Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Romanian football champions/archive2

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was not promoted by Crisco 1492 05:56, 17 March 2014 [1].

List of Romanian football champions

Nominator(s): BineMai 22:13, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe this is a very complete and competent article regarding football statistics from the Romanian football league. Ideas and suggestions are highly appreciated thank you. BineMai 22:13, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support (having stumbled here from my FLC discussion page). I see this follows on from the nominator's prior high quality efforts at List of tallest buildings in Bucharest. A few minor suggestions: (1) Perhaps you could add sisterlinks in the External links sect. (2) Sects Early championships and Divizia A - might be best to break up some of those big paragraphs in those sects. (3) History - just a comment that I love that even though this is technically a list page, there is a healthy amount of sourced material in paragraph format, great job with the research! (4) Notes - suggest renaming this sect to "Footnotes". (5) See also - might be nice to have three to four more entries added here. Excellent efforts overall by Bine Mai, — Cirt (talk) 23:46, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you Cirt for your support and for the kind words, nice to know that someone appreciates my work. Regarding your suggestions: 1 - willing to add sisterlinks section but what links should i populate it with, 2 - already breaked these sections to prior name and period of existance. Perhaps the Divizia A section is a bit long but I can't break it further without having several one-two sentence paragraphs that would not look nice, 3 - thanks for this comment, 4 - done, 5 - added three more entries that might help the article. Overall i thank you for your competent suggestions and remarks. Cheers! BineMai 11:05, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - You're most welcome! Sisterlinks I dunno if there's any type of category on Wikimedia Commons that could be relevant, or you could add photos there and create a related category. Or if not, no worries, either way, just a friendly suggestion. :) Good luck, — Cirt (talk) 13:05, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The list looks good but I am not quite 100% happy with it:

Resolved comments

**~~You could add a table with statistics by city.~~ Nergaal (talk) 15:31, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done BineMai 02:00, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the #2 column since that should probably contain the clubs never winning but coming 2nd several times. Nergaal (talk) 10:34, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok i agree with this BineMai 23:51, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- ~~Ref 8 appears to be dead so I can't check on the "Bukarester FC" and "Bukarester FK" thing. "Româno-Americană București" seems to be a strange name to me.~~
  - I updated the link to the Romanian League but now thay changet the format and there is no runner-up team presented. BineMai 00:52, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - This ref really needs to be figured out. Even using waybackmachine I couldn't find the vice-champions listed there. Nergaal (talk) 17:59, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - I think you can use this website to reference each year [2]. Also, after looking an the Italy's version of this list I think you should also add the #3 team. Nergaal (talk) 18:06, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      - Done BineMai 01:32, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        I moved the refs to a separate column since it seems to be a standard among FLs. I also added the 3rd places columns in the performances section - try to double check I added the correct numbers. Nergaal (talk) 10:34, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        That really does look alot better in this format BineMai 23:51, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- ~~perhaps it might be worth updating the retrieved dates from 2010?~~
  - Done BineMai 11:54, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- ~~In the intro, I would change the sentence on Venus to make it clear that the sentence refers to the 3rd most prolific team and merge the first two sentences in the 2nd paragraph.~~
  - Done BineMai 00:57, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- ~~I am curious as to why are there 3 pictures on the first 5 editions, but none since then.~~
  - Added another pic. BineMai 00:52, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- In the Performances section please change "The following table lists the performance of each club describing winners of the Championship" to something like "the following table summarizes the performances of the clubs that won the championship". In this paragraph perhaps mention how many clubs were runner-up without ever winning.
  - Done BineMai 01:34, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- ~~"best results in the group stage" does not mention the year when it happened.~~
  - Done BineMai 01:01, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- ~~Championship should not be capitalized.~~
  - Done BineMai 01:39, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- " No sources chronicle the top goal scorers of the earliest league championships." Sure about that? Perhaps change it to no sources are available? I am sure some old newspapers did chronicle it, but may not really be available.
  - Done BineMai 01:39, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- Since when has the supercup been contested?
  - Is this necessary? BineMai 23:51, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - Well, the champions play for the supercup, same way they qualify for CL. Nergaal (talk) 10:32, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps mention the notable performances in the Europa League from the champions?
- It might be worth considering putting everything on the continental performances as a separate section.
- perhaps mention the longest winning streaks?
- Some clubs are never wikilinked, such as UCAS Petroşani
  - Yes there are clubs without wikilink because they don't have a wiki page. BineMai 01:39, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yes, but some of those might have been renamed and now exit under different names. Nergaal (talk) 10:32, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nergaal (talk) 21:48, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - How reliable are "kassiesa.home.xs4all.nl", ziare and romaniansoccer.ro? I also am having trouble accessing fotbalromania.com. Aureez (Talk) 11:48, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The first one, while it seems to be a private site [3], I know this site to have lots of statistics on soccer games and I never had any reason to doubt the numbers the guy provides. Ziare.com seems to review the submissions of new editors (at least) before publishing, so it is not a blog-like site. romaniansoccer.ro is the website linked by the Romanian Football Federation on its own site under the statistics tab, which likely implies that the federation itself seems the statistics published on that website reliable enough to suggest them. Nergaal (talk) 14:47, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How does Ziare and kassiesa verify the data they have? it's not enough to be a convenient source of data. Aureez (Talk) 18:29, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really know. When I google "UEFA rankings" I get this link to the guy's website. Unless that is tailored for my MAC address, it would suggest that google ranks his site high. Another non-answere: for the Ziare link, the author is trying to reference a relatively well known/accepted statement within people that follow Romanian football. Nergaal (talk) 11:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Kassiesa is reliable he appears to just collect the info from other websites, the UEFA website does list the same statistics though, also WP:GOOGLE#Verifiability states it doesn't determine how reliable the source is. Also the statement which ziare is a reference to I don't think would likely be challenged considering the 24 wins Steaua București has in Liga I. Aureez (Talk) 21:50, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This list has been up for well over two months, and no consensus has formed. As such, I am archiving this nomination. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:55, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.