Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 324: Line 324:


I see that there is currently no article on [[Simon Hooper]] who is now a [[Select Group]] referee. It appears that there was an article, but this was deleted on 11 October 2018. Can this article be reinstated? Thanks. [[User:Daemonickangaroo2018|Daemonickangaroo2018]] ([[User talk:Daemonickangaroo2018|talk]]) 08:35, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
I see that there is currently no article on [[Simon Hooper]] who is now a [[Select Group]] referee. It appears that there was an article, but this was deleted on 11 October 2018. Can this article be reinstated? Thanks. [[User:Daemonickangaroo2018|Daemonickangaroo2018]] ([[User talk:Daemonickangaroo2018|talk]]) 08:35, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
:{{ping|Daemonickangaroo2018}} The article deleted on 11 October 2018 was not about the referee, it was about a completely different person (a "social media influencer", whatever the hell that us), so if we were to have an article about the ref it would need to be started from scratch.... -- [[User:ChrisTheDude|ChrisTheDude]] ([[User talk:ChrisTheDude|talk]]) 10:33, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
:{{ping|Daemonickangaroo2018}} The article deleted on 11 October 2018 was not about the referee, it was about a completely different person (a "social media influencer", whatever the hell that is), so if we were to have an article about the ref it would need to be started from scratch.... -- [[User:ChrisTheDude|ChrisTheDude]] ([[User talk:ChrisTheDude|talk]]) 10:33, 12 November 2018 (UTC)


== James H. Logan ==
== James H. Logan ==

Revision as of 10:39, 12 November 2018

    WikiProject iconFootball Project‑class
    WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
    ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

    Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/WikiProject used

    National team ranking templates

    I've created {{FIFA World Rankings}}, {{World Football Elo Ratings}} and {{FIFA Women's World Rankings}} to help facilitate the update of national team rankings. This should allow for all the rankings to be updated in a matter of minutes instead of changing individual articles, also ensuring pages don't become outdated. Additionally, all the rankings are now properly sourced. I've added documentation that should explain the templates well, let me know if anything is unclear. S.A. Julio (talk) 07:45, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Good job. Kante4 (talk) 09:41, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Let me copy it for the FIBA World Rankings. Asturkian (talk) 09:44, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    This is amazing S.A. Julio! :) One problem I can forsee is IP editors wanting to update their own country's ranking right away, not understanding the format, and changing it on the country's page. I wonder what would be the best way to minimize that... --SuperJew (talk) 13:47, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Good question – there is a similar issue for {{English football updater}} towards the end of the season. Number 57 17:13, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Excellent! Is there a page/script that monitors how many pages a template is used on? Perhaps something like that can be used to detect when people remove it? Probably this will be easier than making sure there's someone actively watching every national team page.. --Philk84 Talk Contributions 16:29, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    The "what links here" tool should allow to see where the template is transcluded in the mainspace, I'll check the count once new rankings are released to see if any articles have had the template removed. S.A. Julio (talk) 17:02, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Have you considered do this with a Lua module. Once over the initial learning curve the code is far easier to follow than the template language. It would also be easy to have one module with different data pages for the different rankings.   Jts1882 | talk  15:19, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not too familiar with Lua, though I'll consider using a module in the future. S.A. Julio (talk) 17:21, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    FIFA World Rankings as of 18 July 2024.[1]
    Rank Change Team Points
    1 Steady  Argentina 1901.48
    2 Steady  France 1854.91
    3 Increase 5  Spain 1835.67
    4 Increase 1  England 1812.26
    5 Decrease 1  Brazil 1785.61
    The Lua modules make life much easier when dealing with complex modules and provide flexibily for extension. I find the Lua code far more easy to read. When the template doesn't change often there isn't so much advantage. As an exercise I've drafted a generic module for sports rankings: (Module:SportsRankings). The idea is that different rankings just need a separate data subpage, which then are implemented with the same code. For demonstration purposes I've put top ten data in data pages for FIFA and ELO rankings: Module:SportsRankings/data/FIFA World Rankings and Module:SportsRankings/data/World Football Elo Ratings. I've created sandbox versions of the calling templates: {{FIFA World Rankings/sandbox}} and {{World Football Elo Ratings/sandbox}}. For other data pages it should work automatically if the name of the ranking called by the template matches the module data subpage. If there is any interest, this can be developed further to allow different outputs and include additional information.   Jts1882 | talk  15:27, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    FIBA World Rankings as of 27 February 2024.[2]
    Rank Change Team Points
    7 Decrease 1  Canada 746.2
    8 Decrease 1  Argentina 743.2
    9 Steady  France 737.1
    10 Steady  Lithuania 713.1
    Hi, as I told you I did the same for the {{FIBA World Rankings}} of basketball. Asturkian (talk) 08:27, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    I've gone ahead and made a fully functional version of the module for the sports rankings, using the sandbox templates mentioned above. I've added an alias for the FIFA codes to make updates easier. As the data is in place, I've also created a template for making tables from the rankings ({{Sports rankings table}}). This means the table in the FIFA World Rankings article page and the individual rankings in infoboxes can all be updated in one place. I've updated the FIBA ranking as well.   Jts1882 | talk  17:49, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Ok, I see how to include it. But where is it edited? Or is it autogenerated from sources? -Koppapa (talk) 20:17, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Koppapa: At Template:FIFA World Rankings/data. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 20:42, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Koppapa: The data for the module is held in a series of subpages. The current pages are listed at Module:SportsRankings/data. These have to be updated by an editor when new rankings are released. The Excel formula to generate the correct format is in the data subpage. The FIFA World Ranking data is at Module:SportsRankings/data/FIFA World Rankings.   Jts1882 | talk  08:15, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]


    UEFA Coefficient Rankings as of 23 October 2018.[3]
    Rank Change Team Points
    41 Increase 2  Lithuania 6.75
    42 Decrease 2  Latvia 5.625
    43 Increase 5  Luxembourg 5.25
    44 Increase 2  Armenia 5.25
    45 Increase 2  Malta 5.125
    I don't suppose anyone has/plans to have a similar template for the UEFA Coefficient ranking? That way, for example, the table on Football in Luxembourg for FIFA (new template) and UEFA (old table) rankings would look similar.. --Philk84 Talk Contributions 21:01, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Philk84: The idea behind the module is that all you need to do is create a UEFA Coefficient ranking data subpage in the appropriate format and call the module function with the subpage name. So the function call {{#invoke|SportsRankings|DATA_SUBPAGE|list}} would use data in Module:SportsRankings/data/DATA_SUBPAGE, with the data subpage set to UEFA Coefficient Rankings. The current functions handle all the rankings the same way, but the advantage of a module is that customisation of different rankings is possible.   Jts1882 | talk  08:26, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I've created data subpage Module:SportsRankings/data/UEFA Coefficient Rankings and entered the data for the five countries in the Football in Luxembourg page. I haven't added the previous points column, but can do if that is considered important.   Jts1882 | talk  09:14, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Great, thanks @Jts1882: - but Latvia are actually down two places compared to the last ranking. I guess all that's needed then is to just pull the information from UEFA and plug it into the data page? I don't think the previous points is needed, it's not shown in the new FIFA ranking table, and if anyone is that desperate to find it out they have the source link directly there.
    UEFA Coefficient Rankings as of 23 October 2018.[3]
    Rank Change Team Points
    42 Decrease 2  Latvia 5.625
    43 Increase 5  Luxembourg 5.25
    44 Increase 2  Armenia 5.25
    On a side note, do you think it's possible to just provide "LUX" instead of 82|86 or 41|45 for these kinds of templates? That way, it doesn't need to be updated again as it could automatically show LUX and the two nations above/below? --Philk84 Talk Contributions 09:54, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes. The table is created directly using invoke in the div just above your comment. It uses the full country name for now, I'll add the code option. I need to think about how to handle the templates, one with all the options (and named parameters) or several with simple options.   Jts1882 | talk  10:29, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks @Jts1882: - I've got both tables now on the Football in Luxembourg page using this new template with the 2 countries above/below. I'll see if I can get the other UEFA Coefficients entered in the data page later today.. --Philk84 Talk Contributions 10:49, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    References

    1. ^ "The FIFA/Coca-Cola Men's World Ranking". FIFA. 18 July 2024. Retrieved 18 July 2024.
    2. ^ "FIBA Ranking Presented by Nike". FIBA. 27 February 2024. Retrieved 27 February 2024.
    3. ^ a b "Member Associations-UEFA Coefficients". UEFA. 23 October 2018. Retrieved 23 October 2018.
    Hi, FIBA rankings still links to the football teams instead of their basketball (or "men's basketball" ones). Asturkian (talk) 11:03, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Links fixed for basketball and women's football teams   Jts1882 | talk  13:51, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    SK, JK, FK for Turkish clubs

    The correct names of some Turkish clubs are "Galatasaray SK", "Fenerbahçe SK", "Beşiktaş JK", "İstanbul Başakşehir FK" - without dots for SK, JK, FK. All of these clubs use these names in their local and foreign official websites and social media presences as such, without the dots. To further support this, you cannot have a Turkish name or acronym with dots in it, as this is explicitly stated by the Turkish Language Association.

    If we are changing names for consistency in English, how about we just change Başakşehir F.K. (futbol kulübü = football club) to Başakşehir F.C. then? It doesn't make sense. There's no point in trying to alter these foreign names to match English naming norms or consistency. I would say accuracy is more important, so trying to anglicise the writing of these names doesn't help. Junk2711 (talk) 19:43, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    If you want to prove the version without dot, list out each club without dot in the primary source (club website) and secondary source. It is not relevant for Turkish Language Association , but WP:RS that exactly about those clubs.
    And yes Galatasaray website https://www.galatasaray.org use SK (without dot)
    fenerbahce website https://www.fenerbahce.org/ also use SK (without dot)
    But please list out the rest of the Turkish Super League, i.e. 18 more club in primary source, plus 20 more secondary sources.
    However, as i said before, http://www.tff.org use dot in the abbreviation. May be you need more secondary source for proving not dot is more common.
    For Ngram, use Fenerbahce and Galatasaray as example, there is no result for any suffix at all [1][2] Matthew hk (talk) 19:54, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I would support removing all the dots if possible, but ideally I would like us to be consistent. People seem to think the dots are necessary to indicate an abbreviation, but that just isn't how things work any more. There was a time when all initialisms would have had dots, but most people are perfectly content with FBI, CIA and UEFA not having dots, so why are we insisting on keeping them for football clubs when they're purely stylistic? – PeeJay 20:00, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    The whole point of mentioning the Turkish Language Association is to say that this is a general naming rule so the situation is the same for every Turkish club. Otherwise of course I wouldn't cite a Turkish language rule for use in English.
    Asking for 40 citations to see this seems a bit absurd. The primary, general citation is the naming rule here (in Turkish) - fourth paragraph, right above #2 says no names besides T.C. or T. (respectively meaning Turkish Republic and Turkey) can use dots. The secondary sources can then be the clubs. As we also talked before, the Turkish Football Federation website is not very reliable with names and I'll also quote that here:
    "the TFF website does not feature the club names with SK or JK. In addition, they are unfortunately not a reliable source for names. Just yesterday this player name was in the news for being ridiculously long. They wrote his name twice but because it is the official FA website people assumed his name was just peculiar. The name was later corrected. Long story short, the TFF site is not reliable for names and other sources using dots are incorrect too." - Junk2711 (talk) 21:07, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Junk2711, it is not that harsh when you want to move 40 or more Turkish football clubs articles for requesting just 40 citations. Matthew hk (talk) 08:21, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Matthew hk - fair enough. Though there are only a few other clubs besides Galatasaray and Fenerbahce. For the other Super Lig clubs: Kasimpasa, Basaksehir, Besiktas Junk2711 (talk) 18:08, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Despite there being no consensus here, Junk2711 has started a handful of RMs, referring back to this discussion as a rationale, as well as moving another one. The discussions are here, here, here and here. Cheers, Number 57 12:18, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Not the happiest with this procedural development, but having thought about it, I'm in full support of doing a move in bulk for the 100 Turkish teams, since they don't use the periods for abbreviations in Turkey and other Eastern European teams lack them (GNK Dinamo Zagreb, AEK Athens, CFR Cluj). SportingFlyer talk 13:06, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not sufficient; saying to move because nearby nations do is like saying 'do X because all English-language nations do' even though we have Los Angeles FC but Manchester United F.C.... GiantSnowman 13:25, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not my point - a quick web search/twitter search shows Turkey rarely if ever uses periods on their abbreviations, and the neighboring nations rule shows our abbreviation periods rule is not absolute (and not for exceptions where "FC" is the official name of the club). SportingFlyer talk 13:30, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Notability of Allan Morrison

    Going through the "unreferenced" articles for the WikiProject, I noticed Allan Morrison. Is he notable under WP:NSPORTS or WP:GNG? Hack (talk) 14:54, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    I would check to see if he actually played for Carlisle (and source it if he did), and if not send it to AfD. Would do it now but am just doing a casual watchlist check. SportingFlyer talk 03:52, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    He played for Clyde when they were in the Scottish second tier. (Then, 'Scottish Division One'; currently, the 'Scottish Championship'). Eagleash (talk) 04:18, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    They were close to promotion to the SPL that season, as indicated in 2003–04_in_Scottish_football. The achievements section of the Clyde_F.C. might need fixing as it as them as runners-up in Scottish Division Two or successors (tier 3) that season. Someone more familiar with the Scottish football division name change might like to check.   Jts1882 | talk  07:45, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    According to the NoTW Football Annual 2004–2005 p.108 they finished 2nd in the 'Bell's' First Division (2nd tier) in 2003–04. The Scottish Football League Division Two was, I believe, the original name for the second tier from the 1890s till 1975. Hence the reference to Div 2 and successors in the Clyde stats. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 12:51, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    In the Clyde article, the wikilink to Scottish Division Two takes it to a division that was the third tier from 1975 and 2013. I think that means the runners-up for 2004-05 is in the wrong tier.   Jts1882 | talk  13:42, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    That seems to be a poorly thought out redirect, although at the time it was created it was probably correct. Scottish Division Two currently redirects to Scottish Football League Second Division (tier 3): the original Scottish Football League Division Two does not appear to have its own article and redirects to Scottish Football League. The article for the league for the year in question would be Scottish Football League First Division but that only applies from 1975 to 2013 so would be inaccurate as a heading in respect of other earlier years in that honours section. I have tweaked the link to point to Scottish Football League Division Two (which redirects as above); but the whole thing is rather confusing and having no article for the original Div. 2 seems an omission; unless I've failed to find it (not impossible!). Maybe another editor with a bit more time available can have a look and see if there's a better way to do it. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 14:42, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    I've sorted out the Morrison article. GiantSnowman 14:17, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Soccerbase.com

    Is it me or is soccerbase becoming less reliable? Govvy (talk) 14:54, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    It is becoming less reliable.--EchetusXe 11:17, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Both, it is you and Soccerbase is becoming less reliable. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:20, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    :/ I should kick The Rambling Man in the shin for that reply!. Govvy (talk) 13:06, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Olympic footballers

    Hi. As part of my ongoing work to create biographies on Olympians, I've now created a stub for all the missing footballers. If you're intrested, you can find the full list here. I went the squad lists for each Olympics (example), and completed the red links for those with biographies on Sports Reference. The caveat is that I've not gone through every single existing blue link to ensure it's the right person, but if you spot anyone who is missing, I'm more than happy to create a stub for them (drop a note on my talkpage). Likewise, if I've created a stub and the subject already exists (different spelling, etc), then I've no problem if you want to merge/redirect to the earlier article. Or, if you prefer, drop me a note and I'll do the work on that too.

    Now football is my least favourite sport (please put your pitchforks down), and as a result, I know next to nothing about individuals and teams. So any questions about confusion between two players are probably best left to this talkpage, and not mine! And lastly, thanks to @GiantSnowman: for some early guidance. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 19:17, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I was I under the impression that for men's football, playing at the Olympics didn't grant notability to players as it's not classed as senior international matches as the squads are largely U23 players (unlike women's Olympic football, which is full age teams). This is certainly how I recall things going at AfD when this has come up. Number 57 20:58, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    They pass both WP:NFOOTY and WP:NOLYMPICS. Specifically NFOOTY says
    Players who have played in, and managers who have managed in any Tier 1 International Match, as defined by FIFA, in a competitive senior international match at confederation level regardless of whether or not the teams are members of FIFA, or the Olympic Games. Spike 'em (talk) 21:28, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    From 1992 on, Olympic men's football matches haven't counted as full internationals due to the age limits. Hack (talk) 05:41, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    There is no doubt they pass WP:OLYMPICS, and I'd read WP:NFOOTY to read as:

    Players who have played in, and managers who have managed in:

    • any Tier 1 International Match, as defined by FIFA,
    • a competitive senior international match at confederation level regardless of whether or not the teams are members of FIFA, or
    • the Olympic Games.
    Jack N. Stock (talk) 05:52, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    In order to came out from the grey area, better pass both WP:NFOOTY and WP:GNG. As i remember some US Olympics footballer, as they were playing college soccer at that time, were consider not passing NFOOTY (or GNG all together). Matthew hk (talk) 06:16, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the question, Number 57. Per the replies above, they all pass WP:NOLY. I know you have different criteria for N:FOOTY, but I think they pass that as well. If it helps, many of the biographies I created had multiple links to other langauge wiki articles, and the ones I looked at, had a wealth of information in their respective languages. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 08:16, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    It's been long-established that competing at the Olympics - as footballer or other - grants notability. GiantSnowman 09:11, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    May be i messed my memory of early 2010s arguments then. Matthew hk (talk) 16:25, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd agree you could fail WP:NFOOTY but still pass WP:NOLY. SportingFlyer talk 09:12, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    And to be clear, NFOOTY does not apply to Olympic qualifying, correct? (e.g. Football at the 1976 Summer Olympics – Men's qualification) S.A. Julio (talk) 10:28, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Zdenek Bezdek

    I'm trying to decide if Draft:Zdenek Bezdek satisfies WP:FOOTY. It appears that he has played at least one game for FC Baník Ostrava, but I can't tell if this site is a reliable source. Could someone who understands Czech check? Clarityfiend (talk) 07:00, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Lidovky.cz is the website for a Czech newspaper (Lidové noviny) which should be reliable. However, I'm not sure i understand what that link is suggesting. It indicates he played in a 6th round match between České Budějovice and Ostrava which ended 0-2 (but according to DNES' football database and RSSSF, these teams didn't play in the 6th round of the 2008/09 season nor did either match end 0-2). I'm guessing the match was with Ostava's youth team (RSSSF indicates Ostrava didn't play České Budějovice in the cup that year). Even if he made a single 15 minute substitute's appearance in the Czech first division during 2008, that's not enough to meet the spirit of NFOOTBALL (as at age 28, his career is winding down in semi-pro, regional league football). Jogurney (talk) 03:43, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:22, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    2018–19 Premier League screenshot error

    Please have a look at the screenshot, I just wanted to point out that for laptop screens, that capacity information is completely unreadable and stadiums in the list is covered also. I have no idea how to fix it. Maybe someone can fix it. Govvy (talk) 16:07, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Which browser? And do you know what your Browser/Screen size are? What's My Browser should tell you. I resized my (Chrome) browser window and the map was pushed above the table without overlap --Philk84 Talk Contributions 16:25, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Same here in Firefox, the map was pushed above the table. The CSS float right behaviour of the map shouldn't result in overlap. Without knowing why it is occurring, any "fixes" will be dependent on the computer of the editor. Is it a Mac with Safari?   Jts1882 | talk  16:33, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I am using mac, safari, Govvy (talk) 16:53, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Using Firefox, all good for me. Kante4 (talk) 18:06, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I have same effect on Chrome on Mac. I could get it to do similar on a Windows PC using Chrome earlier by resizing the browser window (though there was only a small range of browser sizes that made it happen). Current laptop screen is 1280 pixels, I wasn't aware of how to check the browser size earlier whilst on PC. Spike 'em (talk) 18:56, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    At browser width 1131, the table is quite thin and fits alongside the map. At 1132, and above, the table widens and the map overlaps it. Narrowing again, down to 1097 and below, the table widens and sits below the UK map and next to the London one. Spike 'em (talk) 19:07, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Using Chrome on a Windows 10 laptop I get the same : between browser width of 1132 and 1331, the map overlaps the table (the amount of overlap decreases as window gets wider). Using Edge on the same PC, the overlap doesn't happen: the table is rendered in a different area of the browser window. Spike 'em (talk) 22:19, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Looks fine to me on Chrome v70 on Windows 10. But I've had issues like this on other tables on Wiki before, they usually fix themselves in the next version of Chrome. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:28, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I get the same in Chrome. As I narrow the window there is a width where I get overlap and then it moves when the window goes narrower.
    It appears that the problem is due to interaction of the infobox, the two maps and the table. I've moved the maps to the "Stadiums and locations" subsection and put a
    before this section so it appears below the infobox. This fixes (or at least is a workaround for) the problem in Chrome for me. How about Mac/Safari?   Jts1882 | talk  09:33, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, looks good to me (on chrome), will have a look on Mac later. I was going to try moving / adding some text to move the table clear of the infobox; I'd not seen {{clear}} before. Spike 'em (talk) 09:48, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    In this case it would be convenient to widen the infobox, say to 400px. There is a lot of information in the infobox compared to the top text sections and the first column is rather narrow. Unfortunately this particular template doesn't use bodystyle or labelstyle and doesn't have an image (another way to widen infoboxes).   Jts1882 | talk  10:00, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    That's better, it's fixed on my browser now from the changes. Govvy (talk) 13:07, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Odisseas vs. Odysseas

