Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Seattle Sounders FC task force/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Book

I created a book yesterday to remove a redlink in the featured topic template. Today Headbomb did a great job expanding it to include many more highly relevant chapters. You can have a look at it here - feel free to help improve it too! ← George talk 21:22, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I like that picture. Maybe we should use it in the featured topic mock up too. So how would the featured topic (assuming we ever accomplish that) relate to the book? Do all the articles in the book need to be in the featured topic? I don't completely understand the relationship. Regardless, good work on it George. I tried out the PDF creation tool, and it's pretty cool. We should all get golden scarves for this once we're done. --SkotyWATC 06:18, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
I can't take any credit for the work. I just created the book as a stub; it was all Headbomb from there. As far as I know, the relationship is pretty loose: All good/featured topics have books, those books should at least contain the articles from the topic, but can contain more. If it become an issue, we can of course trim down this book to exactly match the good/featured topic candidate when we get there (other soccer team books only have their featured topic articles). ← George talk 06:38, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Changes to the task force page

I was bold and made some changes to the task force page. Please revert anything you don't like. I formalized the task force's goal to push for a featured topic and mocked it up to add a bit of visual motivation for us all. I wasn't sure whether the USOC final article should be in there or not. I think it doesn't belong. Maybe in a few years we'll have enough cup finals under our belt to constitute a separate featured topic. In adding the FT mock up, I had to move the list of participants up so that it didn't collide with the WP:FOOTY banner. I also had a hard time picking a picture for the FT mock up. If you have a better idea, go ahead and change it. I added a link to the commons category that had a bunch of useful pictures since they don't show up in our assessed articles category. I also removed the generic alerts from the alert list. They took up a lot of space and weren't that interesting to me as a member of the task force. Lastly, I set it up so that this talk page is automatically archived (pretty much everything else about this task force is automatic already). Hope that's okay with everyone. Please undo any of these changes if you disagree with them. --SkotyWATC 06:14, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Great job on the changes, in my opinion. I would have removed those generic alerts ages ago if I had known how, and having a concrete goal of making a featured topic should help us focus on our most important articles first. ← George talk 06:41, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

FC?

There's a question on the FA review for the US Open Cup final about why Sounders FC does not have periods after F and C. I can't remember why, but I know this has come up a couple of times in the past. Do any of you remember? If so, please comment in the FA review. Thanks! --SkotyWATC 16:04, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Cptnono answered. Thanks! If anyone else watching this page has time to contribute to the FA review, I'd appreciate it. According to this discussion on WT:FAC, many of the regular FA reviewers are MIA and so they're in need of every extra hand they can get. --SkotyWATC 04:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

w00t!

It's a nice sunny day in Seattle and I bring good news to go with it. 2009 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final has just been promoted to featured article this morning. Thanks to all project members for your help with this and especially thanks to Cptnono for following up on many of the review comments. --SkotyWATC 15:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Look at WP:GO (will be archived at Wikipedia:Goings-on/April_25,_2010)... Note that this was promoted to FA in the same week as Brougham Castle (ala "The Brougham End" at Qwest). Concidence or a sign? :) --SkotyWATC 05:24, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
That's great news! Let's see if we can get Sigi's article up to FA standards and the 2009 season to GA standards before the World Cup! – CGTalk 01:45, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
2009 season is my next focus. I've already cleaned up the prose through April. --SkotyWATC 04:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Great! I could help keep writing the 2010 season and filling in the boxes, as I've been doing since April! –CGTalk 23:20, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
And the Sigi peer review is finishing up. I am nominating it for FA sooner or later if anyone wants to go through it. Featured Topic is close if we are still going with 2009 Seattle Sounders FC and Sigi Schmid in place of the lists most team topics use. Criterion 3 might be a problem though. Is that new?Cptnono (talk) 00:37, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Evening all. Glad to see things are still moving around here. Once the 2009 season is done I think you'll be fine for FT. Even the new stricter criterion wouldn't affect you until January 2012. All the best! WFCforLife (talk) 22:36, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

New participants navbox

I was just bored a bit, so I created a navbox based on the one we use for Sounders FC players. Enjoy!

User:ComputerGuy/SSFCtf

{{User:ComputerGuy/SSFCtf}} –CGTalk 23:46, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I thought you were gone CG? Good to see you back and nice work dude.Cptnono (talk) 10:48, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Well, I returned after getting my priorities straight. –CGTalk 15:04, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Yo

