Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 59

Archive 55

←

Archive 57

Archive 58

Archive 59

Archive 60

Archive 61

→

Archive 65

2010-11 Supercopa de Espana

First leg on the right side should be "Real Madrid vs. Barcelona" and the reverse in the second leg since Madrid won the copa del rey, whose winner always have the first leg at home. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.74.170.145 (talk) 08:11, 29 April 2011

New club page : Al-Jaish

I created a new article for a club in Qatar that just got promoted to the top flight (Qatar Stars League): Al-Jaish (Qatar). There's not much info out there but I managed to add some details (and some of their signings). The article needs a lot of work, so if someone doesn't mind taking a crack at it I'd appreciate it! Thanks.

List of combined European club champions

List of combined European club champions—This article looks like it needs a clean-up. I'm even considering putting this up for deletion or a page move because of some of the content. --MicroX (talk) 00:17, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:Infobox football biography discussion

FYI Usage of the dagger (†) in the Template:Infobox football biography is part of a discussion here. Comments are welcome and wanted.--Kevmin § 05:30, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

If people want to get their knickers in a twist about typography then that's up to them, but good luck forcing us to do anything about it. We generally don't change things here even when there is good reason to. —WFC— 13:20, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Brazilian VANDAL

Here's the latest one in a series of almost 20 (please see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/177.0.204.119), this Brazilian anon "user" continues: he removes stuff in box without explanation (in José Ángel Valdés, he even removed a bit in intro which contained a REF! http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jos%C3%A9_%C3%81ngel_Vald%C3%A9s&diff=446577612&oldid=444027049), writes no summaries and is virtually impossible to reach, as he's: a VANDAL; someone with various IPs, which makes it (near) impossible for him to read the messages.

User:Jaellee and i (at least) are getting fed up with this situation, but it's very hard to offer advice/make the wiki-legal machine run, due to the question of the dynamic IP which i mention above. Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 18:03, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

• Ahah! Checking the contributions list better, found out he has used this address on three different days, left him a concise message in his (mine) mothertongue. --Vasco Amaral (talk) 18:13, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

In the last hours he was active again. I'm cleaning up behind him for weeks now (and he seems to get on the nerves of other editors as well from what I see). As he is quite active in German footballer articles, I even left him a message in German (even if I'm quite sure that it is useless). Any ideas how to deal with this? --Jaellee (talk) 09:26, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

• The IP shown above continues to be active today (fourth day then), nice job Jaellee! Also, i've learned that User:Struway2 has left User:Bruno corinthiano - a username so Brazilian it hurts, it might be him! - a warning message regarding that same "pack" of actions, unexplained removal of contents. I think that this IP should be blocked. --Vasco Amaral (talk) 17:42, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Carlos Gutierrez from Atlas Club on loan to Rijeka

I have found this 2 players on wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Guti%C3%A9rrez_Armas and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Alberto_Guti%C3%A9rrez both playing in Club Atlas and both are on loan in HNK Rijeka. Both are born on same day and Atlas wiki refers to one, while HNK Rijeka refers to another. So it's question is this the same person.

Skizlin (talk) 19:50, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Same name, same date of birth, same career .. I'll go ahead and say yes, 99% chance that it is the same player!TonyStarks (talk) 10:47, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Articles will beed to be merged by an admin. GiantSnowman 11:54, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

FC United of Manchester GA nomination

I've nominated the FC United of Manchester article for GA status. If anyone is able to review [1] the article it would be much appreciated. Thanks. Delusion23 (talk) 13:48, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Ukrainian league apps / goals

If someone has a moment, can you go through these contributions and make sure all the players have accurate apps / goals for the domestic league? I noticed he kept changing Ideye Aide Brown's apps / goals (presumably to reflect other competitions). The website soccerway.com is reasonably accurate for this. Thanks! ugen64 (talk) 00:34, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

upgrades in Template:International football base in others templates of the "Category:International sports navbox templates"

Base on the Template:International athletics, Template:International baseball and Template:International basketball (Women) we can split in some way the long list of links in the top of the Template:International football, maybe split in Defunct, "minor" and "mayor" world event, show some descrition of its, show that they are not all the same and everything means something diferent, also add Football at the Summer Universiade maybe in the minor events list? we already have a "non-FIFA" which is weird in someway but always more info is better that less --Feroang (talk) 23:45, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

upgrades in Template:International football first try

--Feroang (talk) 23:37, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Do you like it new version?--Feroang (talk) 15:28, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Why is the world map to the right of the box (resulting in lots of white space) and why does the map say 'See also International women's football', what is the link there? GiantSnowman 15:32, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

changed the position of the See also International women's football.--Feroang (talk) 02:39, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that, but the white space that the map adds to the article is slightly concerning. GiantSnowman 17:34, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

all the Games in--Feroang (talk) 00:07, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Games added to the official template--Feroang (talk) 01:18, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

List of Brazilian football champions

It's pretty simple: something more like this or something more like this? Digirami (talk) 19:45, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I would probably keep the original list of champions table, but add Srawberry on Vanilla's "By state" and "By club" tables. But if the flags are the problem, perhaps replacing those with text can be a better compromise (I mean Rio Grande do Sul instead of , as most non-Brazilians do not recognize the flags). Anyway, the info regarding the titles by state is very relevant in Brazil, and should stay. --Carioca (talk) 19:51, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

By state and By club tables are in both version. They only difference is my version, it only extends to the winners, not those that finish 2, 3, and 4. As for the flags and mentioning what state a club comes from (except for the "by state" table) since it bears no relevance in any way to the national league in Brazil (unlike the Copa do Brasil). Digirami (talk) 20:16, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Actually, as I said above, I agree that flags are not needed in the list of champions tables. In the other tables, the flags can stay, but using {{flagicon}} instead of {{flagicon}} or using just text (maybe adding a separate column for the state in the "by club" table). In the by state and by club tables I would also include the first and the second placed teams. --Carioca (talk) 20:26, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it is important to know which state the team came from outside of a "By state" table (which is already included and complies with MOS:FLAG). What state a team comes from bears no relevance to the league in any way, shape, or form. It's not worth mentioning it outside the aforementioned table. Besides that, I wouldn't extended those additional tables beyond the winning statistics. It is a champions list, after all. Digirami (talk) 20:34, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

The "by state" table lists the winning clubs anyway so, yes, there is no need to repeat the flags in the other tables. I noticed that the List of English football champions page include the winning years column in the total titles won table, but it is absent in the List of Brazilian football champions page. --Carioca (talk) 20:59, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Totally feasible. I would suggest mentioning which editions of the Serie A or Robertao or Taca each club won. Digirami (talk) 21:28, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Great, thanks. --Carioca (talk) 21:30, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Looks much better without flags. I say remove. Portal did this for Japanese clubs too. -Koppapa (talk) 18:17, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

The page is protected for the time being (a week). Digirami (talk) 22:08, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I found these in the archives 1, 2, there should be a longer discussion about Japanese state flags but i can't find it. -Koppapa (talk) 10:11, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Venezuela national football team

There are some major edits being made to the Venezuela national football team article over the past couple of days, with no sourcing. Could someone knowledgeable check it out, please? The Mark of the Beast (talk) 23:09, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Anybody? The Mark of the Beast (talk) 00:00, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Basically only squad changes. Should be easy to check and refd. Won't do it though. -Koppapa (talk) 17:57, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

If nobody involved in the football project is concerned, then I won't be either. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 20:15, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Couple things: 1) You can't force us to take a look at the article. 2) You asked for someone knowledge on the Venezuelan national team to look it out. Perhaps no one took a look because no one is knowledgeable on that topic. 3) Did it also occur to you that the rest of us do have lives outside of Wikipedia and did not have the time to take a look at the article? This is a WP on football and a lot of it is played on the weekend. We are all probably out watching games and having drinks in the process (individually, not collectively). And sometimes if you want it done right, do it yourself. Wikipedia:Be bold. Digirami (talk) 22:25, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Strike action in association football

I have started this article, currently it mainly focuses on the recent Spanish conflict, so if anybody can help expand, please do. Cheers, GiantSnowman 16:41, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Great idea! —WFC— 17:32, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

So is this an attempt at documenting every strike-related case in football by country? --MicroX (talk) 04:18, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but that's obviously open to change. GiantSnowman 16:27, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree with WFC, great idea. Certainly merits an article. Have started sections for Norway & USA. Deserter1 talk 12:19, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit war at Munich air disaster

There was a short edit war on Munich air disaster. Members of your project might have some input. Agathoclea (talk) 17:56, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject or task force?

I've probably brought this up before, but why do we have WikiProjects for Argentine, German, Hong Kong, Iranian, Irish and non-League football, but task forces for everything else? And that's not even mentioning the WikiProjects that have decided to set themselves apart from WP:FOOTY, such as WikiProject Real Madrid, WikiProject Sheffield United, WikiProject Sheffield Wednesday, WikiProject Association football in Australia and WikiProject Persepolis F.C. The members of those WikiProjects will no doubt disagree, but surely they should all be brought under the WP:FOOTY banner? – PeeJay 12:01, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

They all seen pretty inactive. -Koppapa (talk) 12:05, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Why on earth does an obscure Iranian club have its own WikiProject? The Sheffield clubs' projects are pointless as well. BigDom 12:17, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

There's no need for seperate WikiProjects, any relevant ones (agree that The Iranian club, while not "obscure", doesn't merit a WP) should become task forces. GiantSnowman 12:47, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Agree with PeeJay and GS that they should become task forces. There's no shame in "just" being a task force, nor does it have any real bearing on the independence of discussions. I would note that even when a task appears stale, as WP:SOUNDERS now sort of does, a semi-active task force still serves as a valuable resource for a small group of editors who are still actively working on the topic (Steve Zakuani became a GA very recently). Using WP:SOUNDERS as an example, the task force specific assessments, showcased content and proposed featured topic serve as valuable pointers for what there is to do. —WFC— TFL notices 13:53, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree, there's nothing wrong with clubs having their own task forces as they can provide a good overview of the standard of articles associated with a particular team and allow centralised discussion between interested editors. All the relevant projects should be turned into Task forces under the WPF banner. BigDom 14:34, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Now that I think about it, I don't actually remember there being any discussion about the formation of a Persepolis WikiProject. There certainly isn't any record of an official proposal at WP:WPPRO, and I can't find anything about it in the archives of this page other than to discuss whether or not it was still active. I'm not really fussed about the existence of the others, just their status as WikiProjects when they would definitely be better off as task forces, if only to streamline the use of talk page assessment banners. – PeeJay 14:48, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

What's the mechanism for changing projects into task forces then? —WFC— TFL notices 16:55, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

WP:MFD states that "It is generally preferable that inactive WikiProjects not be deleted, but instead be marked as {{inactive}}, redirected to a relevant WikiProject, or changed to a task force of a parent WikiProject, unless the WikiProject was incompletely created or is entirely undesirable" - but not how to actually do it, which is super helpful I know. We could maybe nominate them at MFD, as some (e.g. Persepolis) shouldn't remain in any form, and state which ones we feel need to become taskforces. GiantSnowman 17:02, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

For anyone who doesn't regularly check our list of football-related deletions and page moves, I've listed Wikipedia:WikiProject Persepolis F.C. for deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/WikiProject Persepolis F.C. along with its subpages. I've also nominated its disused talk page banner (Template:WikiProject Persepolis F.C.) for deletion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 July 25#Template:WikiProject Persepolis F.C. as its use has been superseded by a parameter in Template:WikiProject Iran. – PeeJay 18:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Can somebody with the appropriate skills please update {{WikiProject Football}} to reflect the change in taskforces? Cheers, GiantSnowman 16:47, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to bring this back to this page, but I'm about to go through our daughter WikiProjects and suggest to them that they become task forces under the WP:FOOTY banner. However, before I do, does anyone have any opinions regarding WikiProjects I should ignore when putting that suggestion forward? – PeeJay 15:46, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I think the discussion on all of them should be held in one place; much like a multi-nomination AfD, if for some reason one or two of them are special cases, participants are free to point that out. And I would note that despite having at a glance achieved sod all in five years, at least one of the aforementioned projects is not likely to take this lightly. —WFC— TFL notices 16:31, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh yes, because they're extremely active... GiantSnowman 16:36, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm not suggesting we should give a damn about it, just thought it was worth mentioning. In any case, the person who wrote that is still editing today. —WFC— TFL notices 16:46, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

True, but why should they edit as part of a seperate WP instead of as part a WT affiliated to this WP? GiantSnowman 17:06, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

IIRC, the main reason why WP:SUFC rejected adoption by us before is because they were founded as a daughter of WP:SHEFF. Why they can't be a task force of both WikiProjects, I don't know. After all, the Bayern Munich task force belongs to both WP:FOOTY and WP:MUC. – PeeJay 17:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

That would be the sensible suggestion, although sense doesn't seem to count for much these days. BigDom 17:31, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Indeed it would. I had no idea Sheffield United had a task-force so this is news to me. One of its key articles has one reference for 2,133 words. The statement of intent was quite something... Argyle 4 Life^talk 17:49, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

SOI is indeed something.. This position remains intact until such a time that the members of WP Sheffield United agree otherwise... how exactly would they agree otherwise without "further discussion or consensus within these project pages or elsewhere"? --ClubOranje^T 12:04, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Sheffield United doesn't have a task force... it has a WikiProject ;-) But anyway, I'll get started on linking the WikiProjects to this discussion and suggest to them that they begin the process of becoming task forces. – PeeJay 18:04, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I think if Bladeboy doesn't already writes press releases for Colonel Gaddafi then he should probably start sending his application off to the various dictators of the world.--EchetusXe 18:08, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I've added a message to the discussion pages of the Real Madrid, Sheffield United, Sheffield Wednesday and Association Football in Australia WikiProjects inviting them to comment on this proposal. I've also given them a deadline of this time on Saturday to respond or I will assume that their silence implies agreement and begin the conversion process. Oh, and by the way, I also found a couple of minor task forces attached to WP:MUC that you guys might find to be of interest; I've nominated for deletion here. – PeeJay 18:22, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Just noticed the message on the Australian WP page. How will changing from a project to a taskforce materially alter the status quo? Are general WP:Football users actually going to care more about a taskforce than a related project? The process is still is reliant on users monitoring their watchlist. Hack (talk) 01:56, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that is true; however, by virtue of the increased association with the parent WikiProject, your WP will have greater exposure, and therefore access to a greater number of willing editors. As you say, this does all rely on editors actually working on the articles, but if a certain percentage of editors who view your articles go on to edit them, then surely more exposure means more helpful editors. – PeeJay 08:09, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

It will also mean when you discuss fundamentals - for example; whether to use "football" "association football", "football (soccer)" etc naming conventions, it will get discussed by wider community and garner true consensus, rather than clique consensus.--ClubOranje^T 12:04, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

In response to peejay's comment. How will the level of cooperation change? In terms of collaboration, this page seems to be the most successful means of communication.Hack (talk) 04:44, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

In all honesty, the level of cooperation may not change that much, but at the minute it seems like the separate WikiProjects are intentionally distancing themselves from us by not coming under the WP:FOOTY banner. By doing so, you may be alienating people by implicitly refusing to accept WP:FOOTY guidance. It also seems like you're separating yourselves from us in order to say "we don't have to accept consensuses from WP:FOOTY because we're a separate WikiProject", when in fact the only distinguishing feature about your project is that you cover a microcosm of the articles covered by WP:FOOTY simply because of the location of your subjects. But instead of us explaining why you should integrate, can you explain why you should remain separate? – PeeJay 12:09, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand where you're going with this. The Australian project page describes itself as a sub-project of WP:Football and is included in the WP:Football category. I'm just trying to work out what the change to a taskforce entails. Is it just a title change or this something more substantial? Hack (talk) 13:07, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it is more substantial. By naming yourselves as a WikiProject, albeit a sub-project, you are setting yourselves apart from the parent project. As noted at WP:TASKFORCE, a task force is "a non-independent subgroup of a larger WikiProject that covers some defined part of the WikiProject's scope". The page also says that task forces should "rely on the parent project to provide much of the procedural and technical infrastructure", which is what we would do. There is no point in the Australian project using a different infrastructure to WP:FOOTY when there is no part of the Australian project that lies outside of WP:FOOTY's remit. To be honest, I don't think we really want you guys setting your own standards for articles when they are just as much a part of WP:FOOTY as they are a part of your project. Finally, I should add that Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Task forces and sub-projects explicitly states that we prefer the use of task forces over sub-projects. – PeeJay 13:52, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I say go ahead given this appears to be just an administrative change and the apparent apathy on the part of the rest of the project members.Hack (talk) 01:03, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to bring this up again, but I've got a bit of an issue with the Australian WP. Apparently, they have their own task force dedicated to the improvement of A-League player biographies; the problem is that I don't know how I would integrate that task force into the WP:FOOTY banner. Is it worth doing, or should it just be merged with the Australian task force (when I get around to moving the pages)? – PeeJay 11:26, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

A merge seems pretty sensible. Hack (talk) 03:58, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

I've moved Wikipedia:WikiProject Real Madrid to Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Real Madrid task force (and requested the appropriate template and category moves). Now for the Sheffield United and Sheffield Wednesday projects. – PeeJay 22:01, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

OK, the Australian WikiProject is now done (pending a few procedural CfRs and TfDs). Next on the list are the Argentine, non-league, German, Hong Kong and Irish football WikiProjects. – PeeJay 00:11, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

IMPORTANT - Can an admin please update Template:WikiProject Football with the code in the sandbox. There's been a request on the template talk page for ages now! – PeeJay 17:18, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Almost done now. It's only the English non-league football project left to convert. – PeeJay 15:43, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Germany task force for a more project-specific discussion. Calistemon (talk) 00:37, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

I've raised another discussion here in regards to this project "swallowing" up other projects without consulting them. Calistemon (talk) 02:25, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Player nationality/flag representation question

Motherwell F.C. player Tom Hateley who was born in Monaco while his father was playing there is represented as English despite the fact he has never represented any of their national teams. I don't really know what flag he should have. I assume he self-identifies as English and left Monaco at a young age after his father moved but he was born there so should technically have a Monaco flag, surely? Adam4267 (talk) 18:35, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

He is English, per [2] and [3]. I was born in Canada, it doesn't make me Canadian. Well, I've got a passport, but you know what I mean! GiantSnowman 18:47, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

GS is correct. Although if he hadn't identified as English, technically he would have had a France flag, as Monaco is not a member of FIFA. —WFC— 18:50, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

But I thought our policy was to put a players footballing nationality. Which would surely be French/Monegasque. As an English flag suggest he has either played for or was born in England. Adam4267 (talk) 19:01, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Our policy is to use reliable sources to verify information, and if they say he is English, then we do. GiantSnowman 19:15, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I think a snowman would stand more chance of survival in Canada than Bradford. Anyway self-identification trumps theoretical FIFA nationality. Unless he has represented France, which he hasn't.--EchetusXe 20:28, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Well we are on the subject, Hyde striker Matthew Berkeley was born in Manchester but has represented St Kitts and Nevis U20s through his parents, what flag should he have? LiamTaylor 20:37, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

SKN, as that is the nation he chose to represent at international level. GiantSnowman 20:41, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, though theoretically he could still play for England. Here is a list of considerations in order of importance:
1. Country with which player won senior caps.
2. Country with which player won youth caps.
3. Self-identification (within reason).
4. Place of birth.
5. If none of these are known then technically no flags are to be used, though in practice people seem to just assume that an English non-league club is full of English players etc.--EchetusXe 22:24, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

• Yes, regarding #3: Marcelo dos Santos Cipriano was born in Rio de Janeiro from Portuguese parents, but said he's always felt Portuguese, hence he would have that flagicon in his squad if he still played...

However, in #1/#2: Hassan Yebda has won caps for France at youth level, now he's a senior Algerian international. Yet, the "current squad" in Granada CF only has his Algerian flag listed (which makes total sense, has he has "denied" his French background, to which he was entitled for birth reasons). Speaking about identification with a nation, Yedba too has stated he feels 100% Algerian. Cheers - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 22:39, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I have often used the example of Romeo Beckham as a putative example of where place of birth should not determine our assumption of nationality because of short-term displacement of the parents: now we have a real example. But to comment on some contributions here: Vasco seems to ignore the fact that the template only allows for one nationality (a situation that so simplifies the reality of some people's situation that it renders such flags severely misleading); Echetus cites "theoretical FIFA nationality", presumably in reference to the header on our club templates, but of course, there is no such thing. FIFA have no presumption as to whom Tom Hateley should represent, only rules identifying a number of nations that he could represent. That header is very misleading. Kevin McE (talk) 00:19, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Which flag would you use on Jermaine Jones? Hack (talk) 01:36, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

• Great point in the JJ issue! I'd list him as German because he was born there and one of his parents hails from that nation, but that only until the point where he decided he would represent USA (which he had already done with the Mannschaft, in friendlies - confusing stuff!). And yes Kevin you are correct, i did not know only one template was permitted. --Vasco Amaral (talk) 02:20, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

When a player has represented more than one senior national team, the flag that should be represented to him is of the national team he represented more recently. :) FkpCascais (talk) 03:54, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

You might get some flak if you applied that to Ferenc Puskas... Hack (talk) 04:28, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Or Michel Platini, whose last cap was for Kuwait [4]. In historical examples I think it is common sense to go with the country the player represented for the vast majority of their international career rather than the most recent. Deserter1 talk 11:58, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Was that Kuwait match an official international? I doubt it... GiantSnowman 17:21, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

It is listed among Kuwait's results at FIFA.com, which I guess is as official as it gets. Confirmation that Platini played in it is harder to find. Kevin McE (talk) 18:18, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Player transfer/ ips adding content prematurely

Baba Diawara is being linked with Celtic and help reverting the ips would be helpful. Thanks. Adam4267 (talk) 12:19, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

James Welford

Having created an article for the cricketer James Welford, I noticed his Wisden obituary said he played football for Aston Villa. I don't particularly follow football, nor really know where to look for reliable sources on it, so I thought I'd post it here for someone to complete information on his football career. Thanks, AssociateAffiliate (talk) 15:05, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

He played for Villa in the 1895 FA Cup Final; his Villa career is summarised here. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 15:20, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

p.s. There appears to be a glitch on the infobox as he is shown as aged 142 years! Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 15:23, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:Brazil football club season

The above seems a bit much since we already have this. Merge? Digirami (talk) 17:15, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Yep, definitely. It reminds me of when somebody create MLS-specific player infoboxes, and they were merged. GiantSnowman 17:19, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

That's what I thought. I went ahead and merged them, but they were reverted by the creator of the template citing "delibrate vandalism". Anyone else wants to give merging them a try, it'll help. Digirami (talk) 18:31, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I've left a message on its talk page inviting anyone interested to either argue for its retention or allow consensus to be acted upon: it does seem a little harsh to run what seems to be virtually an accelerated TfD without notification to the author. Kevin McE (talk) 18:42, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't think he is interested in discussing this. His recent edit history after both you and I informed him of this discussion (you on the talk page of the template and I on his talk page) sees him expand the usage of the redundant template. Digirami (talk) 22:14, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

As I suspected, there is no chance of getting to this editor. PeeJay tried to get through to him, I did the same, so did Kevin... and he continues to refuse discuss the matter. He also seems to think that I want him kicked out (truth be told, if he continues acting the way he does, I won't even have to try). I have no idea how to continue with this. Advice? Digirami (talk) 23:20, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Honours again

Anthony Griffith appeared for Doncaster Rovers in the First and Second Round of the Football League Trophy in 2006–07. These were just 2 of his 5 appearances for the club that season, and he went on loan at Darlington and Stafford Rangers for the rest of the season. Donny won the final and Griffith watched on from the stands. Yet despite this he said "I still got a winners' medal, though, and my commemorative final squad shirt was signed by all the lads."

I never included the trophy in the player's honours section as I only ever include cup honours for players who appeared in the final itself (including substitutes). I just wonder how this fits in to the philosophy that 'where there's a medal, list the honour'.--EchetusXe 10:10, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

His team may not have won the cup ifhe didn't play in the first two rounds. ;) How do you honour a league title then? Playing all the matches only? -Koppapa (talk) 11:13, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

No. Well what if he transferred to Bristol Rovers half-way through the season? Then he would be eligible for both a winners and runners-up medal. Suppose seen as this is sourced I will list the honour for him in this case. Though it seems strange we have some players have an first round League Trophy appearance listed as an honour when other players don't have runner-up appearances listed as an honour.--EchetusXe 17:03, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Just goes to show that the rules on who gets a medal when a team wins a competition are a bit of a dark art and not well publicised at all. Does anyone, for example, actually know definitively who is eligible for a medal when a team wins the Premier League.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:36, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

I remember people suggesting various minimum numbers of appearances, but I'm not sure whether that is guesswork or not.--EchetusXe 09:49, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Council notice

There is currently a discussion here involving this project and ones related to it and there merger.Moxy (talk) 04:58, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Link -- Agathoclea (talk) 08:57, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Faroes player about to be deleted

Resolved

 – Deleted. Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 11:01, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Kevin Gondim expired Prod. Is he notable? Any sources? --Dweller (talk) 10:42, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

If he had played for Hammarby, then yes, he would be; however, I can't find any sources to support that, so I think the article can be safely deleted. – PeeJay 10:47, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Agreed; the article is unverifiable. GiantSnowman 10:48, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Premier League Transfers

I guess this should be either deleted or redirected to List of English football transfers summer 2011. Don't know which way to go, though. Luxic (talk) 13:35, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Quick note, and it may just be me, but many of the "Dates" listed in the "Date" column on that page are being picked up as phone numbers by skype for me(c. 15-20% of them) Darigan (talk) 14:16, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Just disable skype plugin. Thats on many websites. -Koppapa (talk) 15:02, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Definitely Prod (★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★) 15:07, 31 August 2011 (UTC))

Alan Sealey correct date of birth

Hello guys, if you please take a look at the article, two different dates of births appear. So how can we do in these cases? --VAN ZANT (talk) 19:08, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Now corrected and referenced. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 19:16, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks! --VAN ZANT (talk) 19:24, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

You can find the other date (24-2-1942) in the more recent 2005 edition of Hugman Cattivi (talk) 20:29, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

The West Ham stats site [5] also has 22 April 1942. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 21:41, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Why would Hugman change it? What source did westhamstats use, an old one or a more recent one? When someone makes an error, these errors are copied over and over again, and can go unnoticed for many years Cattivi (talk) 22:29, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Neil Brown also has the date of birth as 24 February 1942[6] as does the Plymouth Argyle player database[7]. I guess someone either needs to contact Hugman for an explanation or find Sealey's birth certificate. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 04:56, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

I have copied the above thread to the article's talk page for information. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 07:40, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Proxy club in infobox

Firstly, many footballers of South America were owned by agent and investor in majority, as Hulk (footballer) and Thiago Silva (However is another case, Flu cannot receive foreign transfer and Flu receive nothing for Silva (only solitary contribution) but TOMBENSE did give some player to Flu as return).

And for Gustavo Franchin Schiavolin, Filipe Luís Kasmirski, Rafael Moura and Felipe Mattioni , they were never played for his parent club, which some merely a football club but a proxy for the agent. So how to reflect them on infobox? Is there any rule?

For the permanent deal the current practice is not show, but for the loan deal were show. IS there any suggestion to form a MoS?

(Reply to unsigned comment above) Non-football clubs shouldn't be in the infobox; it's a breakdown of a player's career, not for the minutiate of contract details, which can be described in the article if need be. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 18:28, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

• I agree with ART, box is for clubs and akin. As for the user, without checking edit history, i think it's User:Matthew hk. --Vasco Amaral (talk) 20:45, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Toolserver down?

What's up with all the Template Maintainance links like http://toolserver.org/%7Emerl/specialpages/enwiki/NavigationTemplateMaintenance/1._FFC_Turbine_Potsdam_squad that you find on many Squad templates http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:1._FFC_Turbine_Potsdam_squad .Those don't work like since 2 months. Did the address change or is it down that long? Is there an alternative? -Koppapa (talk) 07:31, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Over-detail

One anon user has taken upon himself to write about EVERY match in (some) Blackburn Rovers players (i mean EVERY match: "on the x day he played so minutes against y team", "the next match he played z minutes against q team", so on, so on). At least i found it and reverted it in Rubén Rochina and Míchel Salgado, in the light of what i heard more than once here at the WP:FOOTY forums (no overdetail, just the highlights: debut, sending off(s), milestone game/goal, etc).

In the latter player, more problems: the anon UK user most not have liked one of my "legendary" edit summaries, and has chosen to edit-war with me over the INTRO, where he removes, without explanation, the competition in which Blackburn is inserted (Premier League) and the player's position (right-back). I don't know what to do, because: 1 - i don't talk to vandals; 2 - even if i did, his dynamic IP would make it nearly impossible for any conversation to happen. In Rochina, he also removed the reference to the competition of the club.

Suggestions please - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 19:10, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

If you really want a suggestion, it would be to tone down your edit notes, not to threaten actions beyond your authority, not to refer to people as idiots, etc etc. Kevin McE (talk) 21:59, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Incredible (even tough i know i very often fail in the civility aspect when dealing with trolls and stuff - have i insulted anyone who is not one or a downright vandal?)! I ask for suggestions, get patronized, when it's obvious i'm being harassed in the Salgado article (stuff removed in article without one word just to aggravate me), and no proper fields to where redirect my query? Gee, "thanks" - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 22:27, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I think the point that Kevin was trying to make is that you shouldn't insult anyone, vandal or not. GiantSnowman 22:36, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

• Yes i know, WP is not my private website for that kind of outbursts, but what's your opinion on over-detail please? --Vasco Amaral (talk) 22:37, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I've noticed that about Blackburn players before and just removed the mentions of run-of-the-mill appearances. WP:BEBOLD. --Jimbo^[online] 22:40, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It's annoying, yes, but not really vandalism. Be WP:BOLD and remove it, and invite the IP to discuss the matter on the article talk page. GiantSnowman 22:41, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks for help fellows! As stated above, i can't talk to the IP because it's dynamic, either i catch them red-handed or no deal (and even if i got to them, would they engage? most certainly not). --Vasco Amaral (talk) 22:44, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

You try to engage and reason with them first, and then you get an admin involved. Think of it this way: you are a young Blackburn Rovers fan and you want the players you see out on the pitch to have detailed biographies so that everyone remembers the 87 minutes you saw of the midfield star on Saturday afternoon (or a Monday evening to please Rupert Murdoch and the gambling industry). So you edit their articles in a way that doesn't necessarily please the WK:Footy community. A lot of established users first edits aren't particularly useful. Try to take a civilized and understanding approach when IPs are making edits that don't question a person's parentage or speculate on the size of a person's genitals.--EchetusXe 23:02, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Small? Adam4267 (talk) 23:15, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Actually Adam I have occasionally had to remove speculation that the genitals were of an impressive size. A personal friend, a fantasist, or just a really enthusiastic fan - I'm not quite sure.--EchetusXe 09:47, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

I was just speculating on the size of Michel Salgado's. Surely no one could be that angry without unkess they were overcompensating for something. Adam4267 (talk) 14:58, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

You tell him that, see what he says.--EchetusXe 13:24, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

• That made me smile and/or laugh Echetus :) However, the bit about Míchel Salgado in which the anon user consistently removes the bits in intro which i have mentioned (namely PLAYER POSITION!), i have counted 5 or 6 times so far, is a clear case of provocative edit-warring.

And again, yes, i must definitely work on my edit summaries (how many times have i promised this?) - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 23:29, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Serie D

Are Serie D teams notable? A recent AfD resulted in a delete (even though consensus seemed to be to keep, but whatever), and there is an ongoing AfD to which this is relevant. GiantSnowman 21:53, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

I think they're definitely notable and I am puzzled by the AfD closure. Deems like a justifiable DRV or at least ask the admin why (no reason was given). Number 57 22:05, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I was going to approach the closing admin following this discussion, and then take it to DRV if needed. However, why are they notable - i.e. what guidelines do they meet for the non-FOOTY members of Wikipedia? GiantSnowman 22:11, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

How exactly they are notable, that's what i want to know. And by the way, on the Todi deletion discussion, there was no consensus at the very worst; apart from Snowman's vote, the rest were made by one editor with a dynamic IP. Kosm1fent ^{Won't you talk to me?} 04:39, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm assuming WP:FOOTYN is no longer current? Though even by that standard, this club isn't notable. Hack (talk) 05:50, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

As there are 168 teams in Serie D (see the current season article), I am at a loss to see why S.S. Todi Calcio and F.C. Calcio Acri seem to be the only ones nominated for deletion. Surely, if one goes on grounds of notability, they all fail (other than those that have played at a higher level). Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:12, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

For that exact reason it is difficult to nominate every non-notable page for deletion at once. I have gone through only 2 groups (H and I) so far and have PRODed quite a few articles. Kosm1fent ^{Won't you talk to me?} 06:42, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

For me, clubs playing in Serie D should be considered notable. As I argued in this AfD, excluding Serie D would leave just six leagues in Italy in which all clubs can be considered notable, compared to almost 50 in England. As Italy has only 78 teams competing in its national cup, it is unfairly punished by WP:FOOTYN criteria. Other editors agree this inconsistency is highly problematic, especially when compared to the 6000+ teams in France's national cup. Deserter1 talk 13:32, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Please be more careful when nominating current Serie D clubs for deletion - you should never have nominated Turris since they've played many seasons in Serie C in the past. Jogurney (talk) 15:12, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't know who had this genius idea of nominating Serie D clubs for deletion. Some of those clubs have significant history, even representing important realities such as big cities of 50,000 or even more, and Serie D is definitely a nationwide league by the way. It used to be called Campionato Nazionale Dilettanti in the past (National Amateur Championship, please note the National word), they assign a national title. In addition, please keep in mind the number of non-professional teams is soon destined to increase, since there are plans to disband Lega Pro Seconda Divisione within two or three years and have only three fully professional leagues. What is important is WP:GNG mostly, so please think twice before nominating articles randomly - such teams receive regular regional, if not national, coverage. --Angelo (talk) 15:24, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Jogurney, i apologise for that mistake, it was silly of me not to check it (i thought i had). Angelo, according to WP:FOOTYN (which nobody seems to follow, but anyway), all teams that played in the national cup are considered notable. It doesn't matter if the league is called "national" or whatever, they just have to be eligible to play in a national cup. As far as i know, Serie D teams aren't eligible for the Coppa Italia. About WP:GNG, i couldn't find anything about any club article i've nominated for deletion. Surely if those clubs receive regular regional or national coverage, you would be able to embelish their articles with such links, other than their official websites i see in every bloody article. Kosm1fent ^{Won't you talk to me?} 15:47, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Serie D teams are actually eligible for Coppa Italia appearances. See 2011–12 Coppa Italia for instance. --Angelo (talk) 15:56, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Hmmmm okay. It is not every Serie D club, though... Only those who have played in the Coppa Italia are considered notable per WP:FOOTYN. Kosm1fent ^{Won't you talk to me?} 16:08, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

No, I think the point that Angelo is trying to make is that all Serie D teams are eligible for the Cup, but not all enter it, for whatever reason (financial etc.) GiantSnowman 16:50, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Exactly. By the way, only a minority of Lega Pro Prima Divisione and Lega Pro Seconda Divisione (both fully professional leagues) are admitted to Coppa Italia as well, so you understand this might automatically make a majority of fully professional teams (including newly-promoted ones from Serie D) from Lega Pro non-notable as well. Namely, rules to choose Serie D teams who qualify to play Coppa Italia change regularly, this year it is supposed to be the second-placed teams from each Serie D round of past season, before that it was the playoff winner instead, some time ago it also included finalists from Coppa Italia Dilettanti but now it doesn't anymore... And, to make things even more complex, Coppa Italia admission rules themselves (including the number of allowed teams) have changed quite frequently in the last few years as well. --Angelo (talk) 16:55, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Where does the Coppa Italia Lega Pro fit into all of this? Hack (talk) 17:00, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

I see Angelo's point, but whatever the Coppa Italia format might be, WP:FOOTYN recognises notability only for those teams who have actually played for the Coppa Italia and not those who can potentially enter (a.k.a. the whole Serie D). And by the way, mere professional status does not justify notability. Kosm1fent ^{Won't you talk to me?} 17:11, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Just noticed WP:FOOTYN is a draft, not even an official guideline. Which means refering to it is just pointless, since it has no consensus (yet) from the community. And, regardless of anything else, it is full of flaws still (there is no definition of "national cup", for instance). And, in any case, we deem players to be notable if they played professionally for at least one game, so I can't just understand why we shouldn't do the same with clubs too. --Angelo (talk) 17:18, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, it's the only guideline we have and can refer too, since most Serie D articles are non-notable per WP:GNG. I agree that we must reach consensus on football-related notability ASAP. Kosm1fent ^{Won't you talk to me?} 17:25, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm in the process of deprodding the Serie D club articles listed in the article alerts section on WP:WPF. Proposed deletion is only for uncontroversial deletions which are unlikely to be contested. That is clearly not the case here. Oldelpaso (talk) 17:59, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

if this can help you, on it.wikipedia only teams with 10 or more seasons in Serie D are elegible. 93.56.45.94 (talk) 17:02, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

FA Vase entry = club notability?

