Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football

Template:WPF navigation

Portal selected images

I nominated some images for the portal at Portal:Association football/Selected picture, but I don't think many people watch that page, so I thought I'd leave a message here. JACOPLANE • 2008-06-12 19:48

Portal image

I nominated another image to be featured on the portal, please comment @ Portal:Association football/Selected picture#Nominations. JACOPLANE • 2008-09-13 15:07

Anyone? Humour me :) JACOPLANE • 2008-09-14 17:57

AC Omonia

Just as a heads up, vandalism of this article (and subsequent repeat of the vandal-added info in the Daily Mirror) has featured in the B3ta newsletter, so the article is likely to be a focus of vandalism for a bit. I've semi-protected it, but it needs a lot of cleanup. пﮟოьεԻ 57 21:25, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

A link to the article mentioned, as it is fairly amusing... HornetMike (talk) 23:01, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

One editor keeps adding an entire section entitled "British media" regarding this. Personally I do not feel a single British journalist's mistake warrants a section on a Cypriot football club, and have removed the section (several times now), as has one other admin. Does anyone have an opinion on this, because I'm getting tired of removing it... пﮟოьεԻ 57 20:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I really can't see how it's notable, and I'm sure there's a policy somewhere that says we should not include "self-referential" references to Wikipedia in Wikipedia articles..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Similar pages

The pages European football records and List of UEFA club competition winners ‎are similar (European club ranking for number of titles won). As only the second article is based in UEFA resolutions (the main source for an encyclopedia), IMHO the first must be deleted. --Dantetheperuvian (talk) 12:28, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

The first article covers a different set of data from the second one, and includes data on top scorers in UEFA competitions, etc. In my opinion, both articles should be kept and the first article should be expanded to cover other records, such as top appearance makers in the various European competitions, etc. – PeeJay 12:33, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

The table for top goalscorers, apparances, and other list in UEFA club competitions are available in UEFA club competition records (Records and Statistics ACCORDING to UEFA resolutions in UEFA OFFICIAL tournaments). If exist a ranking for European competition won (in List of...) why exist another ranking with only UCL-UCWC-UC (In European competition...)? Is correct,for that, write and third European ranking including the Intercontinental Cup (football) as in the UEFA official website? --Dantetheperuvian (talk) 20:06, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I was unaware of the existence of UEFA club competition records. In that case, European football records should be deleted. Feel free to take it to AfD. – PeeJay 20:22, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

What is the box/template for delection? --Dantetheperuvian (talk) 22:46, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Follow the instructions at WP:AfD. – PeeJay 06:20, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Surely a merge & redirect is the easier (and quicker) solution? Qwghlm (talk) 09:18, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

No, please don't delete European football records, it is the only page which (correctly in my view) includes the Fairs Cup along with the UEFA Cup. the UEFA one was started as a content fork, but there's no reason not to have both articles covering similar, but different, ground. - fchd (talk) 10:29, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

If exist a ranking for UEFA competitions, why exist a ranking only for UCL-UCWC-UC? --Dantetheperuvian (talk) 00:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I have proposed the article European football records for delection, thanks. --Dantetheperuvian (talk) 23:02, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Which I've removed. It's certainly most definitely not an uncontroversial deletion. - fchd (talk) 06:37, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Footbo.com

Can someone explain to me what this site is? It has player profiles on it and those are being added to the external links of various articles here. Some of them only tell the birthdate, nationality and the club the player plays for. Is that useful at all? Hubschrauber729 (talk) 23:52, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

It's crap. It's a Social Football Network, and therefore not acceptable as per WP:EL. -- Alexf⁴² 00:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, remove links to player profiles as they serve no point. This is a list of offending articles. Qwghlm (talk) 08:40, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

What, if anything, do we do about people adding player profiles to that site that are unattributed copy-and-pastes of the corresponding Wikipedia article? e.g. Pedro Pelé [1] --Jameboy (talk) 09:31, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

You can report it at WP:GFDLC. I'm about to I've requested the site be blacklisted at WP:SBL for both that and the spamming. Qwghlm (talk) 12:03, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

The fact that two German links are added to an English profile doesnt make much sense to me (all i see are words i don't understand with numbers next to them), nor the fact that fussballdaten.de is adding links to player profiles. In fact, there are lots of football sites adding links to football player profiles. The Footbo page gives much more information than just birthdate, nationality and the club the player plays for, and there is also a community rating, viewers can get a feel for how the player has been performing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Inspiredminds (talk • contribs) 06:37, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I put some links to Footbo as the site is gaining much traction in the football community. According to Alexa.com and compete it is growing very fast. Also some stars are involved. I put the links to some player profiles, because the content is like Wikipedia very much driven by users. I was not aware of WP:EL and social networks as an unaccptable source for citation. In any case it is a great site and I think we will hear about it much more in the near future. Soccerbabe23 (talk) 06:46, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Suggest to keep the references within Michael Ballack and Alexandre Song, because they are valuable. These players actually blog on Footbo. In general there are worse external links than Footbo, so I tend to agree with Inspiredminds. I saw some articles on Footbo recently, so I assume there community is expanding and this is why we saw many external links in the last days. Striker2008 (talk) 06:52, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

It's pretty obvious what is happening here. These three users that support footbo.com have no idea how to use Wikipedia and are probably the same person, or at least some types of sponsors of the site (All three posts are within 15 mins of eachother). What is this called? Sock-puppetry or something? I don't know if you've noticed but all the links to Fussballdaten.de have Template:De icon beside it so if you don't understand German, don't click the link. Pretty basic stuff here. Hubschrauber729 (talk) 23:24, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

It's pretty obvious what is happening here. I get up in the morning, log into my wikipedia account and get accused of posting with different aliases. The fact is Hubschrauber729 that I tried adding a profile page for Footbo after I started using the site. I will admit, I'm no wikipedia expert. But i found that the laws that bind your little virtual world together are being enforced with some kind of corruption. I have one person who patrols the profile and tells me there is nothing wrong with it, and another who doesnt like it, so just deletes it. What is this called? Do you really want me to say "sock-puppetry"?? You, who posts for some German soccer site, are clearly not wanting another football site that might actually be better than Fussballdaten, to be mentioned on relevant pages. So tell me Im wrong. You see, you are not the only one who can make splendid accusations. Oh, and its great to have a Template:De icon next to it...but i think it is of relevance on the german page, not the english one. That's why there is a seperation of languages no? Inspiredminds (talk) 07:26, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually I do speak some German and the links to Fussballdaten.de are really useless. Much deeper information is for example given by Kicker.de , but it seems the real interest in it comes from Hubschrauber in having them. Also I did not know one is not allowed to contribute in less than 15 minutes after someone else without being accused of being the same person. Soccerbabe23 (talk) 15:40, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Probable hoax: Nenad Todorovic

I believe this article is a hoax. The editors that have created/worked on it have only editing this article and the club articles they suggest he has played for. There is a player with this name who plays in the Serbian Superliga for Hajduk Kula and now OFK Beograd, but he is a defender and older. If there is a youth player with the same name at Red Star, I can't believe he has stats as good as shown in the article or otherwise he would have plenty of sources to support the stats and I can't find any. Does anyone follow the Serbian Superliga enough to know if this is a hoax? Best regards. Jogurney (talk) 03:02, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Assuming it is, can we just change the article to be about the real defender? matt91486 (talk) 03:37, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

WOW, this is quite a predicament. I will offer some input in this and give my discussion. Firstly, no I do not follow the Serbian league at all. I'm Croatian, meaning I still hail from the related Balkan area. I take a big interest in Balkan footballers, particularly those who are young and have a bright future (just like this supposed Todorovic guy). However, if you say you have never heard of him, that adds to my suspicion as I have never heard of him either (and I most likely would have heard about him if he is this impressive). Those stats are absolute bogus. I'm pretty sure this is just a joke article which some fan(s) have put togethor about an unofficial or un-existing player. The day the world sees a 22 year old score 79 goals in 149 games will be a blitz of absolute glory from a supernatural force. Every club in Europe would be after such a player if he actually existed. I haven't heard anything about him yet, and he hasn't even been mentioned in the Serbian national squad at all; again, if he was this impressive then he would certainly have at least played for the youth national squads. Without references, this page is clear hoax and needs to be deleted/replaced with the real player. Domiy (talk) 04:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

The defender looks different to the guy in the You-tube video. I suspect there may be a youth player or some such who does not yet meet notability, but if the defender does (which appears so), take matt91486's advice and be bold. Start here--ClubOranje^Talk 11:55, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I've replaced the information in the article with sourced information about the Hajduk Kula defender who has played in the Serbian Superliga and CIS Cup, and appears to pass WP:ATHLETE. Jogurney (talk) 12:18, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Steve Bruce

User:Tony1 has stated at the FAC for this article that the prose still needs a copy edit. Anyone with a bit lot of spare time on their hands want to see if they can pick up on anything I've apparently missed.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:25, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I've given it some minor tweaks, mainly limiting details from linked matches and abridging some of the long sentences, but I cannot see any need for major adjustment. Yet another of CtD's excellent expansions of an article. Kevin McE (talk) 20:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Cheers Kev, much appreciated! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:31, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Danny Welbeck

This player made his Manchester United debut in the League Cup this evening. Could an admin please look back through the deleted versions of the article and reinstate the best of them? – PeeJay 19:21, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I have a copy of the previous version, and have made a request to the last admin to delete the article to allow to it to be recreated. Eddie6705 (talk) 19:26, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Come to think of it, I myself have a copy of a previous version of the article. I can compare our two versions once the article is unprotected. – PeeJay 19:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

< I have restored the article. Please revert it back to a suitable revision. Thanks. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:05, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Glen Johnson

Something seems to have gone wrong with the image of Glen Johnson here (it wasn't a particularly good one). Can anyone sort it out? --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:11, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Must of got wiped in the accidental image deletions on Commons a few weeks ago I think. D.M.N. (talk) 21:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd question the value to the encyclopedia of a shot of the back of his head anyway......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:15, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes!! There need be no rush to restore it! --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:21, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

The Exeter City club logo seems to have disappeared too. Has this been accidentally deleted too? Would someone be able to restore it, or does a new one have to be uploaded? --Jimbo^[online] 07:31, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest that a PNG version of the Exeter City logo be uploaded, rather than restoring a poor quality JPG version. – PeeJay 07:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Emanuel Pogatetz-Rodrigo Possebon incident

Apparent leg-break, similar to the Martin Taylor-Eduardo incident. Could warrant some watchlisting. x42bn6 Talk Mess 21:25, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Crumbs, I'm behind, I've never heard of either of them! --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:40, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not surprised you haven't heard of Possebon, but Pogatetz has been around for years! – PeeJay 21:44, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I've never paid much attention to Middlesbrough ... : ) --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:59, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

What about Austria? Hubschrauber729 (talk) 01:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Very tactful of The Guardian's website to put a picture of the incident right under the big heading "Breaking News" this morning, I thought..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Is there any encyclopaedic value in describing a red card incident on Pogatetz' article? Every goal, every red card gets press coverage: I suspect that this inclusion is due more to the profile of the team offended against than any intrinsic notability of the incident, and that in a short time, there will be no apparent reason why this is being reported on when other events are not. Kevin McE (talk) 20:12, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

You could be right there. However - and I may be biased in saying this - Pogatetz' tackle on Possebon could have ended the young lad's career. A red card for two bookable offences is certainly not worth mentioning, but this is a really big deal in both players' careers IMO. – PeeJay 20:39, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

It hasn't ended his career, though, and ultimately it will most likely prove to be a very minor incident. I don't believe it is a major incident in both players' careers. I'd say mention it on Possebon's article in the context of the lengthy interruption of his promising career, but there's really no need to mention it on Pogatetz's article. Currently (unless it's been vandalised again since I last looked) Pogatetz's article essentially says "in September 2008 he got sent off" - in ten years time people will read that and think "so what?" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:43, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Paul (PJ) Roberts

Any views on this one? --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:09, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

The S-League is fully professional, so he's notable. matt91486 (talk) 02:34, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

2008 OFC Nations Cup

I have rearranged some sections of the article 2010 FIFA World Cup qualification (OFC) to the 2008 OFC Nations Cup. However, I think there is something missing. Please help for expand. Thanks. Raymond "Giggs" Ko 07:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikilinking of dates

As I understand it, there has been a movement of late to avoid the overlinking of dates. This got me thinking, therefore, about which dates it would be OK to link to from a player/club article. From a player's article, I would say that their dates of birth/death ought to be linked, but nothing else, while the date of a club's formation/dissolution should be linked too. Opinions? – PeeJay 21:00, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:MOSLINK#Dates says that "The use of full date formatting is now deprecated." As I understand it, dates should hardly ever be linked any more. I wouldn't even link the date of birth or date of formation. You'll notice that templates such as Template:birth date and age no longer produce links for example. There are still some templates that have yet to catch up with this (e.g. some citation templates still have linked dates) but I believe they are being worked on. WP:MOSLINK also advises on how and when to use "year in (subject)" links, e.g. "1966 in football (soccer)". --Jameboy (talk) 21:55, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I just think that the player's date of birth is vital information and it can be quite useful to be able to click on the link to the article about that date to see what else has happened on that date. – PeeJay 22:07, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I kind of agree with you, but not sure what could be done. Someone made a similar point to yours at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(links)#Wikilinked_dates, i.e. saying that it would be useful to link birth and death dates only, but it appears that _all_ dates are now unlinked. I'm trying to locate any discussion that led up to the change. --Jameboy (talk) 22:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Have a look at WP:MOSNUM - scroll right to the bottom where there is a footnote containing two relevant links: the archived discussion leading to the change and a more recent proposal. Both threads are great for curing insomnia. --Jameboy (talk) 22:38, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Update - there is now a request for consensus re: wikilinking birth and death dates in bios at: Wikipedia talk:MOSNUM#RfC: Linking of dates of birth and death. Cheers. --Jameboy (talk) 20:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Name change people

Does anyone know offhand what we do in the case of a player who changes their name after they become notable? Case in point Simone Ferrara who married and is now Simone Carmichael, as evidenced (more or less) by this link. I have created the page under her original name as that is what she used when 1st notable and FIFA records only show that. I figured on making a Simone Carmichael as a redirect, but should something also be included in the article?--ClubOranje^Talk 01:25, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Good question. Unfortunately I don't have a good answer. Actually I don't have any kind of answer. Why did I even write this? Hubschrauber729 (talk) 01:32, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Gökçek Vederson and Kaan Dobra are two I ran across recently. Jogurney (talk) 02:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

If the name by which a person is most commonly known changes permanently then I think the page should be moved to the new name. Obviously mention should be made of the former name and the change -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:56, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd change "Simone Ferrara also known as Simone Carmichael" to..."Simone Carmichael, neé Ferrara...", as it sounds almost like a pseudonym. In the infobox, keep her player name as Simone Ferrara, but change the fullname to her married name, and mention the fact she kept her maiden name for her football career in the main article. --Jimbo^[online] 09:35, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Colin Miles and Gary Taylor-Fletcher are a couple more examples of this. Using the current name works best, with the former name mentioned and with a redirect. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 10:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Using the current name is best as long as that's what the person is commonly/publicly known by. We don't have an article entitled Katie Cruise, hence if the female player mentioned above has chosen to continue to publicly use her maiden name, that's what the article should stay as, albeit with mention made of her married name -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:20, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

It should definitely be "Simone Carmichael, neé Ferrara", "... born Ferrara" etc. Punkmorten (talk) 09:28, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Another question is what name should be in squad listings and templates if a player changes his/hers name during his/hers career. I think I prefer to use the name used during the tournament and not retro-actively change squads, as in the Tomas Antonelius article. Sebisthlm (talk) 12:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, you would old names in historical articles, just as you would use former nationalities. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 13:20, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Another example - Rune Berger, formerly known as Rune Johansen. GiantSnowman 14:26, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

CONCACAF Gold Cup navboxes

User:BlueRed has unilaterally removed all CONCACAF Gold Cup navboxes from player articles going against recent community consensus not to delete the templates (TfD). Perhaps someone could roll back the disruptive edits? EP 10:33, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Another notability question...

Are players who've played in the Football League Trophy, whilst their team was in the Conference notable? Example being, Martin Rice. Cheers, --Jimbo^[online] 12:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I would say no. Under WP:ATHLETE, a player must have played in a fully professional league to be considered notable, but we usually extend this to cover cup competitions. It is my understanding that, in cup competitions, both teams must play in a fully professional league for the match to confer notability upon a player, so players from the Conference would not count. – PeeJay 12:45, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Which just goes to show how daft the current situation is - a game between two teams, a player making his debut for the home side can become notable by stepping over the white line, but a player for the away side will remain un-notable despite performing the same act. - fchd (talk) 16:16, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

This bizarre situation would not be possible if WP:BIO folk accepted WP:FOOTYN, which clearly states that to be notable for his cup exploits a player must have "played in a competitive fixture between two fully professional national level clubs". EP 16:21, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes it would, it would just shift to be a debating point in FA Cup matches instead. WP:FOOTYN is as flawed, if not more so, than WP:ATHLETE, and no, I haven't got any better ideas to hand. I'd certainly be less inclusive than either of the above criteria though. - fchd (talk) 19:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

A team in the conference doesn't play in the Football League Trophy it is a fully professional competition, you may be thinking of the F.A. Trophy. Skitzo (talk) 19:53, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

They did, for several years quite recently. See Football League Trophy#History. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 19:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Not under the current format, so it wasn't fully professional back then and so for notability POV was a different competition. Skitzo (talk) 20:04, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

MarshallN20

It seems MarshallN20 is pushing a very dubious point of view that Lima Cricket and Football Club is the oldest football club in the world (predating Sheffield F.C. by 12 years) using sources in an extremely dubious way to support his POV (he has also hijacked Bicycle Kick adding a huge rambling section full of irrelevant and misleading sources claiming it was invented in Callao, Peru. The Peruvian claim certainly deserves a mention, but 7.5 kb is a bit much) This is a dangerous development for two reasons:

1. Lazy journalism, some idiot journalist will come along read Marshalls POV that the bicycle Kick and even the concept of the football club were invented in Peru, publish it in a newspaper without citing Wikipedia, then it will become a reliable source to support the minority POV that modern football was invented in Peru.
2. Credibility - Everyone who knows the slightest bit about the history of football knows that the game in its current form was invented in the U.K. Claims that suggest it was invented in Peru damage the credability of Wikipedia.

-EP 14:03, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

That's User:MarshalN20 (one l, not two). x42bn6 Talk Mess 14:09, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Made some further fixes - the sources look sound but clearly state the first game of football in Peru wasn't until 1892. Qwghlm (talk) 15:15, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Current squad

According to the manual of style regarding club articels, squad list are suppost to look like

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

No.	Pos.	Nation	Player
30	GK	Template:Country data Earth	Tom Templateo
31	DF	Template:Country data Earth	Tim Template
32	DF	Template:Country data Earth	Tommy Templatius (on loan to Template City FC)

No.	Pos.	Nation	Player
33	MF	Template:Country data Earth	Tom Template senior
34	FW	Template:Country data Earth	Templaldo (on loan from MediaWiki AFC)
35	MF	Template:Country data Earth	Timmy Templaton

However some pages uses

No.	Nat.	Player name	DoB	With PSV	Former club	Fee	Detailed position	Notes	Deal until
Goalkeepers
1	Template:Country data Earth	Tom Templateo	October 33333	July 33333	Wikipedia City	€2,800,000	GK	European Union player	July 44444
Defenders
1	Template:Country data Earth	Tim Template	October 33333	July 33333	Wikipedia City	€100	DF	European Union player	July 44444
Midfielders
1	Template:Country data Earth	Tom Template senior	October 33333	July 33333	Wikipedia FC	€100,800,000	MF	European Union player	July 44444
Forwards
1	Template:Country data Earth	Templaldo	October 33333	July 33333	Wikipedia United	free transfer	FW	European Union player	July 44444

I added the second one to Halmstads BK, with some changes to fite the club, however it was later changed back to the first one by another user, wonder if the first one is the only to be used or if the second one can be used or if there is something else i have missed ? --> Halmstad, Talk to me 20:47, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I have only seen the 1st 1 used for club sides and something similar to the second for internationals. Skitzo (talk) 20:52, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I think the second one is awful and should be avoided. пﮟოьεԻ 57 20:55, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you completely. --JonBroxton (talk) 20:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

If this is a popularity contest, I must say I prefer the second one since it can show basic information on players that don't merit their own article (as shown above), something that can be useful for clubs where there are a lot of talk about players that haven't débuted yet. It's also more similar to the way the squad is presented on most official club sites. However, I recognize that the first template is used in the MoS, so I maybe wouldn't advise people to use it, or use it myself. Sebisthlm (talk) 09:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Did first see the second one on PSV Eindhoven and recently on AIK Fotboll, was mostly wonder if second one wasnt allowed or similar. --> Halmstad, Talk to me 21:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Clubs for the manual of style on club articles - the first one is used. пﮟოьεԻ 57 21:26, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Ditch the second, it's properly fugly. Qwghlm (talk) 11:22, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Nice idea with the second, but far too much information to hold, and verify. The first is simple, works and although looks a little on the amateur side, it does the job. No reason to stop trying to take a step forwards though. I'd recommend to any creative template editors out there 'keep it simple' as a motto or directive. Anything too radical or remotely complicated will immediately be shot down. I'd say fine-tune the current standard, look elsewhere with those proposed at other projects such as rugby union. Look at those in place for rugby league, AFL, American Football, NHL, cricket, etc to see how they are doing things. There is a way forwards, sadly this option does not appear to be the solution. Fronsdorf (talk) 13:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Category:FC X players

Are categories like [[Category:Chemnitzer FC players]] for anyone that has played at any level of the club or just for the first team? Asking this question because this cat was added to Ralf Fährmann, who only played for their youth system. Hubschrauber729 (talk) 22:32, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't think if should be there for people who were only at the club as children. Remove it. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 08:48, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd disagree. If the player had a formal association with the club as a junior, then I would categorise them as that club's player. Though whatever the merits of including kids, there's certainly no requirement for them to have played first-team football. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

How about including if they were full-time players but never played, e.g., on a full-time youth contract in the under-19s or something? I don't think including players who played for a club's under-14 side is worth including. •Oranje•·Talk 09:08, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

No, I certainly don't think they have to have played first-team football. But I think there is a difference between young players who play in reserve and under-18 teams, and are under contract, who are considered part of the (wider) playing staff, and kids, who aren't particularly tied to the club, and don't play in the usual competitve competition structures. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 09:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Romani Footballers

I have recently come across the category [[Category:Romani footballers]]. I don't really understand why this is a category since there is no Romani nation that these players were born in, nor is there a FIFA recognized national team. Apparently there is a Romani national team but there is no evidence that most of the players in the category have played for it. I'm thinking of nominating it for a CfD. Any thoughts? Hubschrauber729 (talk) 04:50, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Category:Romani people is a subcat of Category:People by race or ethnicity, not related to any particular country of birth, like Arab or Jewish, and it's pretty normal to then sub-categorise by occupation. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it's a valid subcategory. On the national team, I would say that the more prominent footballer, the smaller chance that he/she has ever played for a non-FIFA national team, since they're usually made up of amateurs. The notable exceptions are of course the regional Spanish "National teams". Sebisthlm (talk) 10:02, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Joe Kinnear

Not sure how to go about getting an article protected but Joe Kinnear is being vandelised following appointment at Newcastle Natcong (talk) 12:29, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, a lot of vandalism going on. I've removed a load and semi-protected. If logged-in editors can't behave, I'll put it up to full protection. пﮟოьεԻ 57 12:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Could you protect Dennis Wise as well for a short time until tempers cool down? Cheers. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 12:52, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Done. пﮟოьεԻ 57 13:07, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

To answer your question, you should go to RFPP to request page protection. -- Alexf⁴² 00:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Eugene Killoran

Can an admin please delete this article, I created it back when he was playing professionally in Japan but he has since left without making a first-team appearance, and doesn't look to have signed for a new club - especially a notable one - since. As the author (but not only contributor) I'm unsure if it passes Wikipedia:CSD#G7...either way he fails WP:ATHLETE. GiantSnowman 14:07, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

AfDed Kevin McE (talk) 15:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

General notability discussion

I'm not sure if you guys have looked at the general request for comment on notability yet. It seems as though the second section of discussion will have significant implications on this, and other WP:ATHLETE based, WikiProjects. It would be worth taking a look at. I'm pretty sure this can't fall under WP:CANVASS since Wikipedia is posting the heading to every member! matt91486 (talk) 19:12, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what you're asking or where specifically you are asking us to read. Fronsdorf (talk) 13:43, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) this, specifically this, it is one of the two messages at the top of your watchlist. EP 13:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, a link to the discussion would be helpful - unfortunately I dismissed the note when it arrived, without too much thought. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 13:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Yup, EP's link is correct: Wikipedia:Notability/RFC:compromise is the issue at hand, specifically issue B, dealing with (not explicitly, but really) WP:ATHLETE and other sub guidelines. matt91486 (talk) 14:51, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Is there a standard we can push all those who believe in the status quo to go along. Fronsdorf (talk) 15:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Neil Ruddock

Decent free-use images might be difficult to come by, but surely we can do better than the distinctly unflattering one used in Neil Ruddock. Oldelpaso (talk) 13:47, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Is that definitely him? You're right though, it is hard to get decent free photos. Emanuel Pogatetz blinked when I snapped him yesterday and therefore looks like he is asleep, but I figured it was better than nothing. --Jameboy (talk) 13:59, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Definitely Razor Ruddock. Football isn't one for openly accepting people taking pictures during games, so the best we can hope for on a large scale is warm-up pictures, pre-game pics and truly big-game pics where real fans want to take a picture to say I was there. Fronsdorf (talk) 14:03, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Blimey. Better to have no photo than that photo. Beve (talk) 14:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I like it, sums him up to a T. :) --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:12, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

In most cases, any picture is better than no picture, but I really doubt that is the case with Ruddock. Peanut4 (talk) 16:55, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Joe Mattock

Resolved

 – I have moved it accross as per WP:MOSNAME Skitzo (talk) 19:51, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

when i 1st created this article i moved it to Joseph Mattock, how ever he usually just goes by Joe, in fact I have never heard him being referred to as Joseph, so I'm looking to get a consensus on weather I should revert it back to the original title... Skitzo (talk) 21:34, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

To me, per WP:MOSNAME, it should be Joe Mattock, with Joseph Mattock redirecting to Joe Mattock. x42bn6 Talk Mess 21:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Infobox dates

Just a quick question; if a player signed for a club at the start of the 2007–2008 season, and made his first-team debut at the end of that same season (i.e. in the year 2008), how should his infobox be represented as his pro career starting in 2007 or 2008? Many thanks in advance, GiantSnowman 22:45, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Others may disagree, but I would say that his pro career began in 2008. – PeeJay 22:46, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I concur - that's how I've always done it. matt91486 (talk) 00:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Agree too. -- Alexf⁴² 00:02, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Disagree. His pro career started when he signed pro for the club, therefore 2007. If you do it the other way, the infobox would be misleading, making it look like he was without a club between leaving a previous one in 2007 and playing again in 2008. Take reserve keepers, who often move around without playing much. You could get several apparent gaps in their infobox, so it'd look like they had no club, but where they would in fact have been sat on the new club's bench every match since signing.

The documentation for {{Infobox Football biography}} says the years are "A <br /> delimited list of years that the player has been contracted at each professional club." (my italics) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:32, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, his wikipedia notability may start with his first game, but his pro career started when he signed his first contract. Beve (talk) 11:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Struway. Jason Brown left Gillingham in 2006, but made only one sub appearance for Blackburn Rovers between then and the start of this season. If he hadn't made that one brief cameo and we gave 2008 in the infobox as the start of his Blackburn career, it would look like he was unattached for two years -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:10, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Isn't the infobox only for actual appearances though? If he didn't appear in 2007, why should it show up under that year? We can include contract length in prose. matt91486 (talk) 04:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks all, I'll update the article I was thinking about (Sean Morrison) as starting in 2007. Cheers, GiantSnowman 11:34, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Career statistics tables

Could some kind soul pretty please improve my (pardon my French) piss-poor attempt at creating a career statistics table at Sean Morrison? Cheers, GiantSnowman 11:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I've had a bash at it. What do you think? – PeeJay 12:20, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Cheers man, you're a star! GiantSnowman 13:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Scillonian football clubs

