User talk:Eldumpo/Archive2

FA Cup round names
For every season of the FA Cup since the introduction of qualifying rounds to the competition, it has been the custom for the post-qualifying rounds to be suffixed with the word "Proper". This is to differentiate the "Rounds Proper" from the "Rounds Qualifying". The articles for the last few seasons have included the world "Proper", so I don't see any reason why the older ones shouldn't too. – PeeJay 21:13, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think evidence of "general usage" is required here. The Football Association uses specific nomenclature for the rounds of their competition, and so should we. After all, since there are technically two "First Rounds" in each season of the FA Cup (First Round Qualifying and First Round Proper), it would be ambiguous to simply refer to the First Round Proper as the "First Round". – PeeJay 21:33, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that the rounds may not be referred to as "First Round Proper" or "Second Round Proper" in the common vernacular, but in an encyclopaedic context, using "First Round" or "Second Round" on their own is, in my opinion, ambiguous, even when the other rounds are still referred to as "First Round Qualifying", etc. Do we not use UEFA's terminology when naming the Champions League or Europa League rounds? For the same reason, I believe that we should use the FA's nomenclature for FA Cup rounds. – PeeJay 22:01, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

?
Hi there DUMPO, VASCO from Portugal here,

Regarding this message you sent to User:Jogurney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jogurney#Miquel_Mart.C3.ADnez), will just say the following:

Since this is my first message to you (i have already conveyed to Jogurney), i explain my approach on the subject at hand: i feel references should be articles from newspapers, website announcements, articles and match reports from UEFA/FIFA; links should be official player profile of given team, and one from the thousands of links you can find with stats (i tend to choose links from the country of the player in question).

From Jogurney's reply, i see he has no desire to discuss matters at me no more (after messaging me ONCE - and i politely replied), and i feel you have the same approach. If you have read my summaries, yes sometimes i exaggerate a bit on that part, but NEVER have i insulted another user in my summaries or talkpages (note, i said users, not vandals, those are not users).

OK, no problem with that approach from you guys (i feel that hardly anyone at WP is willing to address me, for reasons that escape me), as long as we both keep working to improve the site...

Keep up the good work, VASCO - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 22:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I see man...It will be hard to comply (human nature :) ) but i will try my best, namely doing the following: whenever i see an article in such a shape, i will, if relocating REFS as LINKS, immediately browse the web for related REFS.

Sorry for any inconvenience, keep it up, have a great week,

VASCO - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 15:35, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

RE: Gary Stevens
None of the sources I have mention anything about a player-manager spell. Sorry I couldn't help more. Kosack (talk) 13:00, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Rollback
Hi Eldumpo - I've added the WP:ROLLBACK flag per your request. Happy editing! Pedro : Chat  08:09, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Powell
I don't understand why you have undone my piping on the Powell page. WP:DABSTYLE relates to disambiguation pages; John Adams (disambiguation) is a disambiguation page, but Powell is not. Obscurasky (talk) 09:04, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Made a hash of the above post. I should have written Powell (surname), not Powell. Hope that's clearer. Obscurasky (talk) 21:51, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Robert Jones (footballer born 1868)
Hmm...it seems you've got me there. My source is mcfcstats.co.uk (all flash so I can't link you to anything, unfortunately), but your questioning made me go back over the stats with a toothcomb and it seems you've caught me out. Man City have the annoying (for me) interesting distinction of having had a whole load of Jones' play for them in their early years - five of them in about their first 12 seasons and more afterwards. Many of those players are called only "Jones" on the line-ups charts on the website. I've been compiling season articles for all of City's history and thought I had spotted an exception where one player signed at a random point in the middle of one season then played most of his games over the following full season and his Wikipedia article had simply only picked up on the full season. Having gone back over the details I was wrong - not only did I misread the page (which would have put his first appearance at 1893 and totally thrown the infobox, and probably alerted me to the error - but also I missed that the two appearances for "Jones" in the 1893-94 season were not marked as the first and second appearance for a player but were marked as the two final appearances. With retrospect and a lot of digging, I've worked out that actually these were the final appearances of a player called A. Jones who played his first games in the 1891-92 season and didn't play during 92-93. Clearly this season out totally threw me, and I made the connection with Robert Jones instead as his appearances were at least in a contiguous season.

I'll revert my changes now, but the plus side of my interference is I can confirm for you that Robert Jones' appearances for City were 1894-95, which had question marks on the infobox before. Thanks for commenting, I'd never have spotted that otherwise. Incidentally, can I ask your own sources for having the know-how to question my changes? Falastur2 Talk 14:54, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply too. That info somewhat mimics what I've got except that my website is quite explicit (when you take the time to be certain) that A. Jones first played in 1891-92, albeit for one game IIRC. I've otherwise got a comprehensive list of player appearances, the only problem being matching player surnames to first names. In this respect my primary source of reference is this page and had I your access I'd be looking up any players on OldElPaso's list who's first names aren't known. That, however, would be time consuming in the extreme and I wouldn't wish the work on you - I couldn't take up that much of your time with a clear conscience. Thanks for the offer, however, and if I ever have a future problem I may just get in touch. Supposing you ever have a query on City or City players, do get in touch though (although I have to admit that several other Wikipedians here have far better info on City - OldElPaso included). Falastur2  Talk 15:34, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That's very true, I was trying to work out why the first appearance wasn't listed. Incidentally, my website lists the exact date of each game plus who was on the team-list and who scored so I can give you the exact dates of his City career if you want ;) I'm always hesitant to use mcfcstats.co.uk as a reference though, since its flash nature means that it's slow to navigate. Falastur2  Talk 15:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Football stub categories
Further to previous postings I would like to raise a discussion relating to the number of football-bio stub categories, and the rationale for them. Category:English football biography stubs provides links to numerous sub-categories just within the 'English bio' area. These are basically sub-divided by position and decade, thus creating a large number of stub categories. I am unsure what the purpose of all these sub-divisions are, and who benefits from them?

This issue first came up when I started trying to change the wording of the stub categories (and the templates) so as nationality was not implied when it was not actually known. See the successful log for the one stub category I did succeed in renaming, but it was quite a task to do that, and given my question above, I'm not sure if there's a need to do this if there's agreement that the current football-bio-stub-categories can be substantially thinned out. Further info on the details relating to the log move is at. I think the wording at Template:england-footy-bio-stub is appropriate and covers people who substantially played football in a particular country, without necessarily being a 'national' of that country. Clearly the issue relates to more than just the English ones although I guess these are most numerous. Eldumpo (talk) 10:58, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I like the new wording and would support changing all the templates and categories to match.
 * The splits have been done because in the past it was found that categories with over 800 articles made it harder for editors to find the articles to expand and so the stub sorting project attempt to split categories when they get to 800. Waacstats (talk) 21:46, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Allfootballers.com
Unfortunately, I've not heard anything yet about when the site will be back online, but there's been no indication that it will be anytime soon. As soon as I hear anything, I'll let you know though. Cheers, Big  Dom  22:15, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Clicking on minor edit help by mistake
Replace the code I gave you with the following instead, which tells the page to make this code the top-priority over Wikipedia's own code for that particular line of text that you want to hide:

This should work; I just tested it. Gary King ( talk ) 16:35, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Rangers Article
I have made an attempt to alter the section that is currently disputed here under heading five, as you replied before and said you would be happy to give any other opinions i would be greatful if you could lend an opinion again on my proposed alteration. Thanks in advance(Monkeymanman (talk) 16:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC))

Category on FIFA World Cup players
Hello. I think there has been past discussions on this issue, but they probably happened a long time ago, so it is perhaps a bit hard for me to find. It may be a good idea for you to raise this issue on the football project talk page: Wikipedia Talk:FOOTBALL. The current convention is to include all squad players regardless of whether they play a match. For example, Category:2006 FIFA World Cup players include all 32x23=736 squad players.Chanheigeorge (talk) 20:59, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

World Cup player categories
It appears that the categories for World Cup players (e.g. Category:1930 FIFA World Cup players) are used to collect all players who were in the squad for that tournament, rather than those who actually played in a game, despite the name of the category and the fact that the category explanatory text has the wording 'players who participated in'. I think these categories should only be for players who actually played in a match at the World Cup finals. I agree it is still noteworthy to collate who was in the squad but this is already being picked up by the squad list articles (e.g. 1930 FIFA World Cup squads) and the individual team templates (e.g. ). At present, there seems to be no means in Wikipedia to easily gather people who actually played a game in the finals. This change would tie in with other competitions in Wikipedia i.e. you would not include someone in Category:La Liga footballers if they had only ever appeared on the bench. At the very least I feel the category names should change and the introductory text should be altered (if the consensus is to record squads rather than those who played). What are people's views? Eldumpo (talk) 09:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I prefer the current convention, for the following reasons:
 * The general public and media seem to recognize a player as a "2010 FIFA World Cup player" once he is included in the squad, regardless of whether he plays a match. (On the other hand, does a 16-year-old who signs for a La Liga club qualifies as a La Liga player? I don't know....)
 * Another problem is obviously that we will have to go back to check the database of previous World Cups to see who plays a match or not. Besides, with the 2010 squad announcement coming tomorrow, people will start to populate the category Category:2010 FIFA World Cup players. What do we tell them? Not to add a player to the category until he plays a match? Or remove a player from the category afterwards if he does not play a match? It will be a logistical nightmare.
 * We also have Category:FIFA World Cup-winning players. Currently every player on the winning squad, whether he plays or not, gets a medal, so I think we have to include all 23 players into this category. So we may have the strange case of somebody in Category:FIFA World Cup-winning players but not in Category:2010 FIFA World Cup players.
 * I think if you really want to be totally accurate about the category names, we can call them, say, "2010 FIFA World Cup squad players" or "2010 FIFA World Cup squad members". Of course, at the very least we should change the introductory text to properly define the categories. Chanheigeorge (talk) 09:49, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed, modern convention in international tournaments is that all squad members, including those who did not play, are recognised as full participants; this has also been retro-acted (see here). Changing the wording and perhaps category title is a good idea. Pretty Green (talk) 12:58, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that squad players should be included in these categories, but as mentioned above, the descriptive text for the category ought to be changed to reflect this. Jogurney (talk) 12:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

List of Wales international footballers
Have you seen that the original page we created has been changed to a list of 25+ capped players, with the content of the original containing all players moved to List of Wales international footballers (alphabetical). Whilst the principle of having a separate list is a sound one (due to file size and ability to list in capped order) I'm not convinced the file naming of each is the best way - the England/Scotland pages are done that way but not really a consensus? The original page name is now wrongly named as it is not a list of all Welsh internationals, and indeed another page exists where they are all listed. Assuming the change is to remain though, then the page history of the original should be moved to the 'alphabetical' page. Any thoughts? Eldumpo (talk) 20:24, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * When I created the complete list of England players I tried to move this from List of England international footballers (alphabetical) to List of England international footballers but was shouted down, including some fairly abusive comments, so I backed off in the end, although I still don't see the need for two lists, one of which is very incomplete. As for the Welsh lists, I feel the same - the complete list is far more useful than a list with an arbitrary cut-off point, (the full list can be sorted in any order, including by number of caps) but I have my doubts that our views will prevail.


 * You are absolutely right, however, that the way it was done was totally wrong and that the article should have been moved properly so that the history was moved as well. This will need to be done by an administrator. Likewise the talk page needs moving. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with both of you regarding the naming of the article but, as Daemonic said, the current format seems to be favoured and the likelihood of a change seems small. Kosack (talk) 08:06, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I will perhaps look to raise WP:Footy comments about the change, but also the specific issue about page history. Eldumpo (talk) 19:15, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Posted now at Football#Category:Lists of_association football players by national team. Eldumpo (talk) 19:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Update
Thanks for the note - moving the full contents from one talk page to another was a simple cut & paste job. Unfortunately, this means that the edit history was left behind. As you say, this should have been done by an admin, but no-one came along to do it. If you think it's important, I guess you need to ask an admin for help. Maybe you should use the tag.

As for Pardew: at the start of the season, I predicted that he would be sacked before the end of September, but that was because I thought that Cortese would get impatient. In the event, it seems that he was in breach of the club's disciplinary rules, so he had to go, regardless of the results on the pitch. In reality, we (as mere fans) will never know the truth unless Pardew writes an autobiography (unlikely to be a best seller).

It still looks as though we might get Adkins, but as I had never really heard of him until ten days ago, I'm don't know whether or not I should be bothered who gets the job as long as he gets us back into the Championship and eventually to the Premiership. I can dream!!. Cheers. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 12:51, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Ivan Golac
Thanks for the note - unfortunately my PC at home is out of action at present, so I have to reply from work. Hopefully, I'll be able to add something meaningful by the end of the week, if the PC is repaired by then. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 08:05, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm still having problems being able to add any meaningful content from my home computer - one thing I do see however is that the article says that Golac only made the one international appearance (against Algeria; see http://www.eu-football.info/_player.php?id=6974) but in the interview with Jeremy Wilson, Golac bemoans the fact that he only made four international appearances. This statistic is also repeated in the "ABC of the Saints" - strange!   Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 15:49, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note - I will try to add a bit more detail to his Saints career shortly, I promise!. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 09:56, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added a bit more about his Saints career - I hope you'll indulge me with the quotes - I was part of that Dell crowd back in 1978!    Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Fourth Division2
Hi! As you can see there is no "Fourth Division2" section in 1976–77 Football League. It was a mistake so the bot changed  in. In order to link the second "Fourth Division" section you had to write instead  (note the space). Basilicofresco (msg) 13:42, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

George Richards (English footballer)
I've checked in Bristol Rovers Football Club: The Definitive History and there's very little information in there about George Richards. All it says is that he joined in 1911 and left in 1913. He made his debut for Rovers on 21 October 1911, so if you have a date for his final appearance for Derby then that would help with making some sort of judgement as to whether it's the same person.

The article as it stands describes him as a wing half, but looking at the Rovers line-ups for the two seasons he was with us, he only played at centre forward and inside left, he didn't play any games at half back at all. I don't know how married to their position players were in those days, and how plausible it is that he played in one position for one club and a different position for another. &mdash; Gasheadsteve Talk to me 18:57, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

George Richards (English footballer)
His date of death is also given as 01-Nov-1959 at www.englandfootballonline.com, whilst ww.englandstats.com gives his place of birth as Castle Donnington, Leicestershire. Hope that helps. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 08:30, 31 August 2010 (UTC) p.s. Sorry about the typos; that's what comes of editing on my laptop while eating breakfast. Who says I'm a wikipedia addict?