Jump to content

Talk:Real Madrid CF/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Why are all English Real Madrid articles biased, mentioning false political connections or divides between sets of fans?

I ignore who did you get your history from, probably some Barcelona propaganda, but there is a bias and total inaccuracies in the main article and both rivalries' articles. I am from Madrid and have been living here 24 years now and I have read quite much about Real Madrid history (the club I support) and Spanish football history in general.

-The identification of Real Madrid as the establishment club is false. Even more if we are comparing both Madrid clubs. Let me remind you some facts. In the 1930s Real Madrid was one of the best clubs in Spain, and enjoyed wide support, especially from the left and the working class in Madrid. The purple band in its crest was introduces in 1931 (as they lost their royal title and the crown) as a reference to the II Republic (whose flag was red-yellow-purple, as opposed to the red-yellow-red, as a reference to the Comuneros, who rebelled against Charles I and V of Germany in the 16th century). This symbol persisted under the Franco regime due to utter ignorance. In the 1930s Real Madrid had players from all over Spain, including Catalonia, and, most notably the Basque country. Among their best players were the Regueiro brothers, one of them was the captain of the Basque national team that toured Europe and America during the Spanish Civil War, and who was proud to be a Basque. Juan Negrín's son (a prominent Socialist politician and prime minister of the Republic during the Civil War) played in their newly created basketball team. Rafael Sánchez Guerra, Real Madrid president from 1935 to 1936 exiled and was later imprisoned by the Franco regime. Furthermore, during the Civil War, the club was seized by the Popular Front. A newspaper (Informaciones) stated:

” …Un club democrático como el MADRID, con un plantel de socios netamente republicanos de izquierda, no podía temer nada. La Deportiva Obrera, que tiene un gran concepto de los principios deportivos, encontró justos los razonamientos de algunos socios, y juntos concibieron un plan que ha sido puesto en práctica y aprobado sin excepción alguna, por todos los sectores deportivos de Madrid. Reunidos socios del MADRID y directivos de la Federación Obrera acordaron designar un comité directivo que sustituya a la actual junta directiva (…)”

Which translates: "A democratic club like Madrid, with mostly leftist republican members, could not fear anything. The Workers' Sport Association, that has a great concept of the sports principles, found fair the reasoning of some members, and both conceived a plan that was unanimously approved by all the sports sectors of Madrid. In a meeting of Madrid members and officials of the Workers' Association, they agreed to name a comittee that substitues the current board of directors".

A communist colonel was a bit later Real Madrid president.

On the other hand, Atlético had been relegated after the last season before the Civil War (1935/36), but appeared in 1st Division in the first league of the Franco regime after winning a play-off because Oviedo could not play this season as their stadium had been destroyed during the war. They were merged with Aviación Nacional from Zaragoza (thus being renamed Atlético Aviación) and went on two win the first two leagues under Franco.

-The FC Barcelona propaganda which has caused this perception tries to rewrite history as a series of events where they are always the victims of the Franco regime and is full of contradictions. When they talk about the 11-1 of the 1942/43 Cup semifinals, they purposedly ignore that Real Madrid eventually lost the final against Athletic Bilbao, and even worse, that 1940-1953 (the harshest years of the francoist regime) where the worst years of the history of the Madrid club, winning only 1 Cup and finishing as low as 11th, avoiding the relegation play-off in the last game. They ignore the unfair referee decisions in both legs of the Real Madrid-Barcelona 1961/62 European Cup eighthfinals, but accuse Real Madrid of winning European Cups thanks to Franco. They also ignore that important people of FC Barcelona also enjoyed good relationships with the regime (who didn't then?), condecorated Franco and were favoured when selling their old Les Corts ground. They not only rewrite football history. The portrayal of Madrid as a francoist city is totally false and unfair, as this city suffered the most during the war. The Battle of Madrid was the only one Franco lost and the city was under siege during two years.

-Therefore, please eliminate that total junk of Real Madrid representing the political right and centralised state and Barcelona the political left. FC Barcelona can arguably represent Catalan identity, but Catalan nationalism includes very notably (and actually was created by) the Catalan burgeosie, which is traditionally right-wing. Real Madrid does not represent any political group, and history tells us that it leaned quite more towards the left.

-The socio-economic and political divide between Real Madrid and Atlético fans claimed in the article does not exist nowadays, and has never existed (and if it has, the other way round). We leave mixing sport with politics to Glasgow, and to a lesser extent, Barcelona. The North-South geographical divide is also completely untrue. It is true that Atlético enjoys more support in the neighbourhood near their current home, which is indeed by the river and South (but not very far from the centre), but it is not so in other Southern (and more working class) districts. It is also true, nevertheless, that they also enjoy more support than average in the area around their previous venue, Estadio Metropolitano, in the North-West, near the Ciudad Universitaria. Anyway, both clubs enjoy support in all parts of the city and the region.

Maki87 (talk) 00:35, 24 December 2011 (UTC)Maki87

I have one thing to say to this: [Citation needed]. No offence intended. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:42, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
Exactly. If Maki87 is right then the above would make a relevant and interesting counter-argument and would help maintain NPOV. Longwayround (talk) 16:54, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
Maki87, If you have references that what you typed is true then feel free to change some of the main article up, im a RM supporter as well and I dont know everything about the club and its always nice knowing new information. About the 11-1, I do beleive Barcelona fans did make up or fabricate some part of what happend that night, in my honest opinion I dont think Franco or his regime had anything to do with it, ive read several differnt theorys stating that, he went to congratulate barcelona, his regime threatend them, he threatend them. After doing so much reading NO BODY knows the truth. Maybe the actual players that where there but in fact two Barcelona players even admitted Franco nor his regime even showed up to the locker room. "and on 13 June 1943 Madrid beat Barcelona 11–1 in the second leg of a semi-final of the Copa del Generalísimo, the Copa del Rey having been renamed in honour of General Franco. It has been suggested that players were intimidated by police, including by the director of state security who "allegedly told the team that some of them were only playing because of the regime's generosity in permitting them to remain in the country."The Barcelona chairman, Enric Piñeyro, was assaulted by Madrid fans." I think that after reading this, its a biased thing to type. After doing some research on the author who claims all this is true Paco Aguilar, I found out that he is in fact a Barcelona supporter and I feel that he is trying to diminish Real Madrid and make it seem like Barcelona are the victims. Of course a Barcelona supporter would say all that. Arrogance. RealCowboys (talk) 05:12, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Can I use references from this article?

