Talk:Sepp Blatter/Archive 1

Archive 1

Email address

I've removed the email address - it seems unnecessary. - AndrewBellis 14:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Mexico

How could he ban Mexico forever from all World Cups? El Chompiras 02:34, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Article lacks references

I'm flagging this article with a sources tag, because I believe it lacks references for the most crucial facts it contains. References for the following would be appreciated: - Biographical and career details (something like an official FIFA bio would suffice for this). - The allegations of corruption, e.g. news articles that may have covered this - The sexist comments and those about diving

I also added in the comment he made about the referee of the Portugal-Netherlands match deserving a yellow card, along with references (same as those used in the article on referee Valentin Ivanov).

A picture of Blatter would also be good for the article if possible.

Incidentally, I personally don't like Blatter (I'm a football referee myself, and I thought the yellow card comment was completely out of place, especially coming from the president of FIFA). However, I think the facts quoted in this article at least deserve citations/references in order to ensure objectivity. --Sanchonx 16:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

World Society of Friends of Suspenders

I removed the sentences about the 'World Society of Friends of Suspenders', because the only references I could find to this group after googling it were to pages attacking Blatter. Also, the sentences themselves were poorly written. If someone can find a source for this, please add it back in. --Araker 22:45, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I added that and i had read it in four four two mag, i had a bit of trouble looking for sources too. But im certain its true, because it wasnt written to attack blatter, but to say which places he has worked at. Portillo 02:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Diving

Does someone have a quote about supposed blatter's comments about diving?? I would be suprised he's encouraging diving! JeDi 19:55, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's that surprising when coupled with his other comments! 88.106.78.29 (talk) 21:32, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

C Ronaldo?

Who thinks we might have to add a section about his comments regarding Christiano Ronaldo soon?

This guy is really controversial isn't he? Tidus mi2 (talk) 11:27, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't see why Blatter's quote doesn't have an original reference. Whoever wrote that section is relying on a third party - The Telegraph - who then use it to get all sorts of dissenting opinion (Redknapp, Bruce as mentioned) and fill up column pages! If it doesn't have an original reference, it should say something like "Blatter was quoted as saying that '...' in the '...'", rather than a black and white statement. No reference, no validity! - Chade, 14 September 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.232.232.59 (talk) 10:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Redirect

Could someone clean up the redirects. For example I dont see why blabber redirects here. 66.245.193.252 (talk) 18:12, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

You can tag the implausible ones for deletion using {{Db-r3}}. Martin 19:33, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Country of birth

The article says Blatter was born in Goldstone, Surrey–which is presumably in the UK–but later goes on to talk about Blatter's "native Switzerland". Which is right? If you know, please fix. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pitix (talk • contribs) 18:06, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

2006 World Cup final

Wasn't Blatter supposed to be present at the 2006 World Cup award ceremony? Where did he disappear? Siggie 02:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

It has been said that he had a stomachache, however, most people think that he was upset that Italy had won and so he did not go.

This man is so obviously biased towards France! Frances loses a world cup final: he doesn't attend the awards ceremony. France wins a match through cheating: he doesn't grant Ireland a replay. The article says he's Swiss, so I have a question, is he a French speaking Swiss person? It would explain a lot about Mr Fifamafia here...--Saoirse Erin Every (talk) 04:01, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

More vandalism

The user 69.74.230.98 just erased the last part of this article, hope someone warn him --189.182.66.241 (talk) 22:05, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Zurich Brown Shirts

Article is locked right now so I can't edit it, but, come on. Zurich Brown Shirts? Are people really so gullible to believe that this organization exists? Obviously, the "reference" supporting this claim goes nowhere -- a Time Magazine profile which makes no mention of this fact. Further, Wikipedia (and copies of it) are the only places on the web that make any mention of such a soccer team existing. Someone who can, please remove this bit of ridiculousness. 128.178.153.230 (talk) 15:14, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. Removed per WP:BLP.  Sandstein  21:01, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

But through what was removed, I found a promising article, which could help source some other things. Enigma^msg 14:57, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

False middle name?

It is circulating on many forums etc (and for some reason the South African presidential web page http://www.thepresidency.gov.za/orders_list.asp?show=482 ) that his middle name is "Bellend"; an offensive term (or at least it is in the UK) and in contradiction to his official bio on the FIFA webpage. There have been several attempts to add this to the page as vandalism, perhaps semi protection is warranted? Badgerific (talk) 17:21, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

It's already semi-protected, precisely for that reason. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:23, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Or at least, it was earlier. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:24, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, sorry, I hadn't notice. Badgerific (talk) 17:31, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

The Guardian newspaper seems to think the rumour started here on Wikipedia. It seems that someone - probably an angry England fan annoyed at Blatter's opposition to goal-line technology - vandalised his biography on here to list his name as 'Joseph 'Sepp' Bellend Blatter'. It appears that while the article was still vandalised, the South African government used his Wiki bio for info used on their webpage detailing his award and consequently twice listed 'Bellend' as his middle name (unlikely South Africans would be aware of the phrase 'bellend' I suppose). It's also been listed as his middle name on some other offical site also copying Wiki's biography (or the material on the SA government website). The SA government website has corrected their mistake but the Guardian have put up a screen capture of the original page. I guess you'd have to be British to appreciate why this is really quite funny, if a little immature. 92.10.158.35 (talk) 01:02, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's also in an article in the Daily Telegraph - here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup-2010/7891632/Sepp-Blatter-given-embarrassing-nickname-on-World-Cup-award.html I have to say, I am amazed that the SA government used Wikipedia as the official source for info on Blatter. Wembwandt (talk) 09:28, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Just as a footnote to that last comment. This would appear to be the talk page of the anon. user that added 'Bellend' - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:192.54.144.229 Looks like the user had been warned umpteen times about vandalism and still not permanently blocked. Once again Wikipedia's policy on repeat vandalism - or lack of proper policy - lets it down. It needs tightening up folk! Wembwandt (talk) 09:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

You may have heard of this already but a year or two ago Manchester City were playing some Cypriot football team in the UEFA Cup and someone vandalised the Wiki article of the Cypriot team in question prior to the match, adding some bizarre if amusing false information that the club has "crazy fans" who wear "hats made of shoes". These 'facts' ended up in the Daily Mirror's match preview article. Not wise for lazy journalists to rely on Wiki, at least not without fact checking properly. 92.9.221.68 (talk) 17:32, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

I find it odd that the reference was added within an hour of that edit, and it was the first of several attempts to change the name within that time. I'm not convinced they weren't responding to the referenced page. One forum post[1] suggests it was on the government page two days earlier than it appeared here. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 09:42, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, interesting. I'm also curious as to how so many IPs just happened to spot it on the same day and decide to update Wikipedia with it. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:36, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, I don't think they got it from Wikipedia, at least not from English and Afriicaans I checked. In WP:EN the first vandalism was this on Tuesday. But in the guardian article they speak that the gala was on Monday, so earlier that the entry in Wikipedia EN. And there was written in the newspapers, that official site had the wrong name too, so I guess first was the wrong Fifa site and someone thought this is real and entered into Wikipedia. Any thoughts? --KurtR (talk) 08:32, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

It's very weird, you would have thought it would have come from Wiki, yet clearly it appeared on the SA government website first. Perhaps Wiki was vandalised earlier, several weeks or even months ago, and the SA website copied the information then but only loaded up their page recently? The only other explantions I can think of is a prankster familiar with British slang working for the SA government (unlikely) or that their website was hacked. 92.9.221.68 (talk) 17:32, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

You can use the tool WikiBlame for search the whole history of an article about a word like Bellend. I did it, and you are right. The first time entry was on 17 July 2009!. Unfortunately in the wayback-archive of the Fifa-Page (or was it another Fifa-page?) you can go only back to 24 June 2008. Maybe in a year we got results there for the same time period. So it's good possible Wikipedia is the source of Bellend. :-/ I just saw something different, another user added Bellend to other Blatter's pages, see his history. I already fix this. Is there a way we can protect these pages for such things? I don't know it here in Wikipedia English, I'm from Switzerland and mostly work in Wikipedia German. Thanks. --KurtR (talk) 07:34, 17 July 2010 (UTC) PS: I just found out, Platini was vandalzed too, I fixed it. See the entries of this user. Bad! What can we do? --KurtR (talk) 07:46, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes that must be the explantion, I did think it was unlikely to be anything so dramatic as the SA government website being hacked. During one of the periods 'Bellend' was on the page the guys who design the website must have copied down the bio from Wiki to use at a later date. We don't actually know how long the SA website page was up anyway, it might have been up since before the tournament started and it was only last week an Englishman (the only people who would know what 'Bellend' meant, I suppose others would think nothing of it and just assume it was a name) went on the page and noticed it and the story broke. At least now we know the motivation wasn't Sepp's opposition to goaline technology in the wake of the Lampard goal as the UK media have been suggesting, it obviously predates this (by nearly a year in fact). Just occured to me, one wonders if 'Joseph Sepp Bellend Blatter' has ended up being inscribed on Sepp's medal as well! Surely not?! They'll have to make him a new one if it has, although it's probably unlikely, surely it was just the website. At any rate, I don't have an account here (IP keeps changing, I presume thats because I'm on an AOL proxy) but I do know users can be banned for repeated vandalism, I don't think that can be for one-off instances but they can be banned if they keep vandalising. I know pages can be protected like this one is at present, but I think this only happens when the page is a regular target of vandalism, so if other Blatter pages or the FIFA page keeps getting vandalised they can be protected as well. Ultimately though it is not Wikipedia's fault this has happened, it the SA government website's fault for using Wiki as a sole source for Blatter's name, very few people would do that, they should have done their research properly and checked with FIFA themselves. Wiki is a great source of info, but most people know to check out what is written here, thats one reason the site gives sources. 92.11.81.77 (talk) 19:34, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Corruption/charges

Why is there no mention of his own criminal offences? Rather than just corruption? In October 2008 he caused a serious car crash. And yet miraculously the whole thing was covered up, even the Swiss police! Should this not be included? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Littleal39 (talk • contribs) 10:39, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

In a 21-page dossier containing 300 pages of evidence presented to FIFA's executive committee early in May 2002, Michel Zen-Ruffinen accused Blatter of making unauthorized payments, covering up the extent of the losses from the bankruptcy in March 2001 of FIFA's former marketing partner ISL/ISMM and running down FIFA's finances through bad management. [2] These are serious charges, and should be dealt with. NuclearFunk 15:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Good sources regarding recent events/criticism both include direct quote from other FIFA officials.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2010/1203/1224284682343.html
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/215163/Sepp-Blatter-sells-out-beautiful-game

MartinSpamer (talk) 11:35, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

What's the point in listing all of his awards?

Two points:

• It makes the article biased towards him.
• It's not encyclopaedic content (in my opinion).

I've placed a tag on the section, but I think it'll be better off deleted. Nickc8 (talk) 00:42, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: The listing of awards is factual and is done with all profiles. It does not make the article biased towards him. In fact, it begs the question just what has he done to justify receiving so many awards from so many different countries and organizations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.174.180.35 (talk) 20:37, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Players removing shirts

I thought the rationale behind the rule about booking players who remove their shirts is that it is unfair on the sponsors if their logo cannot be seen when the player has maximum exposure. After all, players are still booked for removing their shirts even if they are wearing a vest underneath, so it cannot be some objection to barechestedness in general. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.6.96.22 (talk) 22:27, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure but I wouldn't have thought sponsorship was the reason, surely the rule is still enforced in World Cups and other international tournaments in which FIFA bans international sides from even having shirt sponsors in the first place, aside from kit manufacturers? Shirt advertising was also always banned in UEFA club competition finals until the late 90s. I don't think FIFA would be very concerned about getting club sponsors noticed, they are more concerned with the sponsors of their own tournaments, I would have thought it was up to clubs to enforce such a rule themselves on their own players if such things bothered them. 92.8.89.132 (talk) 02:58, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I think inciting the crowd was also a factor, just general reputation of the game kinda thing rather than anything related to sponsorship. FIFA don't care about shirt sponsors, those sponsors hand their money over to the clubs so FIFA are unaffected financially or otherwise.--EchetusXe 17:42, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Also, bear in mind Brandi Chastain when considering the explanation of conservative nations. Nevertheless a reference would be a good idea.--EchetusXe 17:46, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I am no expert, but I doubt this guy's middle name is twat - though I agree with the sentiment. 90.202.246.162 (talk) 19:54, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Joseph's Race

joseph is a jew, an ashkenazi jew or whatever similar you want to call him. why isnt this mentioned? indeed, the references to his jewishness have been removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josephjung535 (talk • contribs) 20:03, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

• If you can find a reliable citation, put it in. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 22:22, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Reverted edit

Someone added "Celebrity villain of the decade" in the Honours section, I reverted since it seems unappropriate there and it is not a particularly notable fact. mgeo talk 09:40, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

"Celebrity villain of the decade"

It was me who added the above-mentioned achievement. The single line I added was:

• "Celebrity villain of the decade": Blatter topped the poll for the UK TV channel Syfy.

As you see, it was a bona fide achievement - an award where he came top, in a poll that required fair voting from a number of people.

The poll was run by a UK TV channel, then reported in the related web site of the Daily Mirror, a UK newspaper with daily circulation of 1,213,323.

That article was in turn deemed noteworthy by the BBC - see http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/gossip_and_transfers/9541155.stm. Look in the last section.

So, it's not (necessarily) wp:POV - it's genuine, properly sourced, and reported in national daily news, both in print and on-line.

I hope that Wikipedia is free to relay 'good' news, but not barred from reporting 'bad' news.

I invite other editors to comment (preferably below here) as to the merits of this award's inclusion - in the Honours section or indeed elsewhere in the article. Trafford09 (talk) 10:38, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Racism comments November 2011

I support IJA's restoration of what MadGeographer removed over Blatter's comment, "There is no racism....There is maybe one of the players towards another – he has a word or a gesture which is not the correct one. But the one who is affected by that, he should say that this is a game".

Under WP:N, as well as the comments in that article from Rio Ferdinand, Mark Bright, Jason Roberts and PFA head Gordon Taylor, it's in the Italian La Repubblica, the French Le Figaro, and Labour Party (UK) leader Ed Milliband has said, "I think Sepp Blatter's comments are a disgrace. I think football needs new leadership". (Chorleypie (talk) 13:59, 17 November 2011 (UTC))

It may be notable, but you can't know for sure since the event is extremely recent. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a collection of news, if the event is really notable then it surely won't be difficult to find reliable sources other than newspapers. mgeo talk 14:28, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

MadGeographer has stated that including the racist statement on this article is "an indiscriminate collection of news", when he/ she has completely overlooked the fact that it is notable because senior members of FIFA have called for Blatter to resign, that is important as it is regarding the head of the worlds second biggest sporting organisation. Just stating the racist statement on it's own would not be suitable, but the further depth about calls for his resignation make it notable. Also I'm rather disappointed with MadGeographer as I informed him/ her on his/her talk page that I had reverted their edit and asked that he/she still opposed it to discuss it here on the talk page first. MadGeographer has completely disregarded the talk page and gone ahead and just reverted it again with a pretty much irrelevant comment summary. I believe it should be discussed here properly in depth instead of unilaterally reverting it in an attempt to start an edit war, which I will not be involved in. IJA (talk) 14:23, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm surely not opposed to any discussion. Actually I think the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle is very important. My concern here is that we have a huge section of the article dedicated to controversies and this is probably not neutral. So adding another "controversy" section doesn't seem acceptable to me. I think the solution would be to summarize the essential aspects in not more than 2 or 3 sections or to rewrite the entire article in a more neutral tone. mgeo talk 14:45, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

But if all these controversies are all together part of his down fall then they're important. This is why we have people calling for his resignation, because of these controversies. If on an article on Ban Ki Moon, people had called for him to resign over controversies, we'd include it. The same should apply here, significant notable people are calling for Blatter's resignation and it must be included in this article. The same way people have being calling for Silvio Berlusconi's resignation. IJA (talk) 15:34, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

MadGeographer, 4 people added referenced material and you reverted them unilaterally - that suggests you are going against the trend here to include the information. That this "controversy" has led to some very serious demands for his resignation from some very influential people shows that it is the biggest controversy of his career so far. Your claim that this is "an indiscriminate collection of news" is completely disingenuous it seems to me - we can see the scale of the issue just from the names of those being quoted. That the BBC says it's the biggest gaffe of his career is also significant. The "Controversies" section is a little large, and perhaps inelegantly written at times, but Blatter makes more gaffes than most people in a similar position, so the extensive coverage is warranted. Without this section - people coming to Wikipedia will get the impression that the page has been censored - a very sad state of affairs. Malick78 (talk) 16:41, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Administrative note: I've full-protected the article for a few days, before it can explode into a full-blown edit war. Please continue discussing here on the talk page and do your best to reach a consensus about what content belongs in the article. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 15:49, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

• I can see why you've done this - but why protect it with the info absent? 4 editors added info on the racism issue, one editor kept reverting. You seem to have chosen a strange way of doing this, and as I said above - without this section, people coming to Wikipedia will get the impression that the page has been censored - a very sad state of affairs. Could you not protect at a more representative moment? Or allow a quick paragraph mentioning the issue to be added before being reprotected? I'm sure we could come up with something asap. Malick78 (talk) 16:41, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I say we keep it but perhaps rewrite it in a more neutral manner with more information. There appears to be a ton of news about it so I would say it's notable, just as notable as the other controversies that are included, and the controversies are a notable component of him. If there's too much about controversy in the article you could always make an article about all his controversies haha. But yeah, to not include it would basically seem to me as not indiscriminate. (I'm not an expert on this wikipedia stuff yet though, so I may just be crazy :P)Glacialfox (talk) 17:05, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank to IJA for mentioning Silvio Berlusconi. I had a look at his article and I think it is a good example of a neutrally written article, where there isn't a subsection for each controversial event, like we have here. So my suggestion, before adding any other controversy, is to condense the "Controversies" section in a way that it doesn't occupy more than half of the article. There is also the possibility of having a specific article dedicated to controversies, I think that would be ok, but the main article should not focus on these. mgeo talk 18:09, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I quite literally didn't even check which version the page was on before I protected it other than to make sure there wasn't any vandalism present - it's a running joke on Wikipedia that when a page is protected during an edit war, it's always protected in a form that's the wrong version to someone. We protect pages to stop edit wars, not to choose content states, and the form in which I protected the article is no more endorsed by me than the form in which I didn't protect it. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 17:28, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Fluffernutter, that's helpful information. Also I agree with your protection yesterday after the vandalism. However, we now have correctly verified information added by Malick78, IJA and Rothorpe, which I and apparently GlacialFox agree with, and it's only MadGeographer who keeps deleting it. Could you please remove the protection, or protect it one version earlier, after Rothorpe's last edit (15:05 my time)? (Chorleypie (talk) 17:52, 17 November 2011 (UTC))

There is no edit war, as far as I can see - or if there is, it'll stop hopefully if the only person involved - MadGeographer - takes note of the general consensus here to include the information. Semi-protect is fine to stop casual vandals. Even those here who want to include the info are likely to revert pure vandalism - that's protection enough. Malick78 (talk) 18:21, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

The page isn't protected against vandalism at the moment; it's protected against the group of constructive editors, you guys, who were somewhat unwisely falling into a dangerous pattern of reverts. As I said, protection is not used to enforce content preferences, so no, I will not be restoring the article to anyone's preferred version. It is incumbent upon you, collectively, to work as a group to reach a consensus. That means engaging with any users who take a position you disagree with, especially when they are, as MadGeographer is, clearly making an effort to engage in discussion. You must reach a consensus, taking into account the opinions of all editors in the discussion. That doesn't mean that you must bow to one person's opinion, but it does mean that you must at least discuss that person's opinion.

The way this will work is that you will all discuss here on the talk page and reach a consensus to include or not include information, and in what form to include or not include it. Then the article will be unprotected so that the consensus can be implemented, and you will all be expected to refrain from engaging in revert wars; if anyone continually reverts the article at that point, blocks will be handed out for edit warring. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 18:55, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

We are all discussing it here. Over to you then MadGeographer - would you like to respond to our points above? (Chorleypie (talk) 19:58, 17 November 2011 (UTC))

• MadGeographer said: "It may be notable, but you can't know for sure since the event is extremely recent. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a collection of news, if the event is really notable then it surely won't be difficult to find reliable sources other than newspapers." Actually, there's no reason why newspapers shouldn't be used as reliable sources - or is there some WP rule I know nothing of? The reaction to Blatter's comments has been huge, so notability is established. I'd suggest the following text, everyone feel free to tweak it:

"Racism statement"

On 16th November 2011, Blatter stated there was no racism on the football pitch. He told CNN that when it did occur, the "one affected by this should say 'this is a game' and shake hands". The BBC reported criticism of the comment from Rio Ferdinand, Garth Crooks, and others, such as the Professional Footballers' Association chief Gordon Taylor. BBC journalist James Pearce commented, "This is one of Sepp Blatter's worst gaffes, without a doubt". Taylor stated that Blatter's comments had come at a bad time due to two racism disputes in the English Premier League, one regarding John Terry and Anton Ferdinand, and the other Luis Suárez and Patrice Evra; consequently he called for Blatter to step down.

• • Hmm, looks agreeably familiar. Rothorpe (talk) 21:04, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

You didn't read my comment above. If this article were specifically about the controversies surrounding Blatter, then your addition would make sense. But it is not. This article should summarize the essential aspects of the life of Sepp Blatter, not focus on every single controversy. Ideally the content above should be summarized as:..he was also criticized for minimizing racism on the football pitch. Adding another entire section dedicated to a controversial event will do more harm than good. There is a tag at the top of the article, and it is there for a reason. mgeo talk 21:28, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I'd suggest adding an intro on his reputation for gaffes and strange statements - including single sentences on missing the World Cup prize-giving and his criticism of the referee to a line each, the Irish handball issue, women wearing shorter shorts, and the foreign over-representation bit, but keeping the other issues including this racism one as they are all worthy of a section. The technology bit could just be put in a section on his 'views' on aspects of the game. How'd that be? They fact is though that he speaks without thinking and we will always have a significant amount on his stranger statements. That's not POV, it's just reflective of coverage of him. Malick78 (talk) 21:58, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, if we can reduce the controversy section to a reasonable length (and a reasonable number of subsections) then I think your addition would be more acceptable (though I still think a separate article would be more appropriate). mgeo talk 22:25, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I've nothing against a separate article too. Malick78 (talk) 23:15, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I was kinda thinking an article on just all of his controversies might be a reasonable idea (as I said before) Glacialfox (talk) 23:32, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

A separate article about his controversies would be a POV fork, and this article is only 28k in size, so a split is not warranted.

As currently structured, the lede section looks like a résumé and the bio looks like an indictment. Per WP:NPOV, articles should not have unflattering material segregated into seedy "Controversy" or "Criticism" sections; this article may best illustrate the pointlessness of doing so since the entire narrative of Blatter's FIFA career is now contained under Controversy. Perhaps this guy is entirely bad (cf. Nixon or Hitler), but unscandalous parts of his career should be woven into the article where they fit. (I'm new to this subject, having just seen mention on BBC News about his "racism" comment, so I'm withholding opinion on its inclusion in this article.)

My suggestion: remove the ==Controversies== header and let it fall under the FIFA heading, then work on the article's POV as needed by adding relevant career information, without undue sanitation or complicated sequestration. Organizational gymnastics won't help. / edg ☺ ☭ 12:56, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Looks like you guys are making good progress here, so I've returned the article's protection to semi. Please remember to discuss changes that are likely to be controversial, and avoid edit warring. WP:BRD is the key :) A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 15:24, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

As I suggested above, I've merged Controversies with FIFA. If someone has a better idea, revert as needed and implement that idea instead. I won't mind. / edg ☺ ☭ 16:38, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 19 November 2011

In the Irish handball article, please change "French striker Thierry Henry's late goal which took France forward was achieved by a hand ball near the Irish goal, which was not called." because it was actually Henry's assist which was achieved by a hand ball near the Irish goal which went on to set-up William Gallas to score from close range.

79.67.95.241 (talk) 11:04, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Done, thanks for pointing it out! Malick78 (talk) 11:54, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Racism #2

It is not sufficient to mention something in the lead which is not mentioned in the article - WP:LEAD. Also, I'm sure we can have something about FIFA's anti-racism campaign under Blatter - just for balance. Leaky Caldron 12:42, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Neutrality of this article

I think this article doesn't give a fair and objective description of Sepp Blatter and his career. Much of it centers on alleged controversies, and yet no references appear in the article. For example, the article says that "His incumbency has been marked with rumors of financial irregularities and backroom dealings" and that "many questions regarding his integrity remain unanswered". I have two problems with these kinds of statements: first, they are unreferenced and may just be the opinion of the person who wrote the article; and second, they are too vague to belong in an objective article (why are we discussing rumors instead of fact? and just how much is "many"?). The criticism section, I feel, is written with clear bias. It begins with "Blatter has made many changes to football since he was elected president of FIFA which have been seen as detrimental to the sport and which a vast majority of fans strongly opposed". The article then goes on to list things like South Africa hosting the 2010 World Cup, eliminating the golden and silver goals in playoff games and removing the automatic qualification of previous World Cup winners. No references are given to suggest that the "vast majority" of fans espouse these views; moreover, in an organization so vast as FIFA and with football being such a global sport, I highly doubt that Blatter as one individual could be entirely responsible for these changes, as the opening sentence of the criticism section implies. I think this article needs to be rewritten in a neutral viewpoint. Much of what's in the criticsm section now could be rcast into a section called "Impact of Blatter's presidency on football" or something to that effect. As the Wikipedia article on NPOV suggests, let the facts speak for themselves: there's no need to tell people outright these things are negative - just state the facts neutrally and let the reader judge for themselves. Any discussion on this issue would be most appreciated.

Finished the hero worship now have we? Blatter cock sucker. You're either against him, or for him. You're clearly for him. WANKER

I don't like Blatter but I have to agree. I added a {{fact}} tag to the most egregious breach, and I also have to say that the policy changes, even though championed by Blatter, are most likely vetted by a supervising body. So it's very questionable why they appear in this article at all. ~ trialsanderrors 00:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

• i helped to change the tone in the critism part and added in a new section "changes under blatter". However, the part on his career also seem to be biased, wonder how to change that? -Zhudyzhu 07:05, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

• I'm an outsider, but it looks to me like there have been citations and specific charges mentioned now, where apparently before there had been none -- who decides if and when the red "the neutrality has been challenged!" sign can be removed? Estephan500 14:45, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Technically, we're an encyclopedia that compiles and paraphrases third party sources. Blatter is a person that's much in the critical spotlight, so it shouldn't be too hard to document the opinions expressed in the article. So if he has been criticized for dictatorial management style, it should read something like "The [newspaper of note] cited unnamed sources within FIFA criticizing Blatter..." with a link or ref to the article. Although in the current state the article isn't strictly {{POV}} but more {{Sources}}, so I'm gonna change the tag. ~ trialsanderrors 17:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

• When the majority of sources references available are concerning controversies, it is entirely reasonable, even required to cover those objectively. Objectivity (NPV) is not a valid explanation to down play or cover up controversy to achieve 'balance'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartinSpamer (talk • contribs) 03:17, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

There needs to be a Controversy section and the stuff in the lead and the random sections reporting individual one-off controversies need to go there

There needs to be a Controversy section rather than all those controversies listed in the lead, and minor one-paragraph controversies scattered throughout the article.

Also, Blatter was loudly booed as presenter of the women's football gold medals today. That should be added to a Controversy section as well. Softlavender (talk) 06:50, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Henry/France Handball Incident

While it elicited much comment @ the time, the Henry handball incident doesn't belong with other much more important events mentioned in the article. Blatter did nothing extraordinary in rejecting the FAI's extraordinary call for a reversal. Roy Keane criticized the Irish team for lackluster play and pointed out that Ireland defeated Georgia on a horrible call. Tapered (talk) 01:42, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I think you will find you are mistaken. First of all the Ireland Georgia game was a Euro 2012 playoff and has nothing to do with the World Cup 2010 playoff. The handball incident by Henry had revitalised calls for technology. However, Blatter said "With technology, you have to stop a match. You have a look at cameras,We have to maintain the human face of football and not go into technology." Blatter's Response to Irish Requests There are further revelations with accurate citations that suggest Blatter's interference in the UEFA playoffs for World Cup 2010 had aided France's qualification (such as a change in seeding). I would recommend you read "2009 Republic of Ireland vs France football matches"2009 Republic of Ireland vs France football matches Wiki page and follow the citations which are all reliable news agencies before you jump to conclusions (BBC, RTE). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.107.196.242 (talk) 22:44, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Jacques Rogge will be President of FIFA

Jacques Rogge will be president of FIFA in 2015. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FallandSpringOlympics (talk • contribs) 22:29, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. This isn't a forum for speculation. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 22:38, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Section "Humanitarian efforts"

Moved content

Blatter has been involved in a wide range of humanitarian projects. Since his election as FIFA president in 1998, he has participated in several campaigns aiming to increase public awareness of children's rights and to bring football to less privileged regions of the world, ensuring its contribution to social advancement. Blatter considers football to provide a "basic education, character formation and fighting spirit, allied with respect and discipline", and which potentially allows better understanding among the peoples of the world. "Football for all, all for football" – is said to be his motto.

