Talk:Olympiacos F.C.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to sports in Greece. | ||||||
| If you would like to participate, you can improve Olympiacos F.C., or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ. | |||||||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (comments) | ||||||
| Mid | This article has been rated as a Mid priority article | ||||||
|
|||||||
 |
The article on Olympiacos F.C. is supported by the WikiProject on Football, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of Association 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. |
|---|---|
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. |
[edit] Water Polo wtf?
Is water polo one of the most popular team sports in Europe? You have to be kidding me. That's incorrect. water polo is not a populer sport
[edit] European History
A defeat by 4 goals is by no means "one of the biggest", it actually happens pretty often. It's hardly even notable, since in every CL season there is a two digit number of such victories. I thus deleted the following: but also managed one of the biggest victories in Champions League, a 6-2 victory against the finalists of the previous year
This is not a sportsforum to defend your favorite teams' performance, i'd rather see less subjectivity in reporting of results.
[edit] Name of the club
- Olympiakos or Olympiacos? - Stoph 17:53, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
- When a non-English name is written in English, we must strive to write proper English first of all, and then to transport as much 'flavor' as possible from the original language. At least, that's what I do. Therefore, the proper spelling in English can only be Olympiacos. We have Olympic games, Olympic airlines, etc, because in English only the letter "c" is used in the many variants of the word. There is no linguistic reason whatsoever to use the letter "k". If the name of the club was to be written in German, then "Olympiakos" would be correct. The Gnome 20:20, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- Totally disagree with you, the name is not written in "English", this doesn't make sense, it's just transcribed to the Latin Alphabet. There are no transcription rules from Greek to Latin Alphabet whatsoever. And it is meant to be read by every person who uses the Latin Alphabet, not English-speaking people only. What about Germans, Italians, French, Spanish etc? Nevertheless, I've yet to meet an English speaking person who can't pronounce "Olympiakos" correctly (apart from the stress on the second to last syllable instead of the last, but that's what they do to all foreign looking words). -- Avg 23:35, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- I did not claim that the term "Olympiacos" is some inherent part of the English language. It is, as you write, transcribed into English (which, I'm afraid, in itself, makes it part of the English language...) and to do this, the rules of the language must be observed. You claim that "there are no transcription rules from Greek to Latin Alphabet whatsoever". Firstly, I am referring specifically to the English language -- and not "the Latin alphabet" generally. Secondly, I was under the impression that there was a rule behind the fact that we write "alphabet" instead of "alfabet", or "Herodotus" instead of "Erodotus", etc. As to pronounciation, I did not dispute that both "Olympiakos" and "Olympiacos" are pronounced the same. It is funny, though, that you yourself admit to the fact that the pronounciation of a name does change when the word is "transcribed" into the English language. You write "that's what they do to all foreign looking words"; however, that's not what English-speakers do and it has little to do with "foreign-looking". Do you think the French language puts the accent on the last syllable of "Olympiacos" because that's the way it is pronounced in Greece -- or because that's where all French words have the accent? But wait, "that's what [English-speakers] do" ...always?? Are you suggesting there's ...a rule here? :-) The Gnome 05:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
- I explained it above but I will explain it again. It is not by accident that I refer to the transcription to the Latin Alphabet and not to English. The Latin Alphabet is not proprietary to any language. When you write Olympiacos/Olympiakos with Latin letters this does not automatically make it English. Or French, or German, or any specific language. This word is supposed to be read by any person who is familiar with the Latin Alphabet. Therefore there are no rules of "proper English" to be observed, because it is not an English word and it is not limited to English speakers only. Olympiacos/Olympiakos is not similar to Olympic, which is an English word, it is a Greek word hence unaffected by rules of the English language (even if it means Olympic in Greek). The second point about pronunciation is a different story. As I said, even native English people read Olympiakos and Olympiacos exactly the same (with the stress in -a-) and native French people read it again the same (with the stress in -os). So the spelling Olympiacos doesn't have a clear advantage over Olympiakos since it doesn't offer any further disambiguation in pronunciation. (Note for other readers: Of course this discussion is irrelevant to which one is the official spelling, that is undeniably Olympiacos).-- Avg 22:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
- You wrote "The Latin Alphabet is not proprietary to any language." True enough, but this is the English language we are talking about. Demosthenes is written differently in French than in English, due to the difference in rules between the two languages, although they both use the same alphabet. Words in Greek are transferred over to a foreign language following the rules of that foreign language and then, as I already wrote above, trying to retain as much of the flavor of the original Greek word as possible. You also wrote "When you write Olympiacos/Olympiakos with Latin letters this does not automatically make it English." True enough but when people tune in to the English version of Wikipedia, they expect to see words in English. (The writing of words in their original language, the translation, etc, are here as additional information. When we write Çõķ in Wikipedia, the English reader is not expected to be able to either understand what it means, nor to pronounce it.) You then wrote "This word [Olympiacos] is supposed to be read by any person who is familiar with the Latin Alphabet." Only because the word "Olympiacos" contains almost no ambiguous letters, my friend! (The exception is, of course, the ambiguous "y".) Same goes for other Greek "straight-forward" names like "Manos", "Pavlos", "Kostas", etc.
- In any case, transferring a word from its original language to the "Latin alphabet" does NOT mean that (a) it is then supposed to be read, as you claim, by "any person familiar with the Latin Alphabet", nor that (b) it is written the same way in every Latin-alphabet language! We transfer a word to a language, and not just an alphabet, even though we may not realize it. (Yes, when you transfer a foreign-language word to the Greek alphabet, you also transfer it to the Greek language. The reason is obvious, I hope.)
- Finally, the point "There are no transcription rules from Greek to Latin Alphabet whatsoever", which you made previously, is irrelevant. The Latin alphabet is just an alphabet, and nothing more. And so are the Cyrillic or the Greek or the Turkish, etc. It's the rules of the specific language that matter. So may we remind ourselves that our host is the English version of Wikipedia? There must be a rule here somewhere that the rules of the English language must be observed when writing in English... The Gnome 09:21, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- I'm afraid we aren't going to agree on this. What more to tell you than that the English THEMSELVES refer to the Greek letter kappa (κ) as Kappa and not "Cappa". See also Romanization of Greek. The only transliteration of κ to c occured two thousand years ago when Greek words came to Western dictionary through Latin, now all Greek words are universally transcribed with a K, as for example all Greek surnames.-- Avg 19:59, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- We could possibly come to an agreement if the dialogue were conducted with each side responding to the other's points and not just raising one's own. You wrote that "the English THEMSELVES refer to the Greek letter κ as Kappa and not Cappa". However, this is because, as you wrote, a lot of Greek words went over to the Latin languages at the time of antiquity. The name of the letter Kappa was one of them. You also wrote "Now all Greek words are universally transcribed with a K, as for example all Greek surnames" but perha~ps you're referring to the "official" (and quite atrocious!) rules for the transcriptions of Greek names in Latin letters in official documents, such as passports. There, the (quite atrocious!) rule is for transcription to be implemented letter for letter without any regard to pronounciation or the rules of either alphabet. The results are predictably hilarious, and the point you're raising is irrelevant.
- I'm not arguing that the word Olympia and its derivatives Olympic, Olympian, Olympiacos, etc, are modern words. They are, in fact, words which come to us directly from antiquity. Therefore, the name of the club Olympiacos (a club born in the 20th century AD but carrying a name "born" in antiquity) should be written with a "c" if we want to retain a signifier of its origin, or with a "k" if we want to be "modern". Or, perhaps, as another contributor aptly put it, we want to think of Olympiacos as more male and virile with a k. (I will concede here that, as far as I understand, the reason that the club's official documents have Olympciacos with a "c" has probably nothing to do with what I wrote. Rather, in typical fashion, the club's owners have decided to have the club "closer to Europe" and away from what they perceive as "Greek provinciality".) The Gnome 07:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- I'm afraid we aren't going to agree on this. What more to tell you than that the English THEMSELVES refer to the Greek letter kappa (κ) as Kappa and not "Cappa". See also Romanization of Greek. The only transliteration of κ to c occured two thousand years ago when Greek words came to Western dictionary through Latin, now all Greek words are universally transcribed with a K, as for example all Greek surnames.-- Avg 19:59, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- I explained it above but I will explain it again. It is not by accident that I refer to the transcription to the Latin Alphabet and not to English. The Latin Alphabet is not proprietary to any language. When you write Olympiacos/Olympiakos with Latin letters this does not automatically make it English. Or French, or German, or any specific language. This word is supposed to be read by any person who is familiar with the Latin Alphabet. Therefore there are no rules of "proper English" to be observed, because it is not an English word and it is not limited to English speakers only. Olympiacos/Olympiakos is not similar to Olympic, which is an English word, it is a Greek word hence unaffected by rules of the English language (even if it means Olympic in Greek). The second point about pronunciation is a different story. As I said, even native English people read Olympiakos and Olympiacos exactly the same (with the stress in -a-) and native French people read it again the same (with the stress in -os). So the spelling Olympiacos doesn't have a clear advantage over Olympiakos since it doesn't offer any further disambiguation in pronunciation. (Note for other readers: Of course this discussion is irrelevant to which one is the official spelling, that is undeniably Olympiacos).-- Avg 22:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
- I did not claim that the term "Olympiacos" is some inherent part of the English language. It is, as you write, transcribed into English (which, I'm afraid, in itself, makes it part of the English language...) and to do this, the rules of the language must be observed. You claim that "there are no transcription rules from Greek to Latin Alphabet whatsoever". Firstly, I am referring specifically to the English language -- and not "the Latin alphabet" generally. Secondly, I was under the impression that there was a rule behind the fact that we write "alphabet" instead of "alfabet", or "Herodotus" instead of "Erodotus", etc. As to pronounciation, I did not dispute that both "Olympiakos" and "Olympiacos" are pronounced the same. It is funny, though, that you yourself admit to the fact that the pronounciation of a name does change when the word is "transcribed" into the English language. You write "that's what they do to all foreign looking words"; however, that's not what English-speakers do and it has little to do with "foreign-looking". Do you think the French language puts the accent on the last syllable of "Olympiacos" because that's the way it is pronounced in Greece -- or because that's where all French words have the accent? But wait, "that's what [English-speakers] do" ...always?? Are you suggesting there's ...a rule here? :-) The Gnome 05:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
- Totally disagree with you, the name is not written in "English", this doesn't make sense, it's just transcribed to the Latin Alphabet. There are no transcription rules from Greek to Latin Alphabet whatsoever. And it is meant to be read by every person who uses the Latin Alphabet, not English-speaking people only. What about Germans, Italians, French, Spanish etc? Nevertheless, I've yet to meet an English speaking person who can't pronounce "Olympiakos" correctly (apart from the stress on the second to last syllable instead of the last, but that's what they do to all foreign looking words). -- Avg 23:35, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- You wrote "[The name in Latin letters] is meant to be read by every person who uses the Latin Alphabet, not English-speaking people only." If that's the case, then please explain how the Serbian (formerly Yugoslavian) club Фудбалски клуб Црвена звезда (which, as it happens, translates into English as Red Star Belgrade) is going to be transcribed "in Latin letters" so that "every person who uses the Latin alphabet" can read it. Remember, it has to be in way that it is read the same in every language using the Latin alphabet! My point is this : There is one unique way of writing in its own language the name of the club, that in every other language there is one unique way of transcribing that name to it (e.g. in German Zvezda is not pronounced the same way as Zvezda in English) and that there is also in every other language one way of translating that name, i.e. the Wiki entry states that "In English-speaking countries [the club] is known as Red Star; in German as Roter Stern; in French as Etoile Rouge; in Spanish as Estrella Roja; in Italian as Stella Rossa". The Gnome 07:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- Totally irrelevant. This is not a transcription, this is a translation. I hope you know the difference. With your logic, Olympiacos should be "Olympic" in English, "Olympique" in French and "Olympico" in Italian.-- Avg 19:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
- The examples of translation were given in order to highlight the absurdity of ignoring the points I raised in my message above. Please provide me with your opinion about the correct writing in "the Latin alphabet" of the name of the club Црвена звезда. Thanks in advance. The Gnome 22:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
- That is not a very good example of yours because you might know that the Serbian language has two alphabets, one is the Cyrillic and the other is the Latin, so there is actually an official transliteration and that is Crvena Zvezda. See also FK Crvena zvezda, KK Crvena zvezda, Stadion Crvena Zvezda. Perhaps this could help you disambiguate between transliteration and pronunciation. -- Avg 23:33, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
- You are correct about the example. You may use, to facilitate things, the example of Red Star Belgrade, as if there were no Latin writing of Slav. If you don't feel like it, please explain to me your position using the following example in Russian, a language that, like the Greek (so far...), has no Latin-writing equivalent: Since Ολυμπιακός transliterates to Olympiakos "in Latin letters", how does Шахтар Донецьк transliterate? Give me the transliteration which is valid for every language using the Latin alphabet, please.
- There is no confusion at all between transliteration and pronunciation in my position. I should point out though that you have not addressed the confusion, inherent in your position, i.e. presuming the English language and the Latin Alphabet to be identical. So far, you have offered various claims about the "correct" transliteration of "Olympiacos", all based on the false assumption that the Latin alphabet equals the English language. I have already explained that the Latin language might be common to most European languages -and then some- but the writing of a name which belongs to a foreign language may change depending on the host language. Hence, there cannot be necessarily one and only one way of writing names which originate in non-Latin languages, such as "Olympiacos", in every language which uses Latin letters ! I hope that's clear enough. (Emphasis on "necessarily", please.) The Gnome 11:07, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
- Somehow we seem to actually support the same position! It was my point from the beginning that the English Language is not identical to the Latin Alphabet. I was also saying that there isn't one and only transliteration of Greek to Latin Alphabet. In fact my initial question is why is Olympiacos better than Olympiakos since these two words are pronounced exactly the same in every language? I believe you were claiming that Olympiacos is "proper" English, while I said that there is no "proper" transliteration. So do we agree on that or am I missing something? -- Avg 16:36, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
- That is not a very good example of yours because you might know that the Serbian language has two alphabets, one is the Cyrillic and the other is the Latin, so there is actually an official transliteration and that is Crvena Zvezda. See also FK Crvena zvezda, KK Crvena zvezda, Stadion Crvena Zvezda. Perhaps this could help you disambiguate between transliteration and pronunciation. -- Avg 23:33, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
- The examples of translation were given in order to highlight the absurdity of ignoring the points I raised in my message above. Please provide me with your opinion about the correct writing in "the Latin alphabet" of the name of the club Црвена звезда. Thanks in advance. The Gnome 22:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
- Totally irrelevant. This is not a transcription, this is a translation. I hope you know the difference. With your logic, Olympiacos should be "Olympic" in English, "Olympique" in French and "Olympico" in Italian.-- Avg 19:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
- You wrote "[The name in Latin letters] is meant to be read by every person who uses the Latin Alphabet, not English-speaking people only." If that's the case, then please explain how the Serbian (formerly Yugoslavian) club Фудбалски клуб Црвена звезда (which, as it happens, translates into English as Red Star Belgrade) is going to be transcribed "in Latin letters" so that "every person who uses the Latin alphabet" can read it. Remember, it has to be in way that it is read the same in every language using the Latin alphabet! My point is this : There is one unique way of writing in its own language the name of the club, that in every other language there is one unique way of transcribing that name to it (e.g. in German Zvezda is not pronounced the same way as Zvezda in English) and that there is also in every other language one way of translating that name, i.e. the Wiki entry states that "In English-speaking countries [the club] is known as Red Star; in German as Roter Stern; in French as Etoile Rouge; in Spanish as Estrella Roja; in Italian as Stella Rossa". The Gnome 07:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I think C is the correct spelling. The official website uses it. - Stoph 22:03, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
- Olympiakos is the name of the club...--62.1.224.5 17:11, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
- It used to be Olympiakos but last year the name changed to Olympiacos. So from now on its with C. Powerade 17:10, 21 January 2006 (GMT+2)
- Olympiacos has been the technically correct spelling for quite a few years now, used in Olympiacos' and UEFA's official websites and anything official for that matter, including tickets for international matches. It also has been recently imprinted in the Georgios Karaiskakis stadium.
- Despite it being the official spelling though, it doesn't sit very well to fan's eyes and I'd expect third parties to continue using the "greeklish" Olympiakos spelling indefinitely.--Magrippinho 05:02, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- The Greeks use k because their is no cc in the Greek alphabet. So I think the correct translation in with a c
- Olympiacos official site It's a "c" --Michalis Famelis 11:28, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Its Olympiakos,trust me,Im even offended when you say Olympiacos,its like I say Khelsea for Chelsea - —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dzoni (talk • contribs)
- I agree the fans don't like Olympiacos and prefer Olympiakos (for some strange reason they consider it more "manly"), but this is a decision of the club itself (see www.olympiacos.org). Nobody forced the club to change its name, but they did, probably for marketing purposes. --Avg 13:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
I just saw it,still its pretty strange,because I went to Real Madrid game with Gate 7 and I brought an original Djordjevic shirt few months ago and its saying Olimpiakos,but I just saw that they really changed it,so what can you do,but still its pretty dumb,like Chelsea changin it to khelsea or Charlton to Kharton,it makes no sense,because we are ortodox and we should not change club names just to make it more in the spirit of foreign language.
Its would be like if we changed the name of Crvena Zvezda to Red Star or Stell Rossa,just because its suits other languages.Or if called it FC Crvena Zvezda instead of FK(becasue we dont say club,we say klub).
Anyways,if Olympiaki board really did it,so be it,but I doubt it will live in Greece or in any ortodoh country,for that matterDzoni 18:56, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- The pronounciation is exactly the same (with a "k"). There is a rule in almost every western language that "c" before "o" is always a "k". When it is pronounced as "s", the French and Spanish put a small s under the c (ç). In fact this is exactly why the name was changed. It supposedly registers better to Western eyes.--Avg 00:59, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
-
They are acting dumb,becoase if you are Ortodox,then you shouldn`t pay attention to how Catholics or other look at your name,plus as Philc said,no one mispronounced it wrong,so they are just being stupid with this oneDzoni 16:13, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] CONSTANT ABUSIVE EDITS
Everyday a new idiot mucks up the page with badly formulated insults. Is there no way this page can be protected from people editing it who are not registered or can we just close the page to all edit except a select few.Reaper7 21:43, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- With all due respect, the vandalism here is infrequent and light. You could try requesting semi-protection for the page, but I would put long odds on that happening. As for editing being allowed by "a select few", this is a Wiki, so that's not going to happen! --Pak21 07:57, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
With all due respect what you said is called a lie. The vandalism on this page is constant. I suggest you look at the history. Reaper7 12:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
- Ummm.... WP:CIVIL, WP:AGF, WP:NPA and various other policies. If you look through my contributions, you'll note that I have removed some of the vandalism from this page. In comparision to many pages on Wikipedia, what is experienced here is light: pages which are given semi-protection typically get 3 or 4 vandalism incidents a day. You are more than welcome to go and request semi-protection; all I'm saying is that I don't think it will happen. --Pak21 13:17, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
"Olympiacos CFP is the gayest popular and one of the largest multisport clubs in Greece."
what the hell is with this kind of vandalism?
-
- Still happening. The Politically Correct answer from Pak21 did not help, thanks anyway., Reaper7 19:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Most popular?
How come is the most popular? This needs referense. I don't remember any elections for this matter. Most of the polls, show that Panathinaikos and Olympiakos have more or less equal number of supporters.
The same (most popular??) applies to the characterization of basketball, volleyball, waterpolo and football (meaning soccer) as the four most popular sports. This is wrong. What about american football, baseball, or even [Badminton] ? citation needed, don't think u will find any!
Yes, it is the most popular based on every poll research made in Greece. Give the example of one poll that says Olympiakos and Panathinaikos have equal number of supporters. Also Olympiakos has the most sold tickets every year the last 20 years. Do u want to paste here all the sold tickets' lists of the past decades?
Yes, they are the most popular bitch because they're the best.
Maria (unregistered user) 26 Feb 2007: Although I do support the club, I also have issues with characterisations such as "most popular". This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, a scientific tool that we try to keep neutral. It does not honour anybody to have lines, like the one I've just deleted, cursing people in Greek, and it certainly doesn't help the club. Given the standards of Wikipedia, reading comments such as "most popular", without any reference on the measure of popularity used in this phrase or any reference to it, simply makes a third party dismiss the rest of the article too, for being too influenced by personal views.
- Wikipedia can't be used as a reference within itself. Check the guidelines. 202.171.170.2 17:47, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
The wikipedia reference cited contains external links substantiating its contents
It's the most popular club because it has the most registered members, uh, i think that's the best citation you can get, as opposed to panathinaikos, who have less than half. How about that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.74.86.56 (talk) 17:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Football???
Please remember you are writing for a worldwide audience and disambiguate whaich of the many varieties of Football they play. I would like to see them take on the Chicago Bears. Maybe do half a game of each mode of football. Note that the article on the Chicago Bears says they play American football while the article on Manchester United F.C. says they play English football. Edison 18:38, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
The worldwide audience is clever enough to understand what football in Europe means.
This was meant to be an encyclopedian article, not a gossip one. There is no need to comment every european game or the last goal curse...
Edison, American, Canadian, Gaelic and Australian Rules football, though interesting in their own right, are just that... local sports which do not amount to anything more than a curiosity to a worldwide audience. Yes, we know... the term football is not the property of one particular code, but when a worldwide audience sees the word "football", they think of the world game. BTW, The Manchester United article does not say that the team plays English Football - it says they are an English (from England) club that plays Football. Dragases 11:17, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Olympiacos FC and Olympiacos CFP
This article needs to be broken up into two - Olympiacos FC (the football club) and Olympiacos CFP (the sports club). Dragases 08:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- Damn right. I'm not even going to attempt disambiguation on Olympiakos until that's done. It seems bizarre that the article refers to CFP yet the infobox contains the FC's stats. extraordinary 12:21, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Agree The article needs to be split into one for just football and one for the rest of their sports asap. Reaper7 15:37, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
-
[edit] Proposals
It'd be interesting to get some opinions before we spilt the article.
Olympiacos for the sports club? Olympiacos CFP or Olympiacos FC for the football club? -Dragases 07:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- Actually I don't agree to split the article. I don't think that it helps. See other articles S.L. Benfica, Fenerbahçe S.K., F.C. Porto, Sporting Clube de Portugal, Panionios. - Sthenel 09:18, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- I beg to differ. You can probably do it for the smaller sports clubs, but not for the bigger ones whose various divisions have gone their separate ways. See Panathinaikos and Panathinaikos FC, Athlitiki Enosis Konstantinoupoleos and AEK Athens FC or AEK Athens BC, Aris Thessaloniki and Aris FC, Aris BC, and Aris VC. How about Beşiktaş Cola Turka and Beşiktaş J.K.? There are many more examples in Wikipedia. Dragases 02:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
The fact that Panathinaikos, AEK, Aris and PAOK have an article about the sport club doesn't mean that it helps anyone..Major clubs don't have such an article, see FC Barcelona and Real Madrid C.F. where one article is for the football and the other for the basketball team. And I don't think that the clubs I mentioned above are "small" clubs (Benfica, Porto, Sporting and Fenerbache), which have a football article which mentions other sections as well. - Sthenel 06:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- The fact that Panathinaikos, AEK, PAOK and Aris have separate articles for each of their major sports allows a reader to go to the sports club of the particular sport they desire. It also allows these articles to better focus the information on the relevant club (and related sport) instead of having to constantly tag on information to the article about the parent sports club, and thus making it too cumbersome (for want of better word) to read. Dragases 14:15, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- The page is simply too long, I don't really care how it is split, but it needs to be asap. There should be a page listing all the olympiakos sports clubs and one just purely for football. Reaper7 15:26, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
-
Reaper 7, I think that it is recommended not to have totally empty sections in the articles... - Sthenel 16:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Sthenel, there is a process going on atm. What you see is not the finished product, a key theme of wiki is development. This is what you see. We now have an Olympiakos Vollyball, Basketball and water polo page. This will continue until we have one page dedicated to the biggest part of Olympiakos, Football. Reaper7 17:01, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
It doesn't mean that we can have empty sections in the articles. That's why in these sections we don't have information about these departments since there are other articles about them. We only have the titles won. And this is the policy of wikipedia in this case. A small section about something which is detailed in another article, is preferable than an empty section. - Sthenel 00:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Which brings us back to suggestions on how to best split the article. Olympiacos for the sports club, Olympiacos CFP or Olympiacos FC for the football club? Dragases 04:14, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- Olympiacos for the sports club, Olympiacos CFP for the football club. Reaper7 13:00, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Done. Olympiacos CFP is now the football club article. Dragases 09:49, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- First of all, splitting an article which is popular and long is not so simple. Second: the article you made was a copy-edit from the original article which was left almost unaffected. Third: the links throughout wikipedia lead to the original article and it's not so easy to change all of them. Fourth: Two persons are not enough to decide if and how they'll split an article. - Sthenel 10:33, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Fith: nothing will ever happen to this article with you here. If by the luck of the lord you were not here, we would now have two articles and be in the process of refining both. However you are here, so I am afraid you just lost another editor's interest, adio. Reaper7 10:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
-
-
The article is not mine so we should discuss in details how we can spliti it. And don't de offensive!! - Sthenel 10:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- So, my suggestion is: we move this article to Olympiacos FC (so there will be no problem with the links until they'll be fixed) and we remove all the non-football content. Olympiacos CFP will be the article of Olympiacos Sports Club, where all the departments will be referred. Is that OK? - Sthenel 11:26, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Now, Olympiacos FC for the football department, Olympiacos CFP for sports club. I hope everyone is happy with it. - Sthenel 12:21, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- I disagree, undo it like you undid did ours, you have no majority. I believe Olympiacos CFP (the name on the football badge) should be for football and Olympiakos for the general team. Rerread your own fourth rule, sorry i mean 'Fourth rule.
Olympiacos CFP is the name of the club, not the name of the football department... I agree that the article about the club should be named Olympiacos, but we can change it when all the links in wikipedia which refer to the football section as Olympiacos are fixed. - -- Sthenel (talk) 21:36, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'm with Reaper7 on this one. Though the name of the sports club is Olympiacos CFP, The term Olympiacos is more suited as an all-encompassing term for the sports club. Olympiacos CFP is the term UEFA use to refer to the football club. Dragases (talk) 14:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- BTW, Sthenel, two people are enough for a majority when there are only three people voting on how to split the article (and two agree). Dragases (talk) 14:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Do we speak the same language or not? I said that I agree that the club's article should be named Olympiacos instead of Olympiacos CFP, but this should change when most of the links in wikipedia are fixed. In addition to this, UEFA refers to all the clubs with their full names because UEFA doesn't have any problem of distinguishing the departments like wikipedia does, Olympiacos CFP stands for Ολυμπιακός ΣΦΠ and this is the official name of the club, which can be used by ULEB, UEFA or CEV etc. - Sthenel (talk) 15:10, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, you are right...I'm trying to explain something to whom...to someone who wants to turn a discussion into a war, to someone who has no ideas and doesn't read anything from what the others say because his will didn't come to reality in the way he wanted, even if he was wrong... - Sthenel (talk) 15:27, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
I did let you two split the article (although I didn't want to), because you were the majority and other people had asked it before. Additionally I helped to this being correctly. That's all. Bye! - Sthenel (talk) 16:21, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Name Transliteration
This is English Language Wikipedia, Sthenel. Will you please stop deleting the Greek transliteration of the name (Olympiacos Syndesmos Filathlon Peiraios)? - English speakers (ie. those that are not familiar with the Greek alphabet) will stumble through trying to pronounce Ολυμπιακός Σύνδεσμος Φιλάθλων Πειραιώς...
- Like most other Greek football club articles, it makes more sense to write the Greek transliteration of the full club name rather than the Greek language name in the infobox. Also, like most other articles, it makes more sense to have the club name in the Greek Language in the opening paragraph as a introduction. Dragases 08:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- In the opening paragraph there is the greek name and the name in "Greeklish" relatively. In the infobox there must be the greek name (because this is the official name of the club-it's a greek club) and we can put the translation in English, as I already did. - Sthenel 12:33, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- The term "Σύνδεσμος" translates into Association or League, in English. And "Φίλαθλοι" into Fans, Sports Fans, or Friends of Sport. The most appropriate translation of the name in English seems to be "Olympiacos Association of Piraeus Sports Fans". And there's a case to be made for "Ολυμπιακός" being an adjective to "Σύνδεσμος", in which case the translation would be "Olympic Association of Piraeus Sports Fans". In any case, the translation currently exhibited on the page ("Olympiacos Fan's Club of Piraeus") is both inaccurate and bad English --note place of apostrophe. The Gnome 06:17, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- The club's name in English, though, is Olympiacos CFP (assumed to stand for Club of Fans of Piraeus), not Olympiacos APSF, Association of Piraeus Sports Fans (which, I agree, would be a more appropriate English translation).Dragases 00:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC) 09:03, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] This article
Is a complete and utter mess. So messy that after countless vandalism I had to revert to an outdated revision from April 30, 2007. I do not keep up with this club, so someone else will have to update it. There are also no references. To add onto that, there's a gigantic external links section that seems to link to every possible fan site and player site. CAN 00:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:SuperLeagueGreece.jpg
Image:SuperLeagueGreece.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 01:53, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Subjective edits from opponent fans
The fact is that Olympiacos is the most popular Greek club and this phrase in the article has been linked to the article Popularity of Greek teams. It's like saying that Manchester United is the most popular club around the world, since you have the sources, which may be true and nothing is wrong with it. We should stop being prejudiced with this kind of expressions, when they are based on strong sources and not personal opinions or common sense. Editors who support other greek teams do costantly change this phrase, and they are "honored" although their will is to change anything they don't like in other clubs articles and make subjective edits in their club's article. - Sthenel 12:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Friendship Clubs
There is a friendship with Red Star but who added Boca Juniors ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.49.71.133 (talk) 08:44, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ban warning
Okay guys, I've had it. Both Sthenel (talk · contribs) and the anon user most recently editing from 85.72.173.36 (talk • contribs • info • WHOIS) are hereby put on a one-revert-per-week parole with respect to all articles dealing with Greek football. (As usual, reversion of obvious vandalism is exempt from this, but that explicitly does not cover either of these two parties reverting the other.) Moreover, both users are strictly banned from making any edit relating to the popularity of Greek football clubs that is not accompanied with a correctly cited source that supports precisely what the edit claims. Any failure to observe this rule will lead to a topic ban from all Greek football articles. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Hey
On European record i think as all team pages we shall have the seasons where the team progressed most in each competition.For example instead of having several seasons where the team reached the last 16 (which isn't much of a success anyway) we could have only the time where the team reached quarterfinals (for the UEFA Cup Winners' Cup) for example.What do you think? Eagle of Pontus (talk) 14:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] References
This page has got 0 references..????...and its rated a "Start"...people please start adding references...we are trying to get the "Big 3" (Olympiacos,Panathinaikos,AEK) at least rated a B The-Real-ZEUS (talk) 00:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
- Well Done...keep it up...and the article will be a B in no time....AEK has just been upgraded...The-Real-ZEUS (talk) 21:24, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Inclusion of Erol Bulut
Please discuss here the inclusion of Erol Bulut in the list of Notable Former Players. So that we can generate a consensus and finish this edit war. Cenarium (talk) 13:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- I have been editing it time and time again. He was brought to Olympiacos as a sub from a 2nd division club. Barely earned any starting 11 appearences, anybody who follows Olympiakos knows that this player isn't memorable. Unlike players like Rashidi Yekini (who came to the club as the African footballer of the year) or Zahovic, despite having more apperences Bulut wasn't a great signing for the club and the fans didn't treat him as a notable player. Thyra19257 (talk) 03:53, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- In my opinion he is not a notable player for Olympiacos. This because of his not memorable appearence for these 2 years. Billagelo (talk) 18:21, 15 May 2008 (EET)
In my opinion he should be listed why are players like Rashidi Yekini on the notbale players list? he barley played for Olympiakos he played overall 4 matches and Bulut played over 20 matches so I dont get the point why he is notable and why Bulut is not, Bulut played in the Champions League and even scored a winning goal against Real Madrid, I dont think the fans will forget that match, what has Yekini done that he is on the list? tell me please it doesnt make sense.Redman19 (talk) 15:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
I removed him from the list :) I hope that we are all in peace now Redman19 (talk) 18:53, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Managers
where can i find a managers list of Olympiakos ? such a big club deserves to have one. Redman19 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 12:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
