Jump to content

Talk:Clásico Regiomontano

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Peerreview Suggestions

[edit]

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Hari Seldon 12:18, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Dates of the 81 matches

[edit]

Only a few of the Clásico Regiomontano matches have dates given. Can anyone provide dates of the other matches in the Historical Results section? Kevyn 18:55, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: One of the main problems is that there is little documentation for the 81 Clásicos. I, for instance, started watching the Clásicos 10 years ago, and that means that I am only familiar and remeber Clásicos from the 46th to the 81st. But getting cited information is very hard! Most of my contributions are done by memory. I am, however, researching and looking for documentation for this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.248.36.100 (talk • contribs) 08:58, 18 April 2006
I've added the dates and places for the first 10 Clásicos. I got them from the homepage of a recognized soccer commentor from Monterrey ( the webpage is Chavana.com) If someone wishes to continue addind the dates, please do. Dreyesbo 15:49, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
EXCELLENT! I've put the sources for those 10 games in proper Wikipedia citation format. Anyone want to volunteer to do the remaining 72? Kevyn 19:22, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I went ahead and added the dates & locations for Clásicos 11-20, and verified scores. Anyone want to volunteer to do the next 10? Kevyn 19:55, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll do the next ten. Surely we could keep up the pace like that. Dreyesbo 00:06, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria for Notable Clásicos

[edit]

This comment is to propose a Criteria for adding content to the "Notable Clásicos" section.

It is common that whenever a Clásico ends, someone wants to add the result and a chronicle of the game to the "Notable Clásicos" Section. Though it may feel great at the moment that your team won or your favorite player scored, it should be taken into account that this is an encyclopedia, not a blog. Only truly Notable games should be added to the section, and not just any league or friendly match that happens to be most recent.

Currently, there is a Historical Results sub-section in the Record Section. Unless the Clásico has been truly notable, the correct procedure should be to simply add the result, date, and stadium to the list/table.

But what is a truly notable Clásico? I would like to propose the following criteria:

  • The First Clásico in which something happened (i.e., the First Clásico ever played, the first Clásico with more than 3 goals, the first Clásico played in a certain competition, or in a certain stadium, or in a certain unusual condition --like, the first Clásico played outside Monterrey, or outside of Mexico, or, if they ever play in Europe or Asia, outside the American continent, or the first time in Copa Libertadores, or something really remarkable--)
  • A Clásico with a broad goal differential, i.e., where a team wins by goal difference of 3 or more.
  • A Clásico with a remarkable amount of goals scored (i.e., if they ever tie 7-7, it would be remarkable, but I think that if there is more than 6 goals scored in the game, the game is notable).
  • A Clásico with importance beyond city pride, such as, a Clásico in the playoffs (semi-finals, Old-style "Liguilla", finals, etc...), or a Clásico that decides whether or not one team goes to an inferior division.

Currently, all Clásicos listed in the "Notable Clásicos" section meet the above criteria. I propose this criteria, and would ask for suggestions on how to improve it. In any case, it is clear that, though every Clásico is memorable, not all are "Notable".

Hari Seldon 12:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you kidding? THIS IS A STUB

[edit]

I dont know why the assesment team of the Wikiproject Footbal assess this as a B-class article, because this is indeed a stub. Please, dont let the length fool you. More than half of this article is merely trivia about dates and scores of the game. Then we have three list of notable players. And it does not satisfy the conditions to be rated as a B-class, it does not have an useful image(sorry, the teams logos facing each other is NOT useful), it doesn not have a section widely explore, it does have some sections, but they are useless (specially the "Notable Clasicos", one of the largest sections, written as a list filled with trivia and biased comments). If someone deleted all that content, the article would get reduced to a stub, and it may even be marked for speedy deletion. --Legion fi 08:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why would referenced content be erased?
Some of it is trivia, but the "notable Clásicos" are descriptions of games that have made the "Clásico" a notable event in Monterrey. Indeed, the rivalry has evolved. As for the "biased comments and weasel words", I urge you to point them out.
Non-copyrighted useful imagery has not been found, thus, none has been added.
How would you write this article?
Hari Seldon 04:57, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
About referenced content. Just because a content is referenced it doesn't mean that it can't be deleted. It can be deleted because: a) It is trivia, b) It is biased and C) It is not reliable. There are many other reasons why referenced content can be delete, but those are the ones that apply to this article.
About notability. Yes it is notable, but not widely notable. It is notable in Monterrey soccer fan circles and that is the same as saying that "The Umbrarum Regni Novem Portis" is a black magic fictional grimoire very notable in goetian demonology circles.
About the biased content in "Notable Clasicos". Just one example to make my point: "Clásico 61 on February 26, 2000. The most emotive Clásico of all time, "the best in history"". It is biased because the use of superlatives (most,best) is subjective. There are at least three other examples of either biased or non-NPOV content. I will list them if you want.
About the images. Im not arguing about the use of non-copyrighted images. It is just that one of the criteria for a B-class is that it may have a useful image. But it does not. Again if certain criteria cannot be match then it must remain a stub.
About how I would write this article. I wouldnt. I think it lacks notability. But being a soccer fan myself I can understand how deep the notability of it most be for you. And I wont argue with that. And that is also why I'm not nominating the article for SD. I think that the introduction is sufficient, and if you want to expand it I suggest you find other sections, not only about the sporty part of the game. How about some social content? or an explanation of why the rivalry started. You can even research more about what Televisa said of it generating the same or more revenue than the classic match Chivas vs. America.
--Legion fi 05:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
btw, I didn't add the "weasel words" tag to the El clásico article. Not even the unreferenced one. But just to keep the disccussion in one talk page, nice work deleting the unreferenced content on that article. --Legion fi 05:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the content referenced in this article is referenced from newspaper articles (not editorials). These newspapers, like Milenio and Reforma (El Norte) are among the widest circulating papers in Mexico. How can you say they are not reliable/biased?
The article states that the Clásico's revenue stream is similar to that of the "Super Clásico". Thus, the notability, at least in economical terms, is similar to that of the national Classic, and is not limited to "Monterrey circles", considering that both teams have an international fan base (particularly Tigres, who hires famous international players, and who enjoys the support of a national-base of UANL graduates). (The sources are TV commentaries, and I am currently researching written, reliable sources).
As for the social content, I don't understand what you mean.
According to one media professor I used to have, the Clásico was invented by Roberto Hernandez Junior, and it started as a tradition when Tigres ascended to first division, as it was the first game they played. The rivalry has been expanding, particularly due to the results in the notable clásicos (hence, the section is not Trivia). The Clásico became something more when Rayados sentenced Tigres to descend to "Primera A", and also when they seeked to annul the 6-3 victory Tigres had over them. The Clásicos shaped the league in 2003 and 2005, in semi-finals, and decided the qualifying team to Copa Libertadores in 2006. Is this only trivia and of notability limited to Monterrey? I don't think so...
I know you didn't add the tag, but you did say that this article had weasel words. Please let me know where, so that the article can be improved. Hari Seldon 00:56, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Clásico Regiomontano. 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:

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) 22:29, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Clásico_Regiomontano&oldid=1198715965"