Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:12, 30 August 2013

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Football: Australia High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Australian soccer task force (assessed as High-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Australia: Soccer High‑importance Soccer in Australia is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Australian soccer task force (assessed as High-importance). Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian at the National Library of Australia. The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Requested move again

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no move. There is ample evidence, anecdotal and otherwise, that football is ambiguous in Australia. While the term may be increasingly popular for referring to this particular sport, it has not been demonstrated that soccer is unrecognizable to a degree that would warrant usurping the Football in Australia article. -- tariqabjotu 05:13, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Soccer in Australia → Football in Australia – In the last few months, whenever anyone has brought up the name "Football" on the talk page, user:HiLo48 has told people to go read the "request move" from 2011 (where Association Football in Australia was moved to Soccer in Australia), while claiming nothing has changed in regards to the evidence. I have decided to take up Mr Hilo on his offer to read the section, and evidence, and I have found that instead of nothing having changed to warrant the page being "Football in Australia", substantial evidence used by the admin to make his decision has in fact changed signficiantly to the point where this article should be renamed Football In Australia.

The 2011 Move from "Association football in Australia" to "Soccer in Australia" happened directly as a result of evidence showing the mass media in this country were using the term "Soccer" as opposed to Football, under the "WP:COMMON" guideline. All other evidence that supported the word "Football" being used was dismissed, or weighted far less than the value of the 'evidence' that supported the word "Soccer" in the media. The only argument those on the "Soccer in Australia" side had was that the media used Soccer.

This has demonstrably changed since that 2011 Request For Move. The main piece of evidence was the media use of the term 'soccer', but that no longer applies. Misplaced Pages has a list of the top newspapers in Australia by circulation that I used to check the dozen or so highest circulating newspapers, most of which happened to be referenced in the last RFM debate. After removing a handful of newspapers like the Australian Financial Review which have no specific section name for the sport, or even any sport coverage at all, six of the biggest newspapers have switched from Soccer to Football (Herald Sun, Daily Telegraph, Courier Mail, Adelaide Advertiser, Canberra Times, Perth Now), adding to the two newspapers that already called it Football (The Australian & The Sydney Morning Herald).

Other notable media outlets that use the word Football include all 5 of the major Television stations (Channels 7, 9, 10, ABC & SBS), Fox Sports Australia, The Roar.com, SportsAustralia.com & Sky News Australia.

The only major media outlets of note that continue to use "Soccer" are the AFL-centric newspapers The Age & The West Australia, but as shown above, other media in those states use Football, so Soccer is hardly a globally used word in either Victoria or Western Australia, and the idea that "Soccer" is a globally used term not only in Australia but in Victoria itself should be discounted and not considered evidence for the use of the word "Soccer".

The word "Football" is used by the Governing bodies of the sport from the world peak body association (Federation Internationale de Football Association), Australia's continental association (The Asian Football Confederation), the peak body in Australia (Football Federation Australia), and all 9 of the major state or regional based bodies (Football NSW, Football Queensland, Northern NSW Football, Football Federation Victoria, Football Federation Tasmania, Football Federation of South Australia, Football West, Capital Football & the Football Federation Northern Territory). The A-League is made up of teams that use the name "Football Club" as opposed to "Soccer Club". Additionally, the sport is called Football across the world, in the leagues that are most popular in Australia such as the English Premier League which is organised by the English Football Association.

The Australian Government uses Football in various websites and discussion on the sport, for example the "Strategic Review into the sustainability of football in Australia". The Australian Institute of Sport calls it's programs for the sport "Football - Men" and "Football - Women" as does a number of the state institutes that actually have a football program. The Australian Olympic Committee uses the word "Football".

The common names for the other sports are often mistakenly called football, even though they are not simply "Football". They are Rugby League, Rugby Union, & Australian Football. Changing Soocer in Australia to Football in Australia has no bearing on the other sports, because their names are not just "Football". If those pages are in fact compromised by a change to "Fooball", it would be up to the project supporters of those sports using incorrect names to fix their names, rather than blocking the correct move of Soccer in Australia to Football in Australia.

Without the core 'evidence' being mass media media using Soccer, the Melbourne centric view that the word "Soccer" is more popular or used more commonly than Football comes crashing down. Only in the AFL Heartland is the word 'soccer' used, and it would be foolish to force the name Soccer onto the sport of Football because some of the media outlets in Victoria (not all, as shown above), and a handful of self-confessed AFL supporting wikipedia editors don't want to have to use the correct word for the sport of Football on Misplaced Pages. Macktheknifeau (talk) 08:19, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose move: There is more than enough evidence that football is NOT the name of the sport in Australia, and it would cause confusion related to Australian football. The common usage is soccer, and I would argue the Australian Football League has the better claim on the name football in an All Australian context, because the major professional league does not use it. Association football is 100% not the default name and lacks common usage. Trove pulls up 9,000 book results for soccer. The Australian libraries catalog using soccer, not football to refer to this particular football code. --LauraHale (talk) 08:37, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment: The evidence that resulted in the move to soccer is no longer relevant, and has been superseded. You would be incorrect that the AFL has any claim on 'football' in any Australian context. That sport is only widely popular in one state, with minor pockets of support in the others. It also has no bearing on this discussion, because AFL already has it's own specific names which this request has nothing to do with it. Additionally, this is not a discussion about past use of the term. It is about current use of the term Football. As shown above, the media now uses Football as opposed to soccer, and as such the only evidence that stopped the sport being named Football on wikipedia is no longer relevant. Macktheknifeau (talk) 08:53, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Didn't notice earlier that laughable claim that Australian football only has minor pockets of support outside Victoria. That sort of ignorance seriously damages your case. Please see Barassi Line. HiLo48 (talk) 09:54, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm in WA and am used to the city's public transport network almost shutting down every time one of our two AFL teams has a game at Subiaco Oval on a Friday night. I think you'll find it's in four states - WA, SA, Victoria and Tasmania plus the NT, with areas of support in the other two major states. The AFL Grand Final and the rugby league State of Origin are the two biggest sporting events of the year in Australia. Orderinchaos 17:06, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Comment - just wondering if centralised request for comment might be more appropriate so that we can get some consistency across the board, whatever we end up calling the game. As it stands, usage for Australian topics varies between football, association football, soccer, football (soccer), football/soccer and association football (soccer). Hack (talk) 09:35, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Macktheknifeau - I suspect you have accessed the online version of the Melbourne Herald Sun. Have you looked at a print copy? The online versions of all the Murdoch (News Limited) papers are clones of one another, using virtually identical articles. News Limited is based in Sydney. I cannot believe that the print version of the Herald Sun would use football to refer to the game everyone in Melbourne calls soccer, when it also carries masses of content on Australian football, called exclusively football by its fans. It simply wouldn't work. The same applies to the Adelaide Advertiser (or whatever it's called now). Murdoch again. The point made in the earlier thread about where media outlets are headquartered is still completely relevant, as is everything else there. Oh, and couldn't you have come up with a better name for this thread? Making it identical to the earlier one isn't wise. HiLo48 (talk) 09:50, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Comment - Although I'm in Canberra I regularly read the printed Herald Sun during my lunch hour at work (I find it less offensive than the Daily Telegraph). I just grabbed one from under my sink and can confirm (surprise surprise) that the pages dedicated to the round ball game do have the header "Soccer". Would be happy to scan a copy if need be. Jevansen (talk) 10:42, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I checked the Monday print edition of the Herald Sun today too, after the weekend. All the round ball results, domestic Australian, but also including English Premier League and Scottish Premier League, were under the heading Soccer. User talk:Macktheknifeau WAS deceived by Murdoch's lazy online approach. Interestingly though, that editor hasn't posted since his first frantic (and now mostly disproven) claims two days ago. HiLo48 (talk) 12:18, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose Football in Australia (note you originally suggested Football In Australia which is wrong by capitalisation) is already a very well thought out and descriptive article that covers the topics as a whole. To overwrite that with a small proportion of the article is simply not appropriate. So the resulting possible names are Soccer in Australia, Association football in Australia, Football (soccer) in Australia or similar. Of these, soccer is the most appropriate and unambiguous. And as for your comment of "That sport is only widely popular in one state, with minor pockets of support in the others" is quite laughable to anyone who has spent any time at all in SA, WA or Tasmania. The-Pope (talk) 09:53, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

LOL. I just called it laughable up above too! Cos it is. HiLo48 (talk) 09:57, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

As I suspected, no-one has any actual counters to the points made in the opening request, just attacking the sport and pro-aFL editors who can't see past the Melbourne AFL bubble. As for the "Football in Australia" pre-existing article, the solution is clear. Split off the article into "XYZ in Australia", such as Rugby League in Australia, Rugby Union in Australia & AFL in Australia, assuming there already aren't pages named like that. It makes no sense to keep the only sport with a legitimate claim to being simply "Football" away from it's own rightful name, just because the AFL project editors think so. Macktheknifeau (talk) 10:27, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Cut the crap. Or is it really just ignorance? Your ignorance about Aussie Rules being a Melbourne only thing has been exposed. Australian football was codified and called football before association football had been codified in England. That surely gives it "a legitimate claim to being simply Football". And I DID point out the problem with your media analysis. It's the same as existed when the first thread happened. Sydney-centrism. Have you checked the print version of the Hun yet?

Oh, and some more ignorance on your part... You claim "The A-League is made up of teams that use the name "Football Club"". It's not. Those names that go near it use "FC". It doesn't stand for Football Club. It doesn't stand for anything. The registered names just say "... FC". Have a think why? Soccer DOES NOT own the name football. You lose again. HiLo48 (talk) 10:54, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Are you seriously trying to suggest that FC doesn't stand for Football Club? Incredible the lengths the AFL project leaders will go to win their arguments. What else is FC supposed to stand for then? That is one of the most desperate, completely incorrect statements I've ever read. FC stands for Football Club. To suggest otherwise is insane, but typical of pro-AFL editors here. Again the Melbourne AFL bubble strikes again. Macktheknifeau (talk) 11:34, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

You didn't look any of them up, did you? They've fooled you. They're officially called FC, not "football club". Go have a look now. HiLo48 (talk) 12:29, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

You're delusional if you think FC refers to anything other than Football Club. Macktheknifeau (talk) 13:53, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

The majority of Australian rules football clubs are called "XXX Football Club" too, so this point if anything shows that the usage of the word "football" in Australia is ambiguous, and no single code should have their article at Football in Australia.— Preceding unsigned comment added by The-Pope (talk • contribs) 18:15, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

True. Unless Macktheknifeau is going down to the Ainslie Football Club and the Melbourne Football Club and the Richmond Football Club and telling Australia's top level football clubs to change the name because it does not suit soccer fans. I'd like evidence to support these three football clubs, which are reasonably well known, actually being confused for soccer clubs because of the name not being common usage. --LauraHale (talk) 19:38, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose Soccer remains the common-use name for the code in Australia. Football in Australia is already in use. Flat Out let's discuss it 10:33, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose this is neither rugby nor Australian-rules so it is not football. Further the target is already a different article and much better one than this one for football. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 11:21, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose. There are four different codes of "football" played in mainstream Australia. Hence, Football in Australia can only ever serve to disambiguate these four codes. WWGB (talk) 11:38, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Football is the round ball game, don't know how AFL can try and claim football to be there main name when (soccer)football has been known by this term.Only America label round ball game as soccer due to the fact of dominance by the financially superior NFL.AFL is Aussie rules,NRL is rugby league and A-league is Football. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.91.55.24 (talk) 11:58, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

• Comment All of the four codes use the term Football that is why the article Football in Australia exists. Also, you are confusing codes with competition namesFlat Out let's discuss it 12:13, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Please note. Interesting tweet just went out from whoever runs the @WestSydney account. Wouldn't be you by any chance Mack?

AFL stooges on wikipedia once again trying to force their old terms on us. Any Wiki editors should look at this (link provided to this talk page)

Have done a screenshot in case it's removed. Jevansen (talk) 12:35, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Comment - a user called mack is a writer on westsydneyfootball.com, the website attached to that Twitter handle. Hack (talk) 12:43, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh look, to borrow a phrase, the AFL supporters are playing the man not the ball. Still nothing to go against my evidence that has shown the original 2011 decision is now obsolete and the vast majority of media sources now use football and thus Football in Australia should be use for Football and not a 'disambiguation' style page. I didn't realise it was illegal to disseminate a discussion. Considering how many AFL supporters have administrative powers, and how forceful the AFL project is in suppressing viewpoints that don't agree with the Melbourne AFL Thought Bubble, why wouldn't I try to raise wider support, especially since this discussion is already being railroaded by AFL project users in order to try and stop legitimate discussion of the fact their viewpoint is now obsolete and the word Football is the common name. Macktheknifeau (talk) 13:50, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Suggest you have a read of Misplaced Pages:Canvassing. Jevansen (talk) 14:14, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Looks like User:Ck786 should read WP:CANVAS. Bidgee (talk) 11:38, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

• When I say football I refer to nothing but the game with the round ball. However, Football in Australia should clearly be a disambiguation page. I would support a move to Football (soccer) in Australia or Association football in Australia, as this page used to be known by, but unfortunately I don't have hours to spend trying to convince people of this. There was a proposed policy on the topic which I wrote many years ago, if someone can be bothered finding it! -- Chuq (talk) 12:53, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Association football in Australia is the name of Aussie rules in several parts of Australia, specifically to differentiate it from the professional Australian Football League. The disambiguation for Association football in Australia would thus include links to both soccer and amateur football (Aussie rules)? --LauraHale (talk) 19:36, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
    • Whaaaat? I have never heard of that! What is the logic in that? The conspiracy theorist in me says it is just the AFL trying to cause confusion and prevent the round ball game from using "Association football". -- Chuq (talk) 22:09, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
      • I'm not familiar with current usage of Association like that, but if Laura says it's true there's a fair chance it is. She is one of our more objective, independent and knowledgeable writers on all sport across all of Australia. What I do know is that from its inception in the 1877 until it was usurped by the Victorian Football League around 1900, the Victorian Football Association was the premier Australian football competition in Victoria. It remained in operation as a separate Australian football competition until 2000. HiLo48 (talk) 00:03, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
        • I'm aware of Laura's extensive work in this area, and certainly wasn't suggesting she was wrong, just astonished that whoever started using it in that way thought it was a good idea. -- Chuq (talk) 00:12, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
• I think egos are taking over on this topic. We must look at this objectively, those not prepare to do so should remove themselves from this discussion.--2nyte (talk) 13:13, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose Football in Australia is quite correctly an overview article about the various football codes played in Australia, including soccer, while "soccer" remains the common name for association football, the fans of which seem to believe that the game owns the word "football", which is quite ridiculous. Soccer is but one of several codes that all have the right to call themselves "football". We need to disambiguate between the various codes, not give ownership of a common word to any one game. The use of Football in Australia as an overview article is consistent with the use of Football as an overview article addressing the many different types of football that have existed. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:55, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

• Support Soccer in Australia → Association football in Australia – As per:

Association football in the Australian Capital Territory

Association football in New South Wales

Association football in Queensland

Association football in South Australia

Association football in Tasmania

Association football in Victoria

Association football in Western Australia

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. MicroX (talk) 17:38, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Nobody in Australia actually calls the game Association football. Those articles existed before the previous move request, but it was agreed in the interests of goodwill and avoiding confrontation that they would not have their names changed immediately after that request reached the decision to change to using soccer for Australian articles. The logical thing to do is to change them all to Soccer in X for consistency with each other and consistency with common name, but there is no need to rush. HiLo48 (talk) 17:58, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

We should start renaming those articles as soon as possible to use soccer. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 23:39, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

According to Names for association football there is no country in the world that actually calls the game Association football. With that in mind may articles relating to the sport use the name 'Association football', including Association football in Poland, Association football in Japan, Association football in Honduras, Association football in Jamaica, Association football in Barbados, Association football in Dominica, Association football in Anguilla, Association football in Curaçao, Association football in Panama, and at least 15 more. The only articles using Soccer are Soccer in the United States and Soccer in Canada, coincidently those are the only two countries in the world where the governing body of the sport uses 'Soccer' rather than 'Football' in its name (United States Soccer Federation, Canadian Soccer Association). Every other article relating to the sport uses Football. As can be seen throughout this Talk page, may in Australia do not recognise the sport as Soccer, so why must it be forced. I do agree that in Australia football refers to may codes and should not be reserved for just one. But can we just settle this once and for all and compromise with the the name Association football, like so many other articles. --2nyte (talk) 02:46, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

That's a diplomatic suggestion, but there's a problem. At least some (I'd suggest many) of our readers won't know what Association football is. (I didn't until after I began editing here.) I don't know how much of a problem that is for articles relating to the sport in other countries, but it would definitely be a problem in Australia. Unfortunately for the game's fans, the name football is at a minimum ambiguous and, on the Aussie Rules side of the Barassi Line, just plain confusing. So if we use Association football, it really needs to be written Association football (soccer). Why not just use the simpler, unambiguous soccer? HiLo48 (talk) 03:08, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I think the obvious compromise is Football (soccer). Flat Out let's discuss it 03:27, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I can't see why Association football would need to be written as Association football (soccer). Similarly, the title Australia national association football team in comparison to Australia national association football (soccer) team. We can make it perfectly clear to the reader which sport the article is about; that is by: Association football (commonly know as football or soccer). --2nyte (talk) 03:34, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

What? Every time we write Association football? If we don't do it every time, there will be confused readers, as I was once. We don't want that. HiLo48 (talk) 03:51, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I meant in the opening line of the Association football in Australia article we can specifically state 'Association football (commonly know as football or soccer)'.--2nyte (talk) 04:21, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Here's a silly question - Most people don't know that association football is soccer, but how many people don't know what soccer is? --AussieLegend (✉) 03:58, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

OK, I'll play the straight man. EVERYBODY knows what soccer is. HiLo48 (talk) 04:17, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

So why do we need to write "association football (soccer)" or "football (soccer)"? Such disambiguation is unnecessary, and a little confusing. All we need to write is "soccer" because, as my good friend Abbott said, EVERYBODY knows what soccer is. --AussieLegend (✉) 04:34, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree. Seems an excellent idea. HiLo48 (talk) 05:31, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

It seems an excellent idea in theory, and probably seems fine on the face of it to those who are not involved with the sport - but the term has grown a rather negative association over the years. Hence the change of most official names of involved businesses, events and organisations to "football". Please read Johnny Warren's Sheilas, Wogs and Poofters if you want the long version. -- Chuq (talk) 06:00, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I can see how "wogball" might have negative connotations but I really don't understand how something that is simply a "shortened form of 'association football'" can be seen negatively. Soccer fans should be more concerned about the negative connotations of what seems to be a puerile attempt to take ownership of the word "football" is seen by those outside the sport. (For the record I far prefer soccer to that stuff they rabidly playwatch down in Vicwegia) That said, we don't cater to personal preferences here. We name articles according to the WP:COMMONNAME and there's no doubt that the common name in Australia is "soccer", not "association football", "association football (soccer)", "football (soccer)" etc. Regardless, this article clearly does not belong at Football in Australia. --AussieLegend (✉) 06:21, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Take a look through Trove for Wogball. Most of the references are older than 2010, and most of the usage comes from inside the soccer community as how the sport used to be viewed and used to be stigmatized. These and other references to wogball and soccer on trove make clear there is no large scale association between the two terms now. It further supports the use of soccer for this article. As further evidence for the use of soccer SBS has 2050 uses of it. SBS is really important considering they air a lot of international matches. 143 results for "association football". You'd actually have a better case using "World Game", which is how SBS markers it over Association football where it has 5930 uses. Photos, newspapers, periodicals, websites and every category except books imply not SOCCER for football default. The books that appear for football like this one which is my first book result have the subject heading of soccer, not football. This further suggests football is not the default name because while international books on the sport are imported with those titles, librarians do not treat them that way domestically. If you look for biographies on trove about football players, what do you get? Rugby league, rugby union, AFL, gridiron, but not soccer on the first page of results. It would be really nice to get some actual numbers to support common name of football. --LauraHale (talk) 11:21, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

The Barassi Line, the geographical divide between Rugby League and Aussie Rules territory, is relevant here. The ideologues in the Football Federation of Australia are Sydney based, on the League side of the Barassi Line. For them to think that they could steal the use of the word football from Aussie Rules on the other side of that line showed either massive optimism or massive ignorance. It's simply not going to happen any time soon. Most soccer clubs in Aussie rules territory are still called soccer clubs, in many cases for the obvious reason that the town or suburb they're from already has a "football club", playing Aussie Rules. User:Macktheknifeau is from Sydney, and has already shown massive ignorance about Aussie Rules. I don't know everything about soccer and League in Sydney either, but I don't claim to, nor do I need to. Here we are looking at the whole of Australia (even if the FFA bosses didn't). We cannot use football for the round ball game. Half the country hardly uses that name for the game at all. "Soccer" works for everybody and is the Australia wide common name. As for it having "a rather negative association", maybe that's a Sydney thing too. No negativity about it here. HiLo48 (talk) 07:09, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I completely disagree with User:HiLo48. You claim Football Federation Australia is stealing "the use of the word football from Aussie Rules" and that Australia is supposedly split into "Aussie rules territory" and Rugby League territory. You claim User:Macktheknifeau has "shown massive ignorance". I claim you have shown the exact same ignorance from these statements. The word football applies to many clubs, many codes, in may locations. The notion of territory does not exist. Brisbane Lions (ALF), Greater Western Sydney (AFL), Sydney Swans (AFL), Melbourne Storm (League), Melbourne Victory (Football), Northcote City (Football), South Melbourne (Football). The Barassi Line is a 1970's completely fictional thing. Basketball, netball, cricket, rugby, Australian rules football, and football are all sports which are competed and supported across the whole of Australia. STOP YOUR IGNORANCE and acknowledge that this is not the 1970's. The country we now live in supports many codes and we as Wiki editors should do the same and support each and every sport equally. --2nyte (talk) 07:56, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to disagree, but I really don't think you understood what I wrote. Nor do the factual points you have made contradict what I wrote. And I feel that by arguing for the name soccer for the round ball game, a name I don't see as a negative one, I am being completely supportive. Why you think that I'm not supporting the game is beyond me. It's simply the name we're discussing, not the game. HiLo48 (talk) 08:26, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I do disagree with you, and I couldn't care less if you support the game or not. All I care about is that fair and just decisions are made and I feel your personal opinions are blinding your judgment on the matter.--2nyte (talk) 08:43, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

What personal opinions are you referring to? HiLo48 (talk) 09:07, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Your opinions (from what I can understand) are that football is inferior to AFL, and that AFL somehow owns the word 'football'. How do I come to this conclusion? Your recent edit on Western Sydney Wanderers FC has the summary "I think the AFL would be the premier football competition (in Australia)". Your recent edit on A-League (football to association football) has the summary "We could even change it to "soccer", but not plain "football"". Your recent edit on Parramatta Stadium (football to soccer) has the summary "Corrected "football" name to "soccer"". Why is it you think "football" can't be used or that it's not "correct". Do you think the reader will not understand the context of football in articles/section specific to the round ball game? My annoyance is the same as User:Macktheknifeau. I am a regular Wiki editor on football related articles and all the time the word football is changed to football (soccer) or soccer and most of the time this change is done by WikiProject Australian rules football members. This change is not necessary, in Australia it's not incorrect to call the round ball game 'football'. So why must it continuously be changed when the governing body is called Football Federation Australia, when the team is called Football Club? Even if we don't agree to rename this article, I still want to be able to call the round ball game football without you or another user changing it because of your opinion that AFL is dominant or that AFL reserves the right of name.--2nyte (talk) 10:23, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

"football is inferior to AFL" - Since AFL is football, how can football be inferior to football? This, of course, leads to......

