Michael Ballack was a Sports and recreation good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result July 13, 2006 Good article nominee Not listed

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Sports and Games This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as High-importance). Germany: Munich High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Munich (assessed as High-importance). Football: England / Germany High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by the German football task force (assessed as High-importance).

Ballack was approached by Spanish giants Real Madrid, but decided to sign with Bayern Munich in a €12.9 m deal in 2002

Is there any source for 12.9 millions Euro? i love him......

Ballack has made 91 assists for the club section: http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/michael-ballack/bilanz/spieler_63.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ray1313 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I once again replaced the photography, because Image:2651449540.jpg has an unknown copyright status. --Stefan ■ 12:25, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ballack had 67 goals in 118 games —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.241.208.26 (talk) 22:09, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, does anyone know, how many DFB Cup appearances Ballack had in 1997? There were three games:

• 16.08.1997 1. FC Kaiserslautern (Ama.) - 1. FC Kaiserslautern 0:5
  • I don't know, he could played for both of them, cause he was first member of K'lautern Ama.!
• 24.09.1997 1. FC Saarbrücken - 1. FC Kaiserslautern 0:4
  • he was a substitute, no goals
• 28.10.1997 1. FC Kaiserslautern - Bayern München 1:2
  • I don't know

Unfortunately this said (unlike 1998 - 2005) nothing about the formations.129.217.129.133 00:42, 5 February 2006 (UTC) edit: Ok, cleared and justified (with process of elimination). Can anyone verify the table?[reply]

Kingjeff suggests that Ballack is still a Bayern player. As the German season has now closed, and Ballack has signed a contract with Chelsea, and Ballack's involvement in the World Cup with Germany, I really don't think Ballack will be training with or playing for Bayern again. It's true that he's contracted to Bayern until the end of June, but misleading and effectively incorrect to say he's still a Bayern player, especially given the rest of the article. I'm going to revert to showing him as a Chelsea player. Please discuss here before making any further changes. Robwingfield ^(talk) 16:03, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I just added that both clubs to the current club section and also stated that he'll be at chelsea on July 1st. I believe this would be the correct way of putting it. Kingjeff 16:05, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You put the following on my talk page:

It's not incorrect information. He's a Bayern player till June 30. Kingjeff 15:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you look here, then you'll see that his conntract expires June 30. Therefore his contract with Chelsea dorsn't start untill Jult 1st. If you look here then you'll see he's still considered a Bayern player.

Both pages haven't been updated since Ballack signed for Chelsea - e.g. "Even Bayern Munich, it seems, have learned to appreciate the priceless talents of the world-class Ballack. Contract talks have now worn on for a number of months and the club are growing impatient to secure the midfielder's services for the foreseeable future." I still feel that showing him as a Bayern player serves no purpose, and just looks inconsistent with the rest of the article. As per above, I'm reverting to showing him as a Chelsea player. Robwingfield ^(talk) 16:10, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But the the FIFA Word Cup Page didn't exist before he signed for Chelsea. His profile at the Bayern Munich website states that June 30 is when is contract would expire. That wouldn't change irregardless if the page was updated or not. In fact, if it was, then it would state that he'll be joining chelsea on July 1st. Kingjeff 16:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, so as you say, both pages are out of date and incorrect. We have no power to update those sites and keep them current, but we do have the ability to keep Wikipedia up to date... something you seem reluctant to do. I can't be bothered to argue with you any more. It's poor etiquette on your part to keep adding the incorrect information onto the page without discussing here first, but I'll leave your edit as is because I don't have the time or inclination to pursue this further. I'll leave you with this, however... does anyone in the world believe that Ballack is still a Bayern player? Of course not. Contracts in European football normally run until 30 June of the year the contract terminates. As Ballack has left Bayern and signed a contract with Chelsea, the legal status is probably that Bayern have released Ballack from his contract, and he is now contracted to Chelsea. Stating on Wikipedia that Ballack is a Bayern player is quite simply a ridiculous. Robwingfield ^(talk) 16:55, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I never said incorrect and out of date. I'll agree with that on July 1. Kingjeff 23:53, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a point, you both have fair points, though, Kingjeffs is rather more perdantic than practical, so I'd put Chelsea, but my point is, he is most certainly not playing for both clubs, so choose, dont put both. Philc _T^E_C^I 23:04, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you have to get caught up on technicalities and be so pedantic. I've changed my mind, I am now in favour of Chelsea, when people look to an article now, they expect to see the team he will be playing for when he next plays club football. Not the one he's never going to play for again. Its silly that you want to put Bayern up there. Whenever I've seen you posts on talk pages, you so often are abrasive and pedantic, and so unwilling to back down, basing entire arguments on misinformation and technicalites. It's a real shame. Philc _T^E_C^I 01:16, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If people want to see his "current club", they expect an accuracy. Saying he's a Chelsea player before July 1 is inaccurate. Kingjeff 14:25, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suit yourself, and Sheva is milan player is he? no, check his article. he's a chelsea boy too! Philc _T^E_C^I 21:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The answer is yes as of July 1st. Kingjeff 22:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

no the point was you were supposed to check the article, and all the other articles of players leaving their clubs to see that they are all listed as ther current club being the one they will be playing for next season. Philc _T^E_C^I 12:42, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FIFA has Ballack as a Chelsea player because all transfers are not official til July 1st. Kingjeff 14:22, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FIFAs site will be very slow to react due the immense amount of players they are dealing with, some player article eg Tomas Rosicky already states him as "currently playing for Arsenal", where as you'd argue he is still playing and contracted to dortmund. I think just to keep inline with all the other articles (and in mine and Robwingfields point of view at least, commen sense) he should be listed as a chelsea player, but I will not edit war, so I am just going to try and convince you. Philc _T^E_C^I 18:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can see you can never admit you're wrong. Kingjeff 20:35, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thats a harsh deduction. I think that you have a fair point, and thats why I won't change it. If I thought I was right and you were wrong I would just change it, but I don't, I think we both have valid points. I think the contract is purely a legal and financial obligation, and the dates on it are respective those matters only, I think now he is either not playing for anyone (except germany obviously) or his current club is Chelsea. And that all that happens on the 1st of july is that his wage goes up, and he gets his last packet from Bayern. But all I can see coming from this now is an argument, and people getting offended (I already am, but I'll let it slip), so you can reply to this, but I may not reply again. Philc _T^E_C^I 01:07, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is too much crap about why he was leaving bayern. Things like Bayern has "only a few world class players" and "they do not want to win the champions league" are bullshit... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.201.73.139 (talk • contribs) 04:18, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Which are the sources for this. I searched in the Internet and found nothing about that and I am very sure that some Sorbian pages would mention this.(I am myself form Lusatia) His lastname "Ballack" has Sorbian roots, that's true, but this is not enough to say he is of Sorbian origin. Maybe there was only one Sorbian ancestor