Talk:Cüneyt Çakır

Edit request on 5 March 2013

The final paragraph of this article is completely and unabashedly biased to portray the person in a negative light. 75.40.89.122 (talk) 22:56, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

I have removed all content that is not backed up by a reliable source. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 23:13, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Currently the article says that the red card was controversial. Personally, I agree. On the other hand, almost every red card is controversial, it rarely happens in an important game that a player is sent off and both his manager and his team's supporters applaud the decision. So I see no point in saying that the call was controversial. Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS and when a call makes it into one of those lists of worst referee mistakes published years after, then it can rightly be called controversial. Calling any red card controversial on the day of the game or immediately afterwards is rather pointless, unless we really want to add it for every red card ever shown.Jeppiz (talk) 23:20, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 6 March 2013

The last sentence does not reflect enough of the seriousness of the Cuneyt Cakir's huge and biased error in handing out the red card. The actual situation is much more serious and controversial, maybe even with elements of referee injustice and even match-fixing. Ck vin (talk) 03:29, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Also you need to provide the exact wording that you want added to the article. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 04:34, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

What would qualify as a "reliable source" in this case? A dozen quotes could be added from distinguished footballers and journalists who commented after the match. The balance of opinion was overwhelming - this should not have been a sending off. It's become an international scandal. So just noting that it's "controversial" doesn't reflect the actual situation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.140.38 (talk) 19:17, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Several distinguished footballers and journalists have said it shouldn't have been a red card and several distinguished footballers and journalists have said it was an obvious red card. Just as with every red card or penalty in a big game, so even saying "controversial" is POV. UEFA has publicly supported the referee. As for "international scandal", please add the sources for a UN resolution or any motion in a parliament. This was an ordinary football game, not an "international scandal" by any stretch of imagination.Jeppiz (talk) 21:43, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Removing unbias

I have removed the phrase "was soley responsible for the elimination" and "for no appearant reason." Real Madrid beat Manchester United; not the ref. And he did not give the card for no reason; it was for the challenge. Please do not edit to add bias in.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Weka (talk • contribs) 21:02, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 7 March 2013

Please merge all of the lines from "On 24 April 2012" to "On 14 December 2012" into a single paragraph. The page will look better without the line breaks between each of them. 98.223.199.119 (talk) 19:49, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Not done: solely on the basis that the requested edit will not fix the section. That section needs a full copy edit to remove undue weight given to certain events in Mr. Cakir's career. This is also not a column to report on every game Mr. Cakir has officiated. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:18, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Clarity

I have changed "first offical" to referee as nobody says that, and I have added that the decision to dismiss Nani was correct. Statto74 (talk) 09:57, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Pagr

Some info missing needs adding Jsjsjwjw (talk) 23:21, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Like what? Rhysy54 (talk) 19:06, 12 July 2018 (UTC)