Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football

Not to be confused with Wikipedia talk:WikiProject American football, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian rules football, or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Canadian football.

Campeones Cup - to include in honours or not?

Hello all - The Campeones Cup is a super cup match contested between the champions of MLS and Liga MX. It is not sanctioned by CONCACAF or FIFA Source, but it is considered an official title by MLS and Liga MX Source Source. There's been some commotion here on whether this should be included in players' and teams' honours sections given its lack of official status from the North American governing body and FIFA. Any guidance on how to approach this would be great. I'm all for including it in the honours section as long as we can include a footnote with the explanation. But open to understanding how we've approached similar situations in the past and what the threshold is for including stuff in honours. Morogris (✉ • ✎) 16:47, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

I've unaware of any parallels to reference, but there are a lot of archived topics discussing honors in the past. Perhaps there was some consensus found in one of those? Not necessarily that we have to agree with it, consensus can change, but it would be nice to look back on if one exists. Raskuly 🐰 18:14, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

I would like to raise the question of how Campeones Cup should be classified on Wikipedia, particularly whether winning it should be included among a player’s competitive honors rather than relegated to a note. The most important distinction is between saying that Campeones Cup is not organized or sanctioned by FIFA/Concacaf and saying that FIFA or Concacaf therefore “do not recognize it as official.” Those are two different claims, and the second does not automatically follow from the first. I have not found a primary source statement, regulation, or publication from either FIFA or Concacaf explicitly saying that Campeones Cup is “unofficial,” “not recognized as official,” or that its trophy should not count as a competitive club honour. If we are going to attribute that position specifically to FIFA or Concacaf, I believe we should hold ourselves to a high evidentiary standard and require evidence of their actual position—not infer it from the fact that they are not the competition’s organizers. Secondary sources can certainly be reliable for many purposes, but a Google search showing that Goal, BolaVip, Sports Illustrated or another publication says FIFA/Concacaf does not sanction the competition is not equivalent to FIFA or Concacaf themselves saying that they regard its title as unofficial. This is particularly important because “not sanctioned/organized by” and “not recognized as an official trophy” are materially different propositions.

More importantly, the primary evidence we actually have from FIFA points away from such a categorical characterization. FIFA directly covered the 2019 Campeones Cup and stated “Atlanta United win 2019 Campeones Cup.” FIFA introduced the competition with “One game. One champion. One cup,” identified the participants as the MLS Cup champion and Liga MX Campeón de Campeones winner, and described Atlanta’s victory as bringing MLS its first “trophy” in the competition, while recognizing Tigres as winner of the inaugural edition. FIFA therefore did not describe this as an exhibition or friendly; in FIFA’s own terminology, there is a cup, a champion and a trophy. None of that proves FIFA sanctions the competition, and I am not arguing that it does. It does, however, make a significant difference when the proposed claim is that FIFA affirmatively does not recognize the title as official. If that is FIFA’s position, there should be a FIFA source establishing it. FIFA’s actual direct coverage instead acknowledges the competition and its trophy in competitive terms.

https://inside.fifa.com/news/atlanta-edge-club-america-to-earn-continental-bragging-rights

The primary evidence from Concacaf is even more difficult to reconcile with an unqualified statement that Concacaf “does not recognize” the trophy. On Concacaf’s own website, Campeones Cup is explicitly described as “the annual trophy contested between the reigning champions of MLS and the reigning champions of LIGA MX.” Even more significantly, in its official Club Rankings coverage in 2025, Concacaf wrote that Toluca had moved upward after “adding the Campeones Cup to its latest list of trophies.” That is remarkably direct language for this particular question: Concacaf itself says winning Campeones Cup added a trophy to Toluca’s list of trophies. There has also been practical Concacaf involvement, with MLS and Liga MX collaborating with the confederation in appointing match officials for the competition. Again, none of this should be stretched into the separate claim that Campeones Cup is a Concacaf-sanctioned competition. But if the question is whether Concacaf simply regards the resulting trophy as unofficial or unrecognized, we should take seriously what Concacaf itself actually publishes. It calls it an “annual trophy” and explicitly adds it to a winning club’s “list of trophies.”

https://www.concacaf.com/news/michelob-ultra-becomes-the-official-partner-of-the-concacaf-club-competitions-and-major-league-soccer

https://www.concacaf.com/news/vancouver-whitecaps-alianza-y-mount-pleasant-suben-en-el-ultimo-ranking-de-clubes-de-concacafhttps://www.mlssoccer.com/news/campeones-cup-match-officials-and-competition-guidelines-368403

The independent statistical treatment supports taking the competition seriously as well. RSSSF maintains a dedicated Campeones Cup record, defines it as an “Annual tournament organized by MLS (USA) and Liga MX (Mexico), between the MLS Cup winners and the Campeón de Campeones winners,” and maintains a formal palmarès of champions beginning with Tigres in 2018. More tellingly, RSSSF places Campeones Cup in its International Club Results archive alongside competitions such as the Concacaf Champions Cup, SuperLiga and Leagues Cup. This matters because Campeones Cup is structurally different from an invitational friendly trophy: qualification is earned through sporting achievement. One participant qualifies by winning MLS Cup and the other through Liga MX’s championship structure, and those champions contest a defined competition for another trophy. MLS and Liga MX themselves consequently treat the winner as a champion/title winner. This combination of predetermined sporting qualification, a recurring competition, formal rules, a trophy, a historical palmarès and independent statistical recognition provides substantial evidence that we are dealing with a competitive title rather than a ceremonial friendly.https://www.rsssf.org/tabless/supcamp1.html

https://www.rsssf.org/intclub.html?

The FA Community Shield comparison is useful for a narrower reason: it demonstrates why “FIFA does not organize/sanction this competition” cannot, by itself, answer whether a trophy belongs in a player’s honours. FIFA does not organize the Community Shield, yet FIFA routinely includes Community Shield victories in players’ and managers’ trophy records. FIFA’s own profile of Bastian Schweinsteiger, for example, has a section literally titled “Schweinsteiger’s trophy cabinet” and includes “English Community Shield winner: 2016” alongside his other major honours. FIFA has likewise included Community Shield titles in its published honours for figures such as Cesc Fàbregas, Rafael Benítez, Carlo Ancelotti and Pep Guardiola. I am not suggesting that the Community Shield and Campeones Cup have identical regulatory structures; they do not. The relevant principle is simply that FIFA organization is clearly not a universal prerequisite for FIFA to recognize something in a person’s trophy record. If the argument is instead that a special rule applies because Campeones Cup is cross-border, then the appropriate evidence would be the FIFA/Concacaf regulation establishing that rule. Without such a rule, the international/domestic distinction cannot simply be assumed to settle the classification.

https://inside.fifa.com/news/schweinsteiger-announces-retirement

This is why I think primary sourcing is particularly important here. As researchers and editors, we should be extremely cautious about putting a position into the mouths of governing bodies that they have not themselves expressed. A reliable secondary source may report that Campeones Cup is not FIFA- or Concacaf-sanctioned, and that fact can be reported with the appropriate source. But converting that into “FIFA and Concacaf do not recognize the title as official” is an additional conclusion. We should not risk perpetuating misinformation through a chain in which one secondary source repeats another, terminology becomes blurred, or a publication ultimately relies on information that originated on Wikipedia itself. If the claim concerns FIFA’s position, the strongest evidence is a FIFA statement or regulation; if it concerns Concacaf’s position, the strongest evidence is a Concacaf statement or regulation. This is especially compelling here because we actually do have primary material showing how those organizations speak about Campeones Cup: FIFA calls it a cup with a champion and trophy, while Concacaf calls it an “annual trophy” and expressly says that winning it added the trophy to a club’s “list of trophies.” Those sources are directly relevant; they cannot reasonably be dismissed merely because neither organization operates the competition.

Therefore, I am not proposing that Wikipedia describe Campeones Cup as FIFA-sanctioned or Concacaf-sanctioned without evidence. The proposal is much narrower: the absence of FIFA/Concacaf organization or sanctioning should not automatically transform a competitive trophy into an unofficial honour when the available evidence shows MLS and Liga MX organizing it as a competition between their champions, FIFA referring to its winner as champion and its prize as a trophy, Concacaf calling it an annual trophy and explicitly adding it to a club’s list of trophies, Concacaf participating in the appointment of officials, and RSSSF recording it as an international club tournament with an established palmarès. On the totality of that evidence, I think there is a strong case for treating Campeones Cup as a competitive club honour and therefore including it in the honours of players who won it, including Lionel Messi’s 2026 title. Most importantly, if there is a FIFA or Concacaf statement or regulation explicitly saying “Campeones Cup is unofficial,” “Campeones Cup is not recognized as an official title,” or that its winners cannot count it as a competitive honour, then that primary evidence should absolutely be produced and would materially change this discussion. But unless such primary source evidence exists, Wikipedia should not state or imply that this is FIFA’s or Concacaf’s position when neither governing body appears to have actually said it—and when their own published language regarding the trophy points in a materially different direction. Ljk20 (talk) 00:21, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Courtesy ping to Merlyn26, Intruder007, Joemx, GoPurpleNGold24, Gumbi93, Davenport9312, Raskuly, SounderBruce who are active in MLS/Liga MX articles. Morogris (✉ • ✎) 16:52, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. I honestly wouldn't mind adding it to the honors section, specially if both leagues consideer it a legit title.Intruder007 (talk) 18:43, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello! A relevant discussion took place in my talk page, see here; my thesis, as explained there, it is it shouldn't be mentioned in the honours section, because it was not sanctioned by CONCACAF, and therefore it is not a FIFA-recognized trophy. Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 00:40, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

It is true that it is not sanctioned by concacaf, but by this logic MLS Cup should not be included in the honours section either, as it is not a Concacaf-sanctioned competition. The fact that Concacaf or FIFA does not sanction or organize a trophy does not, by itself, mean they consider that trophy unofficial. In fact, Concacaf itself calls Campeones Cup an “annual trophy” and has explicitly described Toluca as having “added the Campeones Cup to its latest list of trophies.” Therefore, unless FIFA or Concacaf has actually stated that lack of Concacaf sanctioning makes Campeones Cup an unofficial or non-recognized trophy, I don’t think that conclusion automatically follows. It is a cross-border inter-league super cup contested between the champions of MLS and Liga MX, with qualification earned through winning each league’s respective championship competition, thus run by the leagues themselves. As a super cup, it does not need to be organized by FIFA itself for its trophy to constitute an official honour, just as FIFA includes the FA Community Shield and countless other super cups, whether domestic or inter-league, in players’ trophy records despite FIFA not organizing or sanctioning those competitions. The fact that Campeones Cup is cross-border does not change this principle; it is international precisely because it is an inter-league super cup between the champions of two leagues from different countries. That does not, by itself, establish that Concacaf or FIFA must organize or sanction it before the leagues can award a competitive title between their champions. If such a requirement exists for inter-league competitions, then the relevant FIFA or Concacaf regulation should be cited; otherwise, international status alone cannot be used to turn a league-organized competitive trophy into an unofficial one. Lastly, and most importantly, no primary source from FIFA or Concacaf has been produced stating that Campeones Cup is “unofficial,” “not recognized,” or that its trophy cannot constitute an official honour; without such a statement, we should not attribute that position to either governing body as fact. Ljk20 (talk) 01:01, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello! Courtesy ping to GiantSnowman, Robby.is.on, Mattythewhite, Bakermannn, Mediocre Legacy, OrdinaryOtter, who are active in football-related articles. Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 13:11, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

WP:TLDR... GiantSnowman 17:51, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello, honestly I agree with the others that say it should go under the honours section; altough the trophy is not officially CONCACAF or FIFA-sanctioned, it is still considered a competitive fixture by the clubs and leagues. Additionally I have previously consistently added Campeones Cup matches to players' career statistics totals as well as club season articles in past editions. Mediocre Legacy (talk) 23:22, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

I would like to raise the question of how Campeones Cup should be classified on Wikipedia, particularly whether winning it should be included among a player’s competitive honors rather than relegated to a note. The most important distinction is between saying that Campeones Cup is not organized or sanctioned by FIFA/Concacaf and saying that FIFA or Concacaf therefore “do not recognize it as official.” Those are two different claims, and the second does not automatically follow from the first. I have not found a primary source statement, regulation, or publication from either FIFA or Concacaf explicitly saying that Campeones Cup is “unofficial,” “not recognized as official,” or that its trophy should not count as a competitive club honour. If we are going to attribute that position specifically to FIFA or Concacaf, I believe we should hold ourselves to a high evidentiary standard and require evidence of their actual position—not infer it from the fact that they are not the competition’s organizers. Secondary sources can certainly be reliable for many purposes, but a Google search showing that Goal, BolaVip, Sports Illustrated or another publication says FIFA/Concacaf does not sanction the competition is not equivalent to FIFA or Concacaf themselves saying that they regard its title as unofficial. This is particularly important because “not sanctioned/organized by” and “not recognized as an official trophy” are materially different propositions.

More importantly, the primary evidence we actually have from FIFA points away from such a categorical characterization. FIFA directly covered the 2019 Campeones Cup and stated “Atlanta United win 2019 Campeones Cup.” FIFA introduced the competition with “One game. One champion. One cup,” identified the participants as the MLS Cup champion and Liga MX Campeón de Campeones winner, and described Atlanta’s victory as bringing MLS its first “trophy” in the competition, while recognizing Tigres as winner of the inaugural edition. FIFA therefore did not describe this as an exhibition or friendly; in FIFA’s own terminology, there is a cup, a champion and a trophy. None of that proves FIFA sanctions the competition, and I am not arguing that it does. It does, however, make a significant difference when the proposed claim is that FIFA affirmatively does not recognize the title as official. If that is FIFA’s position, there should be a FIFA source establishing it. FIFA’s actual direct coverage instead acknowledges the competition and its trophy in competitive terms.

https://inside.fifa.com/news/atlanta-edge-club-america-to-earn-continental-bragging-rights

The primary evidence from Concacaf is even more difficult to reconcile with an unqualified statement that Concacaf “does not recognize” the trophy. On Concacaf’s own website, Campeones Cup is explicitly described as “the annual trophy contested between the reigning champions of MLS and the reigning champions of LIGA MX.” Even more significantly, in its official Club Rankings coverage in 2025, Concacaf wrote that Toluca had moved upward after “adding the Campeones Cup to its latest list of trophies.” That is remarkably direct language for this particular question: Concacaf itself says winning Campeones Cup added a trophy to Toluca’s list of trophies. There has also been practical Concacaf involvement, with MLS and Liga MX collaborating with the confederation in appointing match officials for the competition. Again, none of this should be stretched into the separate claim that Campeones Cup is a Concacaf-sanctioned competition. But if the question is whether Concacaf simply regards the resulting trophy as unofficial or unrecognized, we should take seriously what Concacaf itself actually publishes. It calls it an “annual trophy” and explicitly adds it to a winning club’s “list of trophies.”

https://www.concacaf.com/news/michelob-ultra-becomes-the-official-partner-of-the-concacaf-club-competitions-and-major-league-soccer

https://www.concacaf.com/news/vancouver-whitecaps-alianza-y-mount-pleasant-suben-en-el-ultimo-ranking-de-clubes-de-concacafhttps://www.mlssoccer.com/news/campeones-cup-match-officials-and-competition-guidelines-368403

The independent statistical treatment supports taking the competition seriously as well. RSSSF maintains a dedicated Campeones Cup record, defines it as an “Annual tournament organized by MLS (USA) and Liga MX (Mexico), between the MLS Cup winners and the Campeón de Campeones winners,” and maintains a formal palmarès of champions beginning with Tigres in 2018. More tellingly, RSSSF places Campeones Cup in its International Club Results archive alongside competitions such as the Concacaf Champions Cup, SuperLiga and Leagues Cup. This matters because Campeones Cup is structurally different from an invitational friendly trophy: qualification is earned through sporting achievement. One participant qualifies by winning MLS Cup and the other through Liga MX’s championship structure, and those champions contest a defined competition for another trophy. MLS and Liga MX themselves consequently treat the winner as a champion/title winner. This combination of predetermined sporting qualification, a recurring competition, formal rules, a trophy, a historical palmarès and independent statistical recognition provides substantial evidence that we are dealing with a competitive title rather than a ceremonial friendly.https://www.rsssf.org/tabless/supcamp1.html

https://www.rsssf.org/intclub.html?

The FA Community Shield comparison is useful for a narrower reason: it demonstrates why “FIFA does not organize/sanction this competition” cannot, by itself, answer whether a trophy belongs in a player’s honours. FIFA does not organize the Community Shield, yet FIFA routinely includes Community Shield victories in players’ and managers’ trophy records. FIFA’s own profile of Bastian Schweinsteiger, for example, has a section literally titled “Schweinsteiger’s trophy cabinet” and includes “English Community Shield winner: 2016” alongside his other major honours. FIFA has likewise included Community Shield titles in its published honours for figures such as Cesc Fàbregas, Rafael Benítez, Carlo Ancelotti and Pep Guardiola. I am not suggesting that the Community Shield and Campeones Cup have identical regulatory structures; they do not. The relevant principle is simply that FIFA organization is clearly not a universal prerequisite for FIFA to recognize something in a person’s trophy record. If the argument is instead that a special rule applies because Campeones Cup is cross-border, then the appropriate evidence would be the FIFA/Concacaf regulation establishing that rule. Without such a rule, the international/domestic distinction cannot simply be assumed to settle the classification.

https://inside.fifa.com/news/schweinsteiger-announces-retirement

This is why I think primary sourcing is particularly important here. As researchers and editors, we should be extremely cautious about putting a position into the mouths of governing bodies that they have not themselves expressed. A reliable secondary source may report that Campeones Cup is not FIFA- or Concacaf-sanctioned, and that fact can be reported with the appropriate source. But converting that into “FIFA and Concacaf do not recognize the title as official” is an additional conclusion. We should not risk perpetuating misinformation through a chain in which one secondary source repeats another, terminology becomes blurred, or a publication ultimately relies on information that originated on Wikipedia itself. If the claim concerns FIFA’s position, the strongest evidence is a FIFA statement or regulation; if it concerns Concacaf’s position, the strongest evidence is a Concacaf statement or regulation. This is especially compelling here because we actually do have primary material showing how those organizations speak about Campeones Cup: FIFA calls it a cup with a champion and trophy, while Concacaf calls it an “annual trophy” and expressly says that winning it added the trophy to a club’s “list of trophies.” Those sources are directly relevant; they cannot reasonably be dismissed merely because neither organization operates the competition.

Therefore, I am not proposing that Wikipedia describe Campeones Cup as FIFA-sanctioned or Concacaf-sanctioned without evidence. The proposal is much narrower: the absence of FIFA/Concacaf organization or sanctioning should not automatically transform a competitive trophy into an unofficial honour when the available evidence shows MLS and Liga MX organizing it as a competition between their champions, FIFA referring to its winner as champion and its prize as a trophy, Concacaf calling it an annual trophy and explicitly adding it to a club’s list of trophies, Concacaf participating in the appointment of officials, and RSSSF recording it as an international club tournament with an established palmarès. On the totality of that evidence, I think there is a strong case for treating Campeones Cup as a competitive club honour and therefore including it in the honours of players who won it, including Lionel Messi’s 2026 title. Most importantly, if there is a FIFA or Concacaf statement or regulation explicitly saying “Campeones Cup is unofficial,” “Campeones Cup is not recognized as an official title,” or that its winners cannot count it as a competitive honour, then that primary evidence should absolutely be produced and would materially change this discussion. But unless such primary source evidence exists, Wikipedia should not state or imply that this is FIFA’s or Concacaf’s position when neither governing body appears to have actually said it—and when their own published language regarding the trophy points in a materially different direction.

Ljk20 (talk) 00:23, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

I doubt many people read this all the first time, no idea why you posted it again. Spike 'em (talk) 20:04, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

I reposted it just to make sure it was accessible, because I genuinely think the argument is worth reading. I also still have faith in humanity’s ability to make it through a developed argument supported by primary sources 😂 Maybe I’m an optimist, but I’ll take my chances. Ljk20 (talk) 20:36, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

I agree with Spike 'em and GiantSnowman above, this is way too long to read. Nehme1499 (talk) 21:11, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

I would like to raise whether Campeones Cup should be included among a player’s competitive honours rather than relegated to a note. The key distinction is that “not organized or sanctioned by FIFA/Concacaf” is not the same claim as “FIFA/Concacaf do not recognize the trophy as official,” and I have found no primary FIFA or Concacaf statement or regulation saying Campeones Cup is “unofficial,” “not recognized,” or cannot count as a competitive honour. In fact, the primary evidence points in the opposite direction: FIFA covered the competition as “One game. One champion. One cup,” identified Atlanta United as the winner and called its victory a “trophy”; Concacaf itself calls Campeones Cup an “annual trophy” between the reigning MLS and Liga MX champions and later described Toluca as having “added the Campeones Cup to its latest list of trophies.” Concacaf has also participated in appointing match officials, while RSSSF records Campeones Cup as an international club tournament with a formal list of champions rather than treating it as a friendly. Structurally, it is a recurring cross-border inter-league super cup for which qualification is earned by becoming champion, not an invitational exhibition.

Nor does the fact that it is not FIFA-organized automatically make the resulting honour unofficial: FIFA itself includes trophies it does not organize, such as the FA Community Shield, in players’ trophy records. The fact that Campeones Cup is cross-border does not change that principle unless a FIFA or Concacaf regulation actually establishes that an inter-league super cup must be sanctioned by the confederation before its trophy can constitute an official honour. I am not arguing that Wikipedia should call Campeones Cup “FIFA-sanctioned” or “Concacaf-sanctioned”; I am arguing that lack of sanctioning should not be converted into the much stronger claim that FIFA or Concacaf considers the trophy unofficial without a primary source establishing that position. If such a FIFA or Concacaf statement exists, it should be produced and would materially change the discussion; absent that, the available primary evidence repeatedly calls it a cup, championship and trophy and even places it on a winning club’s “list of trophies.” For the sources, quotations, comparisons and fuller reasoning behind these points, please see the more detailed argument above. Ljk20 (talk) 21:40, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

stop it: no one can be arsed to read this seeming ai slop in multiple sections. Spike 'em (talk) 22:17, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

I do apologize that my writing style is not to your preference, I was just trying to make it clear and as well written as I possibly could. Anyways, thank you for taking the time to write a comment!🙂 Ljk20 (talk) 23:29, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

WP:TLDR. And feels like AI wrote that. Kante4 (talk) 21:41, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

It did not, I actually put a lot of time and research into it, but I appreciate the compliment I guess😂. I suppose I just had a little too much faith in Wikipedia editors’ willingness to read a developed argument with primary-source support, but I guess I’m learning. Ljk20 (talk) 21:49, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

In as short as I possibly can, lack of FIFA/Concacaf sanctioning/organization does not itself make a trophy unofficial, and no primary source from either body states that Campeones Cup is unofficial. Their own publications actually recognize it as a cup and trophy, while independent records treat it as a competitive tournament. The full sourcing and reasoning are in my longer argument above. Ljk20 (talk) 22:00, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello! You didn't have to open a new section, when there is already one...now, regarding your argument, since you will be convinced FIFA doesn't consider Campeones Cup official only if there is a publication from CONCACAF or FIFA, how about asking FIFA (they have a form for contact)? Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 23:04, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello! I have done so, to no avail so far, which isn’t a surprise either, but I’ll definitely let you know if I do get a response! Feel free to reach out on your own accord as well! I also want to clarify that I’m not convinced of anything; neither FIFA nor Concacaf have claimed the trophy as unofficial, so I’m simply trying to follow what the available primary sources actually establish rather than assume a status that hasn’t been stated. If either organization provides a definitive clarification, I’d be more than happy to go by that. Until then, evidence points towards them acknowledging it and treating it as a competitive super cup trophy which counts in the honors of the team and their respective players. Ljk20 (talk) 23:24, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello! The reason it is not considered official by FIFA is because it is not sanctioned by CONCACAF. You can also contact CONCACAF by telephone. Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 12:13, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

This is true, however it’s been established that a tournament does not need to be sanctioned by Concacaf for them to deem it as official. They consider MLS Cup official, but they do not sanction it, as it is not a Concacaf tournament. Campeones Cup is not a Concacaf tournament either, it is an inter-league super cup deemed official by the leagues that run it. The primary source evidence shows that Concacaf consider Campeones Cup official as well, as they’ve consistently referred to it as a “trophy” with the winning team adding it to its list of trophies, even though they don’t sanction it, which makes sense given it’s not a Concacaf tournament. Sanctioning and considering a tournament unofficial are not the same, I believe that’s the core of the misunderstanding here. If it were true, the far majority of tournaments would not be considered official, as there are many domestic and inter-league tournaments not sanctioned by fifa or the continental governing body, which makes sense given they don’t run them. Ljk20 (talk) 13:21, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

I have merged this into the first discussion. @Ljk20: Please stop being disruptive. C679 16:28, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

I apologize, that was not my intention. Ljk20 (talk) 17:45, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello, this discussion led me here; I would like to give my opinion again as I shared there.

The Campeones Cup is an official match; the level of competition in this match can be seen from the fact that each team puts its best players into play and tries hard to win the trophy. I haven't found any information from either CONCACAF or FIFA that the trophy or competition is not officially recognized. Sources from CONCACAF (, ) considered the Campeones Cup as an official club competition, and FIFA reports on the 2019 Campeones Cup and calls it "Concacaf's Campeones Cup". Naturally, I support including this title in the honours section. Annh07 (talk) 01:22, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Agree as well. It is an official trophy for two professional leagues and the FIFA/CONCACAF have not issued a statement against them. The CONCACAF sources shared above are good to show this should be okay including. Morogris (✉ • ✎) 02:09, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

I agree as well. The CONCACAF sources shared above make a strong case for including it, and neither FIFA nor CONCACAF deems the competition unofficial. It’s essentially an interleague Super Cup officially run by the two leagues, MLS and Liga MX, as an official competition, just like any other Super Cup. CONMEBOL and Copa América even made a post on instagram after Inter Miami won it recognizing the Campeones Cup as another title for the club. Here’s a great source explaining it as well.

https://en.as.com/soccer/inter-miami-vs-cruz-azul-is-the-campeones-cup-an-official-concacaf-tournament-f202609-n/ Ljk20 (talk) 03:12, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

As I can see, this discussion has been going on for more than two weeks now, and the majority of people support including this trophy. So, if no other convincing arguments against this are raised, I think we have come to a consensus on this. Annh07 (talk) 08:31, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Courtney Meppen-Walter

Does anyone know good statistics checks for English non-league? I always thought that Soccerbase was comprehensive at least down to 5th and 6th tier, but with this player there is no record for 2015-16 when he definitely played in the Conference North for Chorley . His statistics on Soccerbase in the Conference North are far below what is claimed on Wikipedia, either we're wrong or it is woefully uncomprehensive at that level. Unknown Temptation (talk) 21:47, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Soccerbase is not accurate for the sixth tier and is shaky on the fifth tier. I would trust Wikipedia's 10 appearances and 1 goal over Soccerbase's 0 appearances and 1 goal in this instance. Soccerway shows 1 appearance and 1 goal, which is also highly dubious. Transfermarkt has 10 appearances and 1 goal, with full team line ups, goal times, substitution times etc. However, Soccerbase and Soccerway are considered reliable sources, whereas Transfermarkt is not considered a reliable source and cannot be used as a reference. Soccerbase and Soccerway are clearly 100% factually wrong with Courtney Meppen-Walter, so don't cite them just because they are the only ones permitted. EchetusXe 08:59, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

In this case, should we be showing any totals if we can't reliability source them? Spike 'em (talk) 12:24, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

I agree with Spike'em. Where have the statistics come from? If Ashton United is blank because nothing was found, technically we've not found anything for the other non-league clubs. Unknown Temptation (talk) 13:22, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

The appropriate editions of the annual Non-League Club Directory book would have this info but unfortunately the most recent edition I own is from 2011.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:02, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Poor editing by MiaSanMiaRossoneri

Over the past few days, MiaSanMiaRossoneri has been making some standard edits, mainly to player infoboxes and leads. While most edits are fine, they have also been making the following edits: (adding the hlist template to the positions in the infobox, even though it's not necessary), (adding non-Latin script names to the infobox), (violation of MOS:GEOLINK). These are just a few examples.

I have tried to engage with them multiple times through their talk page, but have not received any response. Nehme1499 (talk) 13:54, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

I have stopped adding non-Latin script names to the infobox as you wish so bad, the edits I have made are merely to correct the spellings, add comas, and put proper grammar on those pages I do edit. MiaSanMiaRossoneri (talk) 16:20, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

You kept adding the hlist template despite me telling you (twice) that it is not necessary, as the infobox automatically deals with it. Nehme1499 (talk) 16:52, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

my bad, understood and won’t happen again MiaSanMiaRossoneri (talk) 16:54, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Giovanni Reyna § Requested move 30 September 2026

An editor has requested that Giovanni Reyna be moved to Gio Reyna, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. Raskuly 🐰 15:46, 30 September 2026 (UTC)
(Notification provided by Move+)

Requested move at Talk:Andre Fortune II § Requested move 29 September 2026

An editor has requested that Andre Fortune II be moved to Dre Fortune, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. Raskuly 🐰 15:46, 30 September 2026 (UTC)
(Notification provided by Move+)

Fábio

Hello! How can we find a newer photo for Fábio? He has one from 2009. Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 16:03, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

How do I use template:Football box in other language wikis?

I wanted to use template:Football box in Kannada wiki, but unable to do so and it is prompting me to create a template on my own, wondering if there's an alternative work around. Footy2000♡ (🗨) 21:32, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

This should be the correct template in Kannada wiki. Nehme1499 (talk) 00:33, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Question

Please what is the order regarding national team results for matches that ends in a draw after regulation time on the results box?

Do we classify it as a win or loss if the team losses or wins the game after extra time, penalties? or is it regarded as a draw nevertheless? Jô^hola 03:28, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Standard statistical convention is to consider a match decided in extra time as a win/loss. A match which is decided after a penalty shootout is considered a draw. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 04:43, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Agreed. The penalty shootout is officially not part of the match but used only to determine which team progresses to the next round (or wins the trophy) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:33, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Agreed. Related, in 2021 Man City & Opta had a disagreement about this after City claimed that shootout wins should count towards Guardiola's victory tally (). Potentially something to watch out for when clubs release their own statistics. Timmeh59 (tlk | cntrbs) 08:50, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

FAR notice

I have nominated Chelsea F.C. for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria, or help improve the article. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regard to the article's featured status (see review instructions). ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:34, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Resolved the recently added citation needed notice, will work away on the other nine. If anyone notices anything not cited tag it and I'll have a look. DUCKISJAMMMY🦁✿(talk) 00:08, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

Started a table on the talk page regarding resolving the citations. Is historicalkits.co.uk considered a reliable source? DUCKISJAMMMY🦁✿(talk) 02:36, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

It's mentioned in the source list: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football/Links#Football_kits. Timmeh59 (tlk | cntrbs) 13:26, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

Had forgotten about that list during my years away, thanks. Nine of the ten CN notices are now resolved. As I said prior, if anyone spots any unsourced claims, please tag them and I’ll try to help with the sourcing. DUCKISJAMMMY🦁✿(talk) 14:23, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Mohamed Abdel Salam (footballer)#Requested move 4 October 2026

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mohamed Abdel Salam (footballer)#Requested move 4 October 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ~2026-53300-26 (talk) 14:06, 4 October 2026 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Mohamed Abdallah#Requested move 4 October 2026

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mohamed Abdallah#Requested move 4 October 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ~2026-53300-26 (talk) 14:14, 4 October 2026 (UTC)

FIFA or FA recognized matches?

Hello! What do we use in the footballer's infobox and career section: FIFA recognized matches or the ones the respective Football Association (FA) deem as official when FIFA recognizes more matches than the ones FA does? The dispute is about this. P.S. Ping to Issue0501, and also to GiantSnowman, Robby.is.on, Mattythewhite, Bakermannn, Mediocre Legacy, OrdinaryOtter, Spike 'em and Nehme1499. Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 07:19, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

FIFA now has a list of all recognized international matches. (men, women) Shouldn’t statistics such as First international, Biggest win, and Biggest defeat be based on those records, or at least distinguish between official and unofficial matches? Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 11:26, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

Hello! Yes, they should be based on those records, at least in my opinion. Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 12:57, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

The websites you link, while interesting, are missing some games (especially historical games). There is a note on the bottom stating: Match data varies in detail. Some records are more complete than others, based on what's currently available. FIFA is adding more data over time. Check back for updates. So I wouldn't treat FIFA stats such as this and this as the gospel, as FIFA can also make mistakes, omissions, typos etc...

Generally, I would prefer the respective FA's statistics where available, especially if they provide match-by-match records. An FA may have historical matches that FIFA does not, and FIFA not having a match in its database does not make it unofficial. We also don't necessarily need to follow FIFA's definition of an "official" match; not being played during a FIFA window or not counting for FIFA rankings does not automatically mean it should be excluded from Wikipedia's statistics. Nehme1499 (talk) 13:46, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: Hello! But in the lists, for the records, we use only FIFA-recognized matches, shouldn't this also be reflected on the footballers' page, especially when FIFA recognizes more matches than the FA does? If it was the other way around, we would have the FA's total matches in the infobox and the international career section with a note of the type "the X matches are not recognized by FIFA", why shouldn't we have a note "the X matches are not recognized by the relevant FA, but they are by FIFA" when FIFA recognizes more matches than the FA does? Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 14:27, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

How do we know what matches FIFA recognizes? As mentioned above, their website is still incomplete, so we don't have a comprehensive list of FIFA-recognized matches (especially for historical matches). Nehme1499 (talk) 14:43, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

I get some of the ambiguity. This is an issue that comes up in CONCACAF a lot, as there are six teams that are CONCACAF members that aren't FIFA members (Bonaire, French Guinea, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Saint Martin, and Sint Maarten), but especially Guadeloupe and Martinique who regularly qualify for the continental tournament. You get CONCACAF matches playing in official tournaments against a non-FIFA team. FIFA defines official matches as 'Tournament qualifying and proper matches' for cap-tying purposes, but these are non-FIFA teams.So is an unofficial team in an official game an official or unofficial match? RedPatch (talk) 16:11, 7 October 2026 (UTC)