Talk:Serie A

Treviso and Bologna

Please don't remove Bologna and Treviso from the Serie A template,For financial reasons Torino and Messina can't enter the Serie A,and Bologna and Treviso are probably the replacers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.156.71.55 (talk • contribs) July 19, 2005

Trivia: Foreign players of the same nationality for one team in one match

The record for non-Italian players of the same nationality in one match is held by Internazionale. On January 18 2006, Cruz (one goal), Burdisso, J. Zanetti (captain), Verón, Cambiasso, Kily González and Samuel played as starters to complete 7 Argentine footballers for the team that defeated Treviso 0-1.

Reference: Diario Olé (Spanish)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Marianocecowski (talk • contribs) 19 January 2006 Forgot to sign! Mariano(t/c) 08:11, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Move Scandal Here

Anyone object? --Nissi Kim 04:24, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I do. What exactly are you asking?  SLUMGUM  yap  stalk  20:20, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

The Serie A scandal article is separate from the Serie A article. Look it up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serie_A_scandal_of_2006

Have a problem now? And I ment joining the two articles. --Nissi Kim 21:15, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Now you're making sense. You could add {{mergeto|Serie A}} and {{Mergefrom|Serie A scandal of 2006}} to the respective articles if you desire, but I feel that the articles should stay separate because the scandal article contains much more text than the Serie A article. As an alternative you could link the scandal article from this page, because otherwise people like me wouldn't realise it existed.
 SLUMGUM  yap  stalk  23:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

We can always get rid//edit some of the moot sentences in the scandal article. Yeah, I just realized this article is very weak, someone should fix this up a bit... --Nissi Kim 23:26, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

That Serie Scandal article should stay completely sepperate. In a few years, this scandal may have no reference to Serie A as a whole and hence should really stay seperate. Niall123 18:27, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Season 2005-06 has its own article, I do not see why it should go here, not to speak about merging the two articles.--Panairjdde 23:12, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

• Disagree. The Serie A scandal is very notable in its own right. Erath 10:58, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

• STRONGLY disagree. The scandal is likely to be remembered long after the rest of the season is forgotten, especially if one or more top teams get bounced to Serie B or lower. — Dale Arnett 17:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

• Disagree the serie A article is basically more conceptual and explanatory, expaling how the thing works, and basically listing perfomrances, while this scandal is more of a historical event. Its like merging WWII into war, or world. It just wouldn't work. Philc _T^E_C^I 14:12, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

• Disagree with merger. The scandal is about football clubs AC Milan, Fiorentina, Juventus, and Lazio being involved in match fixing. If these clubs are found guilty, they would be demoted to Serie B/C and perhaps will not be allowed to participate in international matches as punishment (ex. UEFA Champions League). Serie A article is about the league (rules, qualification, winners, etc), not the 4 individual clubs who happen to be in Serie A. So really, this is not a Serie A scandal, but a nitty gritty investigation on Italian professional football. Proposal: Move scandal article to 2006 Italian professional football scandal asap. It's more accurate. :) --Noypi380 12:37, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

• Disagree with merger and proposal, it's not really more accurate as the only clubs that are accused of being involved in the scandal are in the Serie A, none from Serie B, therefore Serie A scandal is more specific than Italian professional football scandal and also more accurate. Yonatanh 00:39, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Disagree that scandal page should be moved here. Plus, now not only Serie A teams are involved, it has come out that Serie B teams are being investigated. The scope of the scandal is continually widening, and should not be solely merged with Serie A. --Drshabazz 14:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

• Strongly Disagree I want to second the editors who noted that the scope of the investigation is widening and that the main Serie A article is (and should remain) concerned more with the abstractness of the league rather than a passing scandal. Vickser 00:46, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

• Strong disagree That article needs further expansion, is entirely legitimate as an independent topic and a merge would distort this article. Calsicol 09:20, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Okay. The tag was removed as agreed by the consensus here. :) --Noypi380 07:03, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Why on earth does the text in the intro to this article not mention the scandal? I strongly believe (that whilst they are clearly separate articles) some mention of the scandal should be in the text of the article, rather than just a link at the bottom.--Gavinio 09:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Seems you are the only one think in this way. I agree you should be bold and "add information" missing, but is the information is there, and a discussion is ongoing, you should not take unilateral steps.--Panairjdde 10:57, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Is it really a unilateral step? The info isn't there - quite simply, the article is missing something that is of key interest - maybe a header at the top or whatever saying - "for info on the scandal" etc. I'm not the most experienced wikipedian, so sorry if that was out of order - but from a random user's POV, upon finding the Serie A page, the most important issue at the moment (namely the aforementioned scandal) is nowhere near as obvious on that page as it could/should be, don't you agree?--Gavinio 15:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

If you are interested on news about Serie A, just go to Serie A 2005-06. This is not the first nor the most important "scandal". Furthermore, the trial is just begun, nothing is settled yet.--Panairjdde 15:32, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

"This is not the first nor the most important "scandal"." Hehe, fair enough - speaks volumes about the state of Italian Football at the moment I suppose. Right, I'll leave it there then. I still believe that some mention of an important event that is ongoing should be made in a wider article, but I'm quite happy to give up on this here if you think no current event tags or any mention in the text are appropriate.--Gavinio 12:07, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Er, can we not just add a disambiguation at the start of the article, no? "For the Serie A scandal, see..." (I'm sorry I can't do this myself, still a beginner.) Ryancolm 08:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Champions 2004/05 and 2005/06

Anyone know who will be awarded the tilte for the last two season after Juve had their revoked? Jimmmmmmmmm 20:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Either no one will be awarded the title or they will be given to Inter Milan, the best placed team who were not involved in the scandel. When Torino were stripped of the title many years back that years title was then left vacent so the title could remain vacent for the past 2 seasons again if that was anything to go by. Although I am just speculating there. We'll have to wait and see. Chad XIII 20:15, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

If Juventus don't win the appeal then the title will be vacant for those two seasons. 84.69.194.80 22:15, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

• Not that I don't trust you guys, but is there an official statement on this matter? Or does it hinge on the appeal?  SLUMGUM  yap  stalk   00:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

First championship has been RETIRED, the latter is NOT ASSIGNED. both means that there won't be any winner. If Juventus will win the appeal on this matter, they will be re-assigned to Juve. --necronudist 11:44, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Juventus FC received both titles (they have bot cups in their see), so why the sentence used two different words to describe the same (according to you) punishment?

Also note, necronudist, that if you revert, you should notice that you left the article in an unconsistent state, with references to a deleted note and 18 title for AC Milan. (And in general, you should avoid being ridiculous by labelling as "pathetic" an edit of yours of "pathetic" quality.)--151.47.76.121 00:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral, Juventus did win the titles even though they have had the titles stripped. This really should be made a lot clearer. As it stands there is just a big mysterious void.--Josquius 11:37, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, mister 151.47.76.121, I'll go to hell for this. =_= however don't try to game the system with me, I'm out of this business, for my fortune. Josquius, so let's assign the famous retired scudetto to Torino. Torino did win that! And all that stuff about the corruption of Allemandi...well...it doesn't really matter...nah? --necronudist 12:24, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Champions League and UEFA Cup

I am suggesting the page should mention the Champions League and UEFA Cup spaces available to Serie A teams. Ignoring the scandal for a moment, I think the first two teams gain automatic entry to the Champions League, while teams 3 and 4 gain qualification to the 3rd qualifying round of Champions League. Teams 5 and 6 gain automatic entry to the UEFA Cup tournament. I believe the COPPA ITALIA winner gets a UEFA Cup spot too, however, I don't know what happens to that spot if the CUP winner and the CUP runner-up are already qualified for the Champions League (as is the case in 2006 if the penalties announced July 14 are upheld). What if the CUP winner is placed 5th or 6th? Juveboy 00:24, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Officially, entries for Champions League are:

• 1- Inter
• 2- Roma
• 3- Chievo
• 4- Palermo

And for UEFA Cup:

• 5- Parma
• 6- Livorno
• 7- Empoli (or Milan)

Empoli, by now, can't take part to the competition. On Monday we will know if it will. Second judgment of the scandal (if it won't come over 25 july) can change something. 'til then, this is the situation. --necronudist 11:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Inter champions?