"I still want to be able to call the round ball game football without you or another user changing it" - And there's the problem. Because it isn't the only code that is football, although it seems to want to own the word, calling the round ball game "football" is ambiguous, which is why "soccer" is a better word. Everyone knows what you're talking about. You don't need disambiguation when you call it soccer and, since we only disambiguate when necessary, we should be calling it soccer. --AussieLegend (✉) 11:19, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

2nyte - YOU can call the game "football" as much as you like in private conversation, although I'd be careful about using that name if you ever come to Melbourne or Adelaide or Perth, etc. You WILL be misunderstood. There are four professional games in Australia called "football" by at least some of their fans, plus at least two more codes played at amateur level. Given that they all have individual, unique names, to insist that one of them must be called just "football" here makes no sense. I don't claim that any one of the sports is better than the other, but there's no doubt that AFL is the most successful at the moment by almost all measures. To say that a soccer club plays in the premier football competition in Australia is just silly. And you have badly misrepresented me just above. I can ignore it this time, but please pay more attention to my carefully chosen words in future. HiLo48 (talk) 11:46, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

""football is inferior to AFL" - Since AFL is football, how can football be inferior to football?" - I would assume a little bit of common sense is needed. The sport you call soccer I have called football for my whole life.

I do not want to own the word "football", I only wish to apply to the round ball game as you do with AFL and as others do to rugby league and rugby union. Is that not allowed by you or by others? You say it is ambiguous. Yes, it may be when referring to more than one sport. But when an article is only concerning the one sport, can it not be used then. In the Western Sydney Wanderers FC article, the A-League article, the Football Federation Australia article, will anyone find ambiguity in the word football? Will one think these articles are referring to AFL? Again, I would assume a little bit of common sense is needed.--2nyte (talk) 11:58, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I don't apply football to any of the major codes, I prefer to call them by their unambiguous names - soccer, rugby league, rugby union and AFL. The only time I use "football" is when I'm referring to touch football. --AussieLegend (✉) 12:13, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

If you don't apply football to AFL why would you say "AFL is football"? And could you please reply to the second part of my response where I spoke of ambiguity in the word football.--2nyte (talk) 12:20, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

• Comment This thread should be closed now. User:Macktheknifeau came here claiming he had new evidence. That evidence has been shown to be wrong. (Print copies of the Herald Sun still use "soccer".) He has made several other wrong, often ridiculous claims (AFL only popular in Victoria, etc) and has resorted to calling an alleged group of AFL supporters names. It is wasting editors' time with an ideological campaign that has no hope of success. HiLo48 (talk) 17:58, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

• Comment @Macktheknifeau: Please retract the comments where you refer to those of us who collectively oppose this move as AFL stooges. I am not, nor shall I ever be, an AFL stooge. I am a PhD student covering Australian sport. I have researched the topic extensively. I have talked to people in multiple football codes, including soccer people on at least three occasions. I am not putting forth any AFL agenda. If you have evidence of my being a stooge, others being stooges of the AFL or of canvassing, please post it now or retract. --LauraHale (talk) 19:55, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

I endorse LauraHale's request and direct Macktheknifeau to the first sentence of Misplaced Pages:No personal attacks, which says "Comment on content, not on the contributor". This applies whether you address one editor, or many. --AussieLegend (✉) 03:49, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Comment Some of us LauraHale prefer to remain more or less anonymous here and don't trail our qualification coat tails in the dust in a form of a specious appeal to authority. From what I have seen of your contributions there is evidence that suggests you have a bias against the code of Association football. Silent Billy (talk) 11:06, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

@Silent Billy : You say: From what I have seen of your contributions there is evidence that suggests you have a bias against the code of Association football. I say diffs that prove that I have a bias against the code of association football. I can show you all my en.wp GAs about soccer, my diffs where I included soccer information into Sport in Australia and other articles, where I took pictures related to soccer in Australia, where I reported on soccer matches for English Wikinews. So please, retract the accusation or provides a metric ass ton of diffs to support your personal attack. --LauraHale (talk) 15:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

This is bordering on a personal attack. Comment on content, not on the contributor. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:35, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

• Comment - what you call the game seems to be something of a shibboleth. A lot of A-League supporters seem to call the game football while others generally use football to refer to the most popular version of football in the area. I don't appreciate being labelled an AFL stooge - while I have edited AFL topics, the large majority of my contributions have been soccer-related. Hack (talk) 00:24, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose, depending on where you live in Australia, "football" is either rugby league or Australian Rules. Only diehard fans of the round-ball game call it "football" in this country. WP:COMMONNAME. Lankiveil 04:32, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

"Only diehard fans of the round-ball game call it "football" in this country." You got a source for that? Silent Billy (talk) 11:06, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

• Support altho' I realise that it's futile. Silent Billy (talk) 13:34, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
• Support Football in Australia, Support Football (soccer) in Australia, Strongly Oppose Soccer in Australia - I really don't see what impact this has on partisan AFL, NRL, etc editors. The sport is not called "Soccer" in Australia. Major news outlets have "Football" sections for football news, the governing body is called Football Federation Australia, clubs in the A-League use the abbreviation "FC" in their names, which stands for "Football Club". It's like Rugby Union fans asking Rugby League to discontinue using the term Rugby because the term "Rugby" on it's own means Union in Australia. This is a bloody petty and childish debate perpetuated by partisan AFL and/or NRL fans who don't like football being referred to as such becuse, in my humble opinion, it implies that the game is moving forward. As a side note, AFL fans should be grateful for Football, the failed World Cup bid has pumped millions of dollars that they would never have seen otherwise into upgrading their stadiums. Ck786 (talk) 21:54, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

1. I'm not aware of any AFL stadium upgrades promised as part of the World Cup bid that actually occurred, rather than just being promises. 2. Don't call other editors names, such as "partisan AFL and/or NRL fans who don't like football." 3. The major Victorian newspapers, at least, both use Soccer to name the sport. I suspect the same is true for Adelaide, Perth, Darwin and Hobart. 4. The FC might informally stand for Football Club, but not officially. You can check the ASIC website to confirm this. HiLo48 (talk) 03:52, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

• Support Football in Australia. Target is a redundant article that should be merged with Sport in Australia. Secondly, "Soccer" is a slang term/abbreviation and thus should not be used for an article title. Finally, supporters of the term "Soccer" who are mainly AFL fans should note that, the term "football" is not used in any way to talk about the game of AFL outside of Victoria. Should we remove the use of "football" from all AFL articles to "Aussie Rules"/"AFL"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.167.218.26 (talk) 22:01, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

• You're sounding a lot like User:Macktheknifeau, with your similar attack on editors opposing the move. Bidgee (talk) 03:18, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Are you accusing me of being a sockpuppet Bidgee? That IP is from a different city and ISP to mine. Macktheknifeau (talk) 10:26, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I never accused you. Read it again. Bidgee (talk) 10:39, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

