User talk:Spiaggia12

September 2015
Hello, I'm Non-dropframe. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to World Football Elo Ratings— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. -- Non-Dropframe   talk   23:45, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Russia or USSR
hello I discuss the nomenclature used in the "Ranking by days as leader" (World Football Elo Ratings) because those recods were earned by the USSR. At the moment Russia will get lead the classification when it will write its name (and reference to 1,097 days) were under the nomination of the USSR. It is something like what happens with Australia. Australia has the best record in the OFC because at that time (December 1997) was part of this confederation and not the AFC. (see: colours in table All-time highest ratings) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.172.65.201 (talk) 22:36, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, and as all USSR records are transferred to Russia, they have been earned by Russia. Russia has inherited all results of USSR, just as USSR inherited all results from the former Russian Empire. As an example, the all time highest ranking of for Russia was achieved while the USSR existed, but is still listed under Russia because that is the standard practice by FIFA. The Germany ranking totals reflect days earned while Germany and West Germany, then as united Germany again. These results are not separated because they were achieved under various names. See the List of men's national association football teams for a list of how former teams are handled, including the successor teams that carrying on the legacy of the country that ceased existence. The Australia example doesn't apply in this case, since these reference is the highest rating achieved by the confederation, which included Australia at the time. The confederation didn't cease to exist at the time of Australia moving confederations, and perhaps a note should clarify this confusion. The approach with Australia may not be appropriate, either, because when Australia achieves a rating higher than it's current high point, but no other OFC team breaks the previous high, multiple entries for Australia would be required. Spiaggia12 (talk) 05:18, 4 June 2016 (UTC)