Since this is not a forum, this is to try to get pictures to upload. Er... that's it. So it looks like people in front of us and my group will have a few extras for Galaxy. Face is $35 which is the only thing I feel bad about. Email me if anyone is on or consider shooting me a message on other weekends since this is like the third week this has happened. It could be considered a taskforce meetup but since there is cash involved it may not be kosher to mention it here. And go PR Sigi's article!Cptnono (talk) 06:25, 8 May 2010 (UTC) So nothing tonight :( Since it is an early start tomorrow I won't be checking email in the morning (roll out of bed hungover to go drink at Qwest). With the guys in front of us and one of my season ticket holding buddies working weekends now we usually have extras (sometimes free if it is last minute) so feel free to ping me in the future on game day if it is an evening kickoff. Seven rows off the field! If you have a camera you can get some better images in the topic area and have a drink (even if it is just a Mocha) with a fellow editor and fan. And just a reminder: There is almost always day of at the box office or on Occidental so don't be shy about getting downtown.Cptnono (talk) 10:58, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I wish I could go, but I am very busy today because I need to study for the dreaded MSP. –CGTalk 15:05, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Good luck!Cptnono (talk) 23:32, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Doh! I'm out of town for the weekend... though I guess I shouldn't be too angry I missed the game, from what I read and saw in the highlights anyways. Yuuch, we're going to be dropping near the bottom of the table. Ah well, better get a result next week! ← George talk 08:05, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Yep, Donavan really dominated yesterday. Watched it on KONG 6/16. Made me cry at the 2nd goal. –CGTalk 18:05, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Sorry but living in Ohio is hard for me to go "west" to Seattle! Antoinefcb (talk) 21:08, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
I recall you saying something about that on the forum. Hopefully you can make it to Columbus in September. I assume ECS will have a few people make the trip. Maybe you can get some images? I keep on finding decent ones on Flickr with the wrong licensing.Cptnono (talk) 22:24, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

New Article

I created this article a couple weeks ago and wouldn't mind someone rating it. I based it on the Arsenal F.C. squad numbers. Here it is, Seattle Sounders FC squad numbers.

Antoinefcb (talk) 18:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

It looks very good, except the lead could be expanded and the "Team Sponsors" section could be incorporated into a new "Style" section, possibly? –CGTalk 19:49, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Could you maybe rate it if you find the time? Antoinefcb (talk) 21:07, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Simple English article

I've started a Sounders FC page on the Simple English Wikipedia here. Its a stub right now, but it could be expanded to a good article or even a "very good article" (their equivalent of a FA). –CGTalk 03:43, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Looks nice. What is the difference between Simple English and Regular English? Antoinefcb (talk) 15:00, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Simple English is for people new to English and is written with text more sutible for grade-school kids (like myself), so I can write. For example, in our wiki, we can say "including", but they say "like" more often. –CGTalk 18:56, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Started a new page

Just started this, List of Seattle Sounders FC records and statistics, feel free to add more. Antoinefcb (talk) 00:32, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikia

I forgot I made a Sounders Wiki back in April of last year, so I started redoing it! I could use a little help, though! Here's the wiki. –CGTalk 19:43, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Rate

Could someone rate these articles:

Thanks, Antoinefcb (talk) 18:53, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I've done three of them. I'm not sure if Carillo is eligible for an article, but I've been away for a while so I don't know if standards have changed. WFCforLife (talk) 04:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

WP:TFA ideas

Sorry for practically disappearing for the last few months. Work and real life have been (continue to be) busy. I still have intentions of getting the 2009 season article up to GA level at some point. The 2010 season article is coming along very well and prose+references are being added by several editors. That article should have a much better/quicker path to GA.

User:ComputerGuy pinged my talk page recently about nominating one of our FAs for todays featured article. I had thought about this before, but wanted to share with everyone in this task force what I had been thinking. Note that none of our current FA level articles have been at that level for a year yet. This is an important milestone to reach preferably before nominating FA article for appearance on the main page (it's not required though). Here are some plans I'd like to propose:

Also, I wanted to get User:Cptnono's thoughts/plans on getting Sigi Schmid to FA level. --SkotyWATC 17:55, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

TFA looks to be rough if there are not enough points. Length of time being at FA< other sports articles not being on the front page, and other stuff all applies. I'm not sure what the typical wait is but I know some do for years. Worth a shot for sure.
Sigi Schmid came along alright. It failed its bid for FA after I said I did not want a repeat of west's first one (second PR). Unfortunately, dude pulled the plug a little early since all issues ha d just been addressed but oh well. I think it is somewhere between GA and FA but could use some new eyes on it.
The 2009 is such a cluster but that is because we weren't keeping up on it. 2010 is coming along swimmingly though.Cptnono (talk) 18:53, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

List of Seattle Sounders FC players

I have a question here. I don't understand why we have the career stats on the List of Seattle Sounders players? The number of matches played, goals, assists, yellow cards, red cards. I don't understand that. I think those should be included in both the 2009 and 2010 season articles and the List of Seattle Sounders FC players should just be a list of players alphabetically by last name who made an appearance for the Sounders. – Michael (talk) 22:35, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Don't compare it to the lists for other MLS teams. This is the only player list for an MLS team that is a featured list. Compare it to other featured lists for other soccer teams. It has been discussed before whether all of the stats belong there, and maybe it's worth being discussed again. If you'd like to propose a change, please do so on the list's talk page. --SkotyWATC 05:04, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
The more I think about it, the less opposed I am to the yellow and red cards going, but otherwise I essentially agree with Skoty. --WFC-- 08:06, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
I say that we take out the:
  • Cards
  • Assists

Antoinefcb (talk) 22:38, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

I've taken the cards out. The reception to them at FLC was lukewarm, and the general acceptance here is that you can't have reds without yellows, and the yellows are more hassle than they're worth. I draw the line at assists though. It's a widely referenced stat in MLS, as it is in lower levels of football and in comparible North American sports such as hockey. The only reason that English teams don't include assists is that we've only recently started to record it. Unsurprising, given that many 19th and early 20th century goalscorers, attendances and in some cases even player's first names have been lost in the mists of time. --WFC-- 22:53, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
First time I've seen yellow and red cards in a list, but then the Sounders are a new team and the statistics are readily available - can see why it would be a pain though. I like the idea of assists and its fine in this case, but I wouldn't dream of putting it in the comparable list of my club! Oh, and hello all. Argyle 4 Lifetalk 23:43, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

List of results by opponent

Hello everyone, I would have joined up sooner but I wanted to have some time available when I did, instead of joining and then not doing anything at all because of my personal life. I've had some free time recently so here I am. I've always been a fan of the city of Seattle and I knew how passionate its people are about sport, so when I heard that it was getting an MLS team I was delighted. They're a credit to the league and I can only see them getting bigger. They also play in green, which is a big plus! I was wandering what sort of reception a List of results by opponent would get?

There aren't many around, but I'm hoping they'll catch on eventually because they're very interesting, in my opinion (I'm a statistical anorak). I saw this at the start of the year and was inspired to do one for Argyle, which I plan to do more work on soon. I would be happy to do one for the Sounders in the MLS. I see the season articles are in very good order, but I'll be happy to update them when necessary and help out anywhere I'm asked to. Cheers. Argyle 4 Lifetalk 23:59, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Welcome! It's always good to get new people involved. We had a lot of momentum last season and accomplished 3 FAs and 1 FL (and a number of GAs, some of which became FAs). Since then we've slowed down a lot (I think we've all been busy with life or other priorities). The current projects for this taskforce are to get Sigi Schmid through an FA review (look through the previous FA reviews to see where it's lacking) and to get 2009 Seattle Sounders FC season through a GA review (the prose after April need a lot of work/cleanup). You may have noticed that our long term goal is to create a featured topic which is what those current projects are aimed at. Feel free to work on these or anything else you want to work on related to Sounders FC. The record-by-opponent list sounds like an interesting idea. My only worry is how to properly cite such a list. If you can find a reliable source with a results summary for a season, that would be best. It would be tedious to have to link to every match summary to derive the list. Anyway, welcome! Thanks for joining the task force. --SkotyWATC 15:55, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the welcome. I've been impressed by what has been achieved here in such a short space of time. The list of results is coming along nicely. I was struggling to find a good source with historical records, but then I thought ESPN has had a variety of statistics and I found this. I'm thinking of adding CONCACAF results too since the Sounders have made it to the Champions League group stage. Hopefully they'll go all the way. Argyle 4 Lifetalk 16:52, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Here it is. Took much less time to do than the Argyle one thats for sure! Argyle 4 Lifetalk 08:02, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Good stuff and hi Argyle. I noticed that there were some good pictures coming in from Flickr as well.Cptnono (talk)
Thanks. I wanted to get some good match pictures and was surprised at how many are readily available with a useable license. 16:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion

There is currently a discussion related to the NASL and USL Sounders' articles that might be of interest. Talk:Seattle Sounders (USL)#Requested move.Cptnono (talk) 22:37, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


ECS layout

Talk:Emerald City Supporters#Sub groups Cptnono (talk) 23:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Sigh

Looks like we might have to vote.

Would be nice to have a list of every team the Sounders have played. Antoinefcb (talk) 16:16, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Both lists, I think, are a good start. I agree that we should probably only have one of these lists, but which one "wins" is probably not important. My thoughts:
  • Seattle Sounders FC all-time record lists a bunch of preseason and friendly matches that I don't think should be included in the same list. IMHO, non-competetive matches (where the result doesn't mean anything) should not be tracked in these lists. The preseason matches should be removed for sure. The friendlies may still be interesting to track, but they should at least be split out into a separate list from the competetive matches then.
  • Seattle Sounders FC results by opponent is well referenced, has a good lead section with clear prose, and has some good pictures. It seems limiting though to only cover league results. That said, being clear about what you cover is a good thing.
My proposal... Join the lists (I don't have a preference on the name, but maybe a compromise of "all-time results by opponent" might work). Keep the league all-time results in a separate table. US Open Cup results could have their own table and CCL results with their own table. Friendlies and preseason matches can be tracked in the specific season articles and left out of an all-time list since they have absolutely zero all-time significance. Just my thoughts though. --SkotyWATC 18:06, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Ok, I will edit my page and only have US Open, CCL, MLS and Friendly matches. Antoinefcb (talk) 18:22, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
I'd agree with that. When I created the article I didn't realise there was a similar one. I only included MLS results to begin with because they were easy to reference (ESPN only lists MLS and Champions League results from what I saw the other day). I'd like to see the list expanded to include all competitive competitions providing there are good sources. Apologies for any inconvenience caused. Argyle 4 Lifetalk 18:32, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Don't worry about it. Which title is more common across the project? I like the formatting and images on the new one so those portion should be kept i some way if there is a merge into the previous one. Cptnono (talk) 18:35, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
I really like the one I created because compared to the results by opponents, it is easier to understand. Antoinefcb (talk) 19:46, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Given that the table is split, I think all-time record is a more appropriate title. "Results by opponent" would imply that you can get all of the Sounders' results against (say) Real Salt Lake in one place. --WFC-- 04:44, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
clarify: Must have been many beers that night. I like the images and layout of Seattle Sounders FC results by opponent but think Seattle Sounders FC all-time record is a fine name. There was some poor typing typing and confusion on which one was created first in my original comment. Skotywa mentioned preseason games and I don;t mind those being in. They certainly don't deserve prominence.
Also, should it be a list instead of an article with "List" in the title? I lean towards yes.Cptnono (talk) 07:03, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Open Cup picture proposed deletion

