Talk:UEFA European Championship/Archive 2

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Representation of former states

Former states are represented in different ways in tables of this article. Shouldn't we choose one or the other? - Soerfm (talk) 16:46, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

The basic principle is that the most recent name under which an entity achieved the threshold that merits inclusion on a list is the name given. This seems to be being applied consistently. The arguable exception is the appearance of Serbia in the participation details table: that entity has only participated in the finals under the name of Yugoslavia, but given that the table acknowledges participation in qualifiers, there is a case to be made for that. Kevin McE (talk) 17:08, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for answering. Please look at:

Team	Titles	Runners-up
Soviet Union	1 (1960)	3 (1964, 1972, 1988)

Team	1960 (4)	1964 (4)	1968 (4)	1972 (4)	1976 (4)	1980 (8)	1984 (8)	1988 (8)	1992 (8)	1996 (16)	2000 (16)	2004 (16)	2008 (16)	2012 (16)	Years
Russia ²	1st	2nd	4th	2nd	•	•	•	2nd	GS	GS	•	GS	SF	GS	10

Team	P	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD
Soviet Union (1960–1988) CIS (1992) Russia (1996–)	30	12	6	12	36	39	−2

Is this consistent? - Soerfm (talk) 10:45, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Although it may not appear so, the first two are indeed consistent with the principle stated: since the Soviet Union's team's record was taken over by the Russian team, they have not reached the final match (i.e. no team called Russia has ever reached the final match, so Russia is not mentioned in that table), but the side has reached the finals tournament (and to prevent that one historical chain being split across two entries on the table, only one name is used: that of the most recent, and indeed current, incarnation, Russia).

I'm not a great fan of the layout in the third table, a more recent addition to the article: it does not follow the general principle followed in such articles, but it is clear, and removes the need for footnotes. Other opinions? Kevin McE (talk) 18:08, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, I prefer the third since it gives you all information. It should be applied in the second table but not in the first. In the first a footnote could tell that Soviet Union is the predecessor of Russia in UEFA context. - Soerfm (talk) 11:58, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Now you are talking about preference rather than consistency. I see no reason to mention Russia in relation top teams that have played in a final. As regards changing the second table, that would be a change from a long held convention, and given that there are equivalent tables in many other articles, I would suggest that it should be discussed at WT:FOOTY before any such change is considered. Kevin McE (talk) 17:26, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

How about this?:

Team	1960 (4)	1964 (4)	1968 (4)	1972 (4)	1976 (4)	1980 (8)	1984 (8)	1988 (8)	1992 (8)	1996 (16)	2000 (16)	2004 (16)	2008 (16)	2012 (16)	Years
Soviet Union	1st	2nd	4th	2nd	•	•	•	2nd
CIS									GS
Russia										GS	•	GS	SF	GS	10

- Soerfm (talk) 13:50, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

I can see why you would like it: it has many merits. As I say, this type of change would affecrt many articles, and so the discussion needs more eyes: I suggest you raise it at WT:FOOTY. Kevin McE (talk) 17:10, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Flag for CIS in Euro 92

On this page, is used for their flag. Over on UEFA Euro 1992, is used. I'm too young to remember the tournament, so I'm hoping somebody can remember and make the relevant changes. Thanks. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess)|(talk to me)|(What I've done) 22:36, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Who was the first European champion?

The article says: ...it was originally called the UEFA European Nations Cup, changing to the current name in 1968. Starting with the 1996 tournament, specific championships are often referred to in the form "Euro 2012" or whichever year is appropriate. Some years ago, I've read, that the UEFA initially had started the European Nations Cup as a competition among those countries, who had failed the qualification for the FIFA World Cup. Subsequently in 1966 the UEFA had had declared this competition as European Championship for all national football associations. Italy, though not the first cup winner, would have been the first champion in 1968. Naturally, such a statement would need a reliable source and not only an article in a local newspaper. Does someone know more about the exact background? Henrig (talk) 19:56, 5 July 2012 (UTC) After writing: Without any sources it would also be easy to disprove the article, which I've read years ago, if one of the competitiors in 1960 and 1964 also participated in the corresponding FIFA World Cups in 1958 or 1962. (I don't know it.)Henrig (talk) 20:11, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Interesting theory, but still unsourced. However - six of the twelve European teams that played in the 1958 World Cup, also played in the qualification for the Nations Cup, and France even qualified for the tournament. But I'd like to know why Sweden, West Germany and the British teams didn't join the first competition. Mentoz86 (talk) 20:42, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Basically I'm suspicious of articles in newspapers. If one (or even six) teams, who had qualified for the 1958 FIFA World Cup, also played in the qualification for the 1960 Nations Cup, I'd suspect, that the competiition at first had only this wrong reputation, as a competition of the loosers in Germany. Germany joined, when the UEFA declared the competition the European Championship!

Concerning the British teams: England, the motherland of football, even opposed the first FIFA World Cups, in a time, when England was considered the leading football nation in the world.Henrig (talk) 21:23, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Specific table for finalists or for semifinalists?

For many years this article has boasted a table of finalists, in a section headed "Winners and runners-up", and referring to the article List of UEFA European Football Championship finals. This has been stable.

An editor has unilaterally decided to expand this to include all semifinalists. Not evil and reprehensible in and of itself, but it seems to expand beyond what is obviously notable. It does not allow consistency, as UEFA has changed its mind in 3rd place matches; it invites the question as to why we shouldn't in that case include quarter-finalists; it breaks the link with the article; final matches are automatically assumed to be notable, and have articles, but the same cannot be said of semifinals.

The more this section gets expanded, the less purpose it has, as its content becomes more a re-presentation of data already apparent in the article. I strongly suggest a return to the previous threshhold for the section, or its deletion. Kevin McE (talk) 09:16, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

I'd say we remove it, and only list finalists in this section. As you say, the info about semifinalist are listed elsewhere in the article. Mentoz86 (talk) 11:35, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

The table is fine as it is right now. No reason to remove it. There has been a third and fourth place in the past - that is why it does make sense to list the semifinalists.--IIIraute (talk) 15:48, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Spain or Germany?

Hi, i just wanted to ask why Germany is not the most successful team in this tournament? Spain won three times and was runners-up one time. Germany won three times, was runners-up three times and was semifinalist two times. Nightrider91 (talk) 12:09, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Germany obviously is the most successful team in the tournament - having played six (of sixteen) finals. --IIIraute (talk) 15:42, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

The only unquestionable success is winning the final. Germany and Spain have done that the same number of times. They are equally the most successful. Kevin McE (talk) 17:27, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Not true. The UEFA does award silver medals for the tournament - so why shouldn't they count? --IIIraute (talk) 20:55, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I made a solution to explain it in the references but Peejay2K3 deleted it again

| most successful team = Germany 3 titles, 3 runners-up^[note]

[note] Germany is the most successful team because it won three times (gold) and was runners-up three times (silver). Spain won three times but was only runners-up one time. So Germany won three golden and three silver medals, Spain won three golden medals and only one silver medal.

In the references I added the note so that it was clear for everybody, but Peejay2K3 deleted it again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=UEFA_European_Football_Championship&diff=500700930&oldid=500700306

This is to driving people crazy.

Klodde (talk) 22:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Olympic Games also do it that way!

http://www.olympic.it/english/game/id_W2010

Klodde (talk) 22:34, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Olympics has nothing to do with this. Do you have a source for declaring Germany as the most successful? I'm sure there are any amount declaring that Spain have matched Germany for most wins... Kevin McE (talk) 22:46, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree, Kevin. Furthermore, who says that the "most_successful_team" parameter has to only have one team? – Pee Jay 23:09, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Only one team can be the most succesfull one, and since Germany has won 3 times gold and three times silver it seems that they are better then Spain currently. Smile4ever (talk) 10:53, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Nonsense. Lots of records are shared. Including that of the team that has won most European championships. Kevin McE (talk) 19:10, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

No, not nonsense - otherwise, why is Germany leading the table in the article → [1] → please note: team"s" = plural; team = singular! --IIIraute (talk) 19:54, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Also in other wiki articles (UEFA!) silver medals are used to compare team's positions in tables,

examples:

Klodde (talk) 08:16, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

In your examples it's only a way of sorting teams in a table, and yes then you'd have to count the silver. But two years ago, before Manchester United 19th English title, did people count 2nd places to figure out which English was most successful? No, because equal amount of titles makes team equally successful, thus Spain and Germany should both be in the infobox as the most successful team. Mentoz86 (talk) 08:55, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Another example would be UEFA Europa League, where three teams have three titles. There have been consensus for years that all three teams should be in the infobox as the most successful team, eventhough two of those teams have one silvermedal - using your logic Liverpool should be removed from the infobox. Mentoz86 (talk) 08:59, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Indeed Liverpool may be removed from the infobox! And there the title should be changed in to most successful team(s).

Klodde (talk) 11:46, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I disagree. If two teams have the same number of wins, they are both the most successful. No one cares about second-place finishes. Second place only exists so that the winners have someone to beat in the final. – Pee Jay 11:50, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

No question: A team with 3 gold and 3 silver medals had clearly more success than a team with 3 gold and 1 silver medal. You can't ignore the number of gained silver medals. If you like to see the Spain colours in the infobox you ought to change the label from 'Most succesfull team' to 'Teams with most titles'.46.5.34.61 (talk) 12:07, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

This is not the Olympics. We aren't talking about gold, silver and bronze but winners, runner-ups and losing semifinalist. The only thing that matters in football are titles, and Germany and Spain both have three titles... Mentoz86 (talk) 12:13, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, you can compare it to the Olympics. See above, Illraute's statement from 2 July 2012! "The UEFA does award silver medals for the tournament - so why shouldn't they count?"46.5.34.61 (talk) 12:32, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I made a little adaption in the infobox, so if there are several teams that it can be marked.

example UEFA_Europa_League, that Juventus and Inter are equal wins and equal runners-up

Klodde (talk) 11:59, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Requested move 2

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

The result of the move request was: Move to UEFA European Championship Cúchullain ^t/c 16:02, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

UEFA European Football Championship → UEFA Euro – After looking at their website, it looks to me that UEFA calls this tournament for UEFA Euro or UEFA European Championship, not the current title. A quick google search, shows 33 million hits for UEFA Euro, 23 million hits for UEFA European Championship, while there is only 9 million hits for UEFA European Football Championship. This implies that UEFA Euro is the most common name of this subject, and the article should be moved. It should also be noted that every tournament since 1968 is names XXXX UEFA Euro, and I think those should be moved if this article isn't moved to match the name of the parent article. Mentoz86 (talk) 10:16, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. Mentoz86 (talk) 10:19, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Comment - there was a discussion about the naming of the individual tournaments in 2007, but the parent article was not discussed in that discussion. Mentoz86 (talk) 10:19, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Oppose UEFA Euro seems a very awkward name, and certainly not one I've heard before (the Euro bit is generally used together with the year, e.g. Euro 2012, but rarely on its own - I cannot find a single example of this on the BBC site for instance). I would say the common name for this is actually "European Championship" (as used by the BBC). However, this would then require disambiguation (as there are several European Championships), so UEFA European Championship would probably be a better option. Number 57 11:12, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- I agree that UEFA European Championship is a better title than the current one, as there is a double disambiguation with both UEFA and Football. Mentoz86 (talk) 11:17, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
  - Perhaps you might consider amending the proposal then? :) Number 5 7 13:20, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Support UEFA European Championship per above, as an improvement. There's no doubt "Euro" is the WP:COMMONNAME for the tournament, but that's obviously going to need disambiguation, and I agree "UEFA Euro" sounds awkward. --BDD (talk) 16:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Support "UEFA European Championship" per No. 57 and BDD. "UEFA Euro" sounds more like a currency unit. Green Giant (talk) 02:43, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Weak support for UEFA European Championship. Mentoz86, it is a fallacy to refer to "UEFA" and "Football" as disambiguating terms in the current title; they are not there to disambiguate, they are there because they are part of the competition's proper name (see here). However, I do agree that the name "UEFA European Championship" occurs more frequently in common parlance, even on their own website (albeit in conjunction with the name "UEFA European Football Championship"). The name "UEFA Euro" is only used to refer to individual UEFA European Championships. – Pee Jay 13:04, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Strong support for UEFA European Championship, though it's a bit awkward. Red Slash 03:29, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

