Talk:2006 FIFA World Cup Group A

Permutations after Germany-Poland match
Before the Germany-Poland match, all four teams in the group could still have finished in any of the four final positions. After the Germany-Poland match, the range of permutations began to narrow. Poland could not finish in 1st place, and Germany could not finish in fourth place. All other permutations were still possible, though some required large changes in goal differences (examples given in brackets - other results may have led to the same rankings within the group, only one set of examples given for each case):


 * Poland finish fourth (Costa Rica beat Poland)
 * Poland finish third (Poland beat Costa Rica)
 * Germany finish first (Germany beat Ecuador)
 * Germany finish second (Ecuador beat Germany)
 * Costa Rica finish third (Costa Rica drawn or win Poland)
 * Costa Rica finish fourth (Poland beat Costa Rica)
 * Ecuador finish first ( Ecuador beat Germany)
 * Ecuador finish second (Germany beat Ecuador)

Examples of required goal differences to be added later. Carcharoth 13:14, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

World Cup Group stage articles
I'm proposing to delete the group articles since there is infor in the main FIFA World Cup 2006 article. Kingjeff 21:38, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Instead, I propose to remove some of the information at the 2006 FIFA World Cup page. I think, that the results at that page should be as on 2004 European Football Championship. When the WC is over, a statistic page also could be made, also as Euro 04. ka la  ha  21:32, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that the group articles should be deleted. They provide much more information than the main article FIFA World Cup 2006. Don't you see that many other languange versions of wikipedia also have the group articles? --Neo-Jay 21:47, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

But there is a link to the match report which provides the same info and the group standings is in the main article with scores and goal scorers. Kingjeff 21:52, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Are you talking about those external links? They are not links to Wikipedia's articles! Almost all Wikipedia's articles have external links which provide relevant info. Do you argue to delete all those articles? --Neo-Jay 21:57, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

But the match reports are very reliable since that's the official match report from FIFA. Kingjeff 22:46, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Haha, you may also argue that Encyclopædia Britannica is very reliable. Why are you still staying with Wikipedia? Just leave here! --Neo-Jay 22:48, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't think this link will change. Kingjeff 22:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Show your proof. --Neo-Jay 22:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree that these pages provide useful information not available elsewhere on wiki and as such shouldn't be deleted. In fact, the wiki for Group E is the first page I check everyday for World Cup news. zipmon 22:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

But the external match report is also a source to proof of the accuracy of the main article score whereas this page is just a copy of the external match report and main 2006 world cup page. Kingjeff 22:09, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I believe that all the information in wikipedia can be found somewhere else since Wikipedia has the No Original Research Policy. Wikipedia is the very place to include the information from External sources! --Neo-Jay 22:20, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Are you saying Wikipedia shouldn't have any sources at all? Kingjeff 22:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that I said very clearly: the Wikipedia's articles of course have their external sources. You said that these articles should be deleted because we can also find information from somewhere else.  If so, all the articles in Wikipedia should be deleted! --Neo-Jay 22:37, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Please have in mind that the external links keep changing. We surelly cannot only rely on the external links to know the group match information.--Neo-Jay 22:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

No longer current sport
As all Group A games are done, the template is no longer appropriate and should be removed.

Also, it is useful to have a brief sentence at the top, documenting the group play results in prose. --EngineerScotty 23:18, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Sourcing
Just dropping by after seeing this at DYK: over 20 of the 51 sources used here are either from BBC Sport or The Guardian. Would it be possible to get some more variety, especially using perspectives from the competing countries in Group A, to ensure a NPOV?  Sounder Bruce  20:43, 23 January 2023 (UTC)