Welcome to ornacle.com on July 6 2009.
This is an internet experiment running to monitor browsing habbits of individuals through wikipedia contents.

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Football (Rated NA-Class)
Association football portal
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Non-article page NA  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
WikiProject on Football
Main pages
Main project talk
Task forces and sub-projects talk
Football portal talk
New articles talk
Cleanup articles talk
Unreferenced BLPs talk
Article Alerts
Football Assessment
Assessment Department talk
  Assessment log
Manual of style
Club articles talk
  Club templates talk
National team articles talk
  National team templates talk
National association articles talk
  National assn. templates talk
Competition articles talk
Match articles talk
Player articles talk
Stadium articles talk
Other
Category structure talk
Notability criteria talk
Fully professional leagues talk
Template list talk
Sources and links talk
Participants talk
Project milestones talk
Did You Know? archive talk
This box: view • talk • edit

Contents

[edit] Scottish junior footballers

User:Salty1984 has created a Category:Junior footballers. I think this is a reasonable category, but I think a name like Scottish Junior Football Association players would be more accurate. Please comment and move the category if there is a consensus to do this. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 14:03, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd have no problem with a Category:Scottish Junior Football Association players. The wording on the current Category:Junior footballers page, for "players who have played at junior level in the United Kingdom, mainly in the SJFA", is a bit imprecise. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:21, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
To people not in the know, 'junior football' is probably the same as 'youth football', and so the category should be renamed to avoid such confusion. GiantSnowman 21:14, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I have started a discussion here. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 20:27, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] David Icke

The David Icke article contained a football infobox, but this was removed and I was wondering what people felt on the issue. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 16:58, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd say that given that his personal details are in the main infobox, the article doesn't really need another box to display one youth club and one senior club. But whoever removed the box should have transferred its information into a couple of sentences in the early career section, not just discarded it. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:12, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
He made 37 league appearances or something for Hereford, and it should be mentioned. GiantSnowman 21:12, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Done Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 04:38, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] FA Cup Categories

I was thinking it might be useful to add some or all of the below FA Cup categories (assuming they don't already exist). What are people's views on this - a good idea or over-categorisation?

Clubs that have reached the FA Cup Final

Footballers who have won the FA Cup

Footballers who have played in FA Cup Final

Footballers who have scored in an FA Cup Final

FA Cup winning captains

Thanks. Eldumpo (talk) 07:30, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

  • I'd say it's overcategorisation. It will open the floodgates for all other minor tournaments as well. --Jimbo[online] 21:32, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] National team yearly articles?

Are the following national team yearly articles notable;

--Jimbo[online] 22:26, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Not in my opinion. The vast majority of the matches covered are friendlies, and therefore probably unimportant/non-notable. If Sweden managed to get to the finals of a major tournament (World Cup or European Championships) in any of those years, any useful info should be used to create Sweden at the 1994 FIFA World Cup or Sweden at UEFA Euro 2000 (example titles). – PeeJay 22:34, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Disagree. If that is not important then Chelsea F.C. season 2007–08 is not important as well... But that would not work well with those that are Englysh-centric.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 22:43, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Utter rubbish. Chelsea's season is absolutely chock-full of competitive matches (60+, I believe), whereas national teams only play about 15 matches a year, and only a handful are competitive. The two are not comparable. – PeeJay 22:52, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Your tone is extremely offensive. I see that all those matches are competitive in respect that players are vying for positions within the team. The team is not a bunch of amateurs but a representation of the National Team. Also just because a team plays 60+ matches or 2 makes no difference in whether the article exists or not. What needs to be done with the articles is references and an introduction that is acceptable by Wiki standards. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 23:48, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I think you've misunderstood the meaning of the word "competitive" in this context. If Chelsea's season was made up of 55 friendlies and five league matches, would it still be notable? Of course not. It would make much more sense to make an article about Chelsea's involvement in said hypothetical six-team single round robin league and disregard the friendlies as they're just not important. – PeeJay 00:06, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
First of all you offensively belittle me by what you think as to what I understand. You're thinking is quite wrong in applying what a "competitive" match is? A friendly international is a competitive football match just because it was not played to garner 3 points or advance to the next round of a knockout competition. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 00:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm afraid you are wrong. A friendly is not regarded as a competitive match for precisely the reasons you mention, regardless of the atmosphere in which it was played or the attitude adopted by the players. Kevin McE (talk) 06:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
And I disagree with you. A "friendly international match" is far more competitive and noteworthly than two local pub teams.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 12:16, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You're right that a friendly international is more noteworthy than a game between two pub teams, but it's still not a competitive fixture. The match may be played in a competitive spirit, but if it's not part of a competition then, by definition, it's not a competitive match. – PeeJay 16:40, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Again, you seem to forget that Friendly Internationals are competitive because FIFA counts the results and coefficients are accumulated for wins and ties. Hence the governing body of the game regards these games far more importantly than your interpretation. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 17:01, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Can you win a trophy for winning friendlies? No, so friendlies aren't competitive. End of. – PeeJay 17:06, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
By increasing FIFA Coefficient points by winning a Friendly International teams can improve their standing when distrubuted in pots for future tournaments. Hence, again IMO Friendly Internationals are more important than your interpretation. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 18:16, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
The more you keep disagreeing doesn't make you any more right... – PeeJay 19:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Of course I'm right. Its just that you can't accept anyone who disagrees with you. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:58, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
*blows whistle* It is beginning to get ugly. Save your personal discrepancies for your talk pages and try to participate in a constructive way instead. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 20:33, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Too late for that, Wikipedia:WQA#PeeJay2K3, which wasn't needed in my opinion. Uksam88 (talk) 21:13, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Consensus is certainly on PeeJay2K3's side here. Brudder Andrusha do you have a Reliable Source indicating that friendly matches are deemed to be "competitive"? National team matches are certainly split between "competitive games" and "friendlies" in the UK at least. - fchd (talk) 19:22, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
They are also split by FIFA, but they do have meaning. See the reference section below. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:44, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
(edit conflict) In the form those articles currently are I'd say no. These are just lists of matches in an sports almanac style, which should violate WP:NOT#ALMANAC. The person behind this stuff, User:Darius Dhlomo, has also created quite a bunch of articles for several nations, including the Netherlands, Estonia, Kazakhstan and Ecuador. And the question about notability has nothing to do with being "English-centric" - the information can easily be included in an article named "1994 in Swedish football" or similar. Any stand-alone article for national team matches only would create a redundancy. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 22:55, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree with user Soccer-holic, which points out that this results should be posted on the "(year) in Swedish football" articles, since that's where other national teams results are usually post it, examples:2008–09 in Argentine football or the 1993–94 in Scottish football, but am puzzle by the last one, since it contains a link to this article: Scotland national football team results and fixtures, should this type of article be the answer or just another problem?--Bocafan76 (talk) 00:14, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Sounds sensible. In the majority of cases, I think converting to a redirect to "Season in countryish football" would be appropriate. Oldelpaso (talk) 07:58, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Just as a cautionary note: the creator of those articles, Darius Dhlomo (talk · contribs), is extremely prolific in sports almanac -like content (almost 120,000 edits) but virtually silent with respect to collaborative work (115 total talk page edits, about 1 per every thousand article edits). I doubt you'll get any input from him when generating consensus. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 00:31, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] References for validity

Reference: The following is the link to the FIFA website where the ranking of importance of international games and how coefficient points are calculated in the rankings table. Friendly Internationals, as expected are the lowest but nonetheless have a value in calculating those coefficient points. The adjustment by FIFA was in July 2006. FIFA/Coca-Cola World Ranking Schedule Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:36, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Reference: The exact calculation of FIFA Coefficient is in the following pdf. Examples in the pdf explain how many coefficient points were gained from an Friendly International i.e. Brazil v. Argentina (3 September 2006) How are points calculated in the FIFA World Ranking? Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:42, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Exeter City honorary director dies

As you all will no doubt have heard, Exeter City F.C.'s former honorary director Michael Jackson has died at the age of 50, the BBC has reported. Very talented man, extremely weird, but I hope he will rest in peace. – PeeJay 23:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

  • And related to that, just a note that I have semi-protected Michael Jackson (footballer) for 24 hours as he (as have some other namesakes) got a little spillover from the news of the late Mr Jackson's death. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:38, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Jackson dead, Spector jailed, Westlife alive and free. 2009 is a bad year for music. Jackson is the most talented musician to die since Johnny Cash back in 2003. In 2005 it was Richard Pryor, 2006 it was Steve Irwin, Mr Jackson will almost certainly prove to be 2009's most famous victim.--EchetusXe (talk) 00:24, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Am listening to some Fats Domino now. Michael Jackson has died of natural causes and Fats Domino is still alive and well (as far as I know). Who could have predicted that one eh? 50 years old and his heart couldn't take it, I guess with all the stresses and strains in his life he would be more vulnerable to a sudden death like that.--EchetusXe (talk) 00:29, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Pete Burns

Can't help thinking the reporter had a brain fart here. Is it 'Referee Jones' or 'P. Burns'? Answers on a postcard in respect of this article please.--EchetusXe (talk) 00:15, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I think I'll go with Soccerbase's W.C.Burns.--EchetusXe (talk) 00:48, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Antonio Olmo

Is working with adding soruces to the Antonio Olmo article, was wondering if any of these links [1], [2], [3] are seen as reliable? --> Halmstad, Charla to moi 01:17, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

The Voetbal International link is definitely notable, it's my prime source for Dutch football. Dunno about the other two though...GiantSnowman 01:31, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] John Webb (footballer)

I've managed to trace this chap's career from 1969 to 1977...then there's a blank until he re-emerges in Canada between 1980 and 1982. So, does anyone know what he did between 77 and 82? And after 82 as well? Cheers, GiantSnowman 02:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

www.allfootballers.com shows him playing for "Bolzen (Belgium)" after Tranmere Rovers - no more detail, I'm afraid. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 04:30, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Cheers! GiantSnowman 12:43, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

He signed for MVV in October 1976, he also played for MVV in 1977-78, 78-79 and 79-80 He played for Bilzerse VV 1983-86 Cattivi (talk) 10:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Cattivi - do you have a source for his Dutch career? GiantSnowman 12:43, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
You can find it in online newspaper archives like this one [4] Cattivi (talk) 13:09, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately I can't read Dutch...GiantSnowman 13:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
He apparently joined MVV Maastricht in October 1976, as the source from Cattivi states: "Engelsman voor MVV" (An Englishman for MVV), being signed from U.S. club Chicago Sting. --Angelo (talk) 13:17, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the link Angelo! GiantSnowman 13:53, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Bolzen is an error, a misspelling of Bilzen. A source for that is this site: [www.bsdb.be ] you need to register but it's free. Cattivi (talk) 13:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

bsdb says 1983-86 Bilzerse VV (3e klasse B). --necronudist (talk) 16:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
There's only 5 weeks between his last appearance for Tranmere and his first for Chicago Sting, Bilzen was a small amateur club at that time (level 5) Cattivi (talk) 13:47, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Hulk (footballer)

I'd revert the vandalism but what's the point? I suspect it's a vandalism account. Spiderone (talk) 15:31, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

The point, is that if we notice misinformation in any article, but particularly in biographies of living people, it's important to remove it. It's probably just someone messing about, I've reverted and given them a gentle warning. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:49, 26 June 2009 (UTC)#
Yes but sometimes that means the mods don't see the vandals. Spiderone (talk) 15:50, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
WP:BLP says that "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." (their bolding) If the vandalism's bad, then anyone can report it at WP:AIV, the diffs are still in the history so the admins can see what was done. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:57, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] J. League 2009 Topscorer rankings

I've been looking at quite some league pages on wikipedia and a big majority of them feature a Topscorer ranking, yet the J. League 2009 doesn't. I've checked at previous editions of the League (J. League 2008 for example) and they do feature such a ranking. So I was wondering if those rankings only get added after the season is finished, or because nobody wasn't interested in making one yet. If it's the latter, I'd be willing to make it if I can find out how to do it. Rhand007 (talk) 16:35, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

It's probably better to wait for the season to finish, to ensure accuracy. If you plan to update after every game or whatever, but miss a game, the information would be incorrect. GiantSnowman 16:53, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
I would use the official website of the J. League as a source, and they update it frequently so accuracy shouldn't be a problem. Rhand007 (talk) 16:58, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Should be fine then, as long as you use something like Correct as of... or Last updated... to show when the table was last updated. GiantSnowman 17:06, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] FC Bavois

Could someone with a bit more knowledge of Swiss soccer have a look I considered a prod due to notability concerns but decided to ask here for more experienced eyes thanks. BigDuncTalk 21:00, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it is a notable club.--Latouffedisco (talk) 08:18, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
I would say they are notable as (judging by the Swiss FA's website) they've just been promoted to the 1.Liga (level 3 in the Swiss pyramid). However, if they haven't been promoted and would still be playing in the 2.Liga (Amateur Liga) next season, I wouldn't be so sure. Anyone else have an opinion on this? Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 08:22, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
The Swiss League system spans over eight steps in total, with only the Super League and Challenge League being professional (and even the CL only to a limited degree). If I would compare it to the English and German systems, this club would possibly play somewhere around level five to seven in England and level four to six in Germany.
A German team is considered notable by Wikipedia:WikiProject German football standards is considered if it has played at the Oberliga level (currently fifth-tier, has been higher in the past) or higher in at least one season in its history. English teams are deemed notable if they are (or have been) in a single-digit level, if I'm correct. So, to sum it all up, we could allow First League team articles, but definitely not below this level. The same would go for Austria and teams in its third-level Regionalliga.
Edit: As you can see by following the link above, most of the First League teams have their own articles anyway, so this should be good to go. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 11:02, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Trying to check the history of this club, but looks like they have never played upon the third level.--Latouffedisco (talk) 18:04, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Just had the major brainwave (!) of looking at their website - they have indeed been promoted. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 11:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Wesley & Nol de Ruiter

Are Wesley (born 1986) and Nol de Ruiter (born 1940) related? - both footballers and both involved with FC Utrecht, the former as a current player and the latter as a former manager. It could be a long shot though, as nothing is mentioned on either of the Dutch Wiki pages...cheers, GiantSnowman 21:11, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think they are closely related Cattivi (talk) 10:52, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
OK, thanks for checking! GiantSnowman 11:00, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] D.C. United

I'm looking for one of the many editors that have been involved in the numerous FA class articles on a Premiership team. For the last month, I've been trying to get an American team article, D.C. United, to be somewhat presentable compared to its UK counterparts. I'm asking for such an editor to look over D.C. United not as an American team article, but compared to current FA team articles, perhaps Norwich City F.C. or Aston Villa F.C., which I used as my examples. I put D.C. United up for GA, and this could be used to review it, but any advice is appreciated! Understand that this is more than just a request for a single team. Major League Soccer team articles are consistently lower quality, and there's yet to be one GA or even FA. I'd like to get a start on one that could be used as a template for the others.--Patrick «» 22:55, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] References =publisher

I was looking at the publisher tag on references on different pages, but mainly on Spurs articles, but no one is using any main uniform, I mean people put the url, or a full newspaper name, or BBC Sport, bbc.co.uk

What I am trying to say is, shouldn't we have a set way to have the |=publisher tag displayed? So which should it be, name or url? Govvy (talk) 10:17, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Also for official club pages, use the club name or the url? Govvy (talk) 10:17, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion, it should be the actual publisher, not the URL. So I use "The Times", "BBC Sport", or "Bradford City A.F.C. official website" as publisher. GiantSnowman 10:20, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Best to use names rather than urls. For club websites, use publisher=Tottenham Hotspur F.C., for BBC Sport pages, use publisher=BBC Sport. Newspapers are different in that the name of the newspaper goes in the work= parameter, so you'd use work=The Times; that makes it appear in italics, where the publisher doesn't. For major newspapers, you wouldn't normally put the publisher as well. Have a look at the template documentation at {{Cite news}} or {{Cite web}}, see if it helps at all. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:28, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Does playing at the Maccabiah Games merit an article?

Um, that's it basically. If a player represented their nation at the 2005 Maccabiah Games - the "Jewish Olympics" - then would said player, regardless of any club notability, be worthy of an article? Cheers, GiantSnowman 13:25, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Not at all. I actually had the chance to play at the Maccabiah in field hockey (but one of my friends, who had only ever played ice hockey before did), so it really isn't that big a deal. пﮟოьεԻ 57 13:32, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Haha, OK thanks. Out of interest, why didn't you play? GiantSnowman 13:35, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
I didn't find out about it in time, so couldn't be registered - I was later told that if they'd known about me, I'd have been in the Israeli team (as they only had about 6 players who'd actually ever played the sport before, and I had played it at school), even though I wasn't Israeli or Jewish :) пﮟოьεԻ 57 16:29, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Heh, my Uncle got a medal in the 150 metres years ago in the games, it would be good to have articles on the games, I don't think you would need player articles know. Govvy (talk) 14:43, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Jamie Clark MLS stats por favor

This souce confirms that Jamie Clark played in 20 consecutive games for the San Jose Earthquakes during the 1999 season; however, I am struggling to find his stats for ALL 2 1/2 season he played in MLS - can anyone help? Cheers, GiantSnowman 15:01, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Tried MLSnet? Nanonic (talk) 21:38, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
I searched the site earlier, and nothing came up...odd. Thanks though! GiantSnowman 21:45, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] FA Youth Cup Finals of the 1970s

Many of the squad lists of this article are incomplete - some have numerous player ommisions, some have surnames only, and one features a grand total of two players! Anyone got a resource to fatten up the squads? GiantSnowman 19:04, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Gordon Smith

I created the page Gordon Smith (footballer born 1954 in Partick) as there was already a Gordon Smith (footballer born 1954). Is the best thing now to move the latter's page to '...born in Kilwinning' in order to be able to differentiate between the two? Eldumpo (talk) 22:20, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Nononono. The article you created should be moved to Gordan Smith (full back) or Gordan Smith (defender); the existing article should be moved to Gordan Smith (striker) or Gordan Smith (forward). Regards, GiantSnowman 22:31, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
That doesn't work, as the much more notable Gordon Smith (footballer born 1924) was also a forward. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 10:36, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Then disambig the two forwards by date of birth - Gordon Smith (forward born 1924) and Gordon Smith (forward born 1954). GiantSnowman 10:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Or Gordon Smith (footballer born July 1954) and Gordon Smith (footballer born December 1954). Whatever you do is going to be messy, just make sure they're all clearly differentiated on the disambiguation page :-) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:46, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Actually, month would be better than position actually. GiantSnowman 10:52, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Association football penalty shootouts

Discussion moved to Category talk:Association football penalty shootouts#Necessity and name of this Category jnestorius(talk) 00:49, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Nicos Jiapouras

Can somebody find reliable sources as the existence of this guy? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 23:57, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Other than mirror sites, I can't find anything. Worthy of deletion in my eyes. GiantSnowman 00:20, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Archiving of talk topics

Can someone check if the current archive is too full to take any more subsections or the archive bot has a malfunction (and delete this thread afterwards)? Given that the bot collected everything older than 10 days, it is well overdue... Thanks, Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 00:29, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

See User talk:Misza13#Archiving Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:55, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Thanks for the link... --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 12:37, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
See it's done it now. Only 49 threads older than 10 days... :-) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:25, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Maps on tournament articles

Articles on international tournaments nearly all carry a map, usually colour coded to show either the stage each team reached or which group they were in for the opening stage. There are often problems with these over consistency and the provision of a key, but a new "feature" has been unveiled on the 2009 FIFA Confederations Cup: the map with superimposed flags. I have my own opinions on this, but in the interests of preserving fair discussion, I will simply point out that somebody is trying to establish a vote on the matter here, where some of you may wish to participate. Kevin McE (talk) 07:59, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Help on FK Senica needed - do we have an expert on Slovak soccer among us?

FK Inter Bratislava, former Slovak Superliga champions and recently promoted team from the Slovak First League, have recently "merged" with fourth-division side FK Senica (it was one of those "playing license for money" deals, similar to the one of Poland's Polonia Warsaw last year). However, the merger did not went through without complications. The new club intended to play under its Senica name, but forgot to file in time for the change. As a consequence, the 2009–10 season will be played as Inter Bratislava, but this is pretty much the only thing left from the old club. However, the recently created article for Senica is currently in, let's say, a pretty blank state. So, is there anybody out there who can help to expand the article? I would have done it myself but I don't know jack about Slovak soccer... --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 17:02, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Steve Evans (footballer born 1962)

What do people reckon with what's going on at the Steve Evans (footballer born 1962) article? An editor feels it is appropriate for unsourced and possibly libel content to be included and remove my MoS compliant and formatting edit. Thoughts? Mattythewhite (talk) 17:32, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I made a reasonable compromise. The editor clearly has a grudge against Evans and would prefer it if the article portrayed him as some sort of ogre. Maybe he is, but all negative statements must be sourced and verified.--EchetusXe (talk) 18:06, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
A lot, and i mean a lot, seem to hold a personal grudge against Steve Evans over his actions in non league football. He is particularly vilified on this forum. Having also met the bloke i can safely say he's not the nicest. Then again, being a York fan Matty you probably know about him already. I'd be inclined to ask for a long term semi-protect because as we are approaching pre-season and no doubt Evans will make some silly comment in the media to raise his profile once again. Uksam88 (talk) 18:38, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Confguide...who don't they slate on there? ;-) --Jimbo[online] 20:50, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

One must presume the editor feels that Stephen Fry's article must read 'Stephen John Fry (born 24 August 1957) IS A CONVICTED FRAUDSTER and an English actor'.--EchetusXe (talk) 01:19, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Formal petition to change the naming conventions

I would hereby like to make a formal petition to change the naming conventions of seasons and yearly competitions to have the year placed in the front of the name of the competition/league as per typical rules of English grammar, ex: 2009 Copa Libertadores, 2008-09 Premier League, etc. The addition of "season", as found in other sporting examples such as 2008–09 NBA season, could be considered, but if decided to be used, should be added to league seasons, i.e. 2008-09 Premier League season, but not 2009 Copa Libertadores season.

I know this would affect A LOT of article, but it makes more sense this way, and it far more practical when placing the articles' title in the prose of other articles. Digirami (talk) 22:20, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Support - I also agree that it should be "2008–09 Premier League season", but not "2009 Copa Libertadores season". – PeeJay 23:26, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Too inconsistant - Either both are ok or none. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 18:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Well one is a league, the other is tournament. The idea, if accepted, would be to have "season" added just to league seasons, and not annual tournaments. Digirami (talk) 21:53, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I dont see the reason for having to add season to article titles, it will also be "harder" to find uncategorised articles, such as searching for prefixes. chandler 23:40, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Redirects would still be in place for the articles, so searching for the old prefixes shouldn't be a problem. Regardless, the proposed changes would bring us in line with WP:COMMONNAME, which is more important. Do people actually search for "Premier League 2008-09" instead of "2008-09 Premier League"? – PeeJay 23:43, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
      • I think most search "Premier League 2008-09", which is the most usage format I see on the net [5] for example (just google search "Premier League 2008-09 " vs "2008-09 Premier League"). chandler 00:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
        • Well the most common usage would go along the lines of "2008-09 Premier League", not "Premier League 2008-09" because heck that's how people talk and it goes with the rules of grammar (adjective, being the year, in front of the noun, being the league/competition name). Adding season to the end is a purely optional idea for now, but I primarily strongly petitioning on having the year in the front. Digirami (talk) 05:38, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support - Other examples in WP, and some of them not sports related are as follows: 2008–09 Australian region cyclone season, 2009 Atlantic hurricane season, 2009 Kentucky Derby. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 15:47, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Weak support According to the naming convention we should use the most easily recognizable name. I'm not a native speaker, but you tell me "200x league season" is the format everybody expects. If that's so we should obviously use that name, too. On the other hand creators of articles have some degree of freedom in naming them and as everybody would recognize "League season 200x", I find this somewhat academic. OdinFK (talk) 07:42, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
    • You could argue back at me and tell me that this is what piping links is for, but changing the article titles to "200x league season" would make it easier to link to these pages from other articles, without needing to pipe; so it's not as academic as you might think. – PeeJay 11:04, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support The year should be in front of the tournament/competition name. - Martin tamb (talk) 05:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment Please include the name of international competitions on this discussions, most of them have the year in front of the tournament (such as: 2006 FIFA World Cup, 2009 FIFA Confederations Cup), but some have the year after the tournament name (such as: Copa America 2007, UEFA Euro 2008). I could agree that Euro 2008 is the common name, but imo Copa America should be 2007 Copa America. - Martin tamb (talk) 05:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Oh yes, I forgot about the European Championships; those should definitely stay at "UEFA Euro [year]". – PeeJay 07:30, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
    • In case anyone wonders, best option for the Copa America tournaments is 2007 Copa America format. The reason why the year appears in the end in the logo is because the year, as the adjective, goes after the noun in Spanish and Portuguese. But in English, you would still say 2007 Copa America. Digirami (talk) 07:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support putting the year(s) first, it makes a lot more sense that way except for ones like UEFA Euro 2008. I have no opinion on adding season to the end of domestic leagues. MTC (talk) 06:35, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment The respective Wikipedia guideline is Wikipedia:Naming conventions (numbers and dates), more exactly Wikipedia:Naming conventions (numbers and dates)#Events recurring at regular intervals. There is stated that either "2009–2010 Premier League" or "Premier League (2009–2010)" would be a correct format. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 13:30, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Maybe it would make sense to retain that flexibilty after all. "2009–10 2nd Fußball-Bundesliga" for example is an awful title. But is "Ligue 2 (2009–10)" intrigueing? I think not, numbers following each other always look bad and aren't very well readable either. If both forms are correct as of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (numbers and dates)#Events recurring at regular intervals why not let the editors have that bit of flexibility to create sensible names? OdinFK (talk) 13:55, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
    • So "Ligue 2 (2009–10)" would be correct, but "Ligue 2 2009–10" wouldn't? That makes sense. However, the parentheses are awful, so should the prevailing format be "2009–10 Ligue 2 season"? – PeeJay 14:01, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
      • There should be no prevailing format, but felxibility, as per OdinFK. Madcynic (talk) 14:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
        • I like consistency very much, too. All I'm saying here is that we should not have to use awful names just because there is a doctrine to always use one very specific format. Actually for some of the German football seasonal articles I would still like to know how to name them "correctly". Correctly here meaning in a way, that a native speaker would not find totally awkward. A guideline would definitely be helpful here. I find it important to make this a guideline, not a doctrine, though. OdinFK (talk) 14:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
          • Make sense to who, exactly? A native German speaker, or an native English speaker? If anything, the title has to first make sense to an native English speaker since this is the English Wiki. We could incorporate the German name in the prose, but not the title.
I think it would be better to NOT have the years in parenthesis. This leave the option of further disambiguation open should it be needed. Could you imagine if we have Primera Division (Spain, 2009–10) and Primera Division (Argentina, 2009–10)?! (This is a hypothetical situation). Now that would look awful! The prevailing format should be [year] [competition] because it is the one that by far makes the most sense to English readers. Digirami (talk) 15:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose I do not believe we need another policy that is a special case of established Wikipedia policy, such as we already have with the notability and national team naming conventions. (See Soccerholic's comment above for explanation) Madcynic (talk) 15:59, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
    • I think we may have gotten a bit lost along the way, but this petition is not about changing/adding policy. This is about getting existing articles (such as UEFA Champions League 2009–10) moved to more appropriate titles (such as 2009–10 UEFA Champions League) and then applying the new conventions to future articles. Sorry if you were confused. Consider this a massive requested move. – PeeJay 16:21, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
      • Excuse me, but does the heading say "request to change the naming conventions" or not? Maybe a convention is not a policy, but what you suggest looks like a change in policy and hence I uphold my comment. Madcynic (talk) 16:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
        • Well that's just heading to open a discussion. The reality is that we needed to have a formal request to change this practice/policy/convention (whatever you call it) because had a user, like myself, decided to do this change single handedly, it would have caused an uproar in this project and amongst users and we would have been back here discussing that instead. Digirami (talk) 17:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support for consistency with the rest of the project. For Chandler's argument that it will make pages harder to find, I would argue that our convention makes pages easier to find using my search bar's autocomplete. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 19:46, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support we need to bring the convention into line with every other sporting project on Wikipedia. Make it so.--EchetusXe (talk) 15:22, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