As you well know from previous discussions, IP addresses in Australia don't necessarily identify your location. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:49, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

• And please note the name of the West Australian Football League. That is but one of many examples I could show you of how wrong you are when you say "the term "football" is not used in any way to talk about the game of AFL outside of Victoria". HiLo48 (talk) 03:40, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

• Could you please explain how Football in Australia is a redundant article? --AussieLegend (✉) 04:29, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

• It is the opinion of some that the Football in Australia article has no use as is. Therefor, it is unnecessary.--2nyte (talk) 04:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

• ROTFLMAO HiLo48 (talk) 05:51, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

• • Comment "football" is the slang term here. It is slang for "association football", "rugby football", "Australian-rules football", etc. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 02:50, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose as per the other opposes above, per WP:COMMONNAME, soccer is the common name for association football. Bidgee (talk) 03:18, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Wiki is not set in stone. WP:COMMONNAME can be dismissed in this circumstance, as it is in the Association football article. I assume WP:COMMONNAME would suggest "Football" to be the 'correct' title for the Association football article, but for the sake of neutrality a compromise was made. Again, just because "Soccer" is supposedly the common term, it doesn't mean it should be used as default.--2nyte (talk) 04:27, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
    • No, it's not set in stone, but you would need a very good reason to bypass that policy. The fact the you "would suggest Football to be the correct title..." is not good enough reason. Many have given you reasons why using football on Misplaced Pages for just one of the multifarious football codes would be silly and confusing. You don't seem willing to engage in the reasons I and many others have given, as I just did with yours. Do give it a try. Let's try a simple reason from me. Despite inaccurate statements to the contrary made here by some soccer fans, there is absolutely no doubt that "football" is the common name for Aussie Rules for around half of Australia's population. So how can it possibly make sense to use that name for soccer in an article about the whole of Australia? HiLo48 (talk) 05:51, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
      • You seem to have misquoted me. I only assumed that WP:COMMONNAME would suggest "Football" to be the 'correct' title, I did not suggest it myself. I in fact previously support Soccer in Australia be moved to Association football in Australia, not Football in Australia.--2nyte (talk) 07:17, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
        • Sorry. I did have the impression that you were one of those arguing for the name football for the round ball game. My apologies. Let my post stand as one addressed to them. I acknowledge that Association football seems spread all over Misplaced Pages as some sort of neutral name, but it's something I don't understand. It's not the common name anywhere. Nobody in Australia ever calls the game Association football. Can you explain, seriously and non-emotionally, what's wrong with soccer? It IS the unambiguous common name that works for all of Australia, and that is supposed be our goal here. And if your response includes anything about it being insulting, offensive or whatever, please provide some sourcing for the claim. I have never heard the name soccer used in a negative way, ever, anywhere. HiLo48 (talk) 07:34, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
          • And such a comment should avoid any reference to soccer = wogball = offensiveness. we have already established through references this usage has fallen out of use, and the current use is mostly done by soccer fans explaining the history of the sport and why it it not the most popular football code in the country. --LauraHale (talk) 08:23, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
• Comment The aggressive posts by soccer supporters about other football codes, AFL in particular, and attacks against other editors based on the mistaken belief that they are AFL supporters, are highly inappropriate and do nothing to encourage support for the move proposal. Please stick to the facts, one of which is that not everyone here supports AFL. --AussieLegend (✉) 04:16, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose This is absurd. It has to be left as it is (regardless of the favours bestowed on soccer's governing body by some media outlets). It can go to "Association football in Australia" if it likes, even though this would contradict the prevalent common usage of 'soccer' among Australians, but "Football in Australia"? Please.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 08:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose - the term "football" is too ambiguous in places like US/Canada/Australia, using 'soccer' or 'association football' instead is cromulent. GiantSnowman 10:00, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose move - I would support a move to Association football in Australia but Soccer in Australia is fine. I don't call football "soccer" or "association football" but we have to be realistic about the context in which we're operating. NRL in Sydney is "Friday Night Football", NFL on OneHD is "American Football", AFL in Victoria and South Australia is "Football". Would I prefer that "our" football (soccer) monopolise the term? Sure, that would be great. But what the hell is the point? AFL supporters have to live with the fact that their sport is called Australian rules football here on WP, even though they call it "AFL" or simply "football". It's about what is easiest, not what makes us feel good inside but makes us curse the day we ever opted for the most complicated option. Besides which, there's already an article at Football in Australia and I'm sure both the NRL and AFL crowds would love to "usurp" that (and might even have a stronger claim than "us"). But instead it evenly provides a general overview of the key "football codes" in Australia and a summary of participation rates. This is a solution looking for a problem to solve that might actually cause more problems. Pass. Stalwart111 11:10, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment: Australian Rules Football, Rugby League & Rugby Union are the official names of those sports, so it should be perfectly acceptable for those sports to remain their official names and also have Football to use it's rightful & official name in this country (and across the planet). The AFL Lobby want to have their cake (using Australian Rules Football, the sports official name) and eat it too (by keeping Football away from it's rightful official name). It has nothing to do with 'monopolising' a name, because there is no name to monopolise, merely Football articles that are forced to use an unofficial name to appease the powerful AFL project lobby here. All the other sports have their own official names, and those are specifically not football and thus they should all be named by those official names here. Despite that, they bring up WP:COMMONNAME to support this ludicrous situation where three sports use their official name across the wiki, while simultaneously denying the use of the official name for the fourth because they don't like the sport itself. Ridiculous. Macktheknifeau (talk) 11:29, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
    • You don't even pretend not to know precisely how controversial this move would be. The Football in Australia article already represents a reasonable and established compromise. Your suggestion does not, and you only emphasize this fact with your hysterical and poorly lettered 'little guy vs big guy' rhetoric.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 11:37, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
      • There's no reason that article should even exist, it should be merged into Sport In Australia with sections named after the already used official names. That page already uses Australian Rules Football, Rugby League and Rugby Union! There is no compromise, because there was nothing to compromise on except for the AFL project supporters changing the fourth sports name from an official name like the rest to a nickname. Macktheknifeau (talk) 12:16, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
        • As has been pointed out many times, its official name is association football. This is a reasonable choice, but soccer is the more common and recognisable term. And it has also been pointed out, the term has no negative connotations except in the minds of those wishing to use such an idea as leverage. After all we had the National Soocer League, Soccer Australia, the Socceroos and hundreds of soccer clubs. The change of name appears to have been for marketing purposes as much as anything
          • What if (hypothetically) those same "marketing purposes" applied to a different sport? AFL? If Australian rules football changed into 'Kickball', if the AFL Commission changed into the 'Kickball Commission', if the Australian Football League changed into the 'Kickball League', if all premier Australian rules clubs changed their names from Football Club into 'Kickball Club', then what would the consensus be? Would you then rename the Australian rules football articles? As ridicules as it may sound, this is the exact change happening to soccer in Australia. And yes, it may take many decades for the name to become common within the Australian society, but as many have pointed out this change has already begun. That is where many feel the name soccer is being forced upon the sport. I really do hope you re-think this topic--2nyte (talk) 05:26, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
            • Poor analogy. Critical differences include: 1. Football is already a widely used and common name for other codes. Nobody seriously uses kickball for a major sport. There are no barriers to its use across the country. 2. The soccer clubs haven't changed their names to football clubs. Some don't have a formal indicator of the game they play at all, just like the A League. Others use FC. Legally that's all they use. It doesn't officially stand for football club. Have a think why. 3. You believe the name change from soccer to football is an inevitable progression. I don't. I submit that it has stalled at the obvious places we repeatedly tell you about, but there are none so blind as those who will not see. I'll repeat two obvious examples. My suburb of Melbourne, like a huge number of towns and suburbs south of the Barassi Line, has both a successful Football Club (Aussie Rules) and a successful Soccer Club. I simply cannot see this ever changing. The same applies to every school south of the Barassi Line. HiLo48 (talk) 06:19, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
              • I think it is a perfectly applicable analogy. Soccer is becoming Football. And to your comment, there are many instances around the whole of Australia of Soccer Clubs changed their names to Football Club (SC to FC) prominently in the last 20 years. If you want I can make a list of the clubs, but it will take a while. And I will rephrase, that the change in name for the sport from soccer to football may not be inevitable for the whole of the country, but you would be wrong to thing the change is not occurring, and gaining momentum. The A-League is gaining profile (around the country and the world), the 2014 FIFA World Cup will be one of if not the biggest sporting event in the Australia next year, the 2015 AFC Asian Cup (the biggest Asian football tournament, watched by hundreds of millions) will be hosted in Australia, the FFA Cup is just around the corner (it will include more than 700 Australian football teams in a annual knockout competition starting next year), and the National Premier Leagues (second division of Australian football) will be Australia-wide next year.--2nyte (talk) 07:01, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

You need to watch your language – Australian football is not soccer (or association football)! Australian football is played in the AFL, not in the A-League or the new NPL. Please get it right! --120.144.187.31 (talk) 08:00, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

2nyte - You are incompetent at discussing this, I pointed out that the change won't go any further, with extremely good reasons, and you point out that it's gone a long way in the past. That's not conversation. That's avoiding conversation. And this has nothing to with do with the commendable success of the A-League, etc, of which I make absolutely no criticism. How the success of a league without football in it's name proves anything about the use of the name football is beyond me. And this is ALL about the name football. You have given no evidence that the change is gaining momentum. Everywhere I look it has stalled, for obvious reasons which you have completely failed to acknowledge. This isn't a conversation. It's a list of irrelevant, unproven claims from you and a complete failure to engage. HiLo48 (talk) 07:58, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose as proposed – the popularity of AFL is enough to prevent this move on the grounds of ambiguity, although I do agree that common terminology for the sport in Australia is shifting from "soccer" towards "football". "Association football in Australia" is a plausible option, although for that to pass you would probably need evidence of the use of the word "soccer" being considered objectionable in Australia. —WFC— _{FL wishlist} 14:32, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose There is no reason to remove the overview of various football codes now present at the target location to create an ambiguous article name. There is no basis in claiming that football is the official name of association football. Even if it were, the case would need to be made that WP:PRIMARYTOPIC applies here. I do not see any argument that football in Australia would be "highly likely—much more likely than any other topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term.". Until such a statement would be proven satisfactory, I will oppose this move. CRwikiCA talk 21:10, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
• Comment: A lot of people seem to be getting defensive over claims that AFL fans are being unfairly targeted... Of the editors who are opposed to football/association football (apologies for anyone I have missed), those who are AFL fans as per their User Profiles are; The-Pope, HiLo48, Flat_Out and Jevansen. Then there are Gibson Flying V (NRL fan) and two long-standing - since at least 2010 - "soccer" campaigners in AussieLegend (because the alternative "makes me cringe" - 2010) and Bidgee (who used the defence that "SBS use soccer" and supporter the use of "soccer until an alternative because more mainstream"). This tact hasn't changed even though the majority of mainstream media refers to the game as football. To me the motivation of a lot of the opposition to football/association football seems very disingenuous/questionable motives. NB. None of this is intended as a personal attack, these are merely facts. Ck786 (talk) 07:26, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

The mainstream media you refer to are that that comes out of Sydney. Mainstream media from other places outside Sydney overwhelming still use 'soccer' and don't look set to change anytime soon. --120.144.187.31 (talk) 08:00, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

All New Limited publications use "football". Channel 9, Channel 7, Channel 10, ABC and SBS all refer to the sport as "football". The ONLY major news provider in the country that doesn't refer to the sport as football is Fairfax. Fairfax have a vested interest in AFL which explains the reluctance to conform. Ck786 (talk) 09:39, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

When they rename the Socceroos to the Footballroos let me know. Flat Out let's discuss it 11:32, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

SBS says you are wrong. Soccer is used, and association football is not. Please come back with some facts and links to support your claim. --LauraHale (talk) 11:19, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

For some more facts, Sydney morning herald may have a football section, but soccer is still used. There are a large number of articles with soccer in the article name dating to this year. There are also a number of football articles referring to Aussie rules. Please, I am waiting for links that demonstrate football is used EXCLUSIVELY to describe the code of soccer. Where are these links? Where? Personal attacks by soccer supporters cannot cover up to outside observers that no references to the exclusive use of football to describe the roundball game in the Australian context have been provided. --LauraHale (talk) 11:25, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!!!! That claim is simply incorrect. It has been explained several times earlier in the thread. HiLo48 (talk) 10:02, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Ck786, but that IS a personal attack. You are saying that my interest in and knowledge of Aussie Rules prevents me from discussing this matter objectively, and that I am opposed to "football/association football". It's simply wrong, and offensive. I am NOT opposed to "football/association football" I am opposed to the use of the name football for the game known unambiguously to all Australians as soccer. I have given rational reasons for this position. Discuss the points I have made and the reasons I have given. Find fault with them if you can. But don't dismiss them because of an alleged but unproven bias. Again, that IS a personal attack. HiLo48 (talk) 08:07, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

As I've pointed out responding to the IP editor above, all I'm saying is that the AFL institution do not agree with the use of the term Football to be associated with "soccer", especially those who live in AFL centric environments such as Victoria, which I believe all the editors mentioned above do. So it follows that ardent fans would tow the same line, especially when it is published in a public domain such as WP. The fact that none of the opponent have shown any room to even accept a rational compromise to the use of say "Football (soccer) in Australia" highlights the blind, frankly, pigheadedness displayed by some people in the opposition in this recurring argument. If you take a step back and look at this overall, it seems to me that a number of the opponents to this, refuse to accept the possibility that times are changing. It's simplistic to look backwards and see where we've been historically. Where we are now and where we are heading is what is important. How do you factually gauge what the sport is called is to look at what it is called in the majority of the mainstream media, which as pointed out above, is football. "Football (soccer) in Australia" or at absolute worst "Association Football in Australia" is a logical compromise and I fail to see what anyone has against that? I would also like to see some facts around these claims of reference that "soccer" is mor popular than "football" in TODAY'S sporting environment. Ck786 (talk) 09:39, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

No, not all the editors opposing football as the name of the round ball game come from Victoria. You are getting almost everything wrong tonight. HiLo48 (talk) 10:02, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Ck786, I'm not a AFL nor am I an NRL fan. I don't have a POV to push unlike the diehard soccer fans. Bidgee (talk) 09:19, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I never claimed you to be an NRL and/or AFL fan. I just said you have been a long-term "soccer" campaigner (since at least 2010). Ck786 (talk) 09:39, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Apparently I'm a campaigner because I made a statement 3 years ago. Scary. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

""soccer" campaigners in AussieLegend (because the alternative "makes me cringe" - 2010)" - Do you have a diff for that? If you do, it's pretty scary. --AussieLegend (✉) 08:40, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Full quote: "Soccer - It's the common name. Calling it association football makes me cringe. --AussieLegend (talk) 08:17, 9 August 2010 (UTC)" "Association football (soccer)" rather than just "soccer" Ck786 (talk) 09:44, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

An obscure quote from archive 16 of 17 from 3 years ago - Are you stalking me? Should I be getting extra security at home? --AussieLegend (✉) 14:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Ck786 I do not appreciate having my objectivity questioned, you should do the right thing and withdraw the implication. Flat Out let's discuss it 09:32, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you're offended by my comment. See my response to HiLo48. Hopefully that clarifies for you. Ck786 (talk) 09:46, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Ck786 , don't insult me further for apologising about how I feel, apologise for your behaviour. Your argument is fallacious. Flat Out let's discuss it 10:08, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Which response? The one full of lies and ignorance? HiLo48 (talk) 10:02, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose. The words 'soccer' and 'football' are just common names for the sport of association football. But, as the word 'football' is also a common name for Australian football and the two rugby football codes, it is reasonable and appropriate to use the other common name for association football, that is soccer, in the title of this article. --120.144.187.31 (talk) 08:00, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I am quitting this thread. Those campaigning against soccer as the name for the round ball game are ignoring truth and reality, telling lies, making personal attacks, repeating bullshit, avoiding effective conversation, and generally provoking confrontation. It's too dangerous an environment, and certainly not a rational or productive one. Good night. HiLo48 (talk) 10:02, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose Soccer is the common name in Australia. Any attempted use of "football" is an attempt to displace the other codes that also use this term. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose Common name is soccer. "Football" used by other football codes. Jevansen (talk) 11:39, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose It's an odd one, but in Australia the word "football" or its abbreviation "footy" in several states is used to mean Aussie rules, and in NSW, QLD and the ACT to rugby league. Soccer is the most common name for this variety of football in Australia. The current setup works well I think where we have an overarching article on all football codes and then articles for each one. (For the record, I'm from WA, and not an "AFL stooge", whatever that is.) Orderinchaos 17:02, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I think the only places in the Anglosphere (English-speaking world) where "football" means "association football" without ambiguity is Britain, South Asia (where native languages are more prominent than English), Singapore and Hong Kong (where native languages are more prominent than English); and ofcourse, the non-English world. In Ireland there's Gaelic football, in North America there's gridiron, in NZ there's rugby, in South Africa it's preferentially called "soccer" (and ofcourse non-English languages are prominent here as well) ... if we're going by the English-world, all "football" articles should be called "soccer" as the English word for the sport. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:28, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Further to above

Just to tidy up a loose end, the discussion above re the proposed move was referenced here, requesting admin attention on the behaviour of editors. --Pete (talk) 22:59, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Tidy up a loose end? What? YOU started the thread. Stop being so shy. You tried to excuse those repeatedly spouting crap on the basis that they might have had truth on their side (they NEVER did), and got yet another pointless thread closed with no result. Not sure what that achieved. But I do still wish we could find a way to stop editors repeating provocative nonsense that has been clearly AND repeatedly demonstrated to be wrong. If you or anyone can find a productive way of doing that, I'd be delighted. HiLo48 (talk) 09:56, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm just waiting for the Aussie Rules fans that campaigned so hard that the term "football" should not be claimed by one code go ahead and move Australian rules football → Aussie rules. If "soccer" can't use Football (soccer) in Australia or even Association football in Australia due to the term "football" belonging to many sports, it stands to reason that no code of football in Australia should lay claim to it in an article title. I'd love to know how this is different. Ck786 (talk) 01:57, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

There's absolutely no need for this. Please stop. --AussieLegend (✉) 03:14, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

All I'm looking for is a simple explanation to a point that I feel is valid. If the term "football" does not belong to any one code, but in fact all four codes of football, why is Australian rules football exempt from this guideline and allowed to have "football" in its' name but "soccer" is not (in any of the forms suggested)? Ck786 (talk) 03:26, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I suggest you read WP:COMMONNAME and WP:OFFICIALNAMES. --AussieLegend (✉) 03:38, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Strange comment. So, tell me, how many people and/or media organisations do you know of that refer to AFL/Aussie rules solely and unconditionally as "Australian rules football"? Ck786 (talk) 04:20, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

No, it's not strange at all. While "association football" may be the official name, Misplaced Pages titles articles based on the common name which, based on evidence presented above and elsewhere is unambiguously "soccer". You might also care to read WP:DEADHORSE. --AussieLegend (✉) 04:27, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

So using that logic, while "Australian rules football" may be the official name, Misplaced Pages titles articles based on the common name which, based on evidence presented above and elsewhere is unambiguously "AFL" or "Aussie Rules". Yes? Ck786 (talk) 05:21, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

No, the official name for Australian rules football is Australian football, Australian rules football is just a common name for the code, and common nicknames for the code include: football, footy, Aussie rules and, for marking purposes by the AFL, AFL. --124.181.25.253 (talk) 02:30, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

There has been a discussion above that resolved this article should stay at Soccer in Australia. If you want to discuss the title of Australian rules football I suggest you do so on the talk page of that article. --AussieLegend (✉) 05:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Ck786 - you seem to have misunderstood the problem. There is nothing wrong with the name Australian rules football, because it's both a unique and common name for the sport. It's the whole name that's relevant here, not just one word out of three. Many times and by many people the qualified name Association football has been suggested as the name here for the round ball game. The biggest problem with that proposal is that it's clearly not a common name for the game. Many readers would have no idea what it meant. (I didn't until I began to edit here and was forced to look it up.) Some have also pointed out that for the first 40 years of its existence (mostly before soccer was codified) Australian football in Victoria was an Association game too, played at its highest level in the Victorian Football Association. To me that reason is less important than the simple fact that nobody actually uses the term Association football in common speech or writing. HiLo48 (talk) 03:54, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

That's a perfectly rational explanation (regarding the term "association football"). The bit that I cannot get my head around is what the issue is with using Football (soccer) in Australia?? Seems to me that it fits around all of the concerns that were raised in the above move request. It encompasses the two primary terms used to describe the game in Australia - "football" by fans and most media organisations and "soccer" from non-"football (soccer)" fans. Furthermore, it does not claim exclusive ownership over the term "football"/"Football in Australia" nor will there be any confusion over what sport it is actually referring to. Ck786 (talk) 04:20, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

You'll get nothing more than me. You have yet again gone down the bullshit path, making claims that are just not true. I don't want another fight. You won't accept what others tell you is the truth. Piss off. HiLo48 (talk) 04:25, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Well that was unnecessary, I've been more than civil in this conversation - I thought it was quite constructive. Why can't you just answer the question? What is wrong with "Football (soccer) in Australia"? Ck786 (talk) 05:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

You have NOT been civil. It is NOT civil to ignore editors who know what they're talking about when it comes to facts. You have persisted in doing that throughout the two conversations on this page, including in your post date stamped 04:20, 28 August 2013 (UTC) above. Can we get a couple of things straight? Soccer fans (not just non-soccer fans) on the Aussie Rules side of the Barassi Line call the game soccer, as do all the media outlets based there. This represents roughly half of Australia's population. It includes the Riverina, Broken Hill, Wagga Wagga, the Northern Territory, Tasmania, South Australia, Western Australia and Victoria. Now. You've been told a truth. You may not like it, but it's a TRUTH!!!! Deal with it, and don't ever spout bullshit again!!!!!!!!!! Repeatedly spouting bullshit is VERY uncivil. HiLo48 (talk) 05:49, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

What is the "bulls**t" that I am "sprouting". I tell you what is "bulls**t" - the Barassi line makes no reference to "soccer" at all except to say that there is little variance in it's popularity with respect to location. I would like to know your source to support the claim that "Soccer fans (not just non-soccer fans) on the Aussie Rules side of the Barassi Line call the game soccer" - I'm sure you have one. Irrespective of this, if what you say is true and half of "soccer" fans call it soccer and the other half call it football, surely the most rational name is "Football (soccer) in Australia"? Again you have failed to answer why the article cannot be called "Football (soccer) in Australia"... Could you please respond to this point? Ck786 (talk) 06:54, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I really wonder about your competence as an editor. Are you really trying hard to act so dumb? Nobody calls the game "Football (soccer)". Everybody knows what soccer is. It's the simple, non-controversial solution. There is nothing wrong with soccer. It works for everybody in Australia. Football doesn't. There is absolutely no point in adding it. We are one country, after all. And, all this has been said before. You lost. I have a discussion going elsewhere about editors who won't accept the umpire's decision. Very uncivil. HiLo48 (talk) 07:10, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I think we know civility when we see it. HiLo, I started off this thread as a courtesy to other editors in case they wanted to add to the discussion on AN/I. There was no need for any discussion - it was just a pointer to another discussion on another page - one in which you were actively participating. Your response here wasn't in haste or under pressure, you had achieved a positive result on the renaming, and there was no necessity - as you often claim - to use personal attacks and foul language to draw attention to your points. There's no need to re-open the debate. It's not as if your team is behind seven points after a horror season and on track to lose next week's grand final - your side won this particular match. So why not just count to ten a few times and leave it be?

As I say, we have ways to deal with nonsense, and even if it's a line-ball decision, we use consensus to resolve matters. It would help if you - and everybody - stuck to the established procedures. Thanks. --Pete (talk) 06:57, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Bullshit! Yes, the formal rename request was lost, again, as it should have been. In fact, it should never have required re-discussing. But you won't shut up. Ck786 won't shut up. We DON'T have procedures that stop repetitive bullshit being posted. HiLo48 (talk) 07:14, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Tell me that you at least see the irony of you playing the civility card after your potty mouth tirade? Also I'd suggest you have a read of this article before you start throwing around truly ambiguous terms such as "everybody" and "nobody" because if "soccer worked for everybody" we wouldn't be having this conversation. Fact of the matter is, you've just told me that half the population call the game football and the other half don't. Thus it would make sense to use both in the name of the article. You have zero evidence to back it up (as highlighted by your incorrect use of the Barassi Line to support your position) and you know as well as I do that the only reason the move request was resolved in the opposition was sheer weight of numbers with their own agendas. The above move request was certainly not decided on fact and evidence. Ck786 (talk) 07:24, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Bullshit. And I'm retiring from this now. You have nothing. Fact wise OR intellectually. I should not have to explain why I mentioned the Barassi Line, and won't. HiLo48 (talk) 08:24, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Half the population does not define soccer as football. There is ZERO evidence to support this claim. If there is evidence, then it really needs to be put into Football in Australia, and I can find you a number of reliable sources that talk about how in the English speaking world, football is used ONLY in England as being universal for soccer. In other English speaking countries including the USA, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa and Australia, soccer is the word used to describe the game. Association football cannot be used in an Australian context because as sources demonstrate, this is not the word for the game in Australia. If you seriously want a rename with football, it would be Soccer (football) in Australia, and that is pretty silly. If you have new evidence and new sources to support the claims you are making, you need to update Soccer in Australia and Football in Australia regarding the word's usage. Until you have the references to support the claim, references you are citing on the talk page and in the article, please stop with your endless POV pushing (characterized by your lack of sources to support your preferential POV regarding WP:COMMONNAME.)--LauraHale (talk) 20:10, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

The "half the population" point was raised by HiLo48 along with his irrelevant and ultimately incorrect reference of the Barassi line article. No one in any conversation on this talk page (that I can see) has claimed that the use of the word "football" in Australia is solely limited to "soccer", so that point is null and void. As Macktheknifeau raised in the request for the move, in 2011 when the page was moved to "Soccer in Australia", the vote was decided solely on the use of "Soccer" not "Football" by the media to describe the sport in this country. Macktheknifeau then provided physical evidence to show that nearly all major media organisations, print and television, have reverted to using "Football". The goalposts between 2011 and now seem to have shifted, as now apparently media notoriety, the naming of governing bodies, what the government refers to the sport as, etc, etc are not justification enough and the move request was decided by weight of numbers pushing their own POV, not on facts and evidence. Reading through the above move request discussion, there is no physical evidence from those opposing the move - there's plenty of anecdotal/heresay "evidence", but nothing physical. I note your search of libraries and also note that the original publishing date of the vast majority of "soccer" books is before the turn of the millennium and/or the books originate from the USA, where the sport is called soccer and only soccer by the public, fans, media, government, etc. Aside from that all "evidence" supplied by the opposition is anecdotal which does not come close to satisfying any Wiki standard for reputable source of information. Furthermore, "Football (soccer) in Australia" satisfies WP:NATURALDIS. "Soccer in Australia" fails WP:COMMONNAME based solely on the criteria that was used to move the page in 2011. Finally, I find it ironic that I be accused of WP:POV pushing when the entire opposition campaign above was one big baseless POV-push. Ck786 (talk) 23:27, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

@ Ck786, tl;dr. Links to the sources sources supporting your position regarding the name football being the dominant name and common name in Australia? That can be used to support your position despite all the references to in the Football in Australia saying otherwise? I request these reliable verifaible sources as a show of good faith regarding neutrality of your position. -- LauraHale (talk) 20:15, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

What are you proposing be done? The requested move pretty comprehensively fell in favour of soccer as the most common name. If you're not going to open a new RM, move on - this is a venue for improving the article not a forum. Hack (talk) 02:41, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

I would suggest some kind of major administrative review, as opposed to a single random admin deciding, who may or may not have any idea about why the AFL project are so protective of the name 'soccer', someone who can understand bias, knows how to defeat ingrained systemic biased against a group who use overwhelming numbers to smother debate and work to correct it would be a good choice to lead the enquiry. It's clear the AFL project are ultra protective of their non-neutral POV on the situation, they have destroyed objective discussion, ignoring the evidence and use that to force 'no consensus' rulings even when the old reasoning in 2011 was completely turned around now in 2013. Macktheknifeau (talk) 04:26, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

I know I said I was retiring, and I will make no more comment on content here, but "I would suggest some kind of major administrative review" into the appalling behaviour by the soccer fans here, who persistently and repeatedly refuse to accept the umpire's decision, while continuing to abuse those who disagreed with them. Fortunately, there are already discussions currently underway in several plces in WIkipedia about what to do about such vexatious, uncivil behaviour. HiLo48 (talk) 04:50, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Administrators have no more power than any other editor, just an extra set of tools to use, just as many non-admins are rollbackers, filemovers, reviewers etc. WP:CONSENSUS is the primary way we make decisions here and consensus is that this article is correctly located at Soccer in Australia. An uninvolved editor, who just happens to be an admin, has evaluated the above RM and made that evaluation so there is nothing more to be done here, and nothing to be gained from prolonging this discussion unnecessarily. I hope that everyone will realise that if we all walk away, it will just stop. --AussieLegend (✉) 05:14, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

...with the word "all" being the key word in that sentence. Bye. HiLo48 (talk) 05:43, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Where was the first game played?

I'm genuinely confused.

Until last night the article said Parramatta in the Infobox, then it was changed to Goodna, without any change in sourcing. I reverted for that reason, but my old mate Pete/Skyring tells me it IS sourced. For the life of me I can't see where.

Meanwhile, in the History part of the text I'm told that the first game was in Wacol. I don't know Brisbane well. Is Wacol equivalent to Goodna? Whatever, this IS confusing. HiLo48 (talk) 07:49, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

This article makes the claim on the basis of this article from 1875 that the game played in August 1875 was association football. The first article quotes a historian who seems to validate the claim. The 2012 article mentions Goodna, the original article says Woogaroo while the actual asylum is in the current suburb of Wacol. Hack (talk) 08:39, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

I simply did a search of the page for the word "Goodna" and found the source. In the list of sources. I've spent a lot of time in Wacol, for school and army courses, and the difference between Wacol and Goodna is minimal. A few hundred metres. As is easily discovered through Misplaced Pages. --Pete (talk) 09:12, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• C-Class football articles
• High-importance football articles
• C-Class soccer in Australia articles
• High-importance soccer in Australia articles
• Soccer in Australia task force articles
• WikiProject Football articles
• C-Class Australia articles
• High-importance Australia articles
• WikiProject Australia articles