    In Odisseas Vlachodimos article, should we write "Odisseas" or "Odysseas"? Since some people started changing his first name to "Odysseas", I added "also known as Odysseas" to the lead. Apparently, it didn't help much. Please give your input at the talk page. SLBedit (talk) 20:43, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Also, Vlachodimos represented Germany at youth level, but now he's eligible to represent Greece. So I changed the lead to "is a Greek footballer". Is it okay? SLBedit (talk) 20:47, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    As the article is located at 'Odisseas' we should use that spelling throughout. If there is consensus at WP:RM to move the page to 'Odysseas' then use that spelling throughout. And no, that is not standard wording for players born in one country who represent another. GiantSnowman 20:51, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the reply. For some reason, since he joined Benfica, he changed his name to Odysseas (which is now repeated in the lead, by the way), hence the "also known as Odysseas". SLBedit (talk) 20:55, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    It really depends on secondary source. wiki article should reporting notable alternative spelling that appeared in secondary source. Also, wiki used to have Wikipedia:Romanization of Russian and people stick to that essay. I wonder wiki user would stick to one and only one Greek romanization method or not. But sometimes user just edit out alternative spelling in the Greek articles. i and y different may be not quite notable to mention, but sometimes more variation was also observed such as in Dimitris Melissanidis (Dimitrios, Melisanidis). As a side note, Chinese articles are in complete nightmare that came with {{Chinese}} infobox, as many name were not under standard Chinese pinyin translation but under their local dialect. Matthew hk (talk) 04:10, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Is he "also known as Odysseas" or should it instead be a footnote indicating that it's an alternative spelling/transliteration? Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 16:59, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    A footnote would be better because, currently, "Odysseas" is only written twice in the article. SLBedit (talk) 00:30, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Please, move the title to S.S. Lazio Calcio Femminile (as before) and create a new page for S.S. Lazio Women 2015. They are two different clubs, that play in different leagues.--79.36.72.222 (talk) 18:27, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Unlike other team that bought license from another club, S.S. Lazio the football club and S.S. Lazio the multi sport club , is somehow closely related, thus the two teams were also closely related, just one under the professional football club one under muilt sport club of the same name. It may worth to discuss for such one league one team issue or the "B" team was not split from the main article for the women section of Lazio in general. Matthew hk (talk) 18:36, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Matthew hk: Lazio Calcio Femminile have an history that continues in C. These are two clubs that could play against.--79.36.72.222 (talk) 00:19, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    That is something like Juventus verse Juventus B. They can against each other in theory, but they also shared the same club crest and same origins. The argument is not about they are two clubs since the men football club is originate from the multi sport club while the women football club affiliated to the multi sport club. Forking content from stub article is not the best way. Matthew hk (talk) 03:42, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Matchday squads

    Parklands cobbler (talk · contribs) is again adding full matchday squads for each game during the season (here). After removing them, he told me to "plz go away" and readded them. Those should not be included or? That's just too much. Kante4 (talk) 20:01, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Nothing personal, Ive been doing this for a long time mainly with my own team, and its something which clearly adds to the page, its not vandalism. Its alot of work, just let me get on with it without deleting it. Kthanksbye.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Parklands cobbler (talkcontribs) 22:52, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    First, sign your posts. Second, that's a big WP:NOTSTATS issue there. Full squads don't need to be listed except for important matches (e.g. cup finals, world cup groups, etc.) Jay eyem (talk) 00:29, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Another vote for NOTSTATS here. Spike 'em (talk) 00:35, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure it's WP:NOTSTATS as it's a table and there's not a statistic in sight. It does appear to be compiled in a form that is WP:OR, though. SportingFlyer talk 00:44, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Def looks like stats, and I don't see how it adds to the page. The format is very hard to read --SuperJew (talk) 07:40, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Aside from being somewhat excessive, the entire article is unreferenced and the table may confuse readers by listing players as numbers 1-11 even though in this season the team were wearing individual squad numbers. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 08:42, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed as WP:NOSTATS. The match report url link is for people to see more information such as lineup, but no need to insert lineup in the wiki article. Matthew hk (talk) 08:46, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    We don't need full squads for every single match of a league season, I back its removal -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:50, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Ok I'll get rid of the numbers at the top but keep doing it, thats the info I'll take from this chat. thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Parklands cobbler (talkcontribs) 09:26, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    That's just wrong. There is not a single editor in favour of those matchday squads, for different reasons. Kante4 (talk) 09:28, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) I agree with SportingFlyer that it doesn't violate WP:NOSTATS, which covers Excessive listings of unexplained statistics. The statistics are in context and placed in a table as suggested accordingly, statistics should be placed in tables to enhance readability.
    Whether the article needs all the information is another question. But not being necessary is not the same as grounds for removal.   Jts1882 | talk  09:30, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I note that Parklands cobbler (talk · contribs) has reinstated the table, but has now assigned positions instead of numbers. This seems to be stating that Northampton played 4-4-2 in every single game. This may or may not be true, but there is still not a single source for anything in this article. I suggest that the first thing the editor should concentrate on is sorting this out. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 09:50, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    This is absolutely pedantic, but it can't be WP:NOTSTATS because the information isn't quantitative or numerical. I think we're perhaps thinking of WP:NOTDIRECTORY. I think there's now a general consensus to remove the table, though. SportingFlyer talk 09:53, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes we do. And adding it back is editing against consensus. Kante4 (talk) 09:58, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Parklands cobbler: there is clear consensus here that such tables should not be included. I have therefore removed it again. If you re-add it you will be blocked for disruptive editing. GiantSnowman 10:04, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    This is a vendetta by Kante4 who is as has been mentioned is being really pedantic. Ilikeeatingwaffles has stated to sort the problem out which I will endevour to work out. Jts1882 & SportingFlyer don't agree with removal on WP:NOT STATS etc as they are quite clearly stats. So I really don't see a problem.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Parklands cobbler (talkcontribs) 10:24, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Again - there is consensus for removal. Do not re-add it. GiantSnowman 10:26, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Yep, I'm on board with removing this info. It's really not necessary. If you want to compile shit like that, set up your own website. – PeeJay 10:29, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    What a horrible table, had to put my glasses on to read that, it probably violates WP:ACCESS also. Govvy (talk) 10:31, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Hah, I was the one being pedantic, and I think it should be removed as well! SportingFlyer talk 10:42, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Serbia vs. Albania

