Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Malmö FF in Europe/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 promoted by Giants2008 23:06, 6 February 2012 [1].

Malmö FF in Europe edit

Malmö FF in Europe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Reckless182 (talk) 21:20, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Malmö FF is a Swedish association football club that have achieved both domestic and international success. The club's most notable feat is reaching the 1979 European Cup Final. The club also reached the quarter-finals of the Cup Winner's Cup twice and played once in the Intercontinental Cup, the only Swedish team to have played a competitive match outside Europe. The nominated list consists of statistics from all matches played by Malmö FF in official UEFA and FIFA competition, complete with references for all matches. I believe that the list meets all of the FL criteria and I hope that my fellow editors feel the same! --Reckless182 (talk) 21:20, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 22:15, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per previous discussions here and here, consensus was reached that these type of articles should not be lists. An example is Liverpool F.C. in European football which is a good article. NapHit (talk) 15:11, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, I am aware of Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. However, Rosenborg BK in Europe was promoted to FL on 9 June of 2011 and I've looked at that list for guidance. No objections were made then. --Reckless182 (talk) 19:22, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, there is a substantial difference between clubs such as FC Barcelona, Liverpool, Malmö FF and Rosenborg BK. The two former clubs have a much longer history in European club competition play. I don't believe there is enough material for the two later clubs to write a FA about their European endeavours , but that's just my opinion. --Reckless182 (talk) 19:26, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is a substantial difference between the clubs, but that does not mean you cannot create an article about their participation in European football, after all they did reach the final in 1979. I think there would be more than enough material, especially in books about the club's history in the competitions. Thanks for pointing out the Rosenborg list, i'll nominate it for removal, per discussions that have previously taken place. NapHit (talk) 17:34, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that the summary of Malmö FFs European endeavours that you are requesting belongs in an article named History of Malmö FF. As of the moment this article has not been written and a reader would have go to the history section of Malmö FF to read a shorter summary of the clubs history, of which its European matches are a part of. This is a list of the clubs matches in UEFA tournaments and not a summary of the clubs international competition history in prose, such a summary belongs in the article I described above. I would be more than happy to rename the list "List of Malmö FF matches in UEFA tournaments' or 'List of Malmö FF matches in Europe' if this would help. As I pointed out in the removal of FL status discussion for Rosenborg BK in Europe, we don't classify List of Malmö FF seasons as an article with a prose to summarize Rosenborg BKs domestic matches, why should we do the opposite for its international matches? --Reckless182 (talk) 22:03, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments seeing as the consensus id for the list to remain a list I'll strike my oppose and review the list:

  • The tables fail WP:ACCESS at the moment, MOS:DTT explains what needs to be done to make them comply with access and I've done an example on the first table, make sure every entry is on a separate lin, or the whole table will be shaded not just the row header
    • I've done the first couple of tables to bring them in line, the rest I'll leave for Reckless to do. —Cliftonian (talk) 00:21, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refs that are PDFs need format=PDF adding to the citation
    • Okay.
  • Don't think the flags are needed in the footnotes section, looks like decoration to me, linking to the countries is enough
    • Okay.
  • The mention of malmo competing in the intercontinental cup because dorset didn't want to participate in the competition needs a ref
    • Okay.
  • Do you need to mention that malmo's score is noted first in every table, surely just state at the first table that is the format for all tables
    • Okay.
  • "The club's most recent expedition" not keen on expedition change to participation. NapHit (talk) 23:47, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • All fixed apart from the tables, I will leave that mind-destroying task for Reckless to slog through... —Cliftonian (talk) 00:21, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Great job, I'll do the rest later tonight. --Reckless182 (talk) 09:11, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Question, for the matches tables, what columns should be shaded? Season, Stage, Team and Country columns? I'm a bit confused. --Reckless182 (talk) 09:31, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Do the first two columns: season and stage, except for Intercontinental Cup. On that one only do the first column. —Cliftonian (talk) 11:58, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support well done NapHit (talk) 22:15, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Reckless182 (talk) 23:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Alt text was needed for the picture at the top, which I have added. This is a complete, comprehensive and well-laid-out list of Malmö FF's results in Europe, which is all it needs to be. A detailed history in prose form belongs in the History of Malmö FF article. Have given this a thorough copy-edit and resolved some small issues – feel free to revert if you disagree with any of this. I have no qualms about supporting this fine list which meets all of the criteria. Well done! —Cliftonian (talk) 01:27, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 04:03, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • The sentence on the club's stadium could use a citation.
Done. --Reckless182 (talk) 00:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • So could the sentence on the appearance and goal records.
Done. --Reckless182 (talk) 00:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the By country table, the goal difference is sorting oddly. Worth looking at to see if sort templates are required.
I noticed the problem as well now, I will search for a solution. --Reckless182 (talk) 00:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is now fixed. --Reckless182 (talk) 14:43, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It didn't appear to be for me, but it is now. I had to really override it to get it to work though. I noticed a couple of numbers in that column didn't quite seem to be lining up visually – or is that my imagination? I also changed the RSSSF refs to read Rec.sport.soccer statistics foundation. —Cliftonian (talk) 14:58, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • By club: The following list details Malmo FF all-time record...". "Malmo FF" → "Malmo FF's". Of course, yours should still have the diacritics.
Done. --Reckless182 (talk) 00:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Matches: The link to the 1978-79 European Cup could use an en dash in the part that's hidden from the readers in the formatting. Even though it appears with a dash, it's still good practice to get dashes in there whenever possible. Same for the other similar competitions linked in these section leads. Some of the competition links in the tables also need attention.
Done. --Reckless182 (talk) 00:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • UEFA Cup / Europa League: Allsvenskan was already linked in the previous section. It really doesn't need another link here.
Done. --Reckless182 (talk) 00:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should "re branding" be one word, or have a hyphen in it?
Rewritten as "rebranding", see Rebranding. --Reckless182 (talk) 00:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is it possible to make the page numbers for ref 1 more specific? It's a lot to ask anyone interested in fact-checking to go through a range of over 100 pages.
I'll look into it. --Reckless182 (talk) 00:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the reference altogether since it doesn't serve in any purpose. The book is from 2009 and can't be used to source anything other than matches pre 2009 which there already are sources from UEFA and RSSSF for. --Reckless182 (talk) 20:39, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What makes fussballdaten.de a reliable source? Giants2008 (Talk) 22:35, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the legal statement of the website I'd say it looks reliable. The website is a service offered by a publisher specializing in football data by the looks of it. Perhaps a German editor could be able to tell us if he/she would consider it reliable? --Reckless182 (talk) 00:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mh, not reliable: Die Autoren übernehmen keinerlei Gewähr für die Aktualität, Korrektheit, Vollständigkeit oder Qualität der bereitgestellten Informationen. - The authors do not take any warranty for topicality, correctness, completeness and quality of provided information. Doesn't sound very reliable... ♫GoP♫TCN 12:49, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's just a disclaimer, surely... many books include these too, should we discount them as well? According to its "about" page, the site is affiliated with T-online and fussball.de, both run by Deutsche Telekom, and sport.de, published by RTL Interactive. I remember when I used to do a lot of work on English soccer lists and articles the yardstick we used to use there to establish reliability was whether or not the site was cited by a high-quality source. I'd say both Deutsche Telekom and RTL would be considered sound references, so I'd be happy with sourcing to fussballdaten.de. This is just my opinion, of course. —Cliftonian (talk) 14:14, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, similar legal statements is used quite often for websites and books. --Reckless182 (talk) 20:39, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Since there's some debate on this one, I'll leave it outside the capping for others to consider. Giants2008 (Talk) 04:03, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I did some research and found that the site is used as a reference in several season articles for German football clubs on the English Wikipedia as well as the GA Franck Ribéry. Looks more and more like a reliable source. --Reckless182 (talk) 09:23, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just because it's used elsewhere on Wikipedia, doesn't automatically make it acceptable here – just a tip. You'd be better off looking for reliable sources off-Wiki which use its database. —Cliftonian (talk) 12:56, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am aware of that, I just thought I'd mention it. Only source I've found this far is ströer interative which is most likely the company that built or perhaps designed the website. They state in German: "Fussballdaten.de ist DIE bewährte Quelle für Fußballjournalisten und viele andere Meinungsführer aus Deutschlands beliebtester Sportart", which rougly translates to "Fussballdaten.de is THE trusted source for football journalists and other opinion leaders from many of Germany's most popular sport". Can we use this to determine reliability or is this judged as a subjective opinion since they probably built the website? Note that they are not the administrators of the website. --Reckless182 (talk) 13:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can you tell me what is the purpose of the disclaimer then? Tell it to a newbie who has nearly zero knowledge in law :)♫GoP♫TCN 13:18, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
fussballdaten.de really is as reliable as it gets for statistics on German league and cup games. Line-ups, substitutes and other information is exhaustive and commendable for its accuracy. As for their legal disclaimer, this is very typically German. I don't think Germany has a culture of suing as is stereotyped in America, but Germans are very clear about not assuming safeguards for accuracy (which in itself seems incredible with their own stereotypes of correctness and punctuality). Each and every publication includes the same information: "Alle Angaben ohne Gewähr". A great example of this is the official national lottery website, http://www.lotto.de/, note here at the bottom of the page in italics Alle Angaben ohne Gewähr. Not even the lottery's own website assumes responsibility for the publication of the lotto numbers! Even when the draw is made or the winning numbers are announced at the end of the news bulletin, it's always the same "We take no responsibility for the correctness of this information" (and have a look how often this is pointed out here). That fussballdaten.de has the same thing written in their disclaimer makes it no different to any other German website, but the contents, indeed, are as reliable as any other you can find. Even the news service of Rundfunk Berlin-Brandenburg's "inforadio" discount the responsibility of content errors here, so the general disclaimer over at fussballdaten.de really does nothing to discredit its content, as far as the original question is concerned. Jared Preston (talk) 22:12, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Jared. —Cliftonian (talk) 22:18, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Indeed! --Reckless182 (talk) 22:30, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I understood (this can be capped). --♫GoP♫TCN 15:04, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 08:47, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Consider a move to "Malmo FF in European football" or similar?
Wouldn't that confuse readers since Liverpool F.C. in European football and Manchester United F.C. in European football are articles and not lists? What about "List of Malmö FF matches in UEFA competitions" or something similar? --Reckless182 (talk) 19:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "are a Swedish professional football club " would prefer "is" a club here, I know this debate is endless, but a club is singular, and a team can be selectively plural in my mind (e.g. Liverpool are losing this....).
I'd like to keep this to preserve consistency with the main article Malmö FF which also uses the British English style. --Reckless182 (talk) 19:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "run by UEFA" reads a little colloquial for me, maybe "governed by UEFA" or something?
Done. --Reckless182 (talk) 19:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " It has also taken " could replace It with Malmo here to keep us engaged.
Done. --Reckless182 (talk) 19:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Picky, but do non experts know what UEFA and FIFA mean?
I have added the full names and abbrevations used later. --Reckless182 (talk) 19:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Counting all of the 113 games the side has played in UEFA competitions" presumably the FIFA competition is excluded here?
Yes, I've clarified this. --Reckless182 (talk) 19:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • You've overlinked Europa League in the first para. Alternatively link the season's competition.
linked the season's competition instead. --Reckless182 (talk) 19:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " in Malmö, which in UEFA matches is a 21,000-capacity" awkward construction, maybe "in Malmo; for UEFA matches, the capacity is 21,000 all-seated while for Swedish league..."?
Rephrased. --Reckless182 (talk) 19:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "while the team's biggest defeat is 8–3" not keen on biggest, maybe largest? or heaviest?
Replaced with heaviest. --Reckless182 (talk) 19:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Usually see those italic hat notes indented by one colon (e.g. the Updated ..." note)
I'm not sure what you mean here? --Reckless182 (talk) 19:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does "By country" really mean "By opponent club nationality" or something more elegant?
We could of course clarify this, but is it really necessary? I have a hard time believing that a reader could misinterpret what it means? --Reckless182 (talk) 19:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • None in the aggregate score column really should be N/A (i.e. not applicable, doesn't apply to a single-leg match).
Done. --Reckless182 (talk) 19:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • No good reason to have Skonto F.C. when the source just has Skonto and our own article has Skonto FC and the majority of the rest of your F.C.'s etc seem to go without punctuation.
Fixed. --Reckless182 (talk) 19:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't use hyphens in the year ranges in the refs, use en-dash per WP:DASH.
  • A shame that you have so many identically titled references which actually link to different references. Perhaps consider doing something about this.

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:46, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Had a bit of spare time so handled all of these. I hope Reckless doesn't mind. I've also done some work on formatting and added some pictures. —Cliftonian (talk) 19:31, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think it may be advisable to wait before moving the page, in my experience moving them during FLC or FAC processes causes quite a headache. —Cliftonian (talk) 19:32, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Lemonade51 (talk) 13:18, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • UEFA is the publisher in the majority of the sources but the 'work' needs to be identified. Work is 'UEFA.com'.
  • Same with Refs 78 and 79 – FIFA.com needs to be put as the work. – Lemonade51 (talk) 22:52, 4 February 2012 (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/Malmö_FF_in_Europe/archive1&oldid=1076196071"