Jump to content

Talk:Rodrigo Palacio

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Untitled

[edit]

He has NOT SIGNED. why do we have his club down as Arsenal? Even if speculation it is only at the stage of being a transfer target, very different to being an actual registered Arsenal player. Someone change it please.

Sorry, partially my fault - in my haste to delete all the rumors I didn't fully check the article for remnants of "he plays for Arsenal"..... ugen64 15:31, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signing speculation

[edit]

In the last few days there has been a lot of speculative posts that he'll sign for this and that club. Why don't we wait until he actually signs something? This is an encyclopedia, not a sports magazine. See: WP:NOT#CBALL Alexf(t/c) 18:54, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well the people posting those rumors seem to be overexcited anon users, who probably won't check the talk page before adding these rumors... to be honest it happens every time there is even a hint of a transfer rumor (and makes Wikipedia seem very unreliable to football fans). ugen64 06:02, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I must say I disagree with the comment about. In relation with transfer speculation, I generally use Wikipedia to check the football player statistics. By doing this, I feel I get som information about whether this player is suitable for the club, and therby to get som validation of whether the rumours are reliable or not.

To ask football fans to wait unit someone signs something is expecting too much. It is part of the enjoyment following a club to discuss this kind of rumours.

Yeah, but people have been saying things like "Rodrigo Palacio, who currently plays for Arsenal" or even worse, this edit which claims he plays for Tottenham... I've put in the speculation though. I agree that if there are a few sources (or one very notable one, like BBC or Sky Sports) it should be noted, at least for the near future. ugen64 11:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Previous poster disagrees (please sign your comments with ~~~~ next time). "It is part of the enjoyment following a club to discuss this kind of rumours."
This is the crux of the issue here. You may get enjoyment about unfounded speculation on a player being signed here and there. I also can get enjoyment fantasizing about winning the lottery. So? This is not a sports commentary blog or website. It is an encyclopedia that we all collaborate to try to make it better and factual. Alexf(t/c) 12:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Transfer rumour a HOAX?

[edit]

http://www.football365.com/story/0,17033,8652_2542830,00.html

Seems to me a valid answer to this saga. aediasse 13:56, 17. July 2007 (CET)

Confirms my point above about Signing Speculation. All worthless IMO. Thanks for the link. Alexf(t/c) 12:11, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Rodrigo Palacio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:09, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]