Jump to content

Talk:El Clásico

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nwaauyjrlomh (talk | contribs) at 00:20, 3 April 2019 (Manolo Sanchís' appearence: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconFootball: Spain C‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Spanish football task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
WikiProject iconSpain C‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Di Stéfano nationalities

Should there be a Colombian flag beside the Argentine and Spanish flags? He has played 4 times for Colombia but it is not recognised by FIFA. Mobile mundo (talk) 14:55, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's because it wasn't the colombian national team but a team made of the best players playing in Dimayor (Colombian national league). --Brgesto (talk) 15:37, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2017

Not done: Other language Wikipedias are not reliable, as they, like the English Wikipedia, are user generated. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 01:01, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Longest undefeated runs

{ Boots9999 (talk) 23:09, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Change :

Longest undefeated runs

Games Club Period
14 Real Madrid 31 January 1931 – 3 February 1935
13 Barcelona 1 November 1917 – 3 June 1928

To :

Longest undefeated runs

Games Club Period
14 Barcelona 1 November 1917 – 3 June 1928
9 Real Madrid 31 January 1932 – 3 February 1935

[1]


[2]

Section Record : Longest undefeated : It's wrong. Real Madrid doesn't have 14 games undefeated between 1931 and 1935. They lost in the League 3-1 in 5th april 1931 ! The correct answer is 9 games between 31 January 1932 and 3 feb 1935. The same for Barcelona : there are not 13 games but 14 between 1 nov 1917 and 3 june 1928. Source: List of Clasico matches in the Wikipedia French page. And also in bdfutbol.com/p/p.php?id=286 thank you to make the changes !

References

  1. ^ https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Cl%C3%A1sico
  2. ^ bdfutbol.com/p/p.php?id=286

Semi-protected edit request on 19 September 2017

In Goalscorers section -> Suarez didn't score 4 goals in copa del rey. 195.114.29.7 (talk) 10:23, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. SparklingPessimist Scream at me! 15:12, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 15 March 2018

85.4.128.153 (talk) 13:29, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Error : Most consecutive games undefeated in the league : Barcelona 7 (6 wins) and not 5 wins ! Real Madrid 7 (5 wins)

Please correct !

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Spintendo      14:48, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Number of matches

Which info is correct? A lot of reliable media are now reporting that both teams are currently at 95 wins in head-to-head matches (241 total official matches), while some other are listing 240 official matches with 95 wins for Real / 94 wins for Barca as of 27 February 2019. I think the problem is 1902 Copa de la Coronación, which is not recognized by the Spanish football federation, but the media and other sources are usually including it apparently, because other competitions (league, Europe, supercup) are 100% correct. Snowflake91 (talk) 11:21, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The cup's wiki articles in both English and Spanish (with links to other sites) declare it to be an unofficial and/or friendly competition. So I would say that the 240 figure is correct. Crowsus (talk) 11:57, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As of the 1-0 win for Barcelona on March 2 2019, most media cites Barcelona as ahead 96-95, and this website gives a breakdown. The stats are currently poorly/not sourced, so these need to be added or the stats adjusted. Greenman (talk) 03:56, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Added 96-95 now since thats what media are reporting, however thefinalball.com is not a reliable website, but still better than nothing I guess. It actually makes sence, "competitive game" is not the same as "official game", that cup was a full competitive game back in 1902 even if the Spanish federation does not recognize it today, it cannot be included in the "exhibition game" section since it was definitely not a friendly match. Snowflake91 (talk) 11:02, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[Edit conflict: I wrote the comment below before User:Snowflake91 added their comment but posted it after. How can you say The FinalBall is not reliable but then use it as a basis for explaining the discrepancy? I think this will have to go to the project for better consensus since you have now changed your mind a day after coming to a different decision...] Hi User:Greenman, for one thing, TheFinalBall contains user generated content so it can't be relied upon as a source (see here). But thankfully, I have looked and it explains the issue: as stated above, they included the 1902 Copa de la Coronación which the RFEF doesn't recognise as official. The only club which does claim it is winners Athletic Bilbao as they want to add another cup win to their total. So that's -1 win for Barcelona overall. I will add a note explaining this. Crowsus (talk) 11:18, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We cannot use our own statistics, if every single reliable media is now reporting that Barcelona leads 96-95, then we cannot simply use 95-95 because we are assuming that the anomaly in statistics is that 1902 cup. Snowflake91 (talk) 12:18, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I've now changed my mind too, thanks for adding the note on the article and 'promoting' the extra match in question in the Matches list. So at least now it's consistent and there's a suitable explanation. But as you said, it's very clear that's where the anomaly comes from so I don't know why you're doubting it/yourself now. I see we have a warrior refusing to accept that and reverting, so keep an eye on that. Crowsus (talk) 12:20, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I bet that there are reliable Spanish reports with tables similar to this, but I dont know how to search in Spanish articles; this goal.com would be okay to use as a source, but I have no idea where those idiots found 179 league games, 179+36+8+20 = 243 and not 242 so their table is obviously wrong. Snowflake91 (talk) 12:37, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Added Marca source which claims that 1902 was a fully competitive Copa match, RSSSF also claims that 1902 match was competitive, so it should be clear now. Snowflake91 (talk) 10:49, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Manolo Sanchís' appearence

Did he really played 43 maches? In other languages there are records of 41, 42 and 43. which is correct? Can anyone do a fact check? If wiki tells lie, the affect is wide.--Nwaauyjrlomh (talk) 00:20, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]