Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football

Not to be confused with Wikipedia talk:WikiProject American football, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian rules football, or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Canadian football.

National team RfC

How should national football team articles be titled?

It has been mentioned a few times now that a wider discussion is needed regarding the naming convention for national football teams with regards to the inclusion of gender (see here, here and here for more info) and I feel this is more appropriate than a massive RM involving 200+ articles. It also allows more easily for flexibility if there are differing consensus across countries. I've tried to keep the question as neutral as I can but I would like to hear opinions on how consistent the use of gender in article titles should be and what editors should consider before moving a page. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 10:23, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

• ____ men's national football (soccer) team. Let's go whole hog rather than individually deciding on a nation by nation basis. Felixsv7 (talk) 10:52, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

  For clarity: I meant using soccer when appropriate rather than specifying football (soccer) for every page! Felixsv7 (talk) 08:26, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

• Depends on the country. For some countries, the men's and women's teams get equal coverage, but for most of the world, they do not. As such, for most countries in the world, the men's team is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, but there will be some exceptions (which can and should be discussed individually, similar to whether football or soccer is used in article titles). Wikipedia is here to follow sources, not to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS that most sources for most countries use male as norm. If most mainstream media stops using male as norm principles, then and only then should we mass change articles. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:19, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
• Use "____ men's national football team", with rare exceptions. I don't see the point in adding "(soccer)" except in cases like the US, Canada, and Australia where "football" often means something else (namely American gridiron, Canadian gridiron, or Australian-rules football). I'm not swayed by the PRIMARYTOPIC argument, other than for PRIMARYREDIRECT purposes. I.e., in many if not most cases, "____ national football team" should redirect to "____ men's national football team", but in a few cases maybe should be a short DISAMBIG page, in cases where the women's team is about co-notable with the men's.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:52, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
• Use men's national football team (but following LANGVAR ie for USA, Canada, etc, where it would be men's soccer team). Just easier and prevents incorrect links from women's pages as it would get linked to a DAB and then a notification to fix it. RedPatch (talk) 12:14, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
• According to PRIMARYTOPIC. If the men's team (or women's team) is clearly the primary topic, treat it as such. If neither one is and both are of roughly equal notability, make a disambiguation page for the two at the primary title. Add "soccer" only where the term "football" might be confusing to the reader, such as US, Canada, maybe Australia. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:25, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

  And just for clarity: Use "men's" in the name only if that is what is most commonly done in sources. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:55, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

• Depends on the country and we should reflect what sources say and follow WP:COMMONNAME. If the common name adds "men's", such as it does for the United States for example, then it should be added. Otherwise it varies on a case by case basis. Yes it is an example of male as norm, but that's up to the sources to change, not Wikipedia. Jay eyem (talk) 18:30, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
• Depends on the country per PRIMARYTOPIC. GiantSnowman 18:54, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
• Use "____ men's national football team" per WP:NATDIS. --Frenchl (talk) 06:55, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
• I'd say use men's national football team for the mens' team's name, similary to how it would be used for the gendered national Olympic teams in swimming, track and field, gynmastics, etc. Listen1st (talk) 20:12, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
• Depends on the country, for the vast majority of countries the men's team is PRIMARY.--Ortizesp (talk) 20:48, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
• Use "men's." Clarity is always best. natemup (talk) 22:53, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
• Use ___ biological men's national football team. This may not be that important for men's team, but definitely important for biological women's team. Famous player Quinn is out, transgender, non-binary, does not use the pronoun she/her, and yet somehow still plays for Canada biological women's national team. Therefore the term biological cannot be omitted here. Sofeshue (talk) 11:42, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

• That isn't the WP:COMMONNAME of the teams, and doesn't match any sources. Sources refer to teams as women's football/soccer teams, not biological women's football/soccer teams, regardless of the fact that some teams have non-binary players. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:10, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Cambodian Premier League stats

Does anyone know of a reliable source for player stats in this league? Ben Nugent has gone over there; IPs keep adding stats to his infobox (naturally without updating the timestamp, thereby indicating that he had played for the team before he had joined them) but I can't find any source to confirm if the stats are actually correct or not. His Soccerway profile does not even mention his stint with his current club...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:08, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Global Sports Archive. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 12:41, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

fs player template flagicon issue.

So, I was putting in IRE in the flagicon bit for Republic of Ireland, the alt code says Irish football association, however the flag was wrong, it appears to be the Northern Irish flag and I noticed on the alt code which is odd, also, why is IRE pointing there. Why is it different to the code from {{:flagicon}} ? Whats with the inconsistencies? Govvy (talk) 10:59, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

If I'm reading the source code right, it shouldn't make a difference. Can you link an example? Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 11:14, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

(e/c) You need to use IRL for Republic of Ireland. IRE is the code for the pre-split Ireland team, which was run by the Irish Football Association (the Northern Irish body). The Republic team is run by the Football Association of Ireland. Number 57 11:16, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

@Number 57:, is there an (1882–1950) flag code? At the moment I have,

Note: Flags indicate national team as defined under FIFA eligibility rules. Players may hold more than one non-FIFA nationality.

No.	Pos.	Nation	Player
—	MF	EIR	Charles O'Hagan

As you see, I was trying to use flagicon use the code IRE for a player from Ireland from an earlier period, should I be using IRL or a different code? Govvy (talk) 11:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

I don't understand your question, but IRE and EIR both work for the 1882–1950 team. IRL is for the Republic of Ireland. Number 57 11:37, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

I was trying to get the right flag icon and got thrown off by the different codes and different icons. As I told Primefac, this ship is blown off course! Govvy (talk) 11:50, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Hmm, not sure EIR should link to that flag, IMO the term Eire is almost always associated with the Republic of Ireland being the Gaelic version. Crowsus (talk) 18:12, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

EIR is/was a country code defined by FIFA. Number 57 18:22, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks; however, I had a look at List of FIFA country codes, but neither the FIFA ref, its archive nor the RSSSF ref links that country to that code. Strangely neither of them mention the 'old' Ireland at all, although there are entries for the other states which have altered / split etc. As for the coding, if we are using IRE, then why have EIR in use at all? Crowsus (talk) 02:39, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

pre 1991 Kyiv Vs Kiev

Hi, Ive noticed that Wikipedia has gone with the Kyiv spelling of the team, but throughout the time of the Soviet Union the team was known as Dynamo Kiev. In fact I cant find any English sources that refer to the name as Kyiv. Shouldnt we change the name to what it was called at the time? Nothappycamping (talk) 13:20, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Per WP:KYIV I would assume that for article content prior to 1991 "Kiev" is preferable. Robby.is.on (talk) 13:30, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Indeed. So how would we go about changing the soccer articles? I have no idea how to do such a massive edit. Nothappycamping (talk) 13:33, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Which articles do you mean? Robby.is.on (talk) 13:44, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Soccer, the European Cup, Cup winners Cup, Soviet Union Leagues/cups etc. Nothappycamping (talk) 13:50, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Okay. I don't think it's worth the effort. "Kyiv" isn't wrong, it's just that the transliteration of the Russian pronunciation used to be more commonly used. Robby.is.on (talk) 14:08, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

It can be done. Just because its difficult doesnt mean it shouldnt happen. For historical reasons the team should be called Kiev at least before 1989. Many teams have had name changes and I doubt we stop using the older names in articles that would have featured the team with their previous name, Woolwich Arsenal for example or the IRish Free State. It certainly matters. Nothappycamping (talk) 14:25, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

The only oddity here is that the club's name didn't necessarily change, though. SportingFlyer T·C 14:28, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

What club name didnt change? Dynamo Kyiv was called Dynamo Kiev in English until, at the very latest 1989. Id say it goes beyond that by a year or two. But thats where we are now.

Of course its a name change. I challenge you to find something from Soviet times that used the "Kyiv" spelling. Ive posted match programmes, stickers and badges from the 60s though to the late 80s that use either the Russian spelling or the Kiev in English. Nothappycamping (talk) 14:33, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

There is some information on this on the Kyiv article. Kyiv is the official name for the Ukrainian city. The English version of this is Kiev, but after the 2014 Russo-Ukrainian War the use of the English version of the city name lost favor to the more traditional name. I know this doesn't address 1991 through 2014, but I think politics plays a part in this. Demt1298 (talk) 13:34, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Post 1991 I get why its Kyiv, but it wasnt known as Kyiv before then, it was Kiev. I get that because of politics that many people would prefer to see the Ukranian spelling but that goes against what happened in the past. I genuinely cant find any English article pre 1991 referring to the team as Kyiv. Nothappycamping (talk) 13:38, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

From at least 1989 the club used the Kyiv spelling in their official logo, it's difficult to determine what they officially used before that date though which may be helpful. SportingFlyer T·C 14:08, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

YEah, I see their shirt used the Ukrainian spelling, I wonder did that translate over at the time to Kyiv in the English world.

A match programme from 1986 that uses the "Kiev" spelling.

https://www.sportspages.com/product/dinamo_kiev_v_atletico_madrid_1986_%28ecwc_final%29_football_programme_12291

1987 that uses the Russian spelling

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Dynamo-Kiev-v-Besiktas-1987-1986-87-European-Cup-Quarter-Final-2nd-leg-/362987754402?nma=true&si=FKPsNb5goBuLVOkRaGZgGAPWdjw%253D&orig_cvip=true&nordt=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

A soccer pinbadge from 1987 with the Russian spelling

https://violity.com/en/110299659-dinamo-kiyiv-1987-match-z-porto-portugaliya-kubok-ch-polufinal?utm_source=also_like&utm_medium=dinamo-kiyiv-1987-match-z-porto-portugaliya-kubok-ch-polufinal&utm_campaign=15uah Nothappycamping (talk) 14:30, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

So in 1989, the year that their crest changed the spelling to the Ukrainian version they were still known by the Russian name in European competition.

https://memorsport.com/product-eng-4936-Dynamo-Kiev-MTK-VM-Budapest-UEFA-Cup-official-match-programme-13-09-1989.html

Here is a video of the third round game which was in November. A home game and they are refered to using the Russian spelling. But their jersey is sporting the new logo with, I can only assume the Ukrainian spelling. Its very hard to make out the writing under the "D" but it has to be Ukrainian surely.

So I think we can see the change happening around here.

Kiev was part of the Soviet Union, their players represented the Soviet Union, they didnt play for Ukraine, they couldnt. The team was known historically as "Dynamo Kiev".

It would seem that a decision has been made based on modern politics and not on what happened in the past. Nothappycamping (talk) 02:40, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

If any action is to be taken after this discussion, shouldn't it also apply to the other Ukrainian clubs? In the recent months pretty much all mentions of clubs like Dnipro, Metalist Kharkiv, Shakhtar Donetsk, Chornomerets Odesa (and others) were retroactively changed on English wikipedia to present-day Ukrainian spelling (for all or most of Soviet-era league and player articles and pre-1991 UEFA competitions). --BlameRuiner (talk) 06:28, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

YEah, absolutely. I used Kiev as the example as thats the one that stands out as they were the biggest club back in the day. Nothappycamping (talk) 14:39, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Avua-Siav Leo Nelson#Requested move 30 August 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Avua-Siav Leo Nelson#Requested move 30 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 20:46, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Sergei Mikhaylovich Puchkov#Requested move 30 August 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Sergei Mikhaylovich Puchkov#Requested move 30 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 20:47, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Also, please see: Talk:Leonid Alfonsovich Ostrovski, Talk:Dmitri N. Smirnov (footballer), and Talk:Artyom Aleksandrovich Smirnov ASUKITE 20:51, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Requesting roll-back edits on improperly edited articles

Hello! I just wanted to ask if someone with roll-back rights can help me reverse some edits on the articles about Matteo Guendouzi and Bradley Barcola, please: someone added details about their respective transfers despite of the current absence of official announcements (that one source provided for Guendouzi doesn't count as such), and despite me having added the CST template as a warning...

I don't think it will be needed to semi-protect those pages, though, since both transfers should be made official within the end of deadline day. Oltrepier (talk) 08:10, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

You don't need rollback to undo edits, particularly Barcola which had only one edit to remove, and rollback's no use when multiple editors have been involved anyway. With something like Guendouzi, just look though the history to find the most recent good version, edit that, and put back any good edits that might have been lost in the process. I've done it now, but next time you see something like that, try and fix it yourself; the worst that can happen is you have to self-revert, and so long as you preview before saving, you shouldn't even have to do that.

