Talk:Cristiano Ronaldo/Archive 14

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10 ← Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 → Archive 19

Playmaker?

There is a disagreement regarding the understanding of the term 'playmaking'. In my opinion, two reliable sources alone should be enough to prove the quality of one's playmaking abilities, and Ronaldo's such abilities are well documented. In a vote conducted by the IFFHS, 91 members of the jury voted for the World's Best Playmaker 2017. Ronaldo finished eleventh in the voting, six points ahead of Mesut Özil. Additionally, Bleacher Report named him one of Manchester United's 'top playmakers of all time' in 2012: "It is unusual for a winger to be the playmaker in a team, but Cristiano Ronaldo is no usual player, and he was a playmaker for Manchester United." Hurrygane (talk) 17:41, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2018

He scored 15 penalties, the last one against Juventus. check this page (European Cup and UEFA Champions League records and statistics) for the source and for other records. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.140.10.87 (talk) 22:44, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

 Done. Hurrygane (talk) 21:37, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Blocking users

I said when I dropped the protection from full to semi-protected, that I would use blocks if necessary to prevent future edit-warring, especially if that user had been part of the edit-war that caused the full protection in the first place. I have therefore blocked User:Es031989 for again changing the "regarded by some/many" line to their preference, followed by telling other users to "get a life". That's not acceptable. Hopefully no more blocks will be necessary. thanks, Black Kite (talk) 14:17, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

  • I was wrong. User:Reberp blocked for one week. A third edit-warring block suggests that the next one may be indefinite. Black Kite (talk) 16:37, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
    • 84.111.232.165, is also Es031989, they are still commenting on here.O'Flannery (talk) 20:22, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
      • You are correct. That has been dealt with. Black Kite (talk) 22:17, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
        • Despite the addition of the hidden comment to prevent that line being changed, User:PsychopathicAssassin has changed it again, and I have therefore blocked them as well. Black Kite (talk) 09:26, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
          • Es031989 now blocked indefinitely for resuming the edit-war. The concept of consensus clearly doesn't appear to be getting through to some. Black Kite (talk) 17:04, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Well... it doesn't change a thing anyway (some think he's the greatest, some not). the only thing your'e doing by choosing sides is maintain the illusion that there's something definite as "the greatest of all time". it's a matter of personal opinion, therefore there's no answer for this useless debate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.111.232.165 (talk) 19:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not claiming that either player actually is the greatest of all time, we're just reporting that varying numbers of sources have given the player that title. – PeeJay 22:44, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Well... then here are another fresh new sources about Cristiano Ronaldo as the title "the greatest of all time":

and those are just 2 new, there are way more meaning there is a consensus about Cristiano Ronaldo as well.84.111.232.165 (talk) 03:29, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello again ES031989, I had a look at your 'fresh new sources', one is a comment by former team mate Philip Neville, the other article actually has the quote He's one of the best players ever. O'Flannery (talk) 23:25, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
Agreed, Phil Neville isn't an impartial source, also neither website has the greatest repuation in terms of credibility.Purijj (talk) 17:58, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Records

Should the "Records" section be excluded from the "Honours and achievements" section? Would save us a lot of space, since a number of those records are arguably unnecessary. Moreover, the records are already comperehensively listed at List of career achievements by Cristiano Ronaldo#Records. Hurrygane (talk) 18:20, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Good suggestion, agreed, should be similar to Messi's page. Working on it now. Purijj (talk) 14:50, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
 Done. Purijj (talk) 17:24, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

One of the greatest?

We've been through this over and over again, the answer isn't going to change. Black Kite (talk) 00:09, 12 June 2018 (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.

Ronaldo is considered by countless people around the world as maybe the greatest. Is this really the most popular web "encyclopedia"? I really expected more than a site claims to be a worldwide encyclopedia. The fact we even debating on this lead readers to think someone here has strong interest to fight against presenting this fact as it obviously need to be on the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.12.241.40 (talk) 13:36, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

And "countless" people consider Messi, or Pelé, or the Brazilian Ronaldo, or Maradona to be the greatest. As an encyclopedia, we have to present a worldwide view, as you said, not just a Portuguese/Spanish view. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:22, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Ok...so change the statement at the two Ronaldo's page to meet that "worldwide view" u are talking about as required from an encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.12.255.172 (talk) 14:18, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

~Is IP address 176.12.255.172 the same person as IP address 176.12.241.40? O'Flannery (talk) 00:04, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Yes, and almost certainly 176.13.2.208 (see above) as well. Closing. Black Kite (talk) 00:09, 12 June 2018 (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.

Semi-protected edit request on 20 June 2018

Change international goals from 84 to 85 following the goal against morocco, and note that he now has the most international goals of any European player. D1tzl (talk) 12:54, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

After the game is completed, it will be done. Kante4 (talk) 12:59, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Final Resolution, I'm the original writer: "Often considered the best player in the world and regarded by many as the greatest of all time"

Apologies, I have been away from Wikipedia for a while. As I understand it some people have problems with the sentence "Often considered the best player in the world and regarded by many as the greatest of all time" and want to put in "one of the greatest" or "regarded by some" or something to that effect.

First of all I'd like to say this topic was discussed back in 2014, and twice more in 2015 and 2016, both here and on Lionel Messi's article. I was the one who updated both, Messi's and Ronaldo's articles to state "Often considered the best player in the world and regarded by many as the greatest of all time", whereas before both of them had the "one of" modifier. This was done to elevate the status of both Messi, and Ronaldo from the likes of Ronaldinho, Zidane, etc. Legitimate sources were used and everyone was happy. This stood for 4 years now, until in March/ April this year new Wikipedia members started edit-warring.

What I now want a final resolution is on 1) Why admins are reverting to pre-2014 level edits when consensus was already reached, and 2) What the justification for that is, because since 2014, Ronaldo has further solidified his legacy and is now legitimately seen as "the greatest" by many people in and out of football. Futhermore that fact that he will most likely win another Balon d'Or and overtake Messi, seems that there is pov involved when the same people want to add "one of the greatest" to Ronaldo's article but do not want want to add it to Messi's article.

My opinion, having admired both players for years is that we should maintain consensus and the same wording on both articles. Either "one of the greatest" or "the greatest" is suitable but I would prefer the latter to elevate them from the likes of Zidane, Ronaldinho, etc.

Imperial HRH2 (talk) 09:47, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I rewrote the header for Cristiano Ronaldo in late 2016 to pretty much what it resembles today (it was a bit of a mess before), and revised the top paragraph in particular to have the "Often considered the best player in the world and regarded by many as the greatest of all time" of equal prominence to the same phrase in Lionel Messi's article. It really irks me that people are referencing consensus from two, three and even four years ago to conclude that 'one of the greatest' is the only acceptable phrasing.
Based on well cited sources at List of association football players considered the greatest of all time, it seems obvious that he is regarded by at least 'some' as the greatest of all time, but I'd argue that his achievements over the last two years, along with the opinions of fellow professionals, pundits, journalists and fans alike, as evident in those sources, justify the line to now say "regarded by many as the greatest of all time".
Either way, I absolutely agree it is necessary to reflect their achievements and status as beyond many of the greats in football -- the fact there is even debate about whether Messi or Ronaldo is the greatest of all time is in itself proof of their elevated status beyond some of the greats such as Ronaldinho etc. I believe both players have now justified the "regarded by many as the greatest of all time" line, based on the sourced articles. Formulaonewiki (talk) 14:09, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
Oh I remember you from back then. And we worked on the article together then too. And I think you misunderstood me. I'm literally agreeing with everything you said word-for-word. I don't understand then need to change it from "widely regarded by many as greatest" to "regarded by some as one of the greatest". I can only imagine, people are pov pushing here. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 16:26, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
Looking at that greatest players article quite a few of those sources that make the claim are not credible, and not just in regard to Cristiano. Anything from the Daily Express and Daily Mail is wholly unreliable, so much so they are ignored as sources for transfer news as they print anything regardless of whether there is any truth in it. A tweet is not credible. Teammates, coaches and agents of a player are not credible, for example Mendes, Zidane and Mourinho for Cristiano, Di Maria and Pep for Messi. Opposition players, coaches and journalists from reliable sources are credible. EdChambers88 (talk) 14:40, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
"Opposition players, coaches and journalists from reliable sources are credible". Don't agree with you here, neutral sources are reliable too. And no one is quoting Daily Express or Daily Mail here. One is an university study, the other is from Bleacher Report (source used for Messi and other players) and the last is one of India's leading media houses with a quote from one of the best cricket players so I fail to see your point here. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 16:33, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
"Widely regarded by many" is redundant -- if there are really sources to back up the claim that he is "widely regarded", than "many" isn't needed.
However, I really don't think there are reliable sources to back up the claim that any single player is "widely regarded as the greatest of all time". Widely regarded as one of the greatest of all time would be okay, since nearly every list in reliable sources includes Cristiano Ronaldo, Lionel Messi, Pelé, Ronaldo (Brazilian footballer) and Maradona. Regarded by some as the greatest of all time would also be okay, since there are clearly some reliable sources that say that he is the single greatest of all time. However, there are plenty of contradictory sources for anything stronger than those two options. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:17, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

