Talk:FIFA World Cup/Archive 2

message: First of all, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
After some editing, I think this article has a lot of information, but it's just not very organized. I think we should divide the sections more clearly, and move some information to other articles (as we've been doing), so it becomes more readable. Here are some sections I can think of:
# History
# Format
# Results
# Trophy
# Awards
# Records and statistics
# Host selection process
# Social and economics aspects
Hopefully this article can be as good as the one on Olympic Games eventually. Feel free to offer any ideas you have! Chanheigeorge 10:00, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I think we should focus on #1-#6 for now. Chanheigeorge 22:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Ian Manka Questions? Talk to me! 08:11, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've made a stab at rearranging to reflect above structure... much work lay ahead. Merry Christmas! Ian Manka Questions? Talk to me! 08:35, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I suggest we start FIFA World Cup qualification and put all details and history there, and describe the format of the finals and the outline of the qualification in this article. Conscious 13:47, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Great idea. I support this creation. Have links to all the qualification articles, list of teams who have tried to qualify, give detailed explanations of the various ways each continental zone have qualified (be it round robin, knockout, groups, etc.) Ian Manka Questions? Talk to me! 23:10, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

text: What about moving the "Début of National Teams" section to National team appearances in the Football World Cup? Conscious 20:07, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought about it when originally revamping the article, but decided against it in case people objected. I wouldn't mind, personally. Ian Manka Questions? Talk to me! 23:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvements to this article 

message: #Support. I prefer official, current name. Conscious 17:12, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Support

message: #Oppose. I'd rather keep in line with WP standards (<SportName> World Cup). Sebastian Kessel Talk 18:16, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Oppose

message: #Neutral. The problem is not in the naming of the article but in the standard of naming such sports events in Wikipedia. If anything should be resolved, there should be a systematic way of naming such articles (ie. theres the same dispute between "Track and Field World Championships" or "IAAF World Championships"). --Hurricane Angel 22:53, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutral

message: :There have been two previous discussions of this move, first between four users (2/2), second also between four users (2/1/1). Both failed to reach a consensus. Some of the arguments used were that:
*articles on other sports' championships are titled "Foo World Championship"
*"football" is ambiguous
*FIFA World Cup is now an official name of the tournament
**The competition has been World Cup (not FIFA World Cup) since its inception. The trademark World Cup is owned by FIFA and they vigorously defend this specific trademark - see for example http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/2000/d2000-0034.html - FIFA now prefix their name to the competition for marketing and to try to stop anyone using the words World Cup for commercial gain  without crediting FIFA. Jooler 14:07, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Previous Viewpoints/Current Counterpoints

message: Comments on Rousseau's vote:
::Your vote is not valid under this username given that your vote on this page is your very first contribution to Wikipedia. BTW How many of those hits are for the XBox and Playstation game?
:::Sorry; you can ignore my vote then (or erase it).  The video game's addition to the hits is a non-issue since the game is exclusively about the FIFA World Cup.  If the video game was about some other subject or genre, then you might have a point.  But since the game is about the World Cup, it seems dubious to ignore those hits. [User:Rousseau|Rousseau]] 18:05, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The fact that it's being used for marketing purposes is not really relevant IMO. However, you do make a good point in that it was not always called by this name. Perhaps a structure similar to UEFA Champions League is in order. After all, that used to simply be called the European Cup. Jacoplane 09:57, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: But that change was marked by a complete change in the nature of the competition, whereby is was modified from a simple knockout cup competition. Jooler 13:39, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that the French and German Spanish  Wikipedia artles on the Champion's League do not use UEFA in the title. Jooler 14:54, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The German does - de:UEFA Champions League. Poulsen 15:00, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess I'm just a suspicious type, but: es:Liga de Campeones de la UEFA does mention UEFA in the title. Even though I don't believe in the tyranny of the majority, here's the stats on CL naming: Of 26 wikis (including dialects) I count 10 without UEFA in the titles, and 7 I can't make out. No matter the precise number, it's around half of each, but the argument shouln't be based on the number of articles named UEFA CL or FIFA WC, but on what the tournament is actually called. Poulsen 15:25, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The Spanish article was moved less than a week ago, the interwiki from the English page was not updated and the link now links to a disambiguation page. The German page was moved in June. In each case (and when the English article was moved last year (2004), the only reason that UEFA was added was to disambiguate it from the CAF Champions League and the AFC Champions League. In the case of the World Cup such a disambiguation is not required. We merely need to disambiguate the sport and not the governing body. Jooler 17:51, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

text: The game is produced under licence to FIFA. Before FIFA went about suing everybody who used the words "World Cup"  for commerical gain without crediting FIFA, all the games licenced by FIFA (since World Cup Carnival in 1985/1986) did not prefix the name of the game with FIFA. See Football World Cup video games. Jooler 11:09, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments on individual votes

message: I think it might be beneficial to beginners (especially Americans who think the Super Bowl is the most viewed sporting event) if we give numbers after the following statement of the opening paragraph:
The World Cup final tournament, which has been held every four years since 1930 (except when cancelled due to World War II), is the most widely-viewed and followed sporting event in the world, exceeding even the Olympic Games.
For example, we can show that 300 million people viewed the 2006 World Cup Drawing , while the most watched Super Bowl ever only had a viewing audience of 144 million  (or so the NFL says).  And according to ask google , the 2002 World Cup Final--the source disagrees with the NFL's 144 million viewer claim--was an order of magnitude higher than the next highest watched sporting event in recent history.
I think showing such examples might more accurately, and quickly, get the impact and power of the World Cup to beginners.
Any thoughts?Rousseau 07:21, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The "is the most widely-viewed and followed sporting event in the world" statement must be supported by the reference(s). Can anyone find it? Conscious 12:39, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's patently obvious that if the highest estimated figures for the Olympic Games were 127 million watching the opening ceremony in 2002 and and the highest for Euro 2002 was 153 million (exceeding the superbowl's 144 million), that the World Cup will have a still higher audience. The actual figure and where it comes from is irrelevant as it can only ever be an estimate. Jooler 13:31, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I could only find these two:  and .  The first one is from FIFA, and it states that 2002 World Cup was the most watched sporting event in world history; the second link (from the Business Refrence Service) seems to regurgutate the first link's statement.  Still, this only compares the 2002 World Cup to the Olympic Game; whether we can make the reasonable assumption that previous World Cups out-viewed previous Olympic Games is arguable.Rousseau 16:26, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Found .  The first one gives an aggregate figure of just under 30 billion, which averages to about 450 million a match. The second one compares it with the olympic aggregate, which around 17 billion. I can't get hold of decent figures for the final but general concencus is around 1.5 billion. josh (talk) 20:51, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: While I'm weary of using FIFA's numbers to back FIFA claims, other sources seem to use FIFA's numbers withoutqualms.  One issue, however is that Broadcasting of sports events says the Olympics is the sporting event with the largest audience.  The article has no references however, while we appear to have numerous to support the contention. I'm going to make the changesRousseau 21:08, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding Example to Signify Magnitude of Event 

message: I think the vote for this page should be extended (by a week) for several reasons. Firstly it is a very heavily linked article with many sub-pages which use the same name and a move of this page will affect a very large number of sub-pages. Secondly during this holiday period a large number of people will not be using Wikipedia as they normally would and a number of the people who regularly contribute to the football articles will not vote. Indeed they have not as yet voted, their voice has not been heard. Jooler 10:34, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I support this extension of the vote for the reasons outlined by Jooler. (I am, however, yet to consider the matter itself and vote). --Daveb 14:02, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Request vote extension

message: Football World Cup mascot already existed when FIFA World Cup mascots was created. These need to be merged. -Aabha (talk) 21:00, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mascots 

message: I think the introduction needs to be shorter and crisper, this is too complicated to be effective. Most of the details can be moved to Format and Results. Does anyone have any objections? -Aabha (talk) 21:19, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, and a "Media coverage" section could be useful. It would deal with all these TV figures. Do mascots conut as the media coverage? They could be also included there, there's hardly enough information about them for a separate section. Conscious 21:23, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: I've been looking for a free image to use on this page without success. Perhaps the most likely source is the 1978 World Cup, which was hosted and won by Argentina. The image tag  states that images registered in Argentina over 25 years ago are public domain. Maybe a Spanish speaking user would have more luck finding a free image. Oldelpaso 10:47, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we take a fair use image, such as this or this?
There are many pictures from 1978 World Cup, not sure how to find out if they are public domain. Conscious 15:39, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I do not know much about what does or doesn't class as fair use, but in the absence of any suitable free images, I presume a low-res fair use image would be OK. Oldelpaso 16:28, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was going to find an image, but I don't want to jump into the murky waters of image copyright status. ideally, we'd like an image of the World Cup itself, but that's only my opinion. — Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 21:04, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Images