Talk:Football World Cup
|
|
An event mentioned in this article is a July 30 selected anniversary
| Contents |
Please leave this page at Football World Cup
We have -
- Cricket World Cup
- Rugby League World Cup
- Rugby Union World Cup
- Alpine Skiing World Cup
- Volleyball World Cup
- American Football World Cup
- Cross-country skiing World Cup
- Golf World Cup
- World Cup of Hockey
(posted by User:Mintguy, 12 Jun 2004)
- I disagree - those titles (some of which could possibly do with changing) should have no impact on what we call this page. It's not as if they're a series of World Cups, they're all completely separate things. FIFA World Cup is its official name, it's perfectly descriptive enough, and it saves confusion over what form of football we are talking about. I'd like to move it back, but since the title of 2004 European Football Championship is also being debated, I'll wait for that to be decided first. sjorford 13:48, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
FIFA World Cup is not as well known as Football World Cup (though in most parts of the world it's just known as 'The World Cup' - no qualification being necessary). DJ Clayworth 13:51, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- "FIFA World Cup" is better. There are far more hits for "FIFA World Cup" than "football World Cup" - 700, 000 vs 50, 000, so it's not true it's not better known. Mandel 18:02, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
- I get slightly different stats. But it's not a fair analysis anyway. As stated above, "World Cup" unqualified means the Football World Cup 99 times out of 100. Putting "world cup" +football -fifa in to Google gives me 1,460,000 hits. But I don't claim that searches on Google prove anything. Google searches are naturally biased towards US usage simply because there are more US web pages than there are for the rest of the world. Mintguy (T) 20:47, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Your stats are erroneous. You should put them in inverted commas: "Football world cup" and "FIFA World Cup". Putting "world cup" +football -fifa simply means "world cup" is mentioned with football, not as a generic term. Neither is it true that "FIFA World Cup" is a US usage. I follow the European leagues but I have never heard people used the term "football world cup". Mandel 10:30, Aug 1, 2004 (UTC)
- I wasn't suggesting that FIFA World Cup was US usage. I was merely pointing out that in the general case Google stats are not a good indicator. The point that you have singularly failed to grasp is that "World Cup" (unqualified) means the 'world cup of football' 99 times out of 100. Therefore specifically saying "football world cup" doesn't appear as often as you might expect. The fact that a search for the words "world cup" without any mention of FIFA but specifically linked to the word "football" gives such a huge hit rate is an indicator that the "World Cup" of football is mentioned much more often than any specific mention of the "FIFA World Cup". In fact just to ram home the point a search for "world cup" +fifa gives less hits than "world cup" +football -fifa. Mintguy (T) 10:47, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I don't think I misunderstand you. It's true "World Cup" almost always mean "World Cup of football" 99 times out of 100, but what I mean is the entire term "football World Cup", which is very seldom used.
- As you said, "World Cup" almost always means the footballing World Cup, but it's very seldom the generic term "football World Cup" is used.
- To check "world cup" +fifa gives less hits than "world cup" +football -fifa is not accurate. It simply states people mentioned "world cup" with "football" often, which is natural enough, but not that people used the generic term "football World Cup" often. Most are simply "World Cup" and "football" used separately in one article. Mandel 10:54, Aug 2, 2004 (UTC)
- Which precisely prooves the point. The words "World Cup" and "football" are associatied much more often than "FIFA" and "World Cup". But they arn't neccesarily used in a single phrase because no qualification is usually neccesary. But in Wikipedia we need to have qualification. What is best to use for qualification isn't whatever phrase happens to turn up more often in google, but whatever is going to give a clearer understanding of what the article is actually about. The fact that "FIFA World Cup" turns up more often than "football World Cup" doesn't mean anything, for one thing the results are skewed because the XBox and Playstation game is called "FIFA World Cup". "FIFA World Cup" doesn't tell us anthing about what the sport is unless you know what FIFA means, and as the search for "world cup" +football -fifa shows any specific mention of FIFA is less common than a specific mention of football, therefore using the word "football" is better than using the word "FIFA". Now we could call the article "World Cup (football)" or "World Cup of Football", but "Football World Cup" fits in with the previously established naming of articles. Mintguy (T) 12:45, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I disagree. I think it's far better to call it by its official name. Most people who knows football instantly knows what is the "FIFA World Cup", we don't need coined-up terms like "Motor-racing Formula 1". "Football World Cup" is a portmaneau term simply invented to fit in the scheme. I prefer "World Cup (football)", but I simply don't understand why, if a term is used more often and generally accepted around the world, it should be taken against it? Even ' "FIFA World Cup" -XBox -PlayStation ' turns up more results than 'football World Cup'.
- Most people who knows football instantly knows what is the "FIFA World Cup" - This article isn't aimed at people who instantly know what FIFA means. Mintguy (T)
- You seriously haven't given a good enough reason why if a name is used more often, it shouldn't be used. It's a self-contradiction. If "FIFA World Cup" has more hits, obviously people use it more, hence it is more likely to be better known than "football World Cup". As it is, "football World Cup" is just a coined-up term, and it really jars on the ear, like "tennis Davis Cup" or "golf Ryder's Cup". As you know, football means different things in different countries.
- Are we going to end up with "football (soccer) World Cup" simply because it is more descriptive? According to this logic certainly this would make a better choice than simply "football World Cup"!
- If a person seriously is so ignorant as to not know what is the "World Cup" is, then it is also likely that he or she may mistake football for some other sport. A simple way out: at the disambigation page simple state that FIFA World Cup is the World Cup for the sport of football or soccer. A person checking for World Cup will then know what it is. No one seriously will type "football World Cup" first time round because it is not often used. Mandel 10:33, Aug 4, 2004 (UTC)
- The World Cup used to be called the "Jules Rimet Cup". So is it going to be that it will be called "football Cup" just because no one knows who Jules Rimet is? It sounds very strange! Mandel 10:42, Aug 3, 2004 (UTC)
- No. The competition has always been called the "World Cup", or rather "La Coupe du Monde". The original trophy was renamed the Jules Rimet Trophy in 1946 and we have an article on it. The current trophy is the "FIFA World Cup TM". By coincidence, last night on Mastermind (http://www.bbc.co.uk/entertainment/mastermind/) one of the contestant's specialist subject was The history of the Football World Cup 1930-2002 [1] (http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctwo/listings/programme.shtml?day=today&service_id=4224&filename=20040802/20040802_2000_4224_9485_30) Mintguy (T) 12:16, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Like I say, football means different things in different countries. You assume that a reader of the article knows nothing about football; so fair enough, you can't assume that he knows what's "football World Cup" either? There are many kinds of football too. Mandel 10:33, Aug 4, 2004 (UTC)
- There is obviously not going to be an agreement on this, so I see no further point in continuing this discussion and re-stating the same facts over and over again. But I will make one final point. Before the new trophy was created in 1971, the competuition was known as the "World Cup" without any qualification it is only since the new trophy was made in 1971 that the competiton has been known as the "FIFA World Cup", so to refer to the 1930 FIFA World Cup etc.. through to 1970 is just plain wrong. Only from 1974 onwards should you refer to the FIFA World Cup. Mintguy (T) 11:22, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Please leave this page at Football World Cup (more)
- Allow me to interject in this lively discussion ;o)
- "FIFA World Cup is not as well known as Football World Cup."
- That is patently false. The term "Football World Cup" is not popular at all, and is nowhere near as ubiquitous and well known as the more popular title "FIFA World Cup," in America (including Latin America), Europe, and elsewhere.
- "(though in most parts of the world it's just known as 'The World Cup' - no qualification being necessary)."
- Correct, but if any adjective is ever used in the title it is "FIFA," not "Football."
- 'Which precisely prooves the point. The words "World Cup" and "football" are associatied much more often than "FIFA" and "World Cup"'.
- Which precisely proves that you have totally missed the point.
- FIRST:
- The fact that the word "football" is associated with "World Cup" in a generic sense has absolutely nothing to do with whether these words are associated in a TITLE, a proper name. Using your logic, I could very easily argue that terms/names such as "Pele," "Maradona," "Goal," "Red Card," "Yellow Card," and any other number of terms are likewise closely associated with "World Cup," and therefore, one could argue that the title of the article should just as well be the "Maradona World Cup," or the "Goal World Cup."
- But of course, that would be nonsensical, as these associated names/terms are most definitely not associated in the literal sense of forming an intergral part of the name/title of the tournament; they are merely associated conceptually, and as a result, they are also associated in the frequency with which they are mentioned in the same breath, as part of a phrase, but not as one single term.
- People simply do not say "Football World Cup" as a proper name, in most parts of the World. Many people do say "The World Cup of Football," which is not a proper name by itself, but a name "World Cup," followed by an adjectival phrase "of football."
- SECOND:
- If you have in fact actually heard the term "Football World Cup" more often than not, then you must live in an area where that usage predominates, but you would be incorrect to assume that most people speak of it in that fashion. And, if you live in Europe, I can definitely assure you that most people in your continent do not say "Football World Cup" either.
- It is easy for one to confuse a local usage with greater popular usage. For example, in the ceremony announcing the selection of South Africa as the hoast for 2010, I noticed a very high incidence of South African delegates using the term "Soccer World Cup." I cannot speak from presonal experience, but, hypothetically, if we assume, for the sake of argument, that the most commonly known name for the tournament in the Republic of South Africa is "Soccer World Cup," then it is easy to imagine how a South African football fan might come to believe that everyone else in the world thinks of it that way as well, much as an American might not be aware that the name "Soccer" is far less popular name than "football" for describing that sport.
- I believe that your conception of the supposed popularity of "Football World Cup" vs. "FIFA World Cup" falls under a similar misconception.
- "No one seriously will type "football World Cup" first time round because it is not often used"
- Exactly.
- "There is obviously not going to be an agreement on this"
- No, but I believe that our friend here is in a very small minority, and we can safely say (particularly given the varied responses to this discussion) that people find his interpretation to be rather peculiar, and inconsistence with common usage.
--Supersexyspacemonkey 20:25, 29.03.2005
Although I agree that "FIFA World Cup" might make more sense, you cannot move this on a whim. As you say, "Major Edits, such as article title, especially if they are being debated in the discussion page, should NOT be made without announcement or a detailed explanation". Well, that is the case. The title of this page has been discussed ad nauseum. It was agreed that "Football World Cup" was the better title. Agree or not, that's what the conscensus is (and not a "very small minority" like you think). Just because you dissagree, doesn't give you the right to wipe out the history and move the page. If you want to re-open the discussion, fine. But yours is NOT the final decision. A lot of work has been put in by many people to create the "Football World Cup" structure on many pages of this site. Moving the page is easy, but its effects are a bit larger than you think. Perhaps a little higher understanding of Wikipedia is needed before you go on this crusade. --Dryazan 03:39, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Dear Dryazan, thank you for your reponse. Allow me to address your observations:
- Although I agree that "FIFA World Cup" might make more sense, you cannot move this on a whim. As you say, "Major Edits, such as article title, especially if they are being debated in the discussion page, should NOT be made without announcement or a detailed explanation".
And as this discussion proves, I did not move the article on a whim and without a detailed explanation, so, with all due respect, your comment makes absolutely no sense.
- Well, that is the case. The title of this page has been discussed ad nauseum.
True, but irrelevant.
Neither A. the length of two verbose members' posts in this discussion (I being the third verbose debator :oP), nor B. the inability of certain persons to engage in polite discussion without resorting to name-calling, nor C. the stubborn refusal of certain persons to seriously consider opposing viewpoints with an open mind, and either concede these or otherwise retort said viepoints with sensible counter-argument as opposed to simple negation, nor D. the inability to convince one particularly vocal opponent to the majority (Btw, in none of these statements am I refering to you ;oP), outweighs the opinion of other members.
In this case, more than a few others have weighed in with small, one-line or one-paragraph posts, and they have indicated their agreement that "Football World Cup" is an unorthodox title for this article, and that "FIFA World Cup" is much better.
- It was agreed that "Football World Cup" was the better title.
- Agree or not, that's what the conscensus is (and not a "very small minority" like you think).
False, unless you happen refer to some indicator other than this discussion, in which case I apologize for my erroneous assumption.
It was asserted by exactly one member that "Football World Cup" was the better title, whilst the exact opposite has been argued by every other member in this talk page.
- Just because you dissagree, doesn't give you the right to wipe out the history and move the page.
I did no such thing; I move the page whilst conserving the discussion history, by checking the appropriate box during the moving process.
- If you want to re-open the discussion, fine. But yours is NOT the final decision.
I never assumed it was my final decision, as I am nowhere near that arrogant. I assumed, by the evidence in this talk page, that the final decision had been taken, and only one person was arguing to keep the "Football "" "" title (in a rather closed-minded and condescending fashion, by the way). I perceived that I was taking the appropriate measure, given the fact that, as you state, the title has been argued ad nauseum. Once again, if you speak of some other indicator apart from this discussion page, I apologize for my inaccurate assupmtion.
- A lot of work has been put in by many people to create the "Football World Cup" structure on many pages of this site.
Yes, and I respect that.
- Moving the page is easy, but its effects are a bit larger than you think.
Perhaps. ;O)
- Perhaps a little higher understanding of Wikipedia is needed before you go on this crusade.
"Crusade?" LOL!
--Supersexyspacemonkey 10:14PM, 31 Mar 2005 (USCT)
Well, it was not a decision to change the page name. The discussion last took place in August, and no change has been made since then. No consensus was reached, no matter what this talk page might say. Since August, further changes have been made to make this move more complex than it seems. Again, I also think "FIFA World Cup" might make more sense (but then, look at pages in other languages, most of them include "football" or its variety). It just doesn't make sense with the way other World Cup pages, categories, squad lists, etc are set up. This one change will cascade down a lot. But I do appretiate your earnestness and hope that you can contribute to the football (soccer) pages on Wikipedia. --Dryazan 04:26, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I apologize for any grief I have unwittingly caused. This has been a learning experience. I did a little reading just now, and I see that there is a procedure in place for requesting and receiving community approval to move an article. Thank you for your patience, and I promise that I will continue to contribute to the football pages, albeit causing far less damage. ;OP
--Supersexyspacemonkey 10:14PM, 31 Mar 2005 (USCT)
New Table (this was before the New New Table)
The old table was much better. We also appear to have lost the footnotes. Mintguy (T) 02:10, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
New New Table
I very much appreciate work put in on the "new new" table. The "old new" one that replaced the "old old" one was was all cocked up and I had it on my TODO list to fix it. So I like the "new new" table but... I think it should be ordered the other way up, having 3 blank rows at the top looks odd. Mintguy (T) 23:24, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Nazi flag
For Germany in 1934 we display the Nazi Swastika.
According to http://www.nationalflaggen.de/flags-of-the-world/flags/de1933.html the Nazis re-instated the Red White and Black (the old Imperial flag) when they came to power in 1933. This flag flew jointly along with the Swastika (representing the ruling party) until 1935 when the Swastika became the flag of the German state. For accuracy sake should we be showing the Red Whit and Black flag? See also Flag_of_Germany. Jooler 09:18, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Sure, that makes sense... Although the swastika is as accurate. I will fix the WC 1934 page as well, but NOT WC 1938... --Dryazan 13:59, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Disambig message
Do we really need a disambig message for the Women's WC? If this page was at "World Cup", sure, but this way I don't think it's really needed, as I don't see many people coming here looking for the Women's tournament, and if they are, there are links at the bottom. But I am not sold either way. --Dryazan 12:49, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Since no one cares, I'm removing the disambig. --Dryazan 20:15, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Miracle of Bern
Hello, would some kind football person take a look at my translation from German of The Miracle of Bern (on the 1954 World Cup game) and check that the football terms are correct? I'm a native speaker of English but not a football fan! Thanks... Saintswithin 19:39, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)