Template:Did you know nominations/Brazil 76-0 Timor-Leste (futsal)

Brazil 76-0 Timor-Leste (futsal)
Created/expanded by Bar Code Symmetry (talk). Self nom at 02:12, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * ... that Brazil defeated Timor-Leste 76-0 in futsal in 2006, the current world record?


 * Symbol possible vote.svg Even with the quotation box the prose is shorter than 1500 characters.--Tomobe03 (talk) 21:23, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * What is the exact number? Maybe I can work it up? Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 22:35, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * DYKcheck reports 853 prose characters (which does not include the quotation). M AN d ARAX  •  XAЯA b ИA M  03:34, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I expanded it more, can I get a recount?Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 16:06, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: After my recent expansion, not only has it been expanded five fold, it has expanded ten fold. Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 19:08, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It was the absolute length of the article that the reviewer was indicating was a problem: it has to be at least 1,500 characters of prose excluding references, subheaders, lists, and extended quotations. By my count it's currently 2,508 and meets that criterion. See the Rules link in the box at the top right of Template talk:Did you know. However it also says there that an expansion must be 5-fold without counting material taken from other articles, and I see that one extended section in the article refers to a "main article" elsewhere. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:28, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It was a five fold expansion before I put that template in, and the main article has no description of what happened each day; I wrote it all. Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 19:09, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Symbol delete vote.svg Referencing is not up to par. Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:37, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Can I improve the refs or is it too late? Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 02:46, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg If you get a move on. Remember, DYK rules are 1 reference per paragraph except for lede, plot, summaries, etc. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:05, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh. I'll try to add some... Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 04:24, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Added eleven refs. Is it good to go now? Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 05:25, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Needs a thorough copyedit. I see double periods, references before periods, etc. The little blurb about Brazil tying Portugal should be cited. Also, please add accessdates and if possible author information for the online sources. Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:25, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 13:59, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Pictogram voting keep.svg Paraphrasing looks fine. AGF on foreign language sources. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:26, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg Futsal Planet, on which most of this article is based, is not a reliable source. Cunard (talk) 10:03, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Can you give a reason? I would not call this article "based" on Futsal Planet, I used it for match reports. Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 20:08, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * There is little indication that the Futsal Planet pages have received editorial oversight. I will treat these pages of statistics and scores as IMDb filmography pages, which are generally accepted for uncontentious information. However, the Futsal Planet pages are being used to cite more than statistics and scores, which I will discuss below. I have also found some failed verification and sourcing concerns:

http://oglobo.globo.com/esportes/mat/2006/10/14/286106030.asp is also a deadlink. Neither of the Globo links work despite the fact that http://oglobo.globo.com/ is accessible. Cunard (talk) 04:53, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * "Brazil was the favorite to win the Lusophony Games ... Brazil was one of the top futsal teams in the rankings at the time. " – these unsourced assertions need to be sourced to secondary sources.
 * I tried to find a futsal ranking site that had a history like the fifa rankings, but was unsuccessful. Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 20:30, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * "This was a little over one goal per minute. It beat the previous record, 26–0, and was the world record for 4 days. Brazil did not play that day." – this content is unsourced.
 * Hmm....I'll add a ref after 26-0. Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 20:30, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * "Brazil crushed Macau 27–0. This would have been the world record if the match would have taken place a few days earlier. It was the 2nd largest win at the time." – the second sentence is not verified by the Futsal Planet source and is considered original research if there is no secondary sourcing.
 * Absolutely right. I'll delete it. Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 20:30, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * "October 12th was a rest day. Brazil was overlooking their next match against Timor-Leste, and looking forward to the game vs. Portugal." – this content is unsourced. I also do not understand what "overlooking ..." means and why "looking forward to ..." is relevant.
 * "The Match" section is unsourced.
 * Maybe you are unfamiliar with, but the report is basically the same as a ref.
 * "Brazil knew that the game would be a win, but still played their best." – without a citation to a secondary source, this appears to be your own opinion.
 * I guess so.
 * http://oglobo.globo.com/esportes/mat/2006/10/13/286091746.asp is a deadlink.
 * I think that the news article was deleted from the site or something because it was there a few days ago. However, I found a replacement. Just reminding you, I'm writing a DYK not a GA. Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 20:30, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You note above "I guess so" when I wrote that "Brazil knew that the game would be a win, but still played their best" is your own opinion. All original research should be excised from the article per the policy No original research. I know what "overlooking" means. I question how Brazil "fail[ed] to notice, perceive, or consider" their next match against Timor-Leste. This also appears to be more of your own opinion. Neither a DYK nor a GA should contain original research. I agree this is not a GA review. This is a DYK review. That previous DYK reviews have been cursory and have failed to catch policy violations is no reason that the present ones should be cursory as well. It is not too much to expect that the main page should showcase only articles that do not violate policy and do not contain dead links. Cunard (talk) 00:33, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I know what OR is/stands for. I 100% agree with what you said. I am already at work on fixing the page, plus I found a new source with a list of players and goalscorers that I am adding. Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 00:46, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Because you know what OR means, please do not include in articles your personal opinion or content not attributable to secondary sources. Cunard (talk) 00:49, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed. How does it look now? Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 21:53, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Much better.

For the sources, please link to the article in the  parameter instead of a Google Translate link. http://www.bonde.com.br/?id_bonde=1-38-4-324-20061013, http://esportes.terra.com.br/noticias/0,,OI1189250-EI2200,00-Futsal+Brasil+massacra+Timor+Leste+por+a.html, http://www.futsalplanet.com/matches/matches-02.asp?ParId=3368, and http://oglobo.globo.com/esportes/mat/2006/10/14/286106030.asp should be fixed.

After changing the  parameter, please add a   parameter.

If you would like to retain a Google Translate link, feel free to include it in the language parameter. Something like:

For http://www.bonde.com.br/?id_bonde=1-38-4-324-20061013, the  parameter should be "Brasil aplicou a maior goleada de sua história". The English translation can be placed in  Several other Portuguese-titled references should also be rendered in this format. I make these recommendations for verification purposes. If a source becomes a dead link, a search for the English title of the article will return no results, whereas a search for the Portuguese title might.

The dead link http://oglobo.globo.com/esportes/mat/2006/10/14/286106030.asp has not been fixed. I recommend that you use an archiving service such as WebCite to prevent link rot, especially with websites that delete their articles very quickly.

"Brazil wanted to beat Timor-Leste more than Portugal did because of goal difference." – I do not see this in the source. Would you quote the part of the source that verifies it? Cunard (talk) 00:00, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I have fixed the dead link using the Internet Archive. Perhaps you can restore the other dead link using the Internet Archive. I have revised this reference according to the suggestions I made above. I hope you will revise the rest. I would do so myself, though I don't have the time to do so because I promised yesterday to review Template:Did you know nominations/Ho v. Taflove. Cunard (talk) 00:09, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 20:44, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Would you address my above comment about "Brazil wanted to beat Timor-Leste more than Portugal did because of goal difference"? Cunard (talk) 23:54, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Near the end where they are quoting Reinaldo Simoes <span style="-moz-border-radius:1em;border:1px solid black;font-size:11px;background-color:red;color:white;padding:1px 4px 1px 5px">Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 02:54, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * My reading of Reinaldo Simoes' comment is not that Brazil wanted to beat Timor-Leste more than Portugal did. He said that the team needed to score high so they could have an advantage over Portugal in their next day's game. Cunard (talk) 03:24, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * That's basically what goal difference is. <span style="-moz-border-radius:1em;border:1px solid black;font-size:11px;background-color:red;color:white;padding:1px 4px 1px 5px">Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 20:19, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * They do not mean the same thing. The source does not say that Portugal wanted to beat Timor-Leste less than Brazil. Cunard (talk) 23:24, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Brazil wanted to defeat Timor Leste by more than 56 goals, because they were tied in points, and the winner would be chosen by goal difference. That is what I'm trying to say. <span style="-moz-border-radius:1em;border:1px solid black;font-size:11px;background-color:red;color:white;padding:1px 4px 1px 5px">Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 20:33, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the explanation. I have revised the sentence to say "Brazil wanted to beat Timor-Leste by more points than Portugal did because of goal difference." Is this accurate? Cunard (talk) 23:48, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * If you change "points" to "goals" then yes. <span style="-moz-border-radius:1em;border:1px solid black;font-size:11px;background-color:red;color:white;padding:1px 4px 1px 5px">Bar Code Symmetry  (Talk) 01:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Revised. Thank you for patiently addressing my suggestions for improvement. Cunard (talk) 09:42, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Cunard (talk) 09:42, 21 November 2011 (UTC)