Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia talk:WPF)
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Football (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Bot to update tables[edit]

How about a bot that automatically updates tables? The bot would take input from the sites that are customised at User:DatBot/footyconfig, and could either update a page that is transcluded onto the template (such as what Defconbot did) or it could edit the template directly. The only manual thing would be to edit the bot's settings for relegations and promotions I believe. It would also be possible to turn off one of the leagues that the bot would manage, if there would be some weird event that the source updated incorrectly. Dat GuyTalkContribs 22:36, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Absolutely for this. Nobody consistently updates 95% of the players tables and they're always incorrect.Danieletorino2 (talk) 16:13, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
This would be particularly beneficial for non-League season articles and I am definitely in favour. Could we also get it to update infoboxes and stats tables in player articles using a source like Soccerbase? We could have a lookup page that lists pages the bot should ignore in cases where the Soccerbase profile is incomplete or has a known error. Number 57 16:24, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
I am for this as long as it will work with Module:Sports table. Qed237 (talk) 16:25, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
I guess there will be problems when teams have qualified (statusletters should be inserted) and when changes should be made in qualification column, but that could be done manually? Same for possible notes. Qed237 (talk) 16:28, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
I quite enjoy updating tables, as anyone looking at my contributions will see. *sigh* progress. Gricehead (talk) 17:28, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
@Dat Guy: I am confused, what leagues will the bot up changing and how will the bot know which games and leagues to update? More importantly what sources will the bot be taking into consideration when it updates the sources? Soccerway and Nationalfootballteams.com are the two I most regularly use but even in those two I've come across mistakes. Personally I need more information before I sign onto this. Inter&anthro (talk) 19:11, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
@Inter&anthro: It is all customisable. You can set which leagues, you can set which sources. Dat GuyTalkContribs 12:56, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Suggestion from somebody, that has done something like this (other wiki and not widely): include something like <!-- BOT BEGIN --> and <!-- BOT END -->, to be able to have some notes and other things, that can't be automated with bot. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 14:11, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
In a perfect world that is a good idea. In reality it probably will require so fuch fine-tuning, that it will not save much work anyway. Some hints: How often should the bot run and convert the webpage to the article, every hour, once the webpage changes content, once the content does not match the article anymore (in case some user changed the article somehow). Somebody will likely update the table anyway, before the bot has run. At least for the big leagues. And all those smaller ones, that have outdated tables for weeks, might not be worth the botwork anyway. -Koppapa (talk) 09:02, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
Not always. Also, I believe if there is consensus the shortnames would not need to be there as it will just add Team instead of the shortened versions. Dat GuyTalkContribs 18:09, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Additional statistical tables in minor tournaments[edit]

How much statistics is too much statistics, with respect to WP:NOTSTATS ?

I have reverted edits (twice) from @Callofworld: who has been creating statistical compilation of matches for a number of minor tournaments - including see Talk:Algarve Cup - and then they are reverted back saying it is my Personal Impression and Personal Taste, and that the WP:NOTSTATS policy isnt Necessary for all articles, and a request to make a separate article for the table (as a "National team appearances in the XXXX Cup", rather than revert ? I consider that such a table for FIFA world cups (Men/Women) may be warranted due to the high importance of the event, but not for every minor tournament. Similar edits to make these tables for other minor tournaments have been made recently by this contributor for tournaments such as OFC Beach Soccer Championship, Peace Queen Cup, Cyprus Cup (recently reverted by @Snowflake91:), Women's Nordic Football Championship, Africa Beach Soccer Cup of Nations, Nordic Football Championship, Africa Women Cup of Nations, Copa América Femenina. I consider the article on the Algarve Cup already rather unbalanced with respect to tables, and the additional of another long table makes it more so.

Is this sort of detail warranted, or does it set a precedence for every minor tournament to have this level of statistical detail ? Matilda Maniac (talk) 13:34, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Not needed, you were correct to remove it. Kante4 (talk) 13:44, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi , first Algrave and other article is a important official championship and very important for each Continent. Overall results is more important than Participating nations! many article have it. we can transfer it to : National team appearances in the ....... Cup. thanks. this policy : WP:NOTSTATS  :Not specify exactly (each section with Personal Impression and Personal Taste can be deleted) , for improve information and complete overall table is good.Callofworld (talk) 14:17, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
  1. Excessive listings of unexplained statistics. Statistics that lack context or explanation can reduce readability and may be confusing; accordingly, statistics should be placed in tables to enhance readability, and articles with statistics should include explanatory text providing context. Where statistics are so lengthy as to impede the readability of the article, the statistics can be split into a separate article and summarized in the main article. (e.g., statistics from the main article United States presidential election, 2012 have been moved to a related article Nationwide opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2012).
@Matilda Maniac: you first create National team appearances in the Cyprus Cup and reverted table, many article relate to football have a general statistics , many minor or continental championship.
Africa men Cup of Nations have a General Statistics, why not Africa Women Cup of Nations? for policy ? or Personal Impression of policy? we can delete all of table from all of article and wiki become incomplete! is it mission of wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callofworld (talkcontribs) 14:50, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
and more ........................... i havent time find all of them for you.

Callofworld (talk) 15:03, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

But, @Kante4: and @Snowflake91:, I feel I am simply being drowned out by the replies from Callofworld - as above and on my talk page - who is asking me not to offend her. Surely the solution is not to create a separate stand-alone article just for the tables - that would fail WP:GNG I do not really have the time to correspond, and if i revert again, it may be reverted back, and all of a sudden I'm in an edit war. Better things to do. Matilda Maniac (talk) 00:08, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
This table does not violate any law. More than 30 of these tables are available on Wikipedia before From World Cup to Confederations Cup or small regional tournaments like CONCACAF or ASEAN. ::::You can add text to improve Wikipedia to the tables or separate page to create them in accordance with the law. Please end this discussion. We're gathered here to develop our articles rather than remove them under the pretext of incomplete personal interpretations. Wikipedia is one important rule fairness and goodwill, while the table is a short summary of the entire article.
Thank you
Callofworld (talk) 04:41, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
This is an attempt at civil debate, not Harrassment ! Matilda Maniac (talk) 06:16, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
I quite like them, but they have problems: they are all unsourced and self-compiled. They most often contain errors (sum wins is not sum losses, goal difference doesn't add up to 0, etc). Best thing I guess would be to delete all of them for whom you can't find a source. Those are likely then anyway. They have their own Category by the way: Category:All-time_football_league_tables. -Koppapa (talk) 07:12, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
for me, not worth the grief of deleting a table that someone has spent hours of their time on; it will only inflame. Matilda Maniac (talk) 23:09, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
They were added to so many pages by the same author, it's crazy. Look at Africa_Futsal_Cup_of_Nations#General_Statistics, a source is given, but it doesnm't work. Wins don't match losses, overall goal difference is +12. Even the first team has a wrong w-l-d for the points total. Yeah, much work, but not a pretty good one. -Koppapa (talk) 06:40, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

International caps[edit]

Hi, looking for some opinions re a dispute I've had with GiantSnowman re international caps, which can be found here. Essentially, what I want to know is what do we regard as acceptable, e.g. caps approved by relevant football association, only caps approved by FIFA etc? The dispute was borne out of what National-Football-Teams.com regard as 'FIFA' and 'Non FIFA' matches, when they seem to include matches played between two FIFA-approved teams in that category. I mean, if we only go by what NFT regard as official FIFA matches, then we wouldn't include any of Gibraltar's matches in UEFA qualification, which NFT regard to be be 'Non FIFA'. To me, this would be counter-intuitive, factually inaccurate and a bit bonkers. Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 00:13, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

We only include 'official' international games, in the same way as we only include league domestic games. NFT is not always 100% accurate, as in it might have mis-classified a game or two. In the absence of alternative sources, however, we go with it. GiantSnowman 07:57, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Who decided that only NFT can decide what matches are deemed 'official'? And does it actually meet WP:RS? Even if it does, why is it a greater authority on international match-officialdom than UEFA or a football association? If that is the case, we're going to have barrels of laughs revising history, pretending Gibraltar never participated in UEFA Euro 2016 qualifying... Mattythewhite (talk) 17:11, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
NFT can get it wrong, sure, but in the absence of the other sources you mentioned we go with it...and FAs cannot be trusted, they like to award extra caps (see Bobby Charlton...) GiantSnowman 18:35, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
So as per the NFT site, it would be seen as okay to edit Barry Bannan's article and remove the 2015 match shown in his Internationals infobox and reduce his caps number by 1 ? RossRSmith (talk) 07:46, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
If that's what the source says, then yes. Unless you can find other sources which support the higher caps? GiantSnowman 08:06, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
There are two connected points here. Taking NFT first: NFT is a personal website, and its content is supplied (among other ways) by users on its forum. Its contact page states "Responsible for the content of this site: Benjamin Strack-Zimmermann". Doubtless the site owner checks the content supplied, but it is basically his personal site and as such not WP:RS.
On Charlton's 1963 cap against the FIFA XI: every independent reliable source known to man knows that Charlton won 106 caps, including that one. And FIFA knew the same, until their 2001 decision to exclude caps awarded for matches against FIFA or confederation select XIs after all: see Charlton at RSSSF. Except that when the French Federation stood up to them over France v FIFA XI 2000, FIFA backed down and agreed to recognise that game as a full international: see Zidane at RSSSF. But NFT doesn't: their David Trezeguet page counts three fewer goals than does the FFF; Mr Trezeguet scored a hat-trick in that match. NFT doesn't even count it as a non-FIFA match. So NFT's idea of FIFA matches differs from FIFA's in at least some cases.
The other point is the one made above about Gibraltar in the Euros. They were at the time a full member of their continental confederation, and thus entitled to participate in that confederation's major competition. I think that if we try to argue that matches in the Euros in some way don't count as full internationals because Gibraltar wasn't at the time a FIFA member – despite full caps being awarded not only by Gibraltar but by all the countries that played against them (including Mr Bannan for Scotland) – we'd be making ourselves look pretty silly in the eyes of the real world. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:58, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Galleries of kits[edit]

Should not be included per WP:NOTGALLERY; so please can somebody inform @Chuckdisi: over at Antigua and Barbuda national football team? Ta. GiantSnowman 18:28, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Robert Goethals[edit]

The article Robert Goethals was somehow appearing in the non-existent Category:Pages using infobox ftball biography with unknown param, so I went to see if I coukd tidy it up.

It appears to have been using a lot of parameters which are not documented in Template:Infobox football biography, so I commented out the paras which seemed to be causing errors.[1]

Please could some more familiar with Template:Infobox football biography see if they can sort it out?

Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:07, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

I've fixed the infobox formatting. Looks like the article's creator copied the infobox across from nl.wiki and translated the parameter names into English themselves rather than using the en.wiki para names. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:21, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Struway2. That's great. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:15, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

CAF members[edit]

So Zanzibar is a full member now. Anyway, sorting the list Confederation of African Football#CAF members by date i wondered why Kenya is listed as joining in 2012. FIFA and CAF credit is as 1960. Football Kenya Federation has correct dates in the infobox, but the text is worded totally different. There was a rival association from 2011 to 2015, maybe that's why. Any expert on African football able to clarify the situation? -Koppapa (talk) 06:27, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Marouane Fellaini Standard Liege stats[edit]

There is no source which backs up what is in the stats table. Soccerbase has nothing on his Standard Liege career while the Guardian source disagrees with the league appearances. The cup and continental stats seem to have been pulled out of thin air. His Soccerway profile (which is currently not used for stats) also has different league and continental apps and nothing on cup appearances.

What is the solution to an issue like this? I propose just matching up the table exactly with what is in his Soccerway profile (always found it far more reliable for non-English leagues) and removing the links to Soccerbase and the Guardian. This would mean just setting the cup apps to zero so can I do this or is there another solution?

Stuart1234 (talk) 14:02, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

In general, if you haven't got stats sources for all competitions it's perfectly acceptable to only source what you have got, and leave unsourced cells blank. Setting cells to zero if you don't know they actually are zero isn't a good idea.
As to Fellaini at Standard, 2006/07 is a bit long ago for Soccerway. The figures at the Belgian Soccer Database match those currently in the article's stats table, except they give him 4 league goals in 06/07 where the article has 3. The discrepancy is in the match against Germinal Beerschot in April 2007, which other sources give as an own goal, e.g. ESPN, RSSSF.
If it were me, I'd use bsdb.be as my main source, with a note about the Germinal goal. The player page is at https://www.bsdb.be/spelersfiche/28454 (you have to register, but it appears to be free to do so), which gives the league apps and goals, and then you click on the seasons to get a full breakdown of matches played in, including cup and Europe. hope this helps, Struway2 (talk) 16:08, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Alright cheers I'll look into it. Stuart1234 (talk) 21:44, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Jim Wright (footballer, born 1910)[edit]

Greetings all. I just closed an Article for Deletion discussion regarding Jim Wright (footballer, born 1910) on the basis that this person meets WP:FOOTY. I'm not very knowledgeable about football, so if any of the members of this WikiProject are able to improve this article (particularly the sourcing) I'd be very grateful. Thanks in advance! Exemplo347 (talk) 00:38, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Request for advice on honours editing?[edit]

Request for advice: I work on a couple of historical/records pages, namely List of football clubs in England by competitive honours won and Sheriff of London Charity Shield, the latter I have undertaken a research project on over the past three months, providing a big improvement to the page, finding newspaper articles, books and other sources to back up each of the games played (1898-1907) in what was the precursor to the FA Charity Shield. The trophy was fully FA supported, even having the current and former FA president, and secretary, on the trophy committee.

With this improved referencing done I have worked with a couple of other editors to include these early Charity Shield games in the main table at List of football clubs in England by competitive honours won. While of course these games are 'minor' in terms of honours, the games were undoubtedly competitive matches played in by elite first team sides of the day, in fact, Corinthian F.C., the leading amateur side of the era changed their constitution in order to compete in the match for charity (published ref from 1906 [2]) and they played either the league or FA Cup champion every year. During this period Corinthian F.C. provided more England internationals than any other club side. It was an amateurs vs. professionals format, one that the FA Charity Shield itself would use a number of times in its early years after an initial rift with the amateur side of the game had been resolved.

My issue is that I have been faced with a single editor (User talk:Davefelmer) who has now removed Sheriff of London Charity Shield honours from List of Liverpool F.C. records and statistics‎, Aston Villa F.C. and is trying to remove them from List of football clubs in England by competitive honours won; he is stating that the honours listed at the Liverpool website take precedence and that the references on the trophy page are not strong enough to prove 'competitiveness' despite listing every fixture/report/formation of the trophy as a competitive game. I strongly suspect due to blocks, warnings, edit history and comments on their talk page that this is due to to their own club allegiance, as the editor seems to be trying to diminish other 'rival' sides honours. They are stating that the Sheriff of London Shield trophy was 'not competitive' and also are using the fact that it is not listed by Liverpool F.C. on their website as a rationale for removing the honour.

I am quite stumped as to what to do as I don't want to edit war perpetually on this matter, it seems to me that the references are there and are sound, even online newspaper cuttings from the time! Please provide me with any advice on this matter? I have not come across quite this level of subversive editing, hidden behind a veneer of diligence to reliable sourcing, which makes the matter quite frustrating. Mountaincirque 12:14, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Al-Ahli Saudi FC[edit]

I noticed a lot that nicknames keep going into the infobox on the club page, being removed and so on, but a lot of strange unsourced edits on the page. I was wondering if the page should be semi-protected for a few weeks? Govvy (talk) 15:44, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done by another admin. GiantSnowman 20:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Giampiero Boniperti appearances in various tournaments[edit]

Hi. Giampiero Boniperti is one of Juventus' all-time appearances and goal-scoring holder. My question is whether to include his appearances and goals played in the Latin Cup, Coppa dell'Amicizia and the Copa Rio as part of his grand total? Would any of these tournaments count in official tallies? Maybe under "other"? Thanks. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 21:01, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

regarding WP:Overlink[edit]

Someone has removed some of the links in the infobox on Robbie Keane under overlink rules, I didn't think you were suppose to apply that rule in the info boxes so wanted to double check, cheers. Govvy (talk) 13:05, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

@PeeJay2K3: heh, you went and restored it I see fair enough! You could of replied know! Govvy (talk) 15:57, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, sorry. Sometimes I just go ahead and do stuff. – PeeJay 16:20, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

regarding zebra striping for tables[edit]

Walter Görlitz and I, both contributors to the Seattle Reign FC page, have encountered an issue that we are seeking input from WP:FOOTY members. Our dispute is regarding the use of zebra striping for tables and is described at User talk:Walter Görlitz#Zebra striping. You can see from the editing history of Seattle Reign FC#Coaching staff that Walter Görlitz insisted on using a zebra striping that colored alternate rows the same shade of gray as the header row. As I described in their user talk page, this stylistic choice is not currently used in any other table listed in FOOTY's manual of style and potentially creates confusion. We were unable to come to a consensus, so as Walter Görlitz suggested I've brought it up here to seek additional input. —Mightytotems (talk) 16:46, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

I don't think the striping is helpful or aesthetic. Number 57 16:56, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Really not needed. Does not add anything. Kante4 (talk) 16:58, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
If you're colour blind like me in the grey then it's not helpful at all. Govvy (talk) 16:59, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Excellent. Then it should be removed from the template. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:39, 22 March 2017 (UTC)