Moved here from the article. The only source is FIFA.com, which can safely be considered a primary source (i.e. not independent from the subject), is written in a flattering and basically self-promotional tone. Moreover, the content of the section (quoted above) is a minimally edited version of the source text, which is entirely unacceptable in and of itself. --85.197.54.141 (talk) 18:58, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

References

Whistling

Could someone please re-write the section on whistling? Or get rid if it's not needed. The English is pretty poor and despite re-reading it a few times I'm still at a loss as to what it's trying to say! 194.66.198.40 (talk) 14:43, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Check it now! --Cornellier (talk) 16:52, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

It reads like completely unnecessary trivia. Laundry lists of events don't make this a better article. HiLo48 (talk) 20:57, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Good point HiLo. Moved to controversy section and copy-edited down a bit. --Cornellier (talk) 23:25, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Comments about women's football

Why is this not in the article? His derogatory comments which said that women "should wear tighter shorts" whilst playing are some of the words most famously associated with him. Although I personally think he is an absolute disgrace, the fact should be mentioned because it is so associated with him. Spuderoony 16:03, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

If you can source a quote, and provide references to reactions, then comments about women's football would be welcome in the article in my opinion. MLA 10:47, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't quite see why this comment needs to be here. It's a boneheaded thing to say and certainly sexist. However, its more or less just a gaff and doesn't seem to be a legitimate controversy, especially in light of the current FIFA investigations. -Xcuref1endx (talk) 16:08, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Controversy? Scandal? Not on Wikipedia, chaps!

The huge, ongoing scandal about the FIFA (corruption, major international news topic, May 2015) and Blatter's rôle in it, or not, and the extant election for president of FIFA do not get a mention.

Wikipedia might as well be operating in the era of the carrier pigeon. At least in those days there were educated editors of major publications. Such is the [dumbing down] of the age of the web. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.118.0.8 (talk) 17:45, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Except for the fact that no reliable sources actually implicate him in it, therefore it isn't directly relevant to the article, and is WP:UNDUE. If he's directly linked to the case by reliable sources, then it can be added.

Also, this page has a link to 2015 FIFA corruption case, which is a whole article about it. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:55, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

It is split off into 2015 FIFA corruption case which is linked from this article. It would have WP:TOPIC issues here, as this is a biography of Blatter, not a blow by blow account of the 2015 controversy in which he is not indicted.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:58, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Ongoing vandalism

Despite the "pending review" status, this article is receiving a lot of vandalism. I have requested semi-protection at WP:RFPP. Axl ¤ [Talk] 12:55, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

And some media coverage here. The page was not hacked; an IP editor made a change which was pending, and reverted it a minute later. Move along, nothing to see here. The edit never went live in the article, that is the whole point of pending changes.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:12, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, it was precisely because of that "Independent" report that I came to inspect this article. Axl ¤ [Talk] 18:45, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Israel Suspension section

I think we were trying to clean up that section at the same time. I thought the original we were editing was blatant POV. Anyway, the Undue tag is not necessary after the cleanup, unless you'd like to eliminate that section entirely, which is fine with me. Cheers. J M Rice (talk) 18:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC) I have no idea how the line below got here. Some kind of software glitch I guess.

--- This section has clearly been put in by a BDS political activist and even as reported news is highly biased. As this is a section about a non-event it should be removed. Jenny Rubens (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:47, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 May 2015

Hi I would like you to consider editing the section entitled 'Israeli suspension in FIFA' on this page. I would say this article is biased and inserted to promote an idea rather than inform. The title 'Israel suspension in FIFA' is not grammatical and uninformative. The article as a whole presents the idea that discrimination of Palestinians by Israel is a matter of fact whereas it is an opinion which is hotly and widely disputed. The article presents the idea that there is a clear analogy between the present attempt to expel Israel from FIFA and FIFA's suspension of South Africa for racism. This comparison is also widely disputed. I think that the PFA's attempt to have Israel banned from FIFA lacks notability, especially when ranked alongside genuine 'major' controversies, like the allegations of financial and other corruption which may end up destroying FIFA. But in any case the page is about Sepp Blatter whose involvement in the dispute has been slight and recent. The first line of the article looks like it is there solely to justify the presence of the article on this page in the first place. I would like to replace the entire article with the following title and body as I think it is more neutral, factual and appropriate to be included in a list of incidents which occurred during Sepp Blatter's time at FIFA. Thanks.

Politics in Sport

An attempt by the Palestinian Delegation to FIFA to get Israel expelled from the organization was resisted by Sepp Blatter who instead called for a Peace Match between Palestinians and Israelis '..football shall connect people and not divide people..' he said. Israeli Premier Netanyahu agreed saying ' Sport is a vehicle of goodwill among nations.' and later Palestinian football chief Jibril Rajoub withdrew the bid saying ' I am here to play football rather than play politics. I don't want to score goals, I want to end suffering.

http://www.bicom.org.uk/quote/25527/ http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/05/20/fifa-president-refuses-to-suspend-israel-over-alleged-discrimination/ http://news.sky.com/story/1492857/palestinians-drop-bid-to-ban-israel-from-fifa

87.1.247.206 (talk) 19:35, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Section Removed

 Removed Per the above discussions, I have removed the "Israeli suspension in FIFA" section, so it can be better discussed. Currently I think it's too WP:UNDUE. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:52, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Text

Sepp Blatter was heavily involved in a major controversy erupted in 2014 concerning discrimination against Palestinians by Israel. This led to a proposal for Israel's suspension from FIFA. FIFA has suspended South Africa in the past for its apartheid-era discrimination against black South Africans. Israel supports soccer teams in the occupied territories and treats Palestinian members differently. Palestinians allege the policies supported by Blatter are 'racist'. Sepp Blatter objects to the proposed suspension. Palestinian protestors interrupted the congress leading up to the 2015 re-election bid by during Blatter Palestine withdrew the bid for Israel's suspension in the midst of the FIFA presidential election.

