Talk:Atlético Madrid

Colours

The colours must be changed to match the actual season ones: The first short is now red and I don't know anything about the second shirt and short. Probably in atleticodemadrid.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.52.159.40 (talk) 18:38, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

I have modified the shorts colours as suggested — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.38.50.206 (talk) 13:30, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

English name?

Hi, I have been editing the José Reina page and was writing about his father being a former Atlético player. I spelt it "Athletico", but someone changed it to "Atletico". I researched and found that the BBC webpage uses both of these, so I thought that this might be a good place to ask what is the correct word/spelling in English. Is it:

1. Atlético
2. Athletic
3. Athletico
4. Atletico

cheers, aLii 10:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The club website itself uses Atlético. However the club originally used Athletic. The name was changed in 1941 when a decree issued by Franco banned the use of non-Spanish language names. If you read the main article this is explained in more detail. The situation is complicated further by the fact that Athletic Bilbao use the English spelling. I think this is were the mix up occurs. The version you used seems to be a strange combination of both. I would recommend using Atlético in reference to the Madrid club and Athletic when referring to the Bilbao club. Djln--Djln 21:13, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

The Club has to be spelled Atlético ... with out é is also fine because of a few programms don't accept an é ... Atlético with H is totaly wrong and just british newspapers are using it this way, nobody knows why. Rojiblanco 21:50, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Nonetheless, the club is regularly called "Athletico Madrid" in England, so it seems appropriate to mention this if you're going to specifically have a section about the club's name in English. Otherwise the section may as well be deleted. Gwladys24 (talk) 00:25, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

It may regularly be called "Athletico Madrid", but this is wrong, it is a mistake if it is spelled like this, media sources spell it "Atlético", including newspapers and television news programmes. It is a mistake to use the spelling you speak of, and it has no place in Wiki. Brock 009 (talk) 20:01, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm from Madrid and I've ever never heard Atlético Madrid, it is totally wrong. "Atlético de Madrid" is de most common way to refer to this team. "Atleti" is also valid, which is the shorten of "Atlético de Madrid". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.221.60.181 (talk) 15:36, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Pupas

Something should be said to the el Pupas spirit. The club itself has used in advertising the idea that Atlético supporters are used to suffering. --84.20.17.84 16:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I removed it from nicknames, because it is an insulting and not the truth, but the way some media like to present this club with its big success. Rojiblanco 21:44, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Tetuán

Can somebody mention the relation to Atlético Tetuán? --84.20.17.84 16:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

It is a project in Marocco with is supported by the Club Atlético de Madrid S.A.D. Rojiblanco 21:48, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Kits are wrong

the kits are wrong the two shown are both away kits with the traditional red white stripes being used at home. the kit sponsor nike had looked to change the home kit to that shown but unrest from supporterts saw a big back track and the red/white stripes were retained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.86.33.33 (talk) 17:53, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Bizarre

This is bizarre, there's a bit that says they are 6th in the league after 25 games and 5 points behind Real. I changed it to 6th in the league after 33 games and 12 points behind Real because that is what it is now but it's been taken off. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.178.248 (talk) 15:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Torrés

The transfer fee quoted in the article is wrong. I shall try and find out the exact figures but that is a number someone has just plonked in there after reading the English press. I believe that a) it's much less than has been suggested on this page and b) it's commensurate with international appearances, league appearances and goals. If someone does think it's right then at the very least it needs a citation?--Dcb141 13:46, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Torres left the club for 45 Million Euro! He gets 10% of the fee which he don't wanted ... So Liverpool bought him for 40 Million Euros. Nut the fee was 45! The transfer of Luis García has nothing to do with the Torres deal. Rojiblanco 21:46, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

What are you on about? Fernando Torres moved to Liverpool FC, in a cash plus player exchange, involved was the sum of £20million and Luis Garcia. Luis Garcia was to make up the other £5million Atletico demanded. Im sorry i dont know what £20million is in euros, but that is how much he transfered for, plus Luis Garcia. Therefore, Luis Garcia has EVERYTHING to do with "the Torres Deal". Brock (talk) 14:46, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

European Cup semi-final1974

The article states,"In the away leg of the semi-final against Celtic, Atlético had Ayala, Díaz and substitute Quique all sent off during a hard fought encounter in what was reported as one of the worse cases of cynical fouling the tournament has seen . Despite this they still managed a 0-0 draw and then won the return leg 2-0 with goals from Gárate and Adelardo."

