Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 5

message: Is there a great need to have separate articles for each division of every league in the NLS? Steps 1-6 I can understand, but below there it seems a bit unnecessary, as there's not much that can be said about, say, the Anglian Combination that warrants four separate articles. I'd propose that all leagues at step 7 (level 11 overall) be merged into a single article for the league. By my reckoning, this would combine each of the following leagues into a single article each:
* Anglian Combination (Premier, One, Two, Three)
**I've re-formatted most of the Anglian Combination main page to show how much information can be included in a single league article, negating the need for separate divisional articles. I know it's not now the prettiest article on Wikipedia, but am hoping someone else can now pick it up and run with it. (I haven't checked all the spellings either - there may be a typo or two on there!) - fchd 18:24, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds sensible to me. Oldelpaso 17:37, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree too. If you need a hand drop me a line on my talk page. Qwghlm 11:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree also. But there's just getting more and more of them. I'm not even sure of the notability of divisions at higher levels. Division names change frequently (see Southern League). Just one article for each league, explaining the current and recent structures as part of the intro seems sensible to me. - fchd 15:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to disagree here. One of the goals of Wikipedia is to contain as much information as possible. Having a single article for a league containing 2 or more divisions defeats the purpose because eventually, past winners as well as the runners-up of each division will be included in these articles. Having only one article to deal with two or more divisions would prove to be inadequate. Moreover, all the clubs within the English football league system have the potential to be promoted to the highest league of English soccer. If we base on notability criteria on which clubs or leagues to include in Wikipedia, it would mean that even some second division clubs will not be able to have an article of their own. The goal of this project is to expand the information and knowledge of the various clubs and leagues and NOT to decrease it. --Siva1979Talk to me 16:07, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody's talking about decreasing knowledge. All I was saying was that we should organise things better, by not having hundreds of articles each only a page long. For the vast majority of leagues below level 10, as they are at the moment', there isn't enough information to warrant having seven separate articles on the Anglian Combination, for example, when it'll all fit perfectly fine on one. If we do start adding tables of past winners and runners-up and the article starts to get unmanageably long, then it can be split up, but I just don't see that happening right now. But I'm certainly not suggesting deleting any leagues from Wikipedia completely. Individual club articles are a different matter - see the discussion below. — sjorford++ 16:22, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I can understand your point of view. In fact, I was the one who created most of these articles. However, it is NOT in my intention to just create them as stubs and forget about them. I am planning to improve these articles further in content and style. All the articles which I have created have the potential for greater expansion of content. In the meantime, I have to gather more research and information about them. Moreover, I am concentrating my efforts for the time being, in the creation of other leagues within the English football league system. But rest assured, it has always been my intention to improve the content on the articles which I have created in the future. This may take me a few months, so I hope that you would be patient about this. This also applies to the club articles which I have created as well. My goal here is to include every football club within the English football league system into Wikipedia eventually. And most of these articles would definitely have room for expansion in the future. --Siva1979Talk to me 16:41, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lower levels of the [[National League System]] 

message: Is it new? User  is adding some sort of "person data" template in several players' articles. Would somebody check his contribs and tell me what is it about? —Lesfer (talk/@) 05:49, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Persondata is special metadata which can be added to biographical articles. This metadata can then be extracted and processed automatically (unlike conventional Wikipedia content). It consists of a set of standardized data fields which include basic information about the person, such as name, birthday, place of birth, etc. This metadata can be used for a variety of purposes, including advanced search capabilities, statistical analysis, automated categorization, and birthday lists. The addition of persondata will not affect the normal display of an article since the information remains hidden unless a user sets their user stylesheet to display it. – AlbinoMonkey (Talk) 08:11, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! :D —Lesfer (talk/@) 16:28, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Person data?

message: I've been doing minor edits to 2006 FIFA World Cup, and I like the style that's used there — in particular, I think  is much better than the tables used in 1998 FIFA World Cup, so I'd like to change other articles (starting with 1998 FIFA World Cup) to use that style... does that sound like a good thing to do? --StuartBrady (Talk) 19:35, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style of FIFA World Cup articles 

message: After adding flags to the past winners part of Copa Libertadores de América, an inactive user returned, who had been working on the article last year. He expressed that previously, where now on the article below every team it says their country, and has its national flag, it previously had the club emblems. I noticed that User:Ed g2s removed on the grounds that use as decoration (i.e, they added no relevant information that could not be obtained from the link provided) was not fair use. User:Sebastiankessel argued in favour of the emblems, saying that the clubs enter to represent themselves, and no their country, where as I claimed that they do inadvertantly represent football from the league they come from, and as winnings are divided between the club and league federation of their home country, the country they come from was relevant. I thought it should be discussed here as this place works to make footballing articles uniform. 
So, should international club competitions display the club emblems or the club's country's flag? Philc TECI 21:00, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The full discussion is here: Talk:Copa Libertadores de América. Like I said in the talk page club emblems look better and are more representative although I don't have problems with using flags either. And how about using both?  Bruno18 21:51, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think Phil could've expressed my opinions any better. Sebastian Kessel Talk 22:04, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