I don't think the current sports template is designed to stop people pre-empting a transfer; all it's for is to warn readers not to believe what they're reading, and what it really does is advertise that the article tagged might be a complete mess, thus encouraging some editors to try and fix it and other editors to join in the "fun". cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:38, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

@Struway2 Thank you for clarifying this: I guess I didn't understand the real meaning of roll-back...

And yes, that makes sense, since the template doesn't involve protecting a page directly, anyway. Oltrepier (talk) 13:21, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia controversy - article used as a CV to fool european football clubs

Hi! Yesterday, I came across the information that Barkley Miguel Panzo has been utilising his Wikipedia page as a curriculum vitae for an extended period, and he continues this practice to deceive multiple European football clubs. Can you assist me in either removing this content or crafting paragraphs that highlight the Wikipedia controversy surrounding him, which contributed to his notoriety? French Thutmose III (talk) 17:33, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

@French Thutmose III To be honest, it seems like the original scam happened five years ago, and that's reflected in the article's history, but still, the article is definitely a huge mess...

@SarekOfVulcan Sorry in advance for the abrupt ping: I've noticed that you came across that page before, due to vandalism issues. Have you got any thoughts on how we should deal with this situation? Oltrepier (talk) 18:40, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

To be honest, I have never heard of any footballer using Wikipedia as curriculum vitaes before and is probably not sensible to do that.

I can see here that FK Panevėžys, the Lithuanian club, signed him based on false Wikipedia data, an example of deceiving. I agree that the article is definitely messy. It also appears a major contributor, Wakari07, has not been active for two years. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 18:43, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

User:NextEditor123

Is anyone else concerned by this editor's contributions? They are making unilateral changes to hundreds of players' biographies to remove honours that they don't think the player earned. For example, they are removing the 2007-08 UEFA Champions League from Jonny Evans' list of honours despite Evans playing in multiple games during that campaign. They seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that a player has to play in the final for them to be considered to have won a competition, but I'm pretty sure they don't have any grounds for this, certainly not when it comes to a consensus here. – PeeJay 16:48, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

He was not in the team. He was in the loan to Sunderland during that time. You should bring a source which fully confirms that he is Champions League winner in 2008. But you didn't. NextEditor123 (talk) 16:53, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I pointed you to the fact that he made three appearances during that season, which means he was part of the 25-man squad Manchester United named for the competition that year. I also linked you to the UEFA Champions League Statistics Handbook, which lists Evans in a section entitled "Players who have won the UEFA Champions League". Now stop making blind reverts. – PeeJay 16:55, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

At first, he played in 2 group stage matches, not three. Secondary, personal attacks are prohibited there in Wikipedia. Third, if you want to create a topic about Champions League winners right there, you should not put all blame on me as I was just following the consensus that a primary source that mentions particular name of players can be used for the players' articles. The problem is that there were no official sources that lists all players who are officially recognized as UEFA Champions League winners. Therefore, we could only use official news websites or official clubs' profiles for that. You only bring a case with Jonny Evans while there many Wikipedia articles about players where UCL triumph in the honour sections are absent mostly because they left their teams in middle of winning seasons. NextEditor123 (talk) 17:22, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't matter how many matches he played in as long as it's at least one. You have a source now, no need to get defensive. I'm still not impressed by your edits, though, especially your refusal to listen to people who disagree with you. – PeeJay 17:44, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Look who says it.

Speaking of the handbook, would you also recognize managers who were sacked during teams' winning season as Champions League winners? NextEditor123 (talk) 17:53, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

And will you do the same about the rest of missing players in Wikipedia? NextEditor123 (talk) 17:57, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Ass hole 2804:7F4:388B:868A:CCD7:9BEA:1134:2D60 (talk) 18:19, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism is prohibited. You look like a coward by hiding behind IP address and not having Wikipedia account. NextEditor123 (talk) 18:21, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Regardless, wholesale changes like these should really be discussed for a consensus. I don't think you'll get a better citation for winning the event than UEFA stating it. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:51, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Would you also recognize managers who were sacked during teams' winning season as Champions League winners? NextEditor123 (talk) 20:56, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I can't see how that is relevant. We summarise what reliable sources say about a subject, we don't make up rules around who is or who isn't eligible for an honour. Yes, we should have citations that show players have that honour, and if the governing body said they won the tournament, they did. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:23, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Agree with Lee Vilenski here.
I can only give my input regarding Ligue 1, a competition where if you play one single minute and your team is champion, you are also a champion. However, I'm not aware of such rule for the UCL, and you would have to probably find reliable sources to back up the Jonny Evans honour. Paul Vaurie (talk) 23:06, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

But just to clarify: So Samuel Eto'o has won four UCL titles (including UCL 1999-00 with Real Madrid) after all ?!