I object to the suggestion that Atletico secured a 0-0 draw "despite" the "hard fought encounter" and "cynical fouling." This would lead readers to believe that they were somehow the victims whereas in fact they were the sole perpetrators. The behaviour of Atletico players in that match was the worst that I have ever seen in a professional football match and there can be little doubt that in the latter stages of the match, the referee refrained from issuing any more yellow cards that would have forced the abandonment of the match. Their objective was clearly to prevent their opponents from scoring by any and every conceivable means, fair or foul, but with a special emphasis on foul.

There can be no compromise on the facts of their outrageous gamesmanship and brutal behaviour in this tie. No team in the history of European Cup football has ever accrued so many red and yellow cards in one game. I am therefore going to change "Despite this they still managed a 0-0 draw," to "As a result of their brutal tactics, they prevented Celtic from scoring and the 0-0 result was followed by a 2-0 victory in the return leg with goals from Gárate and Adelardo." ReggyRaccoon 14:49, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I changed it back ... Please stop providing us which such stupied things and SPAM! Thanks --Rojiblanco (talk) 12:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

"American Inspired"

I find the fact that someone thinks that Atletico's kit is American-inspired very amusing. Firstly, this doesn't really account for much, but i understand that the US flag includes the colours red, white and blue, but you must realise that there are alot of flags of the same colours which were made a lot earlier, including Great Britain. The US flag was adopted in 1777, whereas Britains was in 1606, sorry bit of a history lesson for you. Secondly, i find the fact that Atletico Madrid are inspired by the USA to make their kit in the colours of red, white and blue. In fact, although it says that the reason for the colours is unknown, one theory is that red and white stripes were the cheapest to make, as the same was used to make bed mattresses. Also, Atletico Madrid's original colours were blue and white, the same as Athletic Bilbao, Atletico were seen as a branch off Athletic Bilbao. Plus, I quote from the history off the main page, "Once in 1911 Juanito Elorduy, former player and member of the board of Athletic Madrid, went to England to buy kits for both teams. He did not find Blackburn Rovers F.C. kits and bought Southampton F.C. red and white ones instead. Athletic Bilbao adopted Southampton F.C. full kit with red and white shirt and black shorts, whereas Athletic Madrid adopted the red and white shirt but kept Blackburn Rovers F.C. blue shorts." I am now going to take this piece of information which has no evidence what-so-ever, out of the text. Brock (talk) 15:06, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the history lesson, I wasn't aware there were a lot of countries that used red, white and blue as national colors. Thank you for pointing out this important information. Next time if you're a little less condescending you'll do a better job of hiding your anti-americanism.

I have no idea if Atletico's kit is American-inspired, but you cannot deny that the club's crest bears an uncanny resemblance to the American flag. It's not just the colors or the red and white stripes, the white stars on a blue field are striking in their similarity. It looks like the logo for some federal U.S. agency, the Dept. of Bears Trying To Get Honey Out Of A Tree, something. If the crest is as old as the uniform, then it is absolutely obvious that it is american-inspired. I have no references whatsoever for this, so I won't change anything. I honestly wish I could find out more about this, google turns up nothing.Armandtanzarian (talk) 03:13, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't mean to come across how i did, just to clear up, and also save you time looking on google: The stars of the badge come from the Community of Madrid flag and coat of arms, the red may also come from this, or it may come from the old mattress material, or from part of the Southampton kit; the blue either comes from the original kit of Athletic Bilbao, or the import of a part of Blackburn Rovers kit; as for the bear and the strawberry tree, this comes from the flag or coat of arms of the city of Madrid. Apologies for how i came across previous, was just trying to clear things up, besides, what has America got to do with football(soccer)? A football (soccer) team, isn't going to copy the flag of a country which used to have nothing to with the sport. Hope this saves you sme time in looking on google. Brock 009 (talk) 08:59, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Your response was just obnoxious, and it seems you are one of many Brits who tend to let their inferiority complex get the best of them. The fact is the kit looks much closer to the American Flag than any other national flag. It utilizes multiple thin red and white strips, much like the American flag, and also has in its corner a blue base with white stars (like the American flag). The Union Jack does not include most of those traits, and unlike the Atletico kit posses a combination of three crosses (St. Andrew, St.Patrick, and St. George). I find it funny that your inferiority complex was so great that you felt the need to lecture us Americans on a Wikipedia page about how the Union Jack is older, wow. No one honestly believes Atletico was inspired by the American flag, but it is worth asking considering the clear similarities. If you were not so busy with an agenda, you could appreciate the honest misunderstanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.251.100.103 (talk) 23:32, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move One supporting and no opposition after five days. Per representations by nominator, appears in keeping with WP:UCN.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The usual name of the club is Atlético de Madrid. If there is an English convention against the use of the "de" then it makes no sense to spell the term "Atlético" as in Spanish, with an acute accent. --Ecemaml (talk) 14:13, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Support --Una Smith (talk) 16:34, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

This is correct, the name of the club is Atlético de Madrid (I'm spaniard and follower of the team, so I know what I´m talking about). --190.196.165.209 (talk) 00:23, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Objection to above move request

This move request was not advertised to anyone other than on the main RM page (I would assume). Anyway, the club is not commonly known as "Atlético de Madrid", so the move was actually against WP:COMMONNAME. I will revert the move now. – PeeJay 11:39, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

As a further point, if anyone wishes to start another RM, I would suggest that they actually inform someone in the WP:FOOTBALL community, preferably by adding it to the project's list of nominations for deletion or page moves. – PeeJay 11:42, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Agreed - the club is usually called Atlético Madrid or Atletico Madrid in English language RS. --Dweller (talk) 11:55, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Basketball team

You can look at the table: 1990–91 ACB season Böri (talk) 14:00, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Atlético Madrid/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Resolute 23:36, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

It is a decent article overall, but I am failing over the lack of citations and references in the vast majority of the article. There is also an existing template questioning whether parts of the article is original research. Both of these will have to be addressed before this article can be considered for GA.

Specific to the article, however:

• In the first section of club history, you state that the team was founded in 1939. Then you state that the team was founded in 1903. The rest of this section and the following makes the first statement unnecessary. Just start with the 1903 founding
• The entire first paragraph focuses on their early uniforms. This would be better suited to the uniforms section, no?
• Avoid overlinking. i.e.: Spanish Civil War and Real Oviedo are each linked twice in close succession while Real Madrid and Athletic Bilbao are linked multiple times throughout.
• English and Spanish are being mixed in some places. i.e.: Atlético Bilbao and Athletic Bilbao. Pick one and be consistent.
• "With the sudden removal of Gil's strong presence, the club was in complete disarray and results on the pitch clearly reflected that." - This statment needs clarification. At present, it reads like the writer's opinion
• Again, overlinking of Segunda División and La Liga
• "Quique Sánchez Flores Revolutionizes Team" I don't like this section header. It's POV. Moreover, how can he "drastically change" the team's fortunes when the previous section describes how Atletico was already on an upswing? He didn't change their fortunes, he continued their progression.
• I dislike the "Notable coaches" title, it sounds POV. Just call it "Coaches" and make sure that either all coaches are linked, or that recent coaches are linked with a pointer to a child article listing all coaches in the team's history.
• I don't understand why there is a near complete list of coaches while there is nothing for players but the bare roster. Does Atletico have any kind of team hall of fame? If so, it would be a nice lead into an article link for List of Atlético Madrid players
• Under "Recent History", is there a child article with the full history that could be used as a hat note for this section? Also, explain the colour coding. Not every reader will understand that pink means relegated and green promoted.
• Ref 10 is dead, and ref 17 needs to be expanded to a similar format as the rest.
• Commons has a pretty good collection of related images that can be used throughout this article: commons:Category:Atlético de Madrid

I hope this helps to improve the article so that when you bring it back to GAN, it can pass easier. Cheers! Resolute 23:36, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Atlético Madrid/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mr.Kennedy1 (talk) 19:48, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

This is a pretty good article, although there are far too much bare URL's and their are some sections of the article with little to few references.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Their are quotes that don't provide references

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Very good on this aspect

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

I feel this is capable of GA status because it has good information and a good layout aswell.