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

east germany in general statistics

Germany is the successor of both East and West Germany. Therfeore East German statistcis should be included were the German and West German statistics are lumped together, not added seperatly, such as the case with the General Statistics section of this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.219.218.239 (talk) 05:04, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

No, Germany and East Germany are completely separate. The DFV was a completely separate association from the DFB, and both FIFA and UEFA consider that Germany is only the successor to West Germany. – Pee Jay 11:00, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

The current Germany is the same as the so called West Germany (Federal Republic of Germany), the co called East Germany (German Democratic Republic) does not exist anymore. the Deutscher Fußball-Bund is the FA of the of the Federal Republic of Germany both before and after 1990, the Deutscher Fußball-Verband was the FA of the German Democratic Republic and does nost exist anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.42.252.102 (talk) 04:57, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Alternative names

With regard to the alternative names "UEFA Euro", "Euros" and "Euro Cup", the former is only ever used to describe individual tournaments, not the competition itself, and this is already indicated at the end of the lead paragraph. The latter two are just colloquialisms, with "Euro Cup" almost never being used in either common parlance or in the media (although if this could be proven otherwise by reliable sources, I would be prepared to reconsider my position). – Pee Jay 21:59, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

map isn't up to date!

Gibraltar isn't shown although they have an own FA! --37.24.150.177 (talk) 02:23, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Czechoslovakia - Czech republic only ? No Slovakia ?

Slovakia is painted in grey colour and never mentioned in statistics, but 1976 champions were Czechoslovakia team consisted of 3 czech players and 8 slovaks. Why Slovakia is ignored ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.242.227.148 (talk) 08:58, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Slovakia should be colored in for being part of the team and supplying the head coach and most of the players. Otherwise, this is just typical Czech erasure of Slovak history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.21.137.198 (talk) 03:24, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Argentina won 3 consecutive major trophies before Spain

In the last paragraph of the section with the title about the increase to 16 teams, it incorrectly states that Spain were the first team to win 3 consecutive major international tournaments. Clearly, this is wrong, as Argentina won 3 consecutive Copa Americas in the 1940s. As the World Cup wasn't played in 1946, that was 3 consecutive major international tournaments. ACCH (talk) 11:13, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the requirement was that the set of three had to include at least one World Cup. – Pee Jay 11:52, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

 It doesn't say including the World Cup; it just says 3 major international tournaments. ACCH (talk) 12:44, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Map showing furthest progress in European Championships by country

This map is incorrect, the Republic of Ireland reached the Quarter-Finals of the 1964 Championship^[1]

Could this be updated please? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.255.200.134 (talk) 20:04, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

That was the last round of the qualification rounds. That was not the final tournament. Ireland did not qualify for the final tournament in 1964. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.124.185.10 (talk) 13:03, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Need to improve redirections

I've been trying to find this article, with terms such as "European cup of football" and "Eurocup", only to be directed to other articles. I think this "UEFA European Football Championship" article needs to be easier to find.-Ignacio Agulló — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.165.154.81 (talk • contribs) 05:09, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

The map of countries' best results

The map in question is this one. I'm posting the following here rather than on the map's talk page because much fewer people would see it there, let alone discuss it there.

The map's colouring scheme identifies the round of 16 as a "higher" stage than the group stage, notwithstanding that the group stage once used to be Europe's top 8.

Thus, the orange colour of the Republic of Ireland indicates that the team's participation in 2016, when it progressed from a 24-team group stage and got eliminated in the round of 16, is treated as a better result than 1988, when it appeared in an 8-team group stage. Similarly, Slovakia is coloured in yellow while Scotland is red, even though Scotland was in the top 8 in 1992 while Slovakia only made it to the round of 16 in its only finals appearance in 2016.

