone updates just their pet player, it can be reverted on the basis they need to be all done at once or not at all :-) As to number of appearances to qualify, I'd suggest 500 absolute minimum: there are 15 players with 300 appearances just for Birmingham, so there'll be literally thousands with 300+ league apps total. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 18:08, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I have changed it to former players only, and have capped it at 500 domestic league appearances. Cheers, Giant Snowman 09:59, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Right, if no-one can think of a better title, I'm going to move the sandbox to List of footballers in England and Scotland by number of league appearances; if someone does think of a more apt title after I've moved it into mainspace, then we can always move the page. Cheers, Giant Snowman 10:01, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Spiderone 12:22, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Right, I've created an article. Feel free to add to it! Giant Snowman 10:09, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Noticed there are quite a few unreferenced. Can I humbly suggest people don't add any more names without adding the source at the same time? cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:12, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I added references for all but five.--EchetusXe 12:35, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Kofi Nyamah

This player disappears in 2001 after leaving Hayes before reappearing playing for Enfield Town during the 2007-08 season. Can anyone fill in the six year gap? Cheers, Giant Snowman 00:10, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Google news is showing some hits with Exeter in '04 but they are all pay-per-view. Looking a Exeter games during that time period might be a good place to start.Cptnono (talk) 00:19, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Not much:

Oct 2000: Billericay after Stevenage and before Kingstonian

July 2001: trial with Hendon which didn't lead to anything

Jan 2002: Boreham Wood

I'd guess the Google hits for Exeter in 04 are spurious, and the date comes from another item aggregated on the same page: that's certainly the case with the HighBeam ones. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 07:45, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Cheers for that. Giant Snowman 11:03, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Bucheon SK/Jeju United FC

These two articles - Bucheon SK and Jeju United FC - look to be about the same team that simply underwent a name change. Can an admin or someone look at it, check I'm right, and merge them or something? Cheers, Giant Snowman 12:15, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Looks like FC Seoul is also following Anyang LG Cheetahs...--Latouffedisco (talk) 17:26, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

George Nevin and John Nevin

There was a footballer in the 1930s named George Nevin, who was born in Lintz, County Durham, in 1907. Michael Joyce's book "Football League Players' Records 1888 to 1939" also lists a John W Nevin, who was born in Lintz in 1887. Does anyone know if these two might be related. If it helps, the book says that John W Nevin was playing for Gateshead at the time. – Pee Jay 17:53, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

GAN backlog reduction - Sports and recreation

As you may know, we currently have 400 good article nominations, with a large number of them being in the sports and recreation section. As such, the waiting time for this is especially long, much longer than it should be. As a result of this, I am asking each sports-related WikiProject to review two or three of these nominations. If this is abided by, then the backlog should be cleared quite quickly. Some projects nominate a lot but don't review, or vice-versa, and following this should help to provide a balance and make the waiting time much smaller so that our articles can actually get reviewed! Wizardman 23:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Date of birth changes

Crispin173 (talk · contribs · count) has changed the dates of birth of two footballers and made no other edits. I suspect vandalism. But does someone have an appropriate reference source to confirm things one way or the other.--Peter cohen (talk) 20:57, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

I've reverted the Cech one, as this newspaper confirms his real DOB. And Quinn's was falsified to (according to setanta). Will warn user. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 21:03, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. The Quinn was in a particular mess as the vandal had changed the date from 4th to 1st April in the article a while ago, then someone else had got confused on how day and month are ordered in the box and changed the date in the box from 4th April to 4th January, then the vandal tried to hide the discrepancy by making both 1st April. Now it is safely back at 4th April,--Peter cohen (talk) 23:01, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, and thanks for fixing the Quinn mess I made because after finding the change was wrong I simply undid it, but I neglected to fully check the change and just assumed it had done the right thing. I'll be more careful in future. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 23:10, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Things have got more complicated, so I've removed the resolved status. The user has now reinstated the 1st of April as Quinn's birthday. I was going to revert and warn him, but the Blades' official site actually give that as his birthday. Meanwhile, when I searched the FAI's site I found stuff saying he was born on the 4th. I'm tempted to email the club to see if they can confirm that their site is right.--Peter cohen (talk) 16:34, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

International career of Simon Kjaer

SWE-DEW (1-1) of 06/06/2009 and DEN-POR (1-1) of yesterday. But in the page of Kjaer there are 3 matches. What is the third? --87.10.166.52 (talk) 12:27, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

[14] says he played in a friendly against Chile in August. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 12:46, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you verymuch :) --87.10.166.52 (talk) 13:31, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Automatic numbering in table

We want to add a 'Rank' column down the left-hand side of List of footballers in England and Scotland by number of league appearances, can anyone tell us how to do automatic numbering? In articles # is used, but it doesn't work in tables. Cheers, Giant Snowman 12:36, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Jimmy Blair (footballer born 1918)

The above's article states he was the son of Jimmy Blair (footballer born 1888), while the latter's article claims Doug Blair as his son. There's no mention of the two being siblings. Can someone clear this up? - Dudesleeper / Talk 12:55, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

The SFA confirms Jimmy and Jimmy were father and son. Giant Snowman 13:08, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

They are both sons of Jimmy sr. (Sources Cardiff City who's who, the definitive Bournemouth) Jimmy jr. joined Blackpool in june 1935 not in 1937. You can only find season/careers on Neil Brown's site when a player played a league match, seasons spent playing for the reserves/ youth teams are never added. You can find months when signed a first contract in Hugman's Blackpool was his first club as a professional , he played for Cardiff City as an amateurCattivi (talk) 16:46, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Integrating individual team seasons

I've put together an idea I had a while ago over at my sandbox. Since the standings and league tables in each league season article don't link to individual team's seasons I think that it would be benificial to integrate them into the yearly navbox. I think that a lot of individual team season articles are nearly orphans as things currently stand. What does everyone else think about this? JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 19:33, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Seems like a good idea to me, I've thought for a while that there should be a navbox to link club season articles from the same season. The only problem is whether you include every team (which would mean a lot of redlinks) or only those with articles (meaning you'd have to review it regularly to make sure new articles get added). A slight aside, but the "players transferred for over £10m" seems a bit arbitrary, particularly as it is based on market forces rather than pure football factors - i think it should be removed. --Jameboy (talk) 19:58, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Are you happy to add the links to each of the navboxes if this idea is supported. I am personally in favour of it as it will allow us to keep a better track of the club-by-club articles for each season and see where the gaps are, particularly if we include redlinks. We could avoid the redlinks in the navbox by having a page on the footy wikiproject showing missing season articles. 03 md 22:10, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

One of the most talked about transfers what that of Michael Owen, and he was free. So the £10 million thing should be removed. Individual club seasons should be added,without redlinks.--EchetusXe 00:41, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to remove the transfers link. I'm also going to hide the awards section until some actual awards are...awarded. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 10:40, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

So then how should we go about integrating team season articles? Should the redlinks be included? If so, should they only be included down to a certain tier? JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 10:50, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Why is this cut off at League Two? What about Conference teams, I've counted at least seven teams in the Conf National with seasons article. --Jimbo^[online] 12:33, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I just stopped there because I'm not familiar with those leagues or teams at all and didn't think to go any further down the pyramid beyond the Football League. I'll see if I can get them in there alright. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 17:50, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I have converted the 2002-03 season template to a navbox, removed the transfers over £10 million section and added the section on football club seasons, with wikilinks to relevant articles. 03 md 22:01, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone have a preference on whether or not to include on the templates the redlinks or unlinked titles for teams who do not currently have an existing team season article? This or this? JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 11:43, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Goal average

I noticed a general problem in pages about past Serie A and Serie B seasons: all classification tables have a column for the goal difference. The problem is that GD was unknown in Italy before 1968, because goal average was used instead, under English influence. More, from 1938 to 1942, GA was part of the official regulations, and could decide relegations or promotions: in Serie B 1938-39, SSC Venezia was promoted to Serie A instead of Atalanta BC for a best GA (1.69 against 1.65) even if, nowadays counting, Atalanta had a best GD. Can anyone solve this problem?--Civitatem (talk) 15:16, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Just add a note to the affected pages explaining what you just said.--EchetusXe 16:46, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

There are more than 90 affected pages between A and B, it isn't a fast thing to do... A Bot could be useful in this case....--Civitatem (talk) 14:05, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

More general, replace the GD column with GAvg and insert the correct values. The probably best approach for doing this is using the formula
{{#expr: <insert GF> / <insert GA> round 2}}
--Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 09:19, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm not skilled with that formula. Can I ask you a practical example using a page?--Civitatem (talk) 14:05, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

First of all, I mixed up "#if" with "#expr", sorry for that. The above formula has been fixed. It has further been implemented in the Serie B article mentioned in the original post. If you have any more questions, feel free to ask. :-) --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 21:52, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Soccer-holic, I'm unable to improve the formula. Could you look at Serie A 1938–39 history?--Civitatem (talk) 17:18, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Red cards in WCQ games

Do we display them: Yes or no? Someone has gone out and added them in the South American zone, and who knows if he'll do the same to the other regions. Digirami (talk) 00:50, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't think so. I've always thought that, as the parameters imply, the "goals1" and "goals2" parameters are for goals only. After all, red cards don't have a direct effect on the score. – Pee Jay 07:40, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I was that someone and my point was simple: red cards do have a considerable effect on the game process, and even if expulsion doesn't affect the score immediately, this event is important enough to be noticed. Red cards are always mentioned in game reports, even in the brief ones. C'mon, the name of the ref is included, the name of the stadium is included, the crowd is included but the red cards are not..?
What for parameter names... well, is it the cart or the horse you put in front? I somehow thought that the point of footballbox template is to provide valuable info about the game, not to fudge the information according to parameter names. They can be renamed after all, aren't they? —WiJG ? 05:48, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

By your argument, yellow cards should be mentioned too since they appear in match reports. But that is overkill, as is displaying red cards. The only thing that truly affects the score is goals. Simple. Digirami (talk) 07:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

The comparison is wrong. Yellow cards are shown in almost every match and do not seriously affect the game, if at all. Red cards are much more important and happen not too often to be called 'overkill'. I haven't said they affect the score, I was talking about game process. If that matters, I may also add that A-League season articles do contain red cards in match reports. —WiJG ? 09:46, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, you found one league that does it. No other major league does, or competition. Not the Premier League, or La Liga, any of the 5 Champions Leagues and the Copa Libertadores. Actually, you may have found a good example of overkill in the A-League. Digirami (talk) 10:38, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Possibly relevant AfD

There is currently an AfD in progress that may possibly end up being relevant to this project. The discussion concerns Sam Loxton with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948, as well as the rest of a series of articles about the players involved with that cricket tour. Obviously, this AfD could have far-reaching consequences regarding articles about players' involvement in sporting events, so further comments would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Loxton with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948. Thanks. – Pee Jay 17:46, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I am surprised and saddened that these articles are up for deletion, it seems petty and self-defeating. If these go, I will seriously have to think about whether I want to continue to contribute to Wikipedia. Why would anyone want to spend time producing good/featured content if there was a serious danger of it being deleted? --Jameboy (talk) 14:03, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

It's not looking much like the decision will be to delete at the moment...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:17, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, nothing is ever safe regardless of the numbers YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 07:42, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Gaël Kakuta

Surely, for now, a case of WP:ONEEVENT? A similar case was that of Nathan Porritt, whose article became a redirect until he passed WP:ATHLETE. Anyone any objections to me AfDing it? Giant Snowman 19:55, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Similar to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Pogba. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 20:04, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Put it up for AfD. It should be a good debate. Spiderone 08:28, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

The AfD is here. Giant Snowman 09:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Another infobox dates query

Luke Rooney was loaned out by Gillingham before he'd turned professional. So should his infobox show "Youth career: 2007-2009, Gillingham", then "Senior career: 2009 Lewes (loan), 2009– Gillingham"? It's technically correct but would look ridiculous........... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:32, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I'd just use my own discretion unless there is precedent. In this case, considering the year of loan happens to be the same as the year he turned professional I see no harm in ordering it as, Youth: Gills 07-09, Senior: Gills 09-, Lewes (loan) 2009. Because that looks "normal" and is factually still correct. The chronological discrepancy seems minor compared how much more understandable to the reader it would be in that situation. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 21:45, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Yep, that's what I've done with other players in a similar situation - parent club first, loan club second. Giant Snowman 09:03, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Whitespace

There's a line of whitespace after the first and before the last line of seasons at {{Blackpool F.C. seasons}}, but I can't see why in the edit window. I've looked at it in Firefox, Google Chrome and IE, and the problems appears in each. - Dudesleeper / Talk 22:33, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

In my experience, this happens when there is a hard return after <br />'s - as the renderer will see it as

...stuff...br

hard return

..stuff...

An easy (yet inelegant) way to fix this is to replace the hard return with a space instead, like I did in this edit. The bugger between the two is that using the space method adds a noticeable spacing factor between all lines. The same result can be achieved by adding nothing around the br's except the text you are displaying, i.e. Some stuff<br />Some stuff.

You may also notice if you look closely at the existing template that the gap at the top and bottom are not the only formatting issue, there are (admittedly small but noticeable) different sized gaps between 1909-10 /1919-20 and 1969-70/1979-80 (in Firefox at least).

The above "fix" may solve your problem and will at least produce a consistent spacing between rows but it appears to me to be a bit.. lame - someone more switched on with wiki syntax may pop along in a minute or two. Nanonic (talk) 23:11, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

(addendum) Aha, I knew it was hackish - you can use the templates nowrap start and end along with {{wrap}} like in this edit. These templates replace the br's and tell the renderer not to wrap the text apart from at those positions marked with the wrap template. Be aware however that if you use this template - these wrap points are not mandatory, they are places where the renderer will wrap the text if the reader's screen resolution is at a size where it is necessary. The effect of using these templates seems to solve your problem but may present other problems. Six of one.. Nanonic (talk) 23:25, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like pain in the rear to be honest, but thanks for your assistance. For now I've reverted to an older version that renders fine. - Dudesleeper / Talk 00:14, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

As an aside, have you seen {{NavboxYears}}? Nanonic (talk) 00:25, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

No, I hadn't. I doubt there'd be much willingness in the project to change formats again, but I could be wrong. - Dudesleeper / Talk 00:28, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I think a change to "[year] [club] season" wouldn't be such a bad idea. That seems to be the naming convention for MLS team seasons, so perhaps we should change the rest. – Pee Jay 12:13, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Hang on a second. The consensus in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 33#Formal petition to change the naming conventions is NOT valid for club season articles? --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 08:30, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

No, you're right, that discussion didn't cover club season articles. But maybe it should be extended that far. I've never thought that the title "Manchester United F.C. season 2009–10" made sense, and surely "2009–10 Manchester United F.C. season" would fit better. – Pee Jay 09:36, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

As someone who doesn't contribute regularly to this WikiProject I had noticed the consensus had changed for competition articles and the like, and when I stumbled across as club season article it was, in my opinion, strange and inconsistent that the club seasons didn't follow the same convention. Was there any specific reason why they were left out of the previous discussion. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 19:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Stuart Searle

Is he notable? I assumed he wasn't because he hadn't had a page before but now I'm not sure. Spiderone 12:19, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I remember the article being deleted before - I can't find an AfD so it must have been a PROD. Either way, he fails WP:ATHLETE and WP:GNG, so he isn't notable. Giant Snowman 12:21, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

It was deleted as part of this batched AfD -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:37, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Kyle Collins

Can an admin unsalt Kyle Collins please; he has earned international caps for St Kitts & Nevis, as per [15]. Thanks, Giant Snowman 12:32, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I have unsalted it, although the article that was deleted and then salted was actually about a completely different person -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:35, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks Chris! Giant Snowman 12:57, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Would this be worth mentioning?

Something about Patrick Kisnorbo's family history or possible family history. [16]Spiderone 14:51, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

If you can find a source which links the Kisnorbo's of that website to the player, then yes, I'd say it's worth a mention; it looks to be a reputable source. Giant Snowman 15:21, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm almost certain. The source says they were accompanied by 5 children, one of whom was Patrick. Spiderone 15:31, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

But that source is dated 10 April 1969 - even though the footballer called Patrick wasn't born until 1981! Giant Snowman 15:33, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh never mind then, perhaps these are his grandparents. Back to David Wetherall Spiderone 15:36, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Common sense tells us that they are indeed related, but alas, methinks common sense isn't considered a WP:RS! Giant Snowman 15:43, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Footballers called Arthur Brown

There are five footballers called Arthur Brown, and all of the articles are located at Arthur Middlename Brown. Is that for a reason, or am I OK to move to Arthur Brown (footballer born xxxx) Giant Snowman 15:17, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually, at least 6 and I don't yet have a DOB for #6, but will happily settle for (New Zealand footballer) if/when I get down that far. --ClubOranje^T 08:02, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Arthur Brown (soccer)? Giant Snowman 09:45, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

No, Football in New Zealand these days. Big marketing campaign some years ago and a rebranding... hence NZ Football is now the governing body.--ClubOranje^T 19:59, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes although I'm not sure about the Albert Arthur Brown one. Spiderone 15:28, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

His article claims that he was "more commonly known as Arthur Brown" - which is confusing, seeing as his brother was also called Arthur! Giant Snowman 15:31, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I believe that I created some of these articles - at the time (2007) I was a bit confused as to who was who, and followed the lead of our old mate Woody on Albert Arthur Brown but I agree they should all be moved to Arthur Brown (footballer born xxxx). --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 15:51, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, I will move the articles then. I was just checking that none of them used Arthur Middlename Brown as their day-to-day name, in the same way that someone like Jennifer Love Hewitt does. Giant Snowman 15:58, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Fully professional leagues pt 293

Does anyone happen to know whether the Algerian top division is fully professional in the WP:ATHLETE sense? cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:07, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

No but I would say it isn't professional until proof is found that it is Spiderone 08:25, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I actual stumbled on this previousley. According to Football in Algeria it is planned to be fully professional by 2010. This isn't sourced information but it might be a first step in the search.Cptnono (talk) 12:01, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Follow-up: Here we go [17]. The PDF is also a quick and decent read. Updated info is needed still.Cptnono (talk) 12:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I'd seen that, but thanks anyway. The Algerian FA site says here, articles 11-13 (in French, google translate says the page is too big for it) that players may take part in football organised by the FA licensed either as "amateur" i.e. they can receive no more than expenses, or as "professional", i.e. a player whose job is football and who gets paid more than expenses. And in French here, section 1 google translation speaks of stuff that doesn't apply to amateur clubs (those below the top two national divisions), which would imply that clubs in the two national divisions are professional. But I'm not sure what that proves, if anything. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:05, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Looking at it, it means that Algerian first and second divisions are semi-pro.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:42, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Help for stalemate at Northern Ireland national football team

Hi, can someone take a look at Talk:Northern Ireland national football team#First Game, etc. In summary, the Irish Football Association used to organize an all-Ireland team (designated as EIR by FIFA) but now organize the Northern Ireland national football team (designated as NIR by FIFA). The page displays "biggest win", "biggest loss", etc, but as using stats from the all-Ireland team - is this correct? Should those stats be attributed to the Northern Ireland national football team even though there was no such thing as the NI national team then? Thank you. --HighKing (talk) 12:15, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

In summary, yes, it is correct in my opinion. The related articles may be balkanised, but nonetheless the IFA team's history goes back to 1882. Looking at the talk page I only see one user arguing for anything else. But other than what I've just written I don't intend to get involved; hornets nest, tilting at windmills etc. Oldelpaso (talk) 12:36, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Hosny Abd Rabo or Mohamed Abd Rabo...

Hi guys, listen, I´m not sure if this player, Hosny Abd Rabo is the same as this Mohamed Abd Rabo and this Hosny Abd Rabo El Motaleb Ibrahim ? I know two Egiptians played in Slovenia in Olimpija Ljubljana in 2004-05 ( Mohamed Abd Rabo and Riad Aliriza). I just want to know if the wiki page Abd Rabo is the one that played in Slovenia? FkpCascais (talk) 15:36, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

The article on Hosny Abd Rabo looks to be about 2 or 3 different players - the prose and infobox doen't match at all! Giant Snowman 15:52, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Someone accidentally (or purposefully) added information about another footballer over the existing article, and I've attempted to revert it to the last stable version. Jogurney (talk) 16:38, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

The Egyptian who played for Olimpija is a forward born 18 January 1984 (http://www.filgoal.com/English/PlayerProfile.asp?ChampId=140&ClubId=18&PlayerId=3665). I can't find much else for him other than he played for Ahly before joining Olimpija. Jogurney (talk) 16:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Many, many thanx! FkpCascais (talk) 22:44, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Stand-alone articles on reserve teams

What teams merit having stand-alone articles on their reserve teams? I can understand Chelsea F.C. Reserves and Youth Team and Arsenal F.C. Reserves, but Crystal Palace F.C. Reserves.........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:34, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

None whatsoever - not even Chelsea or Arsenal. If you permit them, what reason do you have to delete Palace or Southampton or Northampton? --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 21:15, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Related AfDs: Manchester United, Liverpool, Bournemouth, Hull. A redirect, a no consensus and two deletes. And the redirect is now an article again. There isn't really a clear consensus on the issue. Oldelpaso (talk) 21:45, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't know about any other reserve teams in England, but the Manchester United reserve team has been going almost as long as the first team, won the first five FA Youth Cups, and has produced a fairly large number of players who went on to play for various Premier League and Football League clubs, so if that doesn't constitute notability, I don't know what does. – Pee Jay 22:43, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I'd imagine all professional clubs' reserve teams have been running for as long as the "firsts" (Gillingham's reserves actually played their first match before the first team played theirs, bizarrely) and have produced a decent number of players who went on to play professionally either for the parent club or elsewhere. Oh, and surely it would have been Man U's youth team who won the Youth Cup, not the reserves....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:02, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Blast! You're quite right... I suppose, then, that it comes down to third-party coverage. – Pee Jay 08:05, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Small Heath/Birmingham reserves played in the Birmingham & District League from 1893 to the 1920s, winning it once with a ridiculous amount of goals (160 from 34 games) and runners-up more than once. That league, according to its Wiki page, "came to be regarded as one of the strongest leagues outside the Football League itself, rivalled only by the Southern League and the Midland League", so I'd say its history rivalled any. Saying that, it wouldn't bother me if they were all deleted/merged to the parent article, so long as they were all deleted and merged, and people weren't influenced by the amount of coverage given to the current big clubs' reserve and junior teams in very recent years. Incidentally, Chris, there are some problems in the reference list on the Birm&DistLge article, you may want to have a look at. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:51, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I'd support merging into the articles of the parent clubs. There's little to say about these teams that can't be covered in a couple of tightly-written short paragraphs in the main articles, especially considering that these teams consist mainly of players who normally aren't notable for individual articles - and those who are notable are normally injured/unfit/... visitors from the first team. Furthermore, just because something is notable doesn't mean it needs its own article - indeed, being notable just means is that it meets the minimum threshold for inclusion anywhere in en.wp Knepflerle (talk) 10:44, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Any admins about

please could you restore the deleted Semih Aydilek, player has now played for Kayserispor in the Turkish Super League.[18] thanks, Struway2 (talk) 10:46, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

There you go, all done. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 11:10, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

thanks, hoped there might be sources I hadn't seen, but there aren't... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:16, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually, in case an earlier editor is looking, there was a source I had seen but hadn't picked up on one piece of content, so thanks for that... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:36, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Are official sites allowed as sources?

In Lomana LuaLua I have used his official site as a source on a couple of occasions, is this OK for GA? I realise that for FA this probably wouldn't be acceptable but I'm sure the site is official and that the person writing the blog and stuff is definitely LuaLua and not some impostor. Spiderone 11:42, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

According to a page I was reading the other day (can't remember which one), first party sources may be used to cite specific facts but not to establish a person's notability. Like you say, we normally wouldn't allow blog sites such as BlogSpot or WordPress to be used as sources, but if this source is LuaLua's official site, then I don't see why it couldn't be used. – Pee Jay 12:02, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Good practice would be to explicitly attribute the source in the article text: "According to L LL's official website, ...". Knepflerle (talk) 12:33, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

List of North American Soccer League players

I am part-way through creating a List of North American Soccer League players in my sandbox. As you can see, I've only worked through the Cs and already the list is quite big. Should I keep it as one long list, or split it into individual letters - List of North American Soccer League players - A, List of North American Soccer League players - B etc.? Giant Snowman 14:32, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you could make it about people who've played at least 50 games or something. Failing that the ABC idea could work. Spiderone 15:54, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I would go for a minimum number of appearances too, in line with the List of Premier League players. – Pee Jay 17:10, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough then. Seeing as it wasn't a league in which players made hundreds of appearances, I'll just do 50 for now. Thanks guys, Giant Snowman 17:25, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Today's menu

These AfDs only have one vote, it is also worth noting that one has been expanded since its deletion nomination:

Spiderone 15:57, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Vithoon Kijmongkolsak

According to the Thai national team article, former national captain Vithoon Kijmongkolsak scored 32 goals for the team between 1985 and 1995. But I can't find a SINGLE reliable source for him on Google - everything I can find is from Wikipedia mirror sites! So is this guy a hoax, or am I just being a bit special? Giant Snowman 21:39, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Try a google search for Vitoon Kijmongkolsak instead. Nanonic (talk) 21:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

He's mentioned here but it doesn't prove much [19] Spiderone 07:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

World Cup Assessment

Everyone knows that we have a lot of unassessed articles, but even a lot of the various 2010 World Cup qualification articles, as well as articles from previous World Cups, are unassessed. Would these all fall under "high" importance? I was thinking that they would, but I wasn't sure if some of the articles that focus on a specific round within a single confederation's qualification cycle might be of "mid" importance. Thoughts? JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 11:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Looking at the current articles I would say that the qualifying is "mid" and anything to do with the World Cup itself is "high". Spiderone 12:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

New West Ham Stadium

I've updated New West Ham Stadium if anyone wants to take a look.82.3.86.1 (talk) 12:34, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Season article notablility

We're having a little discussion over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Season article task force#Notability to determine which teams may have a team season article. It's a pretty basic criteria so far, but more input would be welcome. Thanks. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 14:16, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Multiple afd

Good evening, gentlemen! 30+ articles concerning Latvian League have been nominated for deletion; if you are interested, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rihards Gorkšs for discussion. Gorod nad volnoi Nevoi (talk) 17:43, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Now about 80 overall. Gorod nad volnoi Nevoi (talk) 00:28, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

80 at a time is kind of ridiculous in my opinion - especially since people have found that some articles do meet WP:Athlete. Having so many nominated in one hit doesn't really give people a chance to spend any time checking the articles. Camw (talk) 02:46, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

and adding 50 more nominations after people have already commented on the AfD doesn't seem right either, that would mean their comments should only apply to the first 30odd nominations. Camw (talk) 02:49, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

While I understand your concern (it took me a long time to review all of the articles), we have an awfully large amount of not-notable articles about footballers (many of which are unreferenced), and I think these are rather similar articles, so it makes some sense to group them. Listing them all separately would take a lot more time and effort (editors and admins alike). Jogurney (talk) 03:20, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Grouping into maybe 10 or 15 at once and leaving a bit of time between each group would allow some time to actually check them. I'm not saying list them 1 by 1, but 80 is way too many to expect people to look at. I know all about unreferenced players as I've been going through the list for a few countries, but tools like Twinkle make it very easy to list articles at AfD and minimize time wasted. Camw (talk) 03:31, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree, but I think user:Gorod nad volnoi Nevoi is new and still learning (I wasn't aware of Twinkle myself). Hopefully we can make an exception here and let the AfD go through. Maybe it's still possible to split into two AfDs (one for the first 30 and another for the next 50). Best regards. Jogurney (talk) 03:43, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

David Haggerty

The Rotherham official site claims that David Haggerty "made his league debut for the club when he came on as substitute for the final game of the 2007/08 season against Barnet." However, he is not listed in the line-up by Soccerbase - so which source is correct? Giant Snowman 13:14, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Soccernet differs from both. Oldelpaso (talk) 13:26, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

On the match report from the Barnet game, it lists him as coming on in 82nd minute, given its the official website and probably written within a day of the match, I think he did Prem4eva (talk) 13:32, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The BBC match report doesn't make any mention of Haggerty either. – Pee Jay 13:33, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Got another one, The orange match report says Haggerty came on Prem4eva (talk) 13:39, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Has to be Haggerty. Soccerbase, BBC etc have Craig Fleming coming on, however Fleming left Rotherham for Kings Lynn at the start of 2007/08 season and retired through injury in March 2008. Clearly a slip of the finger by the first "reliable source" which was then copied by all the rest. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:50, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks everyone, I'll create the article now I know he's notable. Cheers, Giant Snowman 14:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Note that the BBC or Soccerbase or a multitude of supposedly secondary reputable sources like Sky, all use PA originally for their data. If PA get it wrong, then all the supposed reputable sources get it wrong when it comes to the likes of lower league football. If you want to check on debuts and stats, then I'd suggest using either official sites, local newspapers who know the score, or best still the old Rothmans, now Sky Sports (ironically) Football Yearbooks edited by Rollin. 91.106.113.27 (talk) 22:34, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Peter Daniel x 2

There are at least two footballers called Peter Daniel - one born 1946 and one born 1955. I think editors, in their confusion, have merged the careers of these two players on the existing article (1955), as they both played in the Football League AND the NASL. Career summaries are here - Neil Brown (1946), Neil Brown (1955), NASL (1946), NASL (presumably 1955). Can someone please double check to see if I'm right or not? Cheers, Giant Snowman 13:16, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

[20] would suggest that Peter W. Daniel (1955) ex Wolves is the Minnesota one, leaving Peter A. Daniel (1946) as the Vancouver one. Neil Brown would include the 1979 season data because that was after he left Derby, whereas 1978 was still during his Derby career (it's a theory, anyway). You might want to ask User:Wolvesweb to confirm from his book that (1955) didn't sneak off to Canada in 1978 with a view to confusing people 30 years later. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 14:46, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, will do - many thanks. Cheers, Giant Snowman 14:52, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

According to Colin Jose's NASL book published by Breedon Peter A. Daniel played for Vancouver (on loan in the summer of 1978, permanent Febr. 1979) and Peter W. for Minnesota Cattivi (talk) 18:43, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks guys, I'll rewrite the existing article and create the new one later. Giant Snowman 18:56, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

The career of Peter W. (1955) should read: Hull City (74-78 as a senior pro), Wolves (May 78-May 84), Minnesota Kicks (Summer 84), Sunderland (August 84-Nov 85), Lincoln (Nov 85-May 87), Burnley (July 87-89). He never played for Vancouver - this is his correct NASL stats page: http://www.nasljerseys.com/Players/D/Daniel.Peter2.htm Wolvesweb (talk) 19:20, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Archive problems

A couple of discussions at the top of the page are over two months old, but haven't been archived by MiszaBot II (talk · contribs), who hasn't stopped operating...any reason for this? Giant Snowman 15:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I have manually moved them. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 17:08, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Cheers. But I'm still wondering why MiszaBot II didn't archive those discussions, when it has done for more recent ones...Giant Snowman 09:28, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Kit Help

Would somebody please be able to add the black stripes on the goalkeeper's shirt as in this image, to this kit, as i am useless :) thanks. Eddie6705 (talk) 20:21, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Home goalkeeper

I'm going to suggest this design, which also includes (to my eyes at least) slightly more accurate kit colour. Regards, Giant Snowman 20:34, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

GiantSnowman #1

I would agree with your colour (i had trouble matching it up). The top 'snake' would be suitable, but not really the bottom. There are some suitable ones such as

and

, but i don't know how i could change the coulour or positioning of them to the left shoulder. GiantSnowman do you know how? Eddie6705 (talk) 23:55, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I would have to say that Goalkeepers' Kit (and there are presumably goalkeepers' away and third kits too for many teams) does not sound like a useful, encyclopaedic addition to a page. We don't see press launches for a change, there is no meaningful loyalty to colours, often 2 goalies at the same club will prefer different shirts: meaningless. Kevin McE (talk) 07:36, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Eddie - you can't change the colour or position of an existing design. To be honest, as Kevin says, there's no REAL use in having a goalkeepers kit - it's not going to be in the infobox, that one-stop shop for information - so using a design which gives a rough idea (as my snake did) is probably the best best. Cheers, Giant Snowman 08:54, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Agreed Snowman. I have replaced the old kit with your suggestion. Thanks for your help. Eddie6705 (talk) 09:00, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Not a problem! :) Giant Snowman 09:27, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Automated process to fix Guardian's Stats Centre url?

I have added Guardian's Stats Centre as a reference to thousands of articles (and I know I'm not the only person who has) mostly because it is reliable (at least for recent seasons) and in English. For several countries (such as Greece or Japan), I'm not good enough with the local languages to find non-English alternatives. Here's the problem, the url has changed recently (only slightly). The opening part of the address http://touchline.onthespot.co.uk/ has moved to http://guardian.touch-line.com/, but everything after that is the same. I could try to change them all manually (ugh), but I was hoping someone knows how to order a bot or create a bot that could do it automatically. I would appreciate any help. Jogurney (talk) 02:41, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I can do it with something like AutoWikiBrowser although it still involves hitting Save for each page, it probably wouldn't take too long. There may be an easier option but I'll run through a few while I'm bored at work ;) Can you confirm that you need to drop the /guardian/ after the http://touchline.onthespot.co.uk/ as well?

Good catch. That's exactly right, the /guardian/ part needs to be removed as well. It's a pity that every page needs to be saved separately. I imagine it will take many hours to complete. Thank you for your help. Jogurney (talk) 04:00, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Just found User:DeadLinkBOT but it looks like it hasn't been run since July and there are a few requests since then. Might be worth trying there as well and seeing if the Bot creator is still checking it. Camw (talk) 04:09, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I've done 478, 999 to go! Taking a break, if anyone else wants to have a go feel free. Camw (talk) 06:09, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. AWB is great - I just fixed 215 more while listening in on a conference call. Jogurney (talk) 15:12, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Template:EuropaLeagueFootballbox

User:WCR4 6 has created {{EuropaLeagueFootballbox}} for use in 2009–10 UEFA Europa League group stage. The only difference between this template and {{footballbox}} is the addition of spaces for the assistant referees, fourth official and goal-line officials. Personally, I think this is overkill, but I wanted to see what other people thought before I nominated the template for deletion. – Pee Jay 08:07, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Definite overkill. Who's likely to look back in ten years' time and wonder who the fourth official of a match was? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:15, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Exactly! We only tend to put the information about assistant referees in articles about specific matches anyway, and even then we don't put it in the {{footballbox}}. – Pee Jay 08:21, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

(EC)Crystalballing, maybe nobody, but maybe lots of people - 4th official seems to be getting more and more profile these days, particularly with various controversies (4th official viewing replays etc). That aside, if that is the only difference, why not simply include it as an optional parameter in {{footballbox}} and do away with the additional template.--ClubOranje^T 08:24, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Because it's too much info. – Pee Jay 08:48, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Martin Donnelly, Northern Irish 1970s/80s player, DOB required

Does anyone have a date of birth of Northern Irish player Martin Donnelly, who played in the NASL in the 1970s and 1980s? I need to disambiguate him from Martin Donnelly (footballer born 1988). Giant Snowman 09:42, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

[21] cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Incidentally, you do intend to go back and fix all the previously valid links to Martin Donnelly and Martin Donnelly (footballer) which used to point to articles about the racing driver and the recent footballer but now point to/redirect to a disamb page? a tedious job which is the main reason why I'm very reluctant to create disambiguation pages... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:09, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Cheers for that. Yeah I'm going to fix the redirects, nothing better to do today at work...Giant Snowman 10:39, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Is there some kind of tool/bot I can use to make the changes? - every page that links to Martin Donnelly is about the racing driver! Giant Snowman 11:02, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I've done most of them. But in future, if you click on the top right where it says my preferences, then click on the Gadgets tab, you'll see a browsing gadget called navigation popups, which is what I use. It may be pre-installed, or you may have to install it. Once installed, if you hover over a link to a dab page, it offers a menu whereby you can click on what you want to disambiguate the link to. hope this helps :-) Struway2 (talk) 11:25, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Very good, thanks very much, it's greatly appreciated! Giant Snowman 11:28, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Today's notability question

ignoring general notability criteria please... If a player has never played in a fully-pro league as understood by WP:ATHLETE, but has played in European competition, what round of the Champions League, UEFA Cup as was, or Europa League structure would he have to appear in to be considered notable per WP:ATHLETE? cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:01, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Any of the rounds after qualifying unless it's between two professional teams, I think. Spiderone 15:30, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

1903/1904 football season in Switzerland

This article needs renaming, but to what? Swiss First Division 1903–04? Giant Snowman 21:25, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

FAR listing: MCFC

I have nominated Manchester City F.C. 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. – Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 21:50, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

2009 UEFA Champions League Final PR

Sorry to be pushy, but could someone give 2009 UEFA Champions League Final a copyedit for its peer review (see here)? I'm hoping to be able to set a benchmark for articles about football matches with this one, so a review with an ultimate goal of WP:FAC would be really helpful. Thanks. – Pee Jay 23:11, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

English managers in the Netherlands

I have just created some very basic stubs on a number of English football managers who were (mainly) active in the Netherlands in the early part of the 20th century. Any information on any of their playing/coaching careers would be much appreciated:

AFC Ajax:

Dutch national side:

Thanks in advance, as ever. Giant Snowman 15:30, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

There's bits and pieces on the Dutch wiki about Denis Neville (1915 – 1995). He played for Fulham, but then the war came (served in British Army in Africa, Italy and Israel). After the war he became manager of OB Odense and the Danish 1948 Olympic team. He then also managed Atalanta and a Belgian team, before becoming Sparta Rotterdam manager in 1955. He had some good results with them and eventually became the Dutch national manager. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 16:29, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I've added his birth & death dates. But I'm going to avoid adding anything about his career until I can find some non-wiki sources, especially as Reg Mountford looks to have been the Danish manager in 1948...Giant Snowman 16:47, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Crook looks to have played for England during WWII. [22].--Latouffedisco (talk) 17:38, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I also found that [23] [24]--Latouffedisco (talk) 17:40, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I've updated Crook's article with sources. Cheers, Giant Snowman 17:55, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Just out of interest, what with Ajax being an amateur team in the 1920s, because they didn't have professional football in the Netherlands for another 30 years, what makes the likes of Harold Rose notable? cheers, Struway2 (talk) 18:04, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Because the sport as a whole was amateur back then, he meets WP:ATHLETE's specification of "People who have competed at the highest amateur level of a sport" - I think. Giant Snowman 18:08, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

In the Netherlands it might have been, just like it is in some countries today, where managers of amateur teams wouldn't be deemed notable in a month of Sundays. "The sport as a whole" wasn't. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 18:15, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

It was massively less professional than today - even the Football League wasn't fully league until the 60s/70s. Giant Snowman 18:27, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:ATH says "People who have competed at the highest amateur level of a sport, usually considered to mean the Olympic Games or World Championships." I don't think the manager of an amateur club side in the 1920s quite reaches those heights :-)

But you're absolutely right about the Football League. In the 1920s there were some amateurs playing for league clubs, and there were a fair few blokes who had outside work, particularly over the summer, until the maximum wage came off in the 1960s because they needed the money to live on. But that's the point: this fully-professional thing is completely ignored when editors write about players or managers of what are now big clubs in fully-professional leagues but certainly weren't when the players or managers were working.

Don't get me wrong: I'm an inclusionist, I don't see the point of deleting properly sourced articles about people who have some claim to notability. I just don't see the logic of accepting without question an article that just states Fred Bloggs played for Birmingham in 1953 with a link to Neil Brown to prove it, even though we all know perfectly well that no English club was fully pro in the 50s because the players had summer jobs and were in and out of National Service, while rejecting without a second thought a similar article about Mohammed Ali (footballer) from somewhere in Africa or Eastern Europe because there isn't a banner at the top of the appropriate league's website saying "This league is fully professional, honest guv, it is, really".

Rant over :-) And it wasn't aimed at you or at Harold Rose. Just at the total stupidity of it all. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 18:59, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow. Just, wow. Don't know how to respond to that :) Giant Snowman 19:19, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I assume you're aware of Jack Reynolds (footballer born 1881). Kevin McE (talk) 19:37, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Is that directed at me? Giant Snowman 19:51, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Although Dutch Football was strictly amateur before 1954, clubs were allowed to employ professional trainers. Trainer is a much better word for their job than manager. Training players was all they did in those days. Not many people in the Netherlands spoke English... Line-ups were made by a committee. Transfers didn't exist etc.. Jack Reynolds only played for Watford in the 1907-08 season (27 SL matches 4 goals) Ajax didn't win the Eredivisie when Reynolds was their trainer. The Eredivisie started in 1956. Should be National Champion or something similar. Harold Bernard (Harry) Rose is the former Reading/ Bristol Rovers player. Born May 1900 in Reading died May 1990 in Reading 1920-21 Reading 5 leaguematches went to Bristol Rovers in May 1921 ,14 league matches until 1924 when he went to Mid Rhondda United Cattivi (talk) 02:32, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I think Jim Waites first name should be Harry

[25] also: [26] Can't find a Jim Waites in the newspapers of that time, only Harry . The early national coaches were often clubcoaches at the same time, Cattivi (talk) 03:43, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Denis Neville did coach Atalanta see here.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:40, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Harry/Jim Waites did coach Feyenoord [27] [28].--Latouffedisco (talk) 11:24, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Newspaper Het Vaderland 4-6-1921 Ochtend edition page 4 Coach Waites (BE Quick) has been invited to join the National team (In Dutch)

[29] Cattivi (talk) 11:39, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

VoetbalStats says he is called Jim...Giant Snowman 14:14, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I know, The Brinvest Voetbaljaarboek says Jim as well. The problem is that I can't find primary sources confirming this, this means his name is Harry in my own archive until proven otherwise. I know wikipedia prefers secondary sources. Cattivi (talk) 14:27, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Can someone with a copy of Joyce, or accesss to Allfootballers, look Waite up and see what his name is? Cheers, Giant Snowman 14:29, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

He's not in the book or on the site. He's not the Walsall goalkeeper Cattivi (talk) 14:35, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh right...have we considered the fact that Jim & Harry may be two seperate people? Giant Snowman 14:47, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so, remember Sid/Georges/Georg Kimpton who surprised us. I would join Cattivi on that point. We should check photographs. On Cattivi Netherlands photograph, we should find Waites [[30]] and compare it to Feyenoord's photograph here. By the way, it would be useful someone with access to allfootballers.com search for the other guys you created (Neville, Castle and Rose).--Latouffedisco (talk) 16:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Rose's playing carrer details have already been added to his article. There is no sign of either Castle or Neville on www.allfootballers.com. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 04:30, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Surely Feyenoord would mention the fact that their manager used to manage the national team? - that is, if they are the same person. Giant Snowman 23:51, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Waites was only caretaker, You won't find him on 'old' lists of national coaches, because Warburton was the official national trainer at that time. He seems to be a fairly recent 'discovery' Like I said before the job of national coach was not what it is today. They trained players and Waites acted probably as physio as well. They didn't select the team and didn't give pressconferences. That was the job of the Select Committee (Keuzecommissie) Karel Lotsy who was chairman of this Committee for many years was much better known than any of the national coaches. You could say that his job was very similar to a present day national team manager Karel Lotsy decided on teamtactics as well and his halftime team-peptalk was famous. I could check Waites next time I visit the National Archives, but this won't be soon. I think there's only 1 Waites. A possibility could be that Harry or Jim was a middle name he sometimes used. So it's a matter of choice: who to believe? A fansite (voetbalstats) backed up by the main Dutch footballmagazine or a photograph from the Dutch FA archives backed up by a few newspaper reports from 1921. Cattivi (talk) 01:46, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Daemonic Kangaroo for looking for these guys. I would tend to use the old Dutch FA photo and newspapers of that time. It was, say, 90 years ago, and his first name could have been changed/mixed up with another one.--Latouffedisco (talk) 06:23, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry but opinions needed

Here, we need ~~to wipe out meaningless stubs~~ opinions on articles that may fail WP:ATH:

Spiderone 08:59, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

If that isn't canvassing I don't know what is!8lgm (talk) 09:16, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, you need to be careful Spiderone. Have a read of Wikipedia:Canvassing to see what you can and can't do; it's fair enough saying "these AfDs have little consensus, input appreciated" but telling people HOW to vote is a no-no. Giant Snowman 09:49, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeovil Town F.C. External links

Are most of those just fan sites? They look like they are too me, wouldn't mind a double check. Govvy (talk) 10:50, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Removed the fan sites. Apologies if that was too bold.Cptnono (talk) 11:06, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Na, fine for me, cheers. Govvy (talk) 11:15, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Cptnono, your removal got reverted by an IP! :/ Govvy (talk) 11:36, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

References in other languages.

When they are in other languages how do you add that in the ref template? Is there a field option to state the language the reference is in? Govvy (talk) 11:20, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

In {{cite web}} you can add the field |language=, for example |language=German. This will display a "(in German)" after the linked url in the reference. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:25, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Pfft, that seems obvious, I don't know why I didn't try it. Mind you, I never see anyone hardly ever need to use that option! Govvy (talk) 11:27, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

HA! Waiting for hell on that page now so it isn't that obvious :) . There should be a discussion up above on this page on it. Although it looks like there is consensus, I don't think there is a specific guideline limiting it to 0 for footy articles.Cptnono (talk) 11:42, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Tevez

Just to let you know that apparently Tevez's transfer value was today revealed as £47m (ridiculous!). I've update everywhere I can think of and another editor updated Transfer (football). If there is anywhere else people can think that needs doing please do so or let me know. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 12:03, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Are we sure that The Times revealing that figure actually makes it a fact, in light of how Kia Joorabchian describes their story as "inaccurate and misleading" and uses the words "mischief" and "fictitious"? Maybe "according to The Times" might be safer... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 12:35, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

That's annoying, I hadn't realised anyone had challenged the new figures. In my naivety I just assumed that a new figure published in a reliable source would be fact. I don't have time to make those amendments now but I'll try and do them this evening. Hopefully someone from City will speak out and clear this up. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 12:55, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

This makes him the most expensive player in the Premiership. Spiderone 17:30, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, its The Thunderer and all that, but a transfer record is big news which one would expect to be verified by more than one source, and most pertinently, the club themselves. While Manchester City have a policy of not disclosing transfer fees, club press releases routinely refer to Robinho as the record signing, no such mention has been made about Tevez. As an aside, its interesting that two parts of the Murdoch media are reporting opposite things. They are usually in broad agreement. Oldelpaso (talk) 19:01, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

That's editorial content you're thinking of. I don't think Rupert tells them what to print on the sports pages. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 21:08, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Nigerian Premier League

It would appear from the article Nigerian Premier League, and from that league's Rules and Regulations, specifically and explicitly Section 1.4 Eligibility which starts off (1) All Professional Football clubs in Nigeria shall be eligible to play in the League for which they qualify, that this is a fully-professional league within the meaning of WP:ATHLETE. Also backed up by the BBC article cited in the article which mentions a minimum wage. Would people say that's enough proof to add it to the list of pro leagues? cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:19, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

That BBC link should be added to the Nigerian Premier League page as a citation. But to operate WP:Athlete for player articles, would be hard for non-English speaking for the majority of the project participants. Govvy (talk) 14:01, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

A minimum wage would hint it at being semi-pro, rather than pro. Giant Snowman 14:15, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Huh? Surely having a minimum wage would indicate that it's full-time. Minimum wages ensure that those who don't have supplemental jobs can still live on their earnings. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:24, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, sorry, my brain's not working too well today! Giant Snowman 14:49, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Snowman needs more coffee! Govvy (talk) 14:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Should I add it to this? I always check the list before AfDs Spiderone 15:06, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, add it to the fully-pro list. Giant Snowman 17:16, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Treviso

