Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/FIFA World Cup top goalscorers/archive2

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 Pres N 22:06, 10 November 2015 (UTC).[reply]

FIFA World Cup top goalscorers edit

Nominator(s): Nergaal (talk) 18:34, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it is an interesting stats page that passes all the FL?. Last time it failed because of lack of reviewer interest, which I hope will not be the case this time. Nergaal (talk) 18:34, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment please fix all the SHOUTING in the references, there's no need to have the surnames of every player capitalised, even if that's what the website you're using does. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:36, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

done. Nergaal (talk) 22:46, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Technical comments Tournaments column doesn't sort properly. Use consistent accuracy for goal average. Make sure all player names include their diacritics. Don't use bold alone as a way to distinguish between players. Date format should be consistent from table to table. Why isn't the second table sortable? Why are you suddenly abbreviating country names without a key? Ref 2 doesn't ref the numbers in that table at all. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:41, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorts now. so you want a 1.00 instead of 1.0? You have an example where I missed it and it doesn't? Done. What date format are you referring to? Which column would you consider it to be necessary sortable (since it is a timeline table)? For brevity/clarity purposes as having the full names seems to clutter the table too much. Which table, the intro? Nergaal (talk) 22:46, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The last one: TBH I did a manual count since FIFA doesn't really seem to have compiled an aggregate one. That is why I used ~ and >. I could put 20 links like [1] and [2] if you think that is better. Nergaal (talk) 22:49, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'll do a proper review once these issues are resolved, right now it needs a lot of work. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:41, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment (1) "The 29 top goalscorers played for 17 different nations, seven players being Brazilian, and eight from Germany or West Germany." Looks like the actual numbers for Brazil and (W) Germany are 5 and 3 respectively.

Not sure where that error appeared from, but thanks for catching it. Nergaal (talk) 19:49, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(2) Can you please fix the sorting using the 'world cup' column in the 'top scorer by tournament' table. Once you sort it using one of the other columns, clicking the sort in the World Cup does not sort in the order of world cups.

Figured out what is happening. When you sort using the 'world cup' column, it now sorts as per the host country. So the Argentina 78 appears first, followed by Brazil 1950, Brazil 2014 etc. The column should be sorted according to the year of the competition - 1930, 1934 etc. Tintin 09:56, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the sorting with that column. Nergaal (talk) 19:49, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Few more quick quibbles before a proper review, I wish WP:PR was still functional these days....

Number of goalscorers[2] isn't referenced by [2].

FIFA seems to have switched the links quite a bit (so I have to go though quite a bit of other refs to relink them). I switched the used reference to something that is a list to all the WCs. I could change that to a note saying something like "see a complete list for 1930, ...., 2014 if you think that is more appropriate. As I've said above, FIFA does not seem to provide a compiled table (as of now), so all the counted totals are just that, manually counted (that is why I have ~ and >). Nergaal (talk) 21:20, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:CAPTION.

added "."

Respect diacritics.

I am not sure what you mean here. Nergaal (talk) 21:20, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For players names, be consistent with diacritics. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:28, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The only place I wasn't strictly consistent is in the FIFA titles that FIFA themselves use. Outside of the ref titles, all the names should be consistent. Nergaal (talk)

They need to be correct, not just consistent. Suker, Eusebio, (Rivellino needs to be spelt correctly), James Rodriguez, Oscar Miguez, Zidane.... to name a few. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:31, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gave it another comb though the text. However, for the titles of the references I don't understand the rules. If a title used somewhere uses a different name spelling then it is considered wrong and should not be used when quoting the title itself? Nergaal (talk)

Goal average still isn't to the same precision.

I can change it, but to me saying 1.00 seems a bit strange. Nergaal (talk) 21:20, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Same precision please. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:28, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"at least 5 goals" MOSNUM please.

I thought anything under 10 should be spelled out. Nergaal (talk) 21:20, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Uhhuh. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:28, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

?

5 is under 10. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:31, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, are you talking about the table caption? If yes, do the same MOS rules apply since tables generally do contain numbers? Nergaal (talk) 14:48, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Date formats in the article like "1930-07-13" are just a joke, not easily readable by normal humans.
Three-letter-abbreviations for countries is bad, spell it out.

They are commonly used in FIFA broadcasts.

This is a Wikipedia article, not a FIFA broadcast. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:28, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

changed

1+1?

Twice, there were two separate games played at the same tournament against TCS and Turkey.

That's not clear. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:28, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You prefer "1, 1"? Because saying turkey twice seems weird to me. Nergaal (talk)

How does it look now? Nergaal (talk) 22:32, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Publisher is FIFA, not FIFA.com.

fixed

WP:DASH fails in ref titles, e.g. ref 31.

I think I fixed them. Nergaal (talk)

"M.espn.go.com. " is ESPN.

fixed

The Rambling Man (talk) 21:14, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: I have fixed most of the issues you mentioned, and left a few clarification questions for the remaining few. Any suggestions? Nergaal (talk) 16:05, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, there are some things I can still see that need to be addressed.

The micro-table in the lead may be referenced by [1] but how? [1] just leads to a generic FIFA website page.

Do you think this is a RS? Nergaal (talk) 03:08, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You need to explain why goals in penalty shoot-outs are not included.

It is the sort of thing if you follow the WC you "just know" but honestly not sure how to find a ref why FIFA doesn't include in the stats. The best I could find is help.bet365dotcom/en/rules/rules-sports/soccer which is blacklisted. Nergaal (talk) 03:08, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I added a ref showing totals explicitly excluding shoot-outs. Nergaal (talk) 19:53, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have "2,300" then "1200", so be consistent throughout.

fixed

"edition" is very American, why not just use the name of the tournament, e.g. instead of "The top goalscorer of the first edition was" perhaps "The top goalscorer of the inaugural competition was"?

Inaugural competition sounds awkward to me but I changed to that. Nergaal (talk) 03:46, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Since then, only 22 players have surpassed this threshold at games " not clear, it seems that Stábile scored all his goals in a single tournament. This sentence is unclear.

He did score only in 1930. It appears he only played 4 games for Arg, those all at the 1930 WC. Is the current formulation more clear but not too awkward? Nergaal (talk) 03:08, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

" in 1954" Easter egg link.

There are a few links like this. You think I should just remove all the yearly links? Nergaal (talk) 03:17, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have been encouraged to remove them from GAs so as this is a featured candidate, yes, rephrasing it each time is the solution. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:07, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I removed all the easter eggs. Nergaal (talk) 20:03, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"managed to improve on this record" clumsy, just "improved on" is fine.

changed

" in only six games" POV. State the facts, don't apply POV.

He has the third best g/g average. Doesn't that count as "only"? Nergaal (talk) 03:08, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"at the 1970 edition" awful, perhaps, "in the 1970 World Cup finals".

Changed to just the year. I tried to stay away from repeating "World Cup" too much, and finals is a bit confusing as it could refer just the final game of each tournament. Nergaal (talk) 03:17, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"during Germany's win" Germany or West Germany?

fixed

" a total of " unnecessary.

removed

"between 1998 and 2006." easter eggs.

see above

" Germany's Miroslav Klose would go on to" why relink Germany national team?

removed

" Germany's Miroslav Klose would go on to" why "would go on", it's happened, speak in English.

changed

"consecutive tournaments between 2002 and 2014" easter eggs.

see above

" Pelé with twelve between 1958 and 1970, and Jürgen Klinsmann with eleven between 1990 and 1998." easter eggs and unreferenced.

They are referenced in the table though. Nergaal (talk) 03:17, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So that's half-way through the lead, I'll give more feedback once these issues are addressed. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:35, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and as for player's names, I didn't mean the ref titles, I meant their usage in the article itself. Make things like (right) into (right) in image captions. spell Ernst Wilimowski correctly, explain what "Goal average" means (we know this, but why should a layman get it?), I'm also not seeing how the up arrow is adequately referenced, e.g. Tim Cahill's link doesn't demonstrate that he played for Australia within the past twelve months (and surely that will age really quickly, you need a different way of explaining this....) The Rambling Man (talk) 18:56, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I sincerely am completely unable to find the examples you see; I went multiple times and still cannot catch any missing/inconsistent diacritics.

e.g. Oscar Míguez should be Óscar Míguez, Zinédine Zidane should be Zinedine Zidane etc etc... The Rambling Man (talk) 07:07, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

At least the ones you emntioned I've fixed. I really have a hard time finding others so please let me know if I am still missing any. Nergaal (talk) 20:03, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I had absolutely no idea about the italics use but I changed it.

Fixed the Wilmowski name.

Added tooltip to goal average even though I find it extremely weird.

Well you could change the name to "goals per game" then. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:07, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Changed the wording to "have continued playing for their national team after the 2014 tournament".

Nergaal (talk) 03:30, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A few more thoughts on the next portion of the lead:

"with 9 goals" MOS says "nine".
Image captions which are complete sentences need full stops.

The only one that doesn't is not a full sentence. Nergaal (talk) 15:11, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I still fail to see how ref [1] verifies the information in the table in the lead.

Is this a RS so I can use it as a replacement? Nergaal (talk) 15:11, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if that's an RS, have you asked the football project? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:03, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So I added a 100% reliable ref for all those up to 4 goals, but for 3, 2, and 1 I still have that one. At least one FOOTY user (Jaellee) "found no sign of user-generated content and I haven't seen anything else which would disqualify it". Nergaal (talk) 20:03, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"90 players who have scored at least five goals, only five " per WP:NUMNOTES, "Comparable quantities should be all spelled out or all in figures".

I tried to redo the numbers per what I think the rules are. Let me know if I screwed up anywhere. Nergaal (talk) 15:11, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Don't repeat first names after the first usage of a player's full name.

removed

"60 footballers came from " why past tense? Especially as several are still active.

present

"60 footballers came from UEFA (Europe), 26 from CONMEBOL (South America), and only four players" NUMNOTES again.

fixed

The lead is surprisingly devoid of references, e.g. where is inclusion in the all-star team referenced?

Unless I completely messed something up, everything in the intro that does not have a ref there has a ref in the tables below. You would prefer to double up the ref usage? Nergaal (talk) 15:11, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll repeat: where is the all-star team inclusion referenced? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:03, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nice catch. I completely missed that the teams were not in there. I added a somewhat detailed note with appropriate links instead. Nergaal (talk) 20:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 07:07, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think I fixed or addressed all the concerns you have pointed out. Let me know what is there still left to be done. Nergaal (talk) 20:05, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What makes sporting99.com a reliable source? I can't see any evidence that it meets our requirements. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:07, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I looked multiple times and I couldn't find any good ref for the All-Star team before 1994 so I removed the column entirely. Nergaal (talk) 19:40, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Tintin1107 and The Rambling Man:. Nergaal (talk) 03:20, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, this nomination has been open for 2 months without a support, so I'm going to have to close it as not passed. Feel free to renominate in the future, and remember that the best way to get more reviewers for a nomination is to review other nominations yourself. --Pres N 22:02, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In these 2 months I did like five or so reviews, and gotten only TRM here... This must be like my 5th straight FLC not getting reviews, so I think I'll stop submitting here. Nergaal (talk) 23:33, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.