(summary...?) It seems that the majority of input is in favor of putting the year in front. How should we go about this effectively due to the large number of articles this will affect? Digirami (talk) 00:46, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Tony Rodwell

If someone with access to a Rothmans book or something similar would check Rodwell's league stats for Blackpool, I'd appreciate it. I have two different goals totals (19 in Roy Calley's Blackpool F.C. book and 17 in Neil Brown's list, despite this including two subsequent seasons), which is causing me some frustration. A hat-trick he scored in 1991–92 was expunged from the record books at the end of the season, but that doesn't explain the two-goal discrepancy. - Dudesleeper / Talk 02:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

www.allfootballers.com has: 1990-91 43+2 (7), 1991-92 40 (8), 1992-93 19+1 (1), 1993-94 28 (1), 1994-95 7+2 (0), Total 142 (17) --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Fenerbahçe S.K.

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

[edit] User:Mastershevchenko

Looks like we've got another hoax artist on our hands. Can everyone keep an eye out for this joker? He seems to be involved with User:Greekskii too. – PeeJay 10:28, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Darius Vassel

Hi could you please keep an eye on the Darius Vassel article, or semi-protect it. It is getting a lot of vandalism (some rascist) most of it in a foreign language (I assume Turkish) and a lot of transfer speculation. Thanks Paul  Bradbury 13:55, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Briefly semi'd. Not sure what it is about Turkish IP editors. The slightest whiff of a transfer rumour involving a Turkish club sparks a frenzy of anon edits claiming the supposed transfer has already happened. Left unchecked I swear articles for every club in Turkey would end up listing about 400 supposed players by the end of the close season. Oldelpaso (talk) 22:17, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
It certainly doesn't help that ankaragucu have put a picture of him on their official website [6] wearing all their scarves etc, but in the wording it only says they are in talks, (I don't speak turkish but with google translate you get the jist) Prem4eva (talk) 23:42, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Meh. Again, I think we spend far too much time trying to head people off from doing this when in most cases the material could just be left for a few days until it's factually accurate. Fair enough if it's just rumours, but when a player is literally wearing a club's scarf at a photo shoot it seems like a waste of effort to go reverting good-faith edits which report the new club just because the ink hasn't dried on his contract. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:02, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
The curse strikes again. Nothing can ensure that a rumour becomes fact quite like me semiprotecting an article (Google News came up with no results other than goal.com prior to protection). Oldelpaso (talk) 12:44, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Association football during World War II

I have added a section to this article for Former players killed in action, which needs populating if any one cares to do so. At present, it is rather Southampton-centic, as that is my interest. Cheers. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 15:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC) (feeling rather depressed at the current state of the Saints)

Now there are three from Southampton and three from Port Vale.--EchetusXe (talk) 00:36, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
I think, in its current form, to make it a resonably complete article, it would become rather large. From a Germany-specific point of view, football didn't really stop during the war (see: Gauliga), but as things progressed, became more and more affected. The list of Former players killed in action from Germany would be a very long one, too. You might want to make the article into a country-specific one, like English association football during World War II. EA210269 (talk) 05:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't think there's any need for country-specific sub-articles; however, there could be a case for a List of footballers killed during World War II. GiantSnowman 13:13, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
No need for country specific articles, create a list of the footballers and link to it from the article. Madcynic (talk) 13:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] CAF Champions League 2009 - First round

Should this article (and others like it) be merged to the main season article? Jmorrison230582 (talk) 18:59, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Following on from this AfD, it looks like people think such articles should exist. Personally, I disagree, but if it must remain, I think that CAF Champions League 2009 - First round should be merged with CAF Champions League 2009 - Second round, and that the same tournament's group stage and knockout stage (semi-finals and final) should have their own articles too. And as you can see by those redlinks I just put in, I also think that the dash should be removed from the article titles. – PeeJay 20:34, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Fully professional leagues and WP:Athlete

Please consider responding to the below talk page link. Thanks. Eldumpo (talk) 21:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues#Definition of Fully Pro League

[edit] {{0}}

I believe the {{0}} template is meant to be used like this example, rather than this example, right? I don't appear to be explaining very effectively the use of the template to User:Earl CG. Mattythewhite (talk) 08:33, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Save a lot of trouble if the infobox automatically right-aligned the apps and goals in tidy columns underneath the headers so we didn't have to use the things at all :-) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
It'd be nice, but it would mean even more reformatting of every single infobox instance to split appearances and goals into two attributes. If this is desirable then it would be best to get it into footybio2 before it's widely deployed. This will also mean having to take {{infobox3cols}} to four columns, which is doable enough but will take a while. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
That wasn't meant to be a formal proposal, just a comment on the aggravation of having to write the {{0}}s and the potential for stylistic differences. But if people were in favour of it, and you/someone were prepared to put in the work, it'd be much appreciated, at least by me. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:36, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
You are not alone Struway2. I'm not 100% clear on how that all works, but maybe just right align them as a pair would at least reduce the amount of {{0}} required (only needed between the two)--ClubOranjeT 00:41, 2 July 2009 (UTC), rather than before the caps as well.--ClubOranjeT 00:41, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I've commented on this below, but suffice to say that this piqued my curiosity enough to work on it; it's now live. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:39, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Any admins about???

Please could you have a look at pages Alex MacDonald (footballer) and Alex MacDonald (footballer born 1990). Looks to me as if (born 1990) was moved to (footballer), then the editor had second thoughts and cut'n'pasted it back. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:04, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Looks like two of us are/were trying. I started but I conflicted with Oldelpaso. I'll let them finish off. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:13, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Done. Oldelpaso (talk) 10:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
thanks both. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:36, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Olympiacos F.C.

The article on Olympiacos F.C. needs quite an overhaul in order to get aligned to the Manual of Style. Note: Prepare for red-white blindness when opening the site, especially further down. Any takers? --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 15:14, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

They also have two season's articles for this season (2009–10);

The one with the figure dash is slightly better than the one with the endash; albeit a bit over the top. Can an admin delete the first one under WP:CSD G6 and G10, and then move the second one to the endash title, creating a redirect from the old name. Cheers, --Jimbo[online] 20:14, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Done. Don't fancy doing the squad template though. Did most of the A-League last year and it took forever... пﮟოьεԻ 57 20:30, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Whenever I try to introduce some semblance of MOS compliance I get reverted. Does anyone else want to bring some input? Oldelpaso (talk) 18:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Since at the moment this has essentially become a disagreement between myself and User:Tube69, some third party input would be most beneficial, particularly regarding the current squad template. Oldelpaso (talk) 10:25, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Did the squad templates. It seems like Tube69 develops some WP:OWN issues in this particular case. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 11:35, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
And trying it again. I've left a WP:OWN-warning on his talk page. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 10:51, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Player infobox

Am I correct in saying that the consensus now is to use the second infobox (ie the one that uses separate codes for each club) rather than the first infobox (ie the one that you have to use breaks to separate each stint). I have twice reverted edits by User:BigDom to Steven Fletcher (footballer) and don't wish to escalate an edit war if there is no consensus on the matter. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 17:16, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Correct, {{Infobox Football biography 2}} is the one we should use for accessibility reasons. GiantSnowman 17:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
I believe it is preferred for the new infobox to be used. His argument that the old infobox should be used as the rest of the Burnley players do doesn't really make any sense to me; how is that relevant to this individual article? Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 17:20, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Consistency is good, but the simple answer here is that eventually a bot will be converting all the old ones over anyway, so having the odd updated box for now only results in temporary inconsistency (and means that in the interim a few of our articles are more accessible to blind or partially-sighted readers). Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:58, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
By the way, when will the bot convert all infoboxes; this subject was already treated here, and everyone agreed with this...So, what's the news? Cheers.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:19, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I've rolled out a new change in the last few minutes which allows goals and appearances to use their own, right-aligned columns; again this will require some testing in the field before it's ready to be deployed. The first instance in the wild is at Kris Boyd; if anyone finds any problems please let me know. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:12, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

(indent)Just the right align when no caps known for first club as mentioned at your talk, refer Jeremy Christie. I can get around it by putting in a dash or something, but left misaligned for now so you can see the issue --ClubOranjeT 11:24, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Checking for this in the template code would mean having to predicate the section headers on whether any one of the 39 allowed clubs had a goals column. For now, the best solution would be to just hack it in the article with a dash. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Question regarding appropriateness of certain pages

I'm not familiar with football articles, so I thought I'd ask here: are the existence of the pages Thailand FA Cup 2009 Qualifying Round, Thailand FA Cup 2009 First Round and 2009 Thailand FA Cup Final appropriate as they currently are? The first two appear only to be competition schedules and score reports, while the last currently contains almost no information as it describes a match not yet taken place. --Paul_012 (talk) 20:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

The first two pages should be merged into the main article, probably by using Template:footballbox collapsible instead of the regular Template:Footballbox. The final page is not a problem per se, but it definitely needs references and a little more information. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 21:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
While we're at it - Thai Premier League 2009 Fixtures & Results and Thai Division 1 League 2009 Fixtures & Results surely should not be kept either, given that we do not allow such articles for any other league? --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 00:00, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
(EDIT) Not to mention Thai Division 2 League North Eastern Region 2009 Fixtures & Results, Thai Division 2 League Northern Region 2009 Fixtures & Results, Thai Division 2 League Central & Eastern Region 2009 Fixtures & Results, Thai Division 2 League Bangkok & field Region 2009 fixtures and results and Thai Division 2 League Southern Region 2009 Fixtures & Results. Anyone willing to PROD or AfD those beauties? --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 00:13, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
My initial thought is that these separate articles should all be merged into a single season article for the entire league, as we do for the major non-leagues (see Southern Football League 2008-09, for example). Any thoughts? Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 10:04, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
No need to merge here. The actual league season articles are Thai Premier League 2009, Thai Division 1 League 2009, Thai Division 2 League North Eastern Region 2009, Thai Division 2 League Northern Region 2009, Thai Division 2 League Central & Eastern Region 2009, Thai Division 2 League Bangkok & field Region 2009 and Thai Division 2 League Southern Region 2009. Every article of those includes a results table, so this section is sufficiently covered. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 10:30, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
(EDIT) A merger of the five third-tier season articles into one would be useful, though. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 10:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
FYI, all seven Fixtures & Results articles have been listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thai Premier League 2009 Fixtures & Results. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 12:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox Football biography 2 update

Hey folks,

Just a heads-up to note that I've now rolled out a new version of {{Infobox Football biography 2}} which uses separate columns for appearances and goals. This finally allows us to right-align those columns and obviate the need to hack in padding using {{0}} and the like. The documentation has been updated to match. If you find any problems then either dive in and fix them or let me know. As usual, any feature suggestions before we make the big switch to using this as the default footybio template are much appreciated. Cheers! Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Chris, I've maybe fixed the issue regarding alignment with no first caps parameter with this coding in the sandbox. Could you please review and implement if you agree. Not sure it is 100%, but it saves needing the non-breaking space, and doesn't seem to affect the existing cap(goals) versions unduly. --ClubOranjeT 12:54, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Seems fine to me - feel free to sync it. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:07, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
That was quick... thought you said it was doable but would take a while :-) well done Chris and ClubOranje. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:25, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I feel that folks wont use it unless it is the predominant infobox. Most folks who add new players hack from a work area that had the original template or use something that used as a template. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 15:03, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I know - the actual work in making this the default will be done by a bot. This is an early heads-up so that early adopters can help out with testing the new version; there's already been enough uptake that all existing issues have been resolved. I'm trying to take this as slowly as possible to ensure a pain-free transition, considering that tens of thousands or articles will be impacted. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:07, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
When the bot DOES eventually replace all football infoboxes with {{Infobox Football biography 2}}, will {{Infobox Football biography}} be deleted to stop it being used again? GiantSnowman 16:26, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Agreed, for consistency.--Latouffedisco (talk) 16:40, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I'd imagine that once the bot has done its job, infobox 2 will be moved to the main location. пﮟოьεԻ 57 19:02, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I tried the new version on Paddy Kennedy, a newly created article, and it looks great. Well done guys. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 10:32, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Just noticed this infobox on Michael Owen. It looks like there's one too many spaces between the apps and goals. 91.106.107.148 (talk) 21:44, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
And there are huge horizontal spaces when viewed on the iPhone (I'll take a screenshot later), which renders the text too small to view without zooming, but at least the appearances and goals are aligned, which was a big problem on that medium. - Dudesleeper / Talk 13:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
The new infoboxes also shift down the main text about two or three lines compared to other articles. 91.106.114.178 (talk) 22:52, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Harassment of updates in Europe Liha

This individual continues disallow entries citing reliable courses:

Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to UEFA Europa League 2009–10 qualifying rounds. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. – PeeJay 18:07, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Live updates are taken from sources such as minute-by-minute http://www.uefa.com/competitions/uefacup/fixturesresults/round=2000033/match=2000508/report=mbm.html.

I believe that until the match report is up on UEFA's site the info from the minute-by-minute is good enough to be post on WP. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 18:28, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Links were not being provided for live updates, and therefore they were unsourced. Nevertheless, I still believe that live updates are inappropriate as there is always the possibility of a match being abandoned before its conclusion, which would void the goals up to that point and make the data in the article incorrect. In my opinion, updates should not be made until the final match report is added to the UEFA website, as it is at that point that the result is official. I hope I'm not the only one who feels this way. – PeeJay 18:52, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I agree with PeeJay on this; wait until a match is over before adding any info. Controversial goals - was it an own goal? which striker got the final touch? etc. - are normally not sorted out until after the match has been finished for a while. GiantSnowman 19:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Disagree: I fail to see how links to UEFA minute by minute information is not reliable and not worthy of being posted on WP. Secondly although the link is for the report - the is absolutely no information in the References section for any of these reports. Also why are these links there for the second leg when the second leg is yet to be be played - in fact its 7 days away? If its a report of the post game result it should not even be there. Yet its already on the WP page (as a reliable source). Thirdly - why are controversial goals really a problem? Don't you think there are capable editors who will question the goal or information associated with it and check the official report. I think the issue here is more of control and power and who does rubber stamping of what goes on the page. Not so surprising that the individual handing our WP:Yellow Cards was against the Europa League qualification round entry itself. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Again someone has nicely added the goalscorers without changing the score in the remaining live games... Seems a shame that the our field marshal wants to play sanitary policeman.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:39, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and I don't think there is a need to report scores before a match is complete. Often times, the match tracker initially reports the wrong goal-scorer or time and things need to be changed after the match report is final. It's just totally unnecessary. Jogurney (talk) 19:44, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Luckily, other areas of WP don't agree with your idea of finality before updating information. I spent a nice week with the folks updating Wimbledon and there was never any problems discussed with up to date scores. Nor any superhyper admin type imposing his authority. Also in non sport events I was involved with a bit updating of Cyclones and hurricanes, which don't end in 90 minutes and if wasn't for updates that would be done (with the references) through the lifetime of the event then quality of those updates would be quite poor because after the event the amount and quality of that information entered is of diminished consideration.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
The real question is why you honestly think it's worth your time to update Wikipedia with information which will be out of date in minutes. It is of no value to readers, as nobody thinks "oh, that match is on just now, I must check what the current score is on Wikipedia". Someone will certainly be along after the match to update the result. Rather than attacking other editors for "imposing authority" or whatever, think about whether you might be able to come up with a better use for your time. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 20:29, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I think Wikipedia is an excellent source of information, especially when I want to find out more information about a goalscorer after he has scored because invariably a link exists. I also noticed that a lot of the players who scored today have no entries for them. Maybe you also have a lot of time to spare because you could fill up some of the holes here on WP. However, how I use my volunteer time on WP is my perogative and if I want to spend it on Europa League qualifiers, for better or worse thats my choice. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 21:49, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
You are right, Wikipedia is an excellent source of information. However, it is not intended to be a primary source of information, and all additions must be accompanied by a reliable source (obviously people often ignore this rule, but that doesn't preclude the rule's existence). Furthermore, again you are right that it is entirely up to you to decide what you do with your time on Wikipedia. However, there are strong suggestions here that your time would be better spent on other tasks, and you would be well advised to follow those suggestions. By the way, why, in god's name, would you choose to look up live scores on Wikipedia ahead of UEFA.com or the BBC (or equivalent)? – PeeJay 21:58, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Obviously you have never been behind a firewall which blocks such sites. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 00:22, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Agree. I used to give minute to minute updates for every game as well, but ever since Sweden vs Belarus in which Elm's goal got reversed to an own-goal I've changed my opinion. Problem sometimes is that reports get updated really slow (in the Copa Libertadores for example). Rhand007 (talk) 02:04, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Huddersfield Town current squad

Does anyone know what the need for this teamplate is? Surely the Huddersfield Town current squad can be updated aptly through the main article? Mattythewhite (talk) 13:07, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

It's transcluded in a couple of places, including the 2009-10 season article so I guess the editor(s) in question only want to keep one set of facts in one place. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:11, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Tbh, there shouldn't be any need to transclude it onto the 2009-10 season article. Why don't they just have a squad statistics table, which would include all squad members anyway? – PeeJay 13:33, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I have no idea, perhaps it's a good idea to contact the editor who created the template? I don't see that it's doing any harm mind you... The Rambling Man (talk) 14:58, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
For the same reason, I've added a problem at the bottom of the page, it won't work to transclude it on the current season page. In five years time, you'll have all the wrong players on the Huddersfield Town 2009-10 page then. 91.106.114.178 (talk) 22:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Premier League & LMA Managers of the Year

Hello all. I'm looking for someone with some reliable sources as to who won each of these titles each year. I can dig a few up electronically but the FA Premier League website is a nightmare and most of the historic awards pages seem to have disappeared up their own .... Any help (or pointers to help) would be very handy, cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:58, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe the Nationwide (ex-News of the World) Annual lists all the LMA winners, I'll check when I'm at home -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
That would be treat-tastic. Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:37, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Just to confirm, I do indeed have the complete list from 1993-2008 (at least, I presume that's the complete list). I'll send it to you, along with the ref, when I have a bit more time. Right now I'm being forced to go to Ikea :-P -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:57, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
ARGH! Ikea - good luck. And thanks! The Rambling Man (talk) 09:54, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Sébastien Faure (footballer)

Does playing in the Coupe de la Ligue make him notable? Spiderone (talk) 17:00, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I would say yes - he played in a pro comp for a pro team, against pro opposition. GiantSnowman 17:30, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I would say yes, as it is a fully professional competition.--Latouffedisco (talk) 17:33, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ian Black(s)

Ian Black (footballer born 1960) is the father of Ian Black (footballer born 1985). Does anyone know if Ian Black (footballer born 1924) is a third generation in the footballing dynasty? GiantSnowman 18:40, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I demand that if that is the case then Black refer to himself as Ian Black III in all future interviews (in the third person of course). Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 19:50, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Doesn't seem very likely given that the eldest Ian Black was from Aberdeen and was still playing in southern England at the time the second Ian Black was born. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 20:42, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

My Southampton reference books are usually fairly good at giving details of other family members who played professional football, and there is no mention of any family in the article for the oldest of this trio. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 21:48, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks for checking for me. GiantSnowman 21:57, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Jan Podhradski

Hi wikisoccerholics, I´ve been on small hollydays, and I really tried to stay away from editing but it was hard and, I must say I´ve missed you all! I hope you are all right and full of energy to make and improve many more good soccer articles in the new season that is starting. I would like to make one about a player that is a little bit peculiar. His name is Jan Podhradski , he was born in 1917 in a town of Kisač, in the region of Vojvodina, north Serbia, in a slovak family. He started playing in a local club, then in 35/36 played for SK Vojvodina, but he became famous when he came to Belgrade to play in BSK,playing 3 seasons and winning one national Championship in 38/39. He get one cap for the Kingdom of Yugoslavia national team in a friendly in 1938. With the start of the german invasion of Yugoslavia, in 1941, he and his family moved to his parents motherland Slovakia, where he continued his career playing for SK Bratislava from 1941 untill his retirement in 1947. In the meantime, he played 4 times for the slovak national team that existed during the war period. My question is:how are you guys dealing with this kind of national teams that existed in short periods of time, and I´m not sure if were recognised by FIFA or UEFA? Should I consider him a slovak INTERNATIONAL player? FkpCascais (talk) 20:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

If he played for an incarnation of the Slovakian national team, then yes, of course mention it. However, mention that he only played in unofficial games. GiantSnowman 22:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Ok, but what about categorization? He is certainly Yugoslav International player but also Slovak International player. I´m asking this becouse I´m not sure if in the "Category:Slovak International players" should be also included the players that represented that incarnation of Slovak national team. And also, for list purposes, if I categorize him as Slovak, and I´m writting the international capped players in bold letters, should I also "bold" him? FkpCascais (talk) 03:17, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't know if you have this link [7] which can help you. And if I remember well (I'm not sure, can anyone confirm that ?) Slovakia matches during WWII are not recognized by FIFA. But he did play for them...So, it should be mentioned, but the category "Category:Slovak International players", maybe not.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:50, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I have the link, that´s where it mentions (in the last sentence) that he had 4 caps for Slovakia, and I´ve confirmed it viewing many websites with international games from that period. I also remembered our conversation about doble international players, and since in this case he played only one game (friendly) for Yugoslavia, and afterwords played 4 (more and more recent) friendlies (same level of importance) for Slovakia, I´ve remembered including him in my lists and maybe making a short article about him. FkpCascais (talk) 22:06, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Players positions

I must say that I find too many players articles where is not mentioned the players position. Many say only in the infobox if the player was a goalkeeper,defender,middlefilder or striker, but there are articles without even that information. Shouldn´t that be one of the most important issues in players articles? FkpCascais (talk) 20:50, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it should. If you find an article like that then by all means correct it. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 00:47, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
OK, thanx Chris, I´ll try my best, but I also wanted to remember younger editors not to forget it. FkpCascais (talk) 22:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Matteo Guardalben

I receved from User:Matthew hk an ugly warning where he ask me not to add unsourced or original content and...if I do so again he´ll block me from edditing...bla,bla,yada-yada, I think you all senior wikipedians know the message. The problem is that, as I´m reserching the foreign players in Yugoslavia, I remembered that in 2006/07, FK Zemun playing in the Serbian Superliga announced that will bring on loan the senior italian goalkeeper Matteo Guardalben. As I still didn´t find the complete datas of the serbian superliga seasons, I don´t have the exact number of games that he played for the club, but I added that info(that he was loaned to FK Zemun in part of that season) to his page. I finded this information in the next external sources: worldfootball.net [8] , weltfussball.de [9] , transfermarkt.co [10] , spox.com [11] , sport1 [12] , jelenfudbal (the serbian superliga unofficial website) [13] ,these are the more important ones, but there are much more, just make a google search ( matteo guardalben zemun ) and you´ll see. Guardalben was also shown as part of the squad of FK Zemun in 2006-2007 old club wiki pages, and was also listed in the current FK Zemun wiki page as a former player until some weeks ago was his name deleted by matthew hk... Matthew hk sended me some old club Vicenza website news page where says that Guardalben had surgery that year so he didn´t played, and explicitelly said that Guardalben played in Zemun must have been a joke. Well, I´m not saying Matthew is wright or wrong, or did Matteo get or not to play in FK Zemun, I don´t really know, becouse I haven´t been in Serbia that year and I didn´t watch any FK Zemun game that season. My question to you, dear soccerholicpedians, are:

  • 1:-Does anyone know if Guardalben get to play to FK Zemun, and how many games he played, if he did? Was he loaned to FK Zemun?
  • 2:-Can all this websites be wrong?
  • 3:-Can this websites be considered non-reliable? Specially Weltfussball/Worldfootball and Transfermarkt, that I touth and used as a pretty reliable source, until now?
  • 4:-If I added this info in the players page, citing the external source from one of this websites (Weltfussball or Transfermarkt, I can´t remember wich one I used), can MatthewHK consider them non-reliable, delete them and send me the thretening message warning me that if I insist I´ll be blocked from editing here?

I greatfully thank in advance all opinions from you wikipedians. FkpCascais (talk) 22:18, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

So if you have sources that confirms Guardalben SIGNED for FK Zemun, and Matthew has sources confirming that he never PLAYED for FK Zemun, then we can probably safely confirm that he signed but didnt make an appearance! GiantSnowman 22:28, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
On the other hand, eufo.de (yet another German portal for players, squads and stuff oO) lists him on Vicenza Calcio as joined at the beginning of the season. Guardalben's article at the Italian wiki (English "googlelation") also says something about a "career-threatening injury", yet it does not cite any sources. Is someone of our Italian contributors able to clear the mess by referencing a non-online source? --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 22:48, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
All that the eufo.de website proves is that Guardalben signed for Vincenza at the beginning of the 2006/07 season. If we look at Weltfussball, it shows that he then moved to Zemun a few months AFTER that, before returning to the parent club at the end of the season...GiantSnowman 23:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanx both for helping me clarify this strange situation. If it comes to be uncertain, it would be the major massive error I´ve ever seen in various football websites. But, it´s still hard to beleve, since the majority of this websites are German, wich are well known as being very reliable and perfectionist. There must be something in this story... I clearly remember a friend at that time telling me about it, and all this websites saying it... Maybe you are right Snowman, but in that case it should be mentioned in his page as FK Zemun(loan) 0 (0) , right? On the other hand there is no place that says that he didn´t play before or maybe after the injury. Anyway, it´s still not 100% clarified if he did or not have some conection to the club. FkpCascais (talk) 03:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

As I already told to FkpCascais, Guardalben DIDN'T play/joined/signed for Zemun. --necronudist (talk) 10:12, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

P.S.: Weltfussball, Worldfootball and Transfermarkt are absolutely unreliable. --necronudist (talk) 10:13, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Incorrect. Weltfussball and Transfermarkt are rather reliable when it comes to German football. Naturally, the more you move away from Germany, the more unreliable it gets, but that would be true of almost any source: Moving away from its focus means introducing doubt. Madcynic (talk) 12:33, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
We aren't talking about Germany. --necronudist (talk) 12:15, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
I was just pointing out the flawed use of the word "absolutely" in your statement. No offense meant. Madcynic (talk) 15:34, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

And if your list only players who played in Serbian Superliga, and not those who were part of the squad, then you should remove this guy.--Latouffedisco (talk) 10:41, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, I disagre about Transfermarkt and Weltfussball. They have been very reliable 99% of the time, and they show a, very rare info, if a player played 1/2, 1 or from what month until what month/year the player played, and for my case, reserching serbian liga, that info is very important becouse the winter transfer moves are very active there. Also, Serbian league has many import/export bussines with German leagues, so it is quite close market to german football reality, just like the rest of central and yugoslav europe. For Necronudist, who defends playerhistory website, I must say that I find it very incomplete ( even in recent seasons and I dont even have to mention the more old ones) and I finded some players completely wrong. Erwan, I´ve changed the criterium in my lists for some time now. I´m including all players that were part of the squads, becouse for many seasons I can´t (for time being) know how many games they played, only the squad lists. So if Guardalben was LOANED (not played/joined/signed) should be included, if not, obviously not. FkpCascais (talk) 22:27, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
You keep discrediting people like a good old Communist. "You are with me? Your lists are great!" "You are against me? Oh, you're good for nothing!". That's pretty childish. I've never defended playerhistory. You would better think about giving a reason to keep the list. For me, it should be deleted and you should keep working on that on your sandbox. Usually, only complete works (or as complete as possible) are published. --necronudist (talk) 12:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh and, my English isn't good, but TO JOIN should cover also loans. And, however, HE HAS NEVER SEEN THE CITY OF ZEMUN EITHER FOR WORK, BIRTHDAYS, WEDDINGS OR HOLIDAYS. Is this better? --necronudist (talk) 12:25, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Guardalben never played and signed for Zemun; by the way in the 2006-07 campaign with Vicenza he had a serious skull injury in training that left him out of the pitch for the rest of the season. I have also had a look at La Gazzetta dello Sport's archive [14] and there is no track of Guardalben having ever played for Zemun. --Angelo (talk) 12:25, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Zemun goalkeepers who played in the league in 2006-07: Bosko Borenovic 1 sub, Sasa Misic 7 starts, Radovan Radakovic 14 starts, Igor Stefanovic 9 starts +1 sub, Nemanja Supic 2 starts 2 subs Cattivi (talk) 13:19, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
You won't find exact transfer dates on sited like weltfussball and transfermarkt they often just radomly pick a month.. Nemanja Supic is an example ot that Cattivi (talk) 14:07, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Take it easy Necronudist. You have lot of complexes, don´t you? I just need something more than your words, ok? EXTERNAL SOURCES, not "he didn´t play becouse some necronudist told me"...
Thanx Angelo and Cattivi, that is the kind of info´s I need. FkpCascais (talk) 18:41, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Cattivi, where you´ve finded those infos? Are there earlier seasons? I have the squad lists, without the thed number of games,starts and subs. FkpCascais (talk) 19:11, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
The source of the stats is the European Football Yearbook, there are ca. 20 volumes/seasons now. Cattivi (talk) 21:12, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] PNG better than SVG if the logo is copyrighted ?

Months ago I've created this File:Luton Town.svg to replace the PNG version logo for Luton Town F.C., suddenly yesterday user Jappalang changed it back to PNG. The reason for the change can be found here – Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Luton Town F.C./archive1. As far as I know it violates WP:Logo & NFCC. As for now I've changed the article logo back to SVG, please do correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks. Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 10:16, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Our rule on fair use basically says that we can't use SVG replicas for fair use images because SVG's resolution-independence means they're never "low resolution". As such, we have to use deliberately low-resolution derivatives instead. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:29, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Then, Wikipedia should change all the thousands football SVG logo to PNG for the fair-use rationale, not to Luton Town logo only. Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 10:38, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Please refer to Manchester City F.C. & Everton F.C., just want to show you some example of many Featured Article football club that uses SVGified logo Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 11:01, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Depends on whether the logo is copyrighted or not I suppose. Using svg format is essentially a master copy of the logo, anyone that finds it here could reproduce it for nearly any purpose they could imagine. Using png limits the ability to reproduce the logo. Bemasher (talk) 11:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Jappalang knows his onions when it comes to image issues. Both Manchester City and Everton went through FAC some time ago, and the logo image has been changed about in both since then, so its entirely possible that it needs adjusting in them (I'm not enough of an image expert to know whether this is the case). Oldelpaso (talk) 14:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
That an article has previously passed FA does not mean it is faultless. What you did there (reverting an image which doesn't fall under fair use back into an article despite having had the reason for its removal explained) can be seen as a copyright violation; please don't do that again. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 16:36, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Copyright violation? There is no rules on wiki that said so. On the matter on the fair use rationale, it doesn't reach any concrete consensus yet. There are thousands of SVGified logo in the english wikipedia itself, if you want to revert LTFC, you should then revert the others too. Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 16:06, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't want to see all the hard work done by fellow wikipedia graphic designers and SVGifier go to waste. This thing must be solved ASAP, it includes thousands of articles Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 16:57, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
In response to this discussion, I've nominated File:Man Utd FC .svg for deletion. The discussion can be found here. – PeeJay 18:22, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
You should have nominated this logo File:CONCACAF logo.svg uploaded in SVG by you first for deletion before you nominate File:Man Utd FC .svg. Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 16:16, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
You may notice on my talk page that I was asked to fix that logo by another user, so don't go pointing the finger at me. That was before this issue even came under discussion anyway. – PeeJay 20:10, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't want to see all the hard work done by fellow wikipedia graphic designers and "SVGifier" go to waste. This thing must be solved ASAP, it includes thousands of articles. Today, you can revert LTFC, but tomorrow you would not know what would happen. I do not want this matter to be repeated in the future Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 16:57, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