Have Inter been given the titles for the 2005 and 2006 seasons or has an Inter fan just decided to invade? Chad XIII 17:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

If you read below, you'll know the answer, it's a re-post. however: First championship has been RETIRED, the latter is NOT ASSIGNED. both means that there won't be any winner. --necronudist 18:22, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Why one is "retired" & the other "not assigned"? Which is the difference?--LimWRtacCHsua 22:08, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

A past title can only be retired, a title who's just been assigned is "not assigned". Like "oh all right guys, we were just kidding, you're on candid camera, give us back the title".

edit: it is assumed that a championship isn't finished 'til the begin of the next. Try to imagine if they retired the title in (e.g.) January. It would be "not assigned", not "retired". You can retire something you already assigned. Hope you'll understand. It's a bit complex, in my English :-) --necronudist 22:17, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I understand the difference by your words, but I am not sure you are right. Once the team is officially recognized as champion (remember the ceremony in Bari, after the Reggina match, in which they received the cup?), the title can be only retired, not "not assigned". Any reference for your interpretation?--LimWRtacCHsua 23:05, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

=_= omg... my reference is English (Italian) grammar. And judge said the first is retired, the second not assigned. Do it like you want. --necronudist 12:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I just want to know why having two different words if the effect is the same (according to your version).--151.47.115.171 21:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I wonder if 'retired' is the right word in english Juveboy 21:37, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

"vacated" is usually the term used in American English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.19.89 (talk) 07:48, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

=_= Mr. 151.47.115.171: A past title can only be retired (yeah vacated maybe is better) , a title who's just been assigned is "not assigned". like I wrote, look above... no, not the sky. And, I repeat, it's not MY version. --necronudist 11:19, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't dare change the word 'retired' on the article - it may cause another stampede of edits are re-edits, but I do think 'vacated' sounds better. The World Cup trophy was 'retired' in 1970, but Juventus' scudetto was 'stripped', 'revoked' or 'vacated'. Juveboy 19:23, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

In the end, it looks like there was actually a difference between the two words...--Semioli 10:04, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Inter have been awarded the title for last season, otherwise they wouldn't be able to wear the Scudetto on their shirts for this season. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.141.98.221 (talk) 12:46, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Trivia: Record for most straight wins

Roma is not the only team that reached this record.
Milan did the same on 1989-90 season, as it can be easily verified here: [1]
Milan won 11 matches in a row as follows:

17a GIORNATA 30 dic 1989 Bari - Milan                    0-1     Van Basten
18a GIORNATA 07 gen 1990 Milan - Cesena                  3-0     Donadoni, Tassotti, Van Basten rig.
19a GIORNATA 14 gen 1990 Lazio - Milan                   1-3     Amarildo (LA), Massaro, Fuser, Colombo (MI)
20a GIORNATA 17 gen 1990 Milan - Atalanta                3-1     Caniggia (AT), Van Basten 3 (MI)
21a GIORNATA 21 gen 1990 Udinese - Milan                 0-2     Van Basten 2
22a GIORNATA 28 gen 1990 Milan - Genoa                   1-0     Massaro
23a GIORNATA 04 feb 1990 Fiorentina - Milan*             2-3     Baggio rig., Kubik (FI), Massaro, Van Basten 2 rig. (MI) *played in Perugia
24a GIORNATA 11 feb 1990 Milan - Napoli                  3-0     Massaro, Maldini, Van Basten
25a GIORNATA 18 feb 1990 Milan - Cremonese               2-1     Massaro, Van Basten (MI)
26a GIORNATA 25 feb 1990 Roma - Milan                    0-4     Tempestilli aut., Van Basten 2, Massaro
27a GIORNATA 04 mar 1990 Milan - Ascoli                  2-1     Stroppa, Tassotti (MI)
Please don't remove the entry.