References

Actual middle name

FIFA's biography (cited by this article) initially names him as "Joseph S. (Sepp) Blatter", then continues to refer to him as "Joseph S. Blatter". It is not clear whether Sepp is short for Joseph or S. is short for Sepp. Either way, "Sepp" should not appear within the full name in quotation marks. Either Sepp is his actual main forename, separate from Joseph, (but why would FIFA suppress it in favour of Joseph?) in which case quotation marks are unnecessary, or it is simply short for Joseph, in which case it has absolutely no place within the full name on the opening line. In fact, this confusing (but spreading) habit is almost certainly why the web site of the South African Presidency, in addition to the error mentioned under 'False middle name?' above, also duplicated what is probably a single first name as if it were two different names(i.e. "Joseph Sepp Bellend Blatter"). So I shall amend the opening line to show Joseph S. Blatter until such time as we establish what (if anything) the S stands for. It's just clearer that way.

(I notice that someone has amended Bill Clinton's full name so it no longer matches the example in the MoS.) Grant (talk) 12:23, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I agree - I always thought the "Sepp" was short for "Joseph", and that his actual middle name was not public knowledge. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:50, 15 July 2010 (UTC) (corrected Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:33, 16 July 2010 (UTC))

It is possible (but not probable) that the middle "S" does not stand for anything at all (c.f. Michael J. Fox). Are Swiss birth certificates publically available? If so, perhaps a Swiss wikipedian could look up Blatter's birth certificate and solve the mystery. Greenshed (talk) 21:32, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

According to 11 Freunde - Die Hände zum Himmel, Blatter's middle name is the shortened form of his first name. To quote:

Als der Schweizer 1981 Generalsekretär der FIFA wurde, reichte ihm der bodenständige, aber nicht eben kosmopolite Geburtsname »Josef« nicht mehr, hastig nannte er sich in »Joseph« um. Später funktionierte der Schweizer Profilneurotiker seinen Rufnamen »Sepp« dann in einen Zweitnamen um und nennt sich seitdem »Joseph S. Blatter«.

Which roughly translates (sorry my German is not very good) as:

In 1981 when the Swiss [i.e. Blatter] was General Secretary of FIFA, his indigenous [German] birth name "Josef" was not cosmopolitan enough for him and he promptly renamed himself "Joseph". Later, the Swiss profilneurotiker (suffering from a neurosis about one's public profile?) then worked his nickname "Sepp" into a middle name and he has called himself "Joseph S. Blatter" thereafter.

I don't know whether 11 Freunde counts as a reliable source but if we can use this I would suggest pulling out the facts and omitting the negative opinion. Greenshed (talk) 11:54, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 June 2015

1. There doesn't need to be another separate heading for "Resignation". Suggest you just remove it, so that the sentence can sit under the previous one which is L3 "2015 FIFA presidential election, controversy and resignation"

(I think that keeps the 'current events' in more context, instead of highlighting the recentism) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.104.18.121 (talk) 17:25, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

2. There's an extra dot on the end of that sentence, "will resign amid the FIFA 2015 corruption scandal..[62] 88.104.18.121 (talk) 17:04, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

 Done

1. This was done, as described below.
2. This sentence has been rewritten by someone else, and so no longer seems to have that mistake. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:32, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

2 June 2015

I just conflated two sentences saying much the same thing. I kept the newly-created separate section as their will doubtless be more views and news (from WP:RS, of course...) etc to come. Hope that's OK. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 17:22, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Looks good, for right now. I hope it can be kept in some kind of context, because I'm sure there will be massive amounts of detail about this specific part, over the next few weeks - and people will be keen to insert it.

BTW, if possible, it might be better to change Main article: 65th FIFA Congress to Main articles: 65th FIFA Congress, 2015 FIFA corruption case - rather than linking that 2nd one within the para itself? 88.104.18.121 (talk) 17:55, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

ext links

The ext links need fixing. 118.93.95.49 (talk) 20:16, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

 Done SLBedit (talk) 21:02, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 June 2015

188.55.56.14 (talk) 23:29, 2 June 2015 (UTC) resigned

Yes, but he's still the President of FIFA until they elect someone else. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:32, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

And now the ticket scandal...

It's almost as if Blatter attracts these things, isn't it? A business his nephew partly owns, despite inept management at the 2010 World Cup, has been awarded the contract to sell tickets for Brazil 2014. Malick78 (talk) 18:49, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

There should be inclusion of the accusations of pedophilia against Blatter by youngsters selected to lead the players onto the pitch during the Brazil World Cup finals — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.157.113.211 (talk) 00:14, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

template

need to collapse the FIFA template. It is too big. 118.93.95.49 (talk) 21:25, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

top right of the template you can click "hide" Cannolis (talk) 21:41, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

by the time I get to the bottom of the page i am not interssted in hiding it. u have to look at what pple want to look at. If i want to look at the template stuff I can click "show". 118.93.95.49 (talk) 21:59, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Not sure what to tell you. I am not removing content from the template. My suggestion would be again to just click hide or maybe stop scrolling down, there's nothing below the FIFA template on this page anyway. You may want to try the Wikipedia:Help desk to see if you can change your preferences to make templates hidden for you by default, but don't use the edit semiprotected template there. Cannolis (talk) 22:36, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

i didnt say to remove content from the template. you can use the collapse option to that it is only one line. 118.93.95.49 (talk) 22:42, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

The template only autocollapses when there are two templates in a article. SLBedit (talk) 23:03, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

i have set the template to default to the collapsed mode. 118.93.95.49 (talk) 01:44, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 June 2015

182.73.37.206 (talk) 08:27, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 09:01, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Do you realize what a joke you editors are making of WP?

There are quite neutral ways of representing facts (e.g. indictments). And they don't have to specifically name a person to be pertinent to an article on said person. In watching, there does seem to be a cabal among editors on this page for the last week insisting that certain news stories not be mentioned. I know..you allowed a link to the 2015 scandal. Oh my! Perhaps you don't know how to write facts? Juan Riley (talk) 01:46, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

What stories? SLBedit (talk) 13:10, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Since they can't be mentioned... he can't tell you!!! _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 13:23, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Spouse(s)

What are the sources for the spouse(s) in infobox? SLBedit (talk) 00:19, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

I have removed them from infobox. SLBedit (talk) 15:41, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Disagrees with itself

In the article, it says his hometown is Visp, but it lists it as Zurich. Any help? ThatKongregateGuy (talk) 22:15, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Born in "Visp, Valais, Switzerland" and lives in "Zürich, Switzerland". SLBedit (talk) 22:29, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

No it says In 2011, his hometown was Visp, I don't know if he moved or what.ThatKongregateGuy (talk) 11:15, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Hometown: "An individual’s place of birth (not the case), childhood home, or place of main residence." He can also have multiple residences. SLBedit (talk) 13:09, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Multiple residences. Not multiple hometowns. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 13:11, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Visp in infobox refers to place of birth which is his hometown. @ThatKongregateGuy: what is the "in 2011" reference? Nevermind it's this one. SLBedit (talk) 13:16, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

My first answer was correct. SLBedit (talk) 13:22, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

@Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: I couldn't find any reference to Talk:Sepp Blatter#Spouse(s) so I removed them from infobox. SLBedit (talk) 13:24, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Good move. With all the attention on him currently, I daresay the world will know all there is to be known about him in the not too distant future! _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 13:27, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

In Switzerland, it is perfectly possible to have several official "hometowns" (Heimatorte), but this does not appear to apply to Blatter, whose hometown is apparently Obergoms (before 2009: Ulrichen). He was born in Visp and he resides in Zurich. --dab (𒁳) 14:32, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

The article says that:

"Blatter has been publicly heckled, at the World Cup in Seoul and the Confederations Cup in Frankfurt, both in 2006, in his home town of Visp in 2011...."

It's a bit ambiguous but "hometown" can mean:

"An individual’s place of birth, childhood home, or place of main residence." ^a

In this instance the its his birth and childhood home. — Blue-Haired Lawyer ^t 14:47, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

We should go with FIFA's reference. SLBedit (talk) 15:40, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

of course it's a matter of reference. I was trying to explain that the term "hometown" in Switzerland has a specific, official meaning different from either "place of birth" or "place of residence". Your place of birth will in most cases be different from your hometown, as is the case with JB. --dab (𒁳) 09:34, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

I think what this conversation says is that we should avoid the unqualified usage of the term 'home town' because it can have several different meanings. In English (and this is the English language wikipedia) it is ambiguous between 'place of birth', 'childhood home', or 'place of main residence'. When used in respect to a Swiss national, it is even more confusing because of the concept of Heimatorte, which is (perhaps erroneously) translated to home town, but (as best I can tell) actually means 'place of origin of family'. However in this case the article has already specified Visp as place of birth, so the usage isn't unqualified, and I think is perfectly reasonable. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 12:51, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Blatters resignation and the FBI

Apparently Blatter met with two members of the FBI the weekend before his resignation. He was told, in no uncertain terms, that unless he resigned his own dealings would be made public. He was told that if he resigned he would be allowed to go quietly. This may or may not be suitable stuff for the article. That is up to others to decide. 213.114.44.178 (talk) 16:53, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

• Source? Juan Riley (talk) 16:56, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Negative source. The Guardian (e.g.) says merely that he was "told by those closest to him that the walls were closing in"- and that was highly unlikely to be the FBI! (Good article here) _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 13:22, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Blatter comments re resignation from June 25

This was added by a new user and immediately reverted. The substance should be included. I edited substantially - took out most of the long quotes. Objections to the material should be raised here - or edits made to have the new material - simple reversions are not appropriate. --Trödel 18:07, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 July 2015

Please delete the unnecessary, extra to before the quote in this sentence: He was further quoted as saying that he resigned to "to take away the pressure from FIFA and my employees, including [pressure] from the sponsors...” Perint (talk) 16:45, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Done Cannolis (talk) 19:06, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Date of FIFA Congress

The date for the FIFA Congress to decide on Blatter's successor is February 26, 2016. 82.6.166.179 (talk) 23:54, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Speculation in our FIFA Congress article was also not reliably sourced, and I have removed it. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 21:22, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Name

According to "Zum 75. Geburtstag von Sepp Blatter: Top Ten und Bilderstrecke – 11 Freunde". 11FREUNDE.de., Blatter was born Josef Blatter but later took the nick name Sepp (a German language diminutive of Josef) and styled himself Joseph S Blatter (note the anglicized spelling of Joseph) where the S does not stand for anything per se but references his nick name. In accordance with the Manual of Style, how should this be reflected in the lead? Greenshed (talk) 03:32, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

What about "Joseph "Sepp" Blatter (born Josef Blatter, 10 March 1936), formally styled as Joseph S. Blatter ..." with footnotes to explain that the "S" in Joseph S. Blatter does not actually stand for any other name? Greenshed (talk) 15:07, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sepp Blatter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/federation/administration/releases/newsid%3D625122.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111008141006/http://www.worldfootballinsider.com/Story.aspx?id=34235 to http://www.worldfootballinsider.com/Story.aspx?id=34235

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:37, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sepp Blatter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714202933/http://www.berliner-zeitung.de/archiv/joseph-blatter--der-fifa-praesident--wird-von-fussballfans-gern-ausgepfiffen--weil-sie-in-ihm-einen-geschaeftemacher-sehen--er-kann-das-nicht-verstehen-der-abwehr-profi%2C10810590%2C10393230.html to http://www.berliner-zeitung.de/archiv/joseph-blatter--der-fifa-praesident--wird-von-fussballfans-gern-ausgepfiffen--weil-sie-in-ihm-einen-geschaeftemacher-sehen--er-kann-das-nicht-verstehen-der-abwehr-profi%2C10810590%2C10393230.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:00, 9 May 2017 (UTC)