Misplaced Pages

talk:WikiProject Football: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 09:20, 2 May 2023 editThe C of E (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers46,000 edits →Liverpool F.C. 7–0 Manchester United F.C.: Not on the list← Previous edit Revision as of 10:24, 2 May 2023 edit undoGovvy (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers36,247 edits →Raul Moreira: new sectionTag: New topicNext edit →
Line 134: Line 134:
::::Sorry, yes, you're right. GNG is most likely satisfied for any game, but ] is definitely one that applies here. – ]] 09:07, 2 May 2023 (UTC) ::::Sorry, yes, you're right. GNG is most likely satisfied for any game, but ] is definitely one that applies here. – ]] 09:07, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
:::::There isn't much in way of content in the article that makes it clear why its notable. Indeed, for example, Arsenal have won a few games 7-0 in the past but we don't have articles on them because they haven't proved any lasting impact or coverage. This article is a fairly ROUTINE affair as 7-0s aren't intrinsically notable. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.5em 0.5em 0.6em;"> ''']''' (])</span> 09:18, 2 May 2023 (UTC) ''On edit'': Indeed it isn't even listed at the High scoring matches list {{ping|Jkudlick}} mentioned above. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.5em 0.5em 0.6em;"> ''']''' (])</span> 09:20, 2 May 2023 (UTC) :::::There isn't much in way of content in the article that makes it clear why its notable. Indeed, for example, Arsenal have won a few games 7-0 in the past but we don't have articles on them because they haven't proved any lasting impact or coverage. This article is a fairly ROUTINE affair as 7-0s aren't intrinsically notable. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.5em 0.5em 0.6em;"> ''']''' (])</span> 09:18, 2 May 2023 (UTC) ''On edit'': Indeed it isn't even listed at the High scoring matches list {{ping|Jkudlick}} mentioned above. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.5em 0.5em 0.6em;"> ''']''' (])</span> 09:20, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

== ] ==

A Portuguese player with one international cap, (at AfD) does anyone know anything about him? Again no questioning the article, how he became an international player for Portugal, his club career, etc. People don't like the tough questions. I had a bit of a look but didn't do so well. Maybe other people can help save it from deletion. Regards ] (]) 10:24, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:24, 2 May 2023

    Not to be confused with Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject American football, Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Australian rules football, or Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Canadian football.
    Skip to table of contents
    This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Football and anything related to its purposes and tasks.
    Shortcuts
    Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168Auto-archiving period: 7 days 
    WikiProject iconFootball Project‑class
    WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball
    ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
    WikiProject Football was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 3 March 2008.
    This WikiProject was featured on the WikiProject report at the Signpost on 9 July 2012.
    On 4 August 2022, it was proposed that this page be moved to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Association football. The result of the discussion was not moved.
    WikiProject Football
    Project pages
    Assessment
    Format templates
    Other

    Question on 2023 CONCACAF Gold Cup Group stage articles

    What is the level of completion that is expected for these pages to exist? The four groups appear to all have been moved to the draft space without warning, and now the article for the main competition is no longer showing the groups. This is after the tables were moved to these new articles so they could be transcluded onto the article in the first place, so I am wondering how complete they need to be to be moved out of the draft space.

    Jay eyem (talk) 22:13, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

    It would help User:Iliochori2 if you provided at least one or two more diverse references for each article. Perhaps from a newspaper or something? Ping User:Govvy, User:GiantSnowman, and User:Jkudlick. Nfitz (talk) 00:14, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    User:Nfitz - Your comments about a particular New Page Patrol reviewer violate the Misplaced Pages policy against personal attacks. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:39, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    I don't see any personal attacks here - except those below that I'd already commented about. Can you point to where on this page this is? I'm not sure how Spike 'em's role as a new page reviewer is relevant. Nfitz (talk) 06:45, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    No problem. The basic nature of the page(s) explains, at least for me, the reasoning behind the draftification of that particular season's article—it functions as a basic list of facts supported by very few basic sources, which I thought ran counter to MOS standards. I am happy to follow the consensus, though, whatever that might turn out to be. Anwegmann (talk) 14:54, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    I ask for common sense to be use, far as I am concerned it's coming up too May now, which in a normal season would be the end of the season. This too early stuff from some editors is bull and shit! As for the Tottenham article, why is that a redirect and not others, inconsistencies in results? I probably be editing it days ago if it wasn't set to that. Govvy (talk) 02:59, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    Why was I the only one to ask for the close to revisited? It didn't seem that consensual - and surely should have been relisted rather than closed. And I've asked User:Randykitty to do so. But yeah - we are long past the time of "too soon" deletions, blanking, and draftifications. The previous season article was started on April 4th! But why did you, User:Govvy, draftify last years' article on May 16th? Nfitz (talk) 05:01, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    What is bullshit is people creating articles when no SIGCOV exists. Stop moaning because your view is not the dominant one. Spike 'em (talk) 06:04, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    With all these snow keeps, User:Spike 'em, how is my view not dominant? Also remain civil - you can be blocked or banned if you make personal attacks. And no significant coverage? Have you done a before on these? Big media coverage of the Gold Cup draw. And are you really suggesting there's not significant coverage of the TOP LEAGUE IN ITALIAN FOOTBALL? These articles are created at this point, every year (or two in the case of the Gold Cup). Nfitz (talk) 06:14, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    I was replying to you and Govvy moaning about the consensus redirection of the Tottenham article, of which there is currently no coverage. There will undoubtedly be some in the future, and at that point the article can be created. Spike 'em (talk) 06:20, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    and responding to this This too early stuff from some editors is bull and shit! How is this not personal? Spike 'em (talk) 06:24, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    I find the use of the word "moaning" uncivil, offensive, and a personal attack - stop now - I don't know what the use of the word bullshit has to do with anything - obviously I'm referring to your personal attack. I don't see consensus there; with 4 of the 8 participants pushing Redirect, the normal action is to relist, as there is no rush. And why waste time deleting articles that are created at this time every year - at best they'll be back in a few weeks time - it's only about 3.5 months to the start of the season. And also, there IS coverage already of next season, such at this, this, this, and this. Nfitz (talk) 06:38, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    Govvy accused people of bull and shit, which is what I was responding to, but you choose to ignore that. Comments such as oh, i've really disturbed the clique haven't i are similarly uncivil so how about you stop posting if you can't keep to the demands that you make of others? Spike 'em (talk) 07:24, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    I don't see that either of those examples are similar - though I've certainly done others, and when asked politely I try not to repeat them - and I apologize to whoever I may have offended - there is no excuse for repeating your "moaning" comment. Either way, you can't use someone else's mistakes to justify your own civility - in fact, isn't doing so "disrupting Misplaced Pages to make a Point"? The issue here is the poor nomination of very notable (see all the SNOW speedy keeps) articles. Do you suggest User:Spike 'em that we should delete 2023–24 Premier League, which would be an identical action to one of those taken? Nfitz (talk) 07:43, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    Well, I do see them as similar. Is a rhetorical re-use of someone else's language really disruptive? If you want to throw guidelines around, then how about OTHERSTUFFEXISTS? The PL article for next season has some meaningful content, which the similar Spurs article does not. Consensus is gained by reference to policy and guidelines, not by a simple vote count, and most of the Keeps in the Spurs AfD were just ILIKEIT. Spike 'em (talk) 08:57, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    Once again, I have not issue, and never mentioned, the rhetorical re-use. My issue was the unnecessary use of the word "moaning".
    Specifically with these "group stage X" articles, are they neccesary before the event actually happens, or at least as there's content for them? We are talking about creating mainspace articles that are almost exactly just straight transclusions of the tables in the main Gold Cup article. Group A for example only says Group A of the 2023 CONCACAF Gold Cup will take place from 24 June to 4 July 2023. The group consisted of the United States and three other teams, and then the rest is in the article itself. The group itself isn't independently notable at this time, so I'm unsure why there's such a vehement chastidisation of having it exist as a draft instead until the event happens. Lee Vilenski 08:04, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    Other references were provided in the AFD - at least in Group D - WP:Articles for deletion/2023 CONCACAF Gold Cup Group D Keep in mind, 2023–24 Serie A and 2023–24 EFL League One were also nominated at the same time - which were even more concerning. Nfitz (talk) 21:11, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

    For the record, I opened a DRV for 2023–24 Tottenham Hotspur F.C. season. Though it's probably in my detriment to mention it here, given most of the current attendees seem to support the deletion! Nfitz (talk) 21:11, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

    Same question has to be asked about the qualifications: 2023 CONCACAF Gold Cup qualification 73.168.5.183 (talk) 22:57, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

    Questions

    Where is there a notability guideline that is applicable to season articles about teams? If there isn't a special notability guide, I will use general notability, which is a stringent standard.

    Where is there a notability guideline for CONCANAF group play articles?

    The best way to persuade a reviewer not to draftify an article or nominate it for deletion is to show a notability guide— Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert McClenon (talk • contribs) 06:51, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

    You mean NSEASONS? Though Onel has been editing long enough in the Football project to be aware of this. Though surely with over 100 pervious seasons articles for Hotspur, this isn't about notability - it's about timing. A proper BEFORE is necessary before nomination for deletion - for the Gold Cup articles, this would quickly have yielded numerous articles about the various groups - not surprising once the draw is made, weeks before the competition. Besides, they were all SNOW Speedy Keeps - I don't think notability is at question here. Nfitz (talk) 07:33, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    The fact that the season will be notable when it starts doesn't mean that a skeleton article needs to be created 3.5 months before a season starts, when the only known information is one friendly fixture. This was the case with the Spurs season article. A sensible time to create it would be when the Premier League fixture comes out (in June?), and they've actually done some squad transfers too, which could be added to articles. Creating almost empty articles months in advance seems to be a sportswide issue on Wiki, but doing so doesn't help readers at all, if there's almost no information on the articles created. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:09, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    Yes, agree with that - The Spurs 2023/24 article was a pointless load of empty and incomplete tables with practically no useful information at all. It should have been in Draft space ready to move to mainspace when there was actually some usable data about the season. Black Kite (talk) 08:11, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    @Black Kite: I agree with you, that's how to use wikipedia correctly, but with the Spurs article there was one already in draft space and a different version in main space. I just felt the AfD wasn't really needed and wasting peoples time. It's peoples choice of words that bug me out. @Spike 'em: Generally people say a football season starts first game of the season, but in the news-sphere they start way earlier, friendlies and the summer transfer window starts from 10 June, that's only 44 days away. That's not that far away, so people that say too soon... really shouldn't be doing that. Govvy (talk) 09:13, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    10 June is probably the right date to create it then, when there is more information. 10 June is still 2 months before the season, but anything before there's decent information is too soon. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:25, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    May/June ... Sticks and stones! :/ Govvy (talk) 09:38, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    The AfD was only necessary because attempts to draftify were ignored, to stop the edit wars over it. The article should only be started when there is useful verifiable information to add to it: if that is 2 months in advance or 2 days then so be it. I will use TOOSOON wherever I see fit, whether you like it or not. Spike 'em (talk) 09:53, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    • Part of the issue is that there was no BEFORE for the AFDs, which were based on the current state of the article, in violation of NEXIST. Independent references have been provided - even for the Tottenham article. Nfitz (talk) 21:21, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
      The sources you have supplied are speculation and unconfirmed rumours: I find it difficult to see what content we could add to the article using them. Spike 'em (talk) 21:46, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    • Real Madrid is clearly a keep (though if one thinks that a similar top club like Tottenham should have the article deleted, than so should Real Madrid's). Wrexham's article is also a keep, given their recent promotion, and it's very unusual international coverage. Even I think that Newport County is pushing it - and I'm a fan - my family is from Newport! Though looking at the 2022-23 article, I see it was created on April 27, 2022 ... so probably not worth deleting at this point; gosh, I hadn't heard that David Hando had died - that's sad, I knew him - and he was close to my father. Nfitz (talk) 23:22, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

    Unreferenced BLPs

    There is currently a large number of football-related BLPs that have insufficient sourcing. It's very important that all WP:BLPs are fully cited. Any help adding sources to these articles would be appreciated. A list of football BLPs with no references can be found here. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:46, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

    I see that Anatoly Morozov (athlete) is on there even though there is one source, albeit a stats one that doesn't confer notability on its own. Also, should the article not be moved to Anatoly Morozov (footballer)? Spiderone 10:05, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
    It's probably worth also having a look at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Football/Unreferenced BLPs/Full list and Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Football/BLPs lacking sources containing significant coverage/Full list. The latter list has over 800 articles listed as lacking significant coverage. Hack (talk) 11:43, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
    If it has a source, then even if that source is a database used as an external link, then it's not unreferenced. So all of those "unreferenced BLPs" are not actually unreferenced at all, just their reference(s) aren't in the generally agreed format. That being said, we should add more sources where they exist, and should be adding significant coverage too, but reliable database sources can be used for factual information. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:29, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

    User input needed...

    ... on this talk page, Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 20:30, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

    Athletic Bilbao

    Why is the page titled "Athletic Bilbao" if that is not the club's name? Literally the first two words of the article are Athletic Club and the infobox says Athletic Club. I'm also looking through the club website and it's clear that they refer themselves as Athletic Club/ Mwiqdoh (talk) 10:16, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

    WP:COMMONNAME : Misplaced Pages does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources), the article continues commonly known as Athletic Bilbao. Spike 'em (talk) 10:23, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    The same reason we have Inter Milan instead of F.C. Internazionale Milano. It's not perfect, but it'll do. – PeeJay 12:03, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

    Cristian Romero (footballer, born 1998)

    Can someone with move rights move the article back, it was moved without consensus. Govvy (talk) 20:35, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

    @Govvy: I have reverted the move. S.A. Julio (talk) 20:50, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
    Cheers, thank you. Govvy (talk) 21:42, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

    So when do people think the right time to create subpages is

    More pragmatically, when is the right time to create sub-pages? This is the root cause of the debate. This is the time of year they start to appear - as confirmation of league schedules, and which teams are in which league appear; along with staff and player changes. I'm puzzled why there are suggestions that 2023–24 Serie A and 2023–24 EFL League One were too soon. Or that group stage articles shouldn't be there seven weeks before the first round begins - I don't see such concerns about UEFA and CONMEBOL continental tournament groups - which are created MUCH earlier. Obviously there are limits - which is why WP:Articles for deletion/2023–24 EFL Championship was a SNOW delete ten months ago. Nfitz (talk) 21:21, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

    Associação Atlética Batel

    Hello! Associação Atlética Batel have changed their name to FC Mariupol, so shouldn't the name be also changed in the according WP article? If yes, then should it be something like FC Mariupol (Brazilian club) or FC Mariupol (Brazil)? Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 16:55, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

    See WP:NAMECHANGES; I'd wait a while to see if the new name sticks or if it just a temporary thing. Spike 'em (talk) 17:01, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
    The name change should be FC Mariupol (Brazil). Goes with the consensus established at Talk:Aurora FC (Canada)#Requested move 13 July 2020 and Talk:Pacific F.C. (Mexico)#Requested move 20 August 2020 and matches with teams such as Unity FC (Ghana), Unity FC (England), CD Guadalajara (Spain),Altitude FC (Belize), Altitude FC (Canada), Windsor FC (Australia), etc RedPatch (talk) 17:46, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
    WP:RM added to the talk page, better to support or oppose it there, no? BRDude (talk) 19:27, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
    I read the Guardian source, I see no mention of a name change, I see mention of "Mariupol’s kit, crest and logo" will be used by AA Batel, to honour the fallen club. Govvy (talk) 09:07, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

    Valeri Zykov and Nikolay Kiselyov

    Would someone from FOOTY mind taking a look at Valeri Zykov and Nikolay Kiselyov (footballer)? They've been assessed as mid-importance for FOOTY, but they're basically unsourced stubs with a few sentences at the moment that are at risk of ending up at AFD given the new guidelines created not too long ago at WP:NSPORT. Perhaps there are Russian reliable sources that can be used to help clarify the subjects' notability. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:28, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

    Thank you for the note. Both appear to be significant figures in Soviet football. I've added references to their Great Russian Encyclopedia entries, and that should satisfy WP:SPORTBASIC. Hopefully someone more proficient in Russian can flesh these out. Jogurney (talk) 14:30, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
    Thank you for taking a look at these Jogurney. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:33, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

    Liverpool F.C. 7–0 Manchester United F.C.

    The PROD on this article has been removed, but I thought before I send it to AfD, I would ask here what everyone thinks of it. Yes, the result was big and it was a record defeat for Manchester United, but it's not a league record and hasn't had the level of coverage you would expect from matches we already have articles for. Manchester United F.C. 8–2 Arsenal F.C., for example, has had loads of coverage over the last 10+ years despite it not being a record scoreline. Would anyone be opposed to deletion, without prejudice to re-creation once the game receives sufficient coverage to pass WP:GNG? – PeeJay 16:53, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

    I'm not convinced it has received lasting coverage yet. Spike 'em (talk) 17:14, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
    Send it to AfD. Not a league record. I would AfD the 8-2 as well to be honest. We shouldn't really have individual game articles for anything except record scores (and by that I don't mean a record victory/defeat for one side, that should be in that club's own articles. Black Kite (talk) 17:26, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
    I think we can have articles about any match as long as WP:GNG is satisfied, they don't have to be finals or record scorelines. Unfortunately, that's just not the case with Liverpool's 7-0 (yet). – PeeJay 17:32, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
    Oh, it meets GNG, as does every single Premier League match. Previews, interviews, commentary and analysis from the UK and indeed many other countries. Articles for most Premier League matches would have better sourcing than millions of other WP articles. Black Kite (talk) 19:53, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
    By that same measure, every regular season NFL, NHL, NBA, MLB, Bundesliga, Serie A, etc. contest would meet GNG. Just because something meets GNG doesn't mean it's notable enough for inclusion, a little WP:COMMONSENSE needs to come in to play. While a 7–0 scoreline is indeed very rare, there is nothing particularly notable about this match. If it had been the largest margin of victory in any Premier League match then I would say that is notable enough for its own article, but being "tied for the third-largest margin of victory by any team" is not notable enough for a stand-alone article. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 21:01, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
    I just realized the context of the previous comment, which was exactly what I said, just not in so many words. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 21:12, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
    Sorry, yes, you're right. GNG is most likely satisfied for any game, but WP:ROUTINE is definitely one that applies here. – PeeJay 09:07, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
    There isn't much in way of content in the article that makes it clear why its notable. Indeed, for example, Arsenal have won a few games 7-0 in the past but we don't have articles on them because they haven't proved any lasting impact or coverage. This article is a fairly ROUTINE affair as 7-0s aren't intrinsically notable. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 09:18, 2 May 2023 (UTC) On edit: Indeed it isn't even listed at the High scoring matches list @Jkudlick: mentioned above. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 09:20, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

    Raul Moreira

    A Portuguese player with one international cap, (at AfD) does anyone know anything about him? Again no questioning the article, how he became an international player for Portugal, his club career, etc. People don't like the tough questions. I had a bit of a look but didn't do so well. Maybe other people can help save it from deletion. Regards Govvy (talk) 10:24, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

    Categories: