Talk:2009–10 UEFA Champions League qualifying phase and play-off round

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

This article was nominated for deletion on 23 June 2009. The result of the discussion was keep.

Contest prod

Given that we have this, this, this, this, I don't see why this article should be deleted. Chanheigeorge (talk) 16:05, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Page splits

(Assuming there is no axing). Is there a rationale for splitting the ties by leg (rather than grouping them together like for the WCQuals etc). These are really two games that make up a single tie and it seems a bit like separating the results from the first and second halves of a match. I don't think any arguments around "chronological order" would fly either as I can't imagine that if a first leg match was postponed it would be placed chronologically in that case if this scheme is used. This would also remove a rather unneccessary level of detail in the page contents. Jlsa (talk) 23:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and it also seems excessive to repeat the summary table once the detail section has been added. Jlsa (talk) 23:35, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some similar pages separate into sections of first legs and second legs, and some other separate them according to ties. I do not have a particular preference myself. Chanheigeorge (talk) 02:03, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen that and I must admit I think it is better grouped by tie (I can't see why you'd need a detailed summary of all first legs for any reason, but a summary of both legs of a tie is pretty much "the result"). Jlsa (talk) 03:29, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are certainly arguments for both sides. Personally, I prefer matches to be grouped into "First legs" and "Second legs". – Pee Jay 09:28, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That strikes me as unfathomably ridiculous. In the group stage will you a) group Matchday 1 results together, then Matchday 2 results etc or b) Group A, Group B and Group C? There is 0% relationship between the results in leg 1 (how does Mogren's first leg result relate to Tre Fioris) and 100% between the two legs of a tie. Jlsa (talk) 11:56, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason to break a custom on the basis of this one article. We should follow the customs as shown in previous season articles. – Pee Jay 13:41, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

I propose that UEFA Champions League 2009–10 qualifying phase and UEFA Champions League 2009–10 play-off round be merged. Although UEFA regulations technically treat these stages as separate, neither stage constitutes the "competition proper", which only begins at the group stage. This is especially noted when tallying the top goalscorers in the competition, for which only goals scored from the group stage onwards are counted. Furthermore, I see no point in creating an individual article for a single round of the competition. The only round that should have its own article is the final, and that is because it is a notable match on its own merits. – Pee Jay 13:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The author blanked and deleted the play-off round page; I have set up a redirect in its place. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 15:56, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Pee Jay. But this is not a good time to block editing on this page. Match results are not being updated properly.--Aidannn (talk) 07:06, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2009–10 UEFA Champions League qualifying phase and play-off round. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150810065503/http://www.olympiacos.org/ to http://www.olympiacos.org/

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:28, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]