Talk:November 2006 in sports

message: Proposal:
We use the name of the sport as the heading, each individual event as the subheading, and then follow with news/results.  Alphabatize by sport.
For example:
*Baseball
**Major League Baseball - ????? named rookie of the year.
**2006 Intercontinental Cup
*** - followed by game results.
*Billiards
**<<name of event>>
***results
*Football (American
**National Football League
***results/schedule/news
any comments ? 
As the Taiwanese say, this is getting luan chi ba tsao (very messy) without a standard format
Ludahai 01:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If there's only one game, like in billards, we can let go out the third-level bullet. --Howard the Duck 03:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with Howard here. SportsAddicted | discuss 08:17, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I was only suggesting this as a general guideline.  Most of us have enough sense when to use and not to use the third bullet - at least I hope so... :)  Ludahai 09:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Organizing each day 

message: How big of a deal are these international baseball tournaments, really? The only international baseball tournaments of significance that I've heard of are the Caribbean World Series and the World Baseball Classic. -- Mwalcoff 04:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So until last year only the Caribbean World Series should be added here? How about the Japan Series? --Howard the Duck 08:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The 2006 Intercontinental Cup is definately notible enough to be mentioned on here, but probably just the more important (medal matches) after the group stage. As for the Konami Cup I think only the final is really necessary instead of all these group matches. SportsAddicted | discuss 08:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

text:  In addition, the fact that you didn't hear of it, doesn't mean it's not notible. SportsAddicted | discuss 08:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Lets remove the group stages scores and focus on the playoffs. --Howard the Duck 08:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: These games are pretty important in the nations that are participating, and are FAR MORE notable than weekly U.S. college football and NFL score reports. Ludahai 09:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI, in our country, nobody cares how bad our baseball team loses (which always loses by the mercy rule) in this tournament. I'm in favor of removing the regular season NCAA and NFL scores (but very few people point out that the group stages of the UEFA Cup and the UEFA Champions league are posted, heck even the qualifying rounds), too, but really, the round robin stages shouldn't be here. Only the playoffs will do. Even the world championships of pool billiards had to wait until the quarterfinals, the third round of the playoffs. --Howard the Duck 09:29, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a different take, as UEFA competitions are international in nature and not purely domestic, I feel they should have more latitude than merely domestic competitions.  The same goes for team events that occur no more than once a year - or even once every several years.  The Konami Cup is annual and includes national champions from three countries and the Intercontinental Cup happens once every four years.  It is not like these events happen every week.  The Asian Games upcoming, likewise, only happen once every four years.  Ludahai 10:30, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: UEFA comepetitions, despite being "international" can be equated with the North American leagues, despite being competed on two countries. The "importance" of a sporting event is more than the number of comepeting countries - there's population, economics, revenue, etc. So if we'll use your analogy, the Adriatic League is bigger than the NFL since the Adriatic League is composed of 5 countries, while the NFL only has one. Teams from UEFA and North American leagues do not represent one country - they represent a city, sometimes even a district of that city. As for non-annual competitions, I'd still prefer the knockout/playoff stages when the games do count, although a summary of what had happened on the group stages maywbe added (check out my contrib on July 2006 in sports#28 July 2006. --Howard the Duck 10:47, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't making a strong case for UEFA competitions, more for the baseball ones.  With the exceptions of the games the Philippines has been in, there hasn't been an unimportant game in the Intercontinental Cup, and the same goes for Konami Cup games that China wasn't in.  I still see no problem with including such scores, especially with the last three days of round robin action coming up and every game is important because so many teams are 2-2 or 1-3.  Ludahai 11:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course every game does count, but the most important - and critical - games are those of the knockout stages. A team may win all of the round robin games but it will be worthless if they lose on the first knock-out round. Again, I'd rather prefer a summary of what has transpired after the round robin phase rather than list each and every game, like the current system that is used. Even MLB had to wait on the last few weeks before results - among playoff contenders - were added here, same with FA Cup, where the results weren't reported until like January last year (of course those tournaments are much longer, but each game counts there too, ask the Houston Astros). --Howard the Duck 11:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

text:  This is mainly where the policies part I started was about as well. You are right that the 2006 Intercontinental Cup is important in at least some of the countries that participate, my country is one of them. I personally don't mind the scores of each and every match here, but Howard does have a point that some national US leagues are said to be more notible than several international leagues might be. With the US being such a huge country where sports is pretty important each and every state can be roughly seen as a separate country, what makes those leagues slightly international as well. Anyways, they are still national domestic leagues, but I don't mind each and every score mentioned on here when it's the highest level in a country. But if you permit one country to have their scores in this news section you should allow other nations to have them here as well. That would mean the current sports section might be expanded hugely, which is not a good thing. Each event can have their own article on Wikipedia and that's mainly where such results can be listed in my opinion, so we can have these current sports pages for the decisive and most important moments in the events. As for college sports, decisive and important happenings can be mentioned here as well, but as they are not the highest level of sports in the USA I don't think the results of each and every game should be here, unless they are still pretty important in the US itself. So my proposal is: Let's quit adding scores from each and every league game, but give a summary of the most important and notible happenings of those leagues instead. When an event gets to the crucial parts that decides the championships or medals then all results can be named here. In tournaments with knock-out rounds, no results should be added before the quarter finals. However notible upsets, like when Roger Federer is beaten in an early stage of a tennis tournament can be mentioned, but than leave the other results of that tournament out. SportsAddicted | discuss 12:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  To date, we have not been reporting everyday scores from baseball, basketball or ice hockey. With those sports, we've only been reporting postseason games and other events of significant note. I think (American) football is a little different because so few games are played in a season (12-14 in college, 16 in the NFL). It's very hard to differentiate the "important" games and the "unimportant ones." In the NCAA, we have been limiting ourselves to top-25 teams (out of 119 in Division I-A and hundreds more in lower divisions). But in the NFL, there's only 32 teams. Almost every game means something in terms of playoff implications. -- Mwalcoff 03:13, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Of course, in theory, every game counts, but in reality, the most critical games are at the tail-end of the regular season, when the borderline teams attempt to qualify, and the top teams vie for homefield advantages. As for NCAA football, I'd rather have the scores of the bowl games (heck, post all of them, even non-BCS), and regular season games between 2 ranked teams (like the upcoming OSU-Michigan game). If the number of the regular season games would be the basis, then I would be the posting the results of the 2006-07 PBA Philippine Cup, in which there are only 18 games. --Howard the Duck 18:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  International baseball scores 

message: All, I hope we can all agree that the proper date for any item is in accordance to where the event/news item happened, and NOT according to what time it is in the United States.  I don't want to get into an edit war over announcements made in Japan that occur the previous day US time.  Ludahai 09:04, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I use the date/time it happened on the place where the game was held. --Howard the Duck 09:14, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes -- editors should use the local time at the site. -- Mwalcoff 23:39, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone please tell Nosenuggets before I bring admins into this.  Ludahai 01:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, name local times instead of US times.SportsAddicted | discuss 08:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dating 

message: SportsAddicted and Howard the Duck have raised important points. We should better define what this page is for to prevent it from getting too big. I suggest putting out an RFC. With your permission (you being SportsAddicted and Howard the Duck), I'll do so. -- Mwalcoff 00:16, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If no one objects, I would also like to participate.  BTW, who cares about amateur football in Canada?  Ludahai 02:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: With the proposed policies for this page, the addition of the CIS games were fine. --Howard the Duck 07:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Sounds good to me, let's see where it can get us. SportsAddicted | discuss 07:36, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like no one wants to join us in our RFC ? SportsAddicted | discuss 08:49, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My points (perhaps yours too) were already debated upon in the earlier discussions, so I don't how the RFC should now work. --Howard the Duck 09:29, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no idea either, I've never seen RFC's before actually. SportsAddicted | discuss 21:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  RFC? 

message: Kelv does have some good thoughts. Now that I've thought about it some, I think that we should make a LOT more use of the individual season articles than we do now.
For example, I'm now beginning to think that all of the NCAA college football scores listed for the 2006 season could have been better put in the article 2006 NCAA Division I-A football season. Similarly, English Premiership scores for this season can go into FA Premier League 2006-07, Serie A scores in Serie A 2006-07, etc. For examples of how this could work, see Euroleague 2006-07, 2006-07 Guinness Premiership, or 2006 Air New Zealand Cup.
How do you think this would have looked for college football last week?
*American college football (rankings from AP poll):
**(1) Ohio State 42, (2) Michigan 39 (a brief description would be useful here, considering the significance of this matchup)
**(4) Southern Cal 23, (17) California 9
**Cincinnati 30, (7) Rutgers 11
**(19) Virginia Tech 27, (14) Wake Forest 6
**For other significant games, see 2006 NCAA Division I-A football season.
What do you all think about this idea? — Dale Arnett 22:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm fine with it. I do think, though, that in addition to limiting the amount of "major sport" scores, we do have to think about drawing the line somewhere on all of the new sports we've been seeing here recently. I'm no expert on beach handball or wheelchair tennis, but when I see so many redlinks among the results, I have a feeling those sports are not of tremendously widespread interest. -- Mwalcoff 23:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm fine with these too. I'll not worry about redlinks though, sooner or later they'll have articles. --Howard the Duck 07:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree the line has to be drawn somewhere - I mean, even as far as football (soccer)'s concerned, the ELF Cup has made an appearance today! Whatever next, the Island Games? -- Arwel (talk) 07:50, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree with all of you too, although we should not prevent information to appear because people or teams don't have articles yet. The ELF Cup is OK with me, but should not have all its matches here, just the final stages. SportsAddicted | discuss 09:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, major upsets should be included as well, I agree. SportsAddicted | discuss 14:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  More thoughts... 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on November 2006 in sports. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070517103052/http://today.reuters.com:80/news/articlenews.aspx?type=sportsNews to http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=sportsNews&storyID=2006-11-07T042208Z_01_SP232152_RTRUKOC_0_US-HORSE-RACING-MELBOURNE.xml&WTmodLoc=SportsNewsHome_C2_sportsNews-4
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:09, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on November 2006 in sports. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061210011326/http://www.fifa.com:80/en/media/index/0,1369,126515,00.html?articleid=126515 to http://fifa.com/en/media/index/0,1369,126515,00.html?articleid=126515
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:51, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified