Talk:FC Barcelona/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Semi-protected edit request on 28 October 2014

The phrase "most successful club in the world" from the intro should be removed as it is generally unhelpful. As a FC Barcelona fan, I trust Wikipedia's legitimacy and the official number of trophies won is 80, not 81 as it states. As of 20 August 2014, Barcelona has one more official trophy than Real Madrid C.F.. Domestic-wise Barcelona leads with 63 trophies versus Real Madrid's 62, while international-wise is 17-17. I am counting The Inter cities fairs cup, as it was an official open competition i.e. It was not an open to all clubs competition as it was limited by one club per city and only cities with business fairs trades. After 1968, it was sometimes referred to as the Runners-Up Cup, with teams now qualifying based on league position It is officially recognized by FIFA as a majour honour. Barcelona only won 2 Eva Duarte cups, unlike the 3 mentioned previously. The Eva Duarte cup was not official until 1947 and therefore, Barcelona's first Eva Duate cup is not recognised. Barcelona's very own honours page makes note of this (http://www.fcbarcelona.com/football/detail/card/honours-football) as does the Eva Duarte wikipedia page. Can you please either completely remove the "must successful club in the world" phrase, or atleast change the trophies in the brackets from (81) to (80)? Thank you, I don't want anyone degrading my club with false information. 87.112.141.101 (talk) 09:30, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

The phrase "most successful club in the world" doesn't appear anywhere in the article! Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 10:59, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

I have, however, removed the bit about being most successful in Spain - success can be a relative thing, and it's difficult to quantify in a neutral way. Without an external source it's best avoided. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 11:02, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

 Not done 81 is more than 79 the last I checked. The statement is clear and neutral. I restored it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:47, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

"Most successful" is not a neutral term, and is open to interpretation. Barcelona have (arguably) won more "major" trophies than any other in Spain, but this is not the only definition of success. In this instance, the two best-supported and richest clubs in Spain have won more trophies than any other. Athletic Bilbao have won 33 trophies with far less support, money - and only using Basque players. It is possible to argue that this makes Athletic a "more successful" club. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 14:39, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

If that were all it said it would violate WP:NPOV, but it clarifies the exact meaning before the end of the sentence and then elaborates through the rest of the paragraph. The current wording is a compromise from what was there several years ago. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:03, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

I see what you mean. I'd prefer not to use the word "successful", but I guess that the context into which it's been put is fairly clear. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 11:44, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 November 2014

Hi, I have a small question, not a request, but I would like to be analyzed in the 2014-15 FC Barcelona season § Squad information section, why not add that between fc barcelona and rdc espanyol 29 October 2014 in the Super Cup Catalunya ?, I would agree that would not get if it had been played by barcelona b, but there were players of the first team and was prob-ably would consider it in this section. I await your response and respect your decisions. Good day. 190.150.34.113 (talk) 15:52, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Is the Suárez note still required

Removal Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:53, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

After repeated unexplained removal and no further discussion I removed the note, although it is still valid, and instead moved it to the history section immediately after the news of his signing. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:49, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

No, it is extremely meaningless. The note should not be included at anytime including when Suarez was banned. On the other words, the present of the note has already include some compromise, so the note must be removed after he being unbanned. Raymond "Giggs" Ko 06:26, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

It was moved to the body of the article, immediately after the section on his signing. It's valid information and will remain in the article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:58, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

The information in the article is fair enough. Don't do any extra thing. Raymond "Giggs" Ko 03:02, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Catalunya super cup 2014 and dani alves profile

Good afternoon , you can add the result of the Supercup of Catalonia 2014 ?, The reason is, the participation of a large number of first team. Another detail is a change of photos, image , in the article by Daniel Alves, and took reference items such as Filipe Luiz, Fernandinho, Danilo, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.150.34.113 (talk) 22:40, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

INACCURATE OR FALSE INFORMATION

Named "World's Club Team of the Year" in 1999 (as well as 2011 and 2012), not "ranked first in the 'All-Time Club World Ranking' by IFFHS" (International Federation of Football History & Statistics). IFFHS did, however, then name Real Madrid the best continental club of the century. A year later, 2000, FCB ranked 4th in FIFA's "Club of the Century" (Real Madrid, once again, ranking first). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.82.58.130 (talk) 14:40, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Too many awards for second place to be listed

Runner up is just too much info. With all of the minor trophies, they should be removed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:27, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Dispute regarding the number of times that FC Barcelona has won the Copa Eva Duarte trophy

The user "Imperial HRH2" is removing the last (the one won during the 1952-1953 season) of the 3 Copa Eva Duarte trophies that FC Barcelona has won in total on the FC Barcelona page, this page and the Football records in Spain Wikipedia page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FC_Barcelona

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_records_in_Spain

He is using the official webpage of FC Barcelona (the English version) as a source here but that webpage has no authority when it comes to official trophies won. It's the Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) that decides who won which trophy and when as they are the founders of those tournaments in place. In this case the Copa Eva Duarte trophy. In other words they are the highest authority.

The Spanish and Catalan Wikipedia versions of the Copa Eva Duarte trophy agree with that opinion and so do the Spanish and Catalan versions of the FC Barcelona page here on Wikipedia.

Most importantly RFEF itself recognizes it on their official webpage which must be regarded as a bigger authority on this matter than FC Barcelona's English webpage. To me it seems that they have just forgot to include the last Copa Eva Duarte triumph. If somebody contacts them to make them aware of this omission they would probably correct it the day after. Yet he bases it solely on what the FC Barcelona webpage says on their "trophy honors" list.

Here is the link to the official RFEF website.

http://www.rfef.es/noticias/supercopa/conoce-antecedentes-supercopa

In fact every source that I could find says that the Copa Eva Duarte was abolished in 1953 and that FC Barcelona won it in 1953 as they won the double that season (La Liga and Copa del Rey) just like they did the previous season where they were also awarded the Copa Eva Duarte trophy.

Please take a look at those 3 pages that I have linked to and give your opinion of this current dispute if you have the time.

Regards,

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 17:43, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Using wikipedia as a source is not appropriate. I won't even look at them.

The club doesn't even claim the victory we're claiming here. See "Honours". Retrieved 20 December 2014.

When a primary source that it didn't win an award, I think we have a problem in stating that they did, unless of course it's a wooden spoon award. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:51, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

You obviously did not read my message. My references/sources are not Wikipedia. I just merely stated that the Spanish and Catalan versions on this regard agree with my view and present sources for that view.

My primary reference is the RFEF which is the Spanish Football Federation and the football organization that organized the Copa Eva Duarte trophy.

http://www.rfef.es/noticias/supercopa/conoce-antecedentes-supercopa

Let me quote that article;

"Con la Supercopa de España nacida en el 82, la RFEF recuperaba el precedente oficial inmediato conocido como la Copa Eva Duarte que no se disputaba desde el 53."

"La temporada 1952/1953 fue la última en la que se disputó esta competición como consecuencia del fallecimiento de Eva Duarte de Perón."

The Copa Eva Duarte became a official trophy organized by RFEF in 1947. In 1948 FCB won their first Copa Eva Duarte trophy defeating Sevilla in the final. In the 1951-1952 season FC Barcelona won the domestic double (La Liga trophy and Copa del Rey trophy) which meant that they were handed the trophy. They repeated the same the season after (1952-1953) where they won the domestic double and were awarded the Copa Eva Duarte trophy. This was the last edition of the Copa Eva Duarte. In 1982 the RFEF founded the current Spanish Super Cup.

Read the link I provided from the official webpage of RFEF and if you do not understand Spanish make a senior Spanish moderator or admin confirm what I have written.

Moreover I provided this page as well which also confirms that FCB won the Copa Eva Duarte trophy in the 1952-1953 for the reasons that I explained.

http://www.rsssf.com/tabless/spansupcuphist.html

FC Barcelona's English webpage obviously forgot the last trophy won by the club. If somebody contacted them and told them that they forgot the CDE won during the 1952-1953 season they would have corrected it. Why? Because the RFEF already recognizes them as winners during that season and every other source that I can find.

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 20:17, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

You obviously didn't read what I wrote.

Wikipedia is not a reliable source.

It don't care if they agree, they're not reliable.

The club doesn't even think it won the trophy. That cannot be explained away. Regardless how many references you supply. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:28, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Do we have a reliable source for this trophy? Also can a non Barcelona or Real Madrid fan confirm the validity if this trophy? I say non because those two sets of fans are biased either way and have been disputing subjects such as this (and the El Clasico page among others). Carlos Rojas77 (talk) 20:38, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Walter and I explained the same to suitcivil about wikipedia not a reliable source! And carlos, the club fc barcelona's official page itself says it has only 2 copa eva duarte trophies. What else would you need to prove this now?SupernovaeIA (talk) 20:47, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Right, had to do a bit of research as I'd never heard of this trophy. The Copa Eva Duarte trophy was a game between the league and cup winners. As Barcelona did the league and cup double in '52 and '53 there was no game and so they were awarded the trophy? If this is the case It needs to be reliably sourced. Does seem odd if '53 is not even in Barcelonas own page....was it awarded that year? Btw, in England if a team does the double they play the league runners up. Out of interest, why was there no follow up (the Super Cup) for nearly 30 years? Carlos Rojas77 (talk) 21:05, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

I believe in facts. I have read the RFEF website and and it just says the last one was in 53. Nothing about Barcelona winning it. Barcelona's OFFICIAL website states 2 trophies and I believe that should be our most legitimate source. Does anyone agree? I won't try to change it any more because the user who started this discussion keeps changing it back to 3. I will let you guys figure it out since you sound more experienced. Thanks Imperial HRH2 (talk) 22:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

So the last one was in '53, but it's not mentioned in Barcelona's official site....very odd. I am inclined to go along with the clubs official page (unless they are sloppy with their own history?). What we need is a Spanish historian on this as quite frankly I'm baffled.Carlos Rojas77 (talk) 23:00, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Another issue, should this even be considered an official trophy? I cannot find "official" in any sources and FIFA doesn't recognise it as a major honour, neither does another source . Should this just be removed from both the FC Barcelona and Real Madrid trophy count to prevent pro Barca vandals and other from switching the count from 2 to 3 and vice versa?Imperial HRH2 (talk) 07:57, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Another source from another user. Need opinions: Imperial HRH2 (talk) 21:27, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

I add one more ref to support that very recent one.. http://www.marca.com/en/2014/12/21/en/football/real_madrid/1419183209.html?a=GI3bbdffe5f5a14f0d7e46d97f47d1ec5c0&t=1419189663 2A01:240:FE3D:4:9CBC:FE96:5CD8:C6DE (talk) 19:23, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Two issues, Daily Mail is not a reliable source and frequently gets deleted. It also has zero authority on Spanish football. Marca...this is a reliable source, however, it's a pro Real newspaper (akin to the Liverpool Echo and Liverpool, or the Manchester Evening News and Manchester United) and an issue such as trophies won needs official third party confirmation...ie.FIFA, UEFA or Spanish FA.Carlos Rojas77 (talk) 21:55, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

How about the fact that FIFA does not recognise as a major official trophy ? If this is the only source that is being used to deduce that the Inter Cities Fairs Cups are offical and major, then this source should also be used to deduce that Copa Eva Duartes are unofficial? What do you think?Imperial HRH2 (talk) 08:31, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Dani Alves profile and Catalunya super cup 2014

Good afternoon , you can add the result of the Supercup of Catalonia 2014 in the fc barcelona 2014-15 season profile ?, The reason is, the participation of a large number of first team players in the match, official. Another detail is a change of photos, image , in the article of Daniel Alves, pictures of 2009 in 2014?, seriously? and i took reference items such as Filipe Luiz, Fernandinho, Danilo, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.150.34.113 (talk) 22:23 20 December 2014 (UTC)

dani alves profile and catalunya super cup

Good afternoon , you can add the result of the Supercup of Catalonia 2014 in the fc barcelona 2014-15 season profile ?, The reason is, the participation of a large number of first team players in the match, official. Another detail is a change of photos, image , in the article of Daniel Alves, pictures of 2009 in 2014?, seriously? and i took reference items such as Filipe Luiz, Fernandinho, Danilo, David Luiz, Neymar, Luiz Adriano, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.150.34.113 (talk) 17:25, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Latin Cup

Breaking apart from the Eva Duarte Cup discussion, what do you think about adding the Lain Cup. It was an official European competition (the European competition) before the Champions started. It wasn't UEFA, but it was organized by the four domestics federations to Spain, Portugal, France and Italy. The record is 2-2 FCB-RM, so there is no colors in this. There are plenty of friendly competitions that shouldn't be here, but this would be the only official competition missing from this article's honours list.--Coquidragon (talk) 18:03, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

The consensus has always been the cups that have been here. European news paper publications don't even include the Eva Duartes when they make the trophy count so I don't know where you are going to find sources for the Latin Cup. I understand Real/ Barca fans wouldn't have problems with it as they both won an equal amount but do keep in mind that this competition overlapped the European Cup (so we can't use the "it was a predecessor" approach). Furthermore, it was only open to French, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish clubs so its wasn't "open" (like ICFC, but atleast FIFA considers that a "major" honour). I personally wouldn't want to include it but I am keen to hear what others have to say. - Imperial HRH2 (talk) 18:42, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Actually, this competition was before the European Cup and overlapped only during the last three years, which was why it ended. It is somewhat predecessor as an attempt, together with the Mitropa Cup in Central Europe, to organize club level European competitions. At the time, it was quite an important competition, and it is an official trophy, since it was organized and recognized by the domestic federations. If we don't add them, I have no problem, but this would be the only official competition excluded. As for sources, besides the Honours page for all 5 winners of the competition, you have RSSSF. [1]--Coquidragon (talk) 19:47, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Regarding numbers of club honours

@Suitcivil133, Walter Görlitz, and Qed237: I'm pinging all of you because you have all been involved in the editing scrum over the honours section. A question about whether to include second-place finishes in this section was asked at WT:FOOTY. Per Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Clubs#Honours, "For clubs with a large number of major trophies, it may be appropriate to omit second places." While I agree that "a large number" is not defined, and it does not require the omission of second-place finishes, an editor must use some common sense.

Regarding domestic competitions: 22 La Liga championships, 26 Copa del Rey championships, and 11 Supercopa de España championships would qualify as "a large number" given the length of time those competitions have existed (85 years [25.9%], 111 years [23.4%], and 32 years [34.4%], respectively). I might even consider combining the Copa Eva Duarte and Supercopa de España since the former was the forerunner to the latter. Thus, the inclusion of second place finishes for these competitions could be seen as unnecessary, even egregious.

Regarding European/UEFA competitions: FC Barcelona are one of only 12 teams to have won the European Cup/UEFA Champion's League multiple times, they hold the records for the most titles in the now defunct Cup Winners' and Inter-Cities Fairs Cups, and are second only to Milan in the number of Super Cup championships. Whether to include the second-place finishes in this section is more contentious, but I personally would not include them for the last three Cups since they are defunct or Barca has won a fairly high percentage (4/42 = 9.52%).

Regarding Intercontinental competitions: I see no problem including the second place finishes there since they represent a total of four competitions.

Overall: If we come to a consensus that not all second-place finishes need to be included, you have my feelings above. If we come to a consensus that this needs to be all-or-none, then I would recommend removing all of them. Barca are one of the most internationally well known clubs with huge fan bases; I see almost as much Barca paraphernalia as Washington Redskins parapernalia in Virginia. Thus, inclusion of all their second-place finishes is not necessary.

Suitcivil133: I am giving you a friendly warning that continuing to revert edits, even partially, could end up in your being blocked for violating WP:3RR. Please respond and come to consensus here, since I and other editors would rather do that than have to report other editors. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 20:10, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Suitcivil133 needs to be blocked. He keeps reverting edits (going against consensus and w/o references). As for second place honours, I think we should have them (just my opinion) because almost every other club page has runner up honours and if we remove it here, we would have to edit thousands of football clubs.Imperial HRH2 (talk) 08:06, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 17:18, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

A obvious biased Real Madrid sockpuppet and his Nepali sockpuppet friend (which I can prove and he has even written under two different usernames on my talk page) are using useless blogs with no references or sources used (what a joke) as "sources" rather than a neutral book about Spanish football that is widely prized and which I did not even include. Moreover he is using Marca as his source which is pro-Real Madrid newspaper and always was and thus not a neutral source.

Moreover he is removing the Copa Eva Duarte trophy which is a official trophy (recognized by RFEF as such) which almost every editor on Spanish football has always agreed with and included all to fit his biased agenda.

Anyway the second I will receive a favorable reply from FC Barcelona this dispute and his vandalism will end as this is the only thing that he has to show off. By then RFEF (highest football authority), FC Barcelona and ironically the reference that is still in use on the Copa Eva Duarte page will be in my favor. Then he can stick to his Marca source which is worthless as Sport and El Mundo Deportivo have different numbers.

It's all about what is official and what is not. Not what some biased sports papers say. He does not understand this.

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 08:46, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Calm down, I don't what Nepali person you speak off. I included the OFFICIAL FC Barcelona honours webpage, the OFFICIAL FIFA website and some other minor sources such as Marca and Daily Mail (because they corroborated the offical Barcelona & FIFA website). You have already reverted edits on this page more than 5/6 times in the last 24 hours and are somehow still not blocked. You don't have any sources to revert our edits on this page. Fine, we will agree with your reverts when you get your sources in January like you say, but until then you will need to agree with us. Stop calling me a sockpuppet and grow up. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 08:55, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm not going to revert any more edits. Can @Carlos Rojas77 and Walter Görlitz: please provide your opinion and/or revert Suitcivil133's edits? Thank you.

You should as he is the user behind the "multiple users in agreement" claim that you wrote on my talk page.

I already explained to you that I have contacted FC Barcelona in order to see what they have to say about this thing. If they tell me that they did not win the Copa Eva Duarte trophy during the 1952-1953 season due to winning the domestic double as the previous year then this discussion will end. Currently there are sources that claim they did while they have not included it. FIFA do not include all major trophies. Besides FIFA are not that relevant when it comes to domestic trophies as they have nothing to do with it. They have just included some major trophies on their respective pages about club x and y. They are no authority. When you already know and this has been established by ALL previous editors (there has been a consensus for years) that the Copa Eva Duarte trophy is a official trophy and the predecessor of the current Spanish Super Cup and that it was recognized as such by RFEF and even recognized by them why are you now trying to delete it and claiming that it is not a official trophy if you do not have a agenda? Which you clearly have but that's another point altogether. I just don't understand it.

I already posted 2 sources that agree with my view. RFEF's official webpage and the source that funnily enough is still present on the Copa Eva Duarte page AS THE ONLY SOURCE. Stop saying "we" when we are talking about you and that Nepali sockpuppet which I can very easily proof and my talk page is a testament of that but I don't bother with that troll.

If you stop saying that I should be blocked because I disagree with you when you are clearly pursuing a pro-Real Madrid biased agenda here. Then we have a deal.

Besides for all I care then the "most successful claim" label should be removed from both FCB's and RM's page. Let people make their own biased lists on the "Football records in Spain" page. And from what I recall us senior editors reached a consensus on that being removed from both pages. It only attracts unnecessary nonsense.

Oh, and I am calm.

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 09:09, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

@Suitcivil133, Walter Görlitz, Qed237, and Jkudlick: And I thought we just agreed to remove runners up? The user Suitcivil133 reverted that too so now all the runners up are included, at the same time as other users on the Football projects are going around Real Madrid and other pages to remove runners up. I thought we were following uniformity?

And Suitcivil133, like I said, I don't know what Nepali sockpuppet you are talking about. Im not Nepali, but please go ahead and prove whatever you want. And I excluded Eva Duartes because FIFA does not include them in honours pages. I found a total of 5 sources (including FIFA, Marca and DailyMail) who excluded Eva Duarte. Can you provide a source which agrees that the Eva Duarte should be counted as "Official"? I speak/read/write Spanish but the RFEF website you provided, simply states that Eva Duarte was a predecessor, and the other website, is a standard archive which just states every trophy Barcelona ever may have won (including Catalan cups and Joan Camper trophies) and as such doesn't distinguish between "official" and "unofficial". You cannot pick and choose which trophies you want. You cited FIFA to include the Inter Cities Fairs Cups, but you are not willing to choose FIFA as a source for the Eva Duarte trophies? This logic is flawed. And please act in a professional manner and cease childish name-calling. I don't know if you are a teenager, but most of us here aren't. Thank you.Imperial HRH2 (talk) 09:18, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Ok, but he is the only user that is agreeing with your edits and supporting them openly.

Once again FIFA are not a authority when it comes to domestic Spanish trophies as they have nothing to do with them.

What are those 5 sources? Marca is not a source. It's a biased pro-Real Madrid newspaper. As I said I can find other lists mentioned by El Mundo Deportivo and Sport. Some were also used as "sources" before but they were thankfully removed as they originate from pro-FC Barcelona newspapers.

We are only interested in what the official football organizations say. In this case RFEF and they are clearly not only recognizing the Copa Eva Duarte as the predecessor of the current Spanish Super Cup but also recognizing it as a official trophy. It was contested as a official trophy too. From 1947 and onwards until 1953.

So why are you removing it if not to pursue your agenda? I am not even the person that included the Copa Eva Duarte trophy. Dozens of editors have included it and agree with it being there as there has been a consensus about including that competition for years until you and your Nepali sockpuppet friend arrived on the scene 1 month ago or so.

The Inter Cities Fairs Cup is recognized as the predecessor of the UEFA Cup which even UEFA recognizes. Moreover it was an international club tournament and not a domestic one. Nor did I include it. Other editors included it.

Once again I do not care about that "most successful club in Spanish football" label that you are so obsessed about. In fact years ago we reached a consensus to remove it from both FCB's and RM's page.

What I am against is you deleting a official tournament (Copa Eva Duarte) to pursue your agenda and using blogs containing no references or sources as your source to dispute neutral books and their claims and then try to appear "neutral" and me as a "vandal". Won't work as long as I am here to defend myself.

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 09:27, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, lets just leave the trophies aside for a bit. The Franco history on this page is biased and I made it neutral by using legitimate sources but you were quick to change it. I had made it uniform with the Real Madrid and El Clasico page (which other users had edited). You can't fool the entire world you know? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imperial HRH2 (talk • contribs) 09:32, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Now that you have been found out you are hellbent on trying to change the topic. How surprising?

A blog written by a Real Madrid fan on a Spanish newspaper without containing any historical references is now a legitimate source and better than a neutral book written about Spanish football? Find more convincing sources then we can talk. That's because nobody bother. Not even me.

Anyway your agenda is clear and once again when I will have more time on my hand in January I will have this sorted out.

Let's not forget that unlike you I am fluent in Spanish and know which sources are neutral and what are not. Sport, EMD, Marca and AS are not neutral sources nor some blogs written by fans of club x or y.

Anyway this is Wikipedia. No academic authority at all.

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 09:38, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

How kind of you. Playing the "nice guy". You maybe fluent in Spanish, you obviously aren't in English. I used the official FIFA and Barcelona website for trophies, and used exactly the same type of sources to provide the Franco history as you have used. You are ready to accept a book written by a Barcelona fanatic as a source but not one written by another individual with a different perspective to yours? The El Clasico and Real Madrid pages were also written by experienced editors. I simply used their sources as the sources for this page, they aren't something I made up. In any case, you have exploited the 3RR rule. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 09:55, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

I am just exposing you. Rightly so. You still don't understand that FIFA are no authority here despite me explaining it to you? You are still unable to understand that RFEF is the highest football authority here? You still do not understand that there are sources that include the Copa Eva Duarte trophy during the 1952-53 season and some that don't? Until I get a reply from FC Barcelona there will be no conclusion.

Yes, a neutral and widely prized book is written by some "Barca fanatic". You are really bordering troll behavior.

Yes, I already explained to all how weak your biased sources are. They are almost non-existent. Also you shamelessly lied about being a FC Barcelona fan on my talk page when this is clearly a big fat lie. Your credibility is very low and you are not pursuing a honest and neutral objective but a biased objective.

The senior editors should look at this individual and make their own conclusions. I am done for today. Don't have the time for this nonsense but I will be back in January to sort this mess out.

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 10:04, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Senior editors, please block this pro barca catalonian clown who doesnt have any proof and keeps tagging people with different nationalities, accusing them of vandalizing when the person itself is a well known vandal and a catalonian pro barca editor-- his/her/the 3rd gender's edit history proves that. if you follow what suitvicl has been doing since some time in spanish football related articles, the comments, the edits etc, its obvious that suitvicil is a sockpuppet of many other pro barca vandals who have already been blocked. BTW I am french not nepalese and definitely not a catalonian disgrace.SupernovaeIA (talk) 17:07, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

General reminder to EVERYONE to please remain WP:CIVIL. Inflammatory language is not welcome in serious debates and discussions. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 21:27, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Calling me a troll, a sockpuppet, and whatever else, won't change the fact that the source you are using is by Paco Aguilar. And if you were Spanish you would know that Paco Aguilar is a FC Barcelona fan. And that article was written in the El Mundo Deportive (which is a pro Barca journal, akin to Marca). The fact that it says and I quote "In 1943, Barcelona faced rivals Real Madrid in the semi-finals of Copa del Generalísimo (now the Copa del Rey). The first match at Les Corts was won by Barcelona 3–0. Before the second leg, Franco's director of state security visited Barcelona's players in the changing room. He reminded them that they were only playing due to the 'generosity of the regime'." is not even anywhere within the source that you have cited. All the source says is that they were threatened by police. Yes, I am a Barcelona fan, but Im not low enough to lie and make up my club's history. Its people like you which bring our club (FC Barcelona) into disrepute. The fact that you are willing to pick and choose sources, vandalise every page that opposes you and ignore the official FIFA and FC Barcelona website (because they don't agree with you), exposes you as a vandal. The fact that you have already been warned three times in the past week further emphasises my point. Maybe you should stick to Wikipedia Espanol, where your vandalism seems to be going unchecked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imperial HRH2 (talk • contribs) 10:12, 26 December 2014 (UTC) Imperial HRH2 (talk) 10:15, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

To give my own views on this. From my experience in dealing with both Barca and Real fans (see El Clasico discussion), I maintain that neither set of fans should be allowed to edit contentious aspects of the two club's articles. Bias is inevitable, neutrality nigh on impossible as history has shown. Using the talkpage to gain consensus (on contentious issues) and THEN editing the article is the only way forward. Suitcivil133, the Copa Eva Duarte trophy I confess i know nothing about and it may very well be a major trophy, we do need clarification on that...either from FIFA, UEFA or the Spanish FA...ie.one of the governing bodies. I do concur that Spanish newspapers are generally terrible sources on issues such as this as each one is a mouthpiece for a specific club and thus will have their own club bias. Only a governing body will have any authority on this. At the minute, there isn't any hence the need for clarification.Carlos Rojas77 (talk) 18:55, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

I agree with you. I am a Spanish football enthusiast in general and have been supporting many articles on Wiki. The issue simply stems from the fact that (besides Marca, DailyMail and what-have-you-publication), FIFA does not list the Copa Eva Duarte as a major honour (it doesn't even list it to begin with). This is fine, we can argue that maybe they can't be bothered to list it. But we are using the EXACT (and only) same source to give the Inter Cities Fair Cup legitimacy (my position on this is that the Inter Cities Fairs cup should be counted) and I have had to argue with countless Real Madrid editors that this is a credible source. And now I am being accused of double standards if we include the Eva Duarte because the Eva Duarte is excluded in the same credible source that includes the Inter Cities Fairs Cup. What is worse is that they used the Marca and Daily Mail sources (which can be seen as semi-legitimate) to back up their claim that the Eva Duarte shall be excluded. I had to agree and I saw the flaws in my logic, and that is why I decided to exclude the Eva Duartes (and then this whole war thing with Suitcivil133) ensued. Keep in mind that I removed the Eva Duartes that Real Madrid had won too to stay objective. My position on this thing now is that we remove the Eva Duartes from this page until we find credible sources. If not, I don't know how I can convince the 'El Clasico', 'Real Madrid', 'Eva Duarte' and 'Football Records in Spain' pages (among others) to include Eva Duartes without going into multiple edit wars. - Imperial HRH2 (talk) 19:23, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Tabloids, newspapers etc are secondary sources who copy and paste stuff (in the case of the Daily Mail, often badly). The only authority on official trophies won is the governing bodies....so one of FIFA, UEFA or the Spanish FA. Regards the Fairs Cup, as it wasn't run by UEFA they haven't listed it, but it does come under FIFA jurisdiction hence they do, so there won't be uniformity in terms of the list. So long as they are recognised by one of the official bodies thats enough. Unless I'm mistaken, at the moment there is no clarification from any governing body on the Copa Eva Duarte trophy. I really need to get Guillem Balague on this. Carlos Rojas77 (talk) 19:44, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, please do. And while you are at it, if you could find any credible source that lists the Eva Duartes as official, that would be great too. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 21:13, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Wow, some recurring issues. Here is my feedback.

• Runner-up - We should be consistent. Many of the clubs without big honours mention their runner-ups. This is easy to understand. Of the traditional European Clubs in the 5 big leagues, Juventus, for example and among others, also includes its runner-up. Other of the big clubs include some of the runner up, but not all. It seems to me that currently there is not overall agreement on this, so if we have the data, being encyclopedic and all, I don't see a need to remove it. If we do remove it, it's fine, but it is being removed based on what? Agreement on this article? What about consistency among football club articles for all leagues? If there is clear agreement on this (no runner-ups), then there is a lot of work to be done, since the criteria is clearly not being followed.
• Fairs Cup - Recognized by FIFA since its people had say in the organizing, but not organized/recognized by UEFA, and hence neither by RFEF.
• Eva Duarte - Organized by RFEF, and as such, not recognized as friendly by it. What is the criteria for officiality? This cup might not be included is some list of records, but it is included in others. The fact that FIFA/UEFA don't mention it, doesn't mean they don't recognize it. They just have to draw the line somewhere. How many domestic defunct cups do they mention/recognize?
  • Here is a link (in Spanish) to the RFEF webpage, where they explain what is the Super Cup. It mentions the two official predecessors: Eva Duarte and Copa de Campeones, and it also says that the latter was a friendly competition. No such statement is done for the Eva Duarte Cup.[2]

I think a good criteria for officiality when I used to edit this article was if the cup was organized by FIFA/UEFA/RFEF, and not recognized as friendly by organizer. Under this criteria, Fairs Cup and Eva Duarte are official.

• Copa Latina - Often ignored and/or removed since it is not recognized/organized by UEFA. Yet it was an official European competition organized by RFEF, along with its Portuguese, French, and Italian counterparts.

--Coquidragon (talk) 13:29, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying this. I knew of FIFA and UEFA, but not the RFEF (Royal Spanish Football Federation). That it is recognised by an official body is what was required. Carlos Rojas77 (talk) 20:45, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

I told you guys that the Copa Eva Duarte was a official trophy organized by RFEF. I even provided you guys a official source (RFEF's homepage) but a certain vandal kept removing it despite this.

I contacted FC Barcelona 1 week ago regarding the Copa Eva Duarte trophy that they supposedly won in 1952-53 but I am yet to receive a reply. Probably due to the holidays. Besides they have other things to look after now after CAS' judgement today.

In any case I am pretty sure that we will have to correct the current page and include the Copa Eva Duarte from the 1952-1953 season and thus make it 3 Copa Eva Duarte titles and not 2.

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 11:49, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Suitcivil mentioned all this time that RFEF is the final authority. So if we agree on this then ICFC cannot be considered official (point made by Coquidragon recently above- not recognized by RFEF or UEFA, its a trade fairs thing anyway not even official open tournament). So if we go for RFEF then it looks like we will have to remove ICFC cup tally as well. For the cova eva duarte, Barcelona has 2 cups, they themselves mention it. Period! Pro barca vandals' tactics trying to pull barca's tally up wont help. SupernovaeIA (talk) 12:29, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

• It is not RFEF vs. FIFA vs. UEFA. On the contrary, it is FIFA + UEFA + RFEF. So, I'll say it again. On the one hand, ICFC is official because it is recognized by FIFA, since its members took part in organizing it. Since UEFA did not organized it, UEFA doesn't consider it part of its European record, and RFEF follows UEFA on this. That's fine. It's still official. On the other hand, FIFA not mentioning a defunct domestic minor cup, like Eva Duarte, doesn't mean they don't recognize it. How many defunct domestic minor cups does FIFA mention when they list a club's records? Not mentioning and not recognizing are two different ideas, and since you won't find any source stating FIFA doesn't recognize Eva Duarte, it is an assumption at best, and has no place in this wiki. So, please, let's stop facing federation vs. federation. We have three official federations: International, Continental and Domestic. If one of the three recognizes a trophy, it is official. Period.
• Also, RFEF is above Club. If RFEF grants FCB the last Eva Duarte, even though there was no competition, even if the club doesn't mention it, it is official. Should we go with club FCB recognizing the first copa del rey (under its first name which I forgot) as official, even though RFEF says it is friendly? No. For matter of this wiki, Federation > Club. So, that's three Eva Duartes for FCB.
• Finally, I make a point again that we should also add Latin Cup, since is was organized as an official competition by four Domestic federations. On this, Barça = Madrid = 2, so I don't expect opposition from the supporters of Real Madrid.--Coquidragon (talk) 13:28, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Now the problem is as soon as you say that, it can be asked straight away why only FIFA+UEFA+RFEF only then? Why dont we include other authorities as well and make a mess of this article right? Why should we only include this three sources then? Spanish clubs belongs to UEFA and Spain belongs to FIFA. This tally is about spanish clubs but not countries or anything related. ICFC is not recognized by neither UEFA or RFEF, and RFEF is the highest authority like the catalonian socpuppet suitcivil begs all the time! So ICFC cannot be included anymore because this article is for spanish clubs which dont come under fifa!SupernovaeIA (talk) 18:21, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

"Pro barca vandals' tactics trying to pull barca's tally up won't help." So, are you on the other hand trying to keep Barça records low to inflate Madrid supposed superiority? You are quick to side with Barça in their 2 Eva Duarte, even though RFEF grants them three. Are you going to side with Barça granting la Copa de la Coronation (I remembered), which FCB claims as official, but which RFEF considers a friendly? Don't pick and choose. Be consistent on your criteria.--Coquidragon (talk) 13:28, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Coquidragon My criteria is simple! If RFEF is to be considered as the only source then cups like ICFC( which was not open to all cities, clubs) should not be included as it will indeniably favor clubs who played it. Plus, its neither recognized by RFEF or UEFA either which is where these spanih clubs belong. If not, then we can expand the scope of which authorities to cite for this article. You blame me on inflating Madrid, when I have not added any titles for madrid at all! However, it is also very interesting to see that the cups on dispute are the ones which Barca has won the most and cups where madrid or 90% of the table teams never even participated no? So including these is actually inflating barcelona as you are including those tournaments. Actually now i ask you not to pick and choose the titles which were not participated by majority of the clubs. Please be consistent on the criteria which is fair to all clubs! Just one question? How can you put a tournament title when it wasnt even participated by 90% of the clubs in the table. Neither it was official! SupernovaeIA (talk) 20:29, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

@SupernovaeIA: I'm always been consistent. You have but to read the history of my comments on this and other football related articles. The consensus for most articles is that if a trophy is accepted by a federation, it is official. Why should Spain be the exception? ICFC is a trophy recognized by FIFA. It is official. Also, if I go by your criteria (# of participant cities/clubs), then we should not count the first few Champions titles from Madrid, since not all cities were represented, and those that were, were selected by a magazine. Again, consistency. As to your comment about my inflating Barcelona, again, read the history of my comments. I've had quite a few debates agains Barcelona fans in my time. I have no colors.--Coquidragon (talk) 23:17, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Please do show me where fifa says ICFC is an official trophy? FIFA doesnt even show those titles in any of the clubs page let go recognize it as an official trophy! It will be very interesting to see a trophy that UEFA doesnt even consider a trophy being considered by FIFA as official for record purposes.SupernovaeIA (talk) 09:22, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

This topic has long been debated here. Do your homework and read the archives. I don' have time to do so myself. Nevertheless, I'll give you at least the FIFA Profile page for FC Barcelona. [3] Please look at the list of mayor honours. The ICFC is mentioned as a mayor honour for all classic clubs that won it.--Coquidragon (talk) 10:15, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, RFEF Is the final authority when it comes to domestic trophies. FIFA is the final authority when it comes to international competitions. FIFA recognizes the ICFC as an official trophy. UEFA themselves recognize the ICFC as the predecessor of the UEFA Cup. End of story.

We will find out whether this is a mistake or not as I have contacted FC Barcelona. Don't get ahead of yourself my Nepali sockpuppet.

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 13:08, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Its good we could get a consensus on this thing. I'll revert changes on the Madrid page to show their Eva Duartes too. I also don't mind adding the last Eva Duarte back to this page, but we need solid references. RFEF's source does not show this club winning (or being awarded otherwise) the last Eva Duarte and for now I think @Carlos Rojas77:, some others and me have agreed the most reliable source so far is the official website. As soon as @Suitcivil133: hears back from FC Barcelona, we can proceed. In the mean time, I'll write to the RFEF about the last Eva Duarte too. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 14:40, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Actually, it does. If you read the content of the source, which again is the RFEF explaining the history of the Super Cup, it says: "El ganador del campeonato nacional de Liga se enfrentó al campeón de la Copa del Generalísimo durante siete temporadas bajo esta denominación... La temporada 1952/1953 fue la última en la que se disputó esta competición..." It says the league champion met the cup champion for seven seasons under this name. 1952/53 was the last season. So, here are your winners: Madrid, Barcelona, Valencia, Athletic Bilbao, Atlético Madrid, Barcelona (6 seasons). During the 7th season (52/53), Barça won both championships. So, you are saying the last season, there was no champion. It's interesting that such detail is never mentioned. We had the competition, but we had no champion. The year before, Barça also won both championship. The competition is counted as one, even though there was no game, since Barça automatically was granted the cup, which is exactly what happened in 53.--Coquidragon (talk) 15:21, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

I can read Spanish, I know what it says. And like you said, it says that was the last competition, but it doesn't mention winners. Before we went by the assumption that it was awarded to FC Barcelona, but since this is now disputed and backed by their official website (which states 2 and could be a mistake), I'm not sure. Either way, this will be sorted out soon. Imperial HRH2 (talk) 15:37, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

The last competition doesn't mention winners? So, because it doesn't mention winners, you assume there is none? Don't you think that if there hadn't been any winners, they would say so. No, they should only say it if there was a winner. Where the common sense in this? We have the RFEF officially recognizing the season, without any disclaimers. We have reliable external sources: RSSSF, ISSHF, and, most importantly, CIHEFE (Centro de Investigaciones de Historia y Estadística del Fútbol Español) [Spanish Football Center for History and Statistic Investigation], which is recognized and used by both FIFA and RFEF. All three attribute the third cup to Barcelona. Moreover, we have the FCBarcelona website listing the three cups. Here is the link.[4]. We also have newspapers articles from As, Sport.es, Kaiser, just to mention some, all attributing the third cup to Barcelona. What else do you need? We have enough sources, official sources, to attribute this title. If you can present one that explicitly says that there wasn't a champion, then it is ok, but there is none. I can tell you why the palmarés doesn't mention it, but it is original research and has no place here. Wikipedia is about sources. Listen, looking at the history of this topic, I can see you are only concern with accuracy. There is no colors here. If we get news that there shouldn't be, we can take it out. Nevertheless, until such moment, it should be included as enough sources have been provided. Would you agree to this? Actually, the article is very inconsistent. It includes it in some places and leaves it out in others. BTW, thanks for this.--Coquidragon (talk) 16:58, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

I fully agree with everything that you have written Coquidragon. Actually I argued what you have written earlier but I was somehow dismissed by users that claimed objectivity which is clearly not the case at a closer look. The fact that we two can speak Spanish is not always a benefit as most editors on the English version of Wikipedia do not hence them doubting sources written in a foreign language. I provided a source proving what you have written and the source was no other than the official webpage of RFEF. In any case it looks like the official webpage of FC Barcelona forgot to include it because otherwise what RFEF has written (they clearly state that FCB also won the Copa Eva Duarte during the 1952-53) would make no sense. Not only that but other sources also state that FCB won the Copa Eva Duarte that season. The sole source/reference used on the English Copa Eva Duarte Wikipedia page also agrees with this yet the Copa Eva Duarte page omits this. Why? Because FC Barcelona's list of major honours on their webpage does not include it. I then ask since when is FC Barcelona's major honours list a official football organization that can determine what tournaments are official and which are not? Or could it just be a omission?

Break (Original research) I don't have now the newspaper to use it as source, but as I understand it, it is due to the fact that there is no trophy. Eva Duarte/Perón died on 1952. After the 1952/1953 season, there was no need to continue the competition. Since Barça won two years in a row, they already had the last trophy awarded, there was no need for an additional trophy. So, although they won the competition (by winning both championships), they don't have the trophy in their palmarés.--Coquidragon (talk) 17:35, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Clearly the user that you are discussing with does not understand Spanish fluently. Nevermind the Nepali sockpuppet.

Anyway every doubt should be removed the second I get a reply from the club. Which will probably happen in the beginning of January. I will post the reply in full when I get the answer.

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 17:22, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

You dont understand anything other than catalonian, you catalonian sockpuppet. Your edit histories are more than clear to prove you are a pro barca vandal!SupernovaeIA (talk) 18:15, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

After having gone through all this (and I checked some other sources), I am inclined towards the idea of putting the last Eva Duarte back on for Barca. It does seem like they won it, but weren't awarded because there wasn't any trophy? Because I can also confirm they don't have it housed in the Nou Camp (they have the other two). Maybe when the Barca blokes made the website, they looked at the trophy room and made a list? Also, I appreciate the link from Barcelona's Spanish page which has counted the trophy. Just one question for @Suitcivil133:, where has the "RFEF has written (they clearly state that FCB also won the Copa Eva Duarte during the 1952-53)". Can you give me the exact Spanish phrase that says FCB won it in 52/53? I can't find it the RFEF reference. I want to use it as a reference when I add the Eva Duarte back on the page. I hope you are not referring to this [5].

P.S. - What Nepali sock-puppet do you keep referring to? You seem really irritated by him. lol

-Imperial HRH2 (talk) 18:28, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Straw poll

In the case of Barcelona, should we include or exclude runner-up finishes.

• Exclude They have a lot of first-place finishes and it's distracting. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:07, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
• Exclude domestic and Europe/UEFA second place finishes, Keep intercontinental second place finishes. If a split !vote will not be considered, then Exclude all. It is quite distracting. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 17:16, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
• Exclude all runners-up, simply because I have spent a lot of time maintaining uniformity across Spanish football pages by removing these. - Imperial HRH2 (talk) 20:27, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
• Exclude. I wasn't bothered either way, but having seen what the policy is (remove runners up for hugely successful teams) I now concur with it. Liverpool fan and it's not in our team page. I suspect Benfica fan, SLBedit, Is possibly biased toward retaining runners up as Benfica have been very unlucky in finals and have been runners up quite a lot (in terms of Benfica I'd support keeping runner up spots as it is so notable in their case). Carlos Rojas77 (talk) 20:55, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
• Exclude As above. When winning many trophies, the runner-up is not an honour that needs to be included. Kante4 (talk) 21:37, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
• Exclude They have to many first place finishes. QED237 (talk) 01:32, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
• Include/Exclude based on consistency with other such articles across wikipedia, not only Spanish/UEFA teams. I don't know what the consensus is currently; Exclude if there is such a consensus across wikipedia articles; Include otherwise. It's good to know, it's encyclopedic material, and doesn't really affect the looks of the article.--Coquidragon (talk) 13:29, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Edit Request: Net worth ranking Joezingaro (talk) 22:18, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

The article incorrectly states...

"...and the third most valuable sports team on the globe, worth $2.6 billion."

These are not updated 2014 values (which you can find by following the link in the article)

Also, the link is to "most valuable football clubs", not "sports clubs" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.188.142.72 (talk) 18:00, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 May 2015

Please add sponsorship for FC Barcelona. The main partners are “Nike” and “Qatar Airways”. The premium partners are “Beko”, “Estrella Damm”, “LA CAIXA” and “Audi”. Official partners are : Movistar, Intel, Etisalat, Replay , Assistènica Sanitària , Gatorade , Stanley Black and Decker, Allianz, EA sports , Coca Cola, Maurice Lacroix and IronFx . There are also other regional partners . Source: fcbarcelona.com Midosept (talk) 12:34, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

WP:NOTADVERT, a list of corporate 'partners' is not encyclopedic. GiantSnowman 13:43, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Only main shirt sponsor and kit manufacturer is relevant. SLBedit (talk) 13:53, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

No, Wikipedia isn't a place to give all these companies free advertising. Adding sponsor list has no encyclopedic value. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:06, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Sponsors are part of the jersey's history. A description of the current and previous jerseys is not advertising. SLBedit (talk) 14:25, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2015

FC Barcelona has signed a partner ship with celphone brand Oppo 49.150.23.229 (talk) 08:07, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Please read the discussion above. SLBedit (talk) 17:52, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2015

Add the 2015 UCL final Lineup in the recent history part 49.150.23.229 (talk) 07:40, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

 Done by another - Arjayay (talk) 18:35, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 June 2015

Put Aleix Vidal's name in the First Team Squad, just put a note that he may not play till 2016 49.150.23.229 (talk) 18:24, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

 Done - his name is in the current squad, but you have not cited reliable sources to back up the second half of your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 18:38, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2015

Hi, I would like to add the graphics for the new 2015-16 3rd kit. I am 8 years old and I love kits. I have started editing kits, please see Rayo Vallecano (2nd and 3rd) for an example of my work. I have uploaded the body and arms to wikimedia commons TheGman2006 (talk) 07:23, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  19:40, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

While winning the UEFA Champions League of late, they are considered the best team in the world. Despite going into the club world cup with other champion's leauge winnners. UEFA is considered the best divisio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.237.28 (talk) 14:46, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Suggestions for improvement

Hi, I can understand this article was promoted to FA status in September 2010, but a quick view learns that this article might now fail a FA review because of issues regarding summary style and layout.

Some remarks:

• The lead counts already five paragraphs, which is less than the ideal of four paragraphs.
• The History section is exhaustive which is in conflict with WP:Summary style, especially the parts about the recent history - the description of the last 15 years counts over 2000 words. Copying parts to the History article and summarizing might be the solution.
• Text should not be sandwiched between images, but at the moment this is the case five times.

I have not checked the content and references yet against the FA criteria. If anyone wants to discuss the bulleted issues or modify the article: be my guest. Kareldorado (talk) 13:26, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 September 2015

Fcb23aj (talk) 15:28, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 15:37, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Squad list - barca B players frequently in play

Recently, Gumbau has played as a substitute multiple times.

I guess his formal designation is a barca B player. But should not it be reflected in the squad list? Jazi Zilber (talk) 15:03, 27 September 2015 (UTC)