Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Romanian football champions/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was not promoted by Dabomb87 23:30, 30 December 2010 [1].

List of Romanian football champions edit

List of Romanian football champions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): BineMai 19:15, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because i believe it meets all the requirements to be a FL. Thank you BineMai 19:15, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Comments looks good: Nergaal (talk) 03:04, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • The name of the league changed in the 2000s. It should be mentioned and perhaps split into another section.
  • The lead is a bit short:
    • it should mention Dinamo also (it won 18, notably more than everybody else)
    • It should also mention how many different teams won it.
    • Bucharest won it 59 of 92 times.
  • It might be worth mentioning which years the winners qualified directly into the UEFA Champions League groups
    • Done. BineMai 13:39, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • There was more than one year. Also, it should say in the text that the champion qualified to the European Champion Clubs' Cup until 1992, and that the 1986 champion won the latter. Nergaal (talk) 01:14, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • There should be a sentence on the Steaua-Dinamo rivalry
    • Done. BineMai 13:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Please work on the intro a bit more (I've done some edits but there should be more). Nergaal (talk) 01:14, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are there no non-Romanian sources available?
    • Sadly not very many. BineMai 13:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Try to use those since it would look better. Nergaal (talk) 01:14, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is "Herzog, Jean Luca P. Niculescu and Harwester Cups" supposed to mean?
    • These were all names of the championship before Divizia A. BineMai 13:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, but the actual text does not say that. Say that in the text (with years) and give references. Nergaal (talk) 01:14, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Changed the title to Pre-Divizia A championships. BineMai 20:59, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The post-war years were dominated by CCA Bucureşti, UTA Arad and Petrolul Ploieşti. The 1960's saw the gradual emergence of Dinamo Bucureşti, needs citation
    • not done. Nergaal (talk) 01:14, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Don't have a ref for this one i just used the table information to compile this. BineMai 09:43, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • "emergence of Dinamo in the 60s" I bet there is a reference about the Steaua-Dinamo rivalry mentioning this. Nergaal (talk) 17:18, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • didn't find any ref for this should i remove the sentence? BineMai 12:13, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • winning the European Golden Shoe (for top scorer in Europe) twice, in 1975 and 1977 needs an actual citation
  • Say that in 2007-08 CFR was the first champion outside Bucharest in 16 years.

Nergaal (talk) 03:14, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've added a bit of text about the UEFA performances. Try to put in the exact dates, and some references. Nergaal (talk) 17:00, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done. And why should I add the Europa League statistics if this list is about champions which qualify to the Champions League? BineMai 21:11, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Neah, I did not mean to suggest adding anything about EL, just CL (i.e. the outcome/rewards fir the 1st place). Nergaal (talk) 02:35, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments - Ref 9 is a note not a reference. Interested in knowing why May is in a different language in Ref 4. Something seems to of gone wrong with the italics on Ref 8. "Florin Costea (Craiova) 17()" error here. Why do you shorten the names of the clubs after first mention in the tables? Also for the Clubs subsection, what do names with neither bold or italics represent? Afro (Nice Beaver) 23:43, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Fixed the refs. Regarding club names i thought there is no reason to list the full name each time. Normal text clubs represent clubs that are neither in the current season of the competition or clubs that still exist in lower divisions. BineMai 09:26, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • It should be noted that they still exist and have been relegated. How reliable is romaniansoccer.ro and Napit.co.uk. On the name issue, you don't seem to share this reason with the runner-up row. Afro (Nice Beaver) 20:09, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Fixed what you pointed. The sites are reliable, romaniansoccer.ro is unes in many Romanian football articles because it has one of the most complete (if not the most complete) statistics regarding this competition, and Napit.co.uk is used and accepted in wiki articles that involve the use of it's statistics. BineMai 11:21, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • That still doesn't give me specifics as to why they are deemed reliable. Afro (Nice Beaver) 13:05, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • What specifics are you looking for? BineMai 12:11, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well if other Featured articles use it, I would like to see where you're pointing to first of all. Plus I did find an editorial page on Romaniansoccer.ro and it appeared to be a fansite of sorts. Afro (Nice Beaver) 17:15, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • The editorial page you found presents the editorial team of the website and I'm pretty sure it isn't a fansite. BineMai 08:56, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Should i search for another ref insted of this one? BineMai 18:09, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • It depends on if these are reliable, which is all I'm asking. Afro (Nice Beaver) 18:11, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • While the sources are still being discussed at the Noticeboard I would like to bring up an issue of first party sources since the use seems to conflict with #5 of WP:ABOUTSELF. Afro (Nice Beaver) 07:50, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Changed the first party sources with others. BineMai 19:09, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • After the response regarding Romaniansoccer.ro I would now suggest the removal. I'm still unsure about Napit.co.uk I would suggest any articles which confirm the golden boot. Also a coloured cell needs to be accompanied by a symbol. Afro (Talk) 04:01, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Changed the Romaniasoccer and napit refs with others. BineMai 12:10, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • There still seems to be an issue regarding first party sources, to be more specific the LPF.ro is first party. Afro (Talk) 06:32, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not saying get rid of them, but it would be nice to have some third party sources backing up the information lpf.ro gives. Afro (Talk) 10:56, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's kind of hard to find reliable sources because there aren't many websites with statistics available for the Romanian Liga I and even if there are they tend to be in the same category as Romania Soccer.ro BineMai 11:47, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So you can't add sources from Newspapers? Afro (Talk) 10:44, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Added some sources. BineMai 16:11, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Little things I notice while scanning the page are the clubs in the Top scorer section are short like the discussion before, and Ref 8 doesn't source the runners-up until 1932/33 season, so how you've sourced 1909/10 to 1932/33 I do not know. Afro (Talk) 06:02, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're right the ref doesn't source the runners-up, must have missed that. BineMai 22:33, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So now the Runner-up's for 2 tables are completely unsourced. Afro (Talk) 11:35, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So what should i do because i haven't found a suitable ref for the runners up in the table. BineMai 20:26, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You can use the Ref 8 to source all the Runners-up from 1933/34 are you able to individually source the earlier seasons? Afro (Talk) 21:15, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have refs for the earlier seasons. BineMai 22:25, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments – Just a partial review, as I'm occupied at the moment. Writing looks a bit rough at first glance, and could use polishing before this is over

  • There's no need at all to have two Liga I links in the first three sentences. Anyone interested will have clicked on the first link, making the second one unneeded.
  • "Venus Bucuresti also the most prolific team during the early editions". Why is "also" being used here when this sentence doesn't expand on anything from before? A simple "was" would do as a replacement.
  • Couple of "it's" should be "its"
  • "The 2007–08 champions CFR Cluj was the first team...". To work grammatically, either change "champions" to "champion" or "was" to "were".
  • More overlinking: Months shouldn't be linked.
  • "due to Romanian's large UEFA coefficient...". Romanian's → Romania's.
  • Early championships: "The most succesfull team from this periods...". "succesfull" → "succesfull". Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:17, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose needs copyediting by native English speaker. Some of those issues, and some technical problems...

  • To assuage concerns over the potential misunderstanding of exactly what "football" means here, I'd suggest you say "...premier annual association football league competition."
  • Don't overlink team names in the lead. One link only per team is needed.
  • Same for Liga I, and Romania, and UEFA Champions League etc etc.
  • Typo in caption and lead (successfull) and no need for (team and cup pictured) - that's pretty obvious.
  • Eternal derby should be Eternal Derby.
  • "was won by a number of 22 teams representing 11 cities" no need for "a number of".
  • "winning 59 titles, or almost 2/3 of the editions" perhaps "with nearly two-thirds of all editions, 59 titles, being won by..."?
  • "Several times in history mark when a champion was not named." really odd English. What you're saying is that "The championship was not awarded a number of times..."

This is just the lead. I really suggest you appeal at WP:FOOTBALL for a native English speaker to help you with this. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:32, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still waiting for a response from someone down at WP:FOOTBALL. BineMai 21:24, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Romanian_football_champions/archive1&oldid=1136094037"