I've seen a couple of mentions (here and here for example) to English clubs being considered notable under WP:FOOTYN by virtue of their entry into the FA Vase. When and how was this decided? Hack (talk) 07:07, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

FA Vase entry is a requirement for FA Cup entry, so the two are fairly analagous - the only difference is that the FA Cup is now limited to clubs finishing below a certain position at level 10 due to a lack of space in the draw. It's also fairly analagous to being at level 10 - only a very small number of clubs enter from level 11. Historically there were also a few cases in the past of there being leagues at level 11 that really should have been level 10 but were constrained by geography or the fact that there were no level 10 leagues in the area - the clubs from these leagues frequently entered the Vase despite the fact that they were technically a level below most other entrants. However, these with the creation of the South West Peninsula League and East Midland Counties League, these anolmolies have largely been ironed out. Number 57 08:25, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

So the Vase is considered an extension of the Cup for club notability purposes? Hack (talk) 09:03, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I suppose you could say that. Whilst it is hardly a "major" trophy, the latter stages of the competition do receive a reasonable amount of media coverage and I believe the final (which often attracts crowds of five figures - one recent one had an attendance of over 37,000) has been televised in the past. Number 57 09:40, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Then that's indeed not fair for the other countries if even level 11 clubs get to play at (some kind of) a national cup and thus justify notability per WP:FOOTY. However, in Italy, the Coppa Italia Serie D/Dilettanti cannot be considered a notable national cup event, can it? Kosm1fent ^{Won't you talk to me?} 10:01, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

I've brought this up in the past and all you'll get is a few replies from editors who think that every club in England should be notable and anyone who challenges them can piss off. Number 57, I don't know where you get the idea that the FA Vase is some kind of "extension" of the FA Cup. We already have articles for the several hundred clubs that participate in the Cup, far more than would be allowed for any other country. Why is this not enough for some people? As you say, the majority of clubs playing in the Vase also play in the Cup, so why use the former as a measure of notability. Would we really miss a few articles about some level 11 clubs? BigDom 10:09, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Given that I've prodded several clubs playing in lower leagues recently, I hardly think you could say that I think all clubs in England are notable. As for why there are more articles "allowed" on English clubs that other countries (I don't believe any other countries have actually had strict limits set?), perhaps it is because football is far more popular (and therefore notable) at lower levels in England than it is in other countries? Most of the (many) matches I have attended at level 10 clubs in England have more spectators than some level 2 clubs in Israel (which certain editors have tried to claim is fully professional). Number 57 10:15, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

What is the level of media coverage for your average Level 11 club? Hack (talk) 11:46, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

My experience would suggest that short match reports and occasional longer articles in the local paper are the norm. I've recently referenced Nettleham F.C. using (amongst other things) a ocuple of local newspapers. Number 57 11:49, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

The "national cup" club notability rule certainly favours England and France, which have many hundreds of teams participating in their national cups each year, over Germany and Spain, which have only 64 and 83 teams respectively. At this discussion and this discussion, it was recently agreed that this was not fit for purpose, but no alternative suggestions were agreed. One was to build up a consensus on club notability criteria on a country by country basis, e.g.: User:Soccer-holic/Club notability criteria. Deserter1 talk 12:45, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Indeed - I thought I had earlier included a comment that WP:FOOTY is an essay that should be ignored (as it always is in reference to players), but I must have closed that window without saving! If it were applied to the French situation (6,000+ clubs) it would be absurd, and it is also unfair that it would only capture 64 clubs in Germany. Country-specific agreements are probably the best way forward. Number 57 12:59, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

So you're suggesting we solely go by WP:GNG? Hack (talk) 14:24, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

No - country-specific criteria like this. Number 57 14:37, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

There are only two countries in that list. Shouldn't it be expanded with more countries and then be put somewhere in common sight? (WP:FOOTYN?) Kosm1fent ^{Won't you talk to me?} 15:51, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

That was the plan, but everyone forgot about it. Number 57 15:52, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Heh. Well then, everyone should remember this and build a list based on consensus, before more misunderstandings or misintepretations of (outdated) WP guidelines happen. Kosm1fent ^{Won't you talk to me?} 16:12, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Added some more countries with what hopefully most will agree are sensible criteria, though I'm not sure the FA Vase or FA Amateur Cup should be notable. J Mo 101 (talk) 12:30, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Very nice. Although i don't agree with the "A or B" format, i think we should just base it on league restrictions. And no, the FA Vase should not be notable, up to a certain round, at least. Kosm1fent ^{Won't you talk to me?} 19:26, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

League restrictions are fine as a guideline for current notability, but what do we do for teams that were notable in the past? Taking the English football league system for example, the non-league structure has changed so many times over the years that the level 10 notability bar is rendered meaningless, which is why the FA Cup is much more useful for determining whether the likes of Leadgate Park F.C. are notable or not. J Mo 101 (talk) 22:08, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

National Football Teams website

On the National-Football-Teams.com website, can someone shed some light on what the "Exch." column stands for in the player stats? For example, for this player: Samad Oppong, it says 0 games, 1 Exch. and 0 goals. However, at the top of his profile, it says 1 International Game. So, I can't for the life of me figure out what it could possibly stand for ... thanks! TonyStarks (talk) 06:43, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

My guess would be that it means "substitute appearances". Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:57, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

It does (stands for Exchange). Compare Ben Foster's NFT and Englandstats pages. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 07:07, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Ah makes sense and pretty straightforward .. thanks guys. TonyStarks (talk) 07:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Another question with regards to this site, how complete is it? For example, Alex Asamoah's Wiki article says he has 1 cap for Ghana, but when I try to find him on the NFT website he doesn't show up. I tried to find his caps for Ghana on Google but couldn't find anything either. Am I safe in assuming that his Wiki article is wrong?TonyStarks (talk) 21:00, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Mr Asamoah played against Nigeria in the CHAN qualifier in December 2008 [8], but I don't think that counts for full caps. Can't find any other international appearance for him.

In general, if NFT says a player has caps, then he probably has, but the number may well not be correct, especially for less well-documented countries. If it says he hasn't been capped, it's not necessarily correct, again especially for less well-documented countries. It's good, but it's still just some bloke's personal website... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 21:41, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree. CHAN matches are not considered "A" internationals by FIFA (and you won't find them listed at FIFA.com), so the editor probably thought Mr. Asamoah had a cap based on that appearance. It's quite possible he appeared in some other "A" international Ghana has played as it's pretty difficult to find a full set of match reports for their "A" international friendlies (let alone the CAN qualifiers). Jogurney (talk) 01:38, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Just as I thought, it was a cap for Ghana's local team .. which isn't considered a full international. I'll go ahead and change his article. Thanks for the help.TonyStarks (talk) 11:24, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

• Regarding Struway's input, well surprise surprise! Did not know it was one individual's web creation, thought it was pretty official. Also, Stru is correct in his approach, take a look at Majed Abdullah's entry (see here), it says 0 games-0 goals when this guy is one of the most capped players in football history (without seeing his WP article, i think he has more than 150 caps for Saudi Arabia, even though some may not be FIFA-recognized), it's only helpful in this case as it shows us his national team years (1978-1994), nothing else. --Vasco Amaral (talk) 19:19, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

If you see, specially for less known NT´s, on each year squad you usually have a "missing matches" list (like Central African Republic in this case), and as you go further in past, you´ll find out that NT´s like Botswana end up having more missing data than the one they actually have. The good thisng about the website is that lists the confirmed stats for players, but that doesn´t mean that those are the correct stats. Exemple: Misdongarde Betolngar has ZERO confirmed stats at NFT, but he has a page on the site and it even mentions the years he played. FkpCascais (talk) 23:48, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Where are they now?

Just thought I'd give a heads up on this interesting new site: http://www.where-are-they-now.co.uk/

Unfortunately the Port Vale page appears to be broken! Because of this I can't tell whether most of its information is simply taken from Wikipedia to begin with or whether it is a useful website. So check it out!--EchetusXe 13:35, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Had a quick look and the players I read didn't seem to be taken from Wiki, but is the source of the data just input from random people, so can it be described as reliable? Eldumpo (talk) 13:55, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Wales task force

Are there any members of WP:FOOTY who would be interested in helping out with a new task force focused on Welsh football? The scope of the task force would include all Welsh players either born in Wales or to Welsh parents, as well as anyone who has played for a Welsh national team (any age group or women's football), or for a club in Wales and/or in the Welsh league system (so as to include Cardiff, Swansea, Wrexham, Newport, Merthyr Tydfil, Colwyn Bay and The New Saints players). The clubs themselves would also be covered, as would the national teams and all the related football grounds. Finally, Welsh football competitions would also come under the task force's umbrella. The structure of the task force would be based on the successful task force model employed by this WikiProject, which would be the primary parent project for the task force. If I can get five people on board for this, I will create all the necessary pages and categories, and I will begin tagging article talk pages with assessment tags. I hope this will spark some interest in the project. Looking forward to hearing from you all. – PeeJay 14:14, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

As an honorary Welshman, count me in. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 14:36, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Glad to have you on board. Btw, "honorary Welshman"? How so? – PeeJay 15:38, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I was called that by another user following my efforts with the list of Welsh international players. Also, my parents named me after the patron saint of Wales. In reality, I'm a bit of a mongrel, but let's not go there! Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 16:11, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

That list article should be moved back to List of Wales international footballers over redirect per WP:NAMINGCRITERIA (Conciseness) as this is now a sortable list and the only complete list as far as I can tell.--ClubOranje^T 09:22, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

That alphabetical list was always sortable. List of Wales international footballers with 25 or more caps was subsequently created and I later moved it to its location now.Eldumpo (talk) 17:33, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

I'll happily join it (as I have the Scottish one) - not out of any massive interest, but because I occasionally happen to edit in those areas. Plus I'm part-Welsh, so I kinda owe it to my mum... ;) GiantSnowman 17:16, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I do a fair bit of editing on Welsh football articles and am happy to be involved further.Eldumpo (talk) 17:30, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Cheers, Eldumpo. Anyone else? – PeeJay 10:55, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

The Welsh football task force is now up and running. If you are interested in taking part, please add your name here. – PeeJay 13:09, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Are you going to have a go at creating an userbox template? GiantSnowman 13:20, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Done, although I could do with a better image. – PeeJay 13:26, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Seeing as we also have User:Warburton1368/WikiProject Football/Scotland task force, and the potential for an Irish one, ideally they should all follow one design, with differing colours (blue/red/green). GiantSnowman 13:31, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Good idea. Do you think the England task force should also adopt a similar pattern? – PeeJay 15:29, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

User persistently adding false information

Are any edits made by User:Dundas2011 worth keeping? I just reverted this at Go Ahead Eagles, having noticed he added false information to a page on my watchlist. I am tempted to undo them all, but some might be accurate, I'm not an expert on where to look for the latest news concerning Dutch football. Argyle 4 Life^talk 00:34, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Just plain vandalism. I reverted his last edits and reported him to WP:AIV. Luxic (talk) 21:04, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

You're correct. I went through those that hadn't been undone yet after posting here and they were all absolute rubbish. People like that puzzle and amuse me, but I expect they'll be back as some IP. Argyle 4 Life^talk 09:17, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm going through the pages that he edited yesterday before being blocked and was alarmed that this edit at Go Ahead Eagles remained. I thought the two IPs that edited it afterwards would've noticed the amount of BS on there, but nevermind, sorted now. Argyle 4 Life^talk 11:18, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Worrying development

I have been doing a lot of work on Peter Swan (footballer born 1966) recently. In his autobiography Swanny he describes how he scored 70 goals in 503 games. Trouble is that I have found that he clearly scored 62 goals in 445 games, as demonstrated in his 'Career statistics' section. He clearly got his stats from Soccerbase here.

Soccerbase is wrong. It shows his Burnley stats from 1995 to 1997 as 49 league appearances, and from 1998 to 2000 as 68 league appearances. Trouble is in his second spell he actually made 19 league appearances. Clearly Soccerbase put his total Burnley stats in his second spell row, in addition to his first spell stats in his first spell row. Thus giving an artificial boost. Soccerbase again is right in one part here and here, but not where it counts (in the profile summary). The fact alone that in his book he describes how he spent 1998 to 2000 almost crippled and recovering at Lilleshall shows him playing 70 games in 18 months as somewhat doubtful.

His book doesn't include a breakdown of his stats, but it shows that his book's throwaway comment of '70 goals in 503 games' was taken from Soccerbase. Now, if the media were to report his stats, if someone else was to do research for some other book then what source would they believe? Wikipedia or Swan's own book? A simple mistake from Soccerbase that could be very quickly corrected (if only they responded to e-mails), and look what the outcome is: a small part of history is changed.--EchetusXe 11:56, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I've noticed similar mistakes - they've given Jake Reeves two profiles, for example. I've e-mailed them to rectify, but I have little hope to be honest. GiantSnowman 11:59, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Andrew Little (footballer) is reported in the local paper as having made fourteen appearances for Rangers, when in fact he made just thirteen. Paul Edwards (footballer born 1980) has three separate Soccerbase profiles.--EchetusXe 12:30, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

I think in this sort of case it's worthwhile to have a detailed footnote explaining the discrepancy, because a seriously interested reader who had noticed the difference would tend to assume that Wikipedia is wrong. See for example note 12 at Nigel Gibbs. For a discrepancy as minor as the one at Nigel Gibbs it is possibly excessive, but it leaves the reader in absolutely no doubt as to why Wikipedia believes it is right and certain reliable sources are wrong. Given the size of the discrepancy here, and the potential knock-on effect of "reliable" sources that Echetus describes, I think a similar note for Peter Swan is probably necessary. —WFC— 14:38, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Good advice W. I am not used to making explanatory notes so if someone could improve it that would be great. I can't make them all direct to the same note like I can with references so it looks a bit naff.--EchetusXe 15:10, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

I've consolidated it into one note, and condensed the wording slightly. —WFC— 15:27, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Ah nice one, cheers!--EchetusXe 16:09, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Template:FIFA Clubs of the 20th Century

Necessary? Digirami (talk) 04:08, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely not. Especially if 2 votes 1.02% means you are in it and 1 vote less means you fall under other. -Koppapa (talk) 04:57, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Do we even need the article FIFA Clubs of the 20th Century.......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:47, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

A quick google search suggests that it may not meet WP:GNG. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 11:20, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, article itself could go in my opinion. No info besides the clubs listed. -Koppapa (talk) 13:08, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, I've nominated it for deletion. Digirami (talk) 15:42, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the article, I've moved the page to FIFA Club of the Century as this was the name of the award conferred on Real Madrid. Incidentally it was awarded the same day as the FIFA Player of the Century which was rigged by FIFA so that Pele and Maradona both won. Hack (talk) 15:27, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

List of football players with a Football League Championship winner's medal

What do people think about the appropriateness of this article? In any case, it's unreferenced at present. Eldumpo (talk) 22:33, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

It will probably remain unreferenced and unverifiable. PROD/AfD candidate. GiantSnowman 12:42, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

I have now put this up for AfD Eldumpo (talk) 15:56, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Jos Hooiveld

As I'm in danger of being blocked for edit-warring, could someone take a look at this article. User:AlexandriaLibrary insists that the "Current club" parameter section of the Infobox should show "Celtic (on loan to Southampton)" rather than the conventional "Southampton (on loan from Celtic)". Furthermore, in the biography, he also insists that the heading should show "Southampton F.C." rather than simply "Southampton". Both rather trivial points I know, but he is adamant that he is correct. (He doesn't seem to edit any other article, but berates me for failing to maintain "The integrity of an online encyclopedia".) -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 03:15, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

I think the club he is actively with should be the one listed first, not his parent club. However, I think a note should be added to the Infobox footballer template to clarify this point. If others agree, can this change be made? Eldumpo (talk) 13:26, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Fifa World Cup

Hi, I would just remind you that there are dozens and dozens of players who participated in the championship of the world waiting to be created ... .. Now why should we not strive to finish all a bit to create them? .. Although it would create one player a day, would be a big step forward ... The list is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alexxander3000/Sandbox

—Alexxander3000 (talk) 09:46, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Are there any online sources we can get enough information from?--EchetusXe 11:17, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

I use FIFA and National Football Teams whenever creating articles on int'l players. GiantSnowman 12:03, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Ok, but there doesn't seem to be any info on those sites. For example there are only three players for the 1986 Iraq team: here.--EchetusXe 13:59, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

It's better to just search for them - NFT is incomplete (but improving) while FIFA has every player in WC and WCQs. GiantSnowman 14:27, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Using online sources is not a great idea imho. Not even sites like this one [9]. It seems they copied the VI books, including the errors. I would use the Matty Verkamman books or old newspapers as a source for the Dutch national team. Cattivi (talk) 15:16, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

{reduce indent} Of course, whilst not doubting that these players are notable, its questionable whether its worth having articles on people for whom we essentially know nothing. To take Said Dghay for example: there are articles on him at Polish Wikipedia and Italian Wikipedia, but I don't see what they add. Indeed, having a plethora of short articles leaves you open to vandalism as people can come in and make incorrect edits without being noticed. --Pretty Green (talk) 15:22, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I gave it a go with Albert Guinchard.--EchetusXe 15:56, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

for help from it.wikipedia ask it without problems, if you want there is also the chance to enlarge some article like Enrico Albertosi.. 93.56.57.204 (talk) 06:42, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

If any Germans speakenz ze English then I just created Willy Huber's article, but his article on the German wiki is very detailed. Its quite difficult to work out what it is saying unless you are familiar with the language and can interpret it, unlike say Spanish or French which is easy to translate.--EchetusXe 09:40, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Where did all these discussions take place?

