Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2017 January 11

= January 11 =

Article/DAB request
I would like to request a disambiguous page for "Detroit Steel." There is a new tv series coming to History Channel as well as a comic book, but there is only a page for the comic.

Thank you. Kristin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kristinroyer (talk • contribs) 16:55, 11 January 2017 (UTC)


 * For convenience, our article is at Detroit Steel, and Detroit Steel (TV series) and Detroit Steel (comic book) would be the likely new titles.
 * A disambig page would make most sense if we already had a page for a show. That being said, you can make a DAB page right now if you'd like, see info at Disambiguation. You could also make an article for the show: be WP:BOLD! Another option is to post at Articles_for_creation. Finally, while it's not really a problem, this probably isn't the best place for this type of request, either AfC above or WP:Village pump would be better for similar requests in the future. Also I put this question in it's own section, that will happen automatically if you use the button at the top of this page. SemanticMantis (talk) 19:13, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

FIFA Club World Cup in Europe
Hi! Is there a reason why European soccer teams and supporters don't take the FIFA Club World Cup seriously? They seem to think that the Champions League is the ultimate prize. Teams from other continents seem to value the Club World Cup more than the European clubs. Why is this the case? Thanks, Jith12 (talk) 21:02, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Should anything emanating from FFA be taken seriously? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:38, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Good one! On the other hand, the FIFA World Cup is the most popular sporting event in the world (in terms of viewership)! Now that their disgraced former president and staff have been given the boot, I think that we can begin to trust them more! Regards, Jith12 (talk) 22:23, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Viewership counting is one of the honesty issues with the old staff. Depending on the day, they reported random numbers between 1 billion and 3 billion as the viewership of the World Cup. Then, to justify the numbers, they would say that anyone who happened to see the broadcast as they walked past a television must count as a viewer. Better analysis puts viewership between 200 and 300 million people - depending on the definition of a "viewer". I went through a lot of that discrepancy recently when doing a report that included television usage. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 19:26, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Quite a thorough analysis of your question here - http://www.goal.com/en/news/1717/editorial/2014/12/12/6987312/why-does-the-club-world-cup-still-struggle-for-relevance Wymspen (talk) 22:49, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi! When I open the link that you provided, I am redirected to http://www.sportingnews.com/soccer Is there any other way I can view the article? Just by looking at the URL, I can tell that it will answer my question spot on. Thanks, Jith12 (talk) 23:01, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Try http://www.goal.com/en-us/news/7711/club-world-cup/2014/12/12/7018182/why-does-the-club-world-cup-still-struggle-for-relevance Alansplodge (talk)
 * Yes - that is the same article. Clearly the internet is not as international as it is thought to be.but I don't have the IT skills to understand why it does things like that. Wymspen (talk) 09:44, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Did it work? Alansplodge (talk) 11:08, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi! The link still doesn't work. I tried putting the link into the Wayback Machine and it had some archives of the page. However, the archives redirected me to the live version of . Is there any other way to view the link? Thanks, Jith12 (talk) 20:43, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I have replied direct to your talk page. Alansplodge (talk) 19:07, 14 January 2017 (UTC)