Jump to content

User:PhilipR

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some Wikipedia critiques

[edit]

In short, I don't like Wikipedia because it's a free-for-all where the most persistent, noisiest people get their way. It's typically dressed up in claims of NPOV, but NPOV is just another way of saying "majority wins." It claims a moral high ground it's not entitled to. More specifically:

Most tenacious wins

[edit]

I don't enjoy devoting time to Wikipedia because "consensus" is a euphemism for whoever has the most free time to argue everyone else into submission wins.


Wasting time on edits

[edit]

If I can't make a substantive edit without being prepared to spend hours defending it, then I just don't find it a good use of my time to continue making substantive edits. I might fix a comma splice or two.

This means that the people who are willing to spend hours defending their edits exercise disproportionate influence over the direction of the encyclopedia. (By disproportionate, I mean not commensurate with the quality of their arguments. In other words, they win debates by attrition.) Rewarding those who spend the most time editing with our esteem and gratitude is certainly fitting. Rewarding people who have the time to always get the last word in any debate by allowing them to always get their way seems counterproductive. However, I'd rather find another hobby than continue to argue about such picayunes just for the satisfaction of "being right."

Let no bad deed go unrewarded

[edit]

See discussion at Talk:Vitoria-Gasteiz. After a couple of years, we finally built consensus. The system worked -- slowly. The offender's page move was corrected -- slowly. But for multiple years, his unilateral move achieved the desired outcome.

That's not a consenus-based community, no matter how much self-deception you practice to tell yourself it is.

lolz

[edit]

[1]

Yeah, good call deleting that article.

Sandbox: Stupid stuff

[edit]

I might play with the colors below to get them like I would like them. :)

Jersey with blue and white vertical stripes, blue shorts, and blue socks
Principal
PhilipR

CONCACAF Champions League

[edit]

Qualification

[edit]

Twenty-four teams are expected to participate in the 2010–11 CONCACAF Champions League from the North American, Central American, and Caribbean zones.[1] Nine of the teams will come from North America, twelve from Central America, and three from the Caribbean.

Teams may be disqualified and replaced if they don't have a stadium for the tournament that CONCACAF deems suitable. If a club fails to meet the standards for its home stadium, this club must find a suitable stadium in its own country. If said club fails to provide the adequate facilities, it will run the risk of being replaced.[2]

  • Central America: 12 Central American clubs can qualify to the Champions League. If one or more clubs is precluded, it will be supplanted by a club from another Central American federation. The reallocation would be based on results from the Champions League 2009–10.

For the Central American representatives that qualify via split seasons, in nations that play a playoff to determine a national champion, the winner will gain the nation's top spot, and in nations that don't, total points over both seasons, followed by other tiebreakers, will determine which team gains the nation's top spot.

After having analyzed previous results, the CONCACAF Executive Committee approved a reallocation of berths compared to the previous two seasons, giving Panama one automatic place in the Group Stage while making both of El Salvador's qualifiers go through the Preliminary Round.[3]

Nation Club Qualifying method
 Mexico
4 berths
Monterrey 2009 Apertura champion
Toluca 2010 Bicentenario champion
Cruz Azul 2009 Apertura runner-up
Santos Laguna 2010 Bicentenario runner-up
 United States
4 berths
Real Salt Lake 2009 MLS Cup champion
Columbus Crew 2009 MLS Supporters' Shield winner
Los Angeles Galaxy 2009 MLS Cup runner-up
Seattle Sounders FC 2009 U.S. Open Cup champion
 Honduras
3 berths
Marathón Apertura 2009 champion
Olimpia Clausura 2010 champion
Motagua Clausura 2010 runner-up1
 Panama
3 berths
Árabe Unido Apertura 2009 champion and Clausura 2010 champion
Tauro Apertura 2009 runner-up
San Francisco Clausura 2010 runner-up1
 Costa Rica
2 berths
Brujas 2009 Invierno champion
Saprissa 2010 Verano champion
 Guatemala
2 berths
Municipal Apertura 2009 champion and Clausura 2010 champion
Xelajú Runner-up with most points in Apertura 2009 and Clausura 2010
 El Salvador
2 berths
FAS Apertura 2009 champion
Isidro Metapán Clausura 2010 champion
 Canada
1 berth
Toronto FC 2010 Canadian Championship champion
CFU
3 berths
Puerto Rico Puerto Rico Islanders 2010 CFU Club Championship champion
Trinidad and Tobago Joe Public 2010 CFU Club Championship runner-up
Trinidad and Tobago San Juan Jabloteh 2010 CFU Club Championship third place