The only problem I saw was References, these are bare URL's and their are not enough of them but this was the only problem, it seems you have went over the last review and improved the article. Nice work, Mr.Kennedy1 (talk) 19:48, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Intertoto 2007

Atlético never won this trophy. Please see here. --VAN ZANT (talk) 10:31, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Atmadrid1917.gif Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Atmadrid1917.gif, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do?

Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. A further notification will be placed when/if the image is deleted. This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotification (talk) 12:35, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Atmadrid1917.gif Deleted

	An image used in this article, File:Atmadrid1917.gif, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons by Shizhao for the following reason: Copyright violation: copyrighted logo of a company (sports club) What should I do?
	A different bot should have (or will soon) remove the image code from the article text (check if this has been done correctly). If you think the image deletion was in error please raise the issue at Commons. You could also try to search for new images to replace the old one. This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotification (talk) 13:12, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Squad summer 2011

At the odd chance of appearing completely off what I'm doing, where the hell are Sergio Agüero, Diego Forlan and David de Gea? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.82.249.149 (talk) 16:23, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Outdated line-up

Line-up currently on the article is As of 2 September 2011

I will not do this my self since I have found the code for the table to be confusing. Also I'm not good at finding nationalities and filling up the table with other needed information.

I recommend this link as a reference point - UEFAs site featuring Atletico - Valencia line-up. Mike --95.155.42.209 (talk) 13:25, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

"European Successes and Falcao"

Can whoever keeps adding Falcao into the section title, please not? He has been at Atlético for just over a year and is neither a significant enough figure to the club's history or a completely determining factor in the success. If it wasn't for Simeone he would've been labelled as a flop, it just shows a lack of knowledge and is completely unneeded. Thanks. --82.32.214.23 (talk) 12:22, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Kit reference

• http://www.abc.es/fotos-historia/20130425/atletico-madrid-anos-historia-119299.html --Cobija (talk) 22:10, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The suggestion that the blue shorts are historically from Blackburn Rovers (with shirts from Southampton) is possibly incorrect as Southampton wore blue shorts in 1911 - http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Southampton/Southampton.htm TacoJim (talk) 13:28, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Diego Costa nationality

Diego Costa should have a Spanish flag next to his name (according to FIFA eligibility rules), not a Brazilian one.81.152.14.25 (talk) 20:16, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Not until he has actually played a match for Spain. Please read Talk:Diego Costa. QED237 (talk) 20:45, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Name

I'm from Madrid and I've ever never heard Atlético Madrid, it is totally wrong. "Atlético de Madrid" is de most common way to refer to this team. "Atleti" is also valid, which is the shorten of "Atlético de Madrid". --195.76.181.177 (talk) 15:30, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

In Spanish that is so, but English media almost universally call the club "Atlético Madrid". Other examples of different names in English media include Inter Milan, Bayern Munich, Rapid Vienna and Steaua Bucharest. '''tAD''' (talk) 13:34, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

I disagree. I'm also from Madrid, but have moved around a lot. Atlético de Madrid is commonly used in English too and should be the name given in the title and infobox. None of your examples are relevant. They all are merely English variants of the city name. In the case of Madrid, there is no English variant. Other well-known Spanish football clubs that include the de in their name on the English Wikipedia include Celta de Vigo, Deportivo de La Coruña, Sporting de Gijon, Racing de Santander and Gimnàstic de Tarragona. J. E. C. E. (talk) 21:01, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Well where I live in the UK, nobody uses Atlético de Madrid and unfortunately a lot of silly people say/write/type Athletico Madrid (and also Athletico Bilbao!) More commonly, just Atlético is used. But the 'de' is never used in print and video media here other than by native Spanish speakers talking about the club like Guillem Balague, with commentators like Sid Lowe and Graham Hunter just using Atlético as far as I can recall. I can't speak for other English-speaking countries. Unfortunately there is a lot of inconsistency with the variations between names of clubs, which seem to skew more towards an inaccurate English version depending on how famous the club is. But I really don't see the big deal with the name Atlético Madrid being used. Crowsus (talk) 21:31, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Well the club's English website consistently uses the de: http://en.atleticodemadrid.com/. I agree that simply using Atlético is more common than either option in both languages, but it's probably too short for this encyclopedia. J. E. C. E. (talk) 05:37, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Intertoto Cup

Yesterday I sent a mail to Atleti, and they have proved me that Atleti has one of it (2007) In addition in UEFA official page it is written that Atletico won it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.83.81.12 (talk) 00:47, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

EDIT: You can also check this http://es.uefa.com/teamsandplayers/teams/club=50124/profile/index.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.83.81.12 (talk) 00:54, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Other players under contract

76.237.134.51, here is SoccerWay, considered reliable on Wikipedia. https://int.soccerway.com/teams/spain/club-atletico-de-madrid/2020/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oblow14 (talk • contribs) 21:24, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Stop edit warring over the loans

I have reported this article to WP:ANI, this is really annoying now. Govvy (talk) 20:34, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

There needs to be some discussion here. I'm not sure whether to block both edit warriors, protect the page, or both. —C.Fred (talk) 20:43, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

I have nothing against the IPs edits. The IP is following a practice that is replicated a lot when many clubs have a second article for an academy page or team B page. However this edit-war is ridicules and the discussion hasn't been localised at all, it's been done on too many talk pages. Govvy (talk) 20:55, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

• @Govvy: Per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 89#B-team loans, B-teams do not loan players. Nobody has their federative rights assigned to Atlético Madrid B. They're all Atlético Madrid players, and some of them are registered to the B-team. All of those registered to the B-team can play for the first team if they meet the RFEF criteria. When one of them is sold, the money goes to Atlético Madrid, not to Atlético Madrid B.

If you check the announcements of Víctor Mollejo, Montero, San Román and Alfredo Pedraza, they are all pretty clear that the club which is loaning the player is Atlético de Madrid. Not Atlético de Madrid B. MYS77 ^✉ 20:59, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

If a player from an academy or B team goes out on loan and there is a club page for it, that information should go on that page. These loans are too trivial to be on the main club page. And a few people would agree with what I am saying, also, a few comments from other editors doesn't make a consensus. Govvy (talk) 21:04, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

• @Govvy: Then, let's bring it to WT:FOOTY. MYS77 ^✉ 21:11, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

@Govvy: No consensus, then? Fair enough, I'll leave it as it is now. However, I do think it's valid enough to add the reserve team player there, since he played for the first team this season and isn't listed in the first team squad according to Atleti's official web. What do you think? MYS77 ^✉ 18:03, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Kits

What is wrong with Atletico's jerseys. I don't know if it is just me but Atletico's jerseys are displaying different than their actual ones, would love to see their original ones be up there in an infobox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noogometni urejevalec (talk • contribs) 13:29, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

new logo

https://en.atleticodemadrid.com/images/EscudoATM.svg

THIS is the new logo 2003:CB:B724:FDD5:F844:4143:59DB:F7F2 (talk) 15:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

That logo is similar to File:Atletico Madrid logo.svg, but it has a blue border instead of gold, and the stripes should be evenly space. By contrast, it is not the same as File:Atletico Madrid 2017 logo.svg, which has a completely different shape and different picture. —C.Fred (talk) 12:42, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

And File:Atletico Madrid Logo 2024.svg now exists and is used in this article. —C.Fred (talk) 13:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Officially (from 1 July), Atlético de Madrid has returned to the old badge/logo. See official statement and other official references: [1] and [2] Panenkazo (talk) 08:39, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

File:Atletico Madrid Logo 2024.svg

With some modifications to the old badge, this is the official today Panenkazo (talk) 08:45, 8 July 2024 (UTC)