text: From the fair use policy: "8. The material must contribute significantly to the article (e.g. identify the subject of an article, or specifically illustrate relevant points or sections within the text) and must not serve a purely decorative purpose." As the Copa Libertadores is the subject of the article, not the individual clubs, Ed g2s is correct to say that fair use logos cannot be used. Oldelpaso 08:34, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Oldelpaso - the rules on fair use are clear cut - they are quite clearly not allowed as decoration for templates or trophy listings. The choice is not between national flag and club crest, but national flag or nothing at all. I'm not bothered whether to include flags, but the main point is that we cannot use the club crest. Qwghlm 17:30, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeh that was one of the points raised if you read the initial question, Oldelpaso just confermed it for us. Philc TECI 16:15, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Flags or Emblems

message: Just to bring this to everyone's attention, Chuq has suggested merging aggregate score and the away goals rule into the Two-legged article. Post any comments you might have on this page. - Pal 13:52, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested Merge 

message: It would be nice to do something like the 2006 Wimbledon Championships - Men's Singles with the brackets etc.. for this season's upcoming FA Cup and then try to fill-in previous years competitions. Jooler 16:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Like with the world cup articles? One problem is how incredibly huge the fa cup tree would be, considering it includes about 150 clubs. Philc TECI 16:19, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

text: *I'd argue that including brackets in a non-bracketed, random-draw tournament is misleading to the reader. - Pal 16:22, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And also the tree is uneven, not everyone starts in the first round. Philc TECI 16:24, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The fact that it's uneven because new teams a brought in in each round, means you need to break it into sections, I'm not talking about one huge single bracket.I see what you say though about the unknown status of the following rounds, I hadn't considered that to be honest. I have a book here in front of me, published in 1960, which shows a bracketed table for every FA Cup from 1871/72 to 1958/59 (from the 3rd round on for the later competitions), so it could be done for past competitons anyway, but maybe for an ongoing competition you could break- it up by not having connecting brackets for the rounds which have not yet been drawn.  Jooler 17:52, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: FA Cup

message: Has there been any work on creating pages for league seasons? Currently some leagues are similiar, but other season recaps are pretty different. I think this would be useful. Thoughts? Rballou 16:33, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you mean '2000-01 in English football' kind off thing, a broad look at that countries league season, or '2000-01 in FA Premier League' kind of thing, looking at the events off a specific league? Because if so they both have been done. Or do you mean something else? Gran2 11:03, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Season templates

message: Recently I created the squad template for Portsmouth which meant every club in the Premiership had one. (I also created the Everton one)
There are only 3 Championship sides that have one Southampton, Wolves and Birmingham. I think that all championsip sides should have one and then we should move on to League 1. Basically all teams that have most of their players with wikipedia articles need one. Simply copy the code of another template and edit it accordingly. Use Birmingham as it has the code to put it in the championship squad category making sure you change the word Birmingham to the team you are making --SenorKristobbal 13:16, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Championship Clubs

message: :I've just realised that the bordered header of certain templates looks ridiculously large in Internet Explorer (which is rubbish). It can be fixed by removing the cellpadding="0" text from the end of the second line.   SLUMGUM  yap  stalk   13:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cellpadding=0

message: I was thinking about the guidelines for the global templates (seen here).  As far as the squad number field (no=) is concerned, I think that the use of 'new' instead of '--' (or "tba" or similar) for new players should be encouraged since it shows that players are new signings rather than youth players who probably shouldn't be on the list anyway.  The only loophole is players who've returned from loan and may not be restored to their old number.  Is it prudent to make this minor guideline or just leave it open to interpretation? It is a problem that only really presents itself during preseason.  SLUMGUM  yap  stalk   01:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dislike "tba" (as I mentioned above) as it doesn't explain why it's "to be announced".  "new" does.  Slumgum T. C.   23:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New players

message: Hi everyone, I was looking for feedback on an idea I had, of using parser templates to make flags change based on year. People tend to go to a lot of effort on sports articles to make sure, say, that the 1934 shows the Kingdom of Italy flag with the coat of arms. My idea (fairly easy to implement) is that we should add a parameter to flag templates (and templates which use flag templates) so that users need not lookup when the flags changed, but merely put in the year of the competition and the correct flag is shown. This would not only make life easier for adding new competitions (especially long result tables), but also save us a lot of work if a country's flag changes.
I posted this on a the flag-related wikiproject but got no responses...would people uses this, or is the current set up fine?
Basically, the result would be something like this:
Code                                    	Result
32px     	32px
32px	32px
32px	32px
32px	32px
32px	32px
32px	32px
32px	32px
Moszczynski 17:50, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical flags 

message: I just thought that this would be the place to point out the inconsistancies of the various style guides concerning football player infoboxes.
Note the differences between:
# Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Players (everything linked)
# Template talk:Football player infobox#Wikilinking (nothing linked)
# Overlinking (ambiguous)
# Wikipedia:Ignore all rules (unhelpful)
Ideally the top three should have a good concensus, and all four have been quoted at me by various editors. Personally I've been making partially linked infoboxes like: Boudewijn Zenden. Basically some anal retentive admin got on my case that they should be like that soon after I started editing here. Anyway it's time that we came to a proper concensus and updated 1 & 2. aLii 19:53, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This might be something for the Infoboxes section on the templates page, that well, doesn't have any content whatsoever (I also believe the content should be available on the template page as well). I personally like 1 better. I think the info box is a good way to quickly navigate information that might be buried on longer pages (players with long histories, etc. might list all the clubs somewhere, but it is easier to get to them on the infobox). --Rballou 20:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox linking(?)

message: Hi, I'm not part of the WikiProject, but I just wanted to point out the rebranding of several FIFA competitions (see Talk:FIFA#Rebranding_of_championships), and wanted to ask you guys to change any of the relevant templates accordingly, as well as any categories. I was starting to do it myself, but noticed that templates are standardized so I didn't want to mess them up. I am however changing the relevant articles, but anyone willing to help is more than welcome. Thanks, --Gabbec 04:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Which templates in particular are you talking about?--Daduzi talk 17:12, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In particular, Template:FIFA U-17 World Championship, Template:Women's football and Template:International club football, as well as Categories with the previous names of the tournaments. For the first template, it's the heading, the 2007 edition and the v-d-e links at the top right that should be changed; for the second, it's the U-17 women's (the U-20 women's isn't a "world cup" yet); for the third it's just the Club World Cup. Thanks, --Gabbec 22:50, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, all the templates have been changed to link to World Cup rather than Championship. For the U17 one I set the link to World Cup but set the title as "U-17 World Cup/World Championship", since otherwise it looked a bit weird on the past tournament pages. I'll have a look at the categories later. --Daduzi talk 01:29, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Regards, --Gabbec 02:44, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Templates and rebranding of FIFA tournaments

message: Are assisits actually recorded? If they are a documented stat, then they should be recorded on players' pages.
:Sometimes at the highest level, but in general, no. While for some competitions, a company called Opta Sportsdata issues a plethora of semi-official stats for various things, such stats are frequently unofficial (often recorded solely for the purposes of fantasy football competitions) and can vary depending on the source. Unlike, say, ice hockey, relatively little importance is given to assists, for example, in the World Cup assists are used as a tiebreaker for the Golden Shoe, but are otherwise ignored. Oldelpaso 08:52, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  assists? 

message: This has become very large, and the existing permanent categories aren't much use in finding enough sufficient stub types to split out to reduce it significantly.  I've proposed two types for full and U21 internationals;  if you have any comments on those, or additional suggestions, please contribute them there.  Alai 20:15, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{tl|England-footybio-stub}} split 

message: Can we sort out which infoboxes we are going to use for both Stadiums and players? I have seen two which I particularly like. Gustavo López for the football players infobox and Estadio Azteca for the stadium infobox. They are not mine but I think they are the best. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oscar86 (talk • contribs) .
:After digging around in the archives I've found the discussion which took place about the stadium template when it was first created. I thought that template was deprecated but evidently it is still used in places. IIRC the difference between the player templates is that one is for current players and one is for retired players, I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong. Oldelpaso 17:39, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standardisation 

message: Hi, I'm relatively new to contributing to WP. I noticed that several referees have their own WP entries (Collina, Frisk, Merk etc), but little in terms of standardisation. I wonder whether it's worthwhile to have a template for notable match officials, since "player" ones are not appropriate (eg. referees don't "change clubs")?--Alexio 05:01, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good idea. The one problem I could foresee is difficulty in getting statistics, but if that can be solved it'd definitely be worth putting in. The only other question is what to put in. The usual biographical stuff would have to be there (full name, date of birth, place of birth and so on). Then there could be a section for games refereed (split into domestic and international). Aside from that, possibly number of yellow and red cards issued? I'm not sure, I'd be interested to hear what others think. --Daduzi talk 07:55, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought the Graham Poll article was very nicely done; a little too nicely done perhaps, full commends to the author, although replicating those results would bump into the problems you brought up: gathering the information will be very difficult. Tentatively I'd say the number of domestic games, international honours, plus any major controversies. Frankly, I do not see the point of focussing on the perceived prejudices of officials and how they're perceived by the public (Mike Riley being case in point).--Alexio 13:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I get you now, for some reason I thought you were talking about an infobox for referee pages, rather than a style template (though it might also be worth creating an infobox). I guess given that "honours" is out of the question (unless there's a golden whistle I'm unaware of) a basic intro->biography (if possible)->matches refereed (ie statistics)->see also/links/references structure would be a good start. It might also be an idea to include a section on high profile matches refereed (though that could go in the biography). As to perceived biases, I'd agree that the Mike Riley article doesn't handle it well, on the other hand a "media scrutiny" section, dealing with press and/or managerial comments about them, might be an idea given how big an issue that is for modern day refs. --Daduzi talk 13:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Referees/officials? 

message: It seems to me that the club manager categories, e.g. :Category:Liverpool F.C. managers, are pretty redundant - most clubs' pages have a list which does the job much better, being presented chronologically and having other information. I think the category could be made more useful by expending it to staff, i.e. non-playing staff, encompassing Chairmen, Coaches, Scouts, etc. This would enable a lot of people to be categorised with a club when they haven't really before. Even if it's felt that the manager category ought to be kept, I think that staff categories would be useful. Any thoughts? ArtVandelay13 12:39, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me. --Daduzi talk 12:53, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, so, next question, how do you rename categories? Or get them renamed? ArtVandelay13 15:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, well that's the fun part, you'll have to manually change the category links on every article to point to the new category, then put the old one up for categories for deletion. It might be an idea to consider using a bot to do the link changing, you can ask someone else to set one up at Wikipedia:Bot requests. --Daduzi talk 17:09, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Club manager and Club staff categories 

message: With the continual addition of more and more international football squad templates, I thought it would be a good idea to change these templates to have them collapsable as below.
So far I've made a few adjustments to it, but I can't get it perfect.
I've made a list at on the discussion section of Template:World Cup Squads that needs to be done to the new template to make it useable on wikipedia.
Hopefully this will be used on all past international templates as it doesn't take up so much space on players pages.  Could also be used on squads of special importances, such as the Liverpool 2005 squad who won the champions league etc.
Please note any changes you've made to the template on the templates talk page and please advise anything else which should be done to it.
Thanks
Niall123 22:14, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  International Football Squad Templates 

message: Smaller and smaller football clubs are writing articles. Up and Under, for example, are around level 18 in England. Some threshold is needed or every pub team will decide they are encyclopaedic! Whatever threshold that is picked will be arbitary with hard cases but we do need some standard. My initial thought is level 11 and above. What do others think, please? BlueValour 01:48, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The problem

message: Having looked at the various leagues that have been suggested for exceptions, none of them seem to have worthwhile articles for their clubs. In all cases that I have looked at the very limited information for the clubs can easily be incorporated into their League articles. We need a straightforward standard that the folk at AfD can cope with :-)
Please note - the standard is one for inherent notability only - in other words clubs who meet the standard are entitled to an article. As always, any other club can assert notability in their article on the basis of present performance, past history etc. On that basis I propose:
*English football clubs in Levels 1-10 are deemed to have inherent notability
Does anyone have strong objections, please? BlueValour 21:08, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would agree with that. I would also add the clubs from lower levels that are allowed to enter the FA Vase as thay highlight deficiencies in the pyramid system in their areas, but that would be notability based on individual criteria rather than an inherit one, so I'm with you. - fchd 08:06, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree with BlueValour's proposal as well. Qwghlm 10:12, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

text: There's got to be a cut off somewhere and this seems like a sensible place to put it. aLii 11:58, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 2nd revised proposal

message: This has now been added at WP:CORP#Criteria for sporting clubs and can be referred to during AfD discussions. BlueValour 22:07, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability criterion

message: I seem to be getting into an edit war with SndrAndrss, over the 1994 FIFA World Cup article.  I need support, as I can't stop them alone.  Thank-you for your help.  --StuartBrady (Talk) 13:19, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Report it at WP:ANI. If it continues they can semiprotect the page to stop anons/new accounts editing it. HTH. BlueValour 13:45, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt it'll be semiprotected, as semiprotection is for vandalism only, not content disputes. I'm pretty sure it's not a new user anyway, IIRC that user has done something similar before, a long time ago, on the 1990 WC page. Anyhow, I've watchlisted the page in question. Oldelpaso 17:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  1994 FIFA World Cup 

message: Should a club's famous players be listed by nationality or by the time that they played at the club? I'm currently in a discussion at Talk:Arsenal F.C. over the matter - I think it makes much more sense to group players of the same era, since they played together, rather than split them into separate lists just because, e.g. one happens to be English and the other a Scot. Anyone with an opinion feel free to make it known over on that talk page. Qwghlm 21:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Chelseas ones are listed alphabetically. Philc TECI 21:40, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Era rather than nationality, definitely, though there's an interesting discussion going on at Talk:Liverpool F.C. about removing such lists altogether. Mind you, having seen the current list for Liverpool it isn't suprising - the list there is enormous. Oldelpaso 21:45, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The listing by nationality seems to have given people the false impression that every nationality needs to be covered. Titi Camara, for example, despite an excellent first season, doesn't really belong on Liverpool's list. ArtVandelay13 09:38, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

text: As for the "removing altogether" option, most clubs have annual "player of the year" awards which would be much more npov to include, than the overtly long, ungovernable lists where everybody want their own private favourite included. For an example, see Brøndby IF#Player of the year. Poulsen 09:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your thoughts. As for an official list of PotY - it's a very good idea but I've been unable to find a list of them anywhere for Arsenal, alas. Qwghlm 13:13, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

