Talk:Fluminense FC/Archive 1

Archive 1

Fair use rationale for Image:Flu badges.gif

Image:Flu badges.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:37, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Tricolor's Legends

I moved the following info to this talk page, as it is unsourced. What fans voted? Who organized the vote?

Tricolor's Legends

These players were voted for by fans.

• Branco
• Castilho
• Faustino Asprilla

• Henry Welfare
• Orlando Pingo de Ouro
• Petkovic

• Rivelino
• Romerito
• Telê Santana

--Carioca (talk) 19:44, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Carioca,

I think I will change the "Notable players" section (perhaps merged with the current squad under a section named "Players", as a subsection "Notable players"?) to include the ones mentioned in http://www.fluminense.com.br/FlufcMemoria.asp?Ism=1&idn=4600. That would also solve the "legends" question, I guess. What do you think?

Pedrovsky (talk) 22:26, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi! Good idea. I support your suggestion, as I suppose you will mention according to who (Fluminense Football Club's official website) those players are considered notable Fluminense players. --Carioca (talk) 22:38, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Yup. That's my plan. Thank you for the quick feedback.

Pedrovsky (talk) 22:42, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

By the way, let me take the chance to say how happy I am that one of the (apparently two? ) persons who care about Fluminense in the English Wikipedia is a Flamenguista. Seriously, this is no joke. That's just awesome. Congrats.

Pedrovsky (talk) 22:53, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks, Pedrovsky! While I support Flamengo, my goal here is to improve the Brazilian football articles. BTW, keep up the good work, Pedrovsky! Regards, --Carioca (talk) 23:09, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Number of Supporters

I've just added 'citation needed' tags for the following two remarks:

1. "There are an estimated 9 million Fluminense supporters all over Brazil and abroad."

2. "Only one-third of the fans actually live in Rio de Janeiro State."

If nobody steps up with a reliable source within a week, I will replace the aforementioned sentences with a more plausible (and verifiable) one saying: "The number of supporters is well above one million."

Thank you for your attention.

Pedrovsky (talk) 00:33, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi! If you have a reliable source, yeah, you can go ahead and replace the unsourced info. Keep up the good work, Pedrovsky. Regards, --Carioca (talk) 18:07, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Club history

Hi! The article needs a history section, detailing the club's foundation and other important moments in Fluminense's history. Most football club articles have a history section. --Carioca (talk) 19:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi. That's my next target. :-) Pedrovsky (talk) 20:14, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Working on it. Feedback appreciated. Cheers, Pedrovsky (talk) 02:47, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi! It is looking great. But I have two minor comments to make: 1. the article name and variants of it (Fluminense Football Club and Fluminense) should only be bolded in the lead section. 2. Dates should not be wikilinked (meaning you can write July 21, 1902 instead of July 21, 1902 or 1911 instead of 1911), but you can keep the wikilinks for now. If you keep the date wikilinks, you can point those links to adequate articles (for example pointing 1984 to Campeonato Brasileiro Série A 1984, like this: 1984. Anyway, your work is excellent, and you deserve a barnstar for that (and you will probably receive one very soon). --Carioca (talk) 19:54, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Any reasons why the whole paragraph on Joao de Deus has been excluded? It certainly provided more relevant information that the new session on "Performance", which, in my opinion, is beyond pathetic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Irscook (talk • contribs) 07:54, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

The paragraph on João de Deus has been excluded for the following three reasons: 1. It was completely unsourced, and expressed matters of opinion ("one of Fluminense's most famous chants") -- most famous according to whom? -- even if it had a source, which it did not, I would find it quite disturbing to see such a statement anywhere on Wikipedia. 2. It was outdated, and wrong. I regularly attend Fluminense's matches and I can assure you that there are many more characteristic chants being used by the supporters. Should we mention them all in the article? This brings me to the next reason. 3. The paragraph about João de Deus had the encyclopedic relevance of mentioning Isaac Newton's favourite bread or Margaret Thatcher's favourite nail polish. It can be included for the sake of completion, but essentially it does not matter. What is relevant in an article about a football club is what the club achieved, believe me, actually playing football. That's what the "Performance" section is about, and funny enough, that's precisely what you criticise. Finally, let me point out that you brought up two topics, the João de Deus paragraph (which was in the Supporters section) and the new Performance section, but you've added your comment to the discussion section of a third and unrelated topic, the Club's history. Please refrain from doing this again. Pedrovsky (talk) 14:58, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Traffic Group

Hi,

Does anyone happen to have any reliable source stating that the Traffic Group is a *sponsor* of Fluminense? All I can find in Google are articles mentioning Unimed as the "main sponsor" and the Traffic Group as a partner. For instance: http://espnbrasil.terra.com.br/fluminense/noticia/53540_INSATISFEITA+UNIMED+PODE+ENCERRAR+PARCERIA+COM+FLU (in Portuguese).

Thank you for your attention.

Pedrovsky (talk) 21:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

All the sources I found (like Terra, O Globo, etc) say that Traffic is a partner, instead of a sponsor. As ESPN Brasil is a reliable source, you can mention in the article that Traffic is a partner. --Carioca (talk) 21:26, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. Pedrovsky (talk) 23:11, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Rewrite 'Honours' section

Hi. I would like to propose a rewrite of the 'Honours' section, as follows.

Honours

International

• Copa Rio (International) (1):
  • 1952

National

• Campeonato Brasileiro Série A (1):
  • 1984
• Campeonato Brasileiro Série C (1):
  • 1999
• Copa do Brasil (1):
  • 2007
• Torneio Roberto Gomes Pedrosa (1):
  • 1970

Regional

• Torneio Rio-São Paulo (2):
  • 1957, 1960

State

• Campeonato Carioca (30):
  • 1906, 1907, 1908, 1909, 1911, 1917, 1918, 1919, 1924, 1936, 1937, 1938, 1940, 1941, 1946, 1951, 1959, 1964, 1969, 1971, 1973, 1975, 1976, 1980, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1995, 2002, 2005

Friendly Tournaments

• Kirin Cup (1):
  • 1987
• Teresa Herrera Trophy (1):
  • 1977

Others

In 1949, Fluminense Football Club was awarded the Olympic Cup by the International Olympic Committee. The official 2009 kit features the Olympic Cup as a 60th year celebration.

Any okays?

Pedrovsky (talk) 22:27, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi! I agree with your suggestion. But we should also include the number of titles after the competition name. For example:

• Campeonato Brasileiro Série A (1):
  • 1984

Regards, --Carioca (talk) 22:41, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi! I've updated the example above to reflect your suggestion.

Cheers, Pedrovsky (talk) 22:56, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi! Good work! --Carioca (talk) 22:57, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Plans

My plans for this article, in order:

- A section about the club's facilities (headquarters, missing training camp, Xerém, etc);

- Ditto for Fluminense's youth team;

- Ditto for the club's crest and colours;

- Improve history section (perhaps on a separate article?);

Pedrovsky (talk) 00:57, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi! That's a good plan. Regarding the club facilities, I suppose you will mention Laranjeiras. Regarding the history section, you can create a separate article, but it is better to keep a summarized version (meaning a shorter version) in the main article. --Carioca (talk) 17:21, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Best Attendances in matches of Fluminense

http://www.rsssfbrasil.com/miscellaneous/attfluminense.htm

In FLA-FLUS : http://www.rsssfbrasil.com/miscellaneous/attflaflu.htm

Against opponents from Rio de Janeiro : http://www..rsssfbrasil.com/miscellaneous/attflurj.htm

In LARANJEIRAS : http://www.campeoesdofutebol.com.br/fluminense_laranjeiras_publicos.html

Attendances when Fluminense won titles in Maracanã Era: http://www.rsssfbrasil.com/miscellaneous/attflutit.htm

Before the Maracanã Era: http://www.chancedegol.com.br/rsssfbrasil/miscellaneous/attflutitpremar.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.13.23.40 (talk) 20:51, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, what is encyclopedic value of listing the best attendances of a club? Is it to illustrate that the club is popular? That is already mentioned in the article, explicitly, several times. What do those numbers say, besides the fact that Maracanã was once able to hold more people than it can today?

Pedrovsky (talk) 06:38, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

It may not be the best option to include this info in the main Fluminense Foootball Club article. Perhaps this info could be included in an article about Fluminense's records and statistics, similar to this one. Regards, --Carioca (talk) 19:29, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Carioca. Since our friend 187.13.23.40 did not show up to defend the inclusion of such data in the main article, I guess I will remove them. Regards, Pedrovsky (talk) 19:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I believe it's valid and of encyclopedic relevance to state that Fluminense holds the record for the highest attendance ever in a club soccer match, in the Fla x Flu that had almost 200 thousand people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.250.231.183 (talk) 05:01, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

That is mentioned in the article already. Pedrovsky (talk) 05:12, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

New text

Hi.. i would like to ask , dont eraser everything, please only make up date where the text is wrong or with bad english... please ..because i had a lot work in translation ... Thanks a lot Carioca and others  :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valfluzao (talk • contribs) 12:16, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I removed all the text because it needed a lot of work, as it looked like a machine translation. Also, you removed references and added some typos in the original text. --Carioca (talk) 19:19, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I update a big part of the text, where was bad translation, but i need your help, if u see somthing wrong, please send me the part, i will do the update... Thanks! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valfluzao (talk • contribs) 08:31, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I will try to improve the text. --Carioca (talk) 19:16, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Honors

Ola Carioca, fiz uma mudança para um titulo internacional do Fluminense que é uma honraria para parte e titulos internacional, colocando o junto a Rio Cup Internacional, não sei se para ti faz sentido já que se trata de algo não nacional.

E aproveitava para adicionar em Other Honours a pagina de todas as conquistas historicas do clube que vem neste documento

Também não sei se notaste mais a parte dos torneios estao titulos repetidos, por isso apaguei... acho que voltaste a coloca-los... atenção nisso, pois estão repetidos.

cumprimentos :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.247.107.140 (talk) 20:26, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I restored your version, but cleaned up a little. You should not use wikilinks to the Portuguese Wikipedia here, as most of the English Wikipedia readers do nor speak Portuguese. --Carioca (talk) 20:41, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

References

Grammar Issues

I've repaired most of the grammar issues. Can someone just make sure they're okay? 19:25, 22 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.53.40.180 (talk)