http://real.theoffside.com/editorialopinion/whiter-than-you-think-a-history-lesson.html Or is it a self entry as well -___- RealCowboys (talk) 05:24, 29 December 2011 (UTC) Im talking about the 11-1 section RealCowboys (talk) 05:25, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

No!No. It's a blog. Read WP:RS. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:15, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

calm your self boy RealCowboys (talk) 07:28, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I am quite calm, thanks. It's simply a statement. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 08:01, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

You didnt have to put emphases on the "No!" thats not a statement. RealCowboys (talk) 08:25, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry if that offended you. It was meant to be emphatic but not excited. The first edit on your talk page, your welcome message, included a link to WP:RS. I take it though that you haven't read it. if you had, you would have seen that blogs are not permitted and so the question itself would not have been necessary. I suggest you check the "Policies and Guidelines" section on that welcome message. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 08:40, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Best Champion League Group Stage

Here is the link that verifies that im not lying

http://www.realmadrid.com/cs/Satellite/en/First_Team/1193040487651/1330074643183/noticia/Noticia/Real_Madrid_seal_record_run_in_UCL_group_stage_in_Amsterdam.htm

I dont know how to put references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RealCowboys (talk • contribs) 08:45, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

The first edit on your talk page was a welcome message. That welcome message is divided into several sections. One section is titled "Policies and Guidelines". In that section is a link to an article titled "Citing sources". It links to Wikipedia:Citing sources. While we could probably help you reference material, it would be best if you learned on your own, particularly since citing references is a key element in being a good editor on Wikipedia. You may also want to look at template:cite web.
On a different tangent, don't take a citation needed tag as an indication that someone is calling you a liar. First, it breaks a fundamental principle, known as a pillar, of Wikipedia. That principle is assuming good faith in other editors. Second, it simply points-out that you missed adding a reference, and almost everything on Wikipedia needs a reliable source to prove that it's a valid statement. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 09:00, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Squad table format

A discussion is being held here on the possibility of rolling out a new squad template. The new template, named {{football squad player2}}, differs from the standard squad layout in several ways:

  • It features a sort function
  • Comes in a single column format that can be understood by screen readers.
    • Single column format ensures that low resolution browsers, including mobile devices, do not get part or all of the second column cut off.
    • Single column format ensures less clutter, particularly at lower resolutions, for wide sections such as the Arsenal loan section.
  • It gives nationality its own column; at present flags are featured in a blank, untitled column
  • It complies with Wikipedia's guidance on flag usage.
  • It leaves enough space to add images of current players, an example of which can be seen at Watford F.C#Current squad.

It is proposed that the new template be added to some of Wikipedia's most high-profile club articles, which might include Real Madrid CF. To give your thoughts, please read and contribute to the discussion above, as well as this one.

Regards, —WFC— 00:47, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

The football project is suggesting that all rosters move to that format. See WikiProject Football/Archive 62#Roster format. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:14, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

"Most successful Spanish club"

I note that there has been a bit of edit warring regarding describing RMCF as Spain's most successful club. This is a term that should be avoided as it is subjective. Please see the discussion here: [[1]] Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 10:33, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I can only emphasise that this is really important: we should avoid 'most successful'. See WP:SUBSTANTIATE for guidelines. The relevant section is worth including here:

Biased statements of opinion can only be presented with attribution. For instance, "John Doe is the best baseball player" expresses an opinion and cannot be asserted in Wikipedia as if it were a fact. It can be included as a factual statement about the opinion: "John Doe's baseball skills have been praised by baseball insiders such as Al Kaline and Joe Torre." Opinions must still be verifiable and appropriately cited. Another approach is to specify or substantiate the statement, by giving those details that actually are factual. For example: "John Doe had the highest batting average in the major leagues from 2003 through 2006." People may still argue over whether he was the best baseball player. But they will not argue over this.

--Pretty Green (talk) 10:41, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Pretty Green. Factual statements pointing out that 9 European Cups and 31 La Liga titles are records might be appropriate, provided that those facts are left to speak for themselves. —WFC— 11:00, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Both this article and Barca should not claim the term. Simply avoid the peacocking and report the record without adding terms like "most successful" or "among the most..." or any other similar statement. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:27, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

It is also factually wrong to lable Real Madrid as the most successful. In terms of league titles and CL they are without a doubt but not in terms of total trophies:

FC Barcelona have more official domestic trophies (La Liga (21) + Copa Del Rey (25) + Super Cup of Spain (10) + Copa Eva Duarte (3) (predecessor of the Super Cup of Spain and foundend organized and officially recognized by RFEF (Spanish Royal Football Federation) + Spanish League Cup (2) = 61 domestic trophies.

Real Madrid (La Liga (31) + Copa Del Rey (18) + Super Cup of Spain (8) + Copa Eva Duarte (1) (predecessor of the Super Cup of Spain and foundend organized and officially recognized by RFEF (Spanish Royal Football Federation) + Spanish League Cup (1) = 59 domestic trophies.

Barcelona have 15 international titles (The Intercities Fairs Cup is recognized as an predecessor of the UEFA CUP and also officially recognized by FIFA (see link: http://www.fifa.com/classicfootball/clubs/club=44217/index.html )

CL (4) + Cup Winners Cup (4) + Intercities Fairs Cup (3) + 4 European Super Cups (4) + 2 FIFA Club World Cup (2) = 17 trophies.

Real Madrid: CL (9) + UEFA CUP (2) + European Super Cup (1) + FIFA Club World Cup (3) = 15 trophies.

In total: 78 (FC Barcelona) and 74 (Real Madrid).

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 16:21, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Please don't make this into another Real Madrid vs. Barca war. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 16:24, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
I agree with waffles, here is a link http://www.realmadrid.com/cs/Satellite/en/Club/1193041516802/PalmaresTotal/Honours.htm that shows how many trophies RM has to date. SO far 100. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RealCowboys (talk • contribs) 16:50, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Stop trying to make this into Barca vs. Real Madrid! Your're not agreeing with me at all. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 17:55, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Those are unofficial trophies. Barcelona have won more official and unofficial trophies.

FC Barcelona have 112 unofficial trophies, so still more than Real Madrid if all trophies are included (which they should not be since only official trophies (meaning trophies recognized by RFEF, UEFA and FIFA) should be included)

http://www.fcbarcelona.com/football/detail/card/honours-football

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 16:57, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

The only problems are that 1) "official" and "unofficial" are subjective terms and 2) the reference you offer doesn't address Real Madrid. I think we should put all of this strutting around between Barca and Real to bed and simply list the number of achievements rather than comparing. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:23, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Walter it is pretty simple. If a certain trophy is recognized by either RFEF, UEFA or FIFA it is official. Otherwise not. So there is a criteria. But I agree that it is better just to list the trophies.--Suitcivil133 (talk) 17:54, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

If User:Suitcivil133 agrees with this, why have they reinstated the 'most successful' term on the FC Barcelona article? I have, of course, rolled this back. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 22:17, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

There is a difference between saying the most successful club and saying the most successful club in terms of number of official trophies won. This has nothing to do with POV. What I did agree with was that one should not write most successful without giving more details (for example using the term "most successful in terms of number of official trophies won" etc.)--Suitcivil133 (talk) 00:19, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

No. One should not write "most successful" without a reference that states exactly that. It breaks WP:NOR and offends WP:NPOV. Imposed both here and on the Barca article. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:46, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Exactly. We can say that a club has won the most La Liga titles, European Cups, etc. But the word "successful" is subjective. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 09:47, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I have provided sufficient references now. Please do not engage in further edits or reverts that will result in a warning for you. Seaboy123 (talk) 00:28, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you have given a good reference. Thanks. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:40, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
None of the three references provided for this incessant 'most successful' text are sufficient. The refs from sportspundit.com and nickbrammer.com are not reliable sources, and the bleacherreport.com ref is out of date as it is from Nov 2010, since when both Barca and Real Madrid have won more competitions. This 'most successful' tag remain subjective and POV and should be replaced by a list of number of trophies won, and whether any of these are records. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 08:29, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Sorry. Was the double negative intentional? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:16, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Is there a double negative? Let me know what's ambiguous and I'll attempt to clarify! Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 15:50, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Sorry I read it as "None of the three ... are not reliable sources". Now that that's settled, why do feel that bleacherreport.com is not sufficient? Since it's from 2010 it can be worded, "As of 2010". The other two: http://www.sportspundit.com/about-us indicates that the "pundits" are fans so obviously not a WP:RS. http://nickbrammer.com/ is a fan site and it's scary to the point that if you leave the page it throws-up a Javascript alert and then an advertisement when you choose to leave. It should be blacklisted. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:08, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
The thing is, since 2010 both Barcelona and Real Madrid have won further competitions. You'd have to say something like "in 2010 Real Madrid were described as the most successful club..." which doesn't look that great. I am yet to be convinced of a more accurate and NPOV way of reflecting the info other than listing how many of each title RMCF (and FCB on their article) have won, and whether any of these figures are a record. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 16:22, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
That's not POV. If you state "As of 2010" and reference it, it's quite reliable. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:42, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

blog in the references

Where did you see any blog in the references? There are no personal blogs. All are dedicated sport websites.Seaboy123 (talk) 05:50, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

From what I can tell, http://bleacherreport.com/articles/510011-world-football-the-11-most-successful-european-clubs-in-history/page/12 is a blog. http://bleacherreport.com/team does not list the author of the article. http://bleacherreport.com/about makes it seem as though not all editors are professional. Shall we take it to WP:RS? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:31, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Well, it depends on what you can call blog and what you cannot. I think its a good idea to take it to WP:RS.Seaboy123 (talk) 20:30, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
A certain, new editor seems to think they're not reliable. Anyone care to counter his argument at revision 473214625? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:58, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
We need more views and opinions. Which editor thought so? And, we need to stop User: Crashweelx from disruptive ending. He is not listening.--Seaboy123 (talk) 03:06, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
You answered your own question. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:22, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Those are not Spanish sources nor are they reliable sources. First of all they do not include the Copa Eva Duarte (the predecessor of the current Spanish Super Cup( which was founded and organized by RFEF and the Inter-Cities Fairs Cup which is acknowledged by UEFA as being the predecessor of the UEFA Cup and moreover is recgonized by FIFA (included as major trophy by FIFA in their club profile of FC Barcelona).

Second of all FC Barcelona have won more domestic, international and overall trophies. Barcelona have won 21 league trophies, a record 25 Copa del Rey trophies, a record 10 Spanish Super Cup titles, a record 2 League Cup trophies and a record 3 Copa Eva Duarte trophies. In total 61 domestic trophies. All those mentioned trophies have been founded and organized by RFEF (The Spanish Royal Football Federation) and a regarded as official.

Real Madrid on the other hand have won a record 31 league titles, 18 Copa Del Rey trophies, 8 Spanish Super Cup trophies, 1 League Cup and 1 Copa Eva Duarte Cup. In total 59 domestic trophies.

AND even if we do not include the Copa Eva Duarte (Which should be included since it is an official tournament founded and organized by RFEF and the predecessor of the currrent Spanish Super Cup) Barcelona would still lead 59 to 58 in terms of domestic titles.

In terms of international titles Barcelona have won 4 CL, a record 4 Cup Winners Cup, 4 European Super Cups, a record two FIFA Club World Cups and 3 Inter-Cities (recognized by UEFA as the predecessor of the UEFA Cup and recognized by FIFA)

In total 17 international titles.

Real Madrid have won a record 9 CL/European Cups, 3 International Cups, 2 UEFA Cups and 1 European Cups. In total 15 international trophies.

Overall it is 78-74 in Barcelonas favour and even if the Fairs Cup is excluded Barcelona would lead 75-74.


Moreover I know some of the writers on Blachereport. This is by no means any serious paper but a page where everyone interested in football can contribute to. I happen to know one writer from Blachereport, whose name is Manuel Traquente. He is active on a FC Barcelona forum called barcaforum.com and he is not even 18 yet. This is by no means an reliable source to use. --Crashwheelx (talk) 16:14, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Absurd edit warning when rightly trying to remove false information

Those are not Spanish sources nor are they reliable sources. First of all they do not include the Copa Eva Duarte (the predecessor of the current Spanish Super Cup( which was founded and organized by RFEF and the Inter-Cities Fairs Cup which is acknowledged by UEFA as being the predecessor of the UEFA Cup and moreover is recgonized by FIFA (included as major trophy by FIFA in their club profile of FC Barcelona).

Second of all FC Barcelona have won more domestic, international and overall trophies. Barcelona have won 21 league trophies, a record 25 Copa del Rey trophies, a record 10 Spanish Super Cup titles, a record 2 League Cup trophies and a record 3 Copa Eva Duarte trophies. In total 61 domestic trophies. All those mentioned trophies have been founded and organized by RFEF (The Spanish Royal Football Federation) and a regarded as official.

Real Madrid on the other hand have won a record 31 league titles, 18 Copa Del Rey trophies, 8 Spanish Super Cup trophies, 1 League Cup and 1 Copa Eva Duarte Cup. In total 59 domestic trophies.

AND even if we do not include the Copa Eva Duarte (Which should be included since it is an official tournament founded and organized by RFEF and the predecessor of the currrent Spanish Super Cup) RM would still not lead in terms of total number of trophies (58-58) when it comes to domestic titles.

In terms of international titles Barcelona have won 4 CL, a record 4 Cup Winners Cup, 4 European Super Cups, a record two FIFA Club World Cups and 3 Inter-Cities (recognized by UEFA as the predecessor of the UEFA Cup and recognized by FIFA)

In total 17 international titles.

Real Madrid have won a record 9 CL/European Cups, 3 International Cups, 2 UEFA Cups and 1 European Cups. In total 15 international trophies.

Overall it is 78-74 in Barcelonas favour and even if the Fairs Cup is excluded Barcelona would lead 75-74.

Moreover I know some of the writers on Blachereport. This is by no means any serious paper but a page where everyone interested in football can contribute to. I happen to know one writer from Blachereport, whose name is Manuel Traquente. He is active on a FC Barcelona forum called barcaforum.com and he is not even 18 yet. This is by no means an reliable source to use.

This must be removed and replaced by the reliable sources/references used by the Spanish and Catalan Wikipedia pages that CLEARLY states that FC Barcelona have won more domestic, international and thus why oerall trophies.! --Crashwheelx (talk) 17:00, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I fully agree with Crashwheel.

The references used to claim that RM is the most successful club in Spain are now outdated. FC Barcelona have the most domestic and international titles also according to the sources used on this page.


http://bleacherreport.com/articles/510011-world-football-the-11-most-successful-european-clubs-in-history/page/12

Moreover it is absurd to use an unreliable source such as a blog by a featured columnists that dates back to November 2010. In the meantime FC Barcelona have won 5 trophies while Real Madrid only have won 1!

According to that article FC Barcelona had 70 titles as of November 2010 while Real Madrid had 72 titles as of November 2010. Since that time until today, January 26th 2012 FC Barcelona have won 5 more trophies (The 2011-2012 league title, CL 2011, Spanish Super Cup 2011, European Super Cup 2011 and FIFA Club World Cup 2011) while Real Madrid only won a Copa Del Rey (2011) title last season.

Conclusion: FC Barcelona have won 70 + 5 = 75 trophies while Real Madrid have won 72 + 1 = 73 trophies as of January 26th 2012 ACCORDING to that source that is used to falsely prove the opposite, that Real Madrid in fact are the more successful team.


http://www.sportspundit.com/soccer/articles/6308-top-10-most-successful-clubs-in-the-world

Also this source used from another absurd blog that states a club such as FC Porto is more successful than AC Milan, Liverpool and Manchester United! Moreover the “article” was published in December 2010. In the meantime FC Barcelona have won 5 more trophies while Real Madrid have only won 1.

If we include those 5 trophies FC Barcelona has won in the meantime and the single trophy Real Madrid have won since December 2010 then FC Barcelona is the most successful club according to that exact “article” that claims that Real Madrid is the most successful club! It is absurd that such source/references have been allowed to be used as evidence!

Real Madrid: “• La Liga - 31 • Copa del Rey - 17 • League Cup - One • Spanish Super Cup - Eight • European Cup/Champions League - Nine • UEFA Cup/Europa League - Two • UEFA Super Cup - One • Intercontinental Cup – Three” FC Barcelona: • La Liga - 20 • Copa Del Rey - 25 • League Cup - Two • Spanish Super Cup - Nine • European Cup/Champions League - Three • Cup Winners’ Cup - Four • UEFA Cup/Europa League - Three • UEFA Super Cup - Three • Club World Cup – One As of January 26 2012 FC Barcelona have won 76 trophies that are included in that list. Real Madrid 73. Therefore this source states that FC Barcelona is the most successful not the other way around! Absurd.

http://nickbrammer.com/9534/real-madrid-the-most-successful-team-ever/

The last above “source/reference” used has nothing to do with titles but economy as seen by the link (if one actually reads it)

Therefore this false statement must be removed immediately since it is untrue and even the sources posted to claim otherwise are actually backing up FC Barcelonas claim not the other way around as I have figured out. Moreover both the Spanish and Catalan Wikipedia agree with me that FC Barcelona is the most successful club in Spain and the sources/references used to prove that are reliable and from major Spanish football newspapers. --Suitcivil133 (talk) 21:49, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

It's not false as per my comment above. Please don't upset the apple cart over a stupid phrase! Please seek consensus when changing contentious issues like this. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:57, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

What are you talking about Walter? I have proved that the two referecens used to claim that Real Madrid is the most successful are outdated and that FC Barcelona now leads in terms of domestic, international and overall trophies. Read my post and the sources and you will see that I am right. Just like the Spanish and Catalan Wikipedia page states.

Please do not identitfy my proof of Seaboys claim being wrong as vandalism when I have figured his untrue claims out!

I will contact and admin on this matter to proof that I am right as I have already done!--Suitcivil133 (talk) 22:02, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Please seek consensus before editing this hot-topic item. That's all I'm saying, and I reverted your edit (accidentally hit vandal, which it wasn't) and then removed the two items that were not WP:RS and indicated the time of the statement. Perhaps that will satisfy the rival Madrid and Barcelona fans for a while again. If not, we should remove all reference to the subject from both articles because it's bound to change annually. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:10, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

What I have proven is that the references used by Seaboy are outdated and now untrue as FC Barcelona have overtaken Real Madrid in terms of domestic, international and overall trophies. This claim is even backed up by the same references he has used to lable Real Madrid as the most succcessful club in Spain, as proven by my first message on this subject in the discussion page.

Not true. Real Madrid has 9 European Titles to Barcelona's 4. Domestically, Madrid have 31 La Liga titles to Barcelona's 21. FYI Seaboy123 (talk) 00:08, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

I am simply trying to remove false information which should be the duty of every Wikipedia contributor.

Moreover, Walter, the last reference you have left (reference 6 as of today, 27 January 2012) is already proven as outdated as seen by my first post if you read it.

"http://www.sportspundit.com/soccer/articles/6308-top-10-most-successful-clubs-in-the-world

Also this source used from another absurd blog that states a club such as FC Porto is more successful than AC Milan, Liverpool and Manchester United! Moreover the “article” was published in December 2010. In the meantime FC Barcelona have won 5 more trophies while Real Madrid have only won 1.

If we include those 5 trophies FC Barcelona has won in the meantime and the single trophy Real Madrid have won since December 2010 then FC Barcelona is the most successful club according to that exact “article” that claims that Real Madrid is the most successful club! It is absurd that such source/references have been allowed to be used as evidence!" --Suitcivil133 (talk) 23:04, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

The dated material is marked as such.
I'd like to hear from Madrid fans and wait for the blocked editor Crashwheelx to comment as well. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:25, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I do not agree with CrashwheelX. He is giving reasons like he knows spanish more than us to back up his claim? Thats more of putting your own WP:POV. While I had agreed about the Copa Eva Duarte to be included for a while, the reference provided by CrashWheelX made it clear that he was proving himself wrong as the Fifa link does not show Copa Eva as an official title. Also, my main point was and has always been regarding the Inter cities Fairs cup is: 'You cannot compare teams when some teams have played in a tournament and some have not. So I do not think it is right to include Inter cities fairs cup. Otherwise other teams will claim any other tournaments they have played where others have not! This will just be a mess. How can you compare Madrid or Bilbao with Barcelona if they did not even compete in that tournament? Its not that they did not qualified or anything, there were simply a handful of teams that participated there, does it mean we should compare teams based on that? Moreover, Copa Eva is not recognised by Fifa and Intercities not recognised by UEFA as you can clearly see here: http://en.archive.uefa.com/uefa/news/kind=1/newsid=2571.html and http://www.fifa.com/classicfootball/clubs/club=44217/index.html ( a quite reliable source which CLEARLY sums Barcelona's title tally to 7 ). If anyone can argue against this, make sure you come up with a valid and highly reliable source before you start a mess again. " Seaboy123 (talk) 23:58, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I just think we need to confirm fair records for the club, and compare them on the tournaments all of them have participated. What do you all think?Seaboy123 (talk)

I am pointing out Suitcivil's comment : "What I have proven is that the references used by Seaboy are outdated and now untrue as FC Barcelona have overtaken Real Madrid in terms of domestic, international and overall trophies. "

(edit conflict) Rather not do math each season as title counts change and then get into edit wars and accusations of original research. It would be best to find a RS and indicate the year it references if necessary. Besides, success can be measured in ways other than titles, most notably, total value of the club. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:12, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Not true. Real Madrid has 9 European Titles to Barcelona's 4. Domestically, Madrid have 31 La Liga titles to Barcelona's 21. FYI. So to claim they have overtaken internationally and domestically is absurd. At least the stats of the league titles dont say so. I am trying to be as neutral as possible here. I favour neither teams but Official Stats say that between the competitions where both played and was officially recognized, Real Madrid have the upper hand.Seaboy123 (talk) 00:11, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Using statements of "not true" is essentially calling an editor a liar. That's not civil. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:13, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Sorry about that. I simply saw a copule of exaggerated and desperate claims from Suitcivil so was quick in mentioning that. Not to mention he called my arguments untrue as well.Seaboy123 (talk) 00:19, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

But what is there to await Walter? Of course usually a consensus must be found among different parties but the evidence of it being an outdated reference is obvious for all. Not to mention the dubious quality of the references which were used to "prove" the initial claim correct.

About the only reference (reference 6 of today, 27th January 2012) that you for some reason have chosen to keep on the main page I have this to say: (which I pointed out in my initial post regarding this discussion)

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/510011-world-football-the-11-most-successful-european-clubs-in-history/page/12

We are talking about a unreliable source such as a subjective blog written by a featured columnist that dates back to November 2010. In the meantime FC Barcelona have won 5 trophies while Real Madrid only have won 1!

According to that article FC Barcelona had 70 titles as of November 2010 while Real Madrid had 72 titles as of November 2010. Since that time until today, January 27th 2012 FC Barcelona have won 5 more trophies (The 2011-2012 league title, CL 2011, Spanish Super Cup 2011, European Super Cup 2011 and FIFA Club World Cup 2011) while Real Madrid have won a Copa Del Rey (2011) title as their only title since the date of the “article” used (November 2010)

Conclusion: FC Barcelona have won 70 + 5 = 75 trophies while Real Madrid have won 72 + 1 = 73 trophies as of January 27th 2012 ACCORDING to that source that is used to falsely prove the opposite, that Real Madrid in fact are the more successful team which they are not anymore as of today as proven above.

Nobody, despite their loyalties, can logically oppose my view that the only reference left (number 6) is outdated and not correct anymore and therefore should not be used as an reliable/true reference.

I expect Crashwhel to agree with this as well. Everthing else would be strange considering his stance on this matter.--Suitcivil133 (talk) 00:17, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Seaboy: A consensus about which trophies should be considered official has been found months ago. Trophies recognized by either RFEF, UEFA or FIFA are official.

Moreover it those not matter whether FC Barcelona have played less seasons in the CL or whether Real Madrid have played less matches in the Cup Winners Cup or Inter-Cities Fairs Cup. That is not the fault of any of the two teams. Therefore you can not use an excuse such as the one you are trying to use (that RM has not participated in the Fairs Cup)--Suitcivil133 (talk) 00:17, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Seaboy: Stop claiming that you are an neutral in this debate which you are not. You clearly prefer Real Madrid. Moreover your are wrong. Copa Eva Duarte might not be included by FIFA but it is by RFEF which makes it an official trophy since it was founded and organized by RFEF.

Another point. You have already been found out. You have deliberately used outdated references that have a dubious quality and used them as a proof of your untrue claim. But I have quickly proven them wrong and as outdated.

And you are wrong. We are talking about the total amount of domestic, international and overall titles. Not which titles have a bigger importance or lesser. Such a debate can never be objective but merely listing the official trophies (recognized by RFEF, UEFA or FIFA) can.

Moreover both the Spanish and Catalan Wikipedia pages agree with me (and others) that FC Barcelona is the most successful Spanish football club in terms of domestic and official trophies. This is proven by the correct referecens that are used in both articles. Those references are not outdated as the ones you used by are from this season.--Suitcivil133 (talk) 00:23, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Please Be Cool and WP:Civil. Please try and understand the point here. I am not talking about less matches or seasons. Madrid did not compete at all in Intercities along with many other teams. The only teams that competed were Barcelona and Valencia. So thats not a trophy count we should put if 18 la liga teams did not play or enter any tournament at all. How can they be compared.Seaboy123 (talk) 00:27, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Besides, there's only one reference in the article now: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/510011-world-football-the-11-most-successful-european-clubs-in-history/page/12 which meets WP:RS and is not written as a blog. However, the most certain way to determine if it's a RS or not is to take the issue up at that page. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:35, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

I am as civil as I can be when somebody deliberately uses outdated sources to back and false claim up.

Once again. It is not the fault of either FCB or RM if one of them have competed more times in a particular tournament. This is not an logical excuse.

And even if we exclude the Fairs Cup (which is recognized by FIFA as an official trophy and acknowledged as being the predecessor of the UEFA CUP by UEFA and therefore should not be removed) FC Barcelona would still have won more trophies overall.

The fact still remains. Your initial references that were used to back your false claim of Real Madrid being the most successful club in terms of trophies have been proven wrong and as outdated. There is not anymore to say about this subject (the references used by you) as I view it.--Suitcivil133 (talk) 00:39, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Walter what is there to discuss yet again? I have already proven it as being an outdated source (from November 2010) and at that period of time the difference in terms of trophies was only 2 (72-70 in RM's favour) Since that time FCB have won 5 trophies and RM only 1. That makes it 75-73 in FCB's favour. Pretty simple in my opinion and that should also be the case with everybody else.--Suitcivil133 (talk) 00:39, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 00:39, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Quite some time and lengthy arguments made by you are focused on proving yourself right and others wrong. As of now, I do not see any references to back you up as I have made two clear references that includes/ does not include certain titles. You still are not disproving my argument with a reliable source that Should we compare records based on all the teams which have entered a specific tournament or include any tournament a particular club has entered and not others being compared have entered at all. Not convinced and actually having hard time what you are trying to convince as you are making huge claims, writing lot and providing no references. Until you provide some, I will halt my discussions for now.Seaboy123 (talk) 00:52, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
A small advice: do not cite wikipedia itself to back you claim. Both you and CrashwheelX have been repeatedly saying both Spanish and Catalan wikipedia agree with you, this is not allowed in wikipedia.Seaboy123 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:00, 27 January 2012 (UTC).
Let me restate my case. If you think it's not a reliable source, take it to WP:RS. If you think it's out-dated, add a date in the prose and leave it. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:01, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I have already proven that the references used by you are outdated and therefore not valid anymore. Moreover the last references still used on the main page (after the two other dubious references were removed due to being false and outdated) CLEARLY states that in November 2010 the difference in terms of overall trophies was 2 in RM's favour (72-70) But since that period (November 2010) Barcelona have won 5 trophies while RM only have won 1. Therefore, according to the last reference of yours still in use, FC Barcelona leads as of January 2012 with 75-73.

So you have been figured out. Interesting that your reference was fine when nobody saw that it was outdated but now when I have done so and proven it wrong it does not suit you anymore. I think I can imagine why that is....

You are still talking about RM not participating in Inter-Cities Fairs Cup. You need to understand that even if that trophy is excluded (which it should not be since it is recognized by FIFA) Barcelona would STILL lead in terms of total trophies. And yet again. It is not the fault of either teams if one of the clubs have participated in a certain tournament fewer teams. That is not a logical argument at all.

You are clouting at straws right now.

I have already proven that your references where wrong and outdated and that they in fact back my claim up. That FC Barcelona is the most successful Spanish football club. In fact this is also the view of the Spanish and Catalan Wikipedia pages and the referecens they use to back their claims up (not outdated references used by you).--Suitcivil133 (talk) 01:10, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

But Walter can you not see that the source you have left is outdated? Just LOOK at the date of the article, the differences between the number of won trophies by both clubs and then count the trophies won by FCB and RM since November 2010 and make a final count. How difficult can it be? You already removed the 2 untrue and outdated references why not the final one that is as much outdated and wrong as the two you have removed?

And yes you can bet I will contact the admins on this. It is absurd to leave the current reference since it is outdated and therefore not valid as of now, January 2012. A simple click on the reference would prove this. I do not understand why you ignore this. It is the duty of every Wikipedia editor to remove references that are outdated and therefore not correct anymore. You are not acting as a responsible editor right now when you refuse to delete the last and obvious and outdated reference--Suitcivil133 (talk) 01:10, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

You are free to contact the admins. However, if you engage in personal attacks, I can report you for attacking other editors. please go ahead and report admins. (a small hint: disproving /proving my references were outdated does not make your claims valid without any references from your side that clearly states your claim)Seaboy123 (talk) 01:21, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
For the umpteenth time, if we just list the number of times that a club has won various titles, and whether any of these numbers are records, then we are being accurate and NPOV. There is no need whatsoever to try and find ways of effectively saying that one club is 'better' or 'more successful' than the other and all this adding up of trophies, debating the validity of some of them, etc. becomes utterly unnecessary. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 09:45, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Seaboy you have been found out as a liar who deliberately uses outdated references from dubious blogs to back an untrue claim up. You are nobody to dictate what others should do or not.

Moreover your OWN sources now PROOF that FC Barcelona actually leads as I have already shown. If the outdated and untrue references you found days ago were fine then why are they not fine now when they show that FC Barcelona leads as of January 2012?

Interesting that your reference was fine when nobody saw that it was outdated but now when I have done so and proven it wrong it does not suit you anymore. I think I can imagine why that is. Your actions resemble an hypocrite not an editor who claims he is neutral.

And what is the point in keeping this reference and say RM was the most successful as of 2010? Maybe I should write that FC Barcelona was the most successful club as of 1952 or that Liverpool was the most succcessful club in England as of 1991. What is the point exactly?

And I have already posted the correct references used from the Spanish and Catalan Wikipedia pages. I can do it very quickly again if an admin asks me for it. So you have nothing to worry about. I have the proof on my hand while you invent claims that are outdated and now untrue. I will contact the admins later today when I get the time. You can be certain about this.--Suitcivil133 (talk) 11:36, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Real Madrid 11 - 1 Farcelona

As I see this will become a problem, I dont think its fair to have a reference written by an author that most likely is pro Farcelona. The truth is no one knows what happend. Ive heard that Franco, his regime, a supporter, the president threatend Barcelona from Culos, but on the other hand Ive heard that none of that actually happend and the whole "threatening" was a cover up to the humilation of 11-1. That reference to me is biased, User:Suitcivil133 is starting to be a pest. He feels the need to revert anything that offends Farcelona and to tarnish Real Madrids image. People like him need to be banned from wikipedia. RealCowboys (talk) 03:23, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

In 1943, Spain’s Cup semifinals, second leg. Real Madrid beats Barcelona by 11-1. Many of our enemies try to hide our spectacular victory against the Blaugrana team behind some poor allegations of being helped by General Franco’s government. For instance, they claim that some agents of the Guardia Civil threatened Barcelona’s players at half time for speaking in Catalan (a regional language spoken in north-east Spain), which was briefly forbidden after the Spanish civil war. Another version is that the officers who came into the visitor changing room gave the Barcelona players a harsh beating which left them in very poor shape. There’s another tale involving government representatives “persuading” the referee that Real should win the match.

The facts:

All these colorful stories can be easily refuted with verifiable data:

- The Guardia Civil agents that supposedly entered Barcelona’s changing room could not threaten them for speaking in Catalan, since the law banning its public use had been repealed in 1942, the match taking place in 1943.

- The main cause of Barcelona’s trashing could hardly be a beating by the police at half time, since at the end of the first half the score was already 8-0. In the second half, Real Madrid scored only three more goals, and Barcelona managed to score one.

- The only referee’s warning on record was a call for both teams for fair play. Taking a look at that era, the notion of Franco helping Real Madrid in its victories over his years of government in Spain emerges as certainly odd: while the General won the war in 1939, Real Madrid wasn’t able to grab a title or a cup until 1947, and didn’t win the league until 1954. Instead, during that same period, Barcelona and Athletic Bilbao, two of the clubs based in the supposedly most anti-Franco regions of Spain, were the clubs that won more titles (one League and four Cups for Bilbao and a whopping five leagues and four cups for Barcelona). Regarding the match this chapter deals with, one could hardly understand how Franco’s men could have helped Real Madrid win Barcelona 11-1 and let them lose the Cup final against Bilbao (0-1). Kind of a waste, huh?

Lastly, Bernardo Salazar, one of Spain’s most recognized sports historians (supporter of Real’s rival Atlético Madrid), has explained in one of his writings how two of Barcelona’s players in that game assured him they had never received any kind of pressure of the authorities in order to lose the match.

Those players are José Escolá, who played the 90 minutes that day, and Domingo Balmanya – very assiduous commentator on the media, hardly the secretive guy-, who didn’t play but was at Old Chamartín with his club mates.

The only true thing among this mish-mash of made-up tales is the infernal atmosphere created by the Whites’ fans (whistles were distributed among the spectators at the pitch’s entrance). This is quite understandable taking into account the first match circumstances, with two clearly illegal goals conceded to Barcelona and a valid goal taken from Madrid with the excuse that the first half was already over (though no one has heard the whistle). The public’s pressure in the second match, combined with Real Madrid’s impressive scoring ability resulted in a great match that to this day fills us with pride and stimulates the imagination of some in order to try and hide their shame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RealCowboys (talk • contribs) 03:30, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Do you have a reference? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:12, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
yup. RealCowboys (talk) 04:20, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Good. Then you add a section countering the referenced material. You don't remove the exiting material.
Oh, and name-calling is to be kept for the school yard, not Wikipedia talk pages. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:31, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Having read just a few lines of the Real Madrid wikipedia web page, I've noticed the following sentence:
The club won the European Cup for a sixth time in 1966 defeating FK Partizan 2–1 in the final with a team composed entirely of same nationality players, a first in the competition.
Spanish Friends and Real Madrid supporters, this claim is totally false, and I'd like to request it to be removed from your webpage. In 1960-61 and in 1961-62 European cup seasons, Benfica won the European Cup with a team totally made up of Portuguese players, as the first ever Benfica foreigner player only joined the squad in 1979. Even though a number of African players were part of these two teams - just like Eusebio or Mario Coluna - they were born in Angola and Mozambique whilst they were part of the Portuguese overseas empire, and therefore Portuguese nationals playing for the Portuguese national team. The first foreigner player ever joining Benfica was in 1979, almost 20 years after the two European cups cited above.
Given the claim being false, I would suggest and request removing the information mentioned above in italic. I'm sure Real Madrid and Real Madrid supporters do not need to base themselves in historically incorrect facts.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.46.86.244 (talk) 02:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Nicknames

Should add los galacticos (the superstars) to the list. Shiny giratina (talk) 14:34, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Controversial Pepe sending off

I fail to understand why such things are present in the article. There have been several hundred thousand controversies since the game of football went global and we could have one of the longest wiki articles were we to list them all in detail. Alves was challenged, Pepe sent off. So were several others over the period of the Clasico history. If those have not been stated, why state this incident? We could go on all day about whether that was a fair challenge or not but that does not belong on a wiki article. It belongs in a blog with a bunch of angry fans commenting on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maverick me1989 (talk • contribs) 22:03, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Pepe sending off

Why is the controversial issue about pepe sending off and dani Alves mentioned?this is totally un-wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.244.152.171 (talk) 05:14, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

How is it un-wiki? Is it referenced? Is it balanced? Is it given undue weight? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:26, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

In short, it is definitely written by a real Madrid fan. An encyclopedia is supposed to present facts, not opinions, especially not controversial ones or those against referees. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.244.151.47 (talk) 00:02, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

You didn't answer my questions. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:55, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Eighth Champions' League title, anti-Galacticos bias

If you only read the history section you would have no clue that Real madrid won its eighth CL title in 1999/00. There is a section titled Quinta del Buitre and seventh European Cup (1980–2000) that should logically at least mention it but it ends in 1998 and the CL final. No mention of the Intercontinental cup win nor of the 2000 CL win. The next section Galacticos 2000-2006 starts at July 2000 and doesn't mention the CL 2000 victory either.

Also on the Galactico section there is the phrase It is debatable whether the gamble paid off, as despite a UEFA Champions League and an Intercontinental Cup (football) win in 2002, followed by the League in 2003, the club failed to win a major trophy for the next three seasons.. A citation to Real's website verifies the facts but the whole part about debatable success and gamble is clearly the writer's own opinion and I don't think it should be on a wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.74.138.32 (talk) 20:33, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

It's important to note that the denonym for Real Madrid supporters is Madridista, as opposed to the proper denonym for the inhabitants of the city, which would be Madrileño. Such is the case also for Barcelona F. C. on which its supporters are denonymed Barcelonistas, as opposed to Barcelonan or Barcelonian — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.156.62.5 (talk) 16:01, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 1 July 2012

In "Finances" section, last sentence of last paragraph has wrong spelling of both 'Manchester Uniter' (missing cap on second word) and 'Arsenal' (spelled 'Arsenel', would be more correct to say 'Arsenal FC'.

37.136.37.246 (talk) 15:32, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Done  Ryan Vesey Review me! 18:11, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Extreme ritgh winded supporters?

I think that's a little generalizing, i'm a Real Madrid Suporter and i'm not ritgh winded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.201.27.254 (talk) 01:29, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

First, it's winged. Second, the statement was specifically about the Ultras Sur and not all supporters and so unless you're a member of the Ultras Sur, your statement about not being ritgh winded [sic] is moot. Finally, the statement is referenced while yours is not. How can we be sure that you're either a fan or not either right-wing or right-wind? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:59, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request

Zidane is linked three times in the "highest transfer fees" bit. That's about 3 times more than he need be in my book. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.247.83.11 (talk • contribs)

Done - Yes, quite. There were a couple of other issues with that sentence, so I made this edit, which I hope improves it a bit. Thank you. Begoon talk 12:34, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

first team players

I think that the roster should be only for registered players. However, Nacho, Morata and Jesús are not registered with the first team but with Castilla. According to the rules Section I, Paragraph 10, sub-section 3(click to page 8), all first team players must have numbers between 1 thru 25 while reserve or youth players must be 26 or higher. The three have 27, 29 & 35 respectively for Madrid thus not registered but they do have first team numbers for Castilla: 4, 9 & 25. Eventhough the Madrid website list them, they are still reserve players.

A few years ago, any reserve player that played for Madrid was allowed on roster list. Now, one editor is removing those players claiming that they are not registered players. Raul17 (talk) 00:24, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. If they have not been on the field in a league match, they should not be listed. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:11, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Fascist Santiago Bernabeu

I just reentered the adjective "fascist" I added preceding the name of Santiago Bernabeu Yeste with a reference to Time magazine (Lisa Abend. "Barcelona vs. Real Madrid. More Than a Game". Time. Retrieved 2009-04-15.) on April 16. His fascism is perfectly established and is recognized in Wikipedia's entry Santiago Bernabeu Yeste. I will not enter any war about how to portray Real Madrid's histry. If somebody takes it away agin I will not reestablish it but I do believe it is a mistake to dedicate a whole paragraph to this president and omit this fact.
-Please move this to Santiago Bernabeu's own page as it does not belong on the Real Madrid main-page.

To consider fascist Santiago Bernabeu is slander spread by those who wish to harm the Real Madrid. Mr. Bernabeu never had outstanding political activity. In the Spanish Civil War was a simple soldier like millions of Spanish. After the war had personal difficulties with General Franco and fighting with General Millán Astray.
The charge that were attacked Barcelona players in the 11-1 defeat in the Spanish Cup is also unfounded and equally interested. References that support the text are not objective. (81.32.183.62 (talk) 20:56, 26 April 2013 (UTC)).
But a reliable source indicates that he "fought with Franco's army during the Nationalist invasion of Catalonia". Perhaps a better source could be found, and if you can find another reference for the Spanish Cup match can be used to restore balance to that section. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Kit reference

Edit request on 10 June 2013

Please change "but the Brazilian coach" to "but the Portuguese coach" (Third paragraph of "Los Galácticos (2000–2006)"), since Carlos Queiroz is Portuguese Carlos_Queiroz 178.166.45.172 (talk) 14:59, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Arrivals and Departures

As of June 16, Ricardo Carvalho has joined AS Monaco so he's no longer part of the club. Also, Casemiro, on loan from Sao Paulo to Real Madrid B has been promoted and has signed a contract. Elsewhere, Real Madrid re-signed Dani Carvajal from Bayer Leverkusen. With all these, would someone mind updating the squad list??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.228.144.120 (talk) 01:42, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Although Carvalho agreed to join Monaco on May 28, his contract with Monaco wont take effect until July 1. Until then, he remains a Real Madrid player. The same holds for Casemiro, Carvajal, and any other potential signings before July 1. Bobby (talk) 19:57, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Okay. However, if you would look at AS Monaco's wiki, it Ricardo Carvalho, James Rodriguez, Radamel Falcao and new signings are already in the squad with TBD as their shirt number... So, I think it's best to delete them from the squad list at AS Monaco until july 1. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.228.144.120 (talk) 21:31, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 25 June 2013

Manager: Carlo Ancelotti

83.244.128.162 (talk) 10:35, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Source please, before I accept your request. --Arctic Kangaroo (✉ • ✎) 10:37, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 Done It's granted. Thanks for your intentions to help Wikipedia.--Pratyya (Hello!) 14:45, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Real_Madrid_CF/Archive_3&oldid=1077785810"