File:SoundersUSOpenCup.jpg has been proposed for deletion. I invite the members of this task force to add their comments/opposition/support to the discussion. --SkotyWATC 08:09, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

The red link says everything. What a mistake this was. I'm really bummed over this. --SkotyWATC 04:25, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry Skotywa, I would have liked to help keep it, but honestly I don't think images like that one fall under fair use rational (though it's a grey area, and I'm definitely not a copyright expert). However, have you considered asking for photographs from the team directly? They would need to be released into the public domain, but you could suggest to the team that it's a good PR move or something to release some extra ones they're not using. Some months ago I had shot a message to the team:

Hi, this message is intended for Drew Carey, or whoever might be able to help. My name is George, and I'm one of a handful of Wikipedia editors who work on Sounders FC-related Wikipedia articles. Together, we've gotten the Sounders FC article to "featured" status - a status held by less than 1 in 1,000 articles. While we have talented, dedicated writers, Wikipedia is limited to using images that have been released into the public domain, so we often lack great photographs of players, coaches, owners, and the team. I was hoping Drew, who I know is also a photographer at the games, might be willing to release some of his photographs into the public domain, so that we could use them to improve the Sounders FC-related Wikipedia articles, polishing the teams image, and giving even better coverage for fans.

I received the following response:

Hi George, Thanks for the email. The best thing to do would be to write him a letter with your request and send it to: 12 Seahawks Way, Renton, WA 98056

Sadly, I never got around to following up on this (I've been really swamped in real life, and, quite honestly, I forgot), but if you've got a few minutes, why not mail a nicely worded letter to Drew and ask if he or the team would be willing to release some of their extra pictures into the public domain for our use. You can read some suggestions on how to go about this at WP:PERMISSION (example letters are here), but I think the key thing would be to explain how releasing the images would be win-win. After all, better representation of the team benefits both the team and its fans. ← George talk 06:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Just a comment. If you decide to request such a permission it is a good idea to read WP:COPYREQ first. It is even more disappointing when such images are deleted because the red tape was not filed correctly. 20:34, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
I've actually already sent mail on exactly this. I got a front office contact from my season ticket representative. I've received a preliminary approval and am waiting to confirm the license I will upload them under. Expect to see the image back in the articles before the weekend! --SkotyWATC 02:02, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Good stuff! Argyle 4 Lifetalk 05:56, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
The image from the Sounders FC website is now back up and in both articles. I've followed all of the upload directions and forwarded the mail thread with the marketing manager to the reviewers. This was definitely a frustrating yet learning experience. I still think this was valid fair-use of the image, but now it doesn't matter. Permission has been given from Sounders FC directly. The articles are again as high quality as they were a week ago, so I'm glad about that. --SkotyWATC 03:59, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
That's fantastic! Although I'm slightly disappointed that the image wasn't kept as fair use, in a way getting permission makes the articles even stronger, as now nobody can question that it's fully compliant with copyright law. --WFC-- 09:50, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Portal:Seattle

I stumbled across this on my travels. And while I'm at it, I may as well shamelessly plug Portal:Hertfordshire, which I've given a little bit of TLC today. Anyway, I was thinking it could do with a revamp, namely the colour scheme and adding some Sounders-related content (although not too much, otherwise there's a danger of unbalancing it). Obviously the main club article is a no-brainer, but any other ideas of what should go in there? --WFC-- 02:09, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Portal:Hertfordshire is looking good!Cptnono (talk) 02:34, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
I just added Seattle Sounders FC to the list of selected articles for the Seattle portal [[1]]. --SkotyWATC 15:55, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Another DYK

As an FYI to the task force members, I've successfully nominated another Sounders FC related article for DYK. The article is 2010 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final which I recently expanded 5x. The hook will include links to Seattle Sounders FC, Qwest Field, and Columbus Crew. Here's the discussion. --SkotyWATC 15:55, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

The discussion is closed. It's been moved the the queue. Expect it on the main page Wednesday or early Thursday. --SkotyWATC 02:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Looks like it appeared on the main page last night. --SkotyWATC 15:55, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Not on the same page

So people don't seem to agree with my edits on the Seattle Sounders FC page. Have I been throwing everybody off lately? Because this is making me think I'm one of the bad guys here, and I'm a Sounders FC task force member. – Michael (talk) 05:52, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

No you suck! Only kidding of course. Check out WFC's comments above (#Squad template). Should be easy enough to work out. And my position on it is that flag icons are annoying across the footy topic in general so I have no other thoughts on how it should go.Cptnono (talk) 06:19, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Sorry about the tone of my edit summary and follow-up post. I've just had quite a few people reverting me without explaining lately. Irritation can get to the best of us at times, and I'm far from the best! Definitely didn't mean to vent my frustration at a Sounder. Hope we're OK now? --WFC-- 23:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

WP:TFA nomination

I've nominated the 2009 US Open Cup final article to be featured on the main page. You can follow the discussion (or even express your support) here. --SkotyWATC 16:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Check this out! I didn't get it listed for October 5 unfortunately (long story), but it will appear 10 days before this year's Open Cup final. --SkotyWATC 00:45, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Booya!Cptnono (talk) 01:34, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion - Leo Gonzalez

I just requested a move for Leo Gonzalez. Talk:Leonardo González#Requested Move – Michael (talk) 01:25, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Miguel Montano loan?

Miguel Montano isn't on loan is he? All the links I found don't say anything about his being on loan and that the terms were not disclosed, so I can only assume that Montano isn't actually on loan from Quilmes. Can anybody conferm that for me? – Michael (talk) 21:43, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I didn't think so. What does the team site say? --SkotyWATC 00:42, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Nothing there, I think one of the references earlier in the season threw me off. His profile on the team site just says he was signed on April 30. – Michael (talk) 01:02, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Squad template

I thought it best to start a discussion about the pros and cons before being bold about it. Obviously Steve Zakuani's country would need to be called "DR Congo", but would fellow Sounders FC task force members be happy to try out the squad template used here in the team's article? A big advantage would be the scope to stick a few images of current players in, without causing problems for low resolution readers. --WFC-- 09:50, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't be opposed to it. It appears that this is more in compliance with MOS:FLAG than the current implementation anyway. --SkotyWATC 15:10, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Cool. I gave it nearly two weeks' exposure. Lets see if it sticks; if it doesn't it should at least provide valuable input. --WFC-- 16:32, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm open-minded as to why the previous version was partially (yet strangely not totally) undone. But here's my guess... --WFC-- 21:46, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
I think it's an improvement to the article. The stacked pictures seemed a bit much though. I've removed the Levesque picture because it was really low quality, and the Jaqua picture because the caption seemed very season specific. The Keller picture is high quality and very relevant since he's been the team captain for 2 seasons now. Good work WFC! --SkotyWATC 03:16, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
I think there is room for three images. I typically hate any form of stacking but the table + images seems like decent enough formatting. I don't feel strongly about it though. I also am not a fan of flags across the fotty project so don;t ave a preference on how that is handled.Cptnono (talk) 21:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Moving this section closer so that it doesn't get auto archived yet. --SkotyWATC 03:42, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

New Table

I will start the discussion by saying that I HATE it, I hope we can go back to the old one. Antoinefcb (talk) 15:34, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

The "Squad Template" section above is where we've already discussed this. Can you elaborate on why you hate it? Is it just because it's not exactly the same as other team articles? It turns out that there has been repeated discussions (recent examples here, here, and here) about the format of the more popular squad list formats because it violates Wikipedia policies (such as WP:FLAG for example). The new format complies with Wikipedia policies and looks fine. --SkotyWATC 03:41, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

USOC final pictures

Anyone have (or have access to) any pictures of the Open Cup final? I need one or two good pictures of the run of play and then one picture of the cup awarding ceremony to include in 2010 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final. It doesn't look like there are any on flickr yet with an appropriate license, but more will likely come. I'm asking the members of this task force to keep an eye out for images of the event that could be used on Wikipedia. I may end up having to ask the Seattle's front office for permission to use one of their pictures again if we can't come up with our own. --SkotyWATC 20:36, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposed addition to Seattle Sounders FC

I've proposed a new section be added to the article and would like some help copyediting it before it's added to the article. If you can help please join the discussion. --SkotyWATC 15:52, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

2011 season article

You guys might want to check this. Made a few changes miself. Antoinefcb (talk) 15:35, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Dreeeeeeeeew

Anyone have a good eye for cropping images? This is appropriately licensed. I was going to bring it over but the guy overshadows the more noteworthy subject (no offence to him at all and it is a cool shot).

And Sigi is over at FAN.Cptnono (talk) 09:18, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I'm so late responding to this (you posted on Thanksgiving weekend and I wasn't online then). I'm happy to help touch up or crop photos. I'm not great at it, but I've got applications that help me do a good job. The link you provided above doesn't work though. Can you find the picture again and update the link? --SkotyWATC 16:55, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

List of Seattle Sounders FC players

I really don't want to revert the significant work made by the IP, but I have concerns here. For all the world it looks like an exact duplicate of another table, with a "goals contributed" (whatever that means) column added. Although simple statistics are not copyvio, porting a table en-masse is. Additionally, if red cards are now considered non-notable, I fail to see how any of the newly-added columns can be justified. Finally, I don't see how the number column is going to work. Sooner or later there will be players that have had more than one shirt number. Could other task force members have a look and give their opinions? Regards, —WFC— 04:47, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Same boat, dude. I didn't want to revert since he put in so much effort but the removal of images and a few other tings are issues. Cptnono (talk) 04:54, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Not to be too flippant about this, but the deviation from Wiki standard way of displaying players is disturbing. I can't imagine a justification. There is something to be said for these articles have consistency in certain elements. The person who put in the work should have kept that in mind. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.239.196.22 (talk) 23:22, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Note the little star at the upper right. It means something was done right.Cptnono (talk) 21:53, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

SSFC Dispatch

I had some free time today (it's been a while) and decided to create a template to help the members of the task force be aware of article activity/reviews without having to check the project page regularly. The template (WP:SSFC/Dispatch) uses the Project content bot to stay updated with GA and FA reviews. I've asked the bot owner/writer to add support for peer reviews as well (should be an easy feature add). You can add this template to your user page or your talk page and have this taskforce's activity "beemed in" for free. Take a look at my talk page for an example of it's usage. --SkotyWATC 01:05, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Request made for "popular pages" list

I've made a request for a page to be generated here (the link will no longer be red when the bot creates the page) that lists the top 20 pages that are part of this taskforce by number of page views. I thought this might be interesting/informative for the members of this taskforce. --SkotyWATC 19:48, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

These can produce some somewhat... interesting results. For instance, the equivalent at WP:HERTS has Hertfordshire at number 16, Adam Johnson (footballer) at number 17, Watford F.C. at number 23, and Watford at 35! My money's on Drew Carey and Freddie Ljungberg to battle it out for top spot here, unless I'm overlooking any prominent NASL Sounders? —WFC— 20:48, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
WP:FOOTY has a popular articles page here (which is where I got the idea) and Drew Carey ranks 83rd overall, Freddie Ljungberg 114th, and Seattle Sounders FC was 500th on the list last month, but fell of the list with the most recent update. --SkotyWATC 01:48, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Peer review opened for 2010 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final

Good news, 2010 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final has just passed WP:GA review and now has that most excellent green icon in the top right. Keeping the progress going, I opened a peer review for the article in the hopes of getting it prepared for an FA review. It would be great if the taskforce members could take a moment and read the article and provide feedback/suggestions on the prose (or anything else). Thanks. --SkotyWATC 20:48, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

The peer review has closed. Thanks to taskforce members WFC and George for their reviews. I've now nominated the article for FAC review. I encourage taskforce members to review the article and either support the nomination or make suggestions on how it can be improved. Thanks! --SkotyWATC 02:42, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
The FAC review is nearing an end and it has only 2 supports so far. Thanks to WFC for the review comments and subsequent support. If any of you have a moment to review the article, please do so soon. The FAC review will be open for only a few more days I expect. --SkotyWATC 18:08, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
After 37 days as a candidate, the article has been promoted to FA quality. Thanks to the taskforce members (WFCforLife and Cptnono) who commented and supported it's promotion. This represents the taskforce's 5th FA and the total amount of featured content to 6. It's been fun working on the 2010 USOC final article, and with any luck, Sounders FC won't wait long provide me with another final match (USOC, MLS Cup, or CCL) to write a featured article about. Good times, thanks to everyone who helped. --SkotyWATC 00:26, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Seattle Sounders FC nomination for Today's Featured Article

I've been preparing for a while to nominate Seattle Sounders FC to appear on the main page on March 19, the anniversary of their inaugural game. It also coincides with opening weekend of the 2011 MLS season which is nice. I've been working on a prototype of the blurb and wanted to ask taskforce members to take a look and see if it can be improved further before I nominate it. I'm planning on nominating it in the next day or so but we'll have several weeks to tweak the blurb still. If you're familiar with the TFA request process, I think it will have 4 points (1 for being over a year at FA status, 1 for date relevance, and 2 for wide coverage). --SkotyWATC 07:07, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

FYI, the nomination has been made. I encourage taskforce members to take a moment to read the blurb (literally only 7 sentences long) and add your support to the nomination. Getting Sounders FC on the main page will be a great way to recognize how far the club has come since their inaugural game 2 years ago, and is an opportunity to put a spotlight on the league during their opening weekend. I'm very excited for this to appear on the main page. We've all worked hard on that article and many other related articles and this is also an opportunity to draw attention to our great work. --SkotyWATC 17:40, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
The nomination is still active but it needs more support or it might get bumped before it's scheduled. Please go add your support if you haven't already. --SkotyWATC 17:28, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
In follow up, in case you missed it, the article appeared on the main page on March 19. While it was there, 19,100 viewers clicked through to read the article. By way of comparison, when 2009 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final appeared on the main page on September 27, 14,800 users clicked through to read the article. --SkotyWATC 16:02, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Pageview stats

After a recent request, I added WikiProject Football/Seattle Sounders FC task force to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Seattle Sounders FC task force/Popular pages.

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the toolserver tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr.Z-man 00:52, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

2011 baby

You guys know me well enough that it should be read as "2011 assholes!" :) . Saw George's edit about no-longer-here Blaze (the eruption at the bar was funny and I am still bummed) and Skoty's about Starfire (the park is not older but the new facility is newer). So it is a new season! I hope everyone's evening was great (considering the loss). Maybe we will work on articles and maybe we won't. All I know is that having a few Sounders fans poking around here makes things that much more fun. Here is to a handful of months with some fun times at least once a week for the next several months. So to you George I am chugging a beer. For you Skoty, a glass of milk. Cptnono (talk) 05:53, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

And I can't miss raising a beer to WFC (Newcastle works for me) and to Antoine (hurry up and turn 21 and get out here, dude)Cptnono (talk) 05:58, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Cptnono. The loss was a bummer, but it's great that the season is finally here. It's been great working on articles about Sounders FC with you all. Looking forward to seeing the club article on the main page Saturday. Hopefully we've got a great season ahead of us. --SkotyWATC 07:43, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Cheers guys. Hope to find the time to help out more around here in the coming months! ← George talk 04:17, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
A belated cheers. Things are going pretty well on-wiki. And let's face it, they can only get better off it! —WFC— 03:06, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

History of professional soccer in Seattle

So this article was created a while ago and has remained "off the radar" of this task force by not having a talk page (and therefore not being tagged). I discovered it this weekend (when it was still called "History of Seattle Sounders"). After looking through the article, I was confused about it's purpose and decided to move it to where it currently sits and rewrote the lead. An IP editor disagreed with me and did a copy/paste move back to the old location (which I've temporarily undone per WP:MOVE and WP:CUTPASTE). I invite the editors of the task force to take a look at the article and then join the discussion on the article's talk page so we can come to some consensus about how to proceed with this article. --SkotyWATC 03:48, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

What name to use in infoboxes

A discussion at WT:FOOTY has been taking place in recent weeks about how to distinguish between the previous and current Whitecaps, specifically at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Vancouver Whitecaps naming issue. In the sub-section of that discussion, there are a few proposals on the table for clearing up the Whitecaps issue. Because at least one of the proposals would affect Sounders articles, combined with the reasonable assumption that a consensus may end up being claimed quite quickly if nobody provides input, task force members might want to monitor the situation. —WFC— 12:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I've added my 2 cents. --SkotyWATC 07:00, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Squad list

I ran into this article and saw the squad list and I have to say something about it. I'm not a big fan of it and I don't know what compelled the change. But, from what I read in the talkpages, it might have something to do with MOS:FLAG compliance. If that is the case, may I suggest an alternative. It's a variation of the common Fs squad template that is used in pretty much every Argentine league football club article, like this one, except it used {{flag}} instead of {{flagicon}}. I have't used it myself for my favorite club because it still needs very minor work. But, I'm sure with more widespread attention drawn to it, it could be improved (like getting the names to not wrap). Cheers. Digirami (talk) 23:12, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

MOS:FLAG was a big reason for moving to the model currently used in Seattle Sounders FC. However, another benefit of it is that the columns are sortable allowing useful sorts by player name or position. --SkotyWATC 23:49, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Don't you think that such a deviation from the accepted format in the club MOS should warrant input from the rest of the project, especially since this project strives for uniformity across common items like a squad list? Digirami (talk) 02:02, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
For the avoidance of doubt, I've tagged that thing as what it is; an essay. Also for the avoidance of doubt, the Manual of Style trumps de-facto practise (debateably WikiProject Football too). But notwithstanding that, there was a massive discussion about this template at Template talk:Football squad player, one that I believe you saw the early stages of. The only reason that it isn't being used across the entire project is that we never figured out how to roll it out, due to the difficulties with using an automated process to apply {{sortname}}. —WFC— 02:53, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
There are also discussions linked to in the FAQ on the article talk page. --SkotyWATC 20:36, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Quiet around here

So I've been very busy with work lately, and haven't been able to get back to working on Wikipedia much. Now that the 2010 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final FA review is completed and Seattle Sounders FC appeared on the main page (yay!), my next goal will be to pass List of Seattle Sounders FC seasons through a peer review (this comment makes it clear that it can't be an FL for several more years) and then get the FT nominated. At some point I'd like to go back through the season articles and finish polishing them up and take them through a GA review, but I won't get to that for quite some time probably. Do any of the newer members of the project want to try to get a season article through GA review? That would be awesome. What's everyone else working on? Any other ideas for what to do next in this task force. We've accomplished a lot, and most of the obvious stuff from when the task force was created has been done now (short of the featured topic thing). What's next? Thoughts? Aspirations? Goals? Anyone? Buler? --SkotyWATC 16:42, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

The latest FA really is excellent. I have a few projects lined up. I'd like to take this to FLC at some point. It needs updating and ideally some more references, but I'm not too familiar with good websites that cover North American clubs. Something like this would be ideal. Argyle 4 Lifetalk 17:05, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
I encourage you to nominate it when you think it's ready. I'll be sure to chime in on the review. If you're concerned that the quality might not be there just yet, send it through a peer review first. Otherwise, I'd say just go for it on WP:FLC and see what happens. I've found each featured content review I've been a part of to be a great learning experience even when they aren't successful. There are also some folks in the task force who are participating in the WikiCup and if you ping them on their talk page, I suspect that they'd be more than happy to help as a co-nominator and respond to and handle the feedback from reviewers. --SkotyWATC 18:59, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Steve Zakuani

Given the events of this weekend, I naturally pulled up his article to read about the player and was pleasantly surprised to find a decent article with good coverage and references. I'm going to put some effort into improving the article (cleaning up refs, expanding the lead, and adding any other points that may be missing) and get it to GA status. I'm doing this for two reasons: (1) to get to know more about this great player and human being, and (2) to pay a small tribute to him on Wikipedia. I encourage task force members to join in if you want to help. Get well Steve. #forSteve --SkotyWATC 16:06, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

I heard about the terrible incident but have only just seen footage of it. Hopefully he'll come back stronger. Argyle 4 Lifetalk 17:13, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Just thought I'd pop in

Hope everyone's keeping well. I've been doing a bit of work on this high-profile stub, and the conversation on the talk page has turned to DYK. The proposed hook at the moment is something along the lines of "...that the 12th man in the 39th game is likely to be a travelling army?", the 12th man referring to a set of supporters, the 39th game some stupid idea the Premier League had a few years back. Anyway, it got me thinking, while we wouldn't get away with a namecheck, it could be an opportunity to get a Sounders FC photo onto the main page. Does anyone know of a particularly good, and free, photo of supporters that we could use? —WFC— 07:10, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

That could be an awesome list. That index should make people American Anlglpophiles and footy fans stoked. Good idea.
There are a handful of options but none of them strike me as perfect: people hanging out, the chick drinking whiskey flavored coke draws too much so it might need a crop, frame seems off center, decent sized tifo, USL days, and there is a video on Flickr somewhere that is appropriately licensed if that is acceptable. I have always loved it since it is not choreographed but am having a hard time tracking it down. Most of the pictures I get at games are not really what we expect quality wise.
Hope life is treating you well WFC! On a side note, the "12th Man" is a big deal for Seahawks home games (noise during defensive stands disrupts the offence) Cptnono (talk) 09:08, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
A video? Now that is an idea. Even if we didn't get the video into the DYK, having a freely licenced video to illustrate one of the terms on the list would be awesome. —WFC— 09:13, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
It is pretty tame noise wise but the background sound and the view of the arch was something I always enjoyed. Might not be perfect for the article you are talking about but it is licensed to use in other articles. If I recall correctly it is from before a match in 2009.[2] If you squint then I might be seen on the other side of the field @ 24 sec.
Then I started looking at more videos just to see what was there this one was almost great but then they started chit chatting and this one might work well in the Keller article
But finding an image of rabid fans with the license we need is rough. Maybe we need to try harder!Cptnono (talk) 09:38, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
I wouldn't worry too much about looking harder. The Keller video might be fantastic for illustrating a save in this list. The first video you link would be a decent addition to 2009 Seattle Sounders FC season IMO. —WFC— 09:48, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
(ec) Come to think about it, the Keller v Henry PK] one could work in several articles. It is licensed appropriately (CC w/ attribution).Cptnono (talk) 09:49, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Cool. I'll upload it. —WFC— 10:02, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
(or I would... if I had a clue how!) —WFC— 10:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
What about supporters doing those tifos last week? [3][4] Don't think either of those are free, but there should be some free ones floating around. ← George talk 10:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
commons:File:Keller saves PK attempt by Henry.ogv Thanks to the Flickr uploader. He saw the inquiry at Wikipedia:Help desk and shot me the file for conversion. What a badass. Go for it WFC. Cptnono (talk) 04:36, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Task force for another MLS team

So I'm tooling around on Wikipedia this evening and I found this: Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/D.C. United task force. Very cool to see another MLS team getting some attention. --SkotyWATC 04:37, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Games at the end of July in er... the stadium in Seattle

I might miss both games (can't remember the last time that happened) due to a massive project at work. If anyone is going, let me know if they are removing the WaMu signage for the theater of the Events Center. I don't know if CenturyLink is grabbing all naming rights Qwest had or if they are picking up all branding. It is hard to assume either way since the operator has said that it would stay WaMu until a new sponsor came up.Cptnono (talk) 03:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye out for changed signage. I haven't heard or read anything about the theater's name changing. --SkotyWATC 04:11, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football/Seattle_Sounders_FC_task_force/Archive_2&oldid=1140165310"