Talk:IFFHS: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Naptharian (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
This ranking is a farce organised by people who want their name in the papers. [[User:Dmontin|Dmontin]] ([[User talk:Dmontin|talk]]) 07:51, 4 June 2008 (UTC) |
This ranking is a farce organised by people who want their name in the papers. [[User:Dmontin|Dmontin]] ([[User talk:Dmontin|talk]]) 07:51, 4 June 2008 (UTC) |
||
The RANKINGS NEED TO BE UPDATED! |
|||
Revision as of 06:08, 17 June 2008
 | Football Stub‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Removed the bias allegation. Every single ranking system can be accused of bias, that´s almost tautological. No need to start such an argument.
- Specific biases should be mentioned and covered for every ranking. Methodology should always be explained and covered. If you're familiar with the IFFHS rankings, you'll see what I'm saying: they are badly flawed. I'm not pretending to be unbiased here: I feel that these rankings have little to no credibility. I'm willing to reason on how we explain the methodology and potential biases, but to leave out the information is just plain wrong. Bill Oaf 23:04, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
- Added some methodology information. Would be glad if you could verify it and add a few sources about the criticism section Lomibz 00:23, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
This ranking is a farce organised by people who want their name in the papers. Dmontin (talk) 07:51, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
The RANKINGS NEED TO BE UPDATED!