And when did Wikipedia release a policy about SVG logos not being permitted? According to the image policy, fair-use images should be limited and that includes vectorization. SVG logos outweighs PNGs in so many ways. Like all fair-use images, a raster should be deleted immediately to keep the copyright limited. Another example is that the SVGs should not render no larger than necessary in the file page. Again, that is to protect the copyright status of the logo. If the SVG is identical to the PNG, there is absolutely no utter to keep it away and waste the graphist's time. ZooFari 17:52, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
This isn't really a football issue, so this discussion should probably continue somewhere else, but I'm not sure where. The nearest I can find to a specific policy is this: "if it's a Fortune 500 logo, is it tagged "{{PD-self}}" or some other equally impossible option? It may be annoying for a requester to have the image they wanted improved deleted, but we all have to follow WP:C." ([15]) There's nothing specific on the WP:C that I can see. What worries me, is that I don't want this policy grey-area to become an excuse for people who don't, for whatever reason, approve of the widespread uptake of the SVG standard to have an excuse to go around WP deleting them. Quite apart from deleting people's hard work unnecessarily. If there are some images that must never be SVGed, then everybody should very clearly be able to tell which ones they are, and a clear policy should be published as to why and which, for all to see. If that hasn't happened, and we need to ask a few people's 'expert' friends to decide for us, then I don't think anyone should be reverting SVGs to PNGs on this basis or off their own bat. --Nigelj (talk) 18:56, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
I've started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Image use policy#File:Man Utd FC .svg about this issue. Comments would be appreciated. – PeeJay 20:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
While this is not explicitly stated in current image policy (as vectors aren't specifically mentioned), I would be of the opinion that an SVG logo violates fair use. Fair use states that Logos uploaded to Wikipedia must be low resolution and no larger than necessary. Image resolution is a term that only applies to raster images as it is concerned with pixels, so that alone should indicate that fair use is restricted to images in raster format. Either that, or that Wikipedia's policy on fair use requires some re-wording to account for vectors (which I'd imagine it does, but until that occurs it's all we have to work with).
If you were to make some attempt to apply the concept of image resolution to a vector format like SVG, the only conclusion you could possibly come to is that SVG images have "infinite resolution". This would fairly clearly be a complete violation of the restriction to images of low resolution.
I'm personally generally vehemently opposed to copyright paranoia in any form, but I don't really think there's very much ambiguity in the statement "Logos uploaded to Wikipedia must be low resolution". Resolution means raster only. Even if you disagree with that, low still means vectors are out. ɹəəpıɔnı 20:52, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Question Is the logo in question from 1885? It appears to be so and, despite the fact it is certainly trademarked, it is a free image. — BQZip01 — talk 00:28, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

No, the 1885 is the date of formation of the club. Most UK football clubs change their badges/crests/logos occasionally and this Luton one has only been in use a couple of years. - fchd (talk) 05:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Indeed, commercial interests mean asserting control over copyrights and trademarks for merchandising purposes is probably one of the main reasons for clubs making such changes. Oldelpaso (talk) 07:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] U.S. Soccer crest

On a completely different note, is anyone else having trouble seeing the U.S. Soccer crest on United States men's national soccer team? For some reason, the crest image no longer works in the article despite the image itself not having any problems I can see. Can someone help? Is there a coding error that is simply being overlooked? AfterMayAndIntoAugust (talk) 19:04, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I've fixed it. The wrong parameter name was being used. :-) – PeeJay 19:13, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Leicester City F.C.

I've just listed it at WP:GAN, if people could help me to ensure its meets the criteria, which i think it does I'd appreciate it, also I've put a minor requestion on the article's talk page for help with the kits in the info box. Jimmy Skitz's Answer Machine 12:01, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Category:The Football League managers

So is this being abandoned or what?--EchetusXe (talk) 15:20, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't say so, as the PL, Serie A and La Liga categories are filled. On the other hand, the Bundesliga category is underpopulated as well. Let's fill 'em up... --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 15:26, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Guadeloupe - 2009 CONCACAF Gold Cup

I have reverted the flag of Guadeloupe to the French flag since Guadeloupe is a French colony. The local flag is unofficial and here @ WP we have to be neutral and attempt to be precise.

However, folks that are coming without login are starting to continually vandalize this.

Can some admin semi-protect this page for the duration of the tournament??? Thanks. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 15:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not seeing anything that warrants protection. Oldelpaso (talk) 15:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Me neither, OP seems to have only made one edit in regards to it. Any protection would be over kill. Uksam88 (talk) 16:15, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
I've done three reverts in 24hrs. Also look in Talk:2009 CONCACAF Gold Cup Brudder Andrusha (talk) 17:59, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ethiopian Premier League Teams

I'm wondering: Why is it hard to find links that provide everything for a Ethiopian club football team? I'm an American but I'm interested in other countries' teams.

Rakuten06 (talk) 21:09, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

It's hard because there's hardly any info available for Ethiopian teams, full stop. – PeeJay 21:17, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
It's hard to discover info available for Central/Eastern African teams?? There's barely info on DR Congo's clubs! Rakuten06 (talk) 21:23, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
African football in General doesn't receive nearly as much coverage in the West as European football does. It's sad but it's true. GiantSnowman 22:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] The Browns of Argentina

Quite a footballing dynasty: six Argentine international players – five brothers (Alfredo, Carlos, Eliseo, Ernesto and Jorge) and their cousin (Juan Domingo) – as well as two non-international players – Diego and Tomás – who won championships with the Alumni Athletic Club. At least one brother – Carlos Carr Brown – played at some point in the UK (see here for confirmation), but can anyone find out details for his British career, and maybe the other Browns? Cheers, GiantSnowman 22:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

What about José Luis Brown? Spiderone (talk) 08:44, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
There's no mention of José Luis being a relation to any of the other Browns in any of the articles I've read about them. GiantSnowman 09:21, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
No Carlos Carr Brown has ever played in the Football League. Given that the source simply says "he played in Great Britain" that could easily refer to non-league or amateur football.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Being of Scottish heritage, maybe he played in the Scottish league? GiantSnowman 10:04, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Football League Two 2008–09

As a result of the template at the bottom of Football League Two 2008–09 being changed every year, it's now unusable at the bottom of the aforementioned page. Either it needs deleting or another solution needs coming up with. I don't know if it's the same with other divisions or the same problems are there too. 91.106.114.178 (talk) 22:40, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

And see my comment above about Huddersfield. 91.106.114.178 (talk) 22:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Do you mean the Football League Two Teamlist template? It's not needed, the clubs are already listed and linked on the map, on the league table and the results grid. - fchd (talk) 05:31, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] User:MaloneyW.F.C

This user has been on a spree creating articles for Weymouth players, none of whom seem to have played in a fully professional league. Haven't got time to take any action at the moment, but someone may wish to look into it..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I'll have a look at the articles and take any PROD/AfD action if needed. GiantSnowman 11:43, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
OK, I've PRODded five players and added an existing AfD (Scott Brice) to the WikiProject's list. GiantSnowman 11:58, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Cattermole's AS Levels

You can't do Further Maths without doing Maths. On Lee Cattermole's early life it says he had 5 A grades but I think this might be vandalism. Any thoughts? I can't find proof. Spiderone (talk) 17:01, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I've deleted a lot of personal stuff for which I can find no convincing sources which precede the info being added. There is a recent Mirror article which backs up the staying on at school thing, but I suspect that's sourced from Wikipedia rather than the other way about. If he's on your watchlist, insist on sources before any of it's added back. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:54, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Football Fakes

I saw this programme on Sky Three tonight, and wondered if an article ought to be written about the programme's subject, Alessandro Zarelli. He already has mentions in Bangor City F.C. and Peter Davenport's articles, but I wondered if a proper article would be appropriate. – PeeJay 00:16, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

For those of without Sky Three, who is Zarelli? GiantSnowman 11:28, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I also saw it last night; I was quite annoyed when he rang them up and called them "sons of bitches", the sod. Not sure if he's particularly notable though. All I can find on the BBC is this one report. Mattythewhite (talk) 11:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Alessandro Zarelli was The Greatest Italian Footballer Ever - According To Him. There is also a BBC version... --ClubOranjeT 11:39, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Smalltime conman, only of interest to Sky (or anybody else) because it was football clubs that he was trying to con. Don't see him as remotely notable, meself. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:40, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I suppose it is similar to Ali Dia, but of course he is notable (for both the athlete guideline and the amount of subsequent publicity) because he actually played for Southampton. In this guy's case it didn't work, so I don't see how he is (or will be) notable. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 11:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Even though he fails WP:ATHLETE, he passes WP:N due to media coverage. Worth an article in my mind. GiantSnowman 12:41, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] {{TwoLegResultFb}}

User:Verwolff has created this template in order to utilise the obscene number of templates in Category:Fb templates. He applied it to the UEFA Champions League and UEFA Europa League articles this morning, something to which I vehemently object. I'm sure a few of you know my position regarding these templates, but to reiterate, I am in extreme opposition to them, and I just hope we can come to some resolution that will result in their eradication. – PeeJay 09:37, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

First of all, the change was brought up undiscussed, which is never a good thing to do. As for a possible solution - take a look at the article for this year's Slovak Superliga, more exactly its league and results tables. Could this be the base for a compromise for both camps (template-lovers and template-haters)? Note that all of the used temps there were already existent.
The reason for the change, by the way, is the f***ed up naming for the FK Senica/FK Inter Bratislava merger. Any "correct" implementation of the fb team templates would have led to a new temp for this season, and to another one for 2010-11.
Personally, I have switched my stance from "template-lover" to undecided. As useful as the temps might be, they have significant flaws if leagues change their teams like underwear or if teams change names every couple of seconds. On the other hand, the average human being corresponds more to key-value pairs than to "unstructured code", so I wouldn't completely abolish them. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 10:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football"
Personal tools
Visit joltnews for the latest headlines
Visit bloit.com for company information
Geed Media does computer consulting on long island.
This page viewed times. See Logs