Garrison Gunners and Woolpack Wanderers - are they at all notable? They're essentially little more than pub sides which people have only heard of because journalists occasionally write "novelty" pieces about how the Isles of Scilly have "the smallest league in the world". Would it be better to merge both into one article about the league, as that's what has the (marginal) notability......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm thinking yes. The Guardian article isn't even about the league - it just mentions it as an answer to a question posed by a reader. x42bn6 Talk Mess 13:33, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd say merge the two into an article about the league, with seperate sections on each team which cover titles, any famous players etc. GiantSnowman 13:41, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I've been bold and redirected both to Isles of Scilly Football League and I'm cooking something up there (Isles of Scilly Football League actually redirected to Garrison Gunners). x42bn6 Talk Mess 14:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Rob Styles (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Lots of IP vandalism following his recent erroneous penalty award. Could do with semi-protection. Am I ok to request it here rather than official channels? Seems to get a faster response here. Beve (talk) 14:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Done! Article needs some work and TLC, especially with weasel words. Qwghlm (talk) 14:43, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Hasan mede

I noticed the creation of the above article, which at the moment is just an infobox, if the stats in it check out then he's notable enough for an article but it needs moving to the correct capitalisation the addition of at least a short bit of prose and checking of his appearance stats. I'd fix this myself but i'm a bit busy and i'm not sure what stub or project templates you guys would use for it so i thought it best to mention it here. Cheers Basement12 (T.C) 16:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't even think that is a real person. I searched his name in Google and there was only 6 sites in total and none which linked him to any type of football let alone Fenerbahce. He isn't on the Fenerbahce.org's squad list. Hubschrauber729 (talk) 17:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I concur, and as such, have prodded it as a hoax. пﮟოьεԻ 57 18:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I also agree; a player just 17 with first-team appearances would be menioned somewhere, so almost definitely a hoax. GiantSnowman

Given the author and only other contributor blanked the page as soon as the PROD appeared I'm surprised it gets to hang around for 5 more days. --ClubOranje^Talk 19:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, him blanking it meant that I could speedy delete it per WP:CSD#G7. пﮟოьεԻ 57 19:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Good-oh. I thought there was a page blank by author thing somewhere, but couldn't easily find it this morning. Thanks --ClubOranje^Talk 23:44, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Referee notability?

Hi, what are the notability criteria for referees? Jonny Ditlefsen refereed in the Norwegian Premier League (first tier), but is up for AFD. The league itself is professional, but referees in Norway are only semi-professional. Punkmorten (talk) 20:44, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I've never been good at formulating notability criteria, but from a European perspective, I would say that referees who officiated at a World Cup or European Championship or in the Champions League or UEFA Cup are notable, as are fully professional referees in a country's top-level league. That would mean that Jonny Ditlefsen is not notable and worthy of deletion. – PeeJay 21:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

We can always fall back on significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject per WP:N. If there are none (and I see none) then he is not notable. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

SK Schwadorf

Bit of assistance from someone in the know, please. SK Schwadorf, formerly based in Schwadorf, Austria, have just relocated to Südstadt and have been renamed Trenkwalder Admira in the process. Should the SK Schwadorf article stay as-is (minus the "current squad" section), and just create the relevant new article, or redirect to the new article and carry the contents over? - Dudesleeper / Talk 20:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Do we know anything about it? Did they keep history, league place, etc? matt91486 (talk) 04:30, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

The description page on www.bundesliga.at cites 1906 as the year the club was founded, which is indeed the foundation year of Admira Vienna. The official club page also begins its historic review with the beginnings as Admira Vienna. There is no word about a merger with SK Schwadorf, though. So, I would propose to keep the SK Schwadorf article minus the current squad section and integrate any other changes into VfB Admira Wacker Mödling. A title change might also be useful, but I strongly oppose the name "Trenkwalder Admira" because Trenkwalder is the name of the company of Admira chairman Richard Trenkwalder. What about FC Admira as a simple replacement instead? This is the most common name for the club in Austria anyway, and Soccerway does also refer to the club by this name. Hockey-holic (talk) 12:05, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Jarnail Singh

Could I request semi-protection of Jarnail Singh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) as well, please? (another referee under fire) Beve (talk) 21:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for one week. Drop me a line if there are any other problems. Kind regards, --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:28, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I notice that the article is almost entirely negative - it seems that whenever he has made a controversial (in heavily biased fans' views anyway) decision, that details about it have been added - should we remove all this rubbish? пﮟოьεԻ 57 07:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Chelsea FA review

Chelsea F.C. has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Marskell (talk) 10:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Template fix required possibly

Could someone who fully understands such things investigate why Template:National football squad player which hasn't been edited in the last month produces odd results now in pages such as this (well, pretty much any page that uses it actually). Didn't do that last week. Seems to have shunted things over a column. Perhaps one of the sub templates has made it skewy. Thanks--ClubOranje^Talk 10:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I believe I have fixed the problem. Some pillock decided that it would be a good idea to remove the "No." column from Template:nat fs start and replace it with a "Goals" column. The change has now been reverted. – PeeJay 10:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Andy King - Leicester player

Mattythewhite he is welsh as he plays for their U21 side so please don't undo the move. Skitzo (talk) 17:51, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

The reason I moved his article to "(footballer born 1988)" rather than "(Welsh footballer)" is because it is uneven to have three Andy King articles that read "(footballer born 1956)", "(footballer born 1970)" and "(Welsh footballer)". Keeping them consistent across the board would make more sense. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:57, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

no that was done because there was more then 1 english andy king, he is welsh so having that in the name is a better disambiguation, we don't need to have them all named in the same style unless there is more then 1 of the same nationality. Skitzo (talk) 18:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

also the 3rd 1 has only just been created, by you, and to be honest it should probably be afd'd as there is so little content as work-in-progress articles like that should probably stay in the sand box until you have more info. Skitzo (talk) 18:11, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd say the article suitably passes WP:N and WP:BIO, so I don't see any problem with it. Mattythewhite (talk) 18:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the primary differentiator should be, but if it is nationality, then I would have thought Andy King (Welsh footballer), Andy King (English footballer born 1956) and Andy King (English footballer born 1970) would be correct. If the primary differentiator is year of birth then we would have Andy King (footballer born 1956), Andy King (footballer born 1970) and Andy King (footballer born 1988). Do we have any disambig guidelines or precedent we can refer to? --Jameboy (talk) 20:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I always thought that the primary disambiguator was the year of birth. A player's nationality can change, provided that they haven't already played for a national team, and is therefore not an ideal disambiguator compared to year of birth, which will never change. – PeeJay 20:41, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes and it has in this case taking him from English to Welsh, in every other case I've seen, nationality has been the primary differentiator, so move the other 2 articles to include the word English, seeing as they are retired so their nationality isn't going to change, nor can this Andy King as he has played at U21 level. Skitzo (talk) 20:55, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I would opt for Andy King (footballer born 1956), Andy King (footballer born 1970) and Andy King (footballer born 1988) on more common precedence. However there are plenty of differentiations between the two naming options. Peanut4 (talk) 21:14, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Leeds United A.F.C. Reserves and Youth Team season 2008-09

Surely this isn't notable? Peanut4 (talk) 20:25, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I definitely agree. We already have people who dislike senior teams' season articles, so surely reserve teams are a step too far. – PeeJay 20:28, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Non-notable, deffo a candidate for deletion. GiantSnowman 20:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Nominated for deletion. Peanut4 (talk) 11:57, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Arthur Cheesebrough

I have declined a speedy request for this article, apparently about a footballer who played for Burnley, Leicester City, Port Vale and Mansfield Town in the 1950s. Would anyone would like to lend a helping hand with it? --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:59, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I've added an infobox and an external link. Peanut4 (talk) 01:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I've added quite a bit more after a quick Google search. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 05:03, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Steve Bruce @ FAC

Anyone from the project want to take a look before it expires......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:35, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Spam links?

User 78.105.4.86 (talk · contribs) is adding external links to the "official PFA team page" for various clubs. These club links seem to add little value, although I'd say there may be an argument for keeping the player profile and interview links that he's also added, as these seem to offer a little more info. What do people think? --Jameboy (talk) 14:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Just took a look at the official PFA page for Gillingham, and under the heading "Gillingham interviews" is a link to an interview with Junior Agogo. They've also got Derek Stillie still in the squad list and Sean Clohessy with squad number 189. If they're all that accurate then I can't really what having them as xlinks adds..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:36, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

hmmm. I'm less sure about the player profiles now that I've realised they want Joe Public to write them. --Jameboy (talk) 14:35, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I was going to say the player profiles looked okay till I read that above addendum. I don't think the interviews add much per WP:EL but would probably be fine as a source for any general addition to the article. Peanut4 (talk) 14:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Looks like an admin has reverted the whole lot. Oh well. --Jameboy (talk) 18:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Scottish Cup 2005-06

I don't feel it is necessary to have the year shown in every footballbox when the year is obvious as it is with this article, but I thought I better check here as to whether it is okay or should I change it back. Darryl.matheson (talk) 14:46, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I would keep the years in match dates, for completeness. A non-football fan landing on the article may look at the title and assume that the competition ran from January 2005 to December 2006, for example, so I think it is best to make these things clear. --Jameboy (talk) 14:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of Scottish Cup articles, what do people think of the table format being used in Scottish Cup 2008-09? I can't decide whether it's a good thing or not. пﮟოьεԻ 57 14:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

In my browser at least, the date/kick-off/stadium stuff doesn't line up correctly. Here's a screen shot:

-- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:59, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

After looking at the screen shot, I assume that you are running on a 800x600 resolution. Since the template looks fine for higher resolutions, I will have a look at the code and see if compatibility with the minimum recommended resolution can be achieved.Hockey-holic (talk) 15:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

According to a colleague more in the know than me, my screen is 1024 by 768 pixels..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:21, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Unless you did not cut off any sidebars on the right side of your screen on your screenshot (e.g. Instant Messengers), this should be 800x600. Anyway. The main problem with the template is that its creator formatted the column width by using absolute values instead of relative ones, which causes the incorrect display. I can try to fix it, but I make no promises that it will look better afterwards... Hockey-holic (talk) 15:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't particularly like that style anyway. Looks rubbish, and the show/hide function is gimmicky. – PeeJay 15:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I actually like this template (Fb match) for the first rounds, because it points out the key information (the result of the game) and reveals additional information to those who are interested. See also DFB Cup 2008–09. ;-) Nevertheless, the footballbox-template is the first choice for the more important games (Quarterfinals and further). Hockey-holic (talk) 15:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Austrian Football Bundesliga

This article seems a bit confused. It appears to be about the top division of Austrian football, called the "Bundesliga", and at the same time about the association that runs the top 2 divisions in Austrian football, apparently also called the "Bundesliga". How can this be cleared up? Dancarney (talk) 16:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

There is a similar problem with this article. Although the vast majority of people refer to Spain's Primera División as "La Liga", "La Liga" technically refers to both of Spain's top two divisions. This would be analogous to The Football League only covering the Football League Championship or Football League First Division. I suggest that separate articles be created for both Spain and Austria's top divisions, and that Austrian Football Bundesliga and La Liga be changed to cover all of the divisions that those terms encompass. – PeeJay 17:13, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree, but what should the articles be called? For the Spanish set we should have Primera División de España and La Liga, but I'm not sure with the Austrian - Fußball-Bundesliga (Austria) and what? Dancarney (talk) 22:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Clubs with sponsored names

I know we normally keep grounds and leagues at their "unsponsored" names, but what about clubs? Connah's Quay Nomads have been moved to Gap Connah's Quay, should we now move Welshpool Town to their new name, Technogroup Welshpool Town? - fchd (talk) 17:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

What are said teams' common names? It seems that Connah's Quay have completely dropped the "Nomads" moniker, but Welshpool Town are still Welshpool Town with a sponsor's name at the beginning, so I would personally agree with moving the Connah's Quay article but not the Welshpool Town one. However, looking at the BBC website, it seems that they have taken to referring to Welshpool Town as Technogroup Welshpool Town. – PeeJay 18:14, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't know whether "common" names have much to do with it - NEWI Cefn Druids are commonly known to most people as just "Druids", how many times do you hear or see these days "Wolverhampton Wanderers" etc. - fchd (talk) 18:33, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

For information, the football team FC Red Bull Salzburg is situated at its new sponsored name. As is its ice hockey equivalent at EC Red Bull Salzburg. And I'd say they were the correct places. Peanut4 (talk) 20:33, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

As I understand it, one of the main reasons for avoiding sponsored names of leagues/grounds is that they're likely to change every couple of years and thereby result in chaotic article moves, broken links, etc. According to the Connah's Quay article, however, the club has actually been taken over by the "GAP" company (rather than them simply paying a few bob to add their name), which would seem to suggest that the new name will have a greater chance of remaining in place for the foreseeable future..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The problem with sponsored team names in general is that they can change in a second if the sponsor decides to withdraw for some reason like bankruptcy, decline of interest or whatsoever. Take Austria's teams for example (and not just the professional teams). Most of them change their sponsor anually. Do you really want to move those articles every time the company changes? Other examples are mainly to be found in Eastern Europe, e.g. in the Czech Republic (Tescoma Zlin) or Slovenia (Interblock Ljubljana). As for said Welsh clubs, they have a grown history and thus should be referred by their "old" names (Cefn Druids and Welshpool Town). In general, sponsor names within a club's name should be omitted unless it is a historic part of it (e.g. Bayer 04 Leverkusen or Skoda Xanthi. Hockey-holic (talk) 20:57, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thiago Jotta da Silva and notability

I'm posting this here rather than the article's talk page to reach a larger audience...

According to the article (and news reports), Da Silva is a former Vasco da Gama player. However, I have not been able to find any stats on the web for this player, so my gut feeling is that he fails both WP:N and WP:FOOTYN. Does anyone know if the guy actually played for Vasco in any senior competition, or if he only was a youth/reserve player? As far as I can tell, his last club Club Estácio de Sá plays on the third tier of Brazilian football and is not a professional club (correct me if I'm wrong). No article existed before his tragic death, and as we all know, Wikipedia is not a news outlet or a memorial. So, again: does anyone know if Da Silva actually did play for Vasco in senior competition? --Badmotorfinger (talk) 19:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Template:Football

Hey, I've updated the code of this template after a request to incorporate Template:WPBannerMeta. Please change anything I've missed. The code is at Template:Football/sandbox with the test page at Template:Football/testcases. This will make it easier to update in the future as well when you add new task forces or subprojects, you can simply add several lines of code to incorporate a new task force. —Borgarde^talk 13:52, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Association football

Does anyone know why Association football appears as an "unassessed" article and not a "featured" article to those users logged on and with the assessment gadget turned on? Peanut4 (talk) 13:56, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Because the assessment is in a subpage, at Talk:Association football/Header. Don't know why it is though. —Borgarde^talk 13:58, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Good spot. Is there any need for the transclusion page though? Talk:Association football is the only page it is transcluded to. Peanut4 (talk) 14:02, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I really don't think there is at all, it looks like it's been done to reduce clutter on the talk page. —Borgarde^talk 14:03, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Template:North American club football competitions

Greetings. Bit of help please, some users are removing the North American SuperLiga link from the template and shows no reason of such change. JC 07:22, 02 Octuber 2008 (PST)

Örjans Vall

Halmstads BK and its supporters are currently trying to get a new stadium built for the club, at the present it appears like one will be built, if its built Örjans Vall will be demolized and replaced by appartments, if this is to happen should the articel regarding Örjans Vall remain, deleted or rewritten?, 2 matches durring 1958 FIFA World Cup where played there. --> Halmstad, Talk to me 22:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

If I understand you correctly, you just need to re-write the first line to say it was a former stadium, etc, and add some information later on about what the stadium becomes. There is no need to delete the article. Peanut4 (talk) 22:42, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Peanut4. There is a category for defunct stadiums here. --Carioca (talk) 22:45, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Goal.Com reliability - a heads up.

For those that use goal.com as a source, be aware that the statistics they give for player _include_ unused substitute appearances (which we don't count!). For example, Goal.com shows Javi Varas as having Played 5 Liga and 2 UEFA (which shows they update quickly because the 2nd UEFA was today's game) but zerozero.pt clearly states he was an unused substitute in 5 Liga games and 1 UEFA game (not updated with today's game yet)--ClubOranje^Talk 00:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

CONCACAF Champions League 2009–10

A head-up that there is edit warring over a prod going on at CONCACAF Champions League 2009–10. This seems to mostly be by User:SuperSonicx1986, who has been clearly advised on his talk page that the prod has been contested and that if he wishes to pursue this, he should now go to WP:AfD. He has received a 'final' warning and a final 'final' warning (as three weeks elapsed since the last one) but an IP has waded in too now. I have no opinion on whether there should be an article on this subject. The contention seems to be that there has been no official announcement of the tournament other than a statement in 1.4 on page 3 here that the tournament will be organised every year but whatever, WP:AfD is the next step not edit warring over the prod. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:27, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

CONCACAF is not a reliable source in this. The same thing happened for the Cup Winners Cup, the Giants Cup, and the Champions Cup of 16 teams which CONCACAF created documents of similar status as the above one and we all know how it ended up. Not to mention, there are media elements talking of a change of slot allocation.

That is why it is best to wait and see what does CONCACAF say FROM THEIR MOUTH, not some online book.