text: No doubt some legendary players will be ommited from this still, you have to remeber that fame doesnt have criteria, so trying to make criteria for famous players will not work. If you use caps, it will be a list of players with so-many caps, not famous players. For example players like George Best, Eric Cantona and Duncan Edwards incredible ability and fame is not reflected in their number of caps. Philc TECI 18:17, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The kind of criteria I was thinking of would be exlusive rather than inclusive (i.e. someone who doesn't meet the base criteria would be excluded, not that anyone who meets the criteria should be included). Best, Cantona and Edwards I'm pretty sure all broke records at some point or another. In any case, the above is just conjecture and not meant to be an exhaustive list, it's just that I think it would be useful to develop some basic guidelines that editors of club pages can take on board when assessing whether players warrant inclusion in a "notable players list" (there would of course, have to be flexibility since it would be ridiculous to hold Liverpool F.C. and Forest Green Rovers to the same standards). --Daduzi talk 21:10, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't believe that club's own "player of the year" awards are justifiable for inclusion in the main page about the club. Most clubs would therefore have to have a list of 100ish players, which would be both ugly and a waste of space. In my opinion we want this to be as short a list as possible. I like the "hall of fame" thing for american sports, but it isn't really mature enough to use for English football. Perhaps players that have won the Football Writers and/or PFA player of the year awards? I guess that would be a relatively small list for each club. aLii 13:10, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Would people back the idea of having a straw poll on this topic? I only put it forward as this discussion is going no-where. My suggestion is that a set of various alternatives will be written, and everyone should vote for which they prefer. Yes? No? aLii 11:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Listing famous players 

message: I ask you a suggestion. This team, A.S. Fortis Spoleto F.C., which won Serie D (5th level of Italy) this year, was cancelled by the Football Federation because of financial troubles and it won't play next season at all, neither in Serie C2 nor somewhere else. What should we do? Should we submit it for deletion or leave it as it is, or something else? Thank you. --Angelo 14:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds keep-worthy to me. Defunct football clubs are worth an article, and their story alone seems notable, and the kind of thing people would be interested to look up. ArtVandelay13 15:04, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I have copyedited. Have we any info about what happens next - have they gone out of existance? Also, have we a reference that gives info about the scandal? BlueValour 18:58, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Out of existance, yes; the team cannot enter any Italian league, in this case. Here are some references (all in Italian)   . Anyway it's not exactly a scandal: in facts, all happened because the club did not pay the registration fees. --Angelo 11:04, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you Angelo; I have re-written the article. Would you check my translation of the bylines in the external links, please? BlueValour 21:16, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks good. I've also include the article in the "Defunct football (soccer) clubs" category. --Angelo 14:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[A.S. Fortis Spoleto F.C.]]

message: I made this as a draft of a possible award for exceptional work on football-related articles. At the moment the best we have is The Running Man Barnstar which is for all sports, but world-wide there must be a lot of people (like me) who have no interest in other sports but love football. Is it worth taking forward? --Guinnog 02:28, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's at Wikipedia:Barnstar and award proposals if you're interested, either for or against it. --Guinnog 03:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can I also ask you if you (as a project) would support this? Sorry to be a bother but it is important in the debate on adopting it. Please indicate below whether you would support it or not. --Guinnog 20:55, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As this is quite a large project in terms of number of participants it might be hard to get a unanimous agreement, but I personally don't see why anyone would have a problem supporting it. Dan1980 21:02, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that. I don't know what we would be looking for in terms of a consensus; maybe if we can get six to ten for with none or one against within a week or so? In return, I promise to join the project! I already do quite a lot of work on wikifying and NPOVing football articles. --Guinnog 21:07, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Support, great idea to have a football barnstar. Wantok 01:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just added my support :) Bruno18 21:17, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Add me to the supporters. --Daduzi talk 16:34, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I approve I'm surprised it hasn't already been done SenorKristobbal 10:02, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I placed the barnstar back on Wikiproject Awards.--Ed 15:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, all who supported this idea. It can now be awarded, to those who make exceptional contributions to football-related articles. --Guinnog 09:49, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Football Barnstar

message: Seeming as a mass deletion proposal is imminent, I thought I'd get it out there, here is a non binding poll I am going to use to get a rough dead of peoples stances, and for everyone to exchange their points of view, and make an informed decision. Please everyone, express your reasoning, as this is the point of the poll.
Reasons;
#Duplication of the category system already in place
#Duplication of text
#Duplication of the relevant articles
#They are clutter, before we know it there will be on for every club season and every international competition. That would mean about 15 at the bottom of the beckham page for example.
#They are spreading, maybe it's best to kill these things off before there is a squad tempalte for every year of every club and squad.
This is not a proposal to delete any articles or information. Please do not use the argument that they are historically relevant, as that is not a reason to keep duplicated content.
===World Cup squad templates===
Proposal, mass deletion of world cup squad templates of all competitions, and any continental championship ones, as no doubt they will begin to spring up.
====In favour of deletion====
# Per above Philc TECI 19:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Just a thought for all those saying "keep the winners". Actually playing in a World Cup finals is much more of an achievement for Trinidad and Tobago than actually winning the Cup is for Brazil. I still don't see any point in keeping a template for the winners. Various players, like Pelé, will still end up with cluttered pages full of templates. aLii 08:54, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quick show of hands for the Bonfire (of templates) 

message: Proposal, mass deletion of world cup squad templates of all competitions, and any continental championship ones, as no doubt they will begin to spring up.
====In favour of deletion====
# Per above Philc TECI 19:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Just a thought for all those saying "keep the winners". Actually playing in a World Cup finals is much more of an achievement for Trinidad and Tobago than actually winning the Cup is for Brazil. I still don't see any point in keeping a template for the winners. Various players, like Pelé, will still end up with cluttered pages full of templates. aLii 08:54, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: World Cup squad templates

message: # Per above Philc TECI 19:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Just a thought for all those saying "keep the winners". Actually playing in a World Cup finals is much more of an achievement for Trinidad and Tobago than actually winning the Cup is for Brazil. I still don't see any point in keeping a template for the winners. Various players, like Pelé, will still end up with cluttered pages full of templates. aLii 08:54, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: In favour of deletion

message: # I think it's ok to leave World Cup squad templates; will be no more than 2-3 per player, doesn't seem to clutter page. --Monk 07:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Against deletion

message: Proposal, mass deletion of club squad templates past and present seasons, regardless of achievement.
(in case people have different views for clubs than countres)
====In favour of deletion====
# Per above Philc TECI 19:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Club squad templates

message: # Per above Philc TECI 19:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: In favour of deletion

message: # For sure present squads templates should be kept. while past seasons templates could be deleted, except of, may be, Champions League past winners squad templates. --Monk 07:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Against deletion

message: Proposal, mass removal of succession boxes from player and club (if any) articles
====In favour of deletion====
# Per above Philc TECI 19:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Succession templates

message: # Per above Philc TECI 19:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: In favour of deletion

message: # Why?? Succession boxes are great, since they can give insight on any positions or awards that player had... --Monk 07:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Against deletion

message: Pele's goalscoring record is somwehat controversial. It is widely asserted that he scored over 1000 first-class goals; even official sources such as FIFA quote this number. However, I've got hold of the stats and it appears that a lot of these goals were scored in friendlies, exhibition matches, and even matches Pele played for army teams during his national service.
In an attempt to rectify this, I have started to copy tables which give the result for every game Pele played in to sub-pages of my talk page. The list of tables can be seen at:
User:James Kemp/Pelé
What I have in mind is that each game should be noted as either valid or not, with a source, and that every game that is checked off has the appropriate username appended to it.
I would really appreciate someone with some knowledge of Brazilian soccer to help me out with this, to let me know what the Brazilian conventions are for counting goals.
I will add more details as to how this project might run as soon as I get the time... Jim (Talk) 12:54, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While is fascinating research, and well worth doing, I'm not sure that Wikipedia is the right place for it. It would probably fall under the heading of original research, in that you're trying to decide which goals to count. As an encyclopedia, we should only cover information that already exists elsewhere, and has been reviewed by the general community. A simple list of Pele's matches is one thing (although this too might be considered to be unsuitable for WP), but any new analysis of that list is something else. — sjorford++ 13:08, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I take your point. Obviously this is a decision for the entire community, but in my opinion this does not count as original research. It seems to me that the problem is that while most players' stats include only goals scored in competitive games, Pele's stats include every single non-competitive game he played in. I intend this work to be not original research, but kind of a really complicated reference: all people will in effect be doing is providing a reference for each goal. The table itself will be a kind of aggregate of all these references and will therefore, IMO, be a reference itself. I only said that I wanted to know about the Brazilian conventions for counting goals to preempt criticism; in my opinion, if Thierry Henry's stats do not include goals scored in friendly matches, then neither should Pele's. The only reason for doing it like this is to keep everything transparent, as it is a very controversial subject. Jim (Talk) 13:15, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

text: His article should note, if it can be proven, that his famed record of 1000+ goals includes many scored during friendly games and while playing for the army/coast guard teams while on national service. Obviously such goals should not be included in his statistics as a professional player. aLii 13:16, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I should add that wikipedia should not be quoted as a source in a wikipedia article. We need outside sources for his record. For all I know you could have made that list up (I'm sure you didn't, but you see my point?) aLii 13:20, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I completely take your point - it's a very valid one. I originally took the list from http://rivelino.caltech.edu/~pelesl/pele/english/pele_statistics.html. They were apparantley compiled from a book called Pelé: O Supercampeão by Orlando Duarte. I have not checked every single result against other sources, but the 30 or so that I have checked were accurate. Jim (Talk) 13:26, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Obviously the main problem with the stats on his wikipedia page is that they definitely weren't all league games, like the info box states... I mean 1265/18 = 70.3 games per season! I know that Brazilian teams now play two different leagues, but they didn't back in Pelé's day (from what I can tell from wikipedia). aLii 13:35, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From what I can gather Brazilian teams did play in more than one league back then, but Pele certainly didn't play 70 games a season for Santos (competitive or otherwise). Some of the games included under the Santos statistic are for combined state teams, some for the Army, some for other teams based in Brazil. Jim (Talk) 13:46, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

text: One useful source is http://soccer-europe.com/Biographies/Pele.html, but the problem with this is that even though it's based on the list I'm gradually adding to my User Page, it only gives final totals and doesn't precisely reference its sources. Jim (Talk) 13:46, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh, and I just checked the rsssf.com source and it's pretty good, although it doesn't seem to include goals which maybe should be included!! God this is complicated... Jim (Talk) 13:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Pelé]]'s goalscoring record 

message: I've created a new category for players currently without a club - :Category:Unattached footballers. I think this would be a useful resource, so if you could help populate it, that would be great. Also, as it's supposed to list currently unattached players, it will need to be kept up to date. ArtVandelay13 15:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New category - unattached footballers 

message: Because of an ongoing dispute, a poll has been opened on this page regarding flags to display next to teams in UEFA competitions. The dispute regards what flags should be displayed next to clubs that qualified through the FA of Serbia and Montengro. Comments and opinions appreciated. - Pal 20:06, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The page has been protected; please help arrive at some agreement. Conscious 07:29, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for comment 

message: Hello, how can I join the project? --::::::100 % Bogotano::::::  (Quejas y reclamos) 17:56, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just add your name to the bottom of the table! There's no voting for who's allowed in or anything like that :) All help is welcomed! aLii 18:10, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Welcome. In case you're wondering which table aLii is talking about, is this one: click here. Bruno18 20:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hello 

message: I have nominated Ariba Ariba for deletion...please vote SenorKristobbal 09:57, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ariba Ariba 

message: Dear all, I saw the Scotland national football team templates deleted, while other teams' were not. Why? I don't understand the isolated deletion. I support the NFT templates (I try to compose template for every squad in every WC), but I want the same conditions for all of them. Mxcatania 14:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would advice you not to compose any more templates for WC squads, as they (according to the TfD) are not wanted, and will probably get deleted anyway. – Elisson • Talk 15:27, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

text: So whos going to do it, and delete all those things, its seems there is overwhelming support to get rid of them all. Philc TECI 16:43, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion and I'll support you for one. --Guinnog 17:03, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually it'll be Wikipedia:Templates for Deletion. There seems to be adequate consensus to delete all but current, so go for it. Qwghlm 17:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Duh! Of course it would be. Sorry for my elementary error. --Guinnog 17:43, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do we have to track ever single one down and list them for deletion, and then vote on them, or can we list the pricniple for deletion, and use the result to delete (or protect them depending on the consensus) them as we find them. Philc TECI 18:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In theory they should all be somewhere in :Category:Football squad templates. Oldelpaso 19:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I wouldn't say there's overwhelming support to delete all of them.  I'd say there's overwhelming support to delete all but current/latest (for national squads and club squads).  No matter whether the comments were in the 'support' section or the 'oppose' section, most are saying that, I think. -- Wantok 02:12, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

text: We already voted! The result was 12:3 in favour of deletion. aLii 14:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I mean, let's vote for a policy regarding totally, partially or never include these templates. I suggest: keep actually football squads, keep top-4 World Cup squads of every World Cup tournament. Mxcatania 14:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency 

message: I wasn't going to bring this here, but seeing as Loudenvier already deemed it necessary to add the page to the WikiProject's watchlist I thought I might as well explain and ask for some mediation.
As per the above discussion, and it's continuation at Talk:Pelé#Pele's Goal-scoring Record (Amalgamation), Pelé's goal scoring statistics have been researched by me and Jim. This was yesterday added to the main page as a new section Pelé#Statistics. Loudenvier has taken exception to this fact and labelled it original research. I argue that it is all fully sourced and referenced, and as such is not original research. 
Please see the discussion at Talk:Pelé#Original research and help mediate this disagreement. cheers, aLii 14:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I took the liberty of inserting a full stop into your comment, as I assume you don't want it to look like you go by the name Jewish Holocaust Jim ;-) Oldelpaso 21:23, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Pelé]] again 

message: The talk page for the Pele article is now pretty cluttered, but one thing I have managed to work out is that no-one is entirely sure what exactly counts as a "domestic league" in Brazilian football in the 50s, 60s and 70s (i.e., when Pele was playing). There was no national championship until the introduction of the Campeonato Paulista in 1971.  We seem to be counting the following competitions:
*Campeonato Paulista - Sao Paulo state championship
*Torneio Rio-São Paulo - Rio-Sao Paulo interstate championship
*Taça de Prata - a national competition which (I think) was partly league-based and partly knockout
*Campeonato Brasileiro - national league championship
This is a problem because the football player infobox states that "* Professional club appearances and (goals) counted for the domestic league only". So, which of these competitions count as "domestic leagues" for the purposes of the infobox? The infobox seems to assume a modern European league structure, which wasn't really present in Brazil in the period in question. Can someone help arbitrate? Jim (Talk) 16:45, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I took the liberty of inserting a full stop into your comment, as I assume you don't want it to look like you go by the name Jewish Holocaust Jim ;-) Oldelpaso 21:23, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Specifying where the mediation might be needed

message: I would like to start a discussion regarding the Manchester Football League. This league has two divisions (excluding the reserve divisions) and I feel that we should have a total of three articles regarding the subject matter of this league. The reason is clear. This is consistent with the other leagues within the English football league system. This also creates a greater amount of consistency with league articles. In terms of content, I feel that there would be major differences between the Manchester Football League article and the Manchester Football League Premier Division article. A Division One article has also been created as well. --Siva1979Talk to me 21:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As you have shown there are three articles, what are you proposing? Philc TECI 21:22, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. The Manchester Football League Premier Division article is a redirect page. I have created this article some time back but a user had transferred this article as a redirect page to this article. I am proposing that thses two articles should be seperated as with the other league articles having two or more divisions in the English football league system. --Siva1979Talk to me 21:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there enough information to warrant 3 articles considering how obscure they are, and how small the articles are anyway. Philc TECI 21:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

text: What information could possibly be included in a separate article for Division One that wouldn't be better off placed in the main league article? I don't even think there is anything relevant for the individual divisions of say the Isthmian League, let alone leagues this far down the pyramid, and my proposal would be to either delete or re-direct all divisional articles to the relevant league page. Why don't you please expand one of the divisional articles before we get too far down this road, and then the community can have a clearer idea about the best way to proceed. I wont make any of the divisional articles into re-directs in the meantime (although if I have time I might still work on expanding league articles) - fchd 05:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All leagues are not equal and I don't see how a league at levels 11-12 of the pyramid should deserve three separate articles. I agree with fchd in that many minor leagues do not deserve to be separated out. Perhaps a cutoff point could be discussed and agreed upon, and all leagues below a certain level (perhaps level 10 - as that is the agreed minimum level of club notability) only have a single article about themselves for consistency's sake. Qwghlm 07:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm working through the Step 7 leagues alphabetically and merging the individual division articles into the league article.  There just isn't anything about individual divisions that can't be concisely stated in the league article. --Balerion 05:21, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Agh, edit conflict. Verifiability is difficult for information about the Premier division, never mind Division One. I'd prefer to see one article used for all divisions, as there is a real possibility that material would fail WP:V for a full article about the lower division. I live in Manchester, and these divisions and teams receive little or no coverage in the local press. I didn't even realise the team West Didsbury and Chorlton existed, despite living a few minutes walk from it and occasionally going to non-league matches at Maine Road F.C. (level 9) a few streets away. Oldelpaso 21:45, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs separate articles for different divisions 

message: Since a lot of nations have their own football pages (eg Football in Brazil), I was thinking should a similar thing be done with continents eg, Football in Africa, giving an insight into how the sport reached the continent, how the cultures reacted, how it set in, a general overview of football and its history in the continent with reference to continental competitions and federations. Similar to the national counterparts, but on a broader scale. Philc TECI 21:20, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good idea to me. – Elisson • Talk 21:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Support.  Sounds worthwhile.  In some cases (Asia) there's a lot of diversity across the continent.  Overall, it's a good idea that fills a gap in the coverage. -- Wantok 01:59, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Support. Fantastic idea. Jim (Talk) 09:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Support. Good idea! Alex Feldstein 16:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Continental football 

message: :Category:FA Cup Finals is growing. I think it would be good if something like :Template:Yearbox could be created (see right) to navigate the articles.  Then again, perhaps is could be adapted so that the competition could be one of the parameters, so that it could be used on FA Premier League seasons or any given competition. Slumgum (who often refers to his or her self in the third person) lacks the nouse to adapt such a template and wonders if others think there is a need for such a thing or if anyone has the desire and skillz to make it happen.   Slumgum T. C.   22:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Yearbox

message: I just noticed this template on a player page and this seems like a template that should be deleted, but I wasn't sure if this related to an acutal team teamplate that should be kept. Thoughts? --Rballou 19:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is an actual team I think, but only the starting squad, and wether it is the greatest is subject to  the creators opinion. Philc TECI 22:19, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Delete it. We've all agreed only current team templates should be kept, at most. Qwghlm 23:50, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

text: There's a similar one for Celtic, see Kenny Dalglish. Apparently it was voted for by fans or players or some such, and is covered on the main Celtic page. It doesn't offend me enough to call for it's deletion though. Maybe this Rangers one is the same kind of thing? aLii 08:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The greatest XI can be included in the articles about Celtic and Rangers (where it can also be mentioned that it's an "official" greatest XI and given an appropriate citation) - it's just the use of it as a template that is contentious. Qwghlm 08:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rangers "Greatest Ever Team" template

message: I'd like to point out that the FA Premier League is currently nominated for featured article status. Discussion on the nomination is located on this page. I've been working with Oldelpaso to bring this article up to FA quality over the past few days and I'd appreciate it if you could support this article's candidacy (assuming you believe it to be of FA quality, of course). If you see any glaring omissions or sections needing improvement I'd also appreciate any feedback you might have. Thanks. - Pal 20:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured Article Candidate - FA Premier League