Talk:Taca de Portugal

Text from match

 * I took away this text from the match 2004-2005:
 * SL Benfica team left the pitch at the 75th minute, when the result was 0-12 (this is a lie, whatever the year you are talking about). The -tekst is added by another wikipedian. If it's vandalism, to be deleted. If the dispute has an outcome, then that should be in the table. -DePiep 10:48, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
 * That's clearly vandalism. It never happened. No team ever scored 12 goals in the final. --Jcmo 18:21, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Estádio Nacional and Explêndido Rocha's accusation of "tretas" (bullshit)
It's not the first time that I see your arrogant behaviour in Wikipedia. Don't be persistent, you have been blocked in the past for your «politeness». What you call "tretas and lies" (portuguese for «bulshit») is to be discussed in the proper public place, here in the talkpage and not decided by your dictatorial "explêndido" person( portuguese for «splendid» - how humble!). Concerning the matter itself there is only one type of people with that view: F.C. Porto mindlock fanatics, the very people who have made people lose belief in any sports truth in Portugal. Not impersonating this statement, your birthplace gives a hint.

--Richard George 06:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Tretas, tretas, tretas. I don't discuss matters of faith. You are within your right to hate FC Porto [all those defeats must be hard to swallow]. You are not within the right of rewriting Portuguese history.
 * Besides, I'm proud that Leça da Palmeira being my hometown makes me guity on the eyes of the likes of you. --Explendido Rocha 16:04, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Explendido may be all that you're saying, but Richard George, you're no better. Or don't you think that your opinion on FC Porto fans and on the political stuff you wrote on the article are heavy in POV? Still, if what you say is truth, I'm sure you can find some decent references to back that up, right? I have to admit, I had a great laugh on your "neutral" "This soviet-inspired attempt of breeding nemesi and molding people's consciousness according imposed ideals was categorically defeated by the Portuguese people". Thank you for that moment... And you call Explendido fanatic... (Not directly, of course, but it's easy to know what you mean)--Serte [ Talk · Contrib ] 16:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * My opinion is not about FCP fans, but the mindlock FCP fans. I know lots of educated FC Porto fans. But we all know the level of retardedness we have seen when a couple of years ago FCP fanatics came to Lisbon with chants "We just want to see Lisbon burn" (even is Estádio do Restelo they did it), with outdoors "We came to the circus", or Super-Dragões members starting to insult the passengers of a bus just because one could read Junta de Freguesia de Benfica (parish) on it? For godsake, the passengers were 70 years old average and they looked mesmerized for being insulted by a bunch a retards for no reason they could know at all. These retards took the football rivalry to regional hatred, they hate Estádio Nacional, they only breed hatred and retardedness, it's not about football, it's about offending an entire region. And we are very AWARE of Pinto da Costa's inciting to this regional conflict.

About the Soviet-inspired politics? What were they? What was that in the the period between 1974 April 25th and 1975 November 25th? DEMOCRACY? for Christ's sake? private properties stolen with the seal «Property of the Portuguese Communist Party» on it? Setúbal's schools vandalized? Rádio Renascença being assaulted and destroyed with bombs? People under threat if they were no leftist? Democracy or Bolshevik-style? What's the difference between those 19 months and the preceding 48 years? Man, don't even try to challenge me with a romantic vision of it, too much sad for a laugh.

About your "defendant", mister solicitor Serte, advise him that his type of language (which just makes me right about some points) may bring him some grief hereby.--Richard George 12:56, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Stop being arrogant, and start thinking that there is nobody totally neutral on points of view. You already know that. I'm not going to argue with you because I don't really care, but you were the one who started this "thread" on the talk page and you are the one inserting dubious informations (you inserted, two people don't agree with it and nobody else has spoken) without references, but you treat us like the bad guys. Just the way you speak and all those falacies show your Point of View. Just because I don't agree with you, does it mean that I agree with everything done on that period? There is more than black and white. But what you're inserting in the article is certainly not grey at all...--Serte [ Talk · Contrib ] 14:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and I don't see what are the "statistical difficulties Porto has to win at Jamor. In the last 12 times it went there, it won 9.--Serte [ Talk · Contrib ] 14:39, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The last 12 times FCP played in Jamor, they were already using the tactics revealed by the Apito Dourado investigation. You know that, I know that, it's public knowledge since Guimaro and Calheiros. Besides, Richard George description of the behavior of PdC and Secretario at the Jamor match is factual and correct, as anyone could see then when it showed on tv - and you both know that part of his contributions is true and factual. He may not be able to provide right now a youtube link, as those images haven't been shown since, but anyone who saw that final saw it. I don't agree with his "Soviet-inspired politics" charges - but even though he is using semantic-charged phrases and doing a right-wing description of a very trouble period in Portuguese history, he still does have some valid points. 195.234.134.115 11:06, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * That's your opinion. And I could go through that road. But I won't. Read the policies. Well, I'll read them for you: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.". So, it just shouldn't be there according to the policies. So you can come up with everything you want, but you're still against the rules. I'm not a rule-freak guy, but putting your opinions as facts and as truth, somehow, goes against the rules here. And even if he has valid points and even if it is truth, it doesn't matter. You have to admit that this should be removed until references are found. For verifiability. And that's how things work here...--Serte [ Talk · Contrib ] 13:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You're right. Time to hunt for old video tapes and transcribe them, if they haven't been "stored" in some bucket at RTP. 195.234.134.115 15:27, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Serte... "even if it is truth, it doesn't matter". That suites you and your fellows, that's how you and those of your kind work: Willful blindness and sneaking (according with your beloved source of inspiration - "2.To hide, especially in a mean or cowardly manner"). It's not rule-freakness, it's dishonest and reveals lack of character, poor excuse to defend what's morally low with more immorality. Cheap. --213.146.217.82 14:08, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Strange article
I think this article is confusing the "knock-out" type of competition with the competitions itself. The cup of Portugal was not founded in 1921 ! it´s completely illogical. The National Championship in the beginning was only open for the regional champions. The perfomance by club should separate all the competitions, because the Cup of Portugal only began officially in 1939.

Every specialized Portuguese sports' book or newspaper always split the National Championship winners from the Cup winners. Different competitions, with different winners. For instance, Benfica didn´t won 27 Portuguese Cups, but 24 Portuguese Cups and 3 National Champioships. This is much more accurate.

Also, another mistake: Competition not held due to the Latin Cup being held in the Estádio Nacional in 1949\50: that is not true, and it´s illogical again, because the Latin Cup was played in the end of the season. I´m pretty sure that the portuguese cup was not held in this season because of the world cup qualifiers; FPF wanted to prepare the games with a long-term project. Obvious failed. --Eagle Fly Free SLB 14:25, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree 100%.

According to FPF, the cup only started in 1938-1939, so its ridiculous that you consider National Championship as a kind of Cup of Portugal. Everything before 1938-1939, should be taken from this article. Or at least should not have the same relevance as the Portuguese Cup events. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.90.17 (talk) 00:08, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was moved to Taca de Portugal. (Note that I have not used the Portuguese "ç" here.) As this discussion focused solely on Google hits as a measure of WP:COMMONNAME, I went through and did a thorough comparison of Google hits. All searches were done in English, and all were restricted to pages that also included at least one of "football" OR "soccer", and excluded "wiki", just to reduce any other cruft that might be wandering around. The results were as follows, in increasing order of hits: Based on the above, it seems clear for our purposes that the most commonly used name in English is "Taca de Portugal", without the Portuguese "Ç". While this is probably due to the limitations of English keyboards, we still have to use the most commonly used written English name. If other evidence is found beyond Google hits, another move can be requested.--Aervanath (talk) 18:07, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 4,820 hits for "Taça de Portugal" (specifically excluding "Taca", so there would be no confusion with the English spelling)
 * 15,500 hits for "Portugal Cup"
 * 19,900 hits for "Cup of Portugal"
 * 24,200 hits for "Portuguese Cup"
 * 31,200 hits for "Taca de Portugal" (excluding "Taça" so there would be no confusion with the Portuguese spelling)

Cup of Portugal → Taça de Portugal — This is the name that the competitions is most commonly known by, as proven by a quick Google search. Searching for "Cup of Portugal" only returns 15,100 hits, while searching for "Taca de Portugal", which automatically includes "Taça de Portugal", returns 325,000 hits. – PeeJay 18:22, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.


 * Strongly oppose Limiting the search results to English hits for Taca de Portugal reduces the hits to 17,800. The idiomatic English Portugal Cup in far more popular than either. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:23, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Calling it "Portugal Cup" would make no sense. If anything, the English translation would be "Portuguese Cup". – PeeJay 08:23, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * What gives you that idea? Portugal Cup has 52.2K English hits, many  more than any of these, and more than Portuguese Cup; this is Portugal as attributive, like Stanley Cup. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment if this isn't used in English most commonly, then it should not be renamed so. This isn't the Portuguese Wikipedia. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 22:52, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aervanath (talk) 07:44, 25 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong oppose. As has been pointed out above, the Google search used to support the nom included Portuguese language pages, which are completely irrelevant. I support Portugal Cup, it seems to be the common name. Andrewa (talk) 22:40, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:


 * This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related page moves. – PeeJay 18:27, 19 January 2009 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.