Misplaced Pages

talk:WikiProject Football - 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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by PeeJay (talk | contribs) at 07:26, 10 April 2014 (→Manchester United–Arsenal brawl (1990): r). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 07:26, 10 April 2014 by PeeJay (talk | contribs) (→Manchester United–Arsenal brawl (1990): r)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
    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.
    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.
    This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Football and anything related to its purposes and tasks.
    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 Football
    Project pages
    Assessment
    Format templates
    Other

    Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/WikiProject used

    This WikiProject was featured on the WikiProject report at the Signpost on 9 July 2012.

    Results templates and tables

    It was brought to my attention that {{footballbox_collapsible}} may violate MOS:COLLAPSE. Does it? If so, is there some other way of presenting match information for club seasons as {{footballbox}} takes up too much space, but is ideal for tournament results. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:05, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

    The phrase is question is, "collapsible sections or cells may be used in tables that consolidate information covered in the main text," so is this template violating that? Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:36, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
    It does. It only shows the opponents, match number, date, score, and the host city. Everything else in the template isn't visible because the template collapsed and hid the other information. Kingjeff (talk) 02:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
    It pretty clearly fails because you can't put that information elsewhere in the article. I would suggest that the collapsibility function be disabled. Hack (talk) 03:50, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
    Just use a wikitable. There also is Template:OneLegResult-plain -Koppapa (talk) 05:56, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
    If it clearly fails, then we should tag the template as well and arrange to have the template fixed. The main issue with that template is that it clearly marks win-loss-draw results which otehr templates don't do and wikitables don't make easy. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:29, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
    {{OneLegResult-plain}} offers less information than the collapsed version of footballbox_collapsible. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:30, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
    The colouring functionality should be transferred across to {{football box}} and the current {{footballbox_collapsible}} should be redirected. Hack (talk) 08:23, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
    Can't just redirect though since there are other parameters present in footballbox_collapsible not present. But that would become obvious as well. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:36, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
    I've said it before and I'll say it again: just use the tabular format in place at 2013–14 Manchester United F.C. season (and other MUFC season articles). You can colour each row, and it includes all relevant information to a club season article – you really don't need to know who the opposition scorers were. – PeeJay 13:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
    The problem is that tables are a higher hurdle for new editors. Let's look at that paragon held-up by both Kingjeff and PeeJay2K3.
    Which is easier, remembering which of three bgcolor to add or adding a value of W, L, D or T beside result =?
    And while I like linking the score, it's not as obvious as linking next to a result parameter. I would do away with a score parameter altogether since it leads to using a hyphen, just have a goals1 and goals2 parameter instead, but that's a wish list. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:31, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
    Instead of treating our editors like morons and assuming they can't handle a simple bit of wikicode, why don't you show a bit of trust in them? You have no empirical evidence that people don't know the difference between "#FFCCCC" and "#CCFFCC", and the only reason a lot of people put a hyphen instead of an endash in scorelines is because most of them don't know how to make the endash or they don't understand the difference; I know I didn't when I first started, but I learned. And besides, the tabular format takes up far less space than the {{footballbox}} template as there is absolutely no unnecessary whitespace. – PeeJay 00:18, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
    I don't assume they are morons. I take great offence at your constant badgering PeeJay2K3. It's rude at best, demeaning at worst and an attempt to control in the extreme.
    I also didn't write that people don't know the difference between the bgcolor values.
    What I wrote is that it's a hurdle for new editors and that using parameters is easier, not just for new editors but for all. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:38, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

    Can you check a player for me?

    It looks as though Timoty Castagne hsa not played any pro games yet (despite the claim in the infobox), but the editors here now better where to check than I do. Fram (talk) 14:28, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

    According to Soccerway, his only involvement with the KRC Genk first team has been as an unused substitute. Mattythewhite (talk) 14:38, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
    Thanks (and to Daemonic Kangaroo for the Prod!) Fram (talk) 07:03, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

    Use of templates on club rosters

    I have noticed that a few major club articles do not use the {{updated}} or {{as of}} templates. What is the benefit of using those templates over using plain text? Is there a need to standardize on one or the other, or plain text? Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:04, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

    Twofold benefit I'd guess. As the documentation of the "as of" template shows, it categorises dated statements, and furthermore also shows the date in your date format preference (if you have one set). Jared Preston (talk) 15:51, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
    So should we use one rather than plain text? If so, which? Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:35, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
    I would suggest using {{as of}} if one was to go around updating squads and wanting to use a template. Jared Preston (talk) 19:48, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

    FA Cup teams

    I have finished creating very basic stubs about every team to have played in the FA Cup proper, full list can be found here - any help in expanding would be much appreciated, seeing as most of these teams have been defunct for a long time and online, reliable sources are few and far between. GiantSnowman 17:57, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

    Birmingham Corporation Tramways are featured in depth in one of the Gone But Not Forgotten books, which I have, so I will expand that one at some point -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:43, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
    I recently acquired the Denied F.C. book, so I will see if any of them feature in that.
    On a possibly related note, do we have a "resource pool" anywhere? I was thinking it might be useful to have a list of all the various history books that project members have, so we can request info from each other where we may have it. Number 57 09:33, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
    Is this what you mean? -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 09:53, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
    Yes, exactly! Number 57 09:54, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

    By the way, having seen that list and found it rather difficult to navigate, I've started splitting it up into more manageable chunks. See Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Football/Booklist/reorg if anyone wants to help (I'm off now). Cheers, Number 57 20:13, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

    WP:FOOTYN and the FFA Cup

    According to this essay, participation in a national cup is sufficient to prove notability of a club. The FFA Cup in Australia includes all clubs affiliated to Football Federation Australia or an FFA affiliate. This means that the vast majority of clubs in Australia are presumed notable despite most never having been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources. Given the myriad previous discussions on the inadequacies of this essay, could we have a note added to top of this page to the effect that it should not be used in deletion discussions? Hack (talk) 03:39, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

    I don't think that's necessary, FOOTYN is just an essay and GNG is the most important guideline. For most clubs that would be eligible for that competition, there would be clear GNG issues. FOOTYN still serves a useful purpose as an initial step in the notability process, namely, if a club has never participated in a national competition then it is highly unlikely that they will pass GNG. Fenix down (talk) 07:04, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
    Additionally, given that the qualifying rounds in this comeptition are done on a regional basis, the competition is not truly a national competition until it gets to the round of 32, so I would say only teams who get past the qualifying stage would count per FOOTYN in terms of notability. Fenix down (talk) 07:06, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
    FOOTYN needs re-writing/updating to reflect current Wiki-wide guidelines and current WikiProject consensus on every aspect of notability. (categories, templates etc. as well as articles). GiantSnowman 17:31, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Martyn Tyler

    Hello again, football experts! Here's an old Afc draft that was never submitted. Is this a notable subject? —Anne Delong (talk) 14:02, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

    I would say yes. The "Commentator of the Decade" swings it for me, as does the fact the article's in good nick and we have others, such as Richard Keys to set the trend. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:06, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
    We already have an article at Martin Tyler. Hack (talk) 14:08, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
    It is the article at Martin Tyler, with the spelling changed to Martyn with a y and then copied over to AfC. Whatever turns them on... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 14:42, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
    (sigh) Well it seems that "Martin" is the correct spelling, so I am sorry that I was taken in by this and wasted everyone's time. —Anne Delong (talk) 14:52, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

    Guidelines and MoSes for football-related articles

    For uniformity, it would beneficial to have editing guidelines and a MoS for football projects. There are issues, such as a player's "nationality" that need to be written down. The recent discussions at Julian Green made that clear. Codifying preferred page layout, tables or templates, etc. so that there's one place to which editors may refer and discuss those issues. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:46, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

    There is already... Player MoS... unless you mean something else? JMHamo (talk) 21:03, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
    Good start for players. It doesn't discuss how to define nationality, particularly in the lede/lead. Leagues and teams, both club and national, could use similar treatment. Documentation explaining when to use flags and not to use them would also be good. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:28, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

    Darrell Clarke

    Hi, does anyone have any idea where I might find Darrell Clarke's 2010/11 stats for Salisbury City in the Southern League? Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 22:54, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

    Could anyone find and input some stats for Peter Storey? He played for Arsenal and Fulham so I am sure they are out there in a fair few books. Thanks.--EchetusXe 17:53, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
    Not sure about Clarke, but Storey's Arsenal stats are available here on Andy Kelly's first team line-ups site. Lemonade51 (talk) 18:11, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
    Many thanks.--EchetusXe 12:47, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

    Match fixing in association football

    Bringing attention to this article, of which I have been the main contributor so far. Consequently I think it is OK, but given the subject matter felt it best to raise it here and ask for further input from both a BLP and a content perspective. GiantSnowman 17:48, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

    FIFA World Rankings Yearly Top 10

    This seems random, doesn't it? -Koppapa (talk) 17:57, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

    Yes. It should be deleted.--MarshalN20 06:15, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
    I have PRODded. GiantSnowman 12:55, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

    Now at AFD. GiantSnowman 12:29, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

    Thank you, GiantSnowman.--MarshalN20 13:26, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

    Ray Kelly played for Manchester City?

    Can someone please confirm if Ray Kelly (footballer) played a league game for Man City against Huddersfield Town on 7 November 1997? Thanks, JMHamo (talk) 20:31, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

    Soccerbase........ cheers, Struway2 (talk) 20:41, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
    Brilliant, many thanks Struway2 JMHamo (talk) 20:48, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
    Additional sources here and here. GiantSnowman 20:51, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

    Quillan Roberts

    Could an Admin please restore Quillan Roberts as he now passes WP:NFOOTBALL. Nfitz has provided this link for reference. Thanks. JMHamo (talk) 00:03, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

    Japan national football team results and fixtures

    What do you think about the sub-article titles on Japan national football team results and fixtures for each decade.. I feel it should be renamed to keep it consistent with similar.. so for example Japan national football team results (1950–59) rather than Japan national football team results (1950–1959)? Thanks, JMHamo (talk) 01:20, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

    I think WP:DATERANGE applies and would support your change. EddieV2003 (talk) 01:45, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

    Date formatting standards

    Hi, just want to check project standards re date formatting following this diff. Which is the standard between 1931–32 and 1931–1932, and between 1933–49 and 1933–1949, bearing in mind that the context here is years and not seasons? I'm assuming that for a season, the standard is ccyy–yy, but am I right? Thanks. GnGn (talk) 05:09, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

    Following the discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers/Archive 144#Date range redux, the relevant section of the MoS was changed to reflect the de facto consensus, which this project follows, that infobox tenures use full years. Please see WP:DATERANGE (under Other notes):
    • A range of sports seasons in an infobox may also be written as 2005–2010.
    You are indeed right that the standard for a season outside the infobox is ccyy–yy. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:09, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

    Sam Oji

    This image has been removed persistently from Sam Oji by the subject himself, Oji187 (talk · contribs), but hre hasn't explained why he has been removing the image. There doesn't appear to be anything untoward with the image, so I see no problem including it. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 14:32, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

    Can see nothing wrong with this image. The image contributor has a history on Commons of images taken at Tamworth's ground and appears to have some close access to players. This is just another of those.--Egghead06 (talk) 19:38, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

    Alen Halilovic

    Hi friends, you all ready know that FC Barcelona has been banned from two successive transfer windows by the FIFA. At the same time, you know that Alen Halilović as well as Marc-André ter Stegen has joined Barcelona. (The club has confirmed the news in their website, so we cannot call these news as transfer speculations.) But the ban can be withdrawn, about which I am not going to write. All I want to know is, should we include these informations that they have joined the club in the respective pages of the players or remove them for the time being or follow an alternative? Further comments/suggestions are welcomed. RRD13 (talk) 15:51, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

    As far as I can tell, and as far as RS are reporting it, the players will join when the transfer window opens in Spain because the deals were signed before the transfer ban was put in place. GiantSnowman 17:51, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
    As far as I'm aware, there's no contract with ter Stegen: there's certainly nothing on Barcelona's website. As to Halilovic, the article shouldn't say he's joined Barcelona, because he hasn't, yet: a deal has been signed for him to join once the transfer window opens. But I think at the moment, the current wording of the article is about right: i.e. that a deal has been signed, blah blah, but the transfer ban has cast doubt on the move. There's a lot of confident bluster from last week with Halilovic's lawyer, Dinamo Zagreb etc saying yeah, course it'll go through, but as far as I can see, there's been nothing substantive since, and certainly no clarification from anyone who might actually know.
    This next bit is original research, i.e. my personal opinion: the fact that there hasn't been anything substantive since, rather implies that Barcelona fear the Halilovic transfer would be caught in the ban. But that's purely my interpretation and doesn't count for anything. Thanks for asking. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 18:20, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
    Alen Halilovic's Barcelona move 'will go through despite transfer ban'. GiantSnowman 19:46, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
    Indeed, that's his lawyer's opinion from a week ago. He may be right, but we don't know. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 22:46, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
    The contract is not with immediate effect. Players officially transfer teams when the transfer window opens up. What we do know is that there was a contract signed prior to the transfer ban and that Barcelona are banned from the transfer market for the transfer window he is suppose to join them. Kingjeff (talk) 23:00, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

    Manchester United–Arsenal brawl (1990)

    I seem to have bumped into some opposition to my attempts to eliminate MOS:FLAG violation and a mis-classification of the Manchester United–Arsenal brawl (1990) article. I've just had these attempts reverted by two different editors. User:VEO15 and User:PeeJay2K3 insist that the flags are somehow relevant, and that the article is about the match when the title seems to clearly indicate that the match is merely supplying the context for the brawl. I feel that some discussion is necessary, especially as I see there are plenty more MOS:FLAG violations in teams and season articles, such as here, where the flags appear to be totally gratuitous. Regards, -- Ohc  01:51, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

    In my opinion, WP:MOSFLAG is a pile of crap when it comes to situations like this (referring only to the Man Utd v Arsenal article). The flags are not being used gratuitously, they are exclusively in the section where the team line-ups appear. They do not take up space unnecessarily and they provide extra visual information for the reader, who has no reason to expect that all the players would be from the country where the match took place, hence why we provide these visual indications to the contrary. Such fastidious, literal adherence to the MOS gets us nowhere, and I suggest that the MOS be changed to cover situations such as this; if the MOS is not changed, I intend to ignore this rule for the benefit of the encyclopaedia. – PeeJay 07:26, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
    Categories: