Talk:2022–23 Juventus FC season

	Association football portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Italian football task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the season article task force.

Italy Low‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy 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.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Why was the format for the matches changed?

As a regular user of these season pages, I was very much used to the format from the previous seasons. Can we please revert to that, as it is much more comprehensive than this current one. 46.252.47.191 (talk) 06:01, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because you do not know the previous format was wrong. The correct one is this (yes, it may seem weird but trust me). Dr Salvus 08:34, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The "Football box collapsible" template is described as follows:

   This template is meant to be used for abbreviated regular season results with expandable details. The goal with this template is to display only one line of text (when collapsed) for each match. Therefore, avoid using line breaks (<br />) in parameters that are still visible when the box score is collapsed.

That sounds like appropriate use for displaying results on the season page. Do you have any source for it being the wrong template to use?

Spiz06 (talk) 20:17, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per consensus at WT:FOOTY, we should not be using collapsible footballboxes, rather tables. See this discussion, for example, and this MOS. If you don't agree open a discussion at WT:FOOTY Dr Salvus 17:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This patently absurd. The collapsible box is the most simple and easy thing since sliced bread to edit for everyone, there are hundreds and hundreds of articles using it and moving to a complex and frankly unfathomable set of bizarrely marked-up tables is ridiculous.

Consensus by action has taken place across hundreds of articles, the consensus by one discussion is clearly nonsense in the face of actual on-the-ground reality. Sparkle1 (talk) 21:37, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is clearly a considerably strong feeling against you here about what is and is not wrong. The wikiproject Football does not own this article and nor do you. There have been multiple complaints here, and now two separate users have reverted to the simplest of templates. Also, this is a significant minority position for you to take when you actually look at how the season articles are actually laid out. What complete nonsense to try and impose these unfathomably complex and difficult-to-edit tables or an incredibly simple and universally accessible template. the KISS (Keep It SIMPLE stupid) acronym comes to mind. Wikimark up is frankly dense and exclusionary and keeps pages in the hands of a minority of in-the-know editors and is patent nonsense to perpetuate. Sparkle1 (talk) 21:42, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FOOTY has authorised me to not care on that. Discuss af WT:FOOTY first. Dr Salvus 06:17, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect but since when did ownership for football articles on Wikipedia become that of a specific wiki project. I do not recognise that I or anyone else is required to seek the permission of a specific wiki project. They do not get to dictate consensus especially in the face of user’s ignoring the outcomes of their internal discussions. I am not talking a minority of users but most and a significant majority ignoring them.

The wiki project you are a member can authorise you to do whatever they like but it has no bearing on anyone else. It’s like the Masons saying non-Masons cannot wear Masons regalia. It’s uninforcable as the wiki project and the Masons only govern its members not non-members. As such I am not going round in circles with a wiki project or clearly a user who has assumed ownership of this and other football articles. Sparkle1 (talk) 07:34, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I draw your attention to the following on Wikipedia:WikiProject which states the following

WikiProjects are not rule-making organizations, nor can they assert ownership of articles within a specific topic area. WikiProjects have no special rights or privileges compared to other editors and may not impose their preferences on articles. A WikiProject is fundamentally a social construct: its success depends on its ability to function as a cohesive group of editors working towards a common goal.

Which is enforceable on Wikipedia. Under WP:Ownership. Sparkle1 (talk) 07:43, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notes section

It doesn't seem to be working properly, with its information included in the page under Champions League group table. What's happening @Dr Salvus:? Island92 (talk) 11:32, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why Ronaldo get out of Juventus

Why Ronaldo get out of Juve 183.171.68.174 (talk) 15:51, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]