Peximus 11:04, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

You are missing the fact that the 16th match, the 0-0 against Verona which should have been played on 17 december 1989, was actually played on 7 february 1990, between the 23th and 24th matches, thus interrupting the record to 7 straigh victories. See here and here.--Semioli 16:00, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Scandal: second round

• A.C. Milan: -30 in 2005-06 and -8 in 2006-07, 3rd place: Champions League
• Juventus: Serie B -17
• Lazio: Serie A -19
• Fiorentina: Serie A -11 --necronudist 19:17, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

what's the difference

2004-05 – vacated
2005-06 – not assigned

what's the difference between the two expressions? isn't the status of the champion in both seasons the same? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.154.102.251 (talk) 11:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

See the 'Inter champions?' section above. Henry^Flower 11:40, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

List of foreign Serie A players...

Out now! Collaborate! --necronudist 08:41, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

@ 2001:D08:1207:415:1:0:F5BA:4AE4 (talk) 02:15, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

"Serie A records" to have its own page

I propose for an article on Serie A records to be created and that all the individual and team records contained here are moved there, in a way similar to FIFA World Cup records. Please advise if this is agreeable. --ChaChaFut 17:01, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I like the idea. Will take a lot of work to collect all the information for it though. The info at the bottom of the Serie A page is a start though. Niall123 19:44, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

That would be nice, currently the article isn't well readable. The comparison is the article about FA Premier League, it has its own page of stats. Asendoh 21:23, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

45/46

i've cancelled a small part of the article about the Championship 1945/46 where it was wrote that it was an unofficial championship.
it's completely invented!
the 45/46 champioship is registred as a regular one, and the winner team, Torino, was and is still considered as the regular champion club. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samoano~enwiki (talk • contribs) 12:03, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Samoano, but it's like when you play a rugby match and you don't receive the cap. No player is awared with the cap for that championship, usually. And, however, it wasn't a "normal" championship: there were two distinct championships ("Alta Italia" North Italy and "Centro-Sud" Center-South Italy, the latter with mixed Serie A and SERIE B teams) and then one final group with best four teams of the two championships. --necronudist 12:25, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Co-Ownership

Can someone write a section about co-ownership of a player? As it is something unique in Italian football. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.40.37 (talk) 23:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Capocannoniere

Should have it's own article like the Pichichi Trophy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.112.59.149 (talk • contribs) 16:00, February 2, 2007

At some point it did, but then it was merged into here. I am neutral on the matter, but I would like to point out that the Pichichi is the actual name of an award that is given to the top scorer, while capocannoniere is just a term used for 'top scorer'. I assume that an award/trophy is also given in Italy to the Serie A leading scorer for the season, although if that's the case I ignore whether the award has a name. --ChaChaFut 03:56, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

"History" section

Can we can some work done on this section specifically?.... its supposed to be history buyt 75% of it is recentisms about events over the last two seasons. - Deathrocker 14:00, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Agree, it's very uneven. An option is to delete the paragraphs and link to the 2006 Serie A scandal article alternatively. StuartFreeloader 11:57, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Mini-World Cup?

I remember the Serie A was called "Mini-World Cup" by some soccer fans in the early 1990s. During its latest heyday in the late 80s and early 90s the Serie A had almost all of the best soccer players on the planet under the same professional league, and thus you saw virtually everyone playing in the World Cup players in Serie A matches. Of course nowadays the Premiership and La Liga has left it far behind in terms of commercial values. Anyone can add to this bit? --JNZ 06:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Individual honours

Does Serie A, like some other top leagues, have a minimum number of matches in a season that a player for the winning club must have played to be considered a champion? Or is it enough to have been in the squad? Or does the concept of individual champion not mean anything officially in Serie A? Just curious really, but if it is treated in the official rules, it might be of interest. OMHalck 17:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Usually if a players plays almost 1 game (1 minute, 1 second...doesn't matter) he's considered champion. Pretty sick. --necronudist 18:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Double-numbered kit numbers in Italian league

Did you notice many players hold numbers like 22,33,44,55...99 ? I'm not just talking about Kaka or Ronaldo but also about other players I've noticed playing in nearly random Italian league matches. Can anyone explain why is there so much love to these kind of kit numbers? YemeniteCamel 06:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

'cause if you can't have 9, you can have 99 (and you're a double number 9). D'you remember Zamorano's 1+8? --necronudist 08:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ItaliaLegaCalcio.jpg

Image:ItaliaLegaCalcio.jpg 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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 01:43, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Lega Calcio.png

Image:Lega Calcio.png 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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 09:06, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

What is the current media income?

Does anyone have any information on the total value of the current media deals, especially the total for all clubs, and the individual figures for the biggest clubs? Postlebury (talk) 12:59, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation

How is the name of the league pronounced in English? Is it worth mentioning in the article?Armandtanzarian (talk) 20:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Juventus

The section at the bottom of the introduction boasted that Juve is "the most successful Italian team", which goes against Wiki NPOV protocol because it is a subjective way of stating the facts. It should be said that Juve has won the most Scudetti as Milan has won more Champion's League titles, which could make them the most successful Italian club by some standards. It does not matter if it is linked to other Wiki articles showing the number of Juve Italian titles. Also, it stated that Juve is the only team to have won all official international titles, but it has not won the FIFA Club World Cup. Only Milan has won this competition. (talk) 19:30, 3 May 2009 (EST)

Italian football host tournament organized by Lega-Calcio. Juve have more scudetti, Italian cup, official national titles and overall titles won than ANOTHER Italian club. It's not POV, is a FACT recognized by FIFA. Also, World Club Cup = former Intercontinental Cup. --Dantetheperuvian (talk) 20:39, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

That is wrong on several points: The InterContinental Cup was REPLACED by the Club World Cup and has a completely different format. Juventus WAS the only team to have won all titles it was eligible for at that point in time, but it has not won ALL titles and it has not won all titles it is currently eligible to win, including the FIFA Club World Cup. The wording must be changed to reflect this. Milan has won the FIFA Club World Cup, UEFA Champions' League, UEFA Supercup. Juventus has won the UEFA Champions' League, UEFA Supercup, and UEFA Cup. In order for Milan to win all titles, it must win the UEFA Cup. And in order for Juventus to make the same claim, it must win the FIFA Club World Cup. The Intercontinental Cup, UEFA Cup Winners's Cup and UEFA Intertoto Cup are all defunct. If you want to say Juventus has won more scudetti and Italian Cups, you should say exactly THAT. You are misinterpreting the article you are citing because it was written poorly. "the most successful Italian club of all time" should mean they are the most successful team in Italian domestic football because they are not more successful than AC Milan in European or World competitions. http://www.fifa.com/clubworldcup/organisation/media/newsid=687173.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.52.12.102 (talk) 09:28, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Brazil is the most successful National team in the world because has won the world title most times. Juventus FC is the most successful Italian club because has won MOST official titles than another team (Scudetti-Italian Cup-UEFA Cup-National titles and Overall titles won), FACT recognized by FIGC, UEFA & FIFA. The international titles are not considered because THIS article is about Serie A and in Serie A Juve is the most winnner club. Juve has won all international titles because has won ALL UEFA club competitions and the World title (Intercontinental Cup). THINK before write. --Dantetheperuvian (talk) 08:10, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Lega Calcio Serie A

Is is stupid to say Lega Calcio Serie A is formed in 2010-11 season, it is Lega Calcio Serie A for years. In 2010-11 season just saw Lega Calcio (the league office which held Serie A ans Serie B) split to Lega Serie A (the Serie A league official) and Lega Calcio (which seems held Serie B and Coppa Italia) Matthew_hk tc 01:38, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

And the bad side???

This article doesn't seem to mention three major negative issues: a) corruption in the system. b) the use of doping in the 1990s. c) the problem of racism. We should cover these unsavoury aspects too. Malick78 (talk) 18:17, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

2011-12 teams

Before updating the teams, isn't it better to wait for FIGC to officialize the list? Atalanta is still involved in this year's scandal... CapPixel (talk) 13:10, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Map

Added a map based on the spain la liga map — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.95.201.18 (talk) 08:06, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

calification rules

In the early years of Serie A teams are clasified only after the points.

Until 2004 the Rules for classification were:

1) points; 2) goal difference; 3) number of goals scored.

When were this rules introduced? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vfb1893 (talk • contribs) 19:10, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Europa League third spot

"A third UEFA Europa League spot is reserved for the winner of the Coppa Italia. If the Coppa Italia champion has already qualified for the major European tournament by placing in the top three of Serie A, the third UEFA Europa League spot goes to the sixth-ranked team in Serie A. If both Coppa Italia finalists finish among the top five teams in Serie A, the sixth-ranked team in Serie A is awarded the UEFA Europa League spot"

It appears the Coppa Italia losing finalist can get the spot but it seems like something is missing here.

Also second sentence should probably be rewritten as this: "If the Coppa Italia champion has already qualified for an European tournament by placing in the top five of Serie A, the third UEFA Europa League spot goes to the sixth-ranked team in Serie A." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.142.254.250 (talk) 16:36, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Looks like that information is outdated. Formerly, the losing finalist could qualify for the Europa League if the winner already qualified for European football, but that is no longer true. I'll rewrite it like you said. Kinetic37 (talk) 18:49, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Serie A. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060902181900/http://www.g14.com/G14members/index.asp to http://www.g14.com/G14members/index.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131208125358/http://en.archive.uefa.com/competitions/eusa/history/season%3D1985/intro.html to http://en.archive.uefa.com/competitions/eusa/history/season=1985/intro.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:40, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

old logo

@Vaselineeeeeeee: Despite wikipedia is not a gallery, the old logo of Serie A serve as identification of the league as it had much different design. Some other football club article also had old logo in it such as Manchester United F.C.. Matthew_hk tc 17:45, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Clubs. This is not a club. I don't see any at Premier League or La Liga for example. The old logo provides no info at all and is not needed. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 19:00, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

It had in Bundesliga. Matthew_hk tc 01:21, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

I still don't think one single old logo is necessary or contributes to the article. What's the point of one old logo? Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 01:37, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

2018–19 season new logo

Serie A Official website just released a new logo for 2018–19 season. I think Serie A logo in this article should be updated. phenolla 🖋 ^{talk · contribs} 03:42, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

The Seven Sisters

In the Nineties the "Seven Sisters" was Juventus, Milan, Inter, Roma, Lazio, Parma, Fiorentina, but now they are Juventus, Milan, Inter, Roma, Lazio, Napoli and Atalanta, not Fiorentina. An italian link here --Conviene (talk) 14:49, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 May 2021

This page needs to be edited to reflect Inter Milan’s recent win of the 2020/21 Serie A league title. They’re not shown as current champions, neither is the 2020/21 title attributed to them in the “Champions Sector”. Andjelkovich (talk) 10:50, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

• ”Champions” sector. Andjelkovich (talk) 10:51, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:20, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

List of Seasons

Is there a list of Serie A seasons somewhere? Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 02:03, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

I guess List of Italian football champions is kind of what I was looking for. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 02:05, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

This is the right logo!

Logo Serie A TIM 2021.svg RealSonny (talk) 13:00, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

@RealSonny: That file does not exist on en.wiki. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 13:06, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Serie a 2021.svg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:22, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Sampdoria and Sampierdarenese

@Tenebra Blu and Footy Tea: pinging involved editors. Apparently, a discussion was already held at it.wiki, and it seems that it was decided to treat the two teams separately from a statistical point of view. This is reflected in the Italian project's all-time Serie A league table. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 21:20, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Every wiki is independent, let’s speak about en.wiki here please! ;-) --Footy Tea (talk) 21:22, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Although each wiki is independent, I still think that the ideal is a consistency between the data entered in the different wikis, as far as possible. By the way, in it.wiki Sampdoria and Sampierdarenese have separated pages. --Tenebra Blu (talk) 06:54, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: English 112 - Freshman Composition

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 February 2023 and 29 March 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lairry (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Lairry (talk) 22:55, 21 March 2023 (UTC)