According to the consensus, any changes in this regard have always been reversed to this day.

On the one hand, page 12 of the handbook in "Players who have won the UEFA Champions League" section, lists Samuel Eto'o in the 1999-00 squad for Real Madrid, but on the other hand, page 15 only lists three titles for him in the section "Players who have won the competition" with more than one club.

--> I don't have a preference myself, but the rule should then apply without restriction. Miria~01 (talk) 01:22, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Regardless of the above, could @NextEditor123: and @2804:7F4:388B:868A:CCD7:9BEA:1134:2D60: please pack it in with the constant edit warring? Mattythewhite (talk) 23:21, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Sahilangh (again)

Hello, I am still unimpressed about a new continual editing pattern of Sahilangh, which continues after a couple of talk page warning messages. It is still obvious this user is not obeying those warnings left yesterday and continues to take away times leaving the "2 September 2023 (UTC)" instead. Especially as later edits were made today so should say "07:58, 3 September 2023 (UTC)" as an example.

There are far too many disruptive edits from this person's block since their return and the warnings other users have placed on the talk page underneath the block notification. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 07:58, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Added to which, it looks like they update stats by adding 1 to what was there before, regardless of whether what was there before was correct and up-to-date per sources. See e.g. Ethan Pinnock, updated by Beatpoet on 13 August to 138 apps, which agrees with Soccerbase; Mr Pinnock has since played 3 PL matches, yet Sahilangh blithely updated it to 139 as of 2 September. Which is either deliberately adding false information or a serious WP:CIR issue. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:27, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

That happened on 28 August when a surely block evading IP did that to Manchester United and Brighton players - on that day I recognised that two users updated them already before the IP did the same hours later. I suspect this editing can only continue. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 08:53, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Inconsistency UEFA competition title honours for players on loan

There should be a consistent policy on how to deal with title honours for players who played matches for the winning team in a UEFA competition but were loaned out during the season. Recent dispute can be seen two topics above, debating whether Johnny Evans won the UCL title in 2007-08 despite being loaned out during seasons. The discrepancy arises from interpretation by the following UEFA Champions League Statistics Handbook, where he is listed in the squad of the winning team Man Utd.
However, the same applies to Samuel Eto'o, who is listed in the 1999-00 UCL winning squad of Real Madrid (page 12), but in an statistical overview of multiple won titles by players (page 15) only three titles are given for him without the supposed 1999-00 title win. In general, to date, all mentions of four titles (with three different clubs) for Samuel Eto'o on wikipedia have always been reversed.

For this reason, there is an inconsistency from player to player on wikipedia based on the perspective of the respective user. Miria~01 (talk) 12:03, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Right - that's probably right. We can't exactly fix that though. We don't make the rules, we just follow what the sources say. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:30, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Coli Saco

Hello everyone!

This is a sui generis report, but anyway, Italian club Ancona recently announced the signing of this player on loan, and I suspect they did so by just translating and copy-pasting chunks of text from his Wikipedia article (I was the one who created it in the first place). Not that I feel angry about it, quite the opposite: I'm happy to see their staff used an article published by me to do their research, and this is literally a free encyclopedia! But still, I'm a little surprised...

Has anyone had similar experiences? Oltrepier (talk) 16:56, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Fantasy Football League#Requested move 28 August 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Fantasy Football League#Requested move 28 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —usernamekiran (talk) 02:44, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Loan end dates in club squad lists

Should we include the end dates of loans in club squad lists such as Manchester United F.C.#First-team squad? User:Chris Calvin and User:Red Devil are arguing that we shouldn't. Chris's reasoning is simply that we don't do it on any other club articles, but I've been editing here for more than 15 years and that seems to be a new development; besides, "we don't do it on other pages" is not a good argument by itself. Red Devil's reasoning is somewhat more developed, claiming that including the end dates damages the aesthetics of the table because it forces the entry onto two lines; I would argue that this is an isolated issue for people using especially small screens, but I'm aware that I mostly use 24-27 inch monitors on the PCs I use most often. They also claim that "it's a current squad" (their bolding); not sure what this means, but I assume they're saying that these players are part of the squad now, so it shouldn't matter when they're scheduled to leave, similar to the way we don't list players whose contracts are coming to an end. In my opinion, this is a completely different issue; loans, by definition, are temporary, and the end date should be listed so that the reader knows whether it's a season-long loan, a six-month loan or a one-month loan. I should also add that those two users haven't been removing the end dates for players who are currently on loan away from Manchester United, so it seems a bit of a double standard. Anyway, what does everyone else think? – PeeJay 08:32, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I have to say I endorse the view that the only really important thing is that the player is currently part of the squad and it isn't really relevant how long that will apply for. If in September Template F.C. have Dave Template (season-long loan) and Bob Template (loan till Christmas) in their squad, does it really matter for the purposes of showing the club's current squad that Dave will still be there in April but Bob won't be (notwithstanding the fact that season-long loans can be curtailed early)......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:39, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Admittedly this doesn't apply in the dizzy heights of the Premier League but it does lower down: if a club signs a player on a short-term contract (not a loan, but an actual contract that only runs for, say, three months), would you want to have "under contract till 30 November" (or whenever) in brackets after his name in the squad listing? After all, that contract is temporary too, and could potentially be shorter than the loan of a player listed above or below him...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:43, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

It's definitely not a recent development as I've never seen it listed on a Scottish club article (I can't speak to English ones though as I don't tend to edit them). I'd agree with ChrisTheDude though. My thinking is that people who want to know when the loan will end will go directly to where they think that information will be – the player's article or the club season article. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 08:45, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I used to be in favour of them, but now the loan market has changed and short term loans don't exist any more at EFL level. So instead of one loanee departing on 10 November, another on 10 December, and another until the end of the season, they all tend to be there until the end of the season and so it's pretty unnecessary to include it and it can look untidy. Still keep it in the 'Out on loan' section because they tend to be one line per entry anyway so there is no downside visually.--EchetusXe 09:58, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I was a bit worried it might not be helpful to add the date, for mobile, small screens access. But it's not too bad. Even still, I wouldn't add the date. Like said above it doubles lines and isn't the best on display. That information can be accessed from season page and player pages. It's just overkill on information. So ye, remove the date. Govvy (talk) 10:13, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

If we're not going to have it in the main squad, I'd remove it from the "Out on loan" section too. No point having one rule for one and one for another. – PeeJay 10:26, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

It's more useful in lower league clubs that loan out players to non-League and may still be on short term loans of varying lengths.--EchetusXe 14:28, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

every club page lists the dates dunno what the opening part is on aboutMuur (talk) 22:39, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

every club page lists the dates - this one doesn't, nor does this one or this one or this one or this one or this one.....I could go on....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:13, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

For consistency's sake though, I think we should make a decision to either have end dates for both incoming and outgoing loans, or neither. – PeeJay 13:34, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I agree completely. I was responding to Muur, who said "every club page lists the dates dunno what the opening part is on about", which I interpreted (rightly or wrongly) as being a claim that all club articles do use end dates and therefore Chris Calvin's argument was unfounded. Which clearly isn't the case...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:40, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Im reffering to when they loan players out, loaning in doesnt list as loaned in until whenever but all the pages do say loaned out until whenever. Muur (talk) 13:47, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough, that was my misunderstanding, for which I apologise -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:15, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

League Performance SVG updates

I would like to update some SVGs from the Romanian Liga I teams, and I'm looking for a recommended SVG editor to do this. If not, is there a page with recommendations on how to size the graph? I see that years are usually 10px wide, but positions vary between 4px and 6px. LaUr3nTiU (talk) 10:37, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Umbro Cup and 1985 Azteca 2000 Tournament

I added a background bit to the Umbro article, don't know if anyone else wants to have a go at expanding the article. I am a bit annoyed these articles are even at AfD! Although minor tournaments, these are still international tournaments and have coverage. They just need fixing up, please help footy project, you're my only hope! Govvy (talk) 10:24, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Trophy display

Just wondering, is it preferable to display club honours like this?:

Taken from: F.C. Famalicão

National
	Competition	Trophies	Seasons
File:Divisao Trophy.svg	Segunda Divisão	2	1977–78, 1987–88
Regional
	Competition	Trophies	Seasons
	Regional Promotion Championship	1	1935–36
	Regional Opening Tournament	3	1982–83, 1984–85, 1986–87
	Regional Honour Cup	1	1986–87
	Primeira Divisão Regional	2	1954–55, 1961–62

Or this?

Taken from: Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Clubs

Template F.C. honours

Honour	No.	Years
Premier Template League	3	3330–31, 3331–32, 3332–33
Template Cup	3	3330–31, 3331–32, 3332–33

Ugogames (talk | contribs) 12:05, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

The trophy icons add nothing encyclopedic and are probably copyright infringements -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:13, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Pretty sure those images fail multiple Wikipedia guidelines, including MOS:ICONDECORATION- An icon is purely decorative if it does not improve comprehension of the article subject and serves no navigational function, which is the case here- and MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE- Images must be significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative. And that's before even discussing the relevance and copyright status of the images you listed here- why would the coat of arms of Braga be an appropriate use for a regional football tournament? Joseph2302 (talk) 12:57, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

The second option 100%. The icons are just decoration. Kante4 (talk) 15:37, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Agree with ChrisTheDude. Checking on Commons, the source says "own work" though I doubt the uploader is the author of that trophy image. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 16:35, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Even if the images were free, we shouldn't use them. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:28, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Arsenal F.C.–Manchester City F.C. rivalry

Eyes on this new article please? I don't have a strong view on its validity and haven't looked at the sources in detail for demonstration of concept notability, but my impression (and TBF the article states as such) is that the content is all very recent. My personal benchmark for a rivalry is, would it endure if both clubs were not challenging for honours? I'd say this maybe wouldn't. There is an interesting aspect to the player and manager relationships currently and recently, but those often fade as the personnel move on. Crowsus (talk) 20:36, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Not a bad article, I liked the opening lead paragraphs, later on prose felt like I was reading some tabloid rag! I don't get the bottom two tables. I would get rid of those under WP:NOSTATS. But I feel the article does have merit. Govvy (talk) 20:49, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

These articles need sources that actively state there is a rivarly. If enough sources talk about this, then there's no real issue if it's only recent games where they've made this comparrison or only a couple. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:23, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

tehres no rivalry Muur (talk) 22:31, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

• There isn't a single source mentioning a rivalry between the teams, let alone a long-running one, and therefore the article should effectively not exist. It would be a shame to send something that an editor has clearly worked hard on to AfD, but I don't see any alternative. Black Kite (talk) 12:21, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

As mentioned by others there is no history or rivalry between these two teams - they just both happen to be two rich and successful clubs playing in the same league. Until last season they had never even finished in the top two places together of either the Premier League or First Division. Delete. ColchesterSid (talk) 12:41, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

There's an ever-growing tendency for people to create Example F.C. - Other example F.C. rivalry articles when really all it actually covers is Example F.C. - Other example F.C. head-to-head record..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:46, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I would take it to AfD. Quite a bit of synthesis going on, particularly in the "manager rivalry" section. It boils down to a few transfers in the early period of Abu Dhabi ownership and a title race last season. Oldelpaso (talk) 13:34, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi guys, the article creator here, I did write a nice informative reply, then hit save and got the edit conflict and it cleaned it all out. Please bare with and I will try to find a spare 5 to reply. Thanks, Footballgy (talk) 14:07, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Appreciate the tag to bring me into the conversation, the thought process behind creating the article to me is pretty self explanatory, in fact I am surprised it didn't already exist. I don't think you have to be a massive football fan to understand that certainly from 2008 onwards the two team entered into a period of rivalry that was well covered and spoken about, certainly given Wenger and the players going the other way. Although only a mere Grimsby Town fan myself, having lived in Manchester during that time there was a lot of angst between the two clubs. The Adebayor slide is one of the most controversial Premier League moments ever and to be at a game involving these two team was a pressure cooker from personal experience.

I don't want to hash over and repeat facts stated in the article but I find a bit bizarre for anyone to dismiss them as not rivals or for the article to be not notable enough. The Artera-Guardiola twist has given new life to this and now the fact they are title rivals and Arsenal have that City connection now it's spiced things up, so I am not really understanding why some of the comments state here such "they are just two rich teams in a league" etc, I think to answer that you maybe need to read the article and the sources? As well stating there is no historic rivalry, again is explained in the article, but are we to say that any new rivalry is deemed as irrelevant as opposed to long-standing traditional ones.

I draw your attention too the Liverpool F.C.-Manchester City F.C. rivalry, despite the location of the two cities being geographically close these two teams were not rivals until they fought for the title in 2013/14 and given the whole Klopp v Guardiola thing which didn't come until 2016 again this is a very recent rivalry as well? One that you can argue is a little cooler now than Arsenal v City. All in all having been on Wikipedia for a long time I am all about growth, improvement and preserving article, so I am happy to go and improve areas of this article or add extra verifications if need be. In the most part I looked for single incidents or moments rather than searching for articles depicting an overarching story of rivalry. I will happily go and add more and ask if there are things you would add then please do.

Lastly in terms of the bottom two tables, it was a mere hash over from the Manchester derby page.

All the best, Footballgy (talk) 14:23, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Footballgy: You did nothing wrong, its just people around here are reading in black and white and not the full colour picture. They don't even bother doing their own correct research these days in my opinion, but here, my quick five seconds yields a great article on the rivalry. I found aljazeera.com Man City, Arsenal and the new Premier League rivalry on the block. There will always been more news outlets and sports magazines talking about rivalries for all sorts of clubs. Govvy (talk) 14:40, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Appreciate the message, I have just been reinforcing the page with articles referring to rivalry, this was one of them. All the best, Footballgy (talk) 14:54, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

From my perspective as a City fan, it simply isn't a rivalry. Games with higher stakes these days yes, but not the needle associated with a rivalry. The Adebayor incident was certainly notable in his career, and watching him run past from my position in the East stand to the away end was certainly memorable. However, it was more about the individual than the clubs. Adebayor and Nasri invoked visceral hatred in the Arsenal support, but Kolo Toure and Sagna were received warmly, being former "Invincibles".

At the time in question I did the social media for a City supporters group, and while there was a vocal minority of irate Arsenal fans, it paled in comparison to what you would get from United or Liverpool fans.

The Arteta-Guardiola thing might be an interesting apprentice and master narrative, but again is more about the individuals than clubs.

I'm ambivalent about the Liverpool rivalry article. While there has certainly been more effort put into this article, and the Liverpool one is in a poor state, there have been a lot more newsworthy incidents relating to rivalry between the clubs - the bus attack before the Champions League game, or the joint statement by the vlubs in December pleading for an end to the toxic atmosphere in games between the two. Oldelpaso (talk) 14:57, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Potential International Fixtures

When showing potential international fixtures in the Results and Fixtures section of national team articles, which should be listed as preferred practice:

1)

Australia v Maldives or Bangladesh

2)

Australia v Maldives / Bangladesh

3)

Australia v Maldives
/ Bangladesh

I've seen all three used, just looking for clarity from the community, though have a personal preference for number one. Felixsv7 (talk) 12:08, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I think can just be "Australia v TBD" --SuperJew (talk) 12:15, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Even when it's just between two options? Felixsv7 (talk) 12:17, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I would choose option 4. Matilda Maniac (talk) 12:18, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

4)

Australia v TBD

16 November 2026 WCQ R2	Australia	v	TBD	Australia
		Source

I also support option 4. If the team isn't known, TBD is clearer than listing either/ors. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:48, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I would also support option 4. I suggest that we can replace "TBD" with "Winner of semi-final 1" or similar where applicable. – PeeJay 12:52, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Nice. With or without italics? Felixsv7 (talk) 13:25, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Without, IMO. – PeeJay 13:33, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

You shouldn't use slashes per MOS:SLASH. Use or to indicate that it's one or the other. TBD or Winner of round one pairing two as appears here would probably be more appropriate though. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 14:15, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Agree with option 4. Kante4 (talk) 14:52, 6 September 2023 (UTC)