Template talk:Infobox football tournament

Champion/champions

This is a difference between American English and British English: American and British English differences#Formal and notional agreement.

The MOS explicitly states one is not considered better than the other and you should retain the status quo "unless there are reasons for changing it based on strong national ties to the topic": Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Retaining the existing variety.

That is not the case here. Beve (talk) 20:07, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

You're right in that there is no national ties to the topic since soccer/football is a global sport. Followers of the game speak both AmE and BrE. Football articles most likely to be read by speakers of BrE (predominantly in Europe) should follow BrE grammar rules; soccer articles most likely to be read by speakers of AmE (the US, Latin America, the Far East perhaps) should follow AmE. But this infobox is used in competitions from around the globe... therein is the problem....

I think the best solution to the Champion/Champions problem is by using Champion(s), or some variation thereof (the way I tried to edit the infobox). Obviously there might be problem (nothing is problem free). The most obvious to me is that those who speak AmE might think there is more than one champion (obviously impossible) since "(s)" is used to indicate multiples of something should there be more than one of something (Most successful team(s)). One plus, especially the case in AmE, is that it is adaptable to teams that are singular and plural (LDU Quito would read as Champion, while Puerto Rico Islanders would read as Champions). This is the way this issue is dealt with in the Sports league infobox, so perhaps it should be used here...

That or add a new parameter... one for each style of English. Digirami (talk) 00:08, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't see why South America, the Far east or anything except US and CA related articles shouldn't use BrE, it would be more consistant, football is more tied to BrE (FIFA uses champions for US teams for example, even espn (american site?) uses champions[1][2][3][4]), and most (all?) american teams use naming where it's "City Somethingers" they would have champions anyway, (even though the MLS infobox doesn't even have the "Current champions" field, as it's "MLS Cup" instead). ch¹⁰ · 05:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Because we don't use BrE in South/Latin America. CONMEBOL, for example, refers to LDU Quito as the defending champion. All other leagues in the region would not Champions (pl.) because their teams don't follow the "City Somethings" format in team names (such as Miami FC), making champion more applicable. FIFA uses BrE because it is based in Europe, a region more likely to use BrE.

Your ESPN only proves that journalists don't know their applicable English grammar, probably the result of most teams in the US refered to in the plural. Digirami (talk) 11:01, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

The problem I can see with "Champion(s)" is that it might misleadly imply that there are sometimes multiple Champions, that the Championship can be tied/shared.

For American readers, might the same ambiguity be possible with "Champions"?

"Champion" might be the least ambiguous way to do after all, even though this will look strange to British English readers.

We could do with a few more people joining the discussion.

Beve (talk) 20:11, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Summarise

Seems not to be a big interest in the question. So I'm gonna propose the change User:Thumperward proposed. The same thing {{Infobox football club}} have {{#if:{{{American|}}} }}, but I don't think it should be added to any countries except the US and Canada related articles... But even there, just asking for articles like the US Open, in AmE it might be corrent that DC United are "champion", but wouldn't "Kansas City Wizards" (or even "New England Revolution", or other teams with a name like that but without a s on the end) be Champions? So under "American = Yes" should we put "Champion" or "Champion(s)"? chandler · 14:02, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

(s)

Yes, the (s) is back, but for a different parameter: Most successful club. As many would know, (s) is added to the end of something to indicate a plural when necessary. I think it should be added to that parameter since there is often more than one club tied as the most successful (current example: Intercontinental Cup; future examples: any tournament really). Any objections? Digirami (talk) 04:56, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't have an objection to that (s), although for accessibility reasons the docs should remind people that if more than one team is given they should be separated by commas and not line breaks (which cause accessibility problems in table cells). Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:52, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Folded/Ceased parameter

Can we add a folded/ceased (whatever word is best) for use in tournament that have are no longer in play? Thanks in advance. Digirami (talk) 19:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Current champions -> Reigning champions

Trying to chg "Current" champions parameter name to "Reigning" champions because the non-specific time reference "current" is unencyclopedic. Being unfamiliar with template changes, ran into difficulty and need some assistance. Presumably the change can be made without damaging existing pages because only the parameter's name and not the parameter itself is intended to chane. Blainster (talk) 18:49, 26 November 2022 (UTC)