On the other hand, the situation with Hungary is interpreted differently. Hungary is highlighted in green as having reached the semi-finals. But both semi-finals of Hungary, in 1964 and 1972, were in fact the first rounds of these Euro main tournaments; back then, by qualifying for a Euro main tournament, a team would immediately find itself in the continent's top 4. And Hungary lost the semi-finals in both cases; it, like Ireland in 1988 and Scotland in 1992, did not make any progress within these main tournaments. Yet, these are treated as better achievements for Hungary than 2016, when the team progressed from the first stage and was eliminated in the next stage, the same as what Ireland did then. That's the opposite of how Ireland is treated.

Things get even more complicated when we consider that, as an IP has noted above, Ireland has in fact had another top 8 finish apart from 1988: it reached the quarter-finals in 1964, even if the quarter-finals were still part of the qualification then. Moreover, because of the expansion of the final tournament over the years, there are some teams which have progressed in qualification even further than they ever did in the Euro finals, and therefore have done better than their "best" results indicated in the map.

Austria and Bulgaria reached the top 8 (the quarter-finals) in 1960 and 1968 respectively, which they never did after that level became incorporated into the Euro finals. Albania qualified, albeit by walkover, for the round of 16 in 1964, and failed to do so in 2016, its only finals appearance.

And then there's Luxembourg. It was a quarter-finalist in 1964, which means that although it has never qualified for the finals and therefore isn't highlighted in the map, Luxembourg has appeared in a more advanced point in the tournament than a number of the highlighted countries have.

Of course, as the Euro main tournament has grown over time, so has its qualification, and nowadays it's more of a big deal to make it, say, to the continent's top 8 than it was back in the 1960s. Still, instances like these demonstrate how conditioned and even misleading such labels for teams' "best" results can actually be. --Theurgist (talk) 10:09, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

UEFA.com links

I work for UEFA, and I am updating broken links to our website (as our urls have all changed - this coud also be the case for match reports on the season pages UEFAlinks (talk) 09:19, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Correct the Map

In the Map of Best results Albania never had part in Yugoslavia, and put Kosovo map because had recognition in UEFA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 191.109.250.2 (talk) 22:31, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

If czechoslovakia won the tournamenmt once, why is only chechia coloured as champions and not slowakia???86.86.185.56 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:58, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

- and similarly, if Yugoslavia were in the finals, why is Serbia coloured as a finalist whereas the other parts of the former Yugoslavia just get a little dot? And the same for the Soviet Union - Russia is marked as a champion, everyone else gets a dot (a white one, so you can't even work out what they did "as part of the Soviet Union"). There seems to be a very dodgy principle being applied in this map, namely that Serbia, Russia and the Czech Republic "inherited" the status of Yugoslavia, the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia respectively - I bet the Slovaks, Croats, Ukrainians and so on are not best pleased about that. 86.13.184.107 (talk) 21:10, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Finalists table

I see we've had another instance of someone challenging the Czech Republic's claim to the 1976 title on the basis that the Czechoslovakia team that won that tournament was mostly made up of Slovakian players. The reason why we list the Czech Republic as having won the competition in 1976 is because UEFA and FIFA consider the Czech Republic to be one of the successors to the record of the former Czechoslovakia; they also consider Slovakia to be a successor, but since Slovakia has not reached the final of the European Championship as an independent nation (whereas the Czech Republic did in 1996), we don't list them in the table. – Pee Jay 10:29, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

@85.216.146.9: Instead of edit-warring and making inflammatory edit summaries, perhaps you could discuss your grievances in an appropriate forum (such as this)? – Pee Jay 14:38, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

@PeeJay2K3:, that's interesting. Can you show where FIFA and UEFA have said Slovakia is a successor to Czechoslovakia? I thought at first this was established in previous discussions on this page. But I found other discussions where the issue came up including Talk:UEFA European Championship/Archive 1#West Germany or Germany?, Talk:UEFA European Championship/Archive 1#Current editwar, Talk:UEFA European Championship/Archive 1#USSR and Yugo, Talk:UEFA European Championship/Archive 1#predecessors however none of them seem to establish it, in fact it doesn't ever really seemed to be mentioned. The one source I saw mentioned that was potentially relevant is [2] which establishes that UEFA may consider Czechia as a successor to Czechoslovakia, but provides no clarity on Slovakia.

So I've looked a bit wider and found several discussions: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 99#UEFA Euro 2016 qualifying Czech Republic & Slovakia Talk:UEFA Euro 2016 qualifying#Continuous editing of the notes on qualified teams, Talk:2010 FIFA World Cup qualification#Slovakia's appearance at the 2010 world cup is their first and not their 9th, Talk:UEFA#Slovakia, Talk:UEFA Euro 2016 qualifying/Archive 1#Slovakia's record in past Euros, Talk:FIFA World Cup/Archive 5#Edit request from 123.20.47.192, 20 September 2011, Talk:2010 FIFA World Cup/Archive 1#slovakia's WC history, Talk:Czechoslovakia national football team#Czechoslovakian football history = Czech Republic football history?, Talk:UEFA Euro 2016/Archive 1#Slovakia and Czech Republic and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 31#FIFA attributes the honours of Czechoslovakia to both Czechia and Slovakia. But these don't really seem to establish it either.

From reading these discussions which linked to sources, it sounds like both FIFA and UEFA have at times listed Slovakia as a successor to Czechoslovakia e.g. by listing Czechoslovakia's previous records as Slovakia's. But at other times they have not. And these have even been some changes in one FIFA page over time whether it lists Czechoslovakia's records under Slovakia, let alone other pages or info. Heck even Czechia doesn't always seem to inherit Czechoslovakia's records. And notably none of these link to any official FIFA or UEFA position that I saw. (I think there is one for Serbia.)

BTW I also came across Talk:UEFA Euro 2016#Slovakia debut?, Talk:2014 FIFA World Cup qualification#Qualification table, Talk:Serbia national football team/Archive 1#Only Serbia, Talk:FIFA World Cup/Archive 4#Successor states/Inheritors of records, Talk:UEFA#disputed/contradiction section, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 100#RfC on a football-related article, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 21#Result maps, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 21#Successor nations, Talk:Northern Ireland national football team#First Game, etc and a few more I read but seemed too unimportant to link but ignored these as while they may make claims, they don't seem to link to any relevant sources for the Slovakia issue. (Some do provide sources for others including Czechia.) This actually sounded hopeful but there was nothing Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 61#UEFA Euro qualification (again). BTW, I see in the first link from 2016 you said the opposite, if you don't mind me asking, what changed your mind?

I double checked some of the sources mentioned in the earlier discussions and my checks seem to concur. I've given archive links just so it's easier to see in the future. The current FIFA pages only gives Czechia Czechoslovakia's records [3]/[4] [5]/[6]. (These didn't archive that well, but look for "FIFA World Cup".) However in the past, Slovakia (and Czechia) received Czechoslovakia's records [7] [8], note that these are older versions of the link after the / earlier i.e. the page has changed as to whether Slovakia gains Czechoslovakia's record over time. Meanwhile for the 2010 World Cup, FIFA produced this document [9] which says Slovakia is a newcomer. While concurrently (not exact dates, but someone in one of the linked discussions says it was the case) still saying they had 8 previous appearances on their page about Slovakia [10]/[11].

Then these pages only has records for Czech Republic from 1992 onwards [12]. Slovakia had 1939 to 1944 then 1992 onwards [13]. And no, this wasn't because they were missing stuff from those intermediate years [14]. The live score pages that replaced (they redirect) those match pages have scores from 1903 for Czech Republic [15] including the Czechoslovakia period. But for Slovakia only the 1939 to 1944 period [16] then the 1992 onwards as before. (Not a great fan of archive.is/today/whatever given their history here on wikipedia but needs must for these pages.)

The current UEFA pages gives neither team Czechoslovakia's records [17] [18]. However in the 2016 season pages to this day, the Czech Republic's best result was "winners 1976 (as Czechoslovakia)" [19] while Slovakia "never qualified" [20]. Maybe this shouldn't be that surprising since UEFA also says the Czech Republic FA itself joined UEFA in 1954 and FIFA in 1907 [21] while the Slovakia FA in 1993 and 1994 [22].

Meanwhile these history pages do effectively give the records to both Czech Republic and Slovakia although are clear when it was as Czechoslovakia [23] [24]. These would actually be decent pages were it not for the fact that UEFA was just as schizophrenic as FIFA about whether or not to count Czechoslovakia under Slovakia and Czech Republic.

Frankly, unless there's some clear statement from FIFA and/or UEFA that I somehow missed, this whole thing seems a mess. It's true that they've included Czechoslovakia's records under Slovakia at times, but other times they do not. At least FIFA have possibly decided to exclude them. (While including them for Czech Republic.) UEFA can't seem to decide what to do even to this day for both teams, and do different things on different pages. This is IMO one of the problems going by what random pages or documents do. Nil Einne (talk) 14:51, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Why would UEFA's arbitrary opinion have any say in international law? Both Czechia and Slovakia are successor states to Czechoslovakia, therefore the maps and tables are simply put incorrect and offensive. I will update them accordingly. Either both Slovakia and Czechia ought to be coloured blue, or none of them.

UEFA's opinion matters because it is the national associations that win titles, not the countries themselves. It's not entirely clear from UEFA.com exactly which of the Czech Republic and Slovakia is considered the successor to Czechoslovakia (or both or neither), but it's their opinion that matters. – Pee Jay 13:11, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I take it back. Judging from these pages on UEFA.com (Czech Republic, Slovakia), the Czech Republic is indisputably considered the only successor to Czechoslovakia in terms of their competitive record. Slovakia only receives a mention in terms of having supplied a "large contingent" of players in the Czechoslovakia team that won Euro 1976. – Pee Jay 13:16, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

FIFA.com also seems pretty clear, since they describe the Czech FA as having been affiliated to FIFA since 1907 (see here), whereas the Slovakian FA only joined FIFA in 1994 (i.e. after the breakup of Czechoslovakia; see here). Hope that clears things up for you. – Pee Jay 13:21, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

I wonder if UEFA changed their webpage recently, I think they may have. In any case, Slovakia's history page now explicitly mentions the three Czechoslovak appearances as part of their history. -- Lejman (talk) 22:07, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-finalists

What’s happened to the semi-finalist data? It’s disappeared overnight…

At the very least this should be included in a separate tab, or even another page. It’s really informative, not to mention interesting… Ross-shire (talk) 14:28, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

why delete third place fourth place and semifinalist from table?+General statistics

why delete third place fourth place and semifinalist from table?+General statisticsAcreswane (talk) 18:03, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Because they're pretty irrelevant and will ultimately make the table pretty unwieldy. – Pee Jay 23:11, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Agreed, makes the table unnecessarily confusing. S.A. Julio (talk) 00:36, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Tottaly agreed as well! Super confusing table with 3rd, 4th place and semifinalists... XMillennium94x (talk) 22:29, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

What’s happened to the semi-finalist data? It’s disappeared overnight…

At the very least this should be included in a separate tab, or even another page. It’s really informative, not to mention interesting…

Also…the table isn’t confusing. It explains clearly why there are different 3rd place, 4th place and SF columns. This is because UEFA used to have a 3rd place playoff, which was scrapped decades ago. Ross-shire (talk) 14:30, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 July 2021

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to UEFA European Championship has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The host country of the 2021 UEFA cup is England not the European Union, 188.222.199.42 (talk) 16:10, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

The tournament was hosted by 11 different countries across Europe, not just England. What you appear to have identified as the flag of the European Union is actually the flag of the Council of Europe, which means its use here is appropriate. – Pee Jay 23:40, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 July 2021

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to UEFA European Championship has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The 2020 finalist are Italy and England Nilabh.aole (talk) 06:21, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --Chris (talk) 07:03, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Official names

I want to talk about the final tournament official names (in the bold in articles) of UEFA Euro 2008, 2012, 2016, 2020, 2024. Now the articles says that the official name is "yyyy UEFA European Football Championship" and the "UEFA Euro yyyy" is an informal name. But after looking in official UEFA tournament regulations, I beg to differ, saying that the "UEFA Euro yyyy" is the official name, while eg "yyyy-yy UEFA European Football Championship" is the name of the final tournament and the qualifiers together.

