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.

Fourth Place / Colours used to indicate results

I'm slightly curious how the current consensus surrounding the colouring for fourth place results isn't applied and is even put in place to begin with. Colour grading the background for team results makes it easier to read. It doesn't even matter about traditional gold, silver and bronze. Looking at tennis players individual performance timelines for example separate colour grading is applied for results from QF's onwards. Why isn't this the case with football?.

If there is a consensus regarding fourth place results not being colour graded then why isn't it being applied. I've being trying to edit the South Korea at the world cup article but @Snowflake91 keeps reverting. Why doesn't this change apply to any other article? The majority of articles I've come across use colour grading for fourth place teams, why are you only reverting this on one specific article? Xc4TNS (talk) 10:33, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFF, and the consensus at WP:FOOTYCOLOURS is clear. So instead of saying "all other articles are like this", go and delete it then from every other team instad of re-adding it at that specific article. And why exactly should 4th place have blue background, did they receive a blue medal or something? If semifinal should be in blue, then why not also quarterfinals in yellow, round of 16 in green, group stage in pink etc., or why exactly is 4th place / semifinal more special than 8th place / quarterfinal that it would need to be highlighted in colours? Snowflake91 (talk) 11:06, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

It does look like most of the other countries - at least the ones I have spot checked - have blue backgrounds for fourth place for the World Cup. But WP:FOOTYCOLOURS says No colour should be used to represent fourth place unless being used in such a competition where a team/players receive a fourth place award. In this case, specific blue colour should be used. I don't think they hand out fourth place awards at the World Cup? Should these all be removed? SportingFlyer T·C 11:11, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes it should, but the IPs would be adding it back with a reasoning "there is a XYZ article that has blue colours", so it would need to be enforced by deleting it from ALL articles and competitions with no exception – unless there are some competitions that actually hand out 4th place medals. No medal = no background colour as there is no reason for it. If semifinals can have blue background, then I see no reason why quarterfinals can't have colours as well, and so on. Snowflake91 (talk) 12:06, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

As above, should not be used. Kante4 (talk) 14:18, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

The blue background color has been used for years now. The reason I see is because those teams have played the same amount of games as both finalists. Also, it's way clearer to distinguish results by use of the blue background color. I've added a shade of beige (light brown/yellow-ish) color before, which got reverted to blue again due to uniformity. I don't think it's OK to get rid of all background colors for semi-finalist; as I said before: they have played the same amount of games as both finalists. ProudTarjaholic (talk) 19:31, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Irrelevant reason, since when are the background colours decided by the number of matches played? And how exactly will the Euro 2024 semifinalist play the same number of games as the finalist if there is no third-place match at all ? Snowflake91 (talk) 12:07, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, I'd say that's an irrelevant comparison, as both semi-finalist are considered getting the 3rd place by default since 1984...

Also, all 4 teams that have reached the semi-finals are mentioned in the tournaments'result tables/templates.

And we can all agree it's easier to read, as Cx4TNS mentioned before. ProudTarjaholic (talk) 18:23, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

"as both semi-finalist are considered getting the 3rd place by default since 1984" – Considered by who? Wikipedia users? Cite a source, UEFA doesn't even publish official final rankings, so there are no 3rd/4th/5th/6th etc. teams, only teams eliminated in the semis, quarters, round of 16, or group stage. And no its not easier to read by any means, if anything it creates a distraction for no reason. Snowflake91 (talk) 18:35, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

You might be right about UEFA itself, I too can't find a source for this anywhere (I thought I did in the past).

About the discraction; that's your opinion only - so far. Both Cx4TNS and myself think it adds to make it easier to read.

How about concensus here then?

I suggest to keep it in blue, but not put 'Fourth place' in bold, unlike 1st, 2nd and 3rd... ProudTarjaholic (talk) 23:23, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@Snowflake91 What is the point of there being a rule when the rule isn't being applied? I've tried to revert certain articles but they keep getting changed back. Literally the only article where that rule seems to be applied is the South Korean one. It’s been like this for ages that fourth place backgrounds have been coloured in. We could have this discussion but shouldn't the consensus on wikipedia surround what is applied rather than an arbitrary consensus on a talk page that doesn't seem to be enforced?.

