Talk:Real Madrid
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
WikiProject Echo has identified Real Madrid as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Chinese, Romanian or Spanish language Wikipedias. |
 |
The article on Real Madrid is supported by the WikiProject on Football, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of football related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page; if you have any questions about the project or the article ratings below, please consult the FAQ. |
|---|---|
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. |
[edit] Nicknames
Why is someone deleting the translation of the nicknames? Both here and on the Barca page. This is an english language encyclopaedia. The nickname Merengues would mean nothing to your average English speaker.
[edit] Formation View
I think the picture of the usual formation is a great idea. I think it would be useful to have this kind of team sheet preview on other famous football club articles. Bobbyfletch85 21:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] EU Flags
The EU flags are important in spanish football. As I've explained only three non-eu citizens can be on a pitch at anytime. Teams get around this by claiming passports from EU countries if they -the players- have ancestry from an Eu country or by nationalising a player after five years which is why some Brazilians have spanish flags e.g Roberto Carlos.
[edit] Adherence to template
I think this article contains a lot of good information, although perhaps some a bit more relevant than other, in any case, perhaps we should start making an effort to adhere it more closely to the template for football clubs found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football/Clubs Avrv 17:21, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Castilla,Basketball team, rumours!
If there are seperate articles on Castlla and the basketball team there is no need to have their squads and excessive info listed here. Otherwise the pages just become repetitive. Also the proposed line-up needs to go as it is clearly a personnel POV and quickly becomes dated. It is also a waste of space and the consensus from this page seems to agree it should not be here. Plus the page should be factual and should not include gossip and rumours. All this just makes the page look untidy and cluttered Djln--Djln 21:20, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Real Madrid Castilla
Please remember there is a seperate page for Real Madrid Castilla. If info is included about them here, the page gets too long. Plus is really necessaary to have a Current Squad and Champions League Squad? This basicly the same info entered twice. 03:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)Djln
[edit] Lineup charts
Why is there Chinese writing after some of the names? Why are there EU flags next to some of the national flags? (Isn't this redundant?) Why do some people have two flags? Why do the English players have the English flag instead of the UK flag? Dyfsunctional 02:07, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Chinese writing might have resulted from somebody translating article for Chinese Wikipedia see top of page. There has been a long debate about flags here before. EU flags are for non-EU born players who have since gained EU passports enabling them to play in EU free of restriction. Some players have dual nationality e.g. Alfredo di Stefano, hence two flags. English flag, I guess represents their national team. I did'nt start this flag lark. Not sure if worth changing.--Djln -- Djln 03:39, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Recent Edits
Some recent contributions to this page have been very poor and have been nothing short of sabotage. If you feel you can improve article, fair enough but otherwise don't remove better contributions. Djln--Djln 03:39, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree, this one looks pretty sloppy. Why is Luxemburgo listed under Squad Changes as "transfered" to Sao Paulo? He was the manager, not a player. Shouldn't the Stadium Information section be left in the article on the Bernabeu, or at most in the infobox? -- JoelCFC25 20:21, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
I've removed the Luxembourgo reference. You are correct, it should not have been there. Don't be afraid to edit obvious mistakes. Regarding Stadium info. I agree it would be better placed in the article on the stadium itself, but I think this standard template has been agreed by Wikipedia editors. I guess the vast majority of clubs don't have a stadium with a seperate article and that could be why the section has been included. Djln --Djln 21:13, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Djln, would you please be more explicit the next time you mention the addition of biased commentaries in the Real Madrid page? It would be quite interesting discussing a couple of things or more with you about this matter. Spooki 23:28, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Considering that you are an FC Barcelona supporter Djln and that you've added things to the article such as Madrid "selling" its training ground to the city government, which is patently false, or Franco giving Madrid "institutional" assistance, and many other things reflecting your clear prejudice, I think it's fair to ask where the bias is coming from.
[edit] History section titles
Since both the "Champions of Spain" and the "Champions of Europe" sections make reference to Madrid's successes not only in the League and European Cup (respectively), but also to success in the Copa del Rey, Supercup, UEFA Cup, etc, I think these terms as titles are innaccurate, to put it nicely. Ive tried several times, with explanations, to rename them to something more all-encompassing such as "Domestic/International Success" but someone keeps changing them back. Does anyone object to changing this? Avrv 07:13, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Avrv, of course not. I totally agree with you here. There is no need to add more explanations. I think it's quite clear. Spooki 12:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
I also agree. Your formulation makes much more sense.
--Bcnviajero 16:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Players numbers
Don't change the players' number yet. These numbers haven't been confirmed. I know they just played a friendly against an English team and the players were wearing those numbers, but those aren't the official numbers. PS: Do you really think they will give Ruben the no. 5 shirt, they'll give it to Cannavaro.200.6.171.135 00:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rivalry with Barcelona
This is a contentious issue. The current section strongly leans towards mentioning incidences which increased the rivalry by negatively impacting on FC Barcelona - such as the pressured to lose allegations and the Di Stefano transfer - while generally ignoring instances in the past where Real Madrid had controversial decisions go against it - the 1960-61 European Cup semifinal is a fine example but there are many others. When I've included them, while not removing the aforementioned ones causing harm to Barcelona, to give the article more even-handedness, they have consistently been removed, when they are just as relevant as the first group. Also the comment about Madrid being the regime team and Barcelona being the opposition team is purely the perspective of an FC Barcelona fan. At that time (and to this day), Madrid fans did not consider their team the "regime" team - the only team receiving official regime support was Atletico, for a time - and fans of Athletic, Osasuna, Sevilla and any other number of clubs that aren't tied to Catalan nationalism did not consider Barcelona the "opposition" team. This should be removed. Again I had a very even handed assessment of it, which has been doctored back to its original fallacies. Avrv 07:23, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
The section as you wrote it gave the impression that Real Madrid were compromised equally by intervention by the authorities, and it would be difficult to find more than a few flat-earthers who would argue that. It may well be true that many or indeed most Real Madrid fans did not themselves see the Club as the regime team, but it is certainly true that that is how it was seen elsewhere, and with good reason. Teams such as those from the Basque Country and FC Barcelona were often seen as being opposition teams.
Many articles on Wikipedia are inevitably written and maintained by those with a strong interest in, and often passion for, the subject, and this is particularly manifested in articles on subjects such as religion, political figures, and football clubs. This is, of course, one such article and it therefore does not come close to detailing the whole story, as to put it there would lead to its deletion almost immediately.
The fact is that Franco, once firmly installed in power, wanted to create a sporting team to represent the new order, and settled upon Real Madrid, a then obscure team. The power of the state was used to ensure that the Club became the dominant force, with influence (to put it mildly) on referees, the administration of other clubs, the transfer of players, and on players themselves. I am not naive enough to think that this information would survive for long on the main page, but here on the talk page, at least, maybe it can be aired and discussed.
As such, the section as currently formulated is mild in comparision to the reality, and any attempt to dilute it further should be avoided.
--Bcnviajero 16:26, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry Bcnviajero but I couldn't disagree more. You are simply insulting all the antifranquists who have supported Real Madrid along the years when you state Real Madrid was the Regime team and Barça the opposition to Franco team. A minority may see it this way, and the majority of people who haven't lived in Spain may find this convincing enough but you just cannot confuse the rest of us. It's just as simple as this.
--Spooki 21:42, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi Spooki. Please do read again what I wrote, as I actually agree with what you are saying and was very careful not to make the point you think I made. I am fully aware and accept that many Madrid fans were opposed to the regime and that being a supporter of the Club did not automatically mean being a supporter of the dictatorship. However, what I am saying is that the regime supported the Club. Are you truly arguing that Franco did not intervene to ensure success for Real Madrid? Surely not.
Therefore, it is true to state that Madrid were often seen as the regime Club as in many ways they were. I pointed out that other teams, notably the Basques, were also often seen as opposition teams but with FC Barcelona being the biggest rival to Real Madrid they were the the most famous case.
(By the way, I am glad that we are having a reasoned discussion here...on subjects such as these there are far too many people on Wikipedia who simply resort to insults).
--Bcnviajero 11:17, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Again though bcn you are approaching this from the perspective of a Barcelona fan. Fans of some clubs, and with questionable motives, have "seen" Madrid as the regime team. But to suggest that they were "often seen" as the regime team, without any sort of nuance suggesting who exactly it was that saw them as such, is inaccurate - because they were not "often seen" as such by anything close to the majority of people. There is a good article that touches upon this here: http://www.tiempodehoy.com/default.asp?idpublicacio_PK=50&idnoticia_PK=35575&idseccio_PK=630 written by Peces Barba....the relevant portion follows:
Tuvo el Madrid pocos éxitos en la posguerra; tenía muchos más el Barcelona, pero cuando el Madrid despertó en la Liga y en la naciente Copa Europea, en aquellos que los más envidiosos han llamado “años en blanco y negro”, la fama trascendió y se extendió. El régimen de Franco, que tenía nula audiencia internacional, se intentó aprovechar del Real Madrid y todos los enemigos del equipo empezaron a llamarle “el equipo del régimen”. Recuerdo que a mi padre le indignaban esas afirmaciones falsas. El único equipo que tuvo en su directiva a una persona destacada del Régimen fue el Barcelona, que fichó como tesorero a José María Guix. Al contrario, el Real Madrid, en uno de sus viajes por América, conectó a través de su vicepresidente Raimundo Saporta con los exiliados republicanos, llegando a presentar a los jugadores al presidente de la Generalitat en el exilio.
As a side note, since this isn't something that (wisely) appears in the article itself, I completely disagree with you on both things you said, that the regime supported the club and that Franco intervened to ensure success. How? The historical record shows, for those interested in really looking at it, that there are many, many more cases of institutional Francoist intervention on behalf of FC Barcelona than there are for Real Madrid. Football for him was a tool just like many other things, I've never argued that he benefited from Real Madrid, but to go from there to saying that Madrid's success is in any part able to be attributed to his intervention smacks of a very facile way of explaining away disparate success. Which is the tendency of interested parties.Avrv 11:25, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
It seems very strange to say that because FC Barcelona had Francoist directors and presidents imposed on it (which I agree it certainly did) that that was to its advantage. Surely that was to ensure that the regime's will was done? Indeed, in the case of Di Stefano, having supporters on the FC Barcelona board was of significant benefit to the Franco regime, as they could claim that Barcelona had voluntarily relinquished ownership.
With regards to there having been support for FC Barcelona from the regime, I have to say that is a new one. It does not appear that there was any such support, let alone to a greater extent than that afforded to Real Madrid. Why would Franco have done that? As you have agreed that FC Barcelona fans, at the very least, often saw themselves as supporting an opposition team, and as they saw football victories as representing small victories against the regime, that would make no sense. I do not doubt that Franco's support was resented by any number of Franco-opposing Real Madrid fans, but this does not mean it did not happen. I maintain my original statement. Real Madrid was not simply aided by Franco's regime, Real Madrid as the significant force that it became was fully the creation of Franco's regime. The fact that this did not happen for the first decade or so does not seem to me to be relevant.
To your point of potential bias or seeing things only one way, if you look through my records on the FC Barcelona page you will see that I have consistently gone against the willfully misguided who try to make untrue or debatable assertions about the club's past or achievements.
--Bcnviajero 14:28, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Kaka and war
Milan has stated that they will not even sit down with Real Madrid to discuss a transfer of Kaka. They have criticized the new leadership, and "declared war" on Real Madrid.
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=374413&cc=3888
this should probably go in. But it's late, and I have class tomorrow. ABart26 07:58, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Ruud van Nistelrooy is NOT yet a Real Madrid player.
Yes he is... he has signed a contract with Madrid... Just because he hasnt been in a press conference yet it doesnt mean he hasnt signed already
Dude... he hasn't passed a medical yet, he is not a Real Madrid player yet. ---- MATTYTHEWHITE yap stalk
[edit] vice captain
Since Raul spends most of his time on the bench, who's the captain of the team when he's not playing?58.168.6.187 12:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
There are 3 captains on the team in order of seniority, Raul, Guti, and Roberto Carlos. In the rare case that none of the 3 are playing, it passes to Casillas. Avrv 21:47, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Raul most of his time on the bench!!!!!!, what hells are you talking about? See the stadistics, last year he was in the bench because he was injuried, when he is ok he always play
[edit] Los galácticos
The reference to los galácticos should be removed. Everyone who calls them like this do it with the only purpose to have a laugh at the nick they temporally earned the right to have. I don't see any references to "el Madrid de los García" or "los Ye-Yes" to name 2 examples, so the part of los Galácticos should be avoided in the same way. Spooki 13:28, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I agree. I believe some mention of the galacticos could be made, perhaps alongside a reference to florentino perez, but it is not club nicknamed used either by the club or its fans, and in fact has become almost derogatory. I again say it should be mentioned, and perhaps we could also make a mention of the Ye-Yes. Avrv 21:16, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I also agree. It is appropriate to discuss the term in the context of the Pérez years, as indeed the article does, but it is not a nickname of the club generally, just of one era. It should not, therefore, be in the info box along with Merengues etc. There was a similar debate on the FC Barcelona article, where one editor wanted to include Dream Team as a nickname.
--Bcnviajero 20:38, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I think this has been taken care of, cheers Avrv 07:08, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Page Needs Tidy Up
This page has been very poorly edited recently. It is organized and there no logic to the layout. I have tried to tidy it up. However my attempts have been constantly sabotaged. Djln --Djln 21:23, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
We have tried to discuss some of the changes as the ones refered to the Stadium Information in adherence to template, still you keep editing that part without wanting to talk about it previously? It seems like you are the one sabotaging things here. Please EXPLAIN why the page has been poorly edited. What's what you don't like? Be more explicit please. Try not to avoid the discussion paragraphs where we comment your ideas. If we make changes and comment about them, it's quite insulting that you erase them without adding any reasons to do it. Spooki --Spooki 9:56, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
How is erasing people's hard work "tidying up"??your just destroying the page, again and again. Besides the fact that the page looks better, it has a lot more information, information that you keep erasing. If i wouldn't have been a pain in the ass and kept editing your pages, "summer 2006", "statistics" would have been erased, why?i don't know. why did the section about the board of directors kept disappearing, an essential part of any real madrid information page, i dont know. wasn't "tidy" enough for you? What reason did you have for deleting "past lineups"?what reason did you have for "rearanging" the "former player" section. my way is better, and more useful. I would like an explanation. at least this time. Hierro --Hierro 12:51, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Improvements Needed
Wikipedia has guidelines on article size. This article regularly goes over these guidelines. To help keep the article within these guidelines, I have started separate articles on Real Madrid Castilla, Real Madrid Baloncesto, Real Madrid Summer 2006 and Real Madrid Football Player Statistics. These articles have been linked together in the category Cat:Real Madrid. This information has not been destroyed, just relocated. With clubs such as Real Madrid where there is lots to write about, editors need to look the Cat:Real Madrid as a whole and not just put everything about club in the main article.
Examples of poor editing
- Excessive detail on current issues that very quickly becomes dated. This includes transfer details and info about presidential elections. This info is more appropriately placed in individual articles on players or presidents.
- Players list is a mess when divided into decades, looks untidy.
- Same applies to lists of managers and presidents. Need to be more reader friendly - table formats rather then lists.
- Paragraph titles are poor. Champions of Europe and Champions of Spain are better titles. The club are record holders in both and it has earned the right to use these titles.
- The Santiago Bernabéu Stadium has its own article and excessive info does not need to be here.
- The same also applies to section on Santiago Bernabéu Yeste. Some of this info is just repeated in other sections anyway.
- The sections on rivalries with FC Barcelona and Atlético de Madrid have been relegated to bottom of article. This has seen the timeline of the article destroyed.
- Links to Real Madrid Summer 2006 and Real Madrid Football Player Statistics are not in approprate places.
- External Links section has too many non-English links.
Djln--Djln 22:26, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Champions of Europe refers unically to European Cups won, and the fact is that that chapter talks also about other trophies. The same applies to Champions of Spain. Domestic and international success are much more proper and some of us had already agreed it was better using them instead. Spooki--Spooki 19:42, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Transfers
I have removed the list of recent transfers, as Wikipedia is not a news service. Oldelpaso 11:40, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fake Madrid
Take a look at the end of the second paragraph in the article. "Their main rivals are Fake Madrid." Isn't that vandalism? Just wanted to check first. Thanks :-) Wushugene 20:56, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ferenc Puskás for FA
As you may know, Ferenc Puskás died on 17 November. He was legendary footballer both for Hungary and for Real Madrid. His article, Ferenc Puskás is now "football collarboration of the week" which has the aim of preparing the article to achieve feature article status. If you would like, please browse by, make some improvements, and help to bring him up to FA status. If you have any noncopyvio media (or know where some is), then please put it up. This isnt an FA nomination just yet.... but it should be in a week or so, and he certainly deserves the honour. István 03:41, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
