Talk:Arab Club Champions Cup

Requested move 6 March 2016

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (non-admin closure).  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   10:04, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Arab World Cup → UAFA Club Cup – The Arab World Cup will be a national football team competition; The UAFA Club Cup is a football club competition. Ben5218 (talk) 20:13, 6 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I've no idea why this has been renamed and is utterly confusing. There's no reference to this name Arab World Cup. All the logos revert back to something different. It's utterly misleading at this moment in time. No consultation happened on it's current title. Druryfire (talk) 20:43, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I've done a google search and translation of this page http://www.uafaonline.com/?module=news&page=details_ar&id=4793 which may possibly revert to calling it Arab Football Federation Championship. Druryfire (talk) 20:47, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * UAFA renamed this competition to Arab World Cup (a competition for teams from the Arab World) and the first edition will be in the 2016/17 season. See for yourself at the following links: http://www.masrawy.com/Sports/Sports_News/details/2016/3/5/763881/ and http://el-ahly.com/Pages/News.aspx?aid=84261&ZID=3 and http://forum.kooora.com/f.aspx?t=36164881 and http://www.yallakora.com/ar/News/296612/2418. Therefore this page should not be moved. Also the reason why the logos don't say Arab World Cup is because the logo for the new tournament has not been released yet. Thanks Hashim-afc (talk) 17:04, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The new official name of the competition is Arab World Club Cup. We don't need to change the name. --Fayçal.09 (talk) 09:49, 24 June 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved in 2018
For the record:


 * ''Anthony Appleyard moved page UAFA Club Championship to Arab Club Champions Cup: Requested by Hashim-afc at WP:RM/TR: The name of the tournament was changed back to Arab Club Champions Cup: https://twitter.com/UAFAAC/status/988821925500739585. This is also the name that it has been referred to most common in the past e.g. on RSSSF: http://www.rsssf.com/tablesa/arabchamp.html.

I found that the page history from 2006 to 31 October 2016 had been left behind after a WP:CUTPASTE move by user:Hashim-afc, and the talk page was left behind at Talk:Arab World Club Cup. I have now moved the talk page to match the article, and merged the article's page history. – Fayenatic  L ondon 22:16, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Merger proposal
Formal request has been received to merge the article 2009–10 Arab Champions League into Arab Club Champions Cup; dated: September 2018. Proposer's Rationale: This very short article is all about a cancelled sporting event and the little content it has can be added into the respective target articles. Discuss here. Richard3120 (talk) 16:27, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Hashim-afc (talk) 14:59, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Status as a friendly competition
The organizer of this competition has said it is a friendly competition, yet any attempt to note this fact on the page is removed as "vandalism." What gives? 73.128.27.131 (talk) 16:12, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Quote from Prince Abdulaziz bin Turki al-Faisal
I believe this quote should be in the article as he is the president of the organization which hosts the event. I do not want to keep going back and forth with endless reversions, and would like to calmly discuss it. In my last edit, I asked to please not simply delete the quote with no explanation. Someone promptly did so. Someone even came on my user talk page and started insulting me personally. Without any rationale for excluding the quote, I will continue to add it in. My next step will be to look for a mediation or a third opinion.

Here is the relevant edit:

BlackenedTheUSSR (talk) 20:24, 22 August 2023 (UTC)


 * It sure is more than just another friendly tournament. Its the main tournament of a big regional football association. The prize money is in the millions, there is a 30 year old history to it. Someone speaks arabic? Is the translation really correct?. Who is the user posting that? The quote sounds out of context. -Koppapa (talk) 09:47, 23 August 2023 (UTC)