I'm really curious to know where User:Strawberry on Vanilla established concensus to make multiple changes to multiple football templates? I only spotted it because I've got Template:Infobox football tournament season on my watchlist. They made a change, immediately undid it, and then repeated it a second time. Others jump out at me as "I don't like it so I'm going to change it" and even documentation subpages have been changed so that it includes Santos, as if the world revolves around them. If this has all been agreed upon somewhere by a group of people then that is fine, but given the users' history I extremely doubt any discussion has taken place, let alone consensus being reached. Argyle 4 Life^talk 03:41, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

No, no discussion has taken place. I have undone his changes, and asked him to come here to discuss his proposals to gain a consensus before rolling out further changes. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:29, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

No place whatsoever. He started a discussion on one aspect, but then implemented his changes anyways a short time after. Didn't give much time for discussion. Digirami (talk) 14:26, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

List of Pelé's matches and goals

A bit much? Digirami (talk) 16:25, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, i guess whole article could be replaced by an link to external site in pele's article. -Koppapa (talk) 16:31, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

The article can never be complete, given the discrepancy in his matches/goals depending on what source you read. No need for a seperate article. GiantSnowman 16:42, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Suggest someone AFD's it then. Also, is there any really good reason to include Santos in the NY Cosmos template? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:45, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

• Now at AfD - and no, no reason for them to be 'related articles' other than the fact that Pele played for both of them. GiantSnowman 17:00, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Single-named Brazilian players

Hey gang. Am I nuts in thinking that we ought to favor the single-name pattern used by Brazilian footballers (vis a vis, Pelé and Ronaldo)? I'm getting a surprising amount of pushback at Talk:Marta Vieira da Silva#Requested move, and I would appreciate some suggestions on how I could communicate the rarity of Marta's surname being used. Powers ^T 12:30, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

• How many female Brazilian footballers named MARTA have an WP article? If only this one, then i guessed the article could be renamed "Marta (Brazilian footballer)". --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:29, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Ronaldo isn't named Ronaldo (Brazilian footballer). Why the difference? Powers ^T 16:13, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

• Because MARTA is bound to appear in several articles (especially Portuguese speaking ones), in other persons not related to sports. Following your train of thought, then yes i agree, the article should be named "Marta", the stuff in parenthesis would be just to avoid confusion. --Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:33, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Ronaldo is an equally popular given name; don't you think it's just as likely to appear "in several articles"? Heck, there are other Brazilian footballers named "Ronaldo". Powers ^T 17:19, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

If you mention 'Ronaldo', 'Ronaldinho' 'Pele' to people - football fans or not - they will know exactly who you mean. 'Marta', on the other hand, is much less well known. GiantSnowman 16:41, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

I think you're quite wrong there. The average non-fan might know Pele, and may have heard of Ronaldo. On the other hand, every soccer fan ought to know who Marta is, especially after this year's World Cup. Powers ^T 17:18, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

No, but would a non-fan know who Marta is? I've just asked my sisters, they looked back at me blankly... GiantSnowman 19:03, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

But do they know who Ronaldo is? Powers ^T 20:26, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Yep. They were less than complimentary about his physique but they knew who he was... GiantSnowman 20:39, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

The average non-fan might know Pele, and may have heard of Ronaldo. On the other hand, every soccer fan ought to know who Marta is
Really? Adam4267 (talk) 21:55, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm a football fan, and I've never heard of Marta. BigDom 22:08, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Neither have i. Warburton1368 (talk) 22:10, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

You guys did know there was a World Cup going on this summer, didn't you? I'm frankly stunned. She's only the most purely skilled female soccer player in the world and the leading scorer in WPS three years running. Sadly, yet more evidence, I suppose, of the short shrift women's sports get in the encyclopedia. Ronaldo's good enough to be at the name on the back of his jersey, but Marta isn't. Sad. Powers ^T 23:14, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

We can´t use Marta for her because Marta is already a disambiguation page, as beside people, there is also a river and a village named Marta, as well. If this was a football encyclopedia, maybe we could question this, however as things stand here, we simply can´t monopolise the page with a female footballer. Anyway, I supose the question is weather the page should be Marta (Brazilian footballer) or Marta Vieira da Silva, right? FkpCascais (talk) 23:30, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

No, I was actually contending that she is the primary topic for her name, though certainly Marta (footballer) would be an improvement. Powers ^T 23:43, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Long story short is that the relative popularity of Brazilian football players means that we can't have a general rule as to how to refer to them. IMO we err too often on the side of using real names in place of sensible disambiguation, but that's just my opinion. Anyway, the RM is getting plenty of attention, even if there may be more heat than light: please do keep the project posted if this comes up again. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 17:31, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Zombie's back

I think - this time using the '91.' IPs, rather than his usual '79.' - please be extra vigilant. Cheers, GiantSnowman 16:43, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

• Any list of "contributions" for us? --Vasco Amaral (talk) 00:30, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

• Any of the '91.23' IPs listed at Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Zombie433. GiantSnowman 00:49, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I've blocked 91.23.169.185 (contribs) for 48 hours. — Satori Son 01:18, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Yep, these are Zombie's. Other than the grammar, one of the dead giveaways is he always inserts references in the player infobox. — JS^{Rant Away} 01:24, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

His IP today: [[10]] Cattivi (talk) 15:01, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks. — Satori Son 21:14, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Self-assessment?

Hi. :) Some of you know me as User:Moonriddengirl. I'm not here in that capacity, though, but as one of my assignments under my contract for the Wikimedia Foundation, as its temporary community liaison. I've been asked to talk to a few projects and see if I can inspire some self-assessment: WMF wants to know what you think you guys are doing well and what might be improved. It would also be good if we can get some dialogue going on how projects can help welcome and nurture newcomers interested in their areas. This information will be compiled into a report to help understand the dynamics of projects and also to generate ideas for best practices for other communities.

If you're willing, I'll set up a subpage so we can talk without overwhelming this one and keep the conversation concentrated in one area. That page will be included in my report to the WMF along with my summary of the conversation (which I will present for your approval before submitting).

Are you guys willing to chat? --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 12:30, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Sounds like a great idea. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 12:35, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, let's do it! GiantSnowman 12:52, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

• Count me in! --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:04, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I am in. Adam4267 (talk) 14:16, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Great idea. Jogurney (talk) 14:18, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

• Fabulous. :) Thanks much for your willingness to help, and especially your promptness. :D I've opened Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Self-assessment and look forward to reading your feedback. I will probably not edit that page until several days after any conversation or participation dies down in order to avoid accidentally interfering with the process. After it's been quiet a bit, I'll post a summary of what I'm seeing so you can let me know if I've misunderstood something or even just add more input, if you're so inspired. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 14:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Christian Wilhelmsson

I have spent the last hour improving this guy's page. In PERSONAL LIFE, however, i have retrieved a reference which i don't know is illegal or not, per WP guidelines (i reckon not, but it's only my opinion). If you have to remove it, please do so and sorry for any incovenience.

Ah, but please first feast your eyes, gentlemen (maybe WIKI-illegal, but not WIKI-immoral!) - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:58, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

It's a bad source, because it doesn't source a marriage or a child but only shows her naked. -Koppapa (talk) 15:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

The source predates the marriage, so it obviously can't be used to reference it. Anyway, I see a far better source has now been found. Good work folks. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 17:24, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Jamen is back...?!

I think the notorious User:Jamen Somasu is back in the form of User:Strawberry on Vanilla. I have opened an SPI case on the matter if anyone else is interested in commenting. Digirami (talk) 04:48, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Quacking so loudly I'd have indeffed already were it not for the open SPI case. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 12:34, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

For sure. If I'd have known about User:Chocolate on Vanilla, I would have blocked this particular variant some time ago... The Rambling Man (talk) 15:45, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

What TRM said. Seems obvious now it has been pointed out, but I never made the connection. Oldelpaso (talk) 20:15, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

The unsettling news is that this particular variant has clearly seen this (and other) discussion and has headed for the hills, awaiting an indef block. I suspect we should remain vigilant and expect yet another re-appearance in due course. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:18, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

It seems to be the case that he has left anticipating some sort of action against him. If he does return in another incarnation, I have a feeling I will be the first to encounter him (just my luck, I suppose). Digirami (talk) 21:04, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

His editing style and general attitude did seem awfully familar. Must be so much fun to be around... Argyle 4 Life^talk 07:24, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Antondefoe

A user whose contributions I noticed while looking for Zombies. Is Dennis Guma notable? (his stats are, but these can only be unsourced) Cattivi (talk) 19:15, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Guma definitely plays for SC Villa[11], but I can't find any evidence he has played for the senior Uganda national team. My guess is that he hasn't (too young), but it will be difficult to find out for sure. Jogurney (talk) 19:28, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

He exists, but no evidence that he has played at senior international level, and I strongly suspect he hasn't. Definitely an article for deletion, meets neither WP:GNG or WP:NFOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 19:31, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

As of this March, he played in the most recent edition of the CHAN,[12] but those aren't FIFA "A" internationals. Jogurney (talk) 19:49, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I was able to confirm that although he was called up for one of Uganda's ANC qualifiers,[13] he has not actually appeared for the senior team yet. He was not called up for this week's match against Angola. Jogurney (talk) 20:01, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

There's also this one Ibrahim Juma I suspect he's de:Juma Saddam Ibrahim (and notable) Again with zombie like stats, and a different DoB. I think all his edits need to be checked Cattivi (talk) 20:20, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Juma is notable. I've expanded it as best I can. Must admit that many Ugandan articles that I've seen are in a poor state. Argyle 4 Life^talk 07:21, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Cattivi (talk) 08:08, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Bot to help delete articles.

While posting over at the self-assessement thing I came up with what I think is not a bad idea. A bot that either PRODs all articles created in which the first sentence says that the person is a footballer So-in-so (born) plays for and any article using the Template:Football player infobox. If that is too drastic (different idea) then maybe a bot (similar to GA bot) which lists the article in the appropriate areas and creates the appropriate pages when it is nominated for deletion. I think that could be helpful as taking the leg work out of nominating an article would be goo. Adam4267 (talk) 20:56, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Wait, you're suggesting that a bot automatically PRODs every article that begins "John Smith (born 1992) is an English footballer who plays for Wikipedia F.C.'? In which case it will attack EVERY article! GiantSnowman 20:59, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

No it would be every new article but that is probably overkill. I think a bot that helps list articles with AFD would be not a bad idea though. Adam4267 (talk) 21:01, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

A bot DOES list every article at AfD for us... GiantSnowman 21:04, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

You need to make 4 edits to list an article for deletion. Tag the page, Create discussion page, List on the AFD log, Add to WikiProject:Football page. This takes 5-10 mins roughly (I looked at the last user to AFD a page and it took him 8 minutes). The idea would be that you could just tag the page and a bot would do the rest. Adam4267 (talk) 21:13, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

A list of newly created football related articles would help I think in keeping things manageable. (this project's main problem I think) Or is there already something like that? And is it possible to make a list of recent changes by IP's on football related articles only?Cattivi (talk) 21:26, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

The problem is that if an article does not have the WikiProject football tag then you can't know that it relates. Many new users do not know to tag the article. I think the IP thing is possible but that would be a huge list. I have a watchlist of about 100 and I see roughly 30 IP edits a day, maybe 10 of which need to be reverted. Scale that up and that is a lot of IP edits. Also there is no reason to pick on them, many users create havoc aswell. Adam4267 (talk) 21:31, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Cattivi, AlexNewArtBot does track all new football articles here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football/New_articles. Jogurney (talk) 21:32, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

To Adam - why not use something like Twinkle to speed the process up?

To Cattivi - there is already a bot which does that, have a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/New articles#New Articles found by AlexNewArtBot.

GiantSnowman 21:35, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I looked at Twinkle a while ago and I think it's to complicated for me. Adam4267 (talk) 21:45, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Twinkle looks daunting but actually very easy once you use it a few time. Warburton1368 (talk) 21:52, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I would recommend giving it a go. It makes things so much easier and I don't know how I managed to edit without it for so long. Argyle 4 Life^talk 03:33, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Island football teams

I was wondering if someone could take a look at these Western Isles official football team, Shetland official football team and Orkney official football team. There not affiliated with Fifa or Uefa but do participate at the Island Games. Are these notable. i genuinely wasn't sure as i had not come across them before so thought it best to ask.Warburton1368 (talk) 23:32, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

I'd guess that they receive better coverage when they play than the typical level 10 English side does. Whether that guess is correct and whether that would amount to notability is for others to determine. —WFC— 14:47, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm intrigued as to who has authority to declare these teams "official". Kevin McE (talk) 17:44, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

I hadn't heard of them before i stumbled across them my initial feeling was that because they weren't affiliated to anything they weren't notable but then maybe because they compete in the island games they are. However the official title is dubious as i agree with kevin who makes them official.Warburton1368 (talk) 21:58, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Non-FIFA affiliated teams can be notable, Catalan national team probably the most. But these appear to have no sources. Also the pages are rather lacking with things like squad lists not being on most of them. I would say that if no sources can be found then they should probably be deleted. Adam4267 (talk) 22:40, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

There may be a case for retaining the articles as the teams do get some local coverage, e.g.Shetland Times Stornoway Gazette Orcadian and occasional national pieces such as this 2007 Sunday Herald article on the Shetland-Orkney rivalry and a BBC match report of Shetland's 2005 Island Games win. I agree the word "official" is not ideal. Deserter1 talk 12:07, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

'representative' is a good word to use here, perhaps? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pretty Green (talk • contribs) 15:23, 5 September 2011

Ding ding ding. We have a winner here, folks. I'd definitely go for "representative" here above "official" where there's no actual officiation being done. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 17:35, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Representative is definitely the right word. In the defence of the people who named the pages, "official" was probably chosen in preference to the previously used "national". —WFC— 15:21, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Finidi George

Is this really the correct way to "present" his name folks? In all my innocence, i thought it was the opposite ("George Finidi"), not being uncommon (at all!) to find African players/people with European first names. This BBC Sport source (please see here http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/i/ipswich_town/1495068.stm), even though referring to the player as FINIDI GEORGE, apparently has the surname (FINIDI) in title ("Finidi agrees Ipswich move"), no one would say about this guy "Zinedine saves day for France" for instance...

And how bout this goal celebration (see here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_mwyGKBSwI)?! Cheers - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 11:37, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I understood that Finidi is his first name and George is his surname. However, he was often referred to as Finidi because he had played in Spain and had partially adopted a Brazilian-style one name. Number 57 11:49, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

You can do that celebration in FIFA 11, though my favourite is still the 'telling off' celebration for some reason.--EchetusXe 12:26, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

First name = Finidi, surname = George. Many Nigerians go by one name only - think of Kanu and Yakubu - and Finidi is a helluva lot more exotic than George. GiantSnowman 12:29, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. I've never seen or heard him called George Finidi. Argyle 4 Life^talk 07:30, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Other "famous" cases: Dosu Joseph, Sani Emmanuel (mmmh, maybe this is not so famous :-) ), Okoroji Henry. I don't know how common that is, but many commentators misspell or just invert first name and surname, and this may lead to further mistakes, spreading an incorrect spelling and/or pronunciation and/or name order. --Triple 8 (talk) 21:25, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Infobox selection

My question is about the article on Ashlyn Harris. Her article currently uses {{Infobox NCAA athlete}}, which kinda makes sense since most of the article is about her college career. But she's a professional now and has even won a professional championship as a goalkeeper. Should I switch her article to use {{Infobox football biography}} instead? Powers ^T 18:20, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Ideally it wouldn't matter. Use whichever one she's most notable for: as time passes, you would assume this would trend towards the "senior" infobox. And please do feel free to propose new fields for the footybio infobox to represent college activity: historically it's been a very Eurocentric template simply because that's where most of the input has come from, but college soccer is only going to become more important over time and we should be ready for that. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 18:33, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, that's part of the problem -- I'm not familiar with her college career, so I don't know how important it is to her bio today. But at the same time, I think her current pro club shouldn't be left out of the infobox, so I guess I'll change it. Powers ^T 22:38, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I would suggest changing it - her college career is over, and as an active pro, that should be reflected in the infobox. If still unsure, as a compromise, why not use both? GiantSnowman 23:09, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Do as they do for other professional sports in the US: use the "senior" infobox and mention her college under "Youth career". Digirami (talk) 00:18, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't really call college athletics - "youth". I think this is a bit misleading. For NFL pro footballers, specifically it is noted as "college". For US based athletes that is much clearer. Maybe the template should have that option? Brudder Andrusha (talk) 00:57, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

That strikes me as a sensible solution. —WFC— 20:18, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Agreed that a 'college career' parameter section would be an idea, to be displayed in between youth and senior, and to contain space for caps + goals. GiantSnowman 20:22, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

What would be the best way to move this forward from discussion to implementation? Should another discussion in Template talk:Infobox football biography be started? A change like this could have some implications. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 15:13, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, start a discussion at Template talk:Infobox football biography, with links to opinions here, and then we can implement it ASAP. GiantSnowman 15:30, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

• A discussion entry has been started in Template talk:Infobox football biography#Entry for college career. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 17:55, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Leads of stub and start-class biographies

I've come across many biographies in my time that have been tagged {{lead too short}}. I don't want to single individual editors out, so I'll use Micky Benning, an article that hasn't been tagged and of which I am the primary contributor, as an example. What I will say is that I have seen similar articles tagged in the past by WP:FOOTY regulars.

From an article of that size, what do we want/expect from the lead? Would significantly expanding that lead be of much benefit, given that the infobox covers the key points, the prose isn't long enough to really need a summary, and there is a relatively limited prospect of the article becoming much longer? —WFC— 20:43, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it needs significant expanding but I think a lead should contain an overview of a player's career. Adam4267 (talk) 20:54, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

In the Benning example, I'd probably include his playing position, his having played 100+ Football League games for Watford, and possibly winning the Southern League with Cambridge City. Not sure I'd have bothered describing him as latterly a businessman, unless his business was something more than just working for a living after he finished playing. Which probably comes to two and a half lines max of extra prose, which is plenty for an article of that size. In a shorter article, I tend not to have a lead section, but rather just a lead sentence, as at Fred Shaw (footballer) or Jimmy Singer. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 21:12, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I'd agree with Struway that Benning could do with a little bit of a lengthier lead. But I'd also say that it is not worth tagging articles of Benning's length i.e. not much beyond one page depth, stupid page ratings box not included. What annoyed me in the past is people tagging articles of 19th century footballers with 20 appearances as orphans.--EchetusXe 23:21, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Ditto per most comments here - Even is a shortish stubby article such as this I like a short summary showing at least key notability point. That would then be repeated and expanded upon in the main body of prose. Also wouldn't mention the businessman bit in lede, he is not notable for that. I have updated with my suggested paraphrase FWIW.--ClubOranje^T 09:27, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

As probably the most prolific {{tooshort}} tagger on the whole of Wikipedia, my most basic criterion for football biographies is that the lead should mention all the clubs someone played for (within reason; I'm guilty of omitting the complete list on occasion myself). That many (probably most) of our biographies don't even meet this trivial requirement amazes me. Beyond that, the next basic rule is "make mention of something from every paragraph of the article", which gets you well on the way to properly summarising the article contents. Personally I feel that lead expansion is an excellent way to get a feel for how an article should develop, as once you're forced to condense an article into a complete microcosm of itself you often find that you understand better which parts of the body need expanded, which parts have undue weight and so on.

For what it's worth, though, when an article is only four paragraphs long then there's no need for {{tooshort}} unless the lead is truly aenemic ("X is an English football player"). Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:51, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Danny Griffin

If a player now plays for a five a side team, should it be included in their article? Someone keeps adding it to Danny Griffin's page, and I'm fed up of deleting it. Swaddon1903 (talk) 20:52, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Ignore the merit of the information for now - all you need to know is that it is unreferenced, and therefore has no place on an article, especially one about a living person. GiantSnowman 22:30, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Thomaspcunningham is as clear a sockpuppet (of banned user Bayern Bru FC) as I have ever seen. 5 a side teams require no registration with the SFA (indeed, the format is no longer acknowledged, futsal is the only recognised small court version), it is entirely informal, uncontracted and without reliable sources. Kevin McE (talk) 22:36, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Blocked indef as a sock. Wikipedia is not a promotional tool for someone's five-a-side team, and the socking was obvious. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:43, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Club locations map

For the 2011-12 Algerian Ligue 1 season, there's a map with the location of all the clubs .. but given the size of the country and the location of the clubs, its pretty crowded and you can hardly see anything. Is it possible to zoom in on part of the country? I'm talking about the map here: 2011–12 Algerian Ligue Professionnelle 1#Team summaries. If someone can have a look I'd appreciate it. Thanks.TonyStarks (talk) 10:51, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

{{location map Algeria}} probably isn't the best choice for this one. You'd really need someone to create a new map which just displays the north of the country. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 11:23, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Probably easiest to take one from here and modify that to suit your needs - there are some that only show the north coast and some that show the whole country with a zoom-in on the coast. Number 57 12:20, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Seeing as five of the teams come from Algiers, I can give you two additional options, even if they may be temporary: 1) do like we did for the Brazil map and group teams from the same city under the city name and list them elsewhere on the map; or 2) do as they do in the Argentina and Uruguay article and use two maps, one for teams in the largest metropolis, and one for the rest of the country. From there, you just have to carefully adjust the locations of the labels so you can read them... sorta like what was done for the Japan map. Option one is the most viable at the moment. But option two is not a bad idea if an extra map become available. Digirami (talk) 17:10, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I went ahead and did some adjustments on the map since it reminded me of the map for the current Venezuela league season (heavy on teams from the northern coast with a couple teams from the capital. The labels are more legible more and I think it is an improvement. Digirami (talk) 23:52, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Just want to thank everyone for the suggestions .. and thanks Digirami for the edits, looks much better now! TonyStarks (talk) 03:27, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Surbiton F.C.

I'm currently on a crusade to wipe out this cache of unreferenced articles. However, I have been unable to find any references on Surbiton F.C., one of the founder members of the FA. Could anyone else provide one? Cheers, Number 57 15:57, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

This was discussed once before (Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football/Archive_52#Founder members of the FA), and we all failed then, partly because we don't actually know if their name included "F.C." or not. Goal.com's Italian site is about the most reliable source to mention them in any form. Current opinion seems to favour them being a school of some kind, but nobody seems to know for sure. And just to confuse things a little more, the FA's Trivia Page lists them as a school called "Surbington" rather than Surbiton, but Googling "surbington school" gives almost nothing else. Alzarian16 (talk) 16:11, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Some of the refs in Perceval House might be of use. Unfortunately I can't load the PDF, have no access to the offline sources, and the FA citation doesn't spell Surbiton correctly. —WFC— 16:41, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

If I click on the PDF reference in Perceval House, a page comes up with a View/Open button at the bottom, click on that and the PDF loads OK for me. However, the only mention of Surbiton is that it was represented by one H. Bell at the October 1863 meeting. Quote:

"The following representatives were at the inaugural meeting:

A. Pember (No Names, Kilburn); E. C. Morley and PD Gregory (Barnes); E. Wawn (War Office); H. T. Steward (Crusaders); J. F. Alcock and A. W. Mackenzie (Forest, Leytonstone); G. W. Shillingford (Perceval House, Blackheath); F. Day (Crystal Palace); F. H. Moore and F. W. Campbell (Blackheath); W. J. Mackintosh (Kensington School); H. Bell (Surbiton); W. H. Gordon (Blackheath Proprietory [sic] School). (Green, 1953: 19-20)

"There were a number of observers present. One of these was B. F. Hartshorne, captain of football at Charterhouse School and the only representative of a public school at the inaugural meeting. He felt unable to commit his school to joining before the attitudes of other educational establishments had been sought. Pember noted that `their silence probably arose from no one in particular liking to take the initiative and put himself prominently forward' (Bell's Life, 31 October 1863)."

I've got online access to Bell's Life, and their report of the 31 Oct meeting doesn't include Surbiton among those represented; probably just their omission. By the association's 6th meeting in December 1863 they're listed as members. In February 1862, there's a report of them playing a 10-a-side match against Dingley Dell on Surbiton Cricket Ground, but pretty well nothing else. If any of this would be usable, just ask and I'll supply detailed refs. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:52, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

If nobody can find anything to expand the current microstub, is it worth even keeping it? Maybe re-direct it to The Football Association#History.......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Or we could create a new article, List of founder clubs of the Football Association, and merge in a couple. GiantSnowman 18:41, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Good idea, "stub" is a very flattering way to describe some of them. Although the article doesn't necessarily have to be a list. Adam4267 (talk) 19:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

History of the Football Association? GiantSnowman 19:09, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Either the History of the Football Association could be expanded from the main article or the page could simply be Founder clubs of the Football Association. Depends on how much work you want to do. The History section certainly needs more refs and a bit of a tidy up. Adam4267 (talk) 20:20, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

This discussion seems to have died with no action taken, just like the last one. So I've decided to be bold and redirected to The Football Association#History as a first step. (This would obviously be superseded should someone create a new article at any of the suggested titles.) Any objections? Alzarian16 (talk) 15:58, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Number 57 15:59, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

A (negative) record?!

In Xisco Nadal, please check the reference (in case you have problems with the Spanish, my edit summary will be self-explanatory). Have you ever heard of a case like this?

Of course, football managers and agents and akin, it's always better to sign the exotic player, U.D. Leiria once had FOUR Burkina Faso players, that "great nation" in football, two more than those from Portugal which it "presented" in last league game (two!) Pityful in a sporting way, but pityful nonetheless...Also, did you know that Brazilian players do not count as foreigners in the Portuguese League, work permit issues notwithstanding?

Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:32, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

That kind of fall is more common than you think. At my former workplace, the works team featured a 31 year old ex-pro who had Premier League experience, including scoring a winning goal against Manchester United. Another example is Leon Mike, who played for Manchester City and Aberdeen. His last SPL appearance was in April 2003, in 2004 he was playing for Mossley in the English ninth tier. There are hundreds of players who peak in their teens or early 20s, and then rapidly drop down the divisions. Oldelpaso (talk) 17:29, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Paul Harsley was League One Port Vale's Player of the Season in 2008. Two years later he signed a deal with a deal with a club in the Northern Premier Division. So a bad season or two can really kill off a career. btw seen as were talking about random crap now, check out this for vandalism. Some people have wild imaginations...--EchetusXe 17:49, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I used to work with an ex-Grimsby pro, who is now a conveyancer - this kind of stuff happens more than you might think! GiantSnowman 20:01, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

If you find Vasco that weird, check out the case of this guy: Aleksandar Mijatović (not related with Pedja, although they share the surname). He played almost a decade in a top leagues of Serbia and Greece (with Kalithea in 2005-06) when he suddently found himself without a contract in summer 2009. See here ([14]), see the season 2009-10 Vojvodina mentioning of 0 (0)? Well, the website got it wrong, as he had already left Vojvodina at that time, and I remember that he actually played those first 6 months of the 2009-10 season with a regional league club Metalac Futog as the season started and he didn´t found any club, so he played with them until the winter break, when he returned to top league football by signing with quite good club OFK Beograd!!! See here, OFK-a actuallt signed him from Futog. From top league to local regional leagues, and back to top league in only 6 months! FkpCascais (talk) 05:24, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Personally, I don't find Vasco that weird.--EchetusXe 08:37, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

As I recall (although it isn't mentioned in his article), Cláudio Taffarel had a year where he couldn't get a club at all and was only playing for his church team in a local churches league, then he returned to the pro ranks and went on to play in the World Cup..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:56, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Does Taffarel's article really devote a single sentence to his entire club career pre-1998? Our priorities are crazy sometimes. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 09:53, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Taffarel actually played as a forward for a church team near Reggio Emilia. --Triple 8 (talk) 13:39, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

More goals than appearances

I've just noticed that Ronaldo has more goals than appearances, even Pele doesn't have such a record. I know very very little about football, but is such a stat unusual? Many more out there with more goals than caps? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SGGH (talk • contribs) 23:07, 12 September 2011

I assume you mean Cristiano Ronaldo, he has scored more league goals for Madrid than he has played games. If you want to see a really impressive goals:games ratio then look at Jimmy McGrory. It is unusual but it happens, it just indicates that the person is a very good goalscorer. Adam4267 (talk) 23:12, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Cosmina Duşa. 103 goals last season in a national top divisiion. Should be the record. Unfortunately her previous stations are not complete. -Koppapa (talk) 05:26, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Not uncommon at certain levels for strikers (Julie Fleeting's done it for the best women's team in England, and you see it for promising players quite often starting around Conference regional level in the English men's game; not even remotely uncommon at schoolboy level). In Cristiano Ronaldo's case it certainly is staggering though, especially considering that he's not even a striker. At the top level of the men's game a goal every two or three games is the hallmark of a very good striker in general. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 09:44, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

• Yes, Ronaldo is "on a roll", patriotisms aside. National teams concerned, this one is the most impressive i have seen, if you consider a substantial amount of games. --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:14, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Playerhistory

In case you haven't noticed, I inform you that Playerhistory.com has been temporarily closed. An it.wiki user wrote an e-mail in order to know how long this condition will last; the answer was "about 8-10 weeks". So, all links to that site are currently dead links. --Triple 8 (talk) 12:28, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks for the tip Triple! Never fell much for that site myself, only available for subscribers... --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:16, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I noteced it. I was going to ask if any of you knew when will they return. The good thing about Playerhistory is that they list numerous obscure players no other websites do. Specially from decades ago. Often, I can confirm players clubs by the flags :) Also, I enjoy very much their mentioning of all levels of national team appereances (U20,U19, U17, etc.), and UEFA (Europa League), Champions League, etc. appereances as well. Sorry to say Vasco, but it is probably one of my favourite websites. Many thanks for the notece Triple 8! FkpCascais (talk) 00:28, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome, both of you. :-) Playerhistory was extensively used on it.wiki, mostly because it showed the number of caps in a national team, whatever their number was. On RSSSF the list of most capped players usually include only players with 15-20+ caps. Playerhistory showed the number even if it was inferior. I was (and still am) a little disappointed by its disappearance, since even if it comes back online it could change the URL code, thus invalidating any existent link. Even a mere link substitution would imply a great amount of work. --Triple 8 (talk) 12:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

User:Bruno corinthiano

Playing wiki-sleuth for a few weeks, i started seeing the connection between the account mentioned above and a vast array of anon IPs which incurred in unexplained removal of contents in BOX/introductions (the most regularly used IP from what i see is this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/177.0.204.119).

Both were blocked, the anon address' block expires today, the account is already active, and has returned to its habitual M.O. (as seen here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sergio_Garc%C3%ADa_de_la_Fuente&diff=449887867&oldid=447054390). Have provided diffs and proof of the blocks to two admins (just in case), one told me nothing could be done as he was rather busy, the other did not send one word in reply, even though he was active.

You have been briefed about the disruptiveness of this chap, "do what thou wilt". Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:23, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

If he is evading blocks by using both IPs and a registered account, then report him at WP:SPI. GiantSnowman 14:37, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

• Have filed the report, but again left it in shabby display. Help folks! --Vasco Amaral (talk) 15:17, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

• Nothing done from what i understand, and he just removed pic caption in Henry Lansbury and removed correct club in João Pereira (Portuguese footballer). Also reverted me in Sergio García de la Fuente. Who stops this?! --Vasco Amaral (talk) 18:28, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Revert, warn, and report at WP:AIV. GiantSnowman 18:41, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

• Surely i can't (and won't) doubt the approach of the admin who blocked the vandal, but his second ban is half of the original one in length? Strange i'll say... --Vasco Amaral (talk) 17:09, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

External links - Language "order"

In Liassine Cadamuro, i have been having a run-in with User:Txuriurdin - but the buck stops here, i'll leave his version be, whatever - about the following: he inserted the player's official profile in Basque, i changed it to Spanish on the grounds that more people know it, he re-reverted it, calling my criteria "absurd".

So, this is EN.WIKI for sure, and my doubt is: do all the languages other than English count the same as far as links go? I mean, with all due respect, does German and Tagalog and Polish have the same weight as far as the number of people who can read/understand it? If a player/person has a profile available in Spanish and another in Euskera, which one shall we choose that gives us more options of good understanding by the viewers/readers?

Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:41, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I'd say its an easy choice for Spanish. Lets wait for some more comments. -Koppapa (talk) 15:08, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't know if there is a protocol, but if an English-language version of the link is not available, I normally try to use a local-language link (e.g., Foradejogo.net for Portuguese league information, rather than a French-language link that covers the Portuguese league). Jogurney (talk) 17:37, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

• I cannot currently think of a more trivial thing to argue about. Order them alphabetically by URL and be done with it. We do not have strict rules regarding the ordering of external links and if that is the limit of how far Basque nationalists are willing to go in editing Wikipedia then we should be overjoyed. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 20:46, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
  • I have to agree with Chris, very very trivial debate. On another note, I've made some edits to his article to add his origin and the proper spelling of his last name (as indicated by him in an interview with an Algerian paper). Also, he said he wants to represent Algeria internationally but I didn't know if it was appropriate to add that to the article (or where .. new international career section?). TonyStarks (talk) 22:12, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

• Nice improvement TONY, sorry to be trivial CHRIS, only wanted to help... --Vasco Amaral (talk) 22:59, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I noticed your last edit and playing for Sochaux's reserve team should really be listed under Youth Career not under Senior career. Even though they do play in the CFA division (D4) its still Sochaux's youth team and its still part of the players youth development. TonyStarks (talk) 23:21, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

• No, if he has played in a senior league (as the CFA is) then that is his senior career, regardless of how old he, or his team-mates, were at the time. GiantSnowman 23:24, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

• In that case, every single player that has come through the French system should have an entry for his clubs "B" team at the start of his senior career in his infobox because every single player passes by the reserve team which plays in CFA/CFA2/DH/DHR, etc. TonyStarks (talk) 23:29, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

• Ideally we should be using in-line citations rather than a list of external links... GiantSnowman 23:25, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

• I have never heard of a 20-year old (Cadamuro's age in 2008) playing as a youth, but if things are that different in France (and in ALL the examples i know - Portugal, Spain, Germany - B clubs play in senior competitions), then accept my apologies and revert me. --Vasco Amaral (talk) 00:05, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Wait a sec. I think some here didn´t quite understood what was the issue about the language link. If I am not wrong, Vasco is asking which external link to use when the same is avaliable in different languages, but none of them English (in this case Spanish and Basque). I beleave no one unswered the question. Vasco is defending the Spanish version with the argument of Spanish being more spoken, but the other user is reverting him to the Basque version by the argument of being equally non-English version, so why not Basque then, as that is the official language, along with Spanish (Castilian) in the region the club is found, that is why the website has both versions... It is an interesting question, specially in these "international" matters, and in my view both are valid, although I am not sure if there is any WP principle on this issue, beside the one saying to use English, but what about when 2 or more other language versions are avaliable? I would say to choose the more complete one, are the two versions, Spanish and Basque, equally expanded in club website? FkpCascais (talk) 00:43, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I see they are exactly the same: Spanish version and Basque version. Not sure what to say. It is trouth that Spanish is more "understandable" to most probably, however Basque language is not much represented, so this is a chance for them... FkpCascais (talk) 00:50, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

In the end, the option which causes the least drama is to include both, even if it results in a little redundancy. It gives IPs one less pointless thing to edit war over. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 07:19, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

• I reverted TXURI once, he did the same to me and i said i will stop, hardly edit warring there... --Vasco Amaral (talk) 17:07, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Superclásico de las Américas in english?

I guess the wikiarticle in spanish http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercl%C3%A1sico_de_las_Am%C3%A9ricas and http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercl%C3%A1sico_de_las_Am%C3%A9ricas_de_2011 are relevant enough to have a english edition, also they have big conections with the articles Copa Roca and Argentina and Brazil football rivalry, official source http://www.conmebol.com/futbolmasculino/Superclasico-Argentina-Brasil-20110909-0005.html, my english is not good enough to start the article but I will help expanding it, first match today in Cordoba --Feroang (talk) 03:27, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

In some articles it is reported that this tournament is some kind of "heir" of the Copa Roca. I think they are wrong, though. The Copa Roca is a completely different tournament, the current "Superclásico de las Américas - Copa Doctor Nicolás Leoz" (again, a tournament entitled to Nicolás Leoz after the Copa de Oro) is only inspired to that. Mere advertisement strategy if you ask me, but as an encyclopedist, I think the tournament is relevant since it has been officialized by CONMEBOL. --Triple 8 (talk) 12:52, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Serbian footy stubs, if even that

This edit reminded me again of this discussion. They can be found mostly at Zone League or by google quite easily: http://www.google.de/#q="is+a+Serbian+football+club+based+in"+"This+section+is+empty.+You+can+help+by+adding+to+it."+site:Wikipedia.org . Most have no refs at all, no homepage and the obscure looking [[File:|100px]] in the infobox. How to get rid of those the best? Nobody is gonna improve them anyway, or does anyone wanna do it? Tagged since '08, Funny long name in squad :D -Koppapa (talk) 08:24, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

If the consensus is that the teams aren't notable, take them to AfD. If the articles are simply low-quality skeletons, one possible solution would be to redirect them to the main league article until such point as someone with a real interest in the English Wikipedia's coverage of the Serbian third tier turns up to improve them. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 09:09, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

... And while we're at it, I've reverted FkpCascais's comment from that article. I assume that it was a mistake brought on by too much monitoring of low-quality pages, but we very much don't want to see things like that happening on pages which already see very little attention. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 09:11, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh, how quick were you all in notecing my edit in such an obscure club. I tought about leaving the comment for a day or two and afterwords removing the entire quad list as unsourced. The thing is that I am fed up of fixing lower league club articles full of unsourced edits, so you all must understand that I did that because it was usseless to leave a message at IP adress... I already started making the second league seasonal articles that were missing (1990s), and next I thought of going and doing the national Cup´s, but in the meantime the there was the summer break and with updating all top league squads I didn´t found time for both. Koppapa, I sourced numerous club articles, so basically the ones which are unsourced are non-notable, but, I didn´t went trough the entire list yet (Category:Serbian football clubs), so please give me a week to check them all, ok? Chris, I apologise for the comment, but it was the only way to try to get trough a message. Otherwise, I would have just deleted the list, so I just tried to establish some kind of dialogue with a user adding squads to all these 3th and 4th league clubs. The page barely has any views anyway, although I know I proceded bad, but what else can I do beside deleting then? Don´t forget that often those IP´s are actually usefull for expanding minor clubs articles, they sre simply not familiarised with WP policies, but they are well intended and I just wanted to give them a chance to work it right, instead of creating an disrespectfull environment by deleting their work. FkpCascais (talk) 18:35, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

This discussion was not about your edit ;-) Great work with the sourcing. Keep going. -Koppapa (talk) 18:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Give me just a bit of time to check the list, as many clubs are not expanded and hardly sourced, but within them there are some notable clubs from the past, and to an unfamilirised editor it is hard to know which are which... Also, as the transfer window closed just at September 1st, many websites waited to start updating club info only by now... Then we can PROD the rest of them in mass. FkpCascais (talk) 18:56, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

PS: If the club doesn´t have the Cyrillic name version in the lead, it is because I didn´t checked it yet (it is kind of a distinctive sign for me). I usually add that beside the defaultsort, cats, and sources I find. As the Cup articles are not done yet, I thought of doing that next so that way we know which pass GNG, which don´t. FkpCascais (talk) 19:04, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Dominic Vose notability

Before I send this article to AfD, I was curious whether people think that a footballer can be notable for being arrested on suspicion of committing a crime. He is clearly not notable for his footballing exploits. Best regards. Jogurney (talk) 15:51, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I'd suggest not - he's notable for WP:ONEEVENT which is also just covered in run of the mill news coverage. I'd also argue that we'd be pushing the WP:BLP guidelines by having an article which is solely based upon a rape accusation. --Pretty Green (talk) 15:55, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

IMO Vose is nowhere near notable. He was 'charged' with the offence (not notable in itself) but was not in custody and has continued his footballing career which, to this date, has progressed no further than 'the development squad' (or The Reserves) as we used to call it. I have no idea where the rape charge stands but even a conviction would barely raise him in the 'notability' stakes.--Egghead06 (talk) 16:01, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the replies. Someone has proposed the article for deletion now, which makes sense as it seems pretty clear that any notability related to the arrest is not enough per ONEEVENT. Jogurney (talk) 19:45, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Hugo Costa

Hi there teammates! Does anybody has any reliable data regarding this chap's spell with Stoke City, 15 years ago? Never noticed it, but now, BOTH links (both Portuguese, as the player) seem to be showing he did appear for the club.

Thanks in advance, cheers - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 21:10, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Soccerbase says that he appeared in two First Division and two League Cup matches. Neil Brown confirms the two league appearances. Also has another article at Hugo Da Costa which should be redirected – appears to have only been called Da Costa in England. I have some time to spare so I'll add an infobox. Argyle 4 Life^talk 21:27, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks, great work! I have re-directed the "intruder", or WAS GOING TO, darn you beat me to it :) --Vasco Amaral (talk) 22:38, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

College soccer taskforce

Given the impending changes to our infobox to include college soccer careers, and given the increasing number of professionals who undertake college soccer careers, would people be interested in starting a college soccer taskforce? There are actual WikiProjects for other college sports, but I don't think we need to go quite that far... GiantSnowman 19:57, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Wouldn't this fit under the scope of the North American taskforce? Hack (talk) 02:29, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

It should be - but isn't. I'll suggest it over there instead. Cheers, GiantSnowman 14:38, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Liverpool vs. Dinamo Bucharest, European Cup Semi Final 1984

Just seen that someone has created this article. Personally I don't think the match is particularly notable, and should be deleted, but thought I'd come here first to get some more opinions. NapHit (talk) 10:43, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Requested moves

There are several requested page moves that could use some opinion and comments:

• Sandro Ranieri → Sandro Raniere (Discuss)
• Thiago Alcântara → Thiago Alcántara (Discuss)
• Nilmar Honorato da Silva → Nilmar (Discuss)
• Thiago Emiliano da Silva → Thiago Silva (footballer) (Discuss)
• Frederico Chaves Guedes → Fred (footballer) (Discuss)

Any comments, both support and oppose, are highly appreciated. Cheers. — MT (talk) 04:16, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

PFA Team of the Year templates

Just a minor query. Would anyone oppose the idea of renaming the existing PFA Team of the Year templates (eg Template:2010–11 Football League Two Team of the Year) from "Team of the Year" to "PFA Team of the Year", in order to reflect the title of the PFA Team of the Year article? Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 04:18, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't (oppose it).--EchetusXe 13:03, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Nope, makes sense, go for it. GiantSnowman 13:07, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Another quick query: Is there a style guideline for these awards templates to be yellow/blue? Clavdia chauchat (talk) 11:33, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Englandstats

I see that the www.englandstats.co.uk website is being moved to www.england.com. Unfortunately, the move is not complete and the website homepage says "Coming late summer". Hopefully, it will be back before too long as IMHO it was the best of the England national team databases. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 21:48, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Sigh, that's gonna me a massive pain for us (fixing links etc.) as well as changing {{Englandstats}}. GiantSnowman 22:10, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

There are currently 290 links to the englandstats.co.uk site: see Special:LinkSearch/englandstats.co.uk. Jenks24(talk) 22:20, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Update

It seems that the site is gradually being upgraded - the home page now says that the site will be fully updated by this October. I have tweaked the {{Englandstats}} template to point to the new player pages; the ones I have looked at all seem to work OK. There are several links to match reports that will also need fixing. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:06, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Good work DK. If you need a hand, give me a shout, let me know what I can do to help! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:26, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

As far as I can see, it will be necessary to replace links to englandstats.co.uk with englandstats.com. Presumably this can be done with AWB, but I have no idea how to do this. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 07:43, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

It would be easier to get a bot to run those changes. GiantSnowman 22:02, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Jonatan Sanchez-Munoz stats

Can anyone confirm that Jonatan Sanchez-Munoz did make 15 appearances for Malaga CF? I can't find any online sources. Thanks, --Jimbo^[online] 22:28, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I think the player's name is misspelt, I found FootballDatabse.eu and Soccerway profiles. No proof he actually played though. --Jimbo^[online] 22:32, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Soccerway is reliable and there is no mention of him on LFP for last season. Argyle 4 Life^talk 22:39, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Most google hits suggest he only played for their B team, a fourth tier team. -Koppapa (talk) 07:35, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

2011-12 La Liga - 2.1 Positions by round

I think the colours given to the 3rd-6th placed team are incorrect, no. 3 should have the same dark green as no. 2, no. 4 should have the light green and so on! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.202.166.188 (talk) 22:05, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

New rationale?

I'm very curious to find out what the community feels about this reasoning. I had made an edit request to the semi-protected article AFC Ajax. In short, I requested that the flag in front of Araz Özbiliz in the Current squad section be changed to a Dutch flag, now that he has been called up for the Netherlands U-21. This request has been denied by Bility (talk · contribs), saying: "The flag represents the player's nationality, not the country of the team they play for." Is this truly the new consensus? Last thing I knew, players with multiple citizenships are listed with the flag of the national team they represent. 83.80.170.157 (talk) 11:15, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it says so directly over the sqaud. So it should be Netherlands, thats even the nationality of him by the two sources in his article. -Koppapa (talk)

You are indeed right. And before that, he should have been marked as Turkish, not Armenian. Now changed on article, but of course, you could have done it yourself if you signed up and joined properly. You'll find your edits and suggestions are far more likely to be taken seriously if you do, and on this evidence, they deserve to be. Kevin McE (talk) 11:37, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Erm, anyone who doesn't take valid comments by IPs seriously because they're from IPs should be trout-slapped. Anyway, it appears Bility has accepted this, so we're done here. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 09:31, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Flags outside of infobox for Players

hi everyone, i know this has been talked about before but i'm still confused about the flag situation outside of the players' infoboxes. everyone seems to agree about no flags in the infobox, but what about in the honours section of a player's article? i see a lot of articles using them and in my opinion it adds value to that particular section. especially if one is not familiar with a certain country or club etc. now there are a lot of users on here that i see remove the flags of certain players articles but then don't remove the flags of other players. it's extremely confusing and would like to know what to do. take Pele for instance as a well known article that one would assume is a good reference to use for other articles. Now in Pele's honour section he has plenty of flags listed. other less popular articles are Antônio Naelson. or another player Andrés Guardado. i still don't see the problem with use of the flags in the honours section and in particular when it refers to the "Country" subsection. i have no problem whichever way the "consensus" opts to go for, but certain users should be more consistent and not just remove flags in a biased manner. thanks for any help Zero01010 (talk) 12:52, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I have been removing flags in the honours' section whenever I see them (without regard for club, country or player) as per MOS:FLAG. As far as I know, this is consensus. But there too many articles to take care of them all. --Jaellee (talk) 14:49, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Yep, Jaellee is correct - follow WP:MOSFLAG. GiantSnowman 15:52, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

still not clear or helpful but thanks anyways. read MOS:FLAG and it vaguely talks about how it applies to footballers. in MOS:FLAG under Use of flags for sportspersons it doesn't state that flags for country should not be used. then there's a part about "Accompany flags with country names". can someone tell me the part where Jaellee and similar minded people are getting this consensus on no flags in honours sections. just trying to get some clarity on the subject. sorry for the trouble or ignorance on my part. but if that's the way Jaellee and co want things to be then so be it. Zero01010 (talk) 16:23, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

The overriding impression the reader should get from MOS:FLAG is "if in doubt, leave the flag out". In Pele's honours section the use of flags is highly confusing as they are used both for a representative national team (Brazil) and for a particular club in that country (Santos) which is not necessarily a representative of Brazil in all competitions (and indeed many of the competitions under that section are national, so all competitors are Brazilian). It is not a case of "consensus for no flags in honours sections": it is a case of "a general consensus to avoid using flags", under which honours sections fall because there's no specific consensus to make an exception for them. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 09:44, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

IP height

An IP has made a number has changed the height of every player in the Darlington first team. The Marc Bridge-Wilkinson and Kris Taylor heights don't match the account on the club's website or Soccerbase so I have reverted them. I am off to bed now so if somebody wants to revert the rest or to investigate further then please do.--EchetusXe 00:44, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Nevermind I got it.--EchetusXe 09:23, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Syaffarizal Mursalin Agri

Just stumbled upon this article. His infobox stats say he has 31 goals in 43 games for Al-Khor since 2009 but I have never heard of him and I can't find his name or stats on any pages. FootballDatabase.eu usually has good stats for the Qatari League and there's nothing there about him. SoccerWay also has the top scorers for the league, which he would have made given his numbers, but again nothing there. I usually "follow" the league so I think I would have noticed him if he was as good as his stats say. Any help? I'm even starting to wonder if he's played any games for the first team and whether he's notable at all. TonyStarks (talk) 04:06, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

The number and goals might be incorrect. The second reference, which is in Indonesian, explains a lot about him. The article says that he is currently a member of Al-Khor junior team and has recently been invited to train with the senior team during the preseason. The article also says that he recently played several minutes in a friendly match and now he is hoping to break into the first team. He is still a part-time footballer, playing football while studying in a university in Doha, and is still undecided whether he want to be a professional footballer after his studies are finished in the next 3 years. Based on these statements, I doubt he already scored 31 goals in 43 games in Qatari League. He also denied being scouted/linked with PSG and Bolton (although he admit he want to go to England by himself to earn a trial in Bolton's academy). I've removed these false information. Anyway, now that he never appear for any official match, is he notable enough to have his own article? — MT (talk) 11:00, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Probably not. If the original author (whose wikicareer seems to consist primarily of creating non-notable BLPs and studiously avoiding any communication regarding them) were more active I'd be issuing a strident block warning right now. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 11:16, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Anyway, after a quick search, there seem to be little information about him apart from the two Indonesian news articles already cited in the article. He also never actually been part of Indonesian under-23 yet. AfD? — MT (talk) 11:18, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Yep, sounds like AfD. Doesn't look like he's ever played for Al-Khor's first team or his country's national team, which means he fails WP:NFOOTY. I'll go ahead and AfD it. Thanks for your help. TonyStarks (talk) 22:26, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

EDIT: AfD request can be found here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syaffarizal Mursalin Agri. TonyStarks (talk) 22:35, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

It seems like the article creator often created footballers' article that fail WP:NFOOTY, there is a lot of deletion notice on his talk page. Anyway, if anyone needs a translation/help in Indonesian football, I'll be happy to help. Just in case I did not see the discussion here, you can give me a nudge in my talk page. Cheers! — MT (talk) 07:26, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Ajax history

The AFC Ajax page has a really long history section. Wouldn't it be better to split that off into a separate article? 178.198.203.28 (talk) 12:01, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

I've taken this as a request to create history of AFC Ajax. Needs a proper lede and for a summary to be re-added to the parent article. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 12:32, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

It is only so long because it is full of unreferenced information. I counted three sources in the entire section - shocking. GiantSnowman 12:33, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

While that's true for the typically execrable "recent events" section, it shouldn't be hard to find dozens of sources discussing the club's history. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 12:39, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Colombia national football team

I caught an IP user adding false team members to Urawa Red Diamonds Ladies. The same user also added two friendlies to Colombia national football team (see this edit), which I suspect are also deliberately false. But I don't have the means of confirming this. Can anyone else do that?Michitaro (talk) 23:23, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Just had a quick look, the player stats (i.e. goals scored) do seem to tally, but maybe one of our South American editors would be able to confirm. GiantSnowman 02:26, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

No such matches listed at FIFA.com or on colfutbol.org, so removed. Kevin McE (talk) 07:21, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Enzo Zidane

I was just looking at the list of football related articles to deleted on WP:FOOTY and noticed that Enzo Zidane had an article and it was BLPProd'd. I had a quick look at it and noticed it had no references, so I added a few. He certainly does not pass WP:NFOOTY but with over a million hits on Google, and numerous articles about him (from a number of different reliable sources), his Real Madrid career (just started training with first team) and his international future (both Spain and France are trying to get him), I think he easily passes WP:GNG (especially considering that a player like Jack McBean, with far less coverage, can also pass). Anyways, if you guys don't mind looking at the article and adding some details. Here's a couple of references with regards to his international future: [15] and [16]. I wasn't too sure how to structure his infobox since he's not technically part of the Real Madrid first team, just part of their youth system. TonyStarks (talk) 02:10, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

The article,. as it stands, is nowhere near to meeting WP:GNG; as I have previously suggested, I would advise you add these sources you have found to the article, in order for us to better judge. GiantSnowman 02:24, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh I know that, that's why I came here for some help. I just added some refs to it earlier to remove the BLPProd tag it previously had. TonyStarks (talk) 03:34, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

He did train with them one time. He is not a team member and will stay in the youth teams for now. -Koppapa (talk) 07:05, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Was anyone involved with a decision to make football club images smaller?

Earlier today User:Fma12 seems to have gone about making a number of football club logos smaller. His rationale: "I have seen that most of the logos in many football club infoboxes are absolutely oversized. As far as I know, non-free logos and other images in Wikipedia are for an identification purpose only.". I reverted three articles that I watch before I realized how many articles were affected. Any comments? Are the logos too large? Should we standardize on a smaller size? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:42, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Non-free content#Image resolution gives some guidelines on the issue, its to large to copy here so please have a look there. Calistemon (talk) 04:17, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

That appears to relate to the size of image uploads not their inclusion in infoboxes. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:01, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Exactly, he didn't change any logo itself but only the inclusion-parameter from 200px to 150 px. It's no big thing. They size doesn't seem to be standadised on all clubs. -Koppapa (talk) 07:04, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

As Walter Görlitz says, the limitation on size for fair-use images refers to upload size, not thumbnail size. Presuming that a file has been uploaded at an acceptable resolution, we should use it at the optimal size; in most cases this means using frameless to display it at the reader's default thumbnail size (or at the full size if the image is smaller than that). Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:52, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Some infobox templates (p.e.: basketball teams or rugby union teams) have an specific field to determine the size of the logo. The changes I made were related to the huge size of some football club team logos as shown in their infoboxes. As Chris Cunningham says, in some cases (like USA Falcons) imaqes uploaded are too small so they are displayed at their original size.Fma12 (talk) 14:08, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

The basketball and rugby union templates have had nowhere near the level of discussion that the football one has. Most of those decisions were made arbitrarily long in the past. There's no pressing need to arbitrarily limit the size of the logo beyond that of fair use, and of editorial discretion: we want all images included on articles to be as clear and distinctive as they can for the benefit of our readers without being unduly featured. Nevertheless, if you want to propose that we introduce a guideline on size then by all means go ahead. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 15:23, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

The images are svg mostly, so quality is fine. The question is how to include them in the article. Example: Barca at 200, Barca at 120, one could go to 350 which looks weird. -Koppapa (talk) 07:09, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Non-free images should never be larger than frameless, which defaults to 225px. As I say, it's editorial discretion whether or not we should have a logo that large, but that's the upper bound. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 08:06, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

From my point of view, images at 120px (p.e. Barca crest) looks much more esthetic than logos at 200 or higher. I have seen football logos that were displayed at 280 px, which is absolutely oversized. Fma12 (talk) 11:47, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

The small Barca logo (120px) looks ridiculous. We should default to frameless like Chris Cunningham has said. – PeeJay 13:34, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

"riduculous" is a very subjective point of view. Fma12 (talk) 14:14, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Rather than say that it looks ridiculous we can say that it looks too small instead. I think using the frameless parameter is a good choice. Does it allow users to control the size via their preferences? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:23, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I see that someone is experimenting with the parameter at FC Barcelona. Comments? Suggestions? Does it still look ridiculously large? Does it look well-placed? Is this something that we can, or should, live with or is it outrageous? Is smaller better or is detail the key? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:33, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

That looks good at frameless. Just looking at the small one it didnt look good at all far too small. Warburton1368 (talk) 18:36, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I see Barcelona logo excesively big at frameless. It could work well in standard infoboxes, but in cases like this (with three kit uniforms instead of two as usual) the width of the infobox expands considerably so the crest results oversized. Fma12 (talk) 18:56, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

"Excesively big" is a very subjective point of view. =) I also think you misunderstand what is happening. The frameless parameter makes it 220 pixels. It's essentially a thumbnail view without a frame (see Wikipedia:Extended image syntax). So the thumbnail is already small by Wikipedia standards. So it doesn't matter if there is only one kit or four, the image should be the same size. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:23, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

You are right ;-) I expresed a subjetive point of view. If the frameless parameter makes all logos 220 pixels, it results in a hugh size for me (yes, I´m expressing a p.o.v. again). But I will follow what be determined by consensus. Fma12 (talk) 20:19, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

From what I understand, it only limits the size to 220. If a logo is 50 pixels, it won't expand it. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:16, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Since there have been no further objections, I would like to suggest that we use the frameless parameter in club infoboxes. I will add it to the template's documentation in a few days. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:15, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Infobox football club season-league result parameter

It seems that some people are completing the ongoing season template incorrectly and including the current placement of the club in the league result parameter. According to Template:Infobox football club season that parameter is to represent "The final result achieved in the season.". Shall we enforce it or change the definition of the parameter? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:26, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I use it to display league placement and state ongoing. As long as the articles are being updated i see no problem with it. However i was unaware thats was the definition of the parameter as i want around here at the time. Warburton1368 (talk) 19:31, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Guilty as charged. However, as long as it's tagged with (ongoing) or something similar I don't see a major problem. Trying to get Wikipedians to stop updating parameters like this is a waste of energy.... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:32, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Not if we add a comment to the effect that the parameter is only to be updated at the end of the season, or we omit the parameter until the end of the season. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:38, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Sure. I see Wikipedians updating individual player profiles and season articles and manager lists during matches. Neither of your approaches will ever work, so that's why I suggest we just "let it be". The Rambling Man (talk) 19:40, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Adding <!--The final result achieved in the season.--> could work. Omitting the parameter could also work as to the casual editor, it just wouldn't be there. As for letting it be, I'm not asking for that. I'm asking whether we go with what's happening and change the template documentation or remove the material if it's added. There's nothing to let be. It's a simply dichotomy. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:03, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

To be honest i feel the majority of season articles use it as ongoing and remove ongoing at the end of the season to display as a final result. As long as the season articles are updated frequently which most are then i see no problem in it. So my pref would be to change documentation and go with that. Warburton1368 (talk) 20:12, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Agree, go with the flow, adjust the documentation. Everything else will be pointless. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:19, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I made the change to the template. Would someone please check the new wording? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:17, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Category:Association football by country

I notice that Category:Association football by country contains Category:Football in India and Category:Football in Japan, but none of the other "Football in <country>" categories. Is there any particular reason for this? I would have expected Category:Association football by country to contain all the "Football in <country>" categories, in the same way that Category:Cricket by country contains all the "Cricket in <country>" categories. If there is consensus that Category:Association football by country should contain all the "Football in <country>" categories, I'm happy to do the work to put them in there. DH85868993 (talk) 02:47, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

They're all under Category:Association football by continent and its subcats at the moment. Seems one form took off and the other didn't. Nanonic (talk) 06:50, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

That plainly needs fixed. Given that the women's articles seem organised by country, it may be better moving the men's articles to match, especially as it eliminates problems with the likes of Turkey. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 09:40, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Numerous sports (cricket, ice hockey, basketball, handball, rugby union, rugby league and swimming) have both "<sport> by continent" and "<sport> by country" categories. That would be my suggestion for association football as well, i.e. the "Football in <country>" categories would be added to Category:Association football by country, but also retain their existing place under Category:Association football by continent. Regarding Turkey, it seems as though the convention for other sports is to include the category under both Europe and Asia. DH85868993 (talk) 23:13, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

List of Indonesian expatriate footballers

I found this article, which has plenty of problems:

1. Almost all the players in the article are not Indonesian, only some names that are in bold held Indonesian passport.
2. The names in bold are supposed to hold Indonesian passport, however these are not cited or sourced at all.
3. The other names who are not in bold are supposed to be of Indonesian descent, however these are also not cited and sourced. Also, these players are not even Indonesian and are not supposed to be listed here.
4. All of the citations only show the players' club and date of birth, and do not have any information about their Indonesian descent.
5. It seems to be original research to list every players with Indonesian-sounding surname as Indonesian descent footballers.
6. A lot of players don't even have a wikipedia article, and they played in some clubs which also don't have a wikipedia article. So their notability are questionable.
7. Are U-16, U-13 and futsal players notable enough to be listed?

I believe this article violates WP:V, WP:OR, WP:N. There is no need to have a list of footballers of Indonesian descent. On the other hand, the actual list of Indonesian expatriate footballers can be found in Category:Indonesian expatriate footballers. Should this article be considered for deletion? — MT (talk) 10:29, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

The author (Iha9c (talk · contribs)) has repeatedly had problems with creating articles on non-notable subjects with no or dubious references and inclusion criteria. I'd be unsurprised if that applied here. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:34, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

What a ridiculous article. That user seems to think that every black Dutch player is Indonesian. Should defniitely be deleted. Adam4267 (talk) 10:39, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Far too many problems with that list, definite candidate for AfD. GiantSnowman 12:22, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Done, AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Indonesian expatriate footballers. — MT (talk) 05:10, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Makes a nice change from vandalism

doesn't it? GiantSnowman 12:19, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

• I was moved...i bet you felt bad reverting it ;) --Vasco Amaral (talk) 13:14, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Nice. I thought I remembered reverting something like that before but I used this tool to find that what I remembered had no sentiment to it. 40,000 edits searched in 2.5 seconds. My god we have some powerful tools available to us.--EchetusXe 15:40, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Sounds like fandalism (vandalism from a fan). --Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:30, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Infobox stats

Hi, there was a short discussion before about this before (here). Basically, one particular user keeps removing infobox stats for Rubén Miño and Sergi Gómez. Both have played for FC Barcelona in competitive cups and tournaments, just not in the league yet and are still part of the FC Barcelona B setup.

I'm close to a 3RR with both, so could you keep an eye on the pages. I've notified the editor and invited him to join the discussion. Thanks, --Jimbo^[online] 12:45, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Formally warned. Ping me if it happens again. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 13:59, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Could you also revert the changes to show FC Barcelona in the infobox as well? Cheers. --Jimbo^[online] 15:28, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Jmorrison230582 beat me to it! GiantSnowman 15:48, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

• Again with this (the club's name)? There is no consensus (we have that WP:KARLSRUHER stuff for German clubs and that's it) for my money (five years "spending" it) why FC Barcelona in box (i thought it was full name in storyline, compression in box) and not AFC Ajax, or S.L. Benfica or - the extra mile - Sporting Clube de Portugal, or FC Sochaux-Montbéliard or Everton de Viña del Mar? I'm baffled - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 00:29, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

at least you won't slosh when you go round corners ;-)--ClubOranje^T 08:17, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

The consensus seems to be that we use the shortest form possible without introducing ambiguity. Although that doesn't always happen. Without hovering or clicking, I would assume that Gustavo Dalsasso has played for Everton and Rangers. —WFC— 12:11, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

I would assume River Plate was the Argentine one. But Nacional for a Portuguese players were always CD Nacional, but it was confusing when the case was on a Brazilian player. i.e. i think it is case by as basis. For B team, it should always marked as B. Matthew_hk tc 13:34, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Writing "C. Nacional de F." for Club Nacional de Football would not be the best solution, so I would choose "Nacional Montevideo". On it.wiki several users kept confusing the two Nacionals, so we had Uruguayan footballers that included the Portuguese Nacional template in their infobox. I wrote this because I think that we need to avoid any ambiguity: ambiguity leads to mistakes. --Triple 8 (talk) 17:22, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

1934 FIFA World Cup and Germany

An anonymous editor from Vietnam has decided to replace the German Nazi flag in the article (and others) with the German Empire flag. The latter is not correct for this time period. However, it's not clear if the existing flag is either. Historically, the Nazi flag at this period was one of two flags, but was probably the official flag. The image at http://footballfootage.blogspot.com/2011/04/football-legends-1934-fifa-world-cup_01.html seems to indicate that the team played under the Nazi flag though. With that said, I'm at (or possibly even past) my 3RR limit. Would anyone care to watch the page for the next few days? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:37, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Page protection requested and the editor's newest IP warned for edit warring. GiantSnowman 13:45, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Duplicate templates

Do we really need both {{CONMEBOL teams}} and {{South American football}}? GiantSnowman 16:45, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

This This should tell WP:FOOTY regulars all they need to know. —WFC— 17:47, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

I actually like the idea of the consolidated template, and so have other since it has been updated since. The current version is certainly better than the original one created last year. We don't need both. But the question remains, which to keep? Digirami (talk) 20:00, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

No other international conferederation feels the need to have any other information other than for senior national teams - {{UEFA teams}}, {{AFC teams}}, {{CAF teams}} etc. - and that's a format I feel we should follow. GiantSnowman 20:14, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

I actually created a number of consolidated alternatives, but I don't think anymore bothered to look. I think #3 works better across all federations. Digirami (talk) 20:32, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Assuming that #3 works on a broad spectrum of browsers, that's what I'd go for. —WFC— 21:26, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Bertrand Traoré

I recently created an article for Bertrand Traoré, a Burkinabe footballer who made his full international début this month 3 days short of his 16th birthday. It's been nominated for deletion because the player "fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL". It seems a bit nonsensical to me. TheBigJagielka (talk) 20:51, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the PROD with no prejudice to an AfD. I'll express no opinion, except to say that a discussion would be useful to see where we stand in this sort of situation. —WFC— 21:31, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

I've just stated on WFC's talk page that I'm struggling to find a reliable source confirming the appearance, the one provided isn't great. GiantSnowman 21:42, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

French is not an obscure language, and Alain Traoré is the man of the moment in French football. I'm surprised that I haven't found more about Bertrand than I have, and for that reason think an AfD would be a good idea. I stand by the de-PROD though, it's worthy of discussion. —WFC— 22:34, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Added my input to his AfD (keep, for the record). However, with regards to his article, I'd remove his name from the Chelsea FC squad template since he's part of the Academy and not the first team. TonyStarks (talk) 06:15, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

EDIT: I've gone ahead and removed his name from Template:Chelsea F.C. squad (sorry BigJalieka .. I know you added him but don't see any reason to why he should be included). TonyStarks (talk) 06:20, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

The reason was, to me, it didn't make sense to have a full international on the books of a club that is not listed in the squad template. :) TheBigJagielka (talk) 08:14, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

European Cup Winners' Cup complete game details: infos

you will find complete ECWC complete game details here: http://www.linguasport.com/futbol/internacional/clubes/c2/C2_61gd.htm http://www.linguasport.com/futbol/internacional/clubes/c2/C2_62gd.htm http://www.linguasport.com/futbol/internacional/clubes/c2/C2_63gd.htm etc.

bye 82.50.63.241 (talk) 12:26, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

These are not "complete" - there are no lineups. A much better site is [17] (CWC up to 1974 currently). 109.173.212.187 (talk) 07:51, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Article help request

Hello, could someone help me to fix FK Baku and FC Inter Baku articles as its written in very poor language. Help would be really appreciated. --NovaSkola (talk) 12:44, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Nobody is going to help me?(

Those articles aren't that bad. -Koppapa (talk) 07:03, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with Koppapa. I also noteced this and I didn´t knew what to say. There are numerous club articles in a much worste condition, so I supose you NovaSkola don´t need to warry much about this two. Guide yourself trough the recomendations found in Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Clubs together with general stile guidelines and everything will be fine. FkpCascais (talk) 18:53, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Denis Compton

The great man's biography has a piddly little section on his football career. Anyone fancy expanding it? --Dweller (talk) 12:21, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Template:Football player statistics 1 and Template:Football player club statistics 1

Why there is two set of templates, most of the time we only need the former, but the original creator of the former made another set and was the sole programmer of the latter. But did it really need? It is difficult to merge as only the code YYY and YY matched, other code such as YXY did not corresponding to XY. It made me recall the memory of infobox manager and player, Infobox football biography 2 and Infobox football biography. Matthew_hk tc 13:29, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Personally I don't think we need either, it's much quicker + easier to use a wikitable. But if one must remain, then one must remain - not both. GiantSnowman 13:36, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm slightly in favour of keeping one, on the grounds that if something doesn't need to be edited in any way, it may as well be a simple "black box" for the user. But as GS says we don't need both. —WFC— 17:53, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

I much prefer the wikitable, don't like either of the templates. Adam4267 (talk) 20:51, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

The latter is an undiscussed fork, from what I can see. One of five. I'd TfD the lot of them asking for them to be substituted, and kindly ask Nameless User (talk · contribs) not to go forking templates and deploying them en masse without consensus in future. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 11:02, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Antiguoko

This club is, I feel, notable - a Spanish version of Senrab or the Wallsend Boys Club, and there are sources out there, but I don't speak Spanish. Can somebody translate + add sources to the article please? Cheers, GiantSnowman 15:11, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

• I'll have a look. But why was a lot of correct info - Real Sociedad's farm team - removed? --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:29, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

• Because it was unreferenced... GiantSnowman 14:41, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Help with uploading a logo

I was trying to upload the logo for JS Saoura to Wikimedia Commons but I couldn't figure out what license to use. Can someone help? I uploaded the logo to an image hosting site here. If someone doesn't mind doing it for me, or to show me exact instructions on how to upload it. Thanks in advance. TonyStarks (talk) 08:52, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

As it is (presumably) a copyrighted logo, it cannot go on Commons -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:54, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Correct. It'll need to be uploaded here with an appropriate fair use rationale instead. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 11:03, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I was looking for the "fair use" option when uploading it to Commons because I saw some other football club logos had it but I couldn't find the option .. now I know why. I'll try to upload it here, if I get stuck I'll come back for some help. TonyStarks (talk) 16:20, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Vladan Vujic Dyse

User:Gregormatap again has inserted this phantom player. The previous Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vladan Dyse Vujic was deleted quickly but this individual needs to be shown a yellow card. Can someone with the right admin privileges help? Brudder Andrusha (talk) 13:03, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

I have approached Ponyo (talk · contribs), an admin, who dealt with the previous article. GiantSnowman 13:20, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorted, articles deleted & SALTed and editors blocked. Should any more incarnations of either article or editor spring up, I'd advise to go straight to Ponyo. Cheers, GiantSnowman 14:31, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Braulio Nóbrega

I have added a section "dedicated" to the legal matter that has affected this player, it's bound to contain some errors, as there are some technical terms i maybe did not thoroughly translate. Please be free to improve the language if you will.

Also, as it has happened before with me in Mateen Cleaves, a former National Basketball Association basketball player which was involved in several off-court incidents, if you think the section is not notable, please remove it and sorry for any incovenience. The reasons presented to me in Cleaves' case was that the "Personal" section was non-notable considering that he was a basketball player and the legal troubles added nothing to his profile.

Attentively, happy weekend - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:34, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Template:Major League Soccer MVP Award

I don't think it's necessary to list each team that the season MVP won it for. That is superfluous information for the scope of this navbox. No other American sports league lists the season MVPs' teams, just the players' last names. If a reader wants to know which teams these guys played on, they would click on the Major League Soccer MVP Award link on the navbox. I'm being bold and removing the squads; they unnecessarily clutter and elongate the navbox. Jrcla2 (talk) 15:45, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

I think you've made a good edit there, all other soccerball navboxes I've seen include only the year + surname, and that is the way it should be I think. GiantSnowman 16:38, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

New discussion of navboxes and succession boxes at the Village pump

Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Using navboxes where succession boxes would suffice. A discussion is going on to look at the use of succession boxes vs. navboxes. The outcome may drive changes to how things like Awards, etc. appear on articles. Please chime in if you have an interest on either side of the issue. Rikster2 (talk) 03:57, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Incoherent section in Football in Pakistan

Section "overseas players" is an unformatted list of Pakistanis playing for overseas clubs. It needs someone from your project to delete it or clean it up because I don't know if such sections are permitted in your article content guidelines, and if it stayed I wouldn't know which clubs are professional. It looks dreadful. Thanks. Itsmejudith (talk) 15:13, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

I've deleted it, and left a small note at the talk page. Thanks for raising the matter. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:26, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

The entire page is a mess - zero references, poor language + unencyclopedic content, I'll have a proper purge in a few minutes. GiantSnowman 15:27, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

You are right, but a lot of info is lost now. The Women's League article for instance. I'll include that orphan in some templates and expand. Take Spain for example: Football in Spain has zero references too. -Koppapa (talk) 19:58, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Correction - a lot on unreferenced information is lost. That is only a good thing. GiantSnowman 13:23, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm not convinced I agree with such a radical pruning. If the unreferenced material had contained BLP violations, for example, then clearly it should have been removed forthwith. But I don't really see what harm it would have done to cut the worst of the woffle and tag the article as needing referencing, rather than scrapping the lot. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:53, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Nearly all football articles are badly referenced. See German champion Borussia Dortmund for example or Football in Spain.

If you want to re-add information with a {{citation needed}} tag, then feel free to do so, I won't challenge you. GiantSnowman 19:19, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Mattinho

Pay attention everybody, danger ahead! According to 100% reliable user User:Mega60 - he does not write summaries, but his actions speak louder than his words - an encyclopedia on Spanish football, this article is utter crap, nothing but a kid trying to get a laugh.

It is - is? The vandal wished! - substantially referenced, but the sources are made-up from Córdoba CF's official website, he just added the stuff in Spanish thinking that no one here speaks the language - i do and Mega does, and several others of us do i imagine - but i took the trouble of reading through the "refs", they don't have SQUAT to do with what the "user" is trying to convey. AfD all over please!

Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:33, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

So the match stats are false? If so, AfD it and warn the article creator about the introduction of false information. GiantSnowman 16:37, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

• EVERYTHING is false, not just the stats! The Twitter account does match, but that's just because it is controlled by the same "user" that created the "article". Also, i don't talk to vandals, but can you tell me how to insert the AFD template in the article? I've forgotten. --Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:39, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

• Argghhh you beat me to it ;) --Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:42, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Yep, noticed that it all false my friend while checking the references. Because it is a hoax, we don't need to AfD it - it is eligible for speedy deletion and have tagged it as such. GiantSnowman 16:43, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

These guys are not very expert in language history. They linked an Italian site, writing the title in Portuguese. Whoa. --Triple 8 (talk) 17:30, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

• Vasco, for the nine millionth time please refrain from heaping invective on any editor who makes disruptive edits. All it does is make this a less collegial place to participate. Report it, ignore it, move on. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 20:29, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

• Since i did not not send the user a message and i have not edited in the (now deleted) mentioned article, i have to assume it was something i said here: was it "user" (a user proper he is not), "vandal" (what he is)? You really blew my mind there Chris, but OK (unless you mean some other edit summary i wrote elsewhere, but since you wrote it here)... --Vasco Amaral (talk) 19:12, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

A source for Bolivian football

I've been working on Bolivian football on it.wiki for the past few weeks, and I want to let you know that virtually every game ever played in Liga del Fútbol Profesional Boliviano is available on this website. The "Estadísticas" section I linked you is very useful for Bolivian footballers statistics, since it includes all goals scored and all games played (except for the 1977 matches). Here's the searching method: select as "Fecha de inicio" (Starting date) the last tournament played before the championship you want to search for and as "Fecha de fin" (Ending date) the last phase of the championship you want to search for. Here's an example: to search for the 1995 LFPB, "Fecha de inicio: III - 1994 Campeonato Liguero 1994 ; Fecha de fin: III - 1995 Campeonato Liguero (1995)". For the games, tick "Cantidad de partidos jugados"; for the goals, tick "Cantidad de goles marcados". Please double check it because I've used this method and it worked, but when I contacted the site they answered me that there was another method; with the method they told me all the statistics I've found were wrong, but I am still a bit anxious about searching in that site. If you want a complete list of every game played in every tournament, just click "Partidos" on the left side. --Triple 8 (talk) 08:54, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

User:Xxxx693 - User:Lombriz de Aguapuerca

Another sock by this Colombian lowlife, has resumed his racist (and more) attacks against me, after the long run-in we had (have? will have?) in Quique Flores. Have a look at this "charmer" (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:VascoAmaral&diff=452131467&oldid=452050337 please see here), wish him nothing but the worst, don't care if he's 15-years old (as some say) or 55.

Has remained untouched in my talkpage for almost one day (but a bot did sign it after the vandal forgot), "interesting"... --Vasco Amaral (talk) 19:14, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Reopen the previous SPI with this new report. In the meantime report at AIV for personal attacks. GiantSnowman 19:17, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

2015 Copa America

In the article, I can read "Invitees : CONMEBOL has stated that South Africa and New Zealand would be invited." But when you click on the link, there's no information about those countries. What do you think about that?Have you got real links about this information?Thank you so much. Moreover, the article in spanish doesn't affirm this idea.FCNantes72 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.8.129.184 (talk) 21:37, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

I have removed the sentence.--EchetusXe 23:02, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

CEMAC

Does appereances at the CEMAC Cup count as full international? I supose not, but just confirming... FkpCascais (talk) 03:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

No they don't count. The matches are not listed on FIFA's website and are played by local players only, so they're not "full internationals". TonyStarks (talk) 06:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, many thanks Tony for confirming that for me. FkpCascais (talk) 18:45, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Just curious .. but any specific reason why you were asking? TonyStarks (talk) 22:49, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

I was going trough the players that played in this and other African tournaments searching for appereances for certain players and I went trough all this tournaments such as All-Africa Games, CEMAC Cup and UDEAC Championship. I added the tournaments info for some players in their articles, you can see it by checking my contributions... Many players participated in this tournaments and the info is missing in their articles and it is good to have them mentioned. RSSSF has a nice database for many of the editions. FkpCascais (talk) 01:21, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Ah, nice! Happy to see someone working on African football, it's an area that definitely needs a LOT of work. TonyStarks (talk) 02:32, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I checked some of the 2005 CEMAC Cup matches and they are full internationals - for example, the Gabon-Central African Republic match on 3 February 2005 is listed as a "A" international on FIFA's website. My guess is that certain matches qualify, but most don't because nations sent local or B sides. Jogurney (talk) 02:48, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

I noteced that some NT´s seem to count matches from these tournaments, some don´t, so that is why I asked... For instance, Cameroon seems to send allways U23, U20 or a so called "Amateur" team, but Central African Republic or Chade seem to play in full-strenght... Resumingly, if FIFA.com lists the match, it is official. FkpCascais (talk) 10:42, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

That's right, it's up to the national federations to decide on whether they want the result to count towards the FIFA rankings. It must be decided before hand as far as I know. TheBigJagielka (talk) 22:07, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

1910 Copa America (unofficial)

That article needs some work, it can't state it was the first edition of the Copa when the 1916 article claims the same. And it should be moved, the name is strange. Move to 1910 South American Championship, or Copa Centenario Revolución de Mayo 1910 or just 1910 Copa America?. -Koppapa (talk) 07:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Maybe just "Copa Centenario Revolución de Mayo". It's not like another edition exist was held, so the year doesn't have to be included. Digirami (talk) 17:25, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Reporting edit warring and removal of sourced info

I am having a strange edit-war with User:Thuglife99 in the Timothy Batabaire article. The user claims the player never played in a certain club mentioned in his National-Football-Teams profile. Playerhistory also mentions his seasons in Serbia, altough the website is temporarily unavailable. The user leaves the source but removes the club from his career without providing any evidence for such behavior. I already reverted him twice and I opened a thread at his talk page, so I would appreciate some help as I don´t want to break 3RR by restoring sourced info. I supose that as we are speaking of a Second League club, the user thinks that the article looks better without that info. FkpCascais (talk) 18:47, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I have also noticed Thuglife99 removing references from articles here and changing referenced information here. He also refuses to adhere to, or is at least ignorant of, MOS (such as with place of birth within the opening brackets), and will remove direct links to articles, replacing them with redirects. Very odd editing. GiantSnowman 19:02, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

What is the users source? I'd hazard a guess that they don't have one. Argyle 4 Life^talk 19:07, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

At my talk page, he calls me to ignore NFT and beleave in his words because he claims NFT is the only source having the Serbian Second League club info. However, NFT even has the number of matches info (I must recognise they were allways right for Serbian First and Second Leagues stats), and there are other sources including the info as well, so the case seems clear. FkpCascais (talk) 19:19, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

A user's opinion or multiple sources? I know which one I choose. I've found an article about him in New Vision which mentions the years he spent with OFK Niš. [18] It's in Swahili – I think – and it doesn't translate for some reason, but you can see it there clearly. Argyle 4 Life^talk 19:29, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks :) Lets see if he reverts again. FkpCascais (talk) 19:48, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I've invited Thuglife99 numerous times to provide a source to justify his edits; none have been forthcoming. There are also wider problems here. GiantSnowman 19:54, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

• Thuglife has provided sources for his edits on my talkpage if anybody should wish to peruse. GiantSnowman 21:59, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I movd the discussion to Talk:Timothy Batabaire. FkpCascais (talk) 22:12, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

J-League Lists

Should these be deleted: List of J-League players from UEFA, List of J-League players from CAF and more here. They just list notable players? Notable by whom? And no references. That's what the categories expatriate footballers in Japan are for, right? List of J-League players from Japan then lists Japanese players, which is sort of weird and finally List of J. League players lists about 2000 players that apperared in the league. Source is the main page or the league only. -Koppapa (talk) 15:26, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

They should all go, to be replaced by List of J. League Division 1 players and List of foreign J. League Division 1 players, to mimic the formatting of existing articles List of Premier League players and List of foreign Premier League players. GiantSnowman 16:09, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Agree with GS. In my view, the word "notable" should be removed, and each of the lists should become an incomplete list of foreign J-League players... FkpCascais (talk) 21:12, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

So what's the plan here? Obviously grouping by confederation is absurd, but would moving List of J-League players from UEFA to List of J-League players from Europe help or is it simply not workable? If the latter, could someone raise a group AfD for these? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 09:34, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

I'D go for delete as there no easy way to see, if they are complete. Europe or UEFA is no big difference. -Koppapa (talk) 15:07, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't think we need to go to AfD - can we not just merge all the UEFA/CAF etc. articles into a new one at List of foreign J. League players, and turn the old articles into redirects? Or would people prefer to go to AfD? If so, I'll do it if nobody else will. GiantSnowman 15:46, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I prefer the GS proposed solution. Merge them all into the List of foreign J. League players. Editors with time will complete it, that doesn´t seem to be a problem, we just need to add a note that it is incomplete. FkpCascais (talk) 19:23, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

OK, never merged. I would just move one and copy&paste the other into it. There is a better way, right? And what do do about the looooong Japanese one? Cut it of at 50 or 100 appearances and include only division one? -Koppapa (talk) 07:18, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

To be as tidy as possible I'd advise getting an admin to do a history merge. GiantSnowman 21:05, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

I think the looong Japanese one should be separate. We need to have one with only foreign players (like the ones many countries have). FkpCascais (talk) 21:15, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Template:Infobox football official

Do we need {{Infobox football official}}? I would have thought the relevant fields could be tranferred to {{Infobox football biography}}...Hack (talk) 13:06, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I'd prefer them to be kept seperate, as there are very few cases of players becoming officials, unlike managers. GiantSnowman 13:21, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

The two don't really share that much common detail, or at least shouldn't. And as GS says, the degree of career overlap is vastly less than, say, the overlap between players and managers. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:35, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

There aren't many recent examples of notable players becoming notable referees (or vice versa) but historically, particularly away from developed footballing countries, players switching roles was more common. All it takes is a few lines of code in the infobox. Hack (talk) 07:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Good article nominations

I know this has been mentioned before but there is a volume of articles relating to the project awaiting review at GAN under 5.4.3 Sports and recreation if any one would be interested in reviewing any of them. Edinburgh Wanderer 22:56, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

The full link is here. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 05:01, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Alexandre Pato

Can someone verify his caps and goals at youth level with Brazil? I was brought to this page by a user who I've had plenty of run-ins with on another page and has messed around with his statistics. I have no idea where to look for Brazilian youth international statistics and those in the specific section are unreferenced (shock), so I thought I'd ask here. Suffice to say, the changes made regarding his club career are wrong so I will be correcting them now, having just done the same at Mario Bolatti. Argyle 4 Life^talk 16:23, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Salerno Calcio

Hi.

After this move, I've requested a move back using the requested move template here. Comments are more than welcome. --Juanm (talk) 16:39, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Livingston F.C.

In the cats section there is one thats called Unverifiable lists of sporting persons from May 2011. I was going to remove it as makes no sense. However when you go in to delete its not actually listed as being there. Could someone take a look not sure if im missing something. Edinburgh Wanderer 22:30, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Might be wrong, but I have a feeling it's because of the notable former players section being tagged. Argyle 4 Life^talk 22:42, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Ah that make sense as it been tagged since may 2011. Never thought of that. I am going to work on improving the article over the next few days to sort all the tags out. Thanks for that. Edinburgh Wanderer 22:45, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Unlike most maintenance tags the {{famous players}} one doesn't require the month to be included. I have removed this and the Category has turned "blue". -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 04:56, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

More intro/lead stuff

Speaking of this discussion (please see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#Should_the_club.27s_league_be_included_in_player_articles.), what is the point - i have seen it in endless articles - of writing "club" or "side" or "team" in the introduction? Isn't it implied that FC Barcelona, Blackburn Rovers, Bayer 04 Leverkusen, etc, etc, are teams/clubs/sides?

Example: instead of "...is playing for La Liga side FC Barcelona...", why not "...is playing for FC Barcelona in La Liga..." - or "...in Spain..."? Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 20:48, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Well there you're just replacing the word 'club/side/team' with the word 'in'. Not like the 'currently plays for' thing.--EchetusXe 21:02, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Um... what? —WFC— 21:16, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

What Fkp said later on.--EchetusXe 14:29, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

• Was just trying to simplify, again i see i did not...--Vasco Amaral (talk) 21:19, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

"Club" as synonymous with "team" / "entity" is a Britishism: in much of Europe a "club" may represent an entire sports club of which the football team is only one aspect, whereas in the US there is no "club" concept at all for historic reasons (MLS being a series of franchised companies). Per-country consistency would be good, but to be honest we have bigger things to worry about. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 23:46, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

I think Chris that Vasco is not going that deep into the meaning of club or team, but he is simply suggesting that the word club/team/side in the lead is unecessary. He suggests we skip those words in the lead sentence. I do often use, mostly club, in that context simply because of sentence flow... Exemple:

Tim Thomson (born bla bla) is a Scotish footballer playing for La Liga club Valencia CF.

Vasco sugests we skip the word club in that context, right Vasco? If that is the case I personally don´t have a view on the subject, and both cases are fine (using, or not, club/side/team in this context) if the sentence structure is grammatically correct. This reminds me of the ocasion few months ago when I asked everyone to avoid using currently in the lead sentence, however, there is a wp principle that says that we should avoid expressions like currently on articles, but in this case Vasco brought here, I don´t know any principle apliable here, so using, or not, the words club/team/side, are both correct. FkpCascais (talk) 01:07, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

• Exactly, thanks for the input, Fil! --Vasco Amaral (talk) 01:53, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

This is just a matter of style and neither approach is right or wrong, IMHO. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 04:58, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

I suppose it could be argued that "football club AFC Wimbledon" is a tautology, admittedly. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 09:49, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Minimum amount of information required for an article

I was wondering whether there is a "minimum" amount of information required to create an article about a person, specifically a manager. I wanted to start creating articles on some of the football managers in the Algerian Ligue Professionnelle 1 but for many, I can't even find the most basic stuff like date/place of birth. Can I still create them without that information? I can work out a timeline of their career for the most part and I was hoping that by having their articles on Wikipedia, it would be easier to find that information (random users to tend add that stuff when it's missing). Just wanted everyone's input before I get started .. or if I should get started at all. Thanks. TonyStarks (talk) 02:24, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

I think that the main issue is if he passes notability. If he passes (notability sourced, of course), then you can make him a WP:STUB article. I already found around articles about coaches where the birthdate and place were missing, that was not a problem. However, if the ammont of info is too scarse, perhaps making a sandbox first wan´t be a bad idea. WP:STUB seems to say that sourced notability is enough for an article, and I don´t see WP:BLP dealing with the subject anywhere, but I am not 100% sure... FkpCascais (talk) 03:51, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

There's enough coverage and reliable information about these coaches that they would pass WP:GNG, so notability will not be an issue. I'll get started on one and see how far I get and whether it's worth continuing. TonyStarks (talk) 03:58, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

If you have a timeline of their coaching history then that is more important and interesting than accidents of their birth.--EchetusXe 09:07, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Fkp has it 100% right. And paraphrasing Echetus, a verified timeline of their coaching history is more important and interesting than the fact that they happened to be at one club on one day in history. I wouldn't worry about DoB for African coaches anyway: some countries are notorious for going the extra mile to win youth tournaments. —WFC— 12:11, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Change of the name

I would like to request a change of the name of a football club, but don't know where to make that request. The club in question is FK Velež Mostar to RSD Velež Mostar AnelZukic (talk) 03:03, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

You can make your request at WP:RM. All the instructions are there. TonyStarks (talk) 04:19, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

EDIT: Just looking at the article, seems like RSD was their old name, and FK is the new one? Why do you want to change it to the old one? TonyStarks (talk) 04:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I see Soccerway refer to them as FK.Eldumpo (talk) 05:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

I object this RfM. RSD (R, not sure, but SD means Sportsko Društvo, English Sport Society) is the name of the sport society, and one of the clubs within is the FK (Fudbalski Klub, English, obvious, Football Club). Thus, the football club should stay FK Velež Mostar. If the user wishes, he can make an article about RSD Velež Mostar where he can talk about the sport society and all clubs in several sports Velež Mostar had competition teams. Most of major clubs in former Yugoslavia have a football club which is part of a wider sport society with same name, exemple SD Partizan and FK Partizan, but we should not rename football sections of the SD into SD. FkpCascais (talk) 19:39, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

José Mourinho vs. EVERYONE?

Found this "Pacheco vs. Mourinho" stuff in Jaime Pacheco's article which spoke about a war of words the two had a few years ago, and which also contained their head-to-head record. I left it be due to the former.

Then, i saw it again in Manuel Cajuda. Come on, is it really necessary to have the results of every match every Portuguese manager had against the "Special (Whiny) One"? Methinks no, inputs please. Attentively, happy weekend - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 17:05, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

I removd the section: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jaime_Pacheco&action=historysubmit&diff=453242873&oldid=453224081 The ref was youtube and it was totally out of context. -Koppapa (talk) 17:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

How low does it get?

In Maniche, following his (non)move to Hearts, his page has been "receiving" some of the most vile vandalism i have seen in the last months. How sick does the human spirit get? But of course, we have to be gallant and let them grow tired haven't we?

Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 17:42, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

The last case of vandalism was 5 days ago so unlikely to keep going as appears to have died down. In regard to the vandalism. Hearts topics in General have been subject to that type of vandalism after a recent court case involving player Craig Thomson (footballer). If happens again revert warn and if continues request page protection. Edinburgh Wanderer 17:50, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Full fixture lists in season articles

Are those encouraged? Like in this article: [[2011–12 Welsh Premier League (women)]]. I'd say the results grid is enough. -Koppapa (talk) 19:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Kosovo national football team‎

I have a question. How do we menage the squad list at this article? We are talking about a non-FIFA NT which only played ocasional friendly matches... I noteced IP´s adding all sort of players to the squad list whithout any relation to the subject, just making a squad list with players they wished to see playing in Kosovo NT one day (some even playing for other FIFA recognised NT´s). I reverted them because what we initially had was the squad that played in the last friendly match Kosovo played, so that is a real squad that played in a last match and that info is sourced and valiable. Now, should we update clubs for those players? The issue is that the team does not exist anymore as such, and who know when they will play the next match, and which players may be called... Thus, does it seem logical to keep on updating clubs of those players, or should we better keep the last match squad profile with teams in which those players played back then? Does this make any logic? FkpCascais (talk) 21:07, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

In my opinion, the simplest solution would be to keep the squad as it was when the team played their last match, and to rename the current squad section to most recent squad or something similar. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:13, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

The entire issue is that for time being there is no current squad... From what I know, they are trying to play friendlies from time to time, but they don´t keep a current squad as FIFA NT´s do. FkpCascais (talk) 21:25, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

I understand that. What I'm suggesting is that the section that would be called current squad for FIFA NT's (i.e. the team that played the most recent game) be listed, but called most recent squad instead. This would make it more clear as what this list of players actually represents, and which players should be on it. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:24, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, renaming the section was an excellent solution because gives a clear inclusion criteium. FkpCascais (talk) 02:20, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Croatia club AfD

I'd be grateful if people could visit/revisit this AfD. Regards, —WFC— 21:11, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Well same as with the Serbian clubs. In its current form the articles are megabad, and there is no good reason to keep them. -Koppapa (talk) 07:48, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Adriano Quintão

Did someone had a single reliable source for his career? There is a East Timor footballer but seems the career history (in wiki) in Italy and Croatia is fake. (thanks transfermarketweb, the heaven of hoax) I can't find no reliable source in Italian nor Croatian.

And if without source (just national-football-team.com merely a "source"), should we AFD the article by no source? Matthew_hk tc 09:25, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

I can't find his Chinese name (the translated name has high variety). Seems the China career is also fake. Also Singapore career, as they use English, there is no source as a Geylang player. Matthew_hk tc 09:30, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Article is a complete mess and should be deleted. Too much weasal words and no sources. Love how the guy that created the article changed the parents from Laos and France to Italian and Timorese. His other created footballers are equalled bad. -Koppapa (talk) 09:42, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

I suggest remove all content but as a internationals. (BTW, he do verse HK, i find it in FIFA.com matchreport. hope i find something) Matthew_hk tc 10:23, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

I've included a ref showing he is currently with Latina, and have removed a number of the unrefd statements.Eldumpo (talk) 11:32, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Zerozero is a community wiki. I tried to correct their content on a footballer, by add one club but they ruined them by remove all club but mine submission. Their admin is dumb and did not filter user request. Zerozero good on statics but not good at career history. Matthew_hk tc 12:11, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm no expert on Zero Zero but I thought there was some discussion on here a while back saying it was reliable. Vasco?Eldumpo (talk) 13:28, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Matthew's right about Zerozero being user-generated. As such, it isn't a reliable source in the Wikipedia sense. Trouble is, once one of the well-known stats site includes a "fact", the others tend to follow, and there's no indication where it came from in the first place. I don't know if there's any truth in this player's Italian career, but the Lega Pro website (click on 1' Divisione B in the Campionato dropdown and Latina in the Squadra) lists three keepers in their squad, none of which are Adriano Quintão. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 14:10, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Plus, Latina's website lists the same 3 keepers as the Lega Pro, which should be pretty definitive... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:47, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

OFF TOPIC. zerozero also publish news, i would say for players of European top divisions (top 5) it is reliable (or it is dumb if everyone is correct on Robben, or Rooney career but you didn't). But for Brazilian footballer who had brief spell in Portugal, sometimes or usually their Brazilian career at zerozero is unreliable (sambafoot also partial reliable, and the worse is some Brazilian footballer and agent create hoax career and can find hoax career in press release of the low division club So, i trust CBF BID-E record first (or FFERJ, Sao Paulo FA) and built on it, other source as supplement. Matthew_hk tc 14:58, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

• Sorry for the delay Eldumpo :) User-generated site? That's news to me, my input in the past discussion was the same as it is going to be now: i use it - and FORADEJOGO.NET - as sources for: 1 - Portuguese players; 2 - imports who have played a significant amount of seasons in Portugal (FORADEJOGO is also good because it contains detailed stats).

Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:55, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

How about Afonso Carson? The Korean wiki had a 2008 squad and all were Korean flag. If they relegated to semi-professional, did they wish to hire/welcome a foreigner? Matthew_hk tc 20:05, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Why is the article "Ildefonso da Silva" called "Afonso Carson"? Is it some kind of Brazilian-like pseudonym, or it's just a mistake? One more thing: the article about Quintão on it.wiki was created by a reliable user, but it was modified by an anonymous user, that added him in the Giulianova roster – most likely as a hoax or a joke. Some other anon user proved to be doubtful about his presence at Giulianova, expressing his thoughts quite outrageously in a reverted edit. I will ask it.wiki's WikiProject Football, and I will report here the talk outcome. Excuse my bad English, but I am hungry and my mind does not work very well. :-) --Triple 8 (talk) 11:31, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Afonso Carson is another bad joke of the creator. [Good faith mode]he may very trust transfermarketweb to build his wordpress and wiki article[/mode] His edit testing my bottom line of good faith, as all the content of Quintão seems and already cleaned. Matthew_hk tc 19:09, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Seems this is another hoax of User:Andy Emmanuel Nonny. Matthew_hk tc 00:29, 3 October 2011 (UTC)