In regulations from this year's competition: https://documents.uefa.com/v/u/WVKcnryVkASzztwJjPBcIw on page 19 it says that The competition stages are as follows: a. Qualifying competition (European Qualifiers) [...] b. Final tournament (UEFA EURO 2020), which makes it extremely clear for me.

In 2022-24 regulations: https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/OfficialDocument/uefaorg/Regulations/02/46/30/61/2463061_DOWNLOAD.pdf on page 7 the term "Tournament" is defined as: the final tournament of the 2022-24 UEFA European Football Championship, including all official events and activities related thereto. "Tournament" and UEFA EURO 2024 are equivalent.

From 2016: https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Regulations/uefa/Others/84/03/26/840326_DOWNLOAD.pdf on page 9 it clearly says that UEFA Euro 2016 is the final tournament of the UEFA European Football Championship 2014–16 including all related official events and activities.

From 2010-12: https://www.uefa.com/multimediafiles/download/competitions/euro/91/87/57/918757_download.pdf I didn't find such a clear explanation, but still only terms "2010-12 UEFA European Football Championship" and "UEFA Euro 2012" are used.

From 2002-04: https://www.uefa.com/newsfiles/19079.pdf There's the same situation, but still only terms "2002/04 UEFA European Football Championship" and "UEFA Euro 2004: are used.

Piotr Bart (talk) 12:39, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

The article doesn't say "the "UEFA Euro yyyy" is an informal name". It says "[...] informally the Euros [...]" and "The individual events are branded in the form of 'UEFA Euro [year]'". "Euros" with "s" is indeed informal, and it's also true that the tournament is branded as "UEFA Euro [year]" (actually this is indeed used as the names of the individual events' articles). So I don't see there's anything wrong with the statement about "UEFA Euro [year]" here. But yeah, the sources you cited clearly use "UEFA European Football Championship" instead of "UEFA European Championship", I don't know why the article was named without "football". If you want to suggest moving it to "UEFA European Football Championship", go ahead. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 18:37, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tomchen1989: I see the confusion, I originally started the discussion on a separate page, but someone moved it here. I'm not speaking about this article, but about all the individual Euros articles: UEFA Euro 2004, UEFA Euro 2008, UEFA Euro 2012, UEFA Euro 2016 and UEFA Euro 2020, where it says: "commonly referred to as Euro yyyy", despite it being the official name, and officialy the only name for the final tournament as per sources "yyyy-yy UEFA European Football Championship" is name for the qualifications and finals combined. Piotr Bart (talk) 18:52, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Soviet Union

It doesn't make any sense that Belarus, Ukraine, Baltic states and Kazakhstan not acknowledged on the map as winners of European Championship in 1964 as part of the Soviet Union. --Grayraw (talk) 04:30, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

UEFA doesn't recognise those nations as "successors" to the record of the Soviet Union. Colouring them in the same colour as Russia would seem to imply that they'd won the competition as independent nations, when they haven't. – Pee Jay 10:32, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

UEFA and FIFA know nothing about history! Most of the best Soviet players were actually Ukrainians! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.63.82.69 (talk) 18:38, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Actually they know all about that, it's just not relevant. – Pee Jay 14:43, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

The winners table is stupid, Russia never won the UEFA European Championship, same goes for Serbia. Czechia at least was able to make to finals in 1996, partially justifying their succession. The Russian tri-color was never seen in final of the UEFA European Championship. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

^ http://www.uefa.com/uefaeuro/season=1964/

[1] [note] Germany is the most successful team because it won three times (gold) and was runners-up three times (silver). Spain won three times but was only runners-up one time. So Germany won three golden and three silver medals, Spain won three golden medals and only one silver medal.

[1] ttp://www.uefa.com/uefaeuro/season=1964/

[1]