Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/United States and Canada task force/Archive 1

Archive 1

disambig standard

We might want to come up with a standard disambiguation for American soccer players/footballs when they share names with other notable persons. For instance, should it be "Eddie Johnson (footballer)", "Eddie Johnson (soccer player)", "Eddie Johnson (soccer)", or something else? (In Eddie's case, it would be "American footballer", "American soccer player", etc., since there have been others of the same name. Ignore that here.) This has come up a number of times, and it would be nice to have a guideline for American soccer/football pages. Personally, I prefer "footballer" - as I grew up partly in England (though American born) and the term seems natural to me - but I realize it strikes some people as pretentious, europoseurish, etc. I mean, I generally like "soccer" for use in articles, but "footballer" over "soccer player" strikes me as less awkward while also being unambiguous. I don't care that much, though; as long as we have an agreed guideline, I'm happy. Bill Oaf 10:54, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

The standard I've seen says footballer is the way to go... and I agree. Jazznutuva 10:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

When referring to players from nations where it's called "football," use footballer. If a player is from a nation where it is called "soccer," then use soccer player or soccer. Che84 17:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Update?

Does anyone know if we'll get a wikiproject or not? Do we need more noms? м info 02:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Creation of WikiProject Football task forces

A proposal to reorganise all football related projects has been made here. Input from members of this project is wanted. – Elisson • T • C • 20:22, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Some task forces are now up and running - it seems like this WikiProject is a little dormant right now, so I've earmarked it for moving over to a Taskforce. Unless there's any objections, I'll do this on/after 5th July. Paulbrock 10:17, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

David Norman

A Vancouver native, or a Glasgow native? --necronudist 15:19, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Notability: North America vs the World

Thanks to the recent attempt at deleting the Sons of Ben page, I've looking at WikiProject:Football. It seems there is a lot of discussion/argument of "notability" that pit US/Canadian views against European views. Soccer is such a global enterprise that establishing a single set of criteria for "notability" is either doomed to failure or will treat a region unfairly. Shouldn't this task force be the ones ruling on "notability" for pages that concern this region? Delmlsfan (talk) 03:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Btw, you linked that wrong. It's located at Sons of Ben (MLS supporters association). For a second there I thought they HAD deleted it! Stancollins (talk) 04:45, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

The Sons of Ben would probably be best placed of the MLS supporters groups to claim notability given the amount of coverage they have received. Some of the other groups are marginal at best and really should be a couple of paragraphs in the club page...Hack (talk) 05:28, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey,Delmlsfan,they did with the NHL All Star Game from 1980s-2002,it all started,because of the Challenge Cup: Soviet Union vs. the World in 1979,to get ready for the XII (or 12th) Winter Olympics! Also,soccer is okay to me,I think the game is too sissy,because there are any take downs,that's my opinon at least! Bye from User talk —Preceding comment was added at 03:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Request for bot assistance with tagging project

I thought it may be a good idea to use a bot (SatyrBot) to help improve the efficiency of our tagging and assessing operation of articles within our scope. However, I made the mistake of requesting the bot's services before discussing the idea with the task force. First of all, I want to apologize to you guys for doing that. Secondly, I would like to know your take on the idea. Here is the original request post I made for the bot a few days ago:

• WikiProject Football/USA and Canada task force - This WikiProject is currently tagging articles within its scope. All articles in Category:Soccer in the United States (and all of its subcategories) need to be tagged with {{Football|USA=yes}}. Some of the work has already been done manually, but I am interested in increasing the Project's efficiency, and I thought SatyrBot might be the perfect solution. I would be very grateful if you could accommodate this request, but if it is not possible for whatever reason, I completely understand. Thank you! TFCforever (talk) 17:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you in advance for your feedback. TFCforever (talk) 02:45, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Notability of teams and leagues

How notable does a team or league have to be to be notable? Are teams or leagues that only receive local media attention inherently notable or inherently non-notable? Leagues run the gamut from purely recreational to "elite" recreational to semi-pro to pro. There are also youth and developmental leagues to consider, plus the NCAA and high-school-based multi-sports leagues. Where does this project draw the line on notability? Obviously, some teams or leagues may be notable even if they are "below the line" if they get national press coverage for whatever reason, but I'm looking for general guidance here.

essay on American soccer on Wikipedia

I have developed and am still developing an essay that I hope can be adopted by a consensus within the task force, in the hopes of channeling influence on WikiProject Football. It is written to address the concerns that more than a few of us have with respect to reconciling Wikipedia's treatment of American soccer in the context of the world game. I invite everyone here to comment on the essay's discussion page; I look to revise and further polish the essay, ideally before it is taken up by all soccer editors. Thanks!

(I also apologize that this is a near copy and paste of what I said on the MLS talk page, but it would be frivolous to retype essentially the same things) --Roehl Sybing (talk) 13:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Can we get an official W-L-T vs W-D-L vote?

There is a discussion and voting on Talk:2008 Major League Soccer season about the standings/tables format. Kingjeff (talk) 19:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

This is more of an issue for all american (canadian too?) soccer articles and should be addressed soon. W-L-T vs. W-D-L is basically the issue on all articles, and we should discuss this here to resolve the issues in other articles, like 2008 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup qualification. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greecepwns (talk • contribs) 18:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

This is a North American issue since the league is in Canada too now. Kingjeff (talk) 19:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

What I was referring to is whether or not Canadian news and other leagues use W-L-T format. Greecepwns (#1 Red Bulls Supporter) (talk) 20:50, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

In regards to whether or not Canadian news use the W-L-T format, I think it is irrelevant, as it is dictated by the fact that the Canadian teams play in american leagues. And this rule should be only applicable to American comptetitions. Competitions which are only involved Canadian teams should follow the same format as the governing body. For example, the Canadian Championship is governed by the CSA and the CSA website clearly shows that they use the W-D-L format as you can see in the link. http://www.canadasoccer.com/tourney/FIFA_Clubs/national.asp?sub=6 So, Canadian only articles should be treated differently than American articles. NeilCanada (talk) 20:07, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Ironically, 2008 Canadian Championship uses W-L-T. I'll fix that. Greecepwns (talk) 21:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I understand that the media is lazy on some points but W-D-L (or W-T-L) works in my logical brain 3-1-0 not 3-0-1. Coppercanuck (talk) 04:39, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Problem with an anonymous editor

I'm hoping someone can help me... I try to keep all the rosters and player details for USL1, USL2 and PDL squads up to date, and in my recent updates of the Austin Aztex U23 roster, I noticed that the player Jamie Watson (soccer) is playing for them this year... so, naturally I added these details to his bio page. However, some anonymous user persists in deleting all references to the Aztex on Watson's bio. Now I KNOW I am in the right here... he is shown on the USL website (http://www.uslsoccer.com/teams/2008/roster/8969453.html), the Aztex website confirms that this Jamie Watson is the same Jamie Watson that used to play for Real Salt Lake (http://www.austinaztex.com/u23/roster/index_E.html - he's #23, second row from the bottom), and an independent third party has provided further confirmation for me ([1])... but as this person is an anonymous user I can't contact him to tell him not to keep deleting the Aztex stats... so, basically, it's descended into an edit war where I keep undoing his deletion, then he undoes my deletion, and so on... Have you got any ideas on what I can do? --JonBroxton (talk) 23:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I think that you can accuse him of vandalism, see if it works --Ceezmad (talk) 21:12, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

This issue was solved over a year ago! But thanks for your advice :) --JonBroxton (talk) 23:38, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Empty userbox

I just noticed that the userbox name is posted twice. Once is in red. I think that's because it is set to display it, but it doesn't exist or something. Tyciol (talk) 01:35, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The Chicago Fire Soccer Club

I think I know the answer to this already, but just bringing it up anyway. Should we refer to them as the just "Chicago Fire" or "Chicago Fire Soccer Club" or "Chicago Fire SC" for that matter? I'm pretty sure everyone is going to go with the first choice, but the "Soccer Club" is part of their official name. Greecepwns (talk) 19:02, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Looks like it is the Chicago Fire--Ceezmad (talk) 21:11, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

by following the link for Chicago Fire, I think that Chicago Fire SC would be better. --Ceezmad (talk) 17:20, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Proofreading help required

As part of my on-going efforts to expand and improve all the entries for USL Premier Development League teams, I'm currently working my way through them, adding 'Competition History' text blocks to each page, as well as creating standardized sections for Stadium History, Coaches, Average Attendances, etc etc.

What I'd like, if you don't mind, is a couple of volunteers to proof-read my stuff. I've finished all the teams for the Southwest Division, so if someone could start there, I would be very appreciative. I've also finished 80% of the Northwest Division (only Cascade Surge and Yakima Reds are left to do), and I will be moving into the Central Conference shortly. Basically, I just want someone to check my grammar, my spelling, make sure I haven't missed words out - you know, just make sure that it reads OK. When you write it, and then edit it yourself, it's tough to spot your own mistakes, and I really want these articles to be interesting and informative for readers.

Oh, and a little note re: sources. All the info for these pages comes from the official USL website, and each team's own website, which is then worked by me into the paragraphs you see. The reason there are no actual reference links is because, in 99% of cases, there are already links to those pages, and I felt it was a little redundant to repeat links to pages which are already linked. The Average Attendance figures come from an e-mail which was sent to me personally by Lee Cohen at USL HQ in Tampa, and so are not from a verifiable public source, but I'm more than happy to send the e-mail on to anyone who would like independant confirmation that the stats are correct. Thanks in advance! --JonBroxton (talk) 17:45, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I've looked at the Southwest Division ones and they all look OK grammatically. Good job! Greecepwns (talk) 20:07, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Canadian University

The Canadian University soccer scene is in need of being documented. As some of the players get listed on CSL, USL and PDL rosters the player bios should be fleshed out. Many of these players either are playing or have played in the Canadian Interuniversity Sport. Linking that university experience should be done. Any opinions on how to tackle this mass of info. Coppercanuck (talk) 04:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Sonia Denoncourt

There is no bio for Sonia. This was a shock to me. Any ideas on how to start a referee's bio. Doesn't she work for FIFA now? - Coppercanuck (talk) 14:33, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Template:Canada-footy-bio-stub

So I started adding this tag to some of the younger players in the Canadian National system and I noticed that some player's bio were rated as 'Start-class'. I don't see a template for Canada-footy-bio. Is there an upgrade template or is it just a category? --Coppercanuck (talk) 03:34, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Worcester Kings

I've been going back and adding useful info to the team pages of teams which played in the PDL from 2003-2007, but are now defunct. The only team logo I'm missing is the one for the Worcester Kings. I've scoured google, and lots of other places, and I CANNOT find a logo for this team. Can anyone help? --JonBroxton (talk) 07:20, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Colleges in PDL rosters

Have a look at what I did on the San Fernando Valley Quakes roster. Do people think that this is something that would be useful for all the other PDL team rosters? 90% of the players on PDL rosters are still in, or have just left, college, so it's applicable as current information... what do you think? Too much? Useful? Confusing? --JonBroxton (talk) 08:27, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it'll be useful but have some way of recognizing players currently not in college as most of the players don't have bios and there would be no other way to know. Greecepwns (talk) 23:29, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

You know, now that I look at it, I don't think I like it in the rosters. It makes it look too cluttered. Maybe there's another way of doing it... --JonBroxton (talk) 04:21, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:NOTED PLAYER

See Wikipedia:NOTED PLAYER for a proposal about making Notable Player sections into official guidelines.  Ravenswing  17:21, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Football in the USA and Canada

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:41, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Open Cup 2009

Just a question of preference for the US Open Cup 2009 article (we'll need one eventually). State qualifying has started as of last week. I just wanted to know if we should include these early rounds that were not in the 2008 qualification article. Greecepwns (talk) 21:30, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion for new list

I noticed that there is a list of expatriot American footballs, I was wondering if it would be possible to construct a list that features only current expatriot footballers? It seems like a sensible enough of an idea. --Rubiksphere (talk) 04:10, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

North American Football Union

Hiya, what do you people know about NAFU? JC 12:00, 20 November 2008 (PST)

List of soccer clubs in Canada

I noticed this list is a mess and doesn't seem to conform to the formatting of the "List of <sports teams> in Canada" group of lists. However, my knowledge of soccer is cursory at best, so I can't sort out the wheat from the chafe so to speak. Does anyone with a better knowledge of the soccer scene in Canada have the time to fix up this list? Shootmaster 44 (talk) 04:10, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Major League Soccer Supporters Groups

A template Template:Major League Soccer Supporters Groups currently lists the various MLS supporter groups. A small number have pages of their own. Given that virtually all of these pages have had their notability challenged in one form or another, is there not a case for incorporating supporter information into the supporter sub-sections of the club pages as per Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Clubs#Supporters?Hack (talk) 01:11, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:10, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Naming convention for MLS season articles

It looks like there needs to be an agreement on the naming convention for the various season articles that are out there for MLS as a whole and various teams. So far the conventions I've found are:

• Major League Soccer seasons: <Year> Major League Soccer season, i.e. 2009 Major League Soccer season
• Kansas City Wizards: Kansas City Wizards season <year>, i.e. Kansas City Wizards season 2009
• Seattle Sounders FC: <Year> Seattle Sounders season, i.e. 2009 Seattle Sounders FC season
• Toronto FC: Toronto FC <year>, i.e. Toronto FC 2009

Of course, that doesn't account for the complete lack of season articles for most of the teams, but if we're going to have any articles on specific seasons, I would think for navigation purposes we'd want to have them be the same name. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 21:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

MLS/Seattle Sounders FC standard should be used. -- Grant.Alpaugh 23:01, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Where were you when I was making all the Kansas City Wizards seasons? I remember basing my formatting off of seeing it this way on a number of EPL articles. I'm sure that wasn't the best place to go looking but when I started the first team season page there was a serious lack of MLS articles to compare. Morry32 (talk) 03:26, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

There probably wasn't any season articles for teams when you created the Wizard articles. it should also be noted that the Sounders FC article started off with the EPL season format. Either way, getting the format set now will help when another takes your initiative and starts to create season articles for other teams. That being said. Do you have a preference as to which format should be used? Either the MLS/Sounders format or the KC format is fine with me. The TFC format is just wonky. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 04:20, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I honestly don't care- if I had to vote it would be to have the EPL style only so I didn't have to change all of my KCW articles :).Morry32 (talk) 14:26, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I vote for the EPL standard. Not everything about MLS has to be "Americanized". --Skotywa^Talk 05:13, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I vote for EPL standard! OnHoliday 15:56, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Well first, this isn't a WP:VOTE, and second, can we agree that the MLS main season articles and all the team season articles should use the same format? So we're talking about changing the MLS articles or changing the Wizards articles, one or the other. -- Grant.Alpaugh 16:32, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

It should be pointed out that 2005 NFL season, 2008 Major League Baseball season, and 2004–05 NBA season are at the "YEAR Name Of League/NOL season" format, which is something we should consider. -- Grant.Alpaugh 16:36, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

From my perspective, this is an American formatting versus a European formatting issue. While soccer/football/fútbol is more popular in Europe, I think we should use the American format for articles on teams in America, in the same way we format dates as April 7, 2009 (not 7 April 2009). Based on just about every other American sports team's season page that I can find, the "American" format for season pages seems to be to have the year in front. I'm not sure which format the Canadians follow, but Toronto FC's seasons page should probably follow whichever format Canadian English uses. ← George ^[talk] 21:52, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

So Grant, your points seem to be [1] if we change any of them, we should change all of them (I totally agree if we change one, we change them all) [2] other American sports seem to have a naming convention you think should be followed. I agree that there's an implicit naming convention in your examples, but I don't think that means we must adhere to it. The question at hand is: for an American version of a worldwide sport, should we follow the American naming convention for other American sports or look for a common naming convention for the same sport in other countries/leagues (what we're referring to here as the EPL standard)? Getting back to point [1], I don't think changing all of the pages is a ton of work, so let's not bring work up as a reason to not do the right thing^TM based on consensus. The current MLS season naming convention was decided on with very little discussion.--Skotywa^Talk 06:07, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey guys I've been the one updating Toronto FC 2009 and I agree that the naming of it should be changed and if it did go to a vote i would take the side of changing all articles to the format of the Seattle Sounders. I'm pretty new to the whole wikipedia updating process so when creating the TFC 2009 article just went along with the naming of the previous 2 season articles. I'm ready to change over whenever a decision has been made.--Hodj222^Talk 11:18, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

First, Hodj, thank you for being so amenable. Second, just like the W-D-L v. W-L-T or Home-Away v. Away-Home formatting issues, we should default to the North American standard. Baseball, Basketball, and Ice Hockey have an international following too, but that doesn't change the fact that we use American English in the article, and we use North American formatting for standings and results, so I see no reason why not to format the article names that way as well. Either way, they should all be on the same format, and I think the "YEAR League/Team season" format is the way to go. -- Grant.Alpaugh 15:28, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... I disagree that this is an issue that should follow suite with W-L-T or Away-Home. I think both of those are isolated topics where the decision happens to have favored an "American" consensus. That doesn't mean that "Americanization" should be the default every time someone notices a possible discrepancy. MLS itself has had a push over the years to remove American-isms in the league such as the removal of the countdown clock, the removal of the automatic penalty shootout in tie games, and they've instituted the recent "Game First" initiatives. Likewise, each of these "American vs. International" standards discussions deserves to be taken individually and not as a snowball, which is what Grant.Alpaugh is suggesting. That said, I don't want this to turn into a long drawn out beating of a dead horse like W-L-T was. This will be my last comment on the matter. I prefer the "EPL standard" as I said above. It stays true to the standard of most other articles for the same sport. When I set out to create the Sounders 2009 page originally, I checked around for naming standards from other soccer teams and this is what I concluded was an obvious choice. Since then it's been renamed twice with little discussion. I stand by my original naming research/decision, but am more than willing to yield to consensus even if that consensus is derived by continual point/counterpoint discussion until people give up (as I'm doing now).--Skotywa^Talk 21:25, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

This is an article about an American sports league, so of course this should follow the format of other American sports leagues. You're obviously a fan of European football, as am I, but that doesn't change the fact that MLS is an American sports league, and there are formatting protocols for American sports leagues. That pretty much ends the discussion. -- Grant.Alpaugh 21:41, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

A few days have passed- any ruling? Morry32 (talk) 17:23, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't look like there is a consensus in this discussion. Several editors prefer the EPL format, while others the American/Canadian format. The editor that has been maintaining the Toronto FC season articles seems to have moved them to the American/Canadian format, but the KC article is still at the EPL format. So if we go based on the current names of MLS articles, it seems the American/Canadian format is winning out on that front. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 22:00, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Anyone have a bot who can do this? Morry32 (talk) 23:06, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

United States men's national soccer team 2008 results

Could I get some opinion on the assessment of this article. Is this a list or article? What grade should it recieve? I don't think I ever contributed to this page, and I'm not sure how to assess. Thanks for any help, everyone. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 19:17, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Steven Cohen

I just stumbled across Steven Cohen (soccer) and found myself questioning his notability. Would his article be better merged with World Soccer Daily? Oldelpaso (talk) 16:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

He has a TV show also. Fox Football Fone-in+ World Soccer Daily seems close enough to the notability guidelines. The article is in need of clean up and sources, though. Also, is (soccer) the best way to disambiguate since he doesn't play? Thought TV and radio personality (or something) might be better.Cptnono (talk) 03:13, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Jozy Altidore

There has been a very lame edit war going on over at Jozy Altidore regarding whether or not he belongs in th category African American soccer players. I feel like I've explained quite plainly on the talk page why the cat is appropriate. Any other opinions would be greatly appreciated. Best, faithless (^speak) 22:31, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Cascadia Cup

There is a very stupid edit war going on over who won the Cascadia Cup this season. The Portland Timbers defeated the Vancouver Whitecaps in the USL to take the cup, and the trophy was officially awarded to the Timbers on August 6th... however, one very eager (and probable Sounders supporter) keeps changing the edits on the page to indicate the Seattle Sounders won the trophy when in fact they did not officially participate in the competition this year. Any help would be appreciated as I'm not really sure what to do. SportingFlyer (talk) 09:25, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Simply embarrassing. I commented on the discussion page. Thank you for the heads up.Cptnono (talk) 12:57, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Duplicate MLS templates

Wanted to let editors know that there are two MLS templates that essentially serve the same purpose. The two templates are Template:MLS and Template:Major League Soccer. I think they should be merged and/or one of them deleted. ← George ^talk 11:32, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, a merge would work, I dont know which destination would be better though DeMoN2009 11:46, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Template:Major League Soccer is cleanerCptnono (talk) 11:49, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I think it would be great if we could create something closer to the format of the second one (which has a longer edit history, and is cleaner, as Cptnono said), but with more information like the first one. Something similar to Template:Premier League maybe? Neither shows former teams right now. ← George ^talk 11:50, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

The format looks better for the second one. I think the format of the first one actually causes confusion because the grid looks like divisions. More articles link to the second one as well. The additional info at the bottom is great on the first but we are looking at duplicating information already in other templates.Cptnono (talk) 11:54, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I've moved the articles that used the first one over to using the second one, and nominated the first for deletion as a duplicate of the second. ← George ^talk 02:33, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to join the conversation so late, but I just noticed that the template had been marked for speedy. I wanted to chime in about one point. Template:MLS was created, according to the edit summary of the original contributor (not me), to give an appearance more in line with the templates for other US sports leagues, like Template:NBA and Template:NFL. I can't say I disagree with the appearance claim, as the grid placement creates a cleaner, more even spacing of team names, as opposed to the uneven lines of the current version. I also happen to think the background colors, which are lighter versions of the colors in the conference logos, do a good job of providing easy to see distinction between the two. I would, however, change the title bar to a light green, to reflect the league logo. oknazevad (talk) 14:32, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

As the original contributor, I obviously have a little explaining to do. I thought I explained my rational well at the MLS Talk page, but it is clear I should have originally brought up the conversation here as well. In my opinion, I thought it would be consistent and appropriate for the MLS article to have a template styled similar to those found in other major & minor North American leagues. However, this didn't mean I wanted to do away with the current football-standard template. Here are some examples as to what I mean:

{{Premier League teamlist}}

As you can see, these leagues' primary templates are used almost exclusively exclusively as an overview of league clubs and nothing else. On just about every soccer league article I've looked at, MLS seems to be the exception. Most league articles of course have more than one template with additional information such as seasons but none have anything quite like a "Miscellaneous" section filled with peripheral information. (On a separate related note, I'd like to point out I made the new MLS template before the Premier League box expanded to include the kind of peripheral info not commonly seen in international football league templates. Before that edit, no box was ever filled up quite like MLS' was.) Now here are some North American league templates:

It is only in these do we get the additional surrounding information such as All-star games, player rosters, championship game links, stadiums, cup competitions, and other extras. In most soccer league articles, templates are not the typical way of expressing this information but they are in North American sports league articles. However in addition to using the new and widely used North American style, what if the current MLS football template was kept and strictly listed league clubs like all others do? I don't want to get rid of it because it still has it's appropriate context when included in other football (soccer)-specific Wikipedia articles. For example the new MLS template may be appropriate on the main article page but the old MLS template may work in an article about the general state of American soccer. Each has its own appropriate use but maybe just not on the same page. So here are the two templates. I think this warrants discussion before we think about deleting things.

And again, apologies for not bringing up this topic here as well. --Blackbox77 (talk) 02:48, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, so a few thoughts. The templates you initially linked to (Template:Premier League teamlist and Template:Serie A teamlist) are only the teamlists, while Template:Major League Soccer is more comparable to Template:Premier League or Template:Serie A. Those latter templates I think are a better model for where we should be heading. I can appreciate that you intended to maintain consistency with the NFL, NBA, and Hockey templates, but I think maintaining consistency with other soccer/football templates is more important. Here's why: no article will ever have both the MLS and NBA templates, but articles are sure to have both MLS and other soccer related templates. From a consistency standpoint, since the MLS template is more likely to be seen next to other soccer related templates, it's more important that it match those templates in style. If you look at Template:Premier League, it has a section for teams, a section for seasons, and a section for "other". I think that's what an ideal MLS template should look like. Otherwise there's the issue of pages having two instances of the MLS template, one named "MLS" and one named "Major League Soccer", which essentially show the same thing or substantially overlap (this was the case before I moved articles over to the other template).

Another issue that was brought up is that in the three templates you linked to - the NFL, NBA, and NHL templates - each conference is further broken down by division (such as North, East, West, South, etc.). In those cases, having the teams sorted into columns means something, because it shows not just which conference a team is in, but also which division of that conference. The MLS has no divisions within it's conferences, so nothing is gained by displaying the teams in columns. ← George ^talk 06:40, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Seattle Sounders FC task force

I'm thinking about creating a sub-task force, dedicated to topics related to the Seattle Sounders FC. I think it would help us harness the efforts of editors from WikiProject Seattle, in addition to this task force. The goal of the sub-task force would be to assess and improve articles specifically related to the Sounders history, its team management, and notable players, in a more concerted, targeted manner. Similar club-oriented task forces exist for larger European clubs, such as Arsenal and Manchester United, and while the scope of this task force would be much smaller (in the range of several dozen to a couple hundred articles), I think the articles within that scope would benefit from the extra attention. From what I've seen thus far, I think there is a good group of editors interested in improving these articles. I haven't brought the issue up at WikiProject Seattle yet—I wanted to first get some feedback and gauge the level of interest here. Thoughts? ← George ^talk 15:24, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

It depends on how many people you can get. If more than five people from WP:SEA and WP:SOCCER support it, go ahead. The formal procedure for this is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals. I would be happy to support it. DeMoN2009 15:48, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Count me in if the taskforce is created. So far there's even two WP:GAs already: Talk:Seattle Sounders FC and Talk:Qwest Field (currently being reviewed). I'd imagine User:Cptnono and maybe User:Bobblehead would probably be interested in helping too. Good idea George. --SkotyWA^Talk|_Contribs 16:18, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Great! I've been impressed by the tremendous work you and the editors you mentioned have done on these articles. That's actually part of the reason for my proposal - three of the four GA-rated articles associated with this task force are related to the Seattle Sounders FC, and it sounds like a fourth is on the way (Qwest Field).

I've posted the proposal here. Interested editors please go and list your names there. I'm going to drop by WP:SEA to let them know about the proposal as well. Cheers. ← George ^talk 16:50, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm hesitant to ask this, but should this be a separate WikiProject (WikiProject Seattle Sounders FC) rather than task force? It seems like WikiProject Football uses task forces for its handful of team-based editor groups, while in other sports, like WikiProject Baseball or WikiProject Hockey, there are dozens of teams, each with their own WikiProject. The upside to this is that an article that would be of high importance to the Seattle Sounders FC (such as the team article) could be rated top importance, while if it's a task force we're forced to stick to the assessments relative to worldwide football (which rates the Sounders as mid-importance). If we do become a task force, I think we're going to have a bunch of mid and low rated articles, which will make it difficult to identify which articles we should focus our collective attention on. ← George ^talk 19:51, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

So I think I've created a workable solution to this issue, that also should improve all the other WikiProject Football task forces as well. I've proposed a modification to the WikiProject Football template that will allow task forces to specify their own importance levels (defaulting to the WikiProject-wide importance level). This will, for instance, allow the United States and Canada task force to mark the Major League Soccer article as of Top or High importance, relative to that task force, and would allow the proposed Seattle Sounders FC task force to mark the Seattle Sounders FC article as of Top importance to that task force–without affecting the importance to other task forces or the entire WikiProject. ← George ^talk 09:19, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Club infobox

Any feedback regarding the MLS specific information in infoboxes would be appreciated. A discussion was started here. Cptnono (talk) 01:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

As I said on the other thread, I think the MLS-specific parameters should go. It makes the infoboxes cluttered, and its very easy to repeat the information with more detail in the prose. --JonBroxton (talk) 21:13, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Notability of coaches

There is a question of the notability of US Soccer coaches over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Notability of coaches in US soccer. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 17:52, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

USL First Division

In my opinion this article needs a major tidy up on two fronts. Firstly in light of the defections to the new NASL which is ongoing and difficult to keep up with. Secondly I thing the article should concentrate on the seasons when it was known as the USL First Division and not be cluttered with excessive info on the various predecessor names/leagues, all of which have their own articles anyway. Mention them by all means but don’t get bogged down. It is a bit ridiculous to try and merge all this info into one article, as one editor is trying to do, especially when US soccer leagues have a history of name changes, mergers and collapses, etc. Any thoughts here Djln --Djln (talk) 00:08, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:19, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

CIS Soccer

Please have a look at CIS Soccer, a lot of work has gone into it. TheBigJagielka (talk) 15:55, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Great work. I'll be adding to that one in the next few weeks. --Coppercanuck (talk) 17:24, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes great job. Bravo TheBigjagielka. I shall add the information for Quebec Student Sports Federation in particular Montreal Carabins and women's team of soccer the other Quebecois universities. --Charlesquebec (talk) 14:28, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Club Names doe Quebec based teams

Should the clubs in Quebec be list with the French name or Anglicized? I was going to work on a page for Royal-Sélect de Beauport but am not sure if it should be Beauport Royal Select? --Coppercanuck (talk) 17:30, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Bonjour Coppercanuck,why not 2 names (french and english) to help the readers foreign Quebec --Charlesquebec (talk) 17:32, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Upcoming WP:TFA

I thought some of the contributors here might be interested that 2009 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final has been scheduled to appear as Today's Featured Article on the Main Page this coming Sunday, September 26. It will appear on the main page 10 days prior to this year's Open Cup final. Hopefully this will raise awarness of the tournament. --SkotyWA^T_C 01:29, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Vancouver Whitecaps FC MLS and USL team articles

Could I please request additional eyes at Talk:Vancouver Whitecaps FC for the discussion about how to handle articles for the Whitecaps MLS and USL teams? Currently, we have Vancouver Whitecaps FC focusing on the team that played from 1986 to 2010 in the A-League, CSL, USL, etc. and Vancouver Whitecaps FC (MLS) covering the new MLS expansion franchise set to begin play in the 2011 season. There is considerable disagreement as to whether there should be one or two articles, and as to whether we should treat the organization or the team as the continuing entity. One position is that the teams are different, with the same management group, while another is that the same team has just moved up to MLS. This has been festering for many months now, and it has potential ramifications for other MLS teams that have ties to former USL and NASL teams. Thanks in advance. --Ckatz^chat_spy 23:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

WNY Flash

I have a question about how to handle the relocation and promotion of a team on Wikipedia. The W-League Buffalo Flash are (very likely to) move up to Women's Professional Soccer for the 2011 season, where they'll be called the Western New York Flash and play their home games in Rochester. Should the article be moved, or should a new article be started? Powers ^T 16:39, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

There's no one right answer. If it's a franchise-type situation where the new team is not considered a continuation of the old one then a new article should be started. If the new team is considered by reliable sources to be a continuation of the old one, move the page and carry on from the old content. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 17:10, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, that's the problem. It's women's soccer, so the number of reliable sources out there are pretty slim. With those sources that exist, it's not at all clear to me which side they come down on. How does one tell? Powers ^T 19:13, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I find it hard to believe that there are reliable sources which report the move itself, but not reliable sources analysing it. For the time being, though, falling back to primary sources like the team's own website should resolve this particular question. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 19:44, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, take this article, which merely indicates that the new team will be owned by the same person who owns the Buffalo Flash, and says things like "The team will be officially introduced". That implies that the team is new. This article, though, clearly indicates that the team is "moving" to a new league. And buffaloflashsoccer.com redirects to wnyflash.com, which clearly says "Est. 2009" on it and includes information from the Flash's W-League championship season. So we have sources on both sides, although mostly writers are treating it as an evolution -- not quite a simple move from one league to another, but also not exactly a brand new team, either. Powers ^T 22:04, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Personally, I'd create a new page for the new franchise. TheBigJagielka (talk) 02:41, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

After taking a closer look at some of the sources (detailed above), it seems some are clearly saying this is the same franchise. What are your reasons for creating a new page? Powers ^T 13:12, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Jorge Salcedo

I've tagged this for deletion as a copyvio. Just thought as it's a substantial article someone might want to go through it and fix it up. Tho it's throughout the article so not sure weather starting from scratch is a better idea.--Misarxist 15:48, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

New York Cosmos and New York Cosmos (2010) team articles

Could I please request further comments at Talk:New York Cosmos (2010) for the discussion about how to handle articles for the New York Cosmos pages? Currently, we have New York Cosmos focusing on the team that played in the original NASL and New York Cosmos (2010) covering the attemped startup of a similarly named organization. There is disagreement as to whether or not they should be merged and could potentially change how all similarly named teams are handled on WIkipedia. Thank you Cmjc80 (talk) 22:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Southern Premier Soccer League

Sorry, I am not a wiki expert, and our league needs some wiki help.

The person responsible for the bulk of our wiki content has exited with a team that elected not to continue participating. This leaves the league wiki pages with incomplete information.

The SPSL expects to gain provisional status as a USASA Regional League sometime next week. We are in the last few weeks of the Winter Cup and will restart for the Summer Cup schedule in April with the addition of three more teams.

Would anybody here consider taking up another league?

StephenHeisler1966StephenHeisler1966 (talk) 15:03, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Soccer in the United States

Soccer in the United States has been requested to be renamed. 65.93.12.101 (talk) 04:49, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

New banner (Template:Women's football)

It remains to complete the section of women players' bibliographies. --Charlesquebec (talk) 16:44, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Chris Sharpe

Has Chris Sharpe (goalkeeper last with Colorado Rapids) ever played in a fully professional league in the United States? I have found evidence he played for Vermont Voltage in the PDL but nothing else... Hack (talk) 03:22, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

USL W-League

The season 2011 soon begins in USL W-League.

I am going to make the updates for the Canadian teams especially the player's roster and the staff:

• Hamilton FC Rage
• Laval Comets
• London Gryphons
• Ottawa Fury Women
• Quebec City Amiral SC
• Toronto Lady Lynx
• Vancouver Whitecaps Women

Also I write a page for the new team Victoria Highlanders Women.

I noticed that pages on several American teams are not up to date. One or two persons could update them ? Thanks, --Charlesquebec (talk) 20:50, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

• Hamilton FC Rage Done
• Laval Comets Done
• London Gryphons
• Ottawa Fury Women
• Quebec City Amiral SC  Done
• Toronto Lady Lynx  Done
• Vancouver Whitecaps Women  Done
• Victoria Highlanders Women  Done

--Par petites touches (talk) 15:10, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

US Open Cup naming

The National Challenge Cup, commonly known as the U.S. Open Cup had an official name change as most of you may know when it became titled the Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup. It might surprise you to know that prior to that the tournament was never officially called the U.S. Open Cup hence my opening statement. The official name was always National Challenge Cup. Articles were created using U.S Open Cup but that was before extensive research was done. Most of the information that people had used came from the internet, namely the US Soccer Archives. They use the term Open Cup as far back as 1948 leading people to believe that there was an official name change however this was not so. Recently some users had retitled some of the older articles to say USOC instead of NCC based on the outdated information on the Archives and US Soccer sites. In fact the 1949 tournament was retitled USOC despite a direct reference in the opening paragraph citing a quote by the cup commissioner himself using the term NCC. There are many variations on the name because there were so many newspapers and sports writers across the country. Among them: U.S. Cup, National Cup, U.S. Open, U.S. Challenge, U.S. National Open, National Open, National Open Challenge, National Challenge, U.S.F.A., U.S. Soccer Championship, National Soccer Cup, National Soccer Championship, U.S. Open National Challenge, USSF National Challenge. Despite the variety in use the only one that can be called the 'official name' is NCC since that is the term used in official documentation and publications as well as championship hardware and sponsorship. In fact all the other tournaments were also called the NCC's which include the Amateur and Junior Cups. National Amateur Challenge Cup(est. 1922) and National Junior Challenge Cup(est. 1935). Variations include National Amateur Cup, Amateur Cup, and U.S. Amateur Cup, etc. The term open is used as an identifier to make things easier for newspaper readers to understand. That goes for the term U.S. since it clarifies which nation's tournament it is not to mention the fact that it saves space and ink. The reason I did not make any other articles past 1940 and prior to 1988(w/ exception of 48,49,73) was that I was uncertain what the best title should be. For example 1982 was USSF/Lowenbrau National Challenge Cup, or 1988 Budweiser USSF National Challenge Cup. Even the 1973 article data coming from USSF publications would be U.S. Open National Challenge Cup which is quite long so I left it as USOC for the time being. Recently I thought a good solution was to use redirects since a user had mistakenly made USOC articles for the 50s and 60s so that USOC redirects to NCC. I think redirects for 70s and 80s would be good too since someone might look for 1985 USOC and it would send them to Budweiser USSF NCC instead. Anyway I brought this discussion here because no one seemed to be taking part in discussions on the main tournament page or the individual articles. I also noticed edit war behavior looming with one user not responding to discussion and another engaging in massive reverts. So far the only discussions that have been taking place were with editors of thecup.us which by the way is also not updated. That site's historical section is still under construction and reflects the old US soccer archive data. Libro0 (talk) 18:52, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

College soccer taskforce

Under your scopes, you don't directly cover college soccer - is there a need to do so? GiantSnowman 14:39, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Werner Fricker Builder Award

U.S. Soccer recently announced that nominations are being accepted for the 2012 U.S. Soccer Werner Fricker Builder Award (see: U.S. Soccer Announcement). Should a new #Awards section be created on United States Soccer Federation and perhaps a reference made on Werner Fricker's page, which could use some improvement. This is much a reminder for myself as anyone else. ~ Fopam (talk) 13:29, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

playoff of 2011 North American Soccer League season

seccion undone yet but games played--Feroang (talk) 20:14, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

History of MLS Cup Playoffs?

MLS Cup Playoffs article need look more like NBA_Playoffs#History, showing how the system change by the years, just do some copypaste, recopilation of the diagrams from every year page--Feroang (talk) 06:34, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

A teamwork together

Why not? Each of us has the skills and we can quite together contribute. We propose the writing together of the page Major women's sport leagues in North America. In more this collective realization can allow us of know and to settle together a solidarity with Wikipedia:WikiProject Women's sport, Thanks --Cordialement féministe ♀ Cordially feminist Geneviève (talk) 14:02, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Kristine et Mia

Hello, We need help and assistant to write on 5 Major leagues of women's soccer in North America (WPS, USL-League, WPSL, NCAA and CIS ). This is in the section Women's soccer leagues of the new page Major women's sport leagues in North America. Please Want to help us? thanks so much, merci beaucoup, תודה --Cordialement féministe ♀ Cordially feminist Geneviève (talk) 00:56, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Women's Soccer

Can american women's soccer be included into the UNITED STATES AND CANADA TASK FORCE?SirEdimon (talk) 00:36, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colin Linford

Hi there. Colin Linford, a former president of the Canadian Soccer Association has been nominated for deletion, and the discussion can be seen here. I thought you guys would know if this was a notable person or not. Mentoz86 (talk) 18:12, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Indoor soccer seasons

Does anyone know whether we should be considering individual indoor soccer club seasons as notable? For example, the articles in Category:American soccer clubs 2011–12 season and Category:American soccer clubs 2012–13 season; should they exist? – PeeJay 16:08, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

History of American soccer

To the task force:

I'd like to begin a discussion on how far back we want to go with American soccer history. We currently have an article that dates back to the 1860s, where there is some confusion as to whether or not it is a kicking game entire or early variations of American football. OL35srf brought it up, and you can see his statement in my personal talk page. Quidster4040 (talk) 19:47, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Early USA & Canadian Soccer Games

Dear Task Force, If I May;

I have spent over 50 years pulling out kicking games (soccer), carrying games (rugby) and ball-possession games (football) for the USA & Canada from the 1700s into the 20th century. I wrote a couple books, but had to self-publish them because they contained too much data vs too little text. Years ago I found out self-published books cannot be used for verification purposes in Wikipedia.

Last December, my 2008 book, 'Evolvements of Early American Foot Ball: Thru the 1890/91 Season', was used to verify some soccer games in 1866, 1868 & 1870. So I questioned Wikipedia's approach and after a discussion they agreed I could greatly help in the histories of soccer & rugby, but I still should not use my book as a verifier very much.

I contacted Quidster4040 and he opened up the 'New Section #16' for discussion. I thank him for answering my statement to him.

I really would like to help add information, but do not know how to use the Wikipedia system. If I have to verify some of my statements, I only know how to use email to send articles and data: MEL1SMITH@hotmail.com. I don't even know how to sign up as a 'participant' yet.

Next I would like to explain a basic problem with the historical approaches to soccer and rugby in America & Canada; versus the world's approach.

Sincerely, Melvin I. Smith, OL35srf, 04/22/2013 OL35srf (talk) 14:54, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

The Two-Game Model vs the One-Game Model

To the Task Force;

There is a paradigm with two different approaches used in the histories of soccer, rugby & football. In Wikipedia, you guys seem to accept the world view of a two-game model. You follow the kicking game (soccer) and carrying game (rugby), which are separated after the 1850s and not mixed together.

Countries like America and Canada have developed their national football games, which use the early kicking games and carrying games as a one-game model. After the 1850s, these early games are still combined and mixed together into the 20th century.

Personally, I am an American who believes in the two-game model approach. But, could there any possible ways these two models could be displayed together in America history between 1869 & 1917? Currently, the 1869 association football game between Rutgers & Princeton is listed under the American gridiron football game. The last rugby games are listed under the American gridiron football game at Stanford University in 1917. I have found tons of early foot-ball games that could be displayed in Wikipedia now, but the information will never be accepted in the American colleges because they go by the one-game model approach during this early period in the USA. Help? - any one!

Melvin I. Smith, OL35srf, 04/25/2013 OL35srf (talk) 12:45, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Assessments

Why is it that the assessments table includes articles with an importance rating of high/mid/low, but not any articles rated "top" importance? Can someone who is a more skilled Wiki user fix that? Barryjjoyce (talk) 17:33, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Problem now solved. That was quick. Thank you to whoever did that. Barryjjoyce (talk) 22:46, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

C.D. Chivas USA

Hi. There is a requested move for C.D. Chivas USA. I'm sure this project would be interested. --MicroX (talk) 19:18, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

MLS Cup Playoffs

Hey everyone,

I'm new to the party here, so yay me, anyhow, the reason I signed up is because I was a bit underwhelmed by the MLS_Cup_Playoffs page. I was wondering if the group wouldn't mind adding some stuff to the page. I was thinking history of playoff formats by year, qualification streaks by team, furthest round reached by team, etc. If this is something that people might want on the page I'd be happy to put in some work on that particular subject. Let me know!

Bluemoon6790 (talk) 01:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC)Bluemoon6790

Support today's featured article nom for USOC article

Hey fellow task force members,

I've nominated 2011 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final to appear as today's featured article (TFA) on Wikipedia's main page on September 16th. In case you don't recognize it, that's the date of the 2014 final (to be played in Philadelphia this year). I thought it would be cool to have it run on the same day as the final and hopefully drive a little more awareness of this 101-year-old tournament. If you like this idea, head on over to the TFA requests page and add your support to this nomination. --SkotyWA^T_C 17:47, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

2014 MLS Cup Playoffs

Hi Everyone, I started a page for the upcoming 2014 MLS Cup Playoffs as well as the corresponding bracket template. If anyone wants to take a look through for typos and new information, it would be appreciated. Someone could also start on the MLS Cup 2014 article. Udeezy (talk) 23:21, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

The US Pyramid - Soccer League system

FYI there is a recent discussion regarding the US Pyramid: Talk:United States soccer league system#ASL's place in the pyramid. In particular, a discussion of how to order the leagues that are not sanctioned by USSF. Broad input for these type of discussions is always helpful. --Trödel 20:19, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

New Sporting Kansas City 3rd Kit

I'm looking for help on doing the new Sporting Kansas City 3rd kit in the templates. I don't know how to make it. The design is here.Elisfkc (talk) 02:49, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

RFC

See this RFC in regards to the use of FC/SC in MLS-related articles. Bmf 051 (talk) 20:47, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Redoing the News Spinner

The problem with the current Wikinews spinner at Portal:Soccer in the United States is that nobody really updates soccer stuff on Wikinews. I think it might be better if we have a manual spinner, something equivalent to what you'll find at Portal:Spaceflight. I wanted to suggest that here before I replace the contents of the spinner. --Kitch ^{(Talk : Contrib)} 19:44, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

• 22 December: Major League Soccer releases the schedule for all home openers for their 2016 season. All teams will open on Sunday, March 6, 2016.
• 22 December: The San Antonio Spurs NBA franchise announces they will field a new team in San Antonio in the United Soccer League for the 2016 season.
• 22 December: The San Antonio Scorpions, of the North American Soccer League, winds down its operations and folds after selling its stadium to the San Antonio Scorpions, the city of San Antonio, and Bexar County, Texas.
• 22 December: Michael Bradley is voted the 2015 Player of the Year for the United States men's national soccer team.
• 16 December: Abby Wambach plays her final match for the United States women's national soccer team, a 1-0 defeat to the People's Republic of China at the Mercedes-Benz Superdome in New Orleans.
• 16 December: Carli Lloyd is voted the 2015 Player of the Year for the United States women's national soccer team.
• 16 December: CONCACAF and CONMEBOL announce the venues for the Copa América Centenario, which will be hosted by the United States. The final will be played at MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey, on June 26, 2016.
• 6 December: Portland Timbers defeat Columbus Crew SC, 2-1, to win MLS Cup 2015.
• 5 December: Major League Soccer announces its intention to expand to 28 teams.

• 5 December: Major League Soccer announces it will take a two-week break in June 2016 during the group stage of the Copa América Centenario.

WikiProject United States - 50,000 Challenge

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Women in Red online editathon on sports

		Welcome to Women in Red's May 2017 worldwide online editathon. Participation is welcome in any language.
		"Sports"

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 12:38, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Tagging Players

I've gone through and tagged most of the players in these three categories:

• Category:Major League Soccer players
• Category:North American Soccer League (1968–84) players
• Category:College men's soccer by conference in the United States

Many were already tagged with the main project but not this Wikiproject. In addition to tagging the players, I have also tagged most of the categories themselves. I'm in the process of tagging as much as possible under the MLS categories, before moving on to USL and NASL 2.0.

I was wondering if there was anyone who thought that something in particular needed to be focused on? I can tell this page doesn't get much use, but I'd like as much input as possible. Jay eyem (talk) 21:28, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Vaughan Azzurri page

I'm guessing the Vaughan Azzurri are now a notable club since they will be playing in the 2019 Canadian Championship. Does someone have a page in their sandbox? --Coppercanuck (talk) 03:14, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

It'll probably be pushed back into the draft namespace until they've actually played per WP:FOOTYN. Jay eyem (talk) 03:36, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Date formatting for North American tournaments

I've gone back and forth at Talk:2019 CONCACAF Gold Cup Final over the date format used in citations and prose for the 2019 Gold Cup Final, with the main argument against being that "it was always that way" for Gold Cup entries. Given the strong national ties to several English-speaking countries who use MDY primarily or almost exclusively (including the all-but-one-time hosts the United States), MOS:DATETIES should be enforced and all Gold Cup articles should be switched in kind to MDY for the sake of our readers. Thoughts? SounderBruce 03:20, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

I was under the impression that who/what is the subject of the article is irrelevant. Generally English Wikipedia is written using the standards of BrE (British English), which is DMY. Again, not claiming some authority, rather reiterating assumed standards. Pirmas697 (talk) 11:54, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

My impression has been that (at least in terms of spelling) articles closely related to national subjects should reflect national practices - ie. American-speaking subjects should reflect American practices, and similarly for British-speaking subjects. It would seem practical for a similar rule to hold for date notation. However, the article in question reflects a regional subject, not a national one, for which there is no single preferred practice. The closest "organizational practice" I could see, for lack of a better term, would be directly from Concacaf's website, which seems to use MM/DD along its bottom scroll bar. That said, I don't believe the selection of a format is important enough to warrant a giant debate. -Gopherbashi (talk) 12:27, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

"That said, I don't believe the selection of a format is important enough to warrant a giant debate." 100% agreed. As long as the article is internally consistent, it's not really worth much discussion. Pirmas697 (talk) 15:19, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Notability of article?

Not sure if Legacy Early College Field meets notability guidelines. What is the consensus on this one? N. Jain ^{(talk to me)} 00:29, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Use of FC/SC suffix for club names

I have been reverted by Walter Görlitz at Major League Soccer records and statistics for trying to un-pipe links to Atlanta United FC, Minnesota United FC, and Orlando City SC in order to remain consistent with other names on the same entry (e.g. Seattle Sounders FC, all the [city name] FCs). Per WP:COMMONNAME, we should use "the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources)". Such independent, reliable sources that use the suffixes include ESPN, Sports Illustrated, New York Times (though they are not consistent, they do elaborate in this article), and international sources like The Guardian and BBC Sport. While other sources do drop the suffix in prose, when it comes to standalone tables and statistical lists, they include the suffix. Moreover, if such names are meant to be piped so often, should they not be moved to the unpiped form? It seems there is community consensus to use the suffixed form. SounderBruce 02:50, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Ask yourself why they were piped in the first place. There have been several discussions about this: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 98#MLS team names? for instance, and multiple others at that project. A handful of well-chosen articles is not necessary. What does MLS call them? North American sports sources such as ESPN? Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:08, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Both of the standings tables you've linked to use the suffix for Atlanta, Columbus, Minnesota, and Orlando. Seems like there is a common standard applied here. SounderBruce 04:58, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Potential issue in regards to 1932 U.S. Open Cup Champions

An article by TheCup.us has brought to light a possible issue in regards to the U.S. Open Cup Champions listings. To summarize, it claims that the New Bedford Whalers side that won the tournament should be counted towards the Fall River Marksmen title count. The NBW team page itself says that the side, under New Bedford Whalers III, was a successor club to FRM, but some evidence shown here may demonstrate that goes farther. [2] If this is the case, should Fall River be seen as a 5-time Open Cup champion or should a note be added to the page?

The section of note I've copied below:

"When Sam Mark left Fall River, he announced that his stadium in Tiverton was available for anyone who wished to put a team there. Former Marksmen and future Hall or Famer Harold Brittan took him up on the offer, buying the Pawtucket club and moving them in as Fall River FC. The new Fall River club survived a mediocre 1931 Spring season finishing mid-table, and afterwards merged with the New Bedford Whalers, the former fierce rival of the Marksmen who had also fallen on hard times.

Heading into the 1931 Fall ASL season, the Fall River FC/New Bedford combination folded. Sam Mark realized the move to New York was not working out as planned and decided to move his team back to New England. In a plot twist that can only happen in American soccer, Mark moved his team to New Bedford to play as the New Bedford Whalers. The new Whalers won the 1931 Fall ASL season and won the 1932 Open cup title over the next American soccer dynasty, Stix, Baer and Fuller of St. Louis. With that win, the Whalers (Marksmen) became the first club in tournament history to win three straight titles.

To date, only four clubs have earned a US Open Cup three-peat: Fall River Marksmen/New Bedford Whalers 1930-32, Stix, Baer & Fuller/Central Breweries/Shamrocks SC from 1933-35, New York Greek American Atlas SC from 1967-69 and Seattle Sounders FC from 2009-11.

Of the 12 players who made Open Cup appearances for the New Bedford Whalers in 1932, eight of them had appeared for the Marksmen in their 1931 title run. Only four players that made Open Cup appearances for the Whalers in 1932 were holdovers from the old Whalers club that played in the 1931 Spring season: Tommy Florie, James Montgomerie, Tommy McMillan and William Watson. The 1932 Whalers were essentially the same team as the Marksmen in 1931, they had just moved twice in less than a year. The many city changes and name swaps during this time no doubt has caused confusion for historians over the years, and lead to counting the 1932 New Bedford Whalers cup-winning team as a separate club from the Fall River Marksmen." ColeTrain4EVER (talk) 15:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Bri Folds

Hi, is someone able to check and wiki-validate the draft page for Bri Folds, NWSL draftee and recently-signed player in Sweden? Soccerella (talk) 16:18, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Question about transfer articles

I generally don't look too closely at transfer articles for other countries, but I notice that for some they are based on transfers within just one league, such as MLS, A-League, CanPL, and the Indian Super League. By contrast, other countries aggregate multiple leagues, such as England, France, Germany, and Italy. Is there any reason not to incorporate other American/Canadian WP:FPL leagues into the transfer lists e.g. USL Championship and USL League One? There are older articles in Category:North American Soccer League transfers and Category:USL Championship transfers but they are typically fairly out of date and poorly maintained. Just wanted to get a general consensus on the best approach to these kinds of articles. Jay eyem (talk) 22:16, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

References for NCAA Rankings

Currently, both sites that put out college rankings (United Soccer Coaches and Top Drawer Soccer) don't update their rankings with a new article weekly. They just update one url with the new week and there is no archived record for that page. Does anyone know how to better cite the source for those rankings, instead of just listing the one URL at the top and making sure it gets caught every week? The current year's article has a tag that it needs additional verification, and I'd like to get that removed. Also, both sites do have a past year's page, but United Soccer Coaches just provides a link to an excel file. How should that be cited in previous years? Swimmer33 (talk) 13:50, 20 April 2021 (UTC)