There simply are not enough sources to legitimately make the claim that many regard Ronaldo as the greatest of all time. You mentioned above that Ronaldo may win the Balon d'or, overtaking Messi. This should be no way to decide who is the greater, as the Balon d'or generally goes to the player from the tream who wins the Champions league. For example, one could easily argue that Messi was far greater this year, as he was voted player of the season for La Liga, and was the top scorer in Europe. We need to be very careful when using statistics to back up claims. In April 2018 it was agreed that the sentence for Ronaldo should read 'Regarded by many as one of the greatest of all time' and I think that this is an accurate description. Why it should be the same as Messi's is baffling, as there are many sources to back up the claim with regards to Messi. It is absurd that this is even being debated again. O'Flannery (talk) 18:05, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

"as the Balon d'or generally goes to the player from the tream who wins the Champions league": What utter nonsense.
I agree with Ahecht in that Regarded by some as the greatest of all time is evidently true, and I believe should at least be the line used on this article. However, I think there is an argument to be made that it could be the same as Messi's. --Formulaonewiki (talk) 08:58, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
'What utter nonsense' Just look at the past couple of seasons. I would be interested to hear why you think Ronaldo merits the same introduction to Messi.O'Flannery (talk) 15:10, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
You're questioning the integrity of an award based on a coincidence that the last TWO out of a sixty-one year old award went to someone who was part of a UCL winning team. So yes, I repeat, what utter nonsense. --Formulaonewiki (talk) 20:15, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
If you genuinely think the Balon d'or accurately awards the best player of the year each year, then we will forever disagree. I used the last two seasons as an example, but there are many other years when the winner can easily be disputed. You mentioned that the award is sixty one years old, however surely you are aware that many things have changed over the decades, not least the amount of hype and advertising involved in the modern game. All these things should be taken into account when considering the accuracy and the integrity of the award. O'Flannery (talk) 08:41, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
I only questioned your nonsense claim about the UCL being the primary factor in the award of the Ballon d'Or. No-one is questioning the influence of external factors, of course it's a subjective award but it's nonetheless still a reliable indicator of whether or not a player can be considered the best in the world that year. It's worth mentioning Messi and Ronaldo have arguably identical levels of "hype and advertising" as you say. --Formulaonewiki (talk) 11:04, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
You're so biased here that its incredible. I remember Ronaldo fans being biased too when I first rewrote Messi's article from "one of the greatest" to "many regard him as the greatest". Your claim that the UCL is the primary factor to win the Balon d'Or is an outright joke. Having played quite a few games less, Ronaldo has outscored Messi for club and country. That is why he won the Balon d'Or with RECORD margins. And that is why he is most likely winning another Balon d'Or. The only thing preventing him would be a Messi WC win, and now that Argentina has been eliminated, that won't be the case. Are you really going to argue that Messi's greatest rival, who has more records than him, has won more FIFA World Player Of The Years than him and has won the same number of Balon d'Ors and about to overtake Messi, shouldn't have the same introduction? Looking at your contribution history and edit-warring bans, its evident you're a a Messi fanboy. Please leave that for Facebook. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a place for opinions. (unsigned comment)
'Are you really going to argue that Messi's greatest rival, who has more records than him, has won more FIFA World Player Of The Years than him and has won the same number of Balon d'Ors and about to overtake Messi, shouldn't have the same introduction?' My answer, is yes. And if you look further down in the discussion, you will see that I am not the only one who is of the opinion that the Balon d'or has become a popularity test, with the team who wins the Champions league being a major factor in deciding who wins. Also, please stop making false accusations, I have never been banned for edit warring, I was warned once and I notice you have been warned too (HRH2, please remember to sign your comments.) O'Flannery (talk) 08:16, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Messi and Ronaldo should have the same opening paragraph. Kante4 (talk) 09:53, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. Hurrygane (talk) 10:50, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Agreed. --Formulaonewiki (talk) 11:04, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Disagree, and a discussion as to why they both should have the same introduction would be worth having O'Flannery (talk) 12:34, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Agreed, O'Flannery is PoV pushing (just look at his contribution history and edit-warring), so he will never agree. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 17:34, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Agreed, and agree that O'Flannery is PoV pushing. Should be same opening paragraph with something to elevate them above other former great players, basically copy what is on Messi's page and put it on Ronaldo's page - "Often considered the best player in the world and regarded by many as the greatest of all time" Purijj (talk) 20:09, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
MY edit history? There was one warning for edit warring, which occurred when a C Ronaldo super fan (not unlike a few of the editors above) was relentlessly changing the sentence. It is laughable that I am being accused of Pov pushing, when that is exactly what you are doing. I have requested discussion, as a good reason has not been given for why Messi's and C Ronaldo's paragraphs should be identical. It is interesting that the editor Purijj has suddenly appeared, with a new account to back up the opinion of another C Ronaldo fan who lacks objectivity. It is also laughable that the person who mentioned edit warring and contribution history is Imperial HRH2, who is guilty of both excessive C Ronaldo editing and edit warring.O'Flannery (talk) 21:50, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
O'Flannery, I've had my account for over 6 months, though I do edit CR7 related pages I don't POV push as it serves no purpose, I'm not some fake account that has just randomly come up to back up other people. I tend not get involved in these discussions as 9/10 they reach a dead end with no agreement made. Yes it is a good idea to have a discussion about this issue, though a final decision is needed (it has come up several times over the last few months with no decision made). Having both pages with the same opening sentence with something that elevates then above other greats is a fair middle ground option IMO. though I will say I agree when you say the Balon d'or shouldn't be a huge deciding factor, it is mostly a popularity contest or whoever wins the Champions League.Purijj (talk) 07:40, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
Purijj, apologies for my skepticism regarding your account. It will be interesting to see this discussion, as at the moment I don't see why they both should have the same introduction. The current opening sentence places Ronaldo alongside other greats, which I personally think is accurate. I am glad you agree regarding the Balon d'or, I was surprised that Formulaonewiki was unable to see this. O'Flannery (talk) 08:06, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
O'Flannery, no problem, no harm done. I can see why you are leaning more towards Messi as at the end of the day Ronaldo tends to get compared to only to Messi, while Messi gets compared to Pelé and Maradona, so he can be seen to have a slightly elevates status, though this can be more to do with how Ronaldo is perceived in the media having an impact on this. On the other hand Ronaldo and Messi have won more of less the same amount of trophies (collective and individual - at the club level), both keep breaking records and have more or less performed at the same level in terms of representing their countries on the international stage.
In the last few years Ronaldo has performed better in terms of winning competitions and awards - 4 Champions Leagues in 5 years (3 being in a row), won the Euro with Portugal (though minimal contribution for that team that performed sub-par throughout the competition to be fair) 4 Ballon D'or in 5 years, 2 The Best FIFA Men's Player awards and will most likely win the next ones. (though world player of the year awards tend to be biased and champions league victories are collective achievements and not individual ones - they are both surrounded by other quality players who contribute to these collective wins, thus elevating how they are perceived)
All this being said, their is fair reason to say either one are the greatest of all tine, so fair middle ground would be IMO to have both of them with the same paragraph will something to elevate them from other greats such as Pelé or Maradona, again just copy whats on Messi's page for Ronaldo's. Purijj (talk) 11:10, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
Purijj, I agree with almost everything you have said. Regarding acheivements, like you said, the Champions League is a collective victory for the team, and the awards tend to be biased in favouring players from winning sides. I would argue that in at least two of the last three years this was clearly the case. What is often overlooked is that the award is supposed to be for the player of the year, and it is fair to say that Ronaldo has in recent seasons performed well over a few months in the latter stages of the Champions league (although not this season, as he did little in the semis and final), but over the whole season he has consistently been outperformed by Messi. This is especially true this past season. I do not see why the paragraph needs to be the same for both players, especially as, like you said, Messi often gets compared with Pelé and Maradona, whereas Ronaldo is generally compared with Messi. C Ronaldo is rightly considered one of the greatest, and the current paragraph reflects this. O'Flannery (talk) 11:32, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
Fair points O'Flannery, though the argument can be made the quality of performance can be to do with the players they are surrounded by, Messi has had better players around him at club level (minus recent years) to contribute to his success (minus the last few years which Xavi and prime Iniesta - which does coincide with Messi's reduced success in the last few years at club level), which can make his performances look better than they actually are, as soon as Messi plays for his national side you see his performance drop as he doesn't have the quality around him, while in recent years Ronaldo has stepped up at international level while being surrounded by lower quality players than in the Argentina squad - the argument can be made that Ronaldo still performs well with not as great players around him but Messi struggles without the high quality support. Ronaldo has suffered from injuries and has been brought back too soon which can be why early on in the season he hasn't performed quite well. Both players have dips in performance (age catching up to them, overplaying etc) and have had issues with the players that they are surrounded by not carrying there weight. Messi and Ronaldo have both won indivudual awards which at times they didn't deserve.
They both have different play styles which have to be taken into account which generate different levels of response (Messi can run past 5 players while Ronaldo can score a goal from no where)
While no metric is perfect, something does have to be used, such as individual and collective awards, top goal scorer records and assists (as both are forwards who play on the wings so you can include both), club vs international performances/awards/records broken/stats - Messi and Ronaldo are for the most part level footing.
Arguments can easily be flipped to favour Messi or Ronaldo, cherry picking data and observations as they see fit (just as I have done 3 paragraphs above - I could have made a similar paragraph stating why Messi is a better player than Ronaldo)
This is why they should have the same parapragh with a sentence that elevates them above other former greats, as they are both on the same level it so hard to distinguish who is the better player - based on all the above comments from various contributors their seems to be a general consensus that this is a fair middle-ground. So I suggest that someone proceeds forward to amend both pages accordingly.Purijj (talk) 12:23, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
Agreed. Don't think there's much I need to add. --Formulaonewiki (talk) 13:03, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
Pretty much agree with most of what you said, Purijj, although I would contest the claim that Ronaldo has performed better than Messi for his national side. If you look at the results for Argentina in qualifying matches without Messi, it is quite evident that he was carrying the team, whereas Portugal managed to defeat France in the final of the Euros without Ronaldo. Internationally, I would argue that Messi has a better record, despite not winning a cup. Also, at club level, without the likes of Xavi and prime Iniesta, Messi still managed to win the league and cup, was top scorer in Europe and was considered the player of the season, surely this is success at club level? It is also interesting if you look at the head to heads, Messi has significantly outperformed Ronaldo in El Clásicos. I think you are right when you said the different styles have to be taken into account, and this is of course subjective. Alternatively, I do have a problem with reliance on stats, especially assists, as these very rarely paint an accurate picture of a players influence (for example miss-hit shots, or a pass to a player who then scores from 25 yeards qualify as an assist). To reiterate, Messi has for a long time been compared to the likes of Pele and Maradona, whereas Ronaldo is, as a rule, compared with Messi. These are my thoughts on why I think the two paragraphs do not need to be identical. O'Flannery (talk) 13:40, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
Agreed Formulaonewiki. Besides a single contributor everyone seems to agree that they both should have the same sentence, so should the change be made (copying what on Messi's page and putting on Ronaldo's?) It's been talking out at this point.Purijj (talk) 14:42, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
No, this is why we should be limiting ourselves to "among the greatest" and leave anything more to the tabloids and pub gossip. These are not the only two great footballers who will ever exist. Given yesterday's events that's just as well, really... Britmax (talk) 15:11, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
Purijj back in April 2018 a consensus was met regarding the claim on Ronaldo's page. For this there was a 30 day period in which people could express their opinion regarding the claim made in the opening statement (one of the greatest). I suggest that the same method be employed, an RfC, with editors having a 30 day period in which to discuss and reach a consensus (why there needs to be one so soon after the last, when very little has happened that would merit a change is, however, beyond me). I am not sure why you are in such a rush to make the changes. O'Flannery (talk) 15:42, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

I agree also with @Britmax:. There are not only two greats (neither is my GOAT), but the intros should be the same. How those are called is antoher discussion. Kante4 (talk) 15:52, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Kante4, O'Flannery, Britmax - All good points Purijj (talk) 15:59, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

As we can all clearly see, there is an obvious consensus that the sentence should be the same in Ronaldo and Messi's pages. The only one who's arguing with everyone is O'flannery who is not even trying to hide the fact that he's subjective and 100 percent biased for Messi. Ok now... since there's a consensus, time to match the sentences in the two pages: Imperial HRH 2 - go ahead and change it... (176.12.140.161 (talk) 12:48, 7 July 2018 (UTC))

anonymous user 176.12.140.161 consensus was reached in April that the sentence should not be changed. There are many editors who do not agree with you, look a bit further back in the talk pages. Thanks. O'Flannery (talk) 20:07, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

The consensus here is definitly the opposite and there's no reason the consensus claimed to be reached on April to be more relevant than the consensus here - therefore the change should be made a.s.a.p. take care of it dear editors, it's your responsibility. (109.253.185.156 (talk) 08:25, 8 July 2018 (UTC))Block evasion. Black Kite (talk) 11:41, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Dear anonymous editor, once again, a consensus was reached in April, over a 30 day period, with RfCs. Since the last consensus, nothing has changed that would merit the sentence change. O'Flannery (talk) 08:52, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Gotta go with IP here. Your edit history does seem fishy and many editors here just want an equal opening on Ronaldo and Messi`s page, which is the correct thing to do. Kante4 (talk) 09:00, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
An anonymous IP shouldn't really have a say.Purijj (talk) 09:57, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Anonymous IPs are quite welcome to comment, unless they're blocked editors avoiding their block, which this one is (it's Es031989). Black Kite (talk) 11:41, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
My apologies, wasn't aware of that. Well, good you spotted this one.Purijj (talk) 12:47, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Kante4, and of course you are a completely impartial voice here, aren't you? 'Gotta go with IP here.' So you don't think it strange how often anonymous IPs regularly post here to try to change the sentence? As I keep mentioning, consnsus was met, with a RfC, over a 30 day period. Where is the justification for now changing the sentence, why is it the 'correct thing to do'? O'Flannery (talk) 09:21, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Never said i'm important. Just saying that more people do agree in this particular discussion. Not talking about the April "discussion". I never said it should say that he is the GOAT, but the same opening as Messi should be done. Kante4 (talk) 09:29, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

O'flannery obviously refer to April discussion because it fits his personal opinion, but April discussion is not more relevant than this discussion, therefore - it's time for editors to make the change, so go ahead now...(109.253.185.156 (talk) 09:49, 8 July 2018 (UTC))Block evasion. Black Kite (talk) 11:41, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Agreed with Kante4, both pages should have equal footing, though if both should have GOAT, one of the greatest etc is a different discussion, which can only be done when both have the same opening sentence. Copying what is on Messi's page and putting on Ronaldo's would be a good first step Purijj (talk) 09:57, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

So, what is the final conclusion? How should the opening be phrased? I agree with the majority here, that the opening should be phrased the same as Messi's "regarded by many as the greatest of all time". @Imperial HRH2, @Purijj, @Kante4, @Formulaonewiki, @Ahecht

Agreed. Seems like O'Flannery is heavily outnumbered here and consensus has been reached. As I had stopped reverting it to flame an edit-war, I'll now go and revert for (hopefully) a final time. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 21:37, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Again I would ask, why should the sentence be the same as on Messi's page? O'Flannery (talk) 14:29, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Just let go of your bias man. You're clearly delusional at this point and you're really new at Wikipedia too and all your edits seem to be either discrediting Ronaldo or exaggerating Messi. You're what we call a fan boy. And someone which such a biased edit history and no Wikipedia experience is a clear tell-tell sign. And either way, you're clearly heavily outnumbered here and it seems that consensus has been reached. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 21:38, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
The irony of you calling someone a fanboy. You keep resorting to lies and personal attacks, rather than debate. Why do the two players need to have the same sentence? What is the justification? O'Flannery (talk) 21:47, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Mate, there is literally three pages worth of justification here alone, yet you keep asking the same question again and again and again "Why do the two players need to have the same sentence?" Read what people having been telling you, try to understand, and then move on. That is how consensus works. Not everyone can be happy about everything all the time. Good thing there are people who can come together to recognise the facts and ignore bias an PoV pushing. 20 years in Wikipedia, and 4 years working on Wikipedia's football pages and focusing on the Spanish football articles, I have seen it all. Trust me. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 21:51, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
One of the sources being used to back up the 'regarded by many as the greatest' claim, is the opinion of a cricketer! Do you not see how utterly absurd this is? If this is the best that can be found to back up the claim, then it is clear that the claim is false. O'Flannery (talk) 21:58, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

My own view on this, if we are to have parity with Messi’s page (which seems to be the argument) can we at least have a source that supports “regarded by many as the greatest” and not one that says, “[Ronaldo is, some have argued of late, the best to have ever played the game”.? A reliable source in the bio that says, “some have argued, lately, he’s the best ever”, does not match “regarded by many as the greatest”, which is being proposed by some here, nor does it match what is written now, regarded as “one of”. Either change it to what that source says, or find another reliable source that backs up what is being proposed. To slightly deviate from this, while the performance of an individual in a World Cup should not carry a significant amount of weight in assessing their ability given the team they play for may be crap which will obviously hinder them, it shouldn’t be ignored completely. Yes Messi and CR7 played in weak teams, that is acknowledged, but neither has ever had a great World Cup. Pelé has, twice, Maradona and the Brazilian Ronaldo both have. F8RIL (talk) 22:55, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Agreed F8RIL, hopefully a source can be found soon, as at this point we are all going in circles. Won't be an east task to find quality, impartial sources. I have found some, though I'm unsure if they meet the standards required.
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/pele-greatest-footballer-brazil-messi-ronaldo-maradona-voted-a8371576.html
https://www.fourfourtwo.com/features/fourfourtwos-100-greatest-footballers-ever
https://www.thoughtco.com/all-time-greatest-soccer-players-3557621
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/soccer/ubcs-star-studded-stereotype-study-the-sociology-of-cristiano-ronaldo/article23786125/
Some sources I've also retrieved from this page.
http://www.rsssf.com/miscellaneous/bestbest.html
https://www.sportskeeda.com/football/ronaldo-messi-10-greatest-football-players-all-time
http://www.goal.com/story/messi-ronaldo-children-of-football/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup/10874465/How-and-why-Peles-mystique-and-reputation-as-the-worlds-greatest-ever-footballer-has-been-overhyped.html
Purijj (talk) 13:12, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
These are all acceptable, except maybe SportsKeeda, considering I drafted Messi's articles using sources from the likes of Goal, etc. initially too.
I also found this source from Trump, and although it doesn't mean much with the President of USA claiming it, the CNN article further delves into the fact that many consider Ronaldo (and Messi) and the greatest ever. https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/28/football/donald-trump-cristinao-ronaldo-greatest-ever-world-cup-spt-intl/index.html
Imperial HRH2 (talk) 13:57, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Agreed, SportsKeeda isn't the best source to use. That CNN one I'm not too sure on as its an American outlet publishing content about a European sport. Also the article doesn't really have any facts to justify Ronaldo being one of the greatest ever, its more to do with Trump knowing who Ronaldo is, and that Baron is a member of DC's academy. Sources like Gaol.com aren't the best (though they aren't the most either(, though as long as you have other more credible sources to go along with it, I see no reason in using it. Some of the sources I have given states Ronaldo and Messi as one of the greatest of all time, in the same vain as Maradona, Cruyff, Pelé etc. Best that F8RIL decides, though I think those sources should be sufficant Purijj (talk) 14:27, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Indeed Purijj, but the source must support the claim. Imperial HRH2 just added, “widely regarded as the greatest”, with no source backing up this statement, and instead added a source that contradicts it, “Pelé has been voted the greatest footballer of all time, Brazilian star beats out Diego Maradona, Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo to top spot”. Imperial HRH2 is shoehorning in a statement with no source supporting it. Further, to add two or three individuals views does not support a claim that he’s “widely regarded as the greatest” either. Just provide a reliable source that says “widely regarded as the greatest” (or words to that effect). The reservation I have is this source, “[Ronaldo is, some have argued of late, the best to have ever played the game”, how do you get away from that? From “some argue, lately, he’s the greatest”, in a reliable source, to “widely regarded as the greatest”, this looks like quite a jump, and original research. On your last comment Purijj, I don’t decide anything, i’m just adding my own input on this. What needs to be done is the text in the article being backed up fully by a reliable source. F8RIL (talk) 14:33, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Oh ok my bad, as you where the original writer I assumed you had final say, apologies. Maybe a better statement would be "Often considered the best player in the world and regarded by many as one of the greatest of all time" instead of "widely regarded as the greatest" or "often regarded as the greatest" as most sources put Messi and Ronaldo in the top 5 of all time, with the top tending to go to either Pelé or Maradona. Agreed, to have the statement “widely regarded as the greatest” you need far more sources that 2 or 3. This would mean changing Messi's statement as his says "Often considered the best player in the world and regarded by many as the greatest of all time" which is a big statement to make as it only uses a single source (The Telegraph). Messi or Ronaldo being considered the best player in the world is a fair statement to make given how many Ballon D'or's each have one, though "greatest of all time" we would need far more sources as you have rightfully stated. Both having ""Often considered the best player in the world and regarded by many as one of the greatest of all time" sounds like a good one to me, as we have enough sources to justify all parts of the statment for both Messi and Ronaldo. What do you think F8RIL ?. Thanks.Purijj (talk) 14:59, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Purijj Wait what? I was the original writer. I was the original writer for both, this article and Messi's article. I wrote them both back in 2014, along with a lot of other articles as I'm part of the Spanish football development community on Wikipedia. I believe F8RIL joined Wikipedia a few months ago. Also, about CNN being an American source is irrelevant. If things like SportBible can be used to quote Messi's articles, CNN is far more credible. I know Trump's opinion is not credible, since its just one person but the CNN article does make it clear that many people regard Ronaldo as the greatest. That was the whole point in me using that article as a source. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 00:38, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Imperial HRH2, ah ok, wasn't aware of that. Fair point, agreed. Purijj (talk) 00:46, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
As someone who has no particular attachment to Ronaldo, Messi, or any of the teams or countries they play for, I feel that F8RIL's suggestion of Often considered the best player in the world and regarded by many as one of the greatest of all time for both Ronaldo and Messi is more appropriate than ...regarded by many as the greatest of all time given the strength of the sources. Per WP:OWN, being the original writer gives you no more of a say than anyone else here. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:47, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Ahecht I was the original writer anyway. I was the original writer for both, this article and Messi's article. I wrote them both back in 2014, along with a lot of other articles as I'm part of the Spanish football development community on Wikipedia. I believe F8RIL joined Wikipedia a few months ago. Either way, I agree with your completely. My only itch is that we have the same sentence for Messi and Ronaldo. Its unfair to either of them to have one being talked about as "many regard him the greatest" and one as "some regard him one of the greatest". To this end, I had written both articles in the same vein and using sources that support the claim. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 00:38, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Agreed, and thanks Ahecht as I wasn't aware of that :) Purijj (talk) 19:05, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Ahecht, I wouldn’t have “one of” for either Messi or CR7, their goalscoring exploits are extraordinary, certainly at club level, so it’s probably accurate, and fair, to elevate them above the “one of” category. My only issue is the source in the article right now, which states, “Ronaldo is, some have argued of late, the best to have ever played the game”, which is hard to get away from. That to me seems the most accurate. In other words have the article say what’s in the source, “some argue he’s the greatest”. F8RIL (talk) 23:23, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Good point F8RIL, I have a few sources below that imply that both Messi and Ronaldo are one of the greatest, as they are put in the top 5-6 in all the lists for the greatest of all time:-
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/pele-greatest-footballer-brazil-messi-ronaldo-maradona-voted-a8371576.html : 40 greatest footballers of all time - 1. Pelé, 2. Lionel Messi , 3. Cristiano Ronaldo, 4. George Best. 5. Diego Maradona
https://www.fourfourtwo.com/features/fourfourtwos-100-greatest-footballers-ever : Four Four Two's 100 Greatest Football Players Ever - 1. Maradona , 2. Messi, 3. Pe;é 4. Cruyff, 5. Cristiano Ronaldo
https://www.thoughtco.com/all-time-greatest-soccer-players-3557621 : The 10 Best Soccer Players of All Time - 1. Pelé, 2. Messi, 3. Maradona, 4. Cruyff, 5. Beckenbauer, 6. Cristiano Ronaldo
Would these sources work?
Purijj (talk) 23:53, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Purijj, those sources would be fine if we were saying “one of the greatest”, which, as you have mentioned, is what they are supporting, but not for “the greatest”, which they do not support. As you can see from the edits of Imperial HRH2 he is doing the latter. The closest source yet to “the greatest” is this one, “[Ronaldo is, some have argued of late, the best to have ever played the game”. F8RIL (talk) 11:30, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
(F8RIL, IMO I believe what we should be says is "one of the greatest" for both as we actually have multiple quality sources. Other contributors seems to be POV editing for either Messi or Ronaldo. "Often considered the best player in the world and regarded by many as one of the greatest of all time" for both pages I believe is a balanced statement that we can provide quality sources to back it up. Though I imagine that a similar discussion would have to be made on Messi's talk page? Purijj (talk) 12:16, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Messi's has "Often considered the best player in the world and regarded by many as the greatest of all time" - "the greatest part" is also a stretch as a lot of sources put him in the top 5 of all time with Ronaldo, but like Ronaldo, not at the top, for Messi's statement there is only one source which isn't enough IMO.Purijj (talk) 12:16, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Fair point. Does seem to be the case both are in the top four or five, but not as often “the number one”. Pelé clearly tops most, and for this reason its him that warrants the tag more than anyone, though Maradona is hot on his heels. “Greatest player” is often too general anyway, has there ever been a focus on a specific attritube? For instance, greatest dribbler, greatest goalscorer, etc? Messi many argue is the greatest dribbler, Cristiano many argue is the greatest goalscorer (certainly when it comes to variety of goals). I’d propose something specific for these two. So, Cristiano, “often thought of as the best player in the world, and regarded by many as the greatest goalscorer ever, he is one of the greatest players of all time”. Similar with Messi, just adding in dribbler in his case. Pelé and Maradona just leave as greatest player given those two often take turns in topping the general lists. Thoughts? F8RIL (talk) 12:32, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Thats a good idea, there are focuses on specific attributes, but its more so saying there are 'prolific', 'elegance' instead of saying their are the one of the greatest or the greatest dribbler, goalscorer, playmaker etc as it is very subjective, though I see what your getting at. Best if we move away from "greatest" statements which is what caused the original issue in the first place. They both have a sentence in there opening paragraph stating their exploits, though maybe they should be expanded? Ronaldo only has 'A prolific goalscorer' followed by stats to back it up, and Messi has a similar thing with "Both a prolific goalscorer and a creative playmaker" followed by states to back it up. Other places seem to have more e.g.:-
Pelé - "A prolific goalscorer, Pelé was known for his ability to strike powerful and accurate shots with both feet in addition to anticipating his opponents' movements on the field. Early in his career, he played in a variety of attacking formations and would use his dribbling skills to go past opponents. In his later career, he played in a playmaking role behind offensive strikers"
Zidane - "Zidane was an elite playmaker, renowned for his elegance, vision, ball control and technique"
Maradona - "Maradona's vision, passing, ball control, dribbling skills, speed, reflexes and reaction time was combined with his small size (1.65 m or 5 ft 5 in tall) giving him a low center of gravity which allowed him to maneuver better than most other football players; he would often dribble past multiple opposing players on a run. His presence on the pitch had a great effect on his team's general performance, while he would often be singled out by the opposition. A precocious talent, Maradona was given the nickname "El Pibe de Oro" ("The Golden Boy"), a name that stuck with him throughout his career"
Di Stéfano - "as a powerful, quick, skillful, and prolific forward, with great stamina, tactical versatility, creativity, and vision, who could also play almost anywhere on the pitch"
George Best - "Regarded as one of the greatest dribblers in the history of the sport, his playing style combined pace, skill, balance, feints, two-footedness, goalscoring and the ability to beat defenders." (only one I could find doing a quick search, he does have "one of the greatest dribblers", so it might be ok to use for Messi and Ronaldo.
Purijj (talk) 12:49, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
"Often considered the best player in the world and regarded by some as the greatest of all time" Purijj, F8RIL I think I like this. And I agree with mostly everything the both of you say here. Here in where the problem lies. We want both Messi's and Ronaldo's page to reflect the same since we have all agree that they deserve to be spoken of in the same breath. But if you attempt to change Messi's article to this here, there will be outrage, edit warring, etc. When I wrote both Messi's and Ronaldo's articles back in 2014 to what it is now, it was under a compromise with both sets of fans that we would have the same sentence for both. But Messi fans/ editors were unwilling to have "regarded by some as the greatest of all time" as they wanted a firm "regarded by many as the greatest". So to maintain parity, Ronaldo's (and many others like Pele, etc.) were written of in the same way. Also, if you scroll up, there is a vote that has taken place and its currently 6-1 in favour of maintaining my original edits from 2014. Please vote there so we can bring this issue to a close. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 16:33, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
"But Messi fans/ editors were unwilling to have "regarded by some as the greatest of all time" as they wanted a firm "regarded by many as the greatest". - Wikipedia is open space, a handful of people pushing POV can't dictate a page, as the examples I have given above, neither Ronaldo or Messi are considered the best ever, they are always in the top 5 best ever. For Messi's page they only give a single source. Messi's page should be changed aswell as more sources put him and Ronaldo in the top 5 and not the "the greatest ever". Purijj (talk) 17:19, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Get away from this “Messi fans” or “Cristiano fans”, are we really at that level? I’ve edited both articles, so maybe I can be accused of being both. It’s irrelevsnt anyway, the only thing that matters is the content being properly sourced. If what appears on these articles does not match what appears in the sources, reliable sources, then there is an issue. F8RIL (talk) 17:36, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
F8RIL , of course we aren't at that level, I agree completly. I was just following on from what Imperial HRH2 was stating about certain contributors to Messi's page. Purijj (talk) 17:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
See WP:NOTVOTE. Wikipedia doesn't run based on sheer numbers of votes, but on strength of arguments. There simply aren't enough sources to label either C. Ronaldo or Messi and the single greatest of all time. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:00, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Good point Ahecht. Purijj (talk) 17:32, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Check for bias against Ronaldo, use of "one of"


I just simply requested "one of" as it be taken out from the main article, as it implies Messi is better.

Original Request

Why does Messi's page state, "Often considered the best player in the world and regarded by many as the greatest of all time", while Cristano Ronaldo's states, "Often considered one of the best players in the world and regarded by many as one of the greatest players of all time."? When Ronaldo has earned more trophies, scored more goals, more intentional goals, more World Cup Goals, more hat-tricks, more intentional titles, runs a top speed of 38.6 km/h to Messi's 32.5 km/h , won more European Cups, won a championship with Portugal, which Messi has failed to win with a better team in Argentina, has converted more goals from penalties and set pieces, scored more headers, and more weak foot goals, as well as free kick goals, as well as having 20+ more international goals to his name, than Messi (Who is ranked #17 to Ronaldos #2, with 65). And Ronaldo, at 85 goals, beat Puskás of Hungary this year, for which the coveted Puskás award is named after also being the second leading international goal scorer of all time, behind only Ali Daei of Iran, and is worth more? Just about every record shows Cristiano Ronaldo is better than Lionel Messi, yet Messi is better because he dribbles pretty right? At the very least they should be addressed on the same level. comment added by Exadajdjadjajdsz (talk)

Hello Exam, those are fair points you have made, which is why, if you look above to what I have pervious said, that I believe both should have the same sentence which includes "on of the greatest", which does mean changing what is on Messi's page aswell.Purijj (talk) 07:41, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
"Facts are nonsense to Vaselineeeeeeee, okay." - please can you refrain from these type of comments, as they can get you banned, thanks. Purijj (talk) 07:41, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Both pages should be changed. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:00, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Exam, your criteria for judging greatness seems a bit faulty to say the least. By your way of judging, we should consider Gerd Muller a greater player than Maradona, as he scored more goals and won more trophies, both at club and international level. Do you see how absurd this way of judging, based solely on statisitcs, is? Ronaldo runs at a top speed of 38.6 km/h, and that is relevant how? Zidane was not a particularly fast player, for example, but this does not detract from him being considered one of the greatest of all time. Ronaldo 'won' an international championship? Well, correct me if I am wrong, but I am fairly sure Ronaldo went off injured early in the first half and his team mates won the final. Also, please remember that Ronaldo is two years older than Messi, so number of goals etc. is an ongoing statistic. To reiterate what has been pointed out many times before, there needs to be sources to back up any claim made here for Ronaldo, why the constant comparison with Messi's page is beyond me (unless it is due to editors being, in the words of Imperial HRH2, 'fanboys' (the irony being that a wikipedia definition of 'fanboy' could do worse than redirect to Imperial HRH2's comments/edit history. O'Flannery (talk) 15:36, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Has Gerd Muller won 5 balon d'Ors and is favourite to overtake Messi? Is Gerd Muller always spoken off in the same breath as Pele, Maradona, etc? Ronaldo and Messi constantly are. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 19:54, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
True O'Flannery, states aren't the only criteria. The reason why we speak about Messi's page being amended is to due both being in top 5 greatest of all time though either gets the top (see previous comments). Purijj (talk) 17:32, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Purijj, if that is the case, would it not make more sense to change the sentence on Messi's article? Again, I appreciate your thoughts on this, but I fail to see why the two opening paragraphs must mirror each other, especialy when it is clear that there are more credible sources to back up the claim for Messi than there are for Ronaldo (do you not consider it laughable that an instagram post by a cricketer and a discussion between the Portuguese president and Donald Trump are used to validate the claim for Ronaldo?). O'Flannery (talk) 17:46, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
O'Flannery, I have to disagree, if you see the sources I've given previously (scroll a bit further up, I have provided a list), they (all credible sources) all put Ronaldo and Messi in the top 5 of all time, but neither at the very top, which is why both opening paragraphs mirror each other, nothing to do with 'fanboying'. As for that particular source your referring to, no an Instagram post from a cricket player shouldn't be used, no chance IMO. Purijj (talk) 18:16, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Purijj, thanks, and I totally agree, your list provides sources which put Messi and Ronaldo in the top five (or six, with regards to Ronaldo in the last source) greatest of all time, with Messi routinely second to either Pele or Maradona depending on the source. I think from these sources, it could be argued that Messi is generally regarded as being the greater of the two, in which case there is no need for Ronaldo's paragraph to mirror Messi's. However, as Messi is generally listed as No.2, perhaps he needs a new description of his own, although one which sets him apart from Ronaldo? The suggestions by F8RIL may be a possible solution to this onging debate. And I would like to make it clear, I was certainly not referring to you when I mentioned 'fanboys', which is a term I only learned of from certain users on here. O'Flannery (talk) 18:37, 15 July 2018 (UTC
There are multiple sources which also have Ronaldo as the greatest. There is no objectivity here. Anyone can find sources which state either of them are recorded as the greatest. That is the whole point of having this discussion and trying to put an uniform sentence for both. When you say things like "it could be argued that Messi is generally regarded as being the greater of the two" is where we have problems because you're pro Messi but a pro Ronaldo editor could make the exact same argument, and yes, he would find sources to back it up, point to Ronaldo's international honours or even point to him having more 'Best player in the World' awards. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 19:53, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
I was simply referring to the sources that another editor provided, which all placed Messi higher than Ronaldo. Regarding pro Ronaldo sources, this article is using an instagram post by a cricketer, and a discussion between the Portuguese president and Donald Trump. Surely you see how poor the sources being used are? O'Flannery (talk) 21:04, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
IMO, both are on the same level and should have the same opening paragraph "often considered the best player in the world, and widely regarding as one of the greatest of all time" Purijj (talk) 09:42, 16 July 2018 (UTC)


Formulaonewiki, Ahecht, O'Flannery, Hurrygane, Kante4, Purijj, Britmax, F8RIL, Exam since this is not moving anywhere as you can all see, lets keeps the current edit, which has been the default since 2014 until we reach a solution to this article (and presumably Messi's?). I have updated the sources and removed one that F8RIL didn't agree with. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 19:53, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Imperial HRH2, agreed, seems like better to leave as we can't see to get a consensus. Purijj (talk) 09:42, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
Irrespective of what Messi's article says, the sources here do not back up such a claim, so the sentence should read 'regarded by many as one of the greatest'. O'Flannery (talk) 20:49, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

To reiterate, the issue I have is not whether Ronaldo is greater than Messi, it's that Ronaldo is not worse than Messi, which this article seems to imply. A person can argue ad-infintium whether Ronaldo is the better player or whether Messi is the better player, the issue is that they are, at the very least, comparable, with most modern day stats actually showing Ronaldo having the upper hand. (More Trophies, More Records, More Goals, et-cetera). You could argue that Real Madrid is a better club than Barcelona, or that somehow Portugal is a better team than Argentina(Which it clearly isn't, Argentina has been a far superior team for a decade now). Which is why the use of the phrase "regarded by many as one of the greatest players of all time" to Messi's article, " regarded by many as the greatest of all time", shows bias against Ronaldo. How is Messi regarded as "the greatest player of all time" by "many" and Ronaldo regarded as "one of the greatest players of all time" by "many"? Who is doing the "regarding" here, and where are the sources? "The" implies an indefiniteness,certitude, and emphatically states that "many" regard him as "the best". Thus inviting no comparison, and standing on a league of his own, indefinitely. "One of" implies, and invites comparison, and states that many regard him as "among the best". It just seems like bias information based on hype or marketing or some editor's personal bias here.

In conclusion they should either both state, "regarded by many as one of the best players of all time" or "regarded by many as the greatest of all time". Anything else just seems to be editorializing their respective greatness, and unfair to the other player, by conferring bias. (In this case against Ronaldo). Exadajdjadjajdsz (talk)

IMO both should say "often considered the best player in the world, and widely regarding as one of the greatest of all time" (I have given some good sources you can see above). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lionel_Messi

comment added by Exadajdjadjajdsz (talk)

Exam, the sources being used here can not back up the claim that Ronaldo is considered by many to be the greatest of all time. That is the issue. As for your opinion of the Argentina side, a quick look at recent results, especially World cup qualifiers, should make it abundantly clear that Argentina are pretty hopeless in matches in which Lionel Messi does not play, whereas Portugal won the final of the Euros without their best player. Of course Argentina have more star players, but that doesn't always make for an effective team, as is the case with Argentina. O'Flannery (talk) 22:24, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

O'Flannery , Again that's only one example. You could also mention Russia 2018, where Ronaldo scored 4 of Portugals 6 goals in that tournament, scoring a hat trick against the world's best goalie in De Gea, and where Messi only scored one goal. If Portugal didn't have Ronaldo, they would have likely be eliminated in the group stage with Iran proceeding. The fact that Ronaldo and Messi both have 5 Ball D'Ors(with Ronaldo likely winning a 6th this year), and Ronaldo edges Messi out on virtually every stat (which I mentioned in my previous post) and has more trophies, should at the VERY LEAST make Ronaldo and Messi comparable. If you don't want to state, "Ronaldo is regarded by many to be the greatest of all time", then at least state "Messi is regarded by many as one of the greatest of all time" (Like Ronaldo's Article). Flat out stating Messi is better than Ronaldo, when nothing shows that, other than the fact, that Messi is younger and perhaps has more time, is unfair at the least. Also, stating emphatically that Messi is better than Ronaldo, is fanboying at the worst, when nothing seems to demonstrate he is, other than, perhaps ball control and a better left foot. Even if trophies, awards, and goals can't make the case that Ronaldo AT LEAST deserves parity with Messi, even FIFA 18(the video game), which works in close conjunction with the federation, puts Ronaldo's stats much higher than Messi's. Exadajdjadjajdsz (talk)

Exam, do you see the sources backing up the claim for Ronaldo? One is an instagram post made by a cricketer, another is a conversation between the Portuguese president and Donald Trump. Do you honestly think these are valuable sources to back up the claim for Ronaldo being the greatest of all time? Unfortunately, we can not know what would have happened had Messi or Ronaldo not played in certain matches, so when you say 'If Portugal didn't have Ronaldo, they would have likely be eliminated in the group stage', it is purely conjecture. However, we are able to see how a team performs without said players. So my point about Argentina without Messi and Portugal without Ronaldo is a valid observation. 'Also, stating emphatically that Messi is better than Ronaldo, is fanboying at the worst, when nothing seems to demonstrate he is, other than, perhaps ball control and a better left foot' If you re-read what I wrote, I was referring to a list of articles which another editor had submitted as sources for the Ronaldo article, all of which listed Messi higher than Ronaldo. You can have a look at them above if you are interested. One thing I have noticed is that C Ronaldo fans seem to be very fond of using the term 'fanboy' to describe anyone who does not share their opinion. Funny how the people who use this term are often perfectly describing themselves. The term wasn't even part of my lexicon until I saw editors using it on this page. I just noticed your comment about the FIFA 18 video game! Did you mention that to add some much needed levity to the conversation? I sincerely hope so.O'Flannery (talk) 23:41, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

O'Flannery, I honestly don't know what you're referencing, some Instagram post? Something about the US president talking to the Portuguese president? None of that is relevant to the discussion, you're probably thinking of some other discussion with someone else on this talk page. I didn't claim Ronaldo was the greatest of all time, far from it actually, but he at least deserves parity with Messi, if you're going references accomplishments over the term of his career. And I have brought up their records for the sake of being called or refereed to as "the greatest of all time" by "many". Again I'm not talking my personal opinion, i'm not talking your personal opinion, I'm talking about this tactic that editors use invoking a third party to justify a certain position. In both articles, relating to Messi and Ronaldo, they use the phrase "regarded by many as", well who is many? Who is doing this "regarding"? I mean there are various celebrities and people in the sporting world who individually say that Messi is the greatest of all time, and there are also various people in the sporting world who say that Ronaldo is the greatest of all time. There's also those who just simply acknowledge without necessarily using the phrase "greatest of all time". In Messi's camp there is Landon Donovan, Zlatan Ibrahimavoic, Thierry Henry, and so forth, in Ronaldo's camp there is Zinedaine Zidane, Rio Ferdninand, Harry Kane, Colin Coherd, Mike Wilbron, Alexis Lalas, LeBron James, and so forth. Yes some of those don't play the sport, some do, some are analysts. But that's not the point, the point is that many people in the sporting world acknowledge Ronaldo as much if not more than Messi. So if verbal acknowledgement is the criteria to be considering "greatest of all time" by wikipedia editors, well, there you go, and then with records i'd refer you to my previous post where Ronaldo has Messi beat in virtually every category. Yet somehow he's not granted parity for that? What evidence have you provided that prove that Messi is actually better than Ronaldo, because i'm not saying the converse, I'm saying they are at the very least equals. Like someone else posted, they is no objectivity here. Help me understand, how having 20 less international goals, less league titles, less championships, less trophies, less hat-tricks, less headers, less weak-foot goals, less penalty conversions, less set-piece goals, less speed, makes you a better player in this sport? Again, if not for that, what makes a forward better than another forward? They both play in a similar position, yet Ronaldo has accomplished more, yet somehow Messi is better? So there not even equal? How is Messi better, because some starstruck sports journalist from 2014 says so? Clearly as of late, Ronaldo is, at the very least, equal to Messi. I'm curious though, how is Messi far superior, what stat or accomplishment proves he is? Exadajdjadjajdsz (talk)

Even Maradona says they are equal, and they are the two greatest of their generation. I'm guessing Maradona is wrong too though. Exadajdjadjajdsz (talk)

Exam, again, your criteria for deciding what makes someone great is highly problematic. Your reliance on statistics is highly flawed when attempting to define a player. Like my previous example, Gerd Muller has more club titles, more international titles, more goals etc. than Maradona, but nobody considers him greater than Maradona, as these statiatics are not the most important thing. Similarly, Johan Cruyff never won a World cup or an international trophy with the Netherlands, but he is routinely in the top 5 greatest of all time. No 'stat or accomplishment' proves Cruyff was great, but if you watched him play, I would argue it is pretty evident to most. You seem to be missing my point regarding the problem with the sentence 'regarded by many as the greatest' which was being used on this article. Forget Messi for a moment (something which many editors here seem unable to do) and consider the claim regarding Ronaldo in the opening paragraph. Then look at the sources being used to back up the claim (here you will find reference to the cricketer's instagram post and the Trump discussion). If a claim is to be made, it needs to be backed up. If you have a problem with the sentence on Messi's page, then it would make sense to discuss it there. Also, as I mentioned earlier, an editor provided a list of sources which stated the top five greatest players of all time, have a look over the lists. In each one Messi was placed higher. From the sources provided it suggests that Messi is generally regarded as the greater player of the two, and therefore the opening paragraphs do not need to mirror each other. O'Flannery (talk) 07:23, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

O'Flannery, That's the problem with Sports writers, they are highly biased, and give into hype over actual stats and facts. Just because the marketing campaign for Messi is bigger. Yes you could say Maradona's the greatest of all time, but you could also say he was a cocaine addict, and should be stripped of his awards. Not to mention he was helped by a handball, and dodgy refereeing. That's also a fact. You could also make the case that during Maradona's and Pele's time, leagues weren't as a developed and the competition was much thinner. There was less than half the amount of international teams and clubs, and their athletes where much worse and their game was much more Janky. That's also a fact. When Pele was Scoring hundreds of goals in Brazilian clubs, where the athletes where thinner, shorter, less tactical, and less athletic, it shouldn't mean "oh Pele is the greatest of all time". That's just giving into the hype. If Ronaldo and Messi where constantly playing against Qatar and Oman, they'd have thousands of goals. You take Pele from his time or Maradona from his time and place them in the current game and they'd be above average, but nowhere near Messi or Ronaldo's level of skill or explosiveness. Then you take Messi, who is no doubt one of the greatest, and he needs a team full of superstars in Barcelona to achieve any of his records. Barcelona is arguably the most loaded club in all of Europe. How the hell can anyone not say so, with Suarez, Innesta, Messi, Neymar, Piqué? You take Messi and you put on the Argentina squad, which is actually descent, and some "experts" would say favorites or at least dark horses to win the World Cup, and what happens? One goal to his name, a missed PK, dozens of botched opportunities. Then you take Ronaldo, and put him in an absolutely dreadful Portuguese squad, probably the worst European squad in the entire tournament, and what happens? 6 goals converted. So even if you are to use your argument about "stats don't matter" and what sports writers say is "gospel" Ronaldo outperforms even then. Ronaldo on a bad or mediocre team performs better than Messi on a good team. Look at Man U, Real Madrid, or Sporting CP, are you going tell me those teams are better than Barcelona? Are you going tell me Portugal is better than Argentina? Just look at where the Argentina players and where the Portuguese players are. Exadajdjadjajdsz (talk

Exadajdjadjajdsz, or Exam, you obviously haven't read the full dicussion here, or understood it. As much as I would like to debate this subject, I think I would be wasting my time discussing it with someone who claims: 'You take Pele from his time or Maradona from his time and place them in the current game and they'd be above average, but nowhere near Messi or Ronaldo's level of skill or explosiveness'. No offence, but simply based on this comment alone I am almost certain we will not come to a mutual understanding. And claiming Messi has a greater marketing campaign than Ronaldo is also laughable. Along with some of your comments not making much sense, your understanding of what constitutes a good team seems to be limited. To repeat myself again, having any number of quality players in a team is no guarantee of success if the players don't gel as a team. Argentina are a prime example of this. Your claim that Messi needs a team full of superstars to acheive any of his records can also be refuted simply by looking at Barcelona in La Liga this last season, in which Messi carried a relatively poor Barcelona. Also look at the World cup qualifying matches that Messi played in and those that he didn't to see how important a player he is. Remember, the 'absolutely dreadful' Portuguese team managed to win the final of the Euros without C Ronaldo. And finally, did you seriously suggest that Manchester United and Real Madrid were just average teams when Ronaldo played for them?? Anyway, that is enough of this nonsense, as I said, we will never agree on anything here so let's leave it at that (thanks for introducing me to the term 'janky'). O'Flannery (talk) 23:50, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