Adding a coloured background technically isn't wrong information. As long as it's labelled I don't see why it matters. As I've mentioned before and what you seemingly ignored is my point about adding a coloured background for quarter final performances too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_performance_timeline_comparison_(men)

This also applies to players' performance timelines on their personal biographies. I don’t know why the Olympic gold, bronze, silver colours should apply to football. But anyway it doesn’t really matter, it’s just a case of making stuff easier to read.

Discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § Soccerdonna

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § Soccerdonna. Kingsif (talk) 21:43, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Short-versions of names in intro

For players who use a short version of a name, does it need to be in brackets as the nickname. Ortizesp and I disagree on this on the page Tani Oluwaseyi. Ortizesp believes the "Tani" is needed as it's not a common English nickname, whereas I was of the view that even though Tani is not a regular nickname, it is a short-version of 'Tani'toluwa and easily inferred so writing Tanitoluwa "Tani" is not needed. Just curious about the process, if the short name is easily inferred, do we still need brackets if it's not a common name? Ayo Akinola does not have Ayomide "Ayo", so just trying to find the correct format. (PS. Ortizesp, I'm not trying to invoke any ill-will, just improve my editing for future so I do it correctly. I greatly respect all your work) RedPatch (talk) 15:00, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

• I think Ayo Akinola should have Ayomide "Ayo" in the intro. Any player with a non-English nickname non-common hypocorism should have it in quotation marks as per the footnote at MOS:NICKNAME in the first sentence, which says: "Consider as a "common" hypocorism one that shortens in a conventionalized way, sometimes also with a diminutive suffix added, and which is derived from a name frequently used in English-speaking countries, e.g. Liz, Beth, Lizzy, Bettie, etc., from Elizabeth. If it is not conventional, it is not "common" (e.g. Nifer from Jennifer). Short forms that differ significantly from the name may be non-hypocoristic nicknames, depending on the particular case. A few such forms are well-known common hypocorisms, such as Bob for Robert and Bill for William, but most are not (e.g. Reba for Rebecca). Assume that most non-English hypocorisms (e.g. Lupita for Guadalupe, Mischa for Mikhail, Sascha for Alexander or Zuzka for Zuzana) are not familiar as hypocorisms to readers of the English Wikipedia, even if well-known in their native culture." Bolded the relevant part.--Ortizesp (talk) 15:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

  Ortizesp has highlighted a very important point in the MOS. Even if the article title uses the shortened name, we should introduce the player by their full name with the shortened version in quotes or otherwise indicated, such as Ayomide "Ayo" Akinola or Ayomide Akinola, better known as Ayo, then they can be referred by the shortened name throughout the rest of the article. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 16:02, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

It isn't necessary to include "Tani" in the intro. It is plainly obvious that Tani is a shortened version of his first name, Tanitoluwa. {Tanitoluwa Oluwatimilehin Oluwaseyi (born May 15, 2000) is a professional soccer player who plays as a forward for Major League Soccer side Minnesota United.} is your first sentence. You won't find many articles where you need to separate the nickname outside of Brazilian/Portuguese football.--EchetusXe 19:11, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

I agree here - we do not need this shortened name. GiantSnowman 19:12, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

But that plainly goes against MOS:NICKNAME. Tanitoluwa is plainly not an English name, it is Yoruba. It is not plainly obvious that Tanitoluwa would be shortened as Tani, and not "Tanito", "Tanitolu", or whatever else you could come up with. Same with Ayo Akinola. Look at pages like "Tammy Abraham" or even Tobi Adebayo-Rowling which I think should be changed. Ortizesp (talk) 19:57, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

"David" is not an English name, it is Hebrew. GiantSnowman 20:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

I think what everyone means is that knowing the page is called Tani and seeing Tanitoluwa, you can fairly easily figure out 'yeah it's from the first four letters' like Matt coming from Matthew. The "non-English hypocorisms" that the bolded parts refer to are ones where it bears limited/no resemblance to the original name (Lupita for Guadalupe, Mischa for Mikhail, Sascha for Alexander or Zuzka for Zuzana) which is very different than Tanitoluwa using just the first four letters) RedPatch (talk) 21:28, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

But that's beside the point, I don't think it's reasonable to infer that Tani is short for Tanitoluwa, because as mentioned above it's not a familiar hypocorism to most non-Nigerian readers. Even if you could make a backwards inference from seeing a title, it's not common knowledge how many Yoruba names would end up as nicknames. While with the most common hypocorisms in English (Matt to Matthew, Ben to Benjamin, even Dick to Richard) are probably reasonable to know for most English speakers. Notwithstanding that a lot of Nigerian diaspora get nicknames that are not traditional in either Nigeria or their home countries, like Tammy Abraham and Timmy Abraham.Ortizesp (talk) 22:39, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

I posted at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography linking here to get more input on the subject. RedPatch (talk) 18:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

they can be referred by the shortened name throughout the rest of the article. Irrelevant anyway, since we use surname and not given name to refer to people throughout the rest of the article. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

The principle behind MOS:HYPOCORISM is not to include the short form of the name where the connection between the short name in the title and the full name in the lead sentence is obvious. A person named Tanitoluwa going by Tani or Ayomide by Ayo cannot reasonably be expected to cause any confusion to the reader. MOS:HYPOCORISM should be updated to address this case specifically.--Trystan (talk) 19:16, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

That's not the principle behind MOS:HYPOCORISM. Even if someone had an easy name like Monique Johnson had the nickanem "Mo", I'd expect the intro to be Monique "Mo" Johnston because it's not a common nickname in English - even if you can infer Mo is short from Monique. Especially a name like Tanitoluwa, that I don't expect any English speaker that's not Yoruba to be able to shorten reliably without purely guessing. Ortizesp (talk) 22:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

That's exactly the principle behind MOS:HYPOCORISM. The page is already named after the nickname and HYPOCORISM basically says when the nickname can be fairly easily inferred from the name it is not needed. When you go to the page for Tani Oluwaseyi, you already know he goes by Tani since that's what the page is called, and seeing Tanitolowa, you can very easily see that it comes from the beginning of that name. Your argument would make sense if it was reversed and the page was called Tanitolwa Oluwaeyi, then it would make sense to show "Tani" to show that it is a name he uses, that differs from the article title. But since the title uses the short form, it's unnecessary as it's very easily inferred. It's different than a case such as JJ Redick or Bam Adebayo, where it makes no sense where their name comes from, compared to Tani, where it is very easy to see where it comes from. RedPatch (talk) 02:24, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I completely agree. If it's clear that the common name is a shortening of the full name then it shouldn't need to be specified. We shouldn't be treating our readers like idiots. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

It seems clear to me that if the article title uses a short name and the short name is quite clearly a shortened form of the long name, there's no need to show the short name in the opening sentence, regardless of whether it's a common English name or not. Ortiz says a name like Tanitoluwa, that I don't expect any English speaker that's not Yoruba to be able to shorten reliably without purely guessing, but we're not asking readers to guess what the common short form of Tanitoluwa is. The article title literally has Tani in massive letters and Tani is literally the first four letters of Tanituwola so I would think that most people with a reasonable level of intelligence can deduce from those two facts that he's known as Tani because it's short for Tanituwola...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:12, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Where is it clear to you "that if the article title uses a short name and the short name is quite clearly a shortened form of the long name, there's no need to show the short name in the opening sentence"? I see that the short name can be used for common English names, and not for uncommon or non-English names. I think we can all agree that Tanitoluwa is not a common English name. It seems to me like you're stating things out of opinion and not what is actually written down as policy. Ortizesp (talk) 13:27, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Policies and guidelines should be applied using common sense and allowing for exceptions, which entails understanding what the policy or guideline is meant to achieve. They weren't drafted in strict legalistic writing to cover every eventuality, so shouldn't be interpreted as if they were. The point of MOS:HYPOCORISM isn't to arbitrarily privilege certain English names, it is to avoid stating redundant information that is obvious to the reader.--Trystan (talk) 13:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Exactly this. We come to the article knowing he's called Tani. Then we see Tanitolouwa. It's not difficult to put two and two together and figure out that Tani comes from Tanitolouwa. It's the same logic as MOS:INITIALS that says if an article is at J.P. Smith, it should be left as just John Paul Smith, there is no need to put John Paul "J.P." Smith, because it is obvious to the reader that JP comes from John Paul, just like how it is obvious that Tani comes from Tanitoluwa. RedPatch (talk) 14:51, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

JP Smith is obvious, because initials are commonly used in English. Ask a random English speaker what the nickname for Tanitoluwa is and they won't know the answer, they'll just guess. Like look above, it's obvious that if the header is "Reba" and the persons name is "Rebecca" that Reba is short for Rebecca, but since it's not a common English abbreviation it should be in quotation marks. Ortizesp (talk) 13:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)"

How is JP obvious. How from looking at it can you tell from seeing "John Paul Smith" that the person goes by "JP Smith or John Smith", but because we know the person uses JP from the title we can easily infer they are JP because of John Paul. Same as Tani, it's easily inferred that it comes from Tanitolouwa when you know the page is Tani. RedPatch (talk) 14:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

(ec with the above) I think when you say Ask a random English speaker what the nickname for Tanitoluwa is and they won't know the answer, they'll just guess you are working backwards somewhat. We are not at any point asking readers to guess what the nickname for Tanitoluwa is. The article title, which is going to be the first thing they see when they land on the article, already shows them that the player is commonly known as Tani (plus if they are on his article then they have almost certainly either followed a link showing him as Tani or actively searched for him under that name). Having already seen the article title showing his name as Tani, they are subsequently presented with his full name of Tanitoluwa, at which point anyone with more than two brain cells is going to be able to tell that Tani is short for that -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:32, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Similary, if an article gives the full name Elizabeth Arpeggio, the reader couldn't guess which (if any) of the many available short forms she goes by, but isn't asked to. We just trust that they won't need explanation how that full name connects to the article title Beth Arpeggio--Trystan (talk) 14:57, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I disagree, I don't really see how this page specifically is an exception when there's thousands of pages that follow convention for nicknames on the site. If there's a need for exceptions, they should be built into the policy not just chosen on a whim on a random footballers page. Ortizesp (talk) 13:55, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Which is what Trystan said above, it should be build into Hypocorism because it's seems common sense for cases like this. RedPatch (talk) 14:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

There is a recommendation to move this discussion to Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Biography#Discussion_on_short-version_of_names as a more appropriate place for this discussion, which I agree with, as it deals with wiki policy. Is there a way to transplant the discussion, apart from a copy/paste move? RedPatch (talk) 15:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Coupe de France qualifying

I discovered numerous Coupe de France season articles. According to the articles, over 5000 teams are involved in the qualifying competition, with 153 of those progressing to round 7 in the 2023-24 season. I would like to ask whether the community here believes the articles merit individual pages. Perhaps the 'preliminary rounds' pages as they currently are, such as this one go into sufficient detail. Although these pages look like they may have previously been WP:SPLIT, notability must be established for such pages to be kept. Listing some such pages here - this is not an exhaustive list.

• 2021–22 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes
• 2021–22 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Bourgogne-Franche-Comté
• 2021–22 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Brittany
• 2021–22 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Centre-Val de Loire
• 2021–22 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Hauts-de-France
• 2021–22 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Méditerranée
• 2021–22 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Normandy
• 2021–22 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
• 2021–22 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Occitanie
• 2021–22 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, overseas departments and territories
• 2021–22 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Paris-Île-de-France
• 2021–22 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Pays de la Loire
• 2022–23 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes
• 2022–23 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Bourgogne-Franche-Comté
• 2022–23 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Brittany
• 2022–23 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Centre-Val de Loire
• 2022–23 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Corsica
• 2022–23 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Grand Est
• 2022–23 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Méditerranée
• 2022–23 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Normandy
• 2022–23 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
• 2022–23 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Occitanie
• 2022–23 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, overseas departments and territories
• 2022–23 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Paris-Île-de-France
• 2022–23 Coupe de France preliminary rounds, Pays de la Loire

Thanks, C679 05:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@Gricehead: tagging you for input since you seem to have created at least some of the above. C679 09:58, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

ML072347's WP:CITESPAM

ML072347 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)'s contributions look like WP:CITESPAM. I've been reverting excessive citations but could use some help. Robby.is.on (talk) 10:43, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

They've responded to my inquiry on their Talk page. What is the appropriate response? Robby.is.on (talk) 12:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Catalonia

Hello, I want to make people aware about discussions about the inclusion of Catalonia in certain football articles in the lead sections. The pages User talk:Panenkazo and Talk:Salvador Dalí are the places of discussions going on earlier today. What's more concerning is the scale of damage done by edit warring and how many football players from the region are affected over the past two days. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 21:30, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

At this moment there is a debate on my Talk page about the use of phrases in the definitions in the lead of footballers or people born in Catalonia such as: Lamine Yamal is a Spanish professional footballer from Catalonia. I also defend the inclusion of phrases such as: Lamine Yamal is a Catalan professional footballer from Spain. At no point am I debating the primary nationality or creating a doubt about what nationality he is. I am describing a fact that cannot be refuted or debated: Lamine is Catalan. Catalonia is officially recognized as a nation. In the footballers case, many of them have represented Catalonia. In other cases, such as Pep Guardiola, Josep Carreras or Salvador Dalí, they have publicly defined themselves as Catalans. There is no doubt they are from Catalonia. However, identification or self-identification as a Catalan is a separate issue. Panenkazo (talk) 23:14, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Some administrators have accepted my reasonings (3 admins). See: [1], [2], [3] and [4]. Rollbackers: [5] Panenkazo (talk) 23:21, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

WHY SCOTTISH PEOPLE YES AND CATALANS NO? See Gerard Butler or Sean Connery lead. Scotland have the same administrative status than Catalonia. Panenkazo (talk) 20:12, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Example: Sergi Roberto is a SPANISH footballer. He was born (as well put/written in his early career) in Reus, Tarragona, Catalonia. He is not from Catalonia, he is from Spain. People may identify themselves as Catalan/Basque/Flemish if they wish to do so, all the right in the world, but unless/until those regions are countries in their own right, we must not overelaborate.

Attentively --RevampedEditor (talk) 18:21, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Surrealist coment. Yes, is from Catalonia. No debate. Panenkazo (talk) 18:34, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Sure, he's from Catalonia, but Catalonia is part of Spain. It's an autonomous community, sure, but it's not a country. There's no need to overcomplicate it, just because of regional pride. We don't say things like he's an Australian person from Tasmania (for people from Tasmania in Australia), or an American person from New York (for New York in the US) or a Canadian person from Quebec (from Quebec in Canada), etc, for every country. It's an easy standard for wiki, use the country. People in Catalonia have a Spanish passport, because Catalonia is in Spain, hence they are Spanish. Unless Catalonia secedes from Spain and becomes it's own country, they are Spanish, first and foremost. RedPatch (talk) 18:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

This is not a debate about which passport everyone has. Catalans do not only live in Catalonia. Catalan is spoken in Andorra, southern France, parts of Italy, etc.. At no time am I advocating to eliminate the term 'Spanish' or 'from Spain'. I am defending the inclusion of the Catalan term. Catalonia is an officially recognized nation and in the past it was an independent country. Not Galicia or Andalusia or the community of Madrid. You have confusing arguments.. Panenkazo (talk) 19:07, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

The first sentence in the page for Catalonia includes a note that says that the Constitutional Court of Spain rejected their self-identification as a nation. It is an autonomous community, which is a sub-national level of political administration. JTtheOG (talk) 19:13, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

You are so lost on this topic that you had to read the definition of Catalonia on wikipedia. Regardless of what the Spanish government says, Catalonia was independent in the past. it has its own language, there are 70 references to Catalonia as a nation... I think the debate should not go that way. Panenkazo (talk) 19:26, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

You are right. How dare I use Wikipedia as a tool for knowledge. I should have just asked Panenkazo. JTtheOG (talk) 19:41, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

But we're not talking about the past, what connection is there between modern footballers and medieval kingdoms? If we were, Francesco Totti would be a Roman footballer (Rome contributed much more as a nation than Catalonia or Spain) and Bobby Charlton would be a Kingdom of Northumbrian footballer. If you're on about languages and ethnicities, would you divide every Indian sportsperson into the thousands of ethnicities and languages in that country? If not, why not? I have a feeling we have a WP:SPA here, and I see evidence of WP:BLUDGEON too. When I saw this user had 300 edits, I never predicted they would all be on this one topic, and all this week. It's kinda of odd how commonly users pop up, turn every footballer into a Basque or Catalan (though never war criminals) and then disappear. Unknown Temptation (talk) 19:45, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

1. Roman people are extingued.. Catalans no… brilliant coment

2. If you intend to strengthen your "arguments" or make mine weaker based on the number of edits I've made or making predictions about my possible disappearance from wikipedia.. there is no need to comment further on your comments.

3. Personal comments about which nation contributed the most to humanity have no place on wikipedia. You who have 2 million edits and 30 years of experience here should know. Panenkazo (talk) 19:59, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Unknown Temptation:, @JTtheOG:, @RedPatch:, @RevampedEditor: WHY SCOTTISH PEOPLE YES AND CATALANS NO? See Gerard Butler or Sean Connery lead. Scotland have the same administrative status than Catalonia. Panenkazo (talk) 20:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Scotland is a country within a country. Catalonia is an autonomous community within a country. JTtheOG (talk) 20:23, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Is it true that they are both Scottish and UK citizens? why is there no reference to the uk when they have a uk passport? Panenkazo (talk) 20:32, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Because Scotland is its own country. Catalonia is not. As my colleague RedPatch said, there's no need to overcomplicate this in the name of regional pride. It is simply untrue that these two entities enjoy the same status. JTtheOG (talk) 20:44, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@JTtheOG:, could not have phrased it better in fewer words! That said, i stop posting here, good luck to all involved. --RevampedEditor (talk) 20:24, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I see Panenkazo sidestepped the point about India. If you were looking up a footballer from India, would you get context by seeing their nationality or their ethnicity first? The same with Nigeria and any other super diverse nation. Nobody ever called Okocha a "Yoruba footballer". Or should we divide the Dutch and French footballers by their ethnicities, because Africans are as real as Catalans, aren't they? I don't see why Catalans as an ethnicity or autonomous area are unique, unless the user thinks they are unique. Unknown Temptation (talk) 06:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

It's clearly just due to regional pride for this editor wanting to emphasize Catalonia. RedPatch (talk) 14:41, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Just a sidenote: now (at least in Sergi Roberto, the only footballer in this regard i currently edit) we have another editor supporting Panenkazo (who have just said in their page that anyone reinstating the version without "Catalan" is vandalising)'s point of view. Like i said, even though i strongly oppose this, i will not edit(war) and that's a promise! --RevampedEditor (talk) 14:37, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

This last comment is very suspicious. Want to justify.. Too many coincidences.. Do you have to do with the two anonymous users who acted a moment ago in a synchronized way just to reverse the word Catalan on multiple pages? Could you be vandalizing anonymously? Panenkazo (talk) 14:54, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Nothing to do with the anonymous user(s) reverting, the minute you reverted me at S. Roberto i stopped editing there and waited for the result of this discussion. This is the FIRST and LAST time you accuse of vandalising OK, been here for 18 years and never did it once. Of course, if you still doubt my reply, you can report me and see where it goes. --RevampedEditor (talk) 14:58, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Anonymous user(s) has/have already been blocked (see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:2804:14C:7F80:8296:7559:1C3E:3725:B6EA), and he/they are from Brazil. I am from Portugal, hopefully that's the end of the unfounded accusations. Thanks. --RevampedEditor (talk) 15:00, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

OK, my apologies. I was just asking. Panenkazo (talk) 15:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Look how much damage has been done with edit warring over many articles, examples: [6][7][8][9] plus more pages than that. The amount of edits with added/deleted text on the equivalent of 19 bytes is clearly happening far too often especially during this and parallel discussions. Certain sanctions which includes page protection (as in the case of Sergio Busquets) and blocking will take place if users/IP addresses continues to do the damage. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 16:26, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Again, another wikipedia administrador believes in the consensus I advocate. There are already 3. Panenkazo (talk) 17:07, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Is there some kind of consensus for these types of edits outside of WP:FOOTY? Because my understanding of this situation was that we did not include sub-national origins or ethnicity in the lead. I know that the UK and its constituent countries are an exception for football for obvious reasons, but why would Catalonia be an exception? Jay eyem (talk) 17:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Given this was never an issue until these couple of users started adding Catalonia a couple weeks ago, I think it's evident that the true consensus is to not use it. The whole argument in favour of adding it is just an WP:ILIKEIT argument. RedPatch (talk) 18:13, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

That's why I was wondering if there was some kind of consensus elsewhere. They have posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catalonia with diffs that show multiple admins backing their changes, but I have no idea where this consensus comes from. Further along the discussion mentions a RfC from 2018, but there is no link there. I personally don't understand how this would be any different than describing a footballer as being German from Bavaria or French from Brittany, which we wouldn't do. Jay eyem (talk) 18:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Neither Bavaria nor Brittany have their own language, nor national aspirations, nor were they fully independent in the past, nor do they have enclaves outside the country. They are not officially a nation either. Catalonia yes. Panenkazo (talk) 18:26, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

However, "X is a German professional footballer from Bavaria" seems to me perfect. Panenkazo (talk) 18:28, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

That is a... surprising amount of ignorance to pack into a few of sentences. Catalonia is also not officially a nation, but an autonomous community. Outside of pointing to admins restoring your edits (which I think it is worth asking for their input on this), where have you determined that there is a consensus to make these changes? Because you are the only one in this thread that seems to think so otherwise. Jay eyem (talk) 18:32, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

There is currently a parallel discussion on WikiProject Catalonia where you will see quite a few more people who think like me. Administrators who say it is and other users who believe it too. Don't think you're the center of the universe. Trust me, you're not. Panenkazo (talk) 18:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Ok for starters, you need to be more civil, because you have been pretty rude throughout this thread. Second, I see that the previous discussion has been linked on your talk page, so it would have been much faster to just link to that (I will need to parse that later). I would ask that you assume good faith of your fellow editors, because you have not done so thus far. Jay eyem (talk) 18:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

You answered my last comment like this: " That is a... surprising amount of ignorance…". Are yo talking about civil? Panenkazo (talk) 19:08, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Seeing as you described Bavaria and Brittany as not having their own languages (Bavarian language and Breton language), national aspirations (Bavarian nationalism and Breton nationalism), and that they were not fully independent in the past (Kingdom of Bavaria and Duchy of Brittany), I would say that was a fairly tame response to what you said, because I would describe those comments as ignorant, yes. Meanwhile you are accusing editors of vandalizing anonymously in this very thread, which is a very clear violation of WP:AGF. I would like to drop the stick at this point, but if you want to take this to WP:ANI, feel free. Jay eyem (talk) 19:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding a chronic edit war at an article about a football club, Botola. The thread is Continued unsourced statistics changes at Botola. Thank you.. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:05, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Discussion about footballers' contracts at Village Pump

There's a discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)#Is football player contract expires means still registered in a football club? that could affect many articles within this project (OP had been removing club affiliations on the grounds that contracts had expired) and could benefit from the participation of informed editors. NebY (talk) 16:22, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Lamine Yamal template case

It is right now a discussion on the Lamine Yamal talk page with the topic: Spanish name template.

@Unknown Temptation: defends that the template of this player at the top page referring to his first and last name corresponds to reality. I think it can get confusing. I am attaching the two arguments below.

Unknown Temptation argument: The template is there to say that his name is formatted the Spanish way with two surnames, not that his surname is from Spain. Equally, it would not be the Catalan name template unless there is evidence he formats it the Catalan way with "i" in the middle. This template is helpful because a lot of people think his surname is Yamal. I see no reason to remove it unless people believe he can't be Spanish because his parents are African, which is just a little problematic. This template doesn't mean his name is from Spain. I see nobody rushing to remove it from Marco Asensio because his second surname is Willemsen, nor from Latin American people with Italian or other surnames. Similarly, we cannot gatekeep what is a Spanish surname (even García is Basque, and so many are Hebrew or Arabic)

My argument: I understand your reasoning. But we will agree that for a reader it can be confusing. The phrase literally says: "In this Spanish name" (and it's not a Spanish name at all). There should be a template that says something similar to: This name have a Spanish naming customs.

Is there any consensus on this? Other footballers may be in the same situation. Panenkazo (talk) 17:00, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Unknown Temptation is correct. Crowsus (talk) 17:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Yes, it's correct. His name uses the Spanish name template. It's to let users know the main surname. Like Sergio Ramos, the spanish name template lets readers understand why he's Sergio Ramos not Sergio Garcia. For Lamine Yamal, he likely goes by Lamine Yamal Nasraoui according to the Spanish name convention. Another example is Emilio Estevez (footballer) why he goes by Emilio Estevez not Emilio Tsai, and uses the template despite Tsai clearly not being a Spanish name RedPatch (talk) 17:18, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I still find it confusing for the reader. I think the template should explain it better or create a new one for these cases because it literally says it's a Spanish name. However, thanks for the explanation. Panenkazo (talk) 17:28, 11 July 2024 (UTC)