Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Players

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject Football/Players page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8: 3 months

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Custom template for goalkeepers

I don't think "Goals" column is particularly helpful in player's data (appearances, team, year, goals) if the player is a goalkeeper. "Goals conceded", "Penalties saved" etc. makes more sense. BurakUeda (talk) 01:54, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTSTATS applies. Giant Snowman 12:07, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On Loan Vs Signed in Club Stats

When a player is on loan, and then is signed by that club, should the club stats subtotal reflect both the loan season and the signed seasons, or should there be separate subtotals? Froglife94 (talk) 02:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm now wondering the same thing, as nearly every article I've seen follows the "loan is not included" practice, and yet recently, my edit to bring Martin Ødegaard to that standard was reverted [1] by an experienced editor saying "includes loan spell". Has the consensus changed without me noticing—and without pretty much any other article following suit—or is Ødegaard's article somehow different? Anwegmann (talk) 04:47, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They should be separate. Matty got it wrong at Ødegaard. Robby.is.on (talk) 23:50, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fully agree with Robby - they are separate spells and should be treated as such. The only exception is when a player has two separate loan spells with the same club in the same season, from the same parent club. Giant Snowman 08:57, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Linking Football player or Association football?

While most articles seem to link to say "football/soccer player", I've seen some articles link the article about people who play a code of football, i.e "football player/soccer player". Which should be used?

It seems that most of the well-known players use the most common method, while less well-known ones (at least less well-known ones for people outside the country they're from or that they play in, e.g an Australian playing in the EFL League One or Two who almost nobody outside England or Australia knows about unless they either like that club/player or watch a lot of English football, or if he's in their EA FC Ultimate Team). Schestos (talk) 12:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It should link to the sport imho, so be [[Association football|footballer]]. Giant Snowman 17:00, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What counts as an honour?

Recently added an honour for Jeppe Grønning for the Danish 2nd divisions in 2011–12, which was reverted. While FC Fyn did not outright gain promotion (as it was not possible), they did win the west league and were subsequently promoted after defeating HIK. While I understand in some areas that a 6th place team gaining promotion via play-offs would not count as an honour, in this case Fyn did both (a) win their league in the division and (b) were the sole promoted team. I’m wondering what sort of MOS there is regarding situations like this, if there is one at all. Thanks for any input. Sunny☀️Tango (talk • edits) 16:56, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wining a league should be an honour - the promotion itself is not. All additions should also be directly cited to reliable source(s) which confirm the player in question won that specific honour. Giant Snowman 17:01, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And I think that’s fair, counting winning the league rather than promotion as numerous teams could gain promotion depending on the league. To the second point, a clear majority of articles referencing honours are already cited in the body of text preceding the honours section.

In this particular case, as you’re familiar with the edit in question, would Soccerway be sufficient as a reference? I’m typically on the fence about using websites like this as they may have different ways of counting honours opposed to Wiki standards. Sunny☀️Tango (talk • edits) 17:45, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The referencing should be repeated, so that the 'Honours' section has every honour clearly and directly referenced. Soccerway is fine. Giant Snowman 18:36, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When Sources Conflict on Player Statistics

When SoccerBase and Soccerway conflict on a player's statistics, which source should be used? Froglife94 (talk) 15:49, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen preference given to Soccerway; however, I'm equally interested in a more consensus-based answer to this question. Anwegmann (talk) 19:27, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I say it's case specific. FYI, Soccerway includes play-offs with league games. Giant Snowman 19:29, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]