Talk:Vatican City national football team

message: Are you sure of the match San Marino-Vatican City?
I have never heard about it and I think i'm an expert about san marino's national team.
- Neither have I. Looks like a mistake of some sort.
- Since Vatican and Italian citizenships are reciprocal, permanent occupation in Holy See is required for members of national XI only. Marcello Rosati was the only bearer of Vatican passport to play against Monaco in 2002. All other players were solely Italian citizens.
--The San Marino team that played Vatican City was not the national team, but an amateur team of some sort, representing San Marino (maybe the San Marino amateur national team that plays in the UEFA Regions Cup?)  Certainly not the full national team.  The 1-9 defeat to Palestine listed as the worst result is also not a bona fide match.  The team that played Palestine was a team of Italian priests. http://topnews.co.uk/215541-palestinians-win-charity-football-match-9-1-beating-catholic-priests  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.18.146.216 (talk) 00:29, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: San Marino Match?

message: In december 25 2007,Vatican will play another match agansit monaco.So don't delete this article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cokepepsi (talk • contribs) 22:32, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Don't delete this article 

message: :Image:VCGame.jpg 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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 07:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:VCGame.jpg

message: After a couple of reverts, I'd like the opportunity to discuss the distinction that is made between 'official' and 'unofficial' matches. It is asserted that there is a distinction between games against national teams, making these 'official', and club teams, making these 'unofficial'. I can see no basis for this distinction. The term 'official' implies that these games are somehow sanctioned by UEFA/FIFA - they are not. The games against Monaco are no more or less official than the games against San Marino Reserves/SV Vollmond. We can distinguish in the text of the article between games against nations and games against other teams if we want, although personally I don't see any advantage to this at this stage. Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 10:27, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, happier with the changes now. Not sure if there's too much point in separating out the Volland game, but equally I've no objection to doing this. --Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 21:38, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Official' v 'Unofficial' Matches

message: I completely agree with you that they are not "official or Full internationals.  "Official" and "unofficial" in the infobox is just standard wording even if it doesn't apply in this case.  I also agree that no matches that the team plays are official because they are not sanctioned by FIFA or any confederation.  However, I think there are benefits of separating matches against other nation's full national teams from the other matches for organization's sake.  That is why I changed the section title from "Full internationals" to "Against other nations".
We need to agree on two points:
1. Is it beneficial to separate matches into two lists?
and 
2. What should we include for matches in the infobox?
My feelings are that:
1. Yes, it is beneficial.
2. We should include only the matches played against Monaco so far in the "first international" and "biggest defeat" section of the infobox because a "national team" typically only plays other national teams.  When confederated national teams play club teams, albeit rare, those matches do not count towards anything rankings and are merely for practice.
Thanks for opening the discussion.  This article is an endless supplier of points of discussion.--Gri3720 (talk) 15:41, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: I agree...but

message: * These are all non-FIFA matches, I believe that a reader might consider that this meant they were officially sanctioned. 
* They are by definition unofficial in the sense that they do not prohibit any participant from playing for a FIFA recognised nation, and I am not aware of any rule stating that players could not change a non-FIFA nationality either.
* The notion of official / unofficial seems to be an arbitrary delineation by Gri3720. Is there any indication that the Vatican classifies the matches in such a way?
* The Monaco article doesn't distinguish in this manner, it would seem better to ignore the notion of "official" matches in the infobox in the same way.
* Why is the San Marino B team considered unofficial? It is a national team.
* They do not seem to have played a significant amount of matches, this seems to be splitting hairs, so I don't see any real need to split official / unofficial.
Fenix down (talk) 16:04, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: I disagree, because...

message: I agree that "official" and "unofficial" should not appear in the infobox.  That is the only place in which those labels occur.  At no point in the text or tables does it label matches as such. As stated previously, separating the matches into two charts of "Against other nations" and "other" is for organizations purposes, although I believe there is a distinction between a match played between a representative "A" team from a fully-recognized sovereign state and a semi-professional club team.  As for the San Marino match, I placed it into "other" because it was not the Full representative team and a reserve squad.  However, I would agree that it could be  placed in either group. As for how the Monaco article lists its matches, it appears that they have ever only played representative "national" teams and no club teams so they haven't faced the same discussion.  --Gri3720 (talk) 16:25, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, happier with the changes now. Not sure if there's too much point in separating out the Volland game, but equally I've no objection to doing this. --Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 21:38, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Needless discussion

message: Clicking the source for the San Marino Reserves game, I see nothing about this 1994 match - just a 2002 game, which does not mention 'reserves' and which contradicts the claim of this article.   --Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 10:27, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The source for the article itself  does not mention a game in 1994. Given that this source cites the Wikipedia article, I think we can consider it a circular reference. --Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 21:37, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, having read the source more closely, your correct. My objection was to the match report, which does not refer to the game. --Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 21:40, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: San Marino Reserves Game

message: I readded the source for the 1994 match.  Somewhere in all of the vandalism, it was lost and I didn't notice.  Luckily I was able to find it against because it is a great article. Thanks. --Gri3720 (talk) 15:31, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The source for the article itself  does not mention a game in 1994. Given that this source cites the Wikipedia article, I think we can consider it a circular reference. --Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 21:37, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, having read the source more closely, your correct. My objection was to the match report, which does not refer to the game. --Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 21:40, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Source

message: Hi. One hour ago I did this edits and after I've rollbacked them preferring an eventual talk and analysis... also because of an Elo problem. As for title, the issue is about Vatican biggest defeat, vs Palestine (9-1), in a match that took place on 26 October 2010 in al-Khader. Btw, I would remark that, talking about national football teams, Palestine is full AFC (source) and FIFA (source) member, and Monaco is not even UEFA (so a match with a FIFA member could be more official). About this match (that I remember to have read about in 2010), I've used as source vatican.com. But, despite it talks about the Palestinian NFT and not about an "amateur representative", it was not reported on World Football Elo Ratings (see: Palestine and Vatican). Elo, that reports rankings and matches related to national football teams (including also non-FIFA members that could be part, as Greenland, Palau, Monaco, Kiribati etc...) is a reliable source, so I've reverted. Well, I leave here this doubt of mine, just to avoid to write possible wrong infos in the mainspace. Regards. --Dэя-Бøяg 16:30, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for explaination about this match. Greets. --Dэя-Бøяg 03:11, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Palestine v Vatican match

message: I'm aware that L'Osservatore Romano states that La prima partita di calcio in Vaticano è stata giocata nel cortile del Belvedere, alla presenza di Papa Leone X, il 7 gennaio 1521.  This statement is included in the article (in translation), but this needs clarification — football as such did not exist in 1521. --Gerrit CUTEDH 22:44, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  1521?  Really? 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:07, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Afghanistan national football team which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 17:35, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress