Talk:Football/Archive 10

message: I will put the argument here. Why is a clearer and better headlining so offensive?
To present Rules as an Australian and Irish variety is misleading and avoidable, so what is the point of continuing this?
There was no offense to it when it was put up, so why wait for two months to change it?
There seems no less point to putting Rules under a rugby school headline than putting rugby football and American football under a rugby school headline, as the deviant point for American football and rugby football is after the publishment of the RFU rules in 1870 which were different from rugby school rules.
Why continue the obtuse and wrong argument?
I deem that a great idea. 02:36, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Licinius or whatever your real name is, did your school reports say "will not play nicely with the other children"? The facts that you refuse to abide by an long-standing and overwhelming consensus, that you can't recognise the relationship between Australian rules and Gaelic football, their shared dissimilarities to rugby football and the fact that rugby is completely British in origin, suggests psychiatric issues. Grant65 | Talk 05:12, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Argument 

message: Kicking games at Caunton, Nottinghamshire were described by a 15th century English monk: "the players propel a huge ball, not by thowing it up into the air, but by striking and rolling it along the ground, and not by their hands but by their feet." This is particularly noteworthy as it is the earliest description of an exclusively kicking ball sport and for being described as a "game". The game, however, was rough, as shown by the monk's description: "a game, I say, abominable enough . . . and rarely ending but with some loss, accident, or disadvantage of the players themselves." cites - http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/sherwoodtimes/football.htm - I don't think this is sufficient. Jooler 22:05, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, now that you come to mention it. Grant65 | Talk 02:46, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proper cites required

message: This is a very nice article, but I have the feeling that it's lacking information on football in non-English speaking countries - it pretty much deals with England/the UK, Ireland, Canada, Australia, the USA etc. exclusively. Would be nice if someone who knows about these things could add some balance to the article. :) -- Schnee (cheeks clone)
:All the sports mentioned in the article evolved in either England, Ireland, Australia, Canada or the USA. As this is just an overview then it is not surprising that the article focuses on these countries. There are plenty of mentions of other countries in the parts talking about other sports e.g. Calcio Fiorentina and plenty in the more detailed articles on the histories of the various different types of football.GordyB 13:39, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you are looking for football (soccer). Unless there a code of football which was invented in Brazil? Grant | Talk 08:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Football in non-English speaking countries? 

message: No idea who put that there. I can only presume whoever did it, did not read this article. It makes no sense whatsoever. If nobody gives a justifcation for this then I will delete it.GordyB 13:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was put here by Cocoaboy . I agree it makes no sense. 3 minutes earlier Cocoaboy placed "Redirect|American Football" in Football (soccer)  (quickly removed). I have taken the liberty of deleting the merge tag. PrimeHunter 14:30, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Correction: The editor is actually called Cocoaguy. Maybe a mental slipup based on my impression. PrimeHunter 14:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger request

message: The problem seems to be getting worse. Maybe we should have the page locked to unregistered editors. What do others think? Grant65 | Talk 01:53, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Football (soccer) was featured on the main page two days ago, and it links here. Maybe that attracted some vandals who will go away soon. PrimeHunter 02:47, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Whenever an article reaches a certain level of maturity (as this one has) - I am always in favour of partial restrictions as mooted above by Grant.  πίππύ δ'Ω∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 03:24, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am none too keen on unregistered editors at all, so I'd be in favour. The nature of this page is that fans of one game are always vandalising the sections of other sports.GordyB 18:33, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As many frequent contributors are in favour, or at least do not object, I will request semi-protection at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection, a day or so from now, unless there is a spate of objections. Grant65 | Talk 02:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Increasing vandalism

message: In consulation with JPD, who came up with the current main image, I have compiled a new collage from the available licensed images, for use at the top of the article. What do others think? Grant65 | Talk 17:37, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was somewhat limited by the lack of suitable images for some of the codes. I can easily make changes to this collage if anyone wants to upload better ones or has any suggestions. Grant65 | Talk 01:12, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can't say that excluding rugby union looks very good. Cvene64 06:36, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Fair point. The league pic is fairly generic "rugby football", but I will have a look for a decent union pic. However they seem to be mostly poor quality shots of scrums and lineouts, neither of which feature much in other codes. Grant65 | Talk 07:16, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I like it. I'd defintiely say it's the best version I've seen so far. JPD (talk) 18:10, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK if no-one objects in the next few days, I'll put it in the article. Grant65 | Talk 15:37, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed new main image

message: Latest version on the lower right, now featuring a rugby union scrum. I don't think we would want it to get much bigger. Grant65 | Talk 14:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like it. I'd defintiely say it's the best version I've seen so far. JPD (talk) 18:10, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK if no-one objects in the next few days, I'll put it in the article. Grant65 | Talk 15:37, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Second version

message: Editors, please consider adding a link to a popular page...
*The Price of a Point by Paul Niquette
...which may be considered as a challenge to the design of the scoring system for football or suggestive of proportionate game tactics.Paul Niquette 22:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed External Link

message: I think that the evidence for the first reference to football in ireland is too weak.  It needs to be cited properly and if it is in a foreign language we need to know what its literal translation is.
Under the FA section I think it should state that this is the first organised soccer organisation in the world and I do think that it needs to say that for this reason it does not have English in front of it.  Otherwise it sounds like some kind of international forerunner to FIFA and anyone who does not follow soccer might think that it died out or was replaced...   Jeb
:The FA don't have 'English' in their title because they were not set up to be the governing body for football in England. Nobody could have known back then that anybody outside the UK would be interested in football and so it was not planned to have any more governing bodies.GordyB 16:43, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: additional info needed

message: Hey fellas. Can anybody educate me here?--Johnhardcastle 11:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the article makes it quite clear.GordyB 16:41, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Try football (word) and Football (soccer) names. Grant65 | Talk 09:42, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soccer V Football 

message: Editors, please consider adding a link to a popular page...
*The Price of a Point by Paul Niquette
...which is a challenge to the design of the scoring system for football and also suggestive of proportionate game tactics. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Paul Niquette (talk • contribs) 22:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While this may be an interesting link for American football (I'm not convinced), it definitely isn't appropriate for this page about football codes in general. JPD (talk) 11:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the observation, with which I fully agree.  The link is most appropriate for American football.  I am a new wikipedian and will appreciate guidance. Paul Niquette 20:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed External Link