This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
Argentina has an unusual system. They play the whole season in two halfs. The 'Apertura (opening) is the first half. A championship title is awarded when this finishes. The points are then reset and they play for the Clausura, in the second half of the season. After that finishes another championship title is awarded.
Mintguy(T) 08:48, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Views on some proposed changes
For me, this is currently a very useful article, containing links to nearly everything I might want so good work so far.
I want to propose a few additions and changes however:
Firstly, would anyone object if I added every nation from around the world? This is certainly what I'd expect to see if I viewed this page. I understand some nations don't have a national league, for example, but this can easily be left blank and we'll have a more complete table?
Also at the moment entries tend to link to the highest league within a nation, but wouldn't it make more sense to link to the general system? For example
English football league system instead of two separate links to the Premiership and Football League,
Chilean football league system instead of just the highest league, and so on.
Next, could international football competitions be listed also? At the moment only domestic ones are. So, the European Championships, or African Champions League could be listed under the relevent headings.
Lastly, a very small point, what is the convention on linking years, like
2004? It makes more sense, and looks nicer, not to, in my opinion and I'd have thought there'd be some kind of convention on it.
One problem with merging is that the resulting page would be quite large. This would be a detriment to users on public systems with limited bandwidth or individual systems with slow dial-up connections. Perhaps the tabular and visual information could be combined on a single page and the narratives left as they are, with links to combined data where appropriate?
I don't really propose that the trigram should be used for both the overview and the national team; just pointing out that the trigram doesn't need a row to itself, and can be used to save space in another row.
Sortable by Confederation is more efficient than having separate sections per confederation
Some other columns might be left unsortable: FA, league(s), cup(s), super_cup
Non-FIFA member codes used by FIFA or confederations
Irregular codes
Obsolete country codes
FIFA and IOC differences
FIFA and ISO differences
Of these, #1, #2, and #3 could be combined into this table, with footnotes for entries in #2 and #3 (which would have no "Joined FIFA" date) ; #4 could be a separate table (like now, but hopefully with references); #5 and #6 could just delegate to
Comparison of IOC, FIFA, and ISO 3166 country codes.
I don't see any problem with the title Association football around the world. Or how about something like Association football overview by country?
jnestorius(
talk)20:27, 8 October 2009 (UTC)reply
"Association football around the world" implies to me that the article gives an appraisal of the reception of association football on a global scale and in individual regions/countries. Since this article is a list, it should begin "List of...", and the title should actually convey what is contained within the list, hence "List of FIFA member associations". –
PeeJay23:19, 8 October 2009 (UTC)reply
In any case, the name of the page is a separate issue. Since the association football around the world page is the biggest and has the longest history, it should be the target of the merge for the other two, even if the merged page ends up having some other name.
jnestorius(
talk)
I also like the idea. My suggestion would be to remove the "easter egg" wikilinks from the trigrams (leaving one instance, unlinked) and instead have one (unsortable) column with three navigations links (e.g. [[Football in England|Overview]]<br/>[[England national football team|National team]]<br/>|[[List of football clubs in England|List of clubs]]. (Also use {{
flag|Foo}} instead of {{
flagicon|Foo}} [[Foo]].) —
Andrwsc (
talk·contribs)
19:04, 8 October 2009 (UTC)reply
Some countries have nonstandard names (e.g. Republic of Ireland) or flag (e.g. Chinese Taipei). I think {{flag}} and/or {{flagcountry}} should be able to handle that. Maybe a variant of these templates could provide the three-in-one you suggest. Should be straightforward to code since most relevant articles have standardised names.
jnestorius(
talk)20:27, 8 October 2009 (UTC)reply
Support, including improvements suggested (not going to get into details; just use good judgement). One detail I will get into: It's important that the trigrammes have their own column so they are sortable, and because trigrammes don't have anything to do with "overviews" whatever those might be; don't mix apples and oranges. Maybe whatever is in them should instead move to a "Notes" column at the end. The trigrammes are very important (thus their being subject to an entire list article of their own so far). Further, as I brought up at the talk page of the list of member associations, we should not be giving columns of Spanish, French and German names, this being the English Wikipedia. This was done in as misunderstanding response to a requests for addition of country names in the majority native language of the country in question, if different from English name. E.g.: CountryNameInEnglish (NativeCountryNameIfDifferent). That would actually be useful. — SMcCandlishTalk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀContribs.05:23, 17 January 2010 (UTC)reply
This merge proposal is now OVER THREE YEARS OLD. There really hasn't been much discussion here, and not much opposition. If the editor that proposed it still cares, then I suggest being
WP:BOLD and
WP:JUSTDOIT. But I will remove the merge tag now.
WTF? (
talk)
02:21, 24 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Non-FIFA associations
I removed from the list Barawa, Bougainville, Kurdistan and Tibet, since are out of criteria applied in the introduction of the section. From the same introduction I also removed "...stateless populations...", if we apply also this criterion then we should add a lot of other Football Associations, not only Barawa or Tibet (moreover, this cluster was already included in "Regional" sub-section). Our guideline should be our page
List of sovereign states and dependent territories by continent, obviously referring to those permanent inhabited only. Following this principle I added to the list Transnistria, and I also added as a note the absence of a FA for Akrotiri and Dekhelia, Pitcairn Islands and Svalbard.
SouLFlamE (
talk)
10:52, 6 December 2020 (UTC)reply