Talk:Major League Soccer records and statistics

message: :Image:Cf97.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Cf97.gif

message: I just added the factual accuracy disputed tag to the all-time records table.  Why are PK wins/losses counted as ties?  Why are the point totals "simplified"?  MLS hasn't rewritten its history as far as I can tell, and Wikipedia's MLS editors shouldn't be taking the lead in revising facts.  I advise major cleanup of this section. --Roehl Sybing 14:35, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: MLS HAS changed it's rules...obviously.  And PK wins always count as ties (in the record books) of most major soccer leagues in the world.  Furthermore, while one team may have been the "victor", MLS considers these games "ties". 66.30.130.133 21:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On this page, the standard is not what "most major soccer leagues in the world" decide, the standard is what MLS decides.  MLS counted shootout wins in its own category, and still does the last time I checked past tables on their website. --Roehl Sybing 01:31, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There needs to be two separate tables: one with shootouts, and then one with shootouts counted as draws. Also, while I'm at it, "regular season champion" doesn't exist. That needs to be changed to Supporters Shield, and there's no need to list MLS Cup winners twice. The Shield doesn't really mean anything, so I also don't approve of it being considered an "honor," which is another iffy category. And if there is going to be an "honors" section, then why not include the Champions Cup too?--Scaryice 12:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There were never any PK wins in MLS regular season history.  Originally, MLS determined winners of games tied at the end of full-time with its own "MLS Shootout," which was different from a penalty kick shootout.  With that said, I agree with Roehl Sybing.  If MLS considered it a win that year, it should be considered a win.  MLS has not rewritten its history books.  The Metrostars still had a 15-17 record in 1996 even if some of those wins came in a shootout. KitHutch 22:26, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps we can standardize the table according to this excellent page from RSSSF.com? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Henryong (talk • contribs) 06:10, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  All-time records 

message: For a similar but slight different reason why the color doesn't work well on the Major League Soccer article, over exaggerated color is not not visually consistent with the many other tables in this article. There are guidelines for color and any reason for inclusion here does not in cooperate one of them --Blackbox77 (talk) 14:28, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colors 

message: I added a "Most Successful MLS Clubs overall" table. It pretty much covers all the information in the "Honors by team" section, so I'll remove that after awhile, unless anyone has any problems.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spw422 (talk • contribs) 04:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  new table 

message: Hi.
I noted that the U.S. Open Cup is listed as a domestic competition in the all-time results table, yet its Canadian equivalent is not. Granted, the (currently) single MLS side to take part in the Canadian Championship has yet to win the contest, but should it not be listed nonetheless? --Nerroth (talk) 22:02, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: i would say: Yes  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.49.244.86 (talk) 07:59, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding the Canadian Championship to the list of 'domestic' honours? 

message: External Link 2 at the bottom doesn't work.
EvanJ35 (talk) 00:09, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been fixed and replaced with a link to the press center. SounderBruce 01:36, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Link 2 Doesn't Work 

message: My interpretation of this page is that it's a series of lists that serve as a resource for specific records and stats.  I believe it is therefore appropriate to have repeated links to the teams in the various lists.  See:
"Duplicate linking in lists is permissible if it significantly aids the reader. This is most often the case when the list is presenting information that could just as aptly be formatted in a table, and is expected to be parsed for particular bits of data, not read from top to bottom. If the list is normal article prose that happens to be formatted as a list, treat it as normal article prose."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Linking#Overlinking
For this reason I've linked the teams in the charts/tables, in addition to notes/comments on those charts.  Would this list of lists be better if each team was only linked once in an opening paragraph? Lanejb24 (talk) 21:17, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an article. A list would constitute a single table, such as :comparison of GUI testing tools, a list broken into sections, such as :list of football clubs in England or :List of Christian hardcore bands, but this is not a unified list, so it's clearly an article that is a collection of lists. Nice try though. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:13, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

text: And it's :WP:REPEATLINKing, not OVERLINKing. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:14, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand your point, though, the difference between a list and several lists seems semantic for the purposes of style.  The purpose of the distinction appears to be better suited for comparing paragraph-style articles with a list or series of lists.  Is there an example you could share of how repeat linking can be avoided under these circumstances?  To my previous question:  Would a series of lists be better if all links were removed from the various tables and the only links were in an opening paragraph?  Only linking in the first instance would result in a reader having to scan all previous lists to find the link (defeating the purpose of how links are supposed to facilitate an article).  This strategy seems cumbersome, and inconsistent with how lauded articles present tables:  "Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, a link may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, hatnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead." See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:REPEATLINK&redirect=no. It seems removing the links would not improve this article (at least to me).  I would welcome your suggestions.  Thank you. Lanejb24 (talk) 21:30, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this an "article" or a "list"? 

message: It's not uncommon to see the overall placing of a team when displaying the best and worst goal differential. In the case of this league, we'd also need to know how many teams were involved at the time. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:51, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you clarify?  There are now three sets of best/worst tables in the goals section:  goals for, goals allowed, and goal differential.  Are you suggesting adding a column just for this third set (goal differential) indicating where that team finished in the overall standings that season (as well as indicating the total number of teams that season)?  Would we also include a column for how they finished in their conference?  And why would this information not also be pertinent to the first two sets of tables (goals for & goals allowed)? Lanejb24 (talk) 22:21, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goals section 

message: In the "All-time most successful teams" table should the Campeones Cup and Leagues Cup columns be reclassified as "Continental" instead of "Intercontinental"? Since these two competitions are contested by teams from MLS and Liga MX there doesn't seem to be any continent other than North America represented. VigilantPenguin (talk) 21:03, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:33, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Campeones Cup and Leagues Cup misclassified? 

message: What on earth is a shutout?--XANIA - ЗAНИAWikipedia talk |  Wikibooks talk 02:16, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Most shutouts'' 

message: FC Cincinnati lost their 2022 season opener to Austin FC today, 5-0.  Technically, it is their 13th straight regular season loss.  However, it marks the beginning of a new season, so one has to beg the question; does this mean their losing streak continues from last season, or is it the beginning of a new losing streak (assuming they lose their following game, of course)?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:900A:1A0E:6600:ED2F:8F3C:685E:F2FD (talk) 01:22, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  FC Cincinnati's losing streak 

message: Clubs have history before MLS, there's no reason as to why not count them, as long as they're recognized as part of a club's history. The table says "Teams with most trophies".
I suggest adding these official division-1 titles:
- NASL: It was the official first division before MLS and the Vancouver Whitecaps won it in 1979. It's recognized by the club as a title.
- CSL: It was the Canadian first division which the Whitecaps won 4 times (88, 89, 90, 91). Also recognized by the club as titles.
The only change to the table would be adding 5 more titles to the Whitecaps.
Thiaguitocpl (talk) 22:45, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: This table refers specifically to titles won when the teams were in MLS. Additionally, when teams are granted expansions in MLS they are technically separate legal entities than the original clubs from which they may have originated due to the league's single-entity structure. This is why we do not list old NASL titles in this page. Jay eyem (talk) 04:16, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pre-MLS titles should be counted