O'Flannery, My apologies for not worshiping the ground that Pele or Maradona walk on. They where great for their time yes, but have you even watched them play? Have you even see their highlight reels and what they could do? Or you just basing your opinion off of sports journalists? It's just a simple fact that as a sport evolves the players in that sport have to better, stronger, faster, bigger and so forth. Have you even watched any sports from the 50s or 60s? Tell me how many athletes of their sport from their 60's and 50's are better than their modern day counter parts? I'm waiting, because you won't be able to provide any. Sense the advent of better drugs for stronger recovery times, better nutrition, better tactics, better style of play, bigger leagues, athletes of all kinds have gotten better. Go ahead and name some Brazilian clubs from the 50's. Tell me Santos is a better club than Real Madrid or Barcelona. Go ahead and watch a game from Pele's time. See the level of ball control, see how fast athletes are running to the ball, see the strategies the keepers use back then. See the power inwhich they can kick the ball, their ability to strike at the ball. See the way in which defenses played back then. As matter of fact, many players weren't even full time players, and a lot of Pele's goals came from playing astonishingly weak teams, in friendlies, in which they beat teams by margins like 10-0, 8-0, so forth. Now take any athlete from relatively modern times, Klose, Zidane, Ronaldo, Messi, iniesta, Robin, Zlatan tell me they can't compete with Pele because "oh Pele's the god of football" yeah okay. They all run faster, have more technical ability, strike better, jump higher, compete in tougher leagues, et-cetera. But because Pele won 3 World Cups (with an absolute powerhouse in Brazil) in time when the competition was lighter, and when teams just dropped out of tournaments, and a lot of teams had players who weren't even considered "professional", he is considered now and forever the greatest of all time. See how ridiculous that sounds? If any modern day player competed in a WC with 8 teams for a knockout round, they'd all have 2-3 titles a piece. In 30-40 years, I'm sure Ronaldo and Messi will also look like peasants compared to their modern counterparts, cybernetic body parts, longer legs, crispr babies, better drugs, I mean who knows. Did you even see the south american teams Messi played with to get Argentina to the WC? I mean really, Ecuador, Venzuela, Peru, Chile, Bolivia do I need to say more? I mean at least, with a team like Chilie or Colombia you could make a case that they are a moderately descent team, but Ecuador,Venezuela and Bolivia??

That absolutely "dreadful" Portugese team, was absolutely dreadful. The Euro 2016 was a completely different story because they had Renato Sanches and Eder. They actually played Quaresma as he was suppose to be played in the tournament as well. Not to mention, they placed 3rd in their group, barely got to the knockout stage, and squeaked by against Wales, and Poland. This WC 2018 Portugal was terrible, it was just awful, I don't know how anybody can't see that, the whole team was abysmal, and why Queresma was a sub was beyond me. Even if you look at their games vs Iran, Morrocco and Spain, they all got outclassed, and if wasn't for Ronaldo they would have been out early. half the time they are giving up the ball and kicking it wild to their opponents, they have no ball control and just relied on fast breaks and counter attacks, they almost never won the possession games, if it wasn't for Ronaldo being so physically dominant, they would have been out early. No I didn't say that Man U and Real Madrid where "average teams" I said that Ronaldo has proven he can perform on average teams, like Portugal, and good teams, like Real Madrid and Man U, whereas Messi has shown can only perform on good teams like, Barcelona, and Argentina (2014). You're saying there ISN'T a better marketing campaign for Messi? That's just laughable, have you seen the Pepsi, Gatorade, Adidas, Air Europa, Pes, Fifa, Lays commercials adds? His face has been virtually planted everywhere, which contributes to people percieving him as the "Goat" besides his lack of stats and trophies compared to Ronaldo. Of course having a a bunch of good players together doesn't necessarily constitute a good team, but again, I've shown you that, stats, along with playing across different leagues, and winning more trophies, should be enough to have parity with Messi. You're right where not going agree, facts can be pretty "janky" :P Exadajdjadjajdsz (talk)

The discussion should be considered over as both pages has now been amended to mirror each other, and quality sources have been added (source only to Messi's for now as we need someone with admin status to amend the sources on Ronaldo's aswell, so it matches Messi's). Thanks :) Purijj (talk) 10:29, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Purijj Why would you revert my edits when we had agreed that although we didn't have consensus that Ronaldo could be "widely regarded as the greatest", I thought we agreed that we could word it as "some regard him as the greatest"? Whats wrong with "some"? In each of the sources, some people argue that he is the greatest. Therefore the "some" holds true. Furthermore, I had added that he is "currently the best player" as opposed to "often the best player". This is factually correct as he is the reigning Balon d'Or holder and the reigning FIFA Best Player holder. Thanks for editing Messi's article though. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 20:23, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Imperial HRH2, Its more that 'some' - 'widely' is more accurate. One award is given out by a French magazine, the other is given out by a football organisation with a sketchy record (and an award that is given out most of the time based on popularity etc). Makes more sense having it on a separate line. e.g. Ronaldo is the currently holder of both the Ballon d'Or, and the FIFA Best Player award.Welcome, though it made sense to edit Messi's aswell.Purijj (talk) 21:18, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
That makes a lot of sense Purijj, thanks for the edits.O'Flannery (talk) 22:51, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Welcome :) Purijj (talk) 23:04, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the Messi edit, i'm glad Ronaldo and Messi are now viewed as equally great, as many journalists, experts, and football stars see them. (Including Maradona). Exadajdjadjajdsz 22:00, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

No problem :) Purijj (talk) 23:04, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
They aren't now viewed as equally great, it is simply that neither of them are being described as the greatest of all time. The new sources which are to be used when the article protection is removed all clearly consider Messi to be the greater of the two. O'Flannery (talk) 22:51, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Agreed that neither of them are being described as the greatest of all time, though as of who is better is down to option..... best not to start that discussion again it goes no were, thanks. Purijj (talk) 23:04, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
True. I especially don't want to start another inane discussion with someone who considers Klose and Robben to be at the same level as Pelé (I assume when he said Robin he meant Robben). I was simply referring to the lists being used as sources which all have Messi placed higher. Anyway, good work with your recent edits, finally the page is more accurate. O'Flannery (talk) 23:13, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Not reading those long winded essays above that have flooded the page, but did happen to catch the odd sentence about Pelé and Maradona. The word nonsense springs to mind. F8RIL (talk) 00:11, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Agreed, Kross and Robin....thats just crazy Purijj (talk) 07:20, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

O'Flannery Robin Van Perse, but again I apologize for not worshiping the ground Pele walks on. Clearly an an athlete from the 50's who won 3 world cups, with an absolute powerhouse in Brazil, with a knockout round of 8 teams, competing against the likes of Yugoslavia, Hungary, and Peru and was only a major goal scorer in one of those tournaments, will always be the greatest of all time. And then in a Brazilian league where (Santos) they stomped opponents because defense was atrocious. He was also injured in the 1962 world cup, and had a team loaded with super stars, who had records above him for goals scored in those tournaments. He would have good ball control and descent technical ability, yes, but the level of fitness and the tactics of the Premier league and La Liga is unparalleled. Sorry for not worshiping sports writers, and my apologizes that you can't not come up with a response or refute anything I stated.Exadajdjadjajdsz (talk) I have crossed out this comment. It is not relevant to this topic. It is related to essays above and it is also trolling. @O'Flannery, @Purijj, @Hurrygane I invite to disscuss about Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/People/Sports figures#Association football. Dawid2009 (talk) 07:42, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Exadajdjadjajdsz, as you can see above, I am not the only editor that considers your rants to be absolute nonsense. There is nothing to refute, because what you are typing is gibberish. You appear to be an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect, and therefore any attempt at reasonable conversation is almost inevitably futile. I am replying to you to point this out. A final note, you keep referring to sports writers, as if they are the only people that consider Maradona or Pelé to be the greatest, this suggests that you are unaware that there are many footballers who also hold this view. Each of your posts is simply further demonstrating your complete lack of knowledge/understanding of the subject. Robin Van Persie! Jesus wept. O'Flannery (talk) 08:53, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Agreed [User:O'Flannery|O'Flannery]], better to just ignore him, don't engage him, not worth your time :) Purijj (talk) 20:58, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
I have started disscussion about Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/People/Sports figures#Association football in Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5. @O'Flannery, @Purijj, @Hurrygane @ Nergaal I also invite to disscuss. Dawid2009 (talk) 06:05, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Dawid2009, I don't seem to see it, can you provide a direct link to the section on the talk page? Thanks. Purijj (talk) 16:50, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/People/Sports figures#Association football Dawid2009 (talk) 18:54, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Dawid2009. I've checked the talk section of that page and I cant see any discussion started about Ronaldo. Purijj (talk) 09:12, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cristiano_Ronaldo/Archive_14&oldid=1067041969"