    Does anyone know if caps were still officially awarded for the abandoned Serbia v Albania (UEFA Euro 2016 qualifying) match in 2014. The RSSSF and NFT do not seem to state that FIFA have not counted the match in players' totals. Kosack (talk) 06:44, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    w/o may be not counted as caps. However, as wikipedia is merely a tool to reporting the caps from reliable secondary source, if those source count w/o as caps, then use that version in the secondary source, instead of "official version". I even digged out a FIFA open letter to country FAs, saying friendly with more than 6 substitute will be doomed from international A match to training, the latter is not counting for ranking. But certainly if this dooming was existed, reliable source may or may not count it (more likely count it in my personal opinion ). Matthew hk (talk) 08:41, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I've always been under the impression that we don't count non-FIFA matches for players' totals. Or have I got that wrong? Kosack (talk) 09:27, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes we don't count non-FIFA match, but it is a grey area for match that never complete (or in my second example, a scheduled, will be recognized FIFA-match turn not recognize by FIFA due to too many substitution), and in this case, the match was scrapped entirely and the result was awarded. Matthew hk (talk) 09:55, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Does this guy pass WP:NFOOTBALL or not? Govvy (talk) 17:59, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    He's played in the Moldovan National Division which is apparently a fully professional league. So yes, he meets WP:NFOOTY. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:30, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Conflict on prize list

    Hello everybody,

    Sorry for my bad English.

    On the Germany team article, on the lead section, there is this sentence:
    After winning the 2017 Confederations Cup, it became one of the only four nations—alongside Brazil, Argentina and France—to win all three most important men's titles recognised by FIFA: the World Cup, the Confederations Cup, and the Olympic tournament. They have also won their respective continental championship (Copa América for Argentina and Brazil, and UEFA European Championship for France and Germany). with two sources.

    But there are many problems with this sentence :

    • Germany team has never won Olympic tournament (only East Germany team and the current Germany team is not the fusion of the two Germany teams but the team of the Deutscher Fußball-Bund what was already the federation of the West Germany), moreover for the great websites of football statistics like Rec.Sport.Soccer Statistics Foundation, Germany includes West Germany but not East Germany for all statistics. Basically, everybody agrees on 19 World Cup appearances and not 20 (number with East Germany);
    • the two sources didn't say Germany team has won Olympic tournament. The best result for the team in the prize lists of the sources (FIFA website) is the silver medal in 2016 and the results before 1990 were in the list too with the bronze medal in 1988 ([3]);
    • when the sentence was written with this sources, the sentence didn't say that but "after the 2017 Confederations Cup it became one of the only four nations - alongside Brazil, Argentina and France - to win all full senior international major titles: FIFA World Cup, Confederations Cup and the applicable continental tournament". No olympic tournament in this sentence;
    • moreover, the sources do not say either that it is the fourth nation but only: Germany team won this three tournaments. For the four nations, we only know by cross-checking with other articles or personal knowledge;
    • according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, "The lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents." this content is not even developed in the body of the article.

    Despite all this elements, an contributor has reverted the deletion of this sentence on 16 October and doesn't want revert his revert. Since three weeks, I try to convince this contributor. This contributor doesn't see the problems et doesn't accept the sources (Wikipedia:Five pillars) et his only argument is that it isn't his opinion despite other contributor with similar contribution than me (@Wildboy7: agrees with me: cf. [4]).

    I want your support for remove this sentence but keeping the sources that are useful for the precedent sentence.

    GabrieL (talk) 16:56, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    I am wondering whether the above article is now more about the scandal than it is about the song. If it is, and the addition of material that Big Jock cannot possibly have known about as it is too recent may suggest so, should the title be changed to reflect this? Britmax (talk) 18:36, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    I added it, so not sure why not address me or at least tag me in the discussion? I was uncertain which article to add the info to (person bio or song), in the end went for both at present although fully welcome such discussions. I would say that although relating to later incidents, its valid to add IMO as the debate on whether torbett should have been allowed around children related back (in the sources, not to synthed by me) to the original incidents when stein or others may or may not have been aware and may or may not have booted him out. And this is the theme of the song. Crowsus (talk) 19:07, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I was seeking a general opinion of which way the article might be going. You make an interesting case regarding the incidents having happened while he was around, lets see what other opinions are. Capital letter for surnames, by the way. Britmax (talk) 16:33, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Nationality in lead

    Hi, this may have been already discussed but what is the standard for the nationality of people with multiple citizenships in the lead?

    For example, Alexander Michel and Felix Michel have just been called up to the Lebanon national football team thanks to their Lebanese origins. They have however lived all their lives in Sweden and, other than having a Lebanese grandfather, are completely Swedish. Is the correct lead "...is a Swedish footballer of Lebanese descent who plays for..." (current), "...is a Lebanese footballer who plays for..." (because of the national team they play for), "...is a Swedish-Lebanese footballer who plays for..." (therefore considering both citizenships equally) or other?

    Thanks for your time. Nehme1499 (talk) 21:55, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Depends on how controversial it is... I usually go for "X is a professional football player for X and the X national team" then you can go into the specifics of where they were born and raised and what myriad nationalities they may have afterwards. Koncorde (talk) 22:42, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Appreciate I'm probably in a minority, but I've never understood the problem with the construct "Felix Michel is a Lebanese-Swedish footballer". Number 57 22:51, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:ASTONISH: Lebanese-Swedish doesn't have a clear and obvious meaning.
    Omitting a "nationality" from the opening sentence – as "is a professional footballer who plays for Foo United and the Bah national team" – and then explaining lower down the lead section "was born and raised in Fooland, and plays for the Bah national team for which he qualifies because his mother comes from that country", tells the reader clearly what the state of play is. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 23:05, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Lebanese-Swedish clearly tells me he's a Swedish national of Lebanese descent, but I think Eduardo da Silva is a better example to use. Based on that I'd go "Felix Michel is a Swedish-born Lebanese footballer"... SportingFlyer talk 00:01, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    The problem being that Eduardo isn't a "Brazilian born Croatian footballer". He is a player with dual nationality, who has chosen to represent one of his nationalities at an international level. Where he was born, and what teams he represents is conflating two different meaning of nationality in the lede that is already a mess because we use footballing nationality in many cases (such as English over British) even though that's a fundamentally flawed premise. It's that kind of problem that gets very sticky with people who are eligible for multiple countries without actually having acquired the nationality (the Home Nations are obvious examples). Eduardo in particular, like Olisadebe, only met the eligibility criteria for Croatian representative nationality because he had not represented Brazil at any prior official competition. However, if he had represented Brazil he might have still taken Croatian citizenship without acquiring eligibility to play for Croatia.
    These are but a few examples why we avoid this kind of crap. Koncorde (talk) 00:47, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    It's accurate. You have to give up prior citizenship to become a Croatian citizen unless you are of Croatian descent. SportingFlyer talk 01:13, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Not according to the Article 5, which states Croatia recognises dual citizenship. Article 2 makes reference to relinquishing a citizenship, but is followed by an "OR" statement indicating that alternatively they may meet the requirement of residency (amongst other factors). Even Wikipedia's own page on Croatian nationality law states so and there are dozens of blogs about Americans applying for dual nationality citizenship. Koncorde (talk) 07:59, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    In the case of the two players mentioned here, they have both acquired Lebanese citizenship due to their origins while maintaining their previous Swedish nationality, making them both Swedish and Lebanese. I have updated both their leads with “is a professional football player who plays for...” and added an explanation about their nationalities under the header. Nehme1499 (talk) 08:19, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Naming conventions

    Hi, which is the preferred option between the two in the case one’s name is already taken by another article on Wikipedia?

    “Felix Michel (footballer)” or “George Felix Michel” (his full name).

    He is commonly called “Felix Michel”, but his full name is George Felix Michel, should that be the article name or should we stick to what it’s called now (“Felix Michel (footballer))? Nehme1499 (talk) 23:52, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Do they have the same year of birth? SportingFlyer talk 01:08, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Unless he's reasonably well known as George Felix Michel, the article should be at Felix Michel (footballer). Hack (talk) 04:10, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Hole (association football)

    Currently Hole (association football) is a redirect to Playmaker. There is, however, no mention of 'hole' that I can see at Playmaker. Is there a more sensible place for that redirect to point to? Or, should some mention of 'hole' be added to Playmaker? Or or, should the page have content in its own right, rather than redirecting elsewhere? I honestly have no idea, as I know very little about football. Cnilep (talk) 03:54, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Here's the last pre-redirect article: [5] I don't think playmaker is the best choice, to be honest. Might be better off deleted. SportingFlyer talk 04:03, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Playmaker could be suitable choice with a simple adddition in the advanced playmaker section, e.g. "advanced playmakers are sometimes described as playing in "the hole" because they occupy a position between midfield and the strickers. This could go before or after the mention of the number 10. Although you have to ask who would be searching using "hole" (a search for "the hole" might be more reasonable) and the more common "number 10" doesn't have a redirect. On the whole, such redirects open a whole can of worms. What about trequartistas or fantasisti, which get a mention in Association_football_positions#Attacking_midfield and Midfielder#Attacking_midfielder (redirect target of trequartistas), possible alternatives for the redirect with appropriate addition to cover the hole term. A delete might be simpler.   Jts1882 | talk  08:13, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    The hole (football) and The hole (soccer) currently redirect to Forward (association football). Hole (association football), Hole (football), and Hole (soccer) each redirect to Playmaker. The Glossary of association football terms as well as several player biographies link to Hole (association football), and some player bios link to The hole (football). Cnilep (talk) 02:26, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    East, West and Germany National Team

    Would someone like to join the discussion about the appropriate lineage of the East Germany Mens National Team and West Germany Mens National Team history in relation to the Germany Mens National Team on Talk:Germany national football team? Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:13, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    FIFA consider Germany the successor to the West Germany team. Just like they consider Russia as the successor of the Soviet Union and Serbia the successor of Yugoslavia. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 09:31, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi everyone. In the page A.S. Roma there is the old logo (used between 2013 and 2017) and not the new one: could anyone upload the 2017 logo?--Luca•M 09:14, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    I uploaded it by myself, could anyone see if the upload is ok?--Luca•M 20:33, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Should this page be on Barawa national football team and the redirect the other way around or not? Govvy (talk) 12:04, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Looks better this way round to me. The team can in no way be seen as representing anything approaching a separate nation or region. See related RM here.Spike 'em (talk) 12:34, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    , K, fair enough, Govvy (talk) 13:09, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Is anyone able to find any other obituary for Roger Hoy besides the Spurs one? Govvy (talk) 12:23, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    This guy? [6] SportingFlyer talk 12:42, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @SportingFlyer: That URL doesn't work, are you sure you copied it right? Govvy (talk) 13:09, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    The source is behind a paywall and also blacklisted on wikipedia. Crystal Palace also have a brief statement like Spurs.   Jts1882 | talk  13:21, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Not an obit, but some information on his condition can be found at the Tottenham Tribute Trust. Another footballer dying too young with dementia.   Jts1882 | talk  13:31, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Jts1882, I used those links as citations. Hope that helps the article, not sure I can do much more for it at the moment. Govvy (talk) 13:52, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Didn't realise it was blacklisted and only hit the paywall - was just putting it up as a possible alternative. Glad it's sorted! SportingFlyer talk 23:59, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Partial ban on "YYYY-YY" article titles (eg 2008–09 Premier League)

    There is a proposal to change Wikipedia's Manual of Style to bar the use of YYYY-YY in articles and titles if ending in -01, -02 etc up to -12 ("unless in close proximity to other ranges in this format that end with numbers outside the 01–12 range"), as "anything ending in "-01" through "-12" ... is routinely misread as YYYY-MM."
    Titles such as "2008–09 Premier League" would not be permitted ("2008–2009 Premier League" would be required) but "2018–19 Premier League" would still be allowed. The discussion is at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Clarifying date ranges in YYYY–YY format. 92.19.28.168 (talk) 16:22, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Simon Hooper referee

    I see that there is currently no article on Simon Hooper who is now a Select Group referee. It appears that there was an article, but this was deleted on 11 October 2018. Can this article be reinstated? Thanks. Daemonickangaroo2018 (talk) 08:35, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Daemonickangaroo2018: The article deleted on 11 October 2018 was not about the referee, it was about a completely different person (a "social media influencer", whatever the hell that is), so if we were to have an article about the ref it would need to be started from scratch.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:33, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    James H. Logan

    On making some edits regarding Raith Rovers players in the McCrae's Battalion article, I noticed that the listing of James Logan linked to the wrong player. The player in question is team captain James H. Logan (the "H" being given as Henry in some references to him), not, apparently, the same individual as Jimmy Logan (footballer) (James Merrilees Logan) or James Logan (defender, born 1885) (James Lochhead Logan, who coincidentally later managed RRFC). Logan is the only one of the Rovers players not to have a linked article, particularly puzzling as he was the captain and the only info I can find regarding him is of him simply in various lists of his comrades. I'm not particularly au fait with using football resources and wondered if anyone here could unearth material with which to create an article. Mutt Lunker (talk) 17:48, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    I've just noticed that the info that James Lochhead Logan was the post-war manager is not cited so this may in fact be a misattribution of our man James H's later career. Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:49, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    And perhaps James Logan (forward, born 1885) is part of the picture. The article appears to only cover part of his career and no middle initial is given. Seems like a bit of straightening out between the 3 or 4 individuals is required... Mutt Lunker (talk) 21:01, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes most of the career of James Logan (forward, born 1885) (he only played as a CF for Bradford City, most of his career he was CH, RH or LH) is missing 1906-1909 Chesterfield, 1909-1912 Bradford PA, Raith Rovers 1912-1916. James Henry Logan born 17-10-1885 (I'm not sure where, sources don't agree) had two spells as a Raith Rovers manager. He also managed Wrexham (January 1937 - May 1938). Outside football he sold candy, tobacco and managed a hotel. He rose to the rank of captain during WW I. Cattivi (talk) 22:58, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    So the attribution of the manager's post to James Logan (defender, born 1885) is incorrect and it should be to James Logan (forward, born 1885), the latter being the James H. Logan we are looking for? Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:22, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, and the link in [[7]] is wrong as well. Cattivi (talk) 23:58, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    As you have the sources for this, would you be able to address it please? Mutt Lunker (talk) 00:30, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Editors in this WikiProject may be interested in the featured quality source review RFC that has been ongoing. It would change the featured article candidate process (FAC) so that source reviews would need to occur prior to any other reviews for FAC. Your comments are appreciated. --IznoRepeat (talk) 21:32, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Categories of Hammam-Lif

    There are Category:CS Hammam-Lif and Category:Club Sportif de Hammam-Lif that should be merged, I guess. --Superchilum(talk to me!) 08:19, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]