1 Berths originally awarded to Belize (Belize Defence Force) and Nicaragua (Real Estelí), but both countries failed CONCACAF stadium requirements, so the spots vacated were awarded to Honduras (Motagua) and Panama (San Francisco) based on the performances of clubs from those countries last season.[4]

Format

[edit]

There will be a two-legged Preliminary Round for 16 clubs, with the eight winners advancing to the Group Stage. The other eight qualified teams will be seeded directly into the Group Stage. The clubs involved in the Group Stage will be placed into four groups of four with each team playing the others in its group in both home and away matches. The top two teams from each group will advance to the Championship Round, which will consist of two-legged ties. The Final Round, to be held in late April 2011, will also be two-legged. The away goals rule will be used, but will not apply once a tie enters extra time.

Group Stage
Pot A Mexico Monterrey Mexico Toluca United States Columbus Crew United States Real Salt Lake
Pot B Costa Rica Saprissa Honduras Olimpia Guatemala Municipal Panama Árabe Unido
Preliminary Round
Pot A Mexico Cruz Azul Mexico Santos Laguna United States Los Angeles Galaxy United States Seattle Sounders FC
Costa Rica Brujas Honduras Marathón El Salvador FAS Canada Toronto FC
Pot B Guatemala Xelajú Panama Tauro El Salvador Isidro Metapán Honduras Motagua
Panama San Francisco Puerto Rico Puerto Rico Islanders Trinidad and Tobago Joe Public Trinidad and Tobago San Juan Jabloteh

Preliminary round

[edit]

The draw for the Preliminary Round and the Group Stage was held on May 19, 2010, at the CONCACAF headquarters in New York City.[5] The first legs of the Preliminary Round will be played July 27–29, 2010, while the second legs will be played August 3–5, 2010.[6]

Team 1 Agg.Tooltip Aggregate score Team 2 1st leg 2nd leg
FAS
PhilipR
Full nameClub Deportivo Futbolistas
Asociados Santanecos
GroundEstadio Oscar Quiteño,
Santa Ana, El Salvador
Capacity15,000
LeaguePrimera División
Clausura 2010Primera Division, 7th
El Salvador
1 Guatemala Xelajú
PhilipR
Full nameClub Social y Deportivo
Xelajú Mario Camposeco
GroundEstadio Mario Camposeco,
Quetzaltenango, Guatemala
Capacity11,000
LeagueLiga Nacional de Fútbol
Clausura 20095th (playoffs) 5th (league)
July 29 August 5
Brujas Costa Rica 2 Trinidad and Tobago Joe Public July 28 August 5
San Juan Jabloteh Trinidad and Tobago 3 Mexico Santos Laguna July 27 August 4
San Francisco Panama 4 Mexico Cruz Azul July 27 August 3
Los Angeles Galaxy United States 5 Puerto Rico Puerto Rico Islanders
Puerto Rico Islanders
GroundJuan Ramón Loubriel Stadium
Bayamón, Puerto Rico
Capacity12,500
LeagueUSSF D2 Pro League
2009 (USL1)Regular Season: 3rd
Playoffs: Semi Finals
Current season
July 27 August 4
Tauro Panama 6 Honduras Marathón July 28 August 4
Seattle Sounders FC United States 7 El Salvador Isidro Metapán
Isidro Metapán
GroundEstadio Jorge Calero Suárez,
Metapán, El Salvador
Capacity8,000
LeaguePrimera División
Clausura 2010Primera Division, 1st
July 28 August 3
Toronto FC Canada 8 Honduras Motagua July 27 August 3

Group A

[edit]
Team Pld W D L GF GA GD Pts
United States Real Salt Lake 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Panama Árabe Unido 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Panama/Mexico Match 4 winner 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Canada/Honduras Match 8 winner 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Group B

[edit]
Team Pld W D L GF GA GD Pts
United States Columbus Crew 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Guatemala Municipal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Trinidad and Tobago/Mexico Match 3 winner 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Costa Rica/Trinidad and Tobago Match 2 winner 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Group C

[edit]
Team Pld W D L GF GA GD Pts
Mexico Monterrey 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Costa Rica Saprissa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
United States/El Salvador Match 7 winner 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Panama/Honduras Match 6 winner 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Group D

[edit]
Team Pld W D L GF GA GD Pts
Mexico Toluca 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Honduras Olimpia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
United States/Puerto Rico Match 5 winner 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
El Salvador/Guatemala Match 1 winner 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UEFA Champions League

[edit]
Group stage
Italy InternazionaleTH (1st) Spain Valencia (3rd) France Lyon (2nd) Romania CFR Cluj (1st)
England Chelsea (1st) Italy Roma (2nd) Russia Rubin Kazan (1st) Portugal Benfica (1st)
England Manchester United (2nd) Italy Milan (3rd) Russia Spartak Moscow (2nd) Turkey Bursaspor (1st)
England Arsenal (3rd) Germany Bayern Munich (1st) Ukraine Shakhtar Donetsk (1st) Greece Panathinaikos (1st)
Spain Barcelona (1st) Germany Schalke 04 (2nd) Netherlands Twente (1st) Scotland Rangers (1st)
Spain Real Madrid (2nd) France Marseille (1st)
Play-off round
Champions Non-champions
England Tottenham Hotspur (4th) Italy Sampdoria (4th) France Auxerre (3rd)
Spain Sevilla (4th) Germany Werder Bremen (3rd)
Third qualifying round
Champions Non-champions
Belgium Anderlecht (1st) Russia Zenit St. Petersburg (3rd) Portugal Braga (2nd) Scotland Celtic (2nd)
Switzerland Basel (1st) Ukraine Dynamo Kyiv (2nd) Turkey Fenerbahçe (2nd) Belgium Gent (2nd)
Denmark Copenhagen (1st) Netherlands Ajax (2nd) Greece PAOK (P-1st) Switzerland Young Boys (2nd)
Romania Unirea Urziceni (2nd)
Second qualifying round
Bulgaria Litex Lovech (1st) Slovakia Žilina (1st) Belarus BATE (1st) Estonia Levadia (1st)
background: #800000;Sparta Prague (1st) Poland Lech Poznań (1st) Bosnia and Herzegovina Željezničar (1st) Albania Dinamo Tirana (1st)
Norway Rosenborg (1st) Croatia Dinamo Zagreb (1st) Hungary Debrecen (1st) Kazakhstan Aktobe (1st)
Austria Red Bull Salzburg (1st) Finland HJK Helsinki (1st) Iceland FH (1st) Armenia Pyunik (1st)
Serbia Partizan (1st) Lithuania Ekranas (1st) Moldova Sheriff Tiraspol (1st) Wales The New Saints (1st)
Israel Hapoel Tel Aviv (1st) Republic of Ireland Bohemians (1st) Georgia (country) Olimpi Rustavi (1st) Northern Ireland Linfield (1st)
Cyprus Omonia (1st) Latvia Liepājas Metalurgs (1st) North Macedonia Renova (1st) Faroe Islands HB Tórshavn (1st)
Sweden AIK (1st) Slovenia Koper (1st) Azerbaijan Inter Baku (1st) Luxembourg Jeunesse Esch (1st)
First qualifying round
Montenegro Rudar Pljevlja (1st) Andorra FC Santa Coloma (1st) Malta Birkirkara (1st) San Marino Tre Fiori (1st)

TH Title Holder

Phase Round Draw date First leg Second leg
Qualifying First qualifying round 21 June 2010 29–30 June 2010 6–7 July 2010
Second qualifying round 13–14 July 2010 20–21 July 2010
Final 28 May 2011 at Wembley Stadium, London


First qualifying round

[edit]


Tre Fiori
150px|logo
Full nameSocietà Polisportiva Tre Fiori
Founded1949
GroundStadio di Fiorentino
Capacity700
ChairmanMarino Casali
ManagerFloriano Sperindio
LeagueCampionato Sammarinese di Calcio - Girone B
2008-09Girone B, 1st
FK Rudar
150px
Full nameFudbalski klub Rudar
Founded1920
GroundStadion Gradski,
Pljevlja,
Montenegro
Capacity11,000
ChairmanMontenegro Radovan Klačar
ManagerNebojša Vignjević
LeagueFirst League
2009–101st


Team #1   Agg.   Team #2   1st leg     2nd leg   Something else


Tre Fiori San Marino| {{{3}}} {{{4}}} {{{6}}} {{{7}}}
SMR|1–7|Rudar Pljevlja|MNE|0–3|1–4


{{country data FC Santa Coloma|flag icon/core|variant=|size=}} AND {{country data Birkirkara|flag icon/core|variant=|size=}} 3–7 MLT 0–31 3–4

Second qualifying round

[edit]

The first legs were played on 13 and 14 July, and the second legs were played on 20 and 21 July 2010.

Team 1 Agg.Tooltip Aggregate score Team 2 1st leg 2nd leg
Liepājas Metalurgs Latvia 0–5 Czech Republic Sparta Prague 0–3 0–2
Aktobe Kazakhstan 3–1 Georgia (country) Olimpi Rustavi 2–0 1–1
Levadia Estonia 3–4 Hungary Debrecen 1–1 2–3
Partizan Serbia 4–1 Armenia Pyunik 3–1 1–0
Inter Baku Azerbaijan 1–1 (8–9 p) Poland Lech Poznań 0–1 1–0 (aet)
Dinamo Zagreb Croatia 5–4 Slovenia Koper 5–1 0–3
Litex Lovech Bulgaria 5–0 Montenegro Rudar Pljevlja 1–0 4–0
Birkirkara Malta 1–3 Slovakia Žilina 1–0 0–3
Sheriff Tiraspol Moldova 3–2 Albania Dinamo Tirana 3–1 0–1
Hapoel Tel Aviv Israel 6–0 Bosnia and Herzegovina Željezničar 5–0 1–0
Omonia Cyprus 5–0 North Macedonia Renova 3–0 2–0
Red Bull Salzburg Austria 5–1 Faroe Islands HB Tórshavn 5–0 0–1
Bohemians Republic of Ireland 1–4 Wales The New Saints 1–0 0–4
BATE Belarus 6–1 Iceland FH 5–1 1–0
AIK Sweden 1–0 Luxembourg Jeunesse Esch 1–0 0–0
Linfield Northern Ireland 0–2 Norway Rosenborg 0–0 0–2
Ekranas Lithuania 1–2 Finland HJK Helsinki 1–0 0–2 (aet)

Third qualifying round

[edit]

The third qualifying round will be split into two separate sections: one for champions and one for non-champions. The losing teams in both sections will enter the play-off round of the 2010–11 UEFA Europa League. The first legs are to be played on 27 and 28 July, and the second legs are to be played on 3 and 4 August 2010.

Team 1 Agg.Tooltip Aggregate score Team 2 1st leg 2nd leg
Champions Path
Sparta Prague color: 800000 Czech Republic Poland Lech Poznań 27 July 4 August
Aktobe Kazakhstan Israel Hapoel Tel Aviv 28 July 3 August
Sheriff Tiraspol Moldova Croatia Dinamo Zagreb 27 July 4 August
Litex Lovech Bulgaria Slovakia Žilina 27 July 4 August
Debrecen Hungary Switzerland Basel 28 July 4 August
AIK Sweden Norway Rosenborg 28 July 4 August
Partizan Serbia Finland HJK Helsinki 28 July 4 August
BATE Belarus Denmark Copenhagen 28 July 4 August
The New Saints Wales Belgium Anderlecht 27 July 3 August
Omonia Cyprus Austria Red Bull Salzburg 27 July 4 August
Non-Champions Path
Ajax Netherlands Greece PAOK 28 July 4 August
Dynamo Kyiv Ukraine Belgium Gent 27 July 4 August
Young Boys Switzerland Turkey Fenerbahçe 28 July 4 August
Braga Portugal Scotland Celtic 28 July 4 August
Unirea Urziceni Romania Russia Zenit St. Petersburg 27 July 4 August

Play-off round

[edit]

The play-off round will be split into two separate sections: one for champions and one for non-champions. The losing teams in both sections will enter the group stage of the 2010–11 UEFA Europa League. The first legs are to be played on 17 and 18 August, and the second legs are to be played on 24 and 25 August 2010. Following a trial at last year's UEFA Europa League, UEFA have announced that in both this year's and the 2011-12 competition, two extra officials will be used - with one on each goal line.[7]

Champions

[edit]

The 10 winners from the third qualifying round for champions will play in the play-off round for champions.

Non-champions

[edit]

10 clubs will play in the play-off round for non-champions: the 5 winners from the third qualifying round for non-champions, and the following 5 clubs which will enter in this round:

Group stage

[edit]

32 clubs will play in the group stage: the 10 winners from the play-off round (5 champions and 5 non-champions), and the following 22 clubs which will enter in this stage:


temp temp

[edit]
Strong support The fundamental argument is that consistency is one of the five criteria for naming. Consistency with other sports articles indicates using officially-sanctioned nicknames. None of the other four criteria comes down clearly on either side (but see my last point below). Some other points of rebuttal:


1. One of MHawk10's sources is irrelevant. "Recent past" -- the supposed source refers to the 1990s. The nickname 20 or more years ago, and its use in an article about student-athletes from that era, is at best marginally relevant to this discussion. 2. In the absence of a large number of sources to the contrary, MHawk's argument has a certain circularity. Why name the article something different? Because that's allegedly common usage. Can we demonstrate how common it is with ngrams? No, because the team isn't referred to often enough. If there's not enough usage to generate a clear written record of preference, there's not much evidence to buck the actual nickname of the team specified by the institution itself. In theory there might be millions of people still talking about the Peahens but insufficient online sources to document said preference. In practice this is implausible.

3. Skarmory's argument seems dispositive to me. The nickname indicates in a sports team's article is viewed by readers as evidence of fact. Keeping a name contrary to their official nickname in there is lying. It's not incumbent on a reader to read an entire article to understand that the title is presenting "casual" or "unofficial" information when this is very much out of the norm for sports articles.

4. See Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Oakland Athletics for examples of marginal cases where one could apply MHawk10's reasoning to suggest WP gets it wrong. It's Unclear which option[s] are slightly favored in *spoken* English, but then it's unclear here too.

5. I doubt it's common parlance to say, verbatim, "Saint Peter's Peacocks and Peahens," or "Saint Peter's Peahens basketball," in that set phrase. If we're going to apply COMMONNAME somewhat legalistically, we need to


5. If you really do want to push the issue with WP:COMMONNAME, then we should be truly legalistic and borderline pedantic about pushing all Wikipedia standards to the limit, "the Peacocks and Peahens of basketball, swimming and volleyball" isn't useful to argue for the present name.

Saint Peter's women's basketball that I'll offer an exceedingly pedantic rebuttal. For that matter,

  1. ^ "Qualifying 2010/11". CONCACAF. Retrieved May 19, 2010.
  2. ^ "CONCACAF Executive Committee tightens stadium standards for next year's Champions League". CONCACAF Official site. 2008-11-07. Retrieved 2008-11-12.
  3. ^ "CONCACAF Executive Committee alters youth championships qualifying format". CONCACAF. 2009-11-23.
  4. ^ "Motagua, San Francisco get CCL berths". CONCACAF.com. May 18, 2010.
  5. ^ "Cruz Azul gets San Francisco for CCL Preliminary Round". CONCACAF.com. May 19, 2010.
  6. ^ "Cruz Azul to open CCL Preliminary Round". CONCACAF.com. June 9, 2010.
  7. ^ UEFA welcomes IFAB referee trial decision