 * There is an automated translation of his remarks here but if anyone wants to dispute it, I'm open to hearing them out.
 * Here is the same clip being published by Al-Bilad (Saudi newspaper), the first Saudi newspaper. https://twitter.com/albiladdaily/status/1690347837383413761 BlackenedTheUSSR (talk) 20:03, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 * , I have watched the video and the words in Arabic are [كل الأندية شاركت بكل جهد رغم أنها بطولة تعتبر بطولة ودية ولكن كل الأندية نافست بشكل جدي في هذه البطولة] which translates word-for-word as: "All the clubs participated with all their effort although it is a championship considered as a friendly championship but all clubs competed seriously in this championship".
 * He didn't "state" that the tournament is a friendly, but he said that it is "considered" [تعتبر] as a friendly – the question is by whom is it "considered"? There is no indication that he is speaking on behalf of UAFA in the interview or saying that UAFA itself considers it a friendly. It is an off-the-cuff interview with some reporters and not an official UAFA press conference or anything of that sort. Many tournaments that are competitive in nature are often "considered" as friendlies (e.g. FA Community Shield, 2022 Finalissima) by large sections of media/fans but it does not mean they actually are.
 * The most likely meaning of the video in my opinion is that "ودية" in this context is referring to the fact that the tournament is not under the FIFA umbrella or included in the FIFA calendar (like the FIFA Arab Cup is for example). The tournament not being under FIFA does not mean that it is actually a friendly though – whether or not it is a friendly or competitive depends on the view of the organising body (are there any official statements from UAFA on their website to state that the tournament is intended as a friendly?) and the view of reliable sources such as major football statistics websites etc (do they count the statistics within their records? Most/all of them do from what I've seen).
 * A very important point to note: the president of FIFA, Gianni Infantino published a post on Instagram (here) congratulating Cristiano Ronaldo on scoring in 22 consecutive seasons after he scored a goal in the Arab Club Champions Cup. Hence, this indicates that even though the tournament is not organised by FIFA, the FIFA president himself recognizes this tournament as a competitive tournament which arguably trumps any other viewpoint.
 * Considering this is the main club competition organised by UAFA, matches in the tournament are often played throughout the entire season (i.e not restricted to pre-season), it is a historic tournament and has extensive qualifying rounds and criteria and more than $10 million of prize money, I think it would be bordering on ludicrous to call it a friendly tournament. Friendly tournaments are tournaments like Emirates Cup and Premier League Asia Trophy which are basically intended to be fundraisers and not held in a competitive nature by the organising body, whereas this is completely different. You wouldn't see Gianni Infantino congratulating players on Emirates Cup goals! Hashim-afc (talk) 22:39, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Edit: A further point: UAFA has been quoted as stating that they aim to convince FIFA to allow the Arab Club Champions Cup champion to participate in FIFA Club World Cup (here). Hence I think it is pretty clear that the statement made in the video is not referring to the viewpoint of UAFA (why would they request the champion of a friendly tournament to enter the FIFA Club World Cup?), but is likely referring the fact that the tournament is not within FIFA calendar or referring to the viewpoint of other people about the tournament. Either way, it's an ambiguous statement in an off-the-cuff interview and not something to put in an article lead. Hashim-afc (talk) 22:53, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 * All of this information is not in the article and is important to note. I think someone should provide a summary of these facts and the quote together to give people the information to understand the situation better.
 * This seems like a stretch to me, congratulating someone for scoring doesn't automatically make the match not a friendly. You could interpret that statement as "congratulations for scoring in 22 seasons including friendlies" or whatever. I'm not saying this is definitely what is meant but it seems ambiguous and seems like a stretch to interpret a whole policy based on a very narrow statement. He didn't directly weigh in on friendly vs official, and in any case an Instagram post indirectly talking about something seems less important than FIFA's official policy (whatever that is)
 * Transfermarkt, one of the biggest stats sites out there, does not count this cup, as an example. The fact that some but not all stats sites include this cup seems again, like a very important fact to include and right now the article doesn't include that fact at all.
 * My conclusion to all of this is that there are some key facts that you have mentioned and that basically all relevant facts should be included. There is clearly something to be said here about the status of the cup, where it's not entirely clear cut. Information should be provided to the reader in a neutral manner so they can draw their own conclusions. BlackenedTheUSSR (talk) 13:34, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't really agree that it is important to note. There are many different football competitions in the world that are not held by FIFA or part of the FIFA calendar, this is not something that needs to be stated on every single article, I was just explaining my opinion on what the quote could be referring to since UAFA has made explicit efforts to integrate the competition with FIFA. It is clear from the article that the tournament is organised by the Union of Arab Football Associations and not FIFA.
 * Well, I would extremely doubt that. But yes, technically it is up for interpretation. In fact, the entire notion of a tournament being "competitive" or "friendly" is ambiguous and under interpretation. There is no standard set by FIFA or something to say that a tournament is a friendly or not. It just depends on what reliable sources reflect about the tournament and any statements from the organising body about the tournament.
 * Transfermarkt has been deemed as an unreliable source for Wikipedia – see WikiProject Football/Links.
 * I personally don't see anything that we've discussed here which really needs to be included in the article. There are so many competitions organised by different bodies around the world of football, we don't need to go into each one and list all the different quotes made by different people calling it a friendly or not a friendly. Is Sheriff of London Charity Shield a friendly? Is GCC Club Cup a friendly? Is Anglo-Italian League Cup a friendly? We could have this discussion about hundreds of tournaments. Like I said above it's an ambiguous issue and really not something that in most cases can be quantified. All we need to say is that it is an association football competition organised by UAFA. Unless UAFA make an official statement to say that the tournament is intended as a friendly or the tournament is explicitly considered a friendly by the main reliable sources then I don't see a need to make any change to the page. Regardless, if any change was to be made it certainly wouldn't be in the article lead. Hashim-afc (talk) 17:50, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not trying to use Transfermarkt as a source on specific stats, since the numbers are maintained by users, I'm simply pointing to one of the biggest stats site not including it at all for users to maintain, when you said it's included by stats sites. The fact some really popular ones don't is interesting to note, since you brought it up.
 * In general I don't see the argument for excluding the information. To me, it's interesting and clears up potential confusion. Also, it lets readers make their own conclusions. If it is as you say, an ambiguous issue, that to me is more reason to include the information that makes it ambiguous and simply let readers figure it out.
 * I also don't see how "this is a discussion that can be had about other cups" is a reason to not have that discussion. Maybe we do need to figure out the status of the GCC Club Cup or at least explain its relationship to FIFA. That GCC article doesn't mention their relationship to FIFA, and I only know about it having discussed it with you, doesn't seem to be a good argument for excluding information.
 * I no longer think it should just say it's a friendly, or include the quote from the organizer calling it a friendly *by itself*, I think including that quote in context with all the other information you provided makes sense. I'm willing to go to a third party to figure out a compromise though. BlackenedTheUSSR (talk) 12:51, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * As mentioned below, per WP:DUE, not everything is added to an article, only material that is "due", based on whether the information is reflected in independent reliable sources. This topic of discussion (whether or not the competition is considered a "friendly", which in this case is judgemental and not quantifiable) and the sources we are talking about (an ambiguous quote and an Instagram post) simply don't meet that criteria. Just because some fans are interested in it, it doesn't mean we need to go and collect every quote we can find about who says it's a friendly and who doesn't and add it all into the article, because that is not reflective of reliable sources. Per WP:NOR, we shouldn't be trying to draw conclusions (or "figure out" the status of a tournament, per your words) that aren't explicitly stated by reliable sources.
 * This topic would only be worth reflecting in the article if a) UAFA had published a statement which said that the Arab Club Champions Cup is intended as a friendly tournament for its clubs (for example, the way Arsenal does about the Emirates Cup), or b) if reliable sources explicitly stated this, for example how they do with the International Champions Cup - read any match report from a reliable source about the International Champions Cup and you'll see they all say it is a friendly. Otherwise, we're just creating a discussion which isn't being had in any reliable sources based on Twitter and Instagram posts - that's not what Wikipedia is for. Hashim-afc (talk) 17:32, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't think there's any point to restating arguments at this stage. I'm not asking for a random Twitter post to be added, by the way, rather there are two things that I want added:
 * 1. The fact that it is not considered official by FIFA or not under the FIFA umbrella. This is important information that is not a social media post of any kind, and is not in dispute. The only way a user can learn about it is going to the talk page at this stage. I think an average reader is better informed by knowing this.
 * 2. A quote from the organizer of the tournament speaking to the media, as reported by the country's oldest newspaper. Yes, I found it on Twitter. But it's not like I'm talking about a random Twitter post. It so happens that the video got posted on Twitter. But it is still the organizer of the event speaking to a major newspaper in a formal interview. I don't think that if I found the exact same video on another website, that it would substantially change how notable it is, right?
 * I offered a compromise, which is that it should not say it is a friendly, but simply include all information and let the reader decide what they want to think. I also proposed that rather than put it in the first paragraph it should be further down. You rejected my proposed compromise.
 * At this point, this clearly needs a third party to weigh in. I have made a request for a third party opinion. BlackenedTheUSSR (talk) 14:09, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * As mentioned below, per WP:DUE, not everything is added to an article, only material that is "due", based on whether the information is reflected in independent reliable sources. This topic of discussion (whether or not the competition is considered a "friendly", which in this case is judgemental and not quantifiable) and the sources we are talking about (an ambiguous quote and an Instagram post) simply don't meet that criteria. Just because some fans are interested in it, it doesn't mean we need to go and collect every quote we can find about who says it's a friendly and who doesn't and add it all into the article, because that is not reflective of reliable sources. Per WP:NOR, we shouldn't be trying to draw conclusions (or "figure out" the status of a tournament, per your words) that aren't explicitly stated by reliable sources.
 * This topic would only be worth reflecting in the article if a) UAFA had published a statement which said that the Arab Club Champions Cup is intended as a friendly tournament for its clubs (for example, the way Arsenal does about the Emirates Cup), or b) if reliable sources explicitly stated this, for example how they do with the International Champions Cup - read any match report from a reliable source about the International Champions Cup and you'll see they all say it is a friendly. Otherwise, we're just creating a discussion which isn't being had in any reliable sources based on Twitter and Instagram posts - that's not what Wikipedia is for. Hashim-afc (talk) 17:32, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't think there's any point to restating arguments at this stage. I'm not asking for a random Twitter post to be added, by the way, rather there are two things that I want added:
 * 1. The fact that it is not considered official by FIFA or not under the FIFA umbrella. This is important information that is not a social media post of any kind, and is not in dispute. The only way a user can learn about it is going to the talk page at this stage. I think an average reader is better informed by knowing this.
 * 2. A quote from the organizer of the tournament speaking to the media, as reported by the country's oldest newspaper. Yes, I found it on Twitter. But it's not like I'm talking about a random Twitter post. It so happens that the video got posted on Twitter. But it is still the organizer of the event speaking to a major newspaper in a formal interview. I don't think that if I found the exact same video on another website, that it would substantially change how notable it is, right?
 * I offered a compromise, which is that it should not say it is a friendly, but simply include all information and let the reader decide what they want to think. I also proposed that rather than put it in the first paragraph it should be further down. You rejected my proposed compromise.
 * At this point, this clearly needs a third party to weigh in. I have made a request for a third party opinion. BlackenedTheUSSR (talk) 14:09, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

3O Response: If the most that can be used to support this are videos and Twitter posts, then regardless of any other consideration, inclusion in the article is undue weight (and I also have a lot of hesitation about how much interpretation seems to be getting done with that type of source). If more reliable and independent sources see fit to comment on this matter, that may change things, but absent that, Wikipedia should not be the first to weigh in. So in short, I would agree that at least based upon what material was provided above, this material should be omitted from the article. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:23, 9 September 2023 (UTC)


 * @Seraphimblade That would relate to the quote, which admittedly does come from a video from Twitter. But the fact that this competition is not recognized by FIFA doesn't come from Twitter at all, in fact it doesn't seem to be in any dispute. Can you weigh in on that point? 73.128.27.131 (talk) 05:07, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what your point is. Olympic hockey is not recognized by the NHL. Australian football is not recognized by the NFL. FIFA soccer is not recognized by the NBA. None of those articles list the various organizations who don't recognize them, because that could go on for gigabytes. Rather, we list any that do, and it is reasonably presumed that any not listed do not. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:19, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @Seraphimblade it's a very different situation as the teams that compete in the Olympics do not also compete in the NHL, same with the teams that compete in Australian rules do not compete in the NFL. We are talking about teams that compete primarily in FIFA recognized tournaments taking part in one non FIFA recognized tournaments. Do you have a background in football /soccer? I'm genuinely asking because I don't understand why you think what I'm saying is confusing and those examples seem very different to me. No one would expect that an Australian rules match would be sponsored by the NFL, however the vast majority of competitions these teams compete in are FIFA competitions, the fact that they aren't is unusual. Prior to me learning specifically that a tournament is non fifa recognized I would assume that it is. I would obviously not assume that an Olympic match between Russia and Sweden is sponsored by the national league of the United States. 73.128.27.131 (talk) 22:19, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
 * It does not matter if I have a "background in football/soccer". And, well&mdash;don't assume things, I certainly have a background in that being a bad idea in pretty much every case. My opinion is that we should not mention any particular organizations which don't recognize or sanction something, because, well, why would we? Just mention any that do. That is, and remains, what I think on the subject, and a whole lot of "Butbutbut" will not change that. Seraphimblade Talk to me 23:07, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Full protection
I have protected the article so it cannot be edited for a week. That is to allow time for editors to discuss the issue behind the slow edit warring that has been occuring. Points to note: Johnuniq (talk) 04:29, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 * (and others) Do not refer to edits as "vandalism" unless WP:VAND applies. Hint: If someone adds "poop" to the article, feel free to call that vandalism. However, the text in question here is not vandalism. Using that term incorrectly is a personal attack and may lead to a sanction.
 * Two sections have been added above regarding the disputed text. No further edits should occur before responding to the comments.
 * Per WP:LEAD, the introductory paragraphs (the "lead" or "lede") must be a summary of text in the body of the article. Do not add new text to the lead.
 * Per WP:DUE, not everything is added to an article, only material that is "due" (see the link). The question of whether something is due is generally resolved by examining independent reliable sources (WP:RS) and determining whether those independent sources use the disputed text.
 * See dispute resolution.