Misplaced Pages

Talk:2022 FIFA World Cup

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.
Good article2022 FIFA World Cup has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 13, 2023Good article nomineeNot listed
March 4, 2024Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article
Skip to table of contents
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2022 FIFA World Cup article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 14 days 
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Material from 2022 FIFA World Cup was split to other pages. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter pages, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter pages exist. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution.
In the newsA news item involving 2022 FIFA World Cup was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the In the news section on 20 November 2022.
Misplaced Pages
Misplaced Pages
This article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
WikiProject iconFootball High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article 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
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconQatar Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Qatar, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Qatar-related topics 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.QatarWikipedia:WikiProject QatarTemplate:WikiProject QatarQatar
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconArab world Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world 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.Arab worldWikipedia:WikiProject Arab worldTemplate:WikiProject Arab worldArab world
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconOrganized Labour Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour 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.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSports
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Sports, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sport-related topics 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.SportsWikipedia:WikiProject SportsTemplate:WikiProject Sportssports
To-do list:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2022, when it received 46,794,250 views.
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 11 times. The weeks in which this happened:
Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

GAN

Hi guys - does anyone have any objections for me to take this through the GAN process? I feel like we are suitably far out from the tournament for it to be stable enough. Does anyone want to step in as a co-nominator? Lee Vilenski 06:52, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

There's two sections towards the bottom that have active tags. I feel that the Security section could be rolled into Preparations, but that would have to be created (and there's thorough coverage of the preparations involved). The match summaries also seem to be a bit underdeveloped. SounderBruce 08:54, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
That's helpful, I'll put together some fixes later. Lee Vilenski 09:14, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

Unsuccessful. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 11:22, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:2022 FIFA World Cup/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Stevie fae Scotland (talk · contribs) 11:22, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Failing this based on cleanup banners that have not been addressed. When the Controversy section was tagged as WP:UNDUE (December 2022), it had 3,251 words of readable prose and the editor tagging it highlighted that it needed "some heavy trimming down". The opposite has happened as the section now totals 3,950 words. This article should summarise the controversies and the reaction to them, the level of detail provided is more appropriate for List of 2022 FIFA World Cup controversies and the related articles on specific controversies.

The Security section has been tagged as needing expanding although it has been suggested on the talk page that it could be included in a Preparations section/article. If the information already provided is all that is available, I would agree that it is not necessary to have a section dedicated to security and that inclusion in a Preparations section would be more appropriate.

There is also one {{update after}} tag and one {{citation needed}} tag.

I have concerns regarding WP:OR as well. From the edit history, the Tournament ranking section with the citation needed tag appears contentious and has been highlighted as potential OR before. The Discipline section is also unsourced. A source to the regulations is provided but no source for individual suspensions and the matches to which they applied has been provided.

A number of bare URLs which do not appear in the list of references have been used to cite match results and standings tables, these should be updated per WP:CITE to full citations.

Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 11:22, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
No drama, if it's alright with you, I'll just put my comments after this. You are well within your rights to quickfail the article, although I don't think there's all that much that needed doing (from the above at least). I've gone ahead and merged security into the venues section. It's important that we note that countries gave police (and other) forces to the event, although the actual security at the event is the same as any other event of this size, so doesn't need its own section (or an expansion). I don't think a preparations section is required, as the whole of the rest of the article is about how the event was created and how it went on.

I've removed the final standings table (as I've done probably 50 times now), as the consensus is that it should not be created unless FIFa actually creates such a table.

I'm just going through and fixing/removing the few uncited items now. I don't think the summary section is underdone, it covers pretty much every match, and full summaries of each match should exist in the sub-articles (see 2022 FIFA World Cup Group B for an example).

As for the controversy (which I suspect is the main reason for the failure, which is fair), it's a bit long, but I don't think it is specifically far too long, mainly due to the sheer amount of press and longevity of the issues surrounding the event. Several press releases have deemed it "the most controversial sporting event of all time", and thus having a section of a larger weight of the whole article makes a lot of sense. However, I shall go through the prose and clean it up a bit before renominating. Lee Vilenski 14:10, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

No worries, that's a good solution for the security section. You've done a lot of good work on the article so far which is much appreciated, good luck when it comes to renomination. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 15:07, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. I was aware it would be a difficult one to promote. I've done a significant cull of the controversy, and I think that about covers it. I'll have another read through and renom later. Lee Vilenski 15:26, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Full Match Replays?

Hi all, FIFA+ has all full match replays of this World Cup available worldwide. Is something that might be considered to add links to those under each match in the same way that Reports are made available? Cobitredici (talk) 03:07, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:2022 FIFA World Cup/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zwerg Nase (talk · contribs) 07:48, 16 August 2023 (UTC)


  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Lead

  • Every information in the lead should also be part of the article itself. I would therefore suggest to include the stat on highest amount of goals down in the statistics section. Then also move the source there, since the source is then not needed in the lead.

Scope

  • The infobox includes number of attendance, but without a source. I suggest adding a section in the article body on ticketing and attendance, then source the numbers there.
    • So I can't say I agree with this, but this is simply an addition of the individual attendances from each of the matches (you can see the amounts in the infobox). There's an argument that WP:CALC comes into play, but I'm not a fan of adding something without any cites (most sources talk about the 3 million or so that attended the world cup, but not necessarily the matches. I'd be hesitant to add to the body without an overall cite. Lee Vilenski 19:17, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
I see, I guess that works. Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:36, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Overview

Host selection

  • A lot here in the criticism section here doubles with the "Controversies" section further down. Any chance to merge them in one place?
  • "Despite convictions and guilty pleas of accepting bribes, FIFA ultimately elected not to change the host site." Missing a source.

Venues

Teams

  • "France, the reigning World Cup champions also went through qualifying stages as normal." This sentence only makes sense if it is explained that defending champions used to not have to qualify. Maybe in a footnote?
  • Could reasons be given why Saint Lucia, Samoa, and American Samoa withdrew?
  • "As a result, the 2022 tournament was the first World Cup in which none of the teams that earned a spot through qualification were making their debut. The Netherlands, Ecuador, Ghana, Cameroon, and the United States returned to the tournament after missing the 2018 tournament." Both of these statements are unsourced.
  • "who decided not to replace Karim Benzema after he sustained an injury" - my French is not great, but I think the French source does not explicitly state this.
  • Footnotes on teams not determined at the time of the draw should include a source, #130 should suffice, though I would love to see a more explicit source here, since the FIFA source does not clearly state which teams have not been determined yet.

Officiating

  • I am not in love with the tweet (or is it an X not?) as a source. I am sure a better source can be found for this.
    • Who knows with that Trainwreck. As much as Twitter is the wildwest, it's a tweet from FIFA, so it's reliable. I can't find too much press about them actually being announced as the ref for the final.Lee Vilenski 20:12, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Group stage

Group A

  • "Many Qatar natives were seen leaving the game before the end, with ESPN reporting that two-thirds of the attendance had left." Not sure if this is really relevant, maybe under controversies (see below later once I get to that part)

Group B

Group C

  • "the biggest upset in the history of the World Cup" - this is a direct quote, but I cannot find it in any of the two given sources??

Group E

  • Feel like the Germany-Japan match could use a better source to back up the fact that it was indeed an "upset".
  • It is noteworthy I believe to point out that four-time World Champions Germany exited in the Group Stages for the second time in a row.

Group F

  • "Belgium manager Roberto Martínez confirmed after the game that he believed Canada to have been the better team." - This sentence can be scrapped, not really relevant, the other games also do not state who might have been the better team, which is pure speculation anyway.
  • "The match sparked riots in Belgium, with residents fires and fireworks being set off." - residents fires? What is that?

Group G

  • "with star player Neymar receiving an ankle injury" - receiving sounds like he got it as a gift or something.
Maybe suffered? Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:43, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
  • "He was later sent off for removing his shirt in celebrating the goal." - This needs context, explain why players can be sent off for this.
    • Yellow cards are given to players for removing the shirt (this has been a worldwide rule for almost 20 years now). He was already on a yellow card. I have added this, but I don't want to unnecessarily explain that you can get a yellow for this behaviour as it would probably bloat the prose. Lee Vilenski 21:32, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
I think it's better that way since these articles should be written in a way that people not familiar with the subject matter can understand them.Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:43, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
  • "The game's first goal appeared to have been headed in by Ronaldo, but the ball just missed his head." - Also not that relevant.
  • "Several Uruguay players left the pitch after the game surrounding the referees and followed them off the pitch." - could also do with some context, controversial non-given penalty late on?

Knockout stage

  • "their biggest win margin in the 2022 tournament, reaching their sixth final" - both statements are not backed up by the source given.
  • "This marked their third World Cup win and their first since 1986. It also marked the first time that a South American team won the World Cup in 20 years and as Copa América champions." - unsourced!
    • Removed - sourced part.

Statistics

  • As mentioned above, overall goal statistics should be added here with the respective source.
  • Discipline: if there is no source available for this table, then I would recommend scrapping this completely.

Awards

Marketing

  • "FanSided" seems like a dodgy source at best to me.
  • "coloured borders "parallels"" - what is a parallel??
  • Broadcasting: Why is Fox Sports in the US singled out for information about how their coverage was received? I am sure these discussions happened in other countries (definitely here in Germany), so why are they not covered? Either include as much as possible or leave it out entirely. I see no reason to single out the US, a nation not even that much into football.
  • Broadcasting: Same with the licensing and the viewership numbers? Why is only the US covered here??

Symbols

  • "Social media commentary compared La'eeb's appearance to Casper the Friendly Ghost or the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man, or even the ghost of the construction workers who died building the stadiums and infrastructure." - scrap for relevance, also, all four sources are highly questionable.
  • "for promoting the world cup" - capital letters on World Cup.
  • "performed by American rapper Lil Baby, teamed up with Budweiser" - Budweiser was rapping?? Like the entire company?

Controversies

  • Generally, this section again suffers from the problem that some issues are brought up in the opening paragraphs and then are covered again in their respective subsections, leading to information being there twice.
  • Source order should be taken care of, for example here: "and wider FIFA corruption."
  • "In December 2022, FIFA World Cup" - just "the World Cup"?
  • "Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen" - the sentence before has an Oxford comma, this one has not, needs to be consistent.
  • "worker conditions ,the rights of LGBT fans" - comma placement
  • "walked back on both commitments." - what exactly did this entail? how were those issues handled in the end?
  • "This also led to concerns about what other commitments may be rolled back." - if nothing else happened, then this sentence can just be scrapped.
  • "with initial plans for air-conditioned stadiums giving way to a potential date switch from summer to November and December" - this is the first time the article mentions that the tournament was originally supposed to happen in summer, this should have been brought up much earlier.
    • That's not exactly true. The schedule does mention that it's in a different time, and why that is. I don't think many ever thought they'd be able to run a summer event. Lee Vilenski 22:55, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Migrant workers: "with the state accused of sportswashing in hosting the World Cup" - already mentioned above.
  • "Better working conditions are now negotiable." - when exactly is "now"?
  • "they would seek compensation from FIFA" - did this eventually happen?
  • "The Sunday Times published bribery allegations based on a leak of millions of secret documents.The Sunday Times published bribery allegations based on a leak of millions of secret documents." - When did this happen?`
I think that would be wise, considering the next earlier mention of a time is two paragraphs before, so it's not really clear. Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:52, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Hahaha, didn't even catch that one! :D With how many S do you spell innocent? Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:52, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
  • "was sentenced to 16 months in prison due to the corruption in 2022." - it would be better to cite the exact charge that he was convicted of.
  • "a German journalist named Peter Rossberg" - just "German journalist Peter Rossberg"
  • "who claimed to have obtained the report, wrote that the report" - report twice, replace with "it"
  • "Wahl reportedly received death threats for wearing the shirt, and his brother said he believes Wahl's later death was the result of foul play, implicating the Qatari government as playing a role." - Since these conspiracy theories later turned out to be unfounded, I would scrap them completely here. There is no connection between his death and the LGBTQ issue, so all information on this should be removed from this section.
  • The photo with the Women, Life, Freedom slogan is in the LGBT section, but should be moved down to the next one.
  • Iran: no mention of the team's silent protest?
True, but the audience protests were about that as well, I would argue that players protesting is more relevant to the World Cup than spectators doing the same. Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:52, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
  • Jewish: again, a problem here with information appearing multiple times, like the fact about kosher food. Please merge into one.

Sources

Will do some more spotchecks later, but for now:

  • Generally, I am a bit concerned about the sourcing here, several issues have been noted above.
  • In a lot of instances, the source parameters are not fully filled out, lacking publisher, dates, access dates, and so fourth. A general sweep through all sources is needed to address this.
  • Some foreign language sources have trans-titles, but many have not, these should be filled out as well.

More to follow. Zwerg Nase (talk) 07:48, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for taking a look at such a long and in depth article Zwerg Nase. I have replied to the above, and I'm just going through the sources to fix up the ones that aren't quite finished. Let me know if there is more I need to look at. :) Lee Vilenski 22:56, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Did you have anything more for me Zwerg Nase? Lee Vilenski 12:11, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi Zwerg Nase - not to chase, but was there anything more? Lee Vilenski 20:49, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
@Lee Vilenski: Sorry, was way more busy over the past week than I thought I would be. I am happy with the prose now, still some minor concerns about the sources though. Some are missing parameters such as release date, retrieval date, author (where available). I don't think there are many, I've noticed #4, #192, maybe you could do a quick scan if you find any others? Then I would be happy to promote. Good work so far! Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:56, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Sure. I don't mind taking a look - fair warning, I edit almost exclusively on mobile now, so scrutinising sources for formatting (especially on large sized articles) can be troublesome. I will need to find some time with a PC to make these changes. Lee Vilenski 22:29, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
I have been away with some personal stuff - I can't remember where we got with this review, did we come to a conclusion Zwerg Nase? Lee Vilenski 08:38, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
@Lee Vilenski @Zwerg Nase I'm just going through the oldest GANs and found this one. It sounds like it's very close to being wrapped up and is just waiting for some minor fixes on some references. Zwerg, if I may be so bold, if Lee is having technical issues editing this and you know what you're looking for, perhaps you could just make the changes yourself so this can get moved along? RoySmith (talk) 17:39, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
Zwerg Nase - any ideas if there was anything else you needed from me? I've lost track as to what is required. I think we are all but there. Lee Vilenski 16:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
@Lee Vilenski: Sorry, had little time to check Misplaced Pages the last couple of weeks. Sources are still my issue here. 305 is missing publisher and date, 306 is missing publisher and retrieval date as well as title translation, 312 is missing retrieval date, 317 "Eurosport" should be capitalized and title given in French with translation, 402 and 403 are questionable since it's YouTube videos (maybe find a better source here?), 406 missing retrieval date. Those are all I can find right now. Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:14, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Cool, should be done. I've fixed 305, 306, 317 and removed 406 (metro is unreliable). One of the YouTube videos is a direct interview with a reliable source, which should be fine, the other is from Sky News, an RS. It being in video form is irrelevant. Lee Vilenski 09:46, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
@Zwerg Nase, I see this is still outstanding, are you ready to pass this? -- asilvering (talk) 02:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
@Asilvering: Looks good now, passing :) Zwerg Nase (talk) 14:34, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Refs

  • Alfarizi, Mohammad Hanaan. Human Rights Abused in Qatar: FIFA Puts World Cup More Than Lives? Jurnal Penegakan Hukum dan Keadilan. Vol 4, No 2 (2023).

Bookku (talk) 07:37, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Wrong Knockout stage results

The final was between Argentina and France. This article shows Argentina and Spain. There are also several wrong match results. 100.15.89.222 (talk) 18:56, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Final standings

Hi! We've previously removed these sections because FIFA haven't made such announcements on newer tournaments. Should we really be making unofficial rankings based on an article by the Sporting News? Lee Vilenski 16:08, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

No Tvx1 10:06, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Messi

@Marco Carrasco: Regarding this edit, where you toned down the wording "based on source", where exactly does the source say that it took Messi the World Cup victory to only become regarded as "one of the greatest" players of all time? He very much was already seen as one of the greatest, and indeed by quite a few as the single greatest, and the World Cup was the only accolade he was missing. The text is quite long and I wasn't able to read it all, but I did see the following posted about him: "a man with no boxes left to tick in his career, a player who can rightly claim his place in the argument as the best of all time". This certainly does not justify the change, even if milder statements also exist in the publication. --Theurgist (talk) 17:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Categories: