Talk:1987 CONCACAF Champions' Cup

What game?

Concacaf seems to be something to do with a sport but why does the article not say which one. Even a guess from its name is likely to be wrong (examples: American/Australian/Association Football). Wikipedia is for giving information not for waving a flag for something. I suspect the other CONCACAF articles are equally unenlightening.--SilasW 10:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

if it's an edition of something, i think the way to know of what subject it's talking about is to click in the link in the first line to CONCACAF Champions' Cup. If it's not sufficient, so we should place the same text for every edition, and it's redundant--Calapez 16:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There we differ. If Wikipedia rejected every article that did not specify what it was about either explicitly or in its very first link then I might accept it as an absolute rule, but much Wikipedia is written, apparently by enthusiasts who cannot imagine that most of us do not know what PQWWVX or "Supersoapy triangulation" is, and who ignore every convention. Such articles can need layers of clicking to reveal what they are about. Maybe Wikipedia needs some dendritic reorganizing so that many articles are in super groups (eg all sports articles in a separate Wiki with a link from a place-holding "empty" articles in Wikipedia, the link uneditable and generated by robot to prevent breakage by inattention or vandalism.) If all "repetitive" articles were template based then the slight extra text would be no trouble and in the Concacaf case, say, if a later entry were written and had a link to one of the year articles the whole thing would be understood.--SilasW 20:43, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]