It appears that Abdul Qayyum Ahmad (talk · contribs) has copied the article Treviso F.B.C. 1993, pasted the content in the new article A.S.D. Treviso 2009 and turned the former into a redirect to the latter. As a result, the full editing history is not visible, which doesn't comply with GFDL, IIRC. I have raised the issue on WP:AN/I. I would welcome comments and suggestions as to what to do next. 94.212.31.237 (talk) 23:26, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. I've deleted the A.S.D. Treviso 2009 article, and moved the original one to comply with the new denomination of the club. --Angelo (talk) 23:46, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Niko Kranjčar

I have been through the article and cleaned it up, I am not sure know, would you call it a B or C class rating?? Govvy (talk) 11:10, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I would say it's a B. The article doesn't say what "Pompey" is though. I know what it is but others might not. Also use – for scores. Spiderone 11:40, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Could the fact that he apparently lived in Austria for 7 years be mentioned? Spiderone 12:29, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I didn't see that mentioned in the article... Also I removed a line and a reference, because the reference didn't clarify he had Austrian citizenship even know that was stated in the article. Govvy (talk) 12:35, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Fabio Borini

I noticed this AfD, and simultaneously I found a new article - Fabio Borini. It could be interesting for your project. --Vejvančický (talk) 13:56, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Definitely non-notable Spiderone 15:12, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Spurs task force.

I was wondering how many peeps are interested in a Spurs task force. If there are enough fans to bother having a sub-page to help organise all the pages/articles? Govvy (talk) 14:57, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Match article rename

Following the discussions in here, I decided to raise the renaming issues for these three articles:

Should they be renamed into Australia v American Samoa (2001), similar to England v Scotland (1870) or AS Adema v SO l'Emyrne, similar to Bayern Munich v Norwich City ? Or are there any other naming suggestions? — Martin tamb (talk) 18:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Have a look at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 32#Naming convention for not-easily-named matches, see if anything in there might help. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 18:34, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't notice that the issues were recently discussed. However I still thought that the Team A XX–XX Team B format are strange and difficult to understand for readers who are not familiar with football. It also looks like a format often seen only on a scoreboard, and not in a news article. Team A v Team B XX–XX sounds a little bit easier to understand. As these matches were notable for the scoreline, I'm proposing the following format: Team A v Team B XX–XX ~~(Year/Competition)~~ (eg. [[Australia v American Samoa 31–0 ~~(2002 FIFA World Cup qualification match)~~]]). — Martin tamb (talk) 19:02, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Australia v American Samoa 31–0 (2002 FIFA World Cup qualification match) would be slightly ambiguous as the match was held in April 2001. Perhaps Australia v American Samoa 31-0 (2001) would be more appropriate - though there'd still be issues of disambiguation where two teams played each other twice in the year.Hack (talk) 01:10, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Why would we need to add ".....(2002 FIFA World Cup qualification match)"? It's not like we need to disambiguate it from other matches which finished Australia 31 American Samoa 0. That's just adding extraneous stuff to the article title unnecessarily. If the scoreline is included in the title then there's no need to add extra qualifiers. If the scoreline isn't included then maybe you do need to add something extra, but I think the year alone (or at worst month and year) would be sufficient -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:02, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I just realize that adding the competition is excessive, but my main concern is why we are having the scoreline in the middle of the team names. I think it's not a proper title for an article, if you read it "Australia thirty one zero American Samoa", sounds really strange. I suggest moving the scoreline after the team name like Australia v American Samoa 31–0. — Martin tamb (talk) 11:10, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. I think the current titles are fine, especially in cases where the actual result is the topic of the article. For matches where it is the context of the match that is in question, such as England v Scotland (1870), then I think that structure is appropriate, but in the case of the match between Australia and American Samoa, the result was the most important aspect of the match, and the current title uses standard football score notation. I say leave it as is. – Pee Jay 11:24, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I would agree with PJ in relation to the Bon Accord/Arbroath game, but in deference to ENGVAR, would appreciate an Aussie opinion as to whether this is standard football score notation in that region of Anglophonia. But what version of English do they speak in Mozambique? Kevin McE (talk) 11:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Portuguese. SCNR Madcynic (talk) 11:45, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Why are we talking about Mozambique? The AS Adema 149–0 SO l'Emyrne match was played in Madagascar (where they speak French). – Pee Jay 13:41, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

D'Oh. But I was being tongue in cheek about the dialect of English, whichever it was. Kevin McE (talk) 15:51, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Personally, where the score is part of the title, I'd prefer the "Arbroath 36 Bon Accord 0" format, which incidentally is what that article was called before it was moved to the scoreline-in-the-middle version, apparently without discussion. Score-in-the-middle is how it'd appear in a formatted table of football results, but it reads more naturally with the scores separated. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Looking at the site of Moçambiquan TV, it looks like they use the usual home team first format. I concluded that after looking at the corresponding FIFA site that definitely uses this format. As match fixtures are the same (don't let the differing dates fool you) on the FIFA and TVM sites, this home team first format seems to be in use in Moçambique as well. Madcynic (talk) 12:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

On the Australian football score thing - are you asking about the order in which the score is written/said?Hack (talk) 12:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes Kevin McE (talk) 15:52, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Both the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and the Sydney Morning Herald use home team first notation. Madcynic (talk) 19:02, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I guess the discussion is going nowhere. I still don't like the scoreboard title, but I wouldn't push for the rename as it seems more people are okay with the current title. — Martin tamb (talk) 07:40, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Martin tamb pointed me here. As someone who doesn't really follow soccer, I'm a) not likely to read many articles under this project's purview, but b) a tad confused by a title like Australia 31–0 American Samoa. Now, when I think about it for a second it's easy to understand what it means, and I think anyone with much of a basis of knowledge in sports can easily figure it out, too. There comes a point when you have to figure out how far to bend for accessibility to people who probably aren't going to read your articles anyway - do you want to make the title idiotproof for people who don't know much of anything at all about sports? They're even less likely to read your articles than I am. I don't really offer any sort of solution, just a few thoughts, but as I mentioned at the article's talk page, 1916 Cumberland vs. Georgia Tech football game is another article about a sports game notable for its final score (though would Australia/American Samoa be considered notable on its own if not for its score?) does not have a scoreboard title. I dislike parenthetical qualifiers as much as the next editor, but I think a title like the 1916 college football game is just unwieldy enough to be accessible to absolutely everyone. Could it have been at Georgia Tech 222, Cumberland 0? Probably. And probably anyone with a basis in sports, even if they're not used to seeing final scores written that way, could understand the title. But I think that article's current title is better. Alex finds herself awake at night _{(Talk · What keeps her up)} 06:49, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, interestingly enough, Georgia Tech 222, Cumberland 0 was indeed that article's original title. Alex finds herself awake at night _{(Talk · What keeps her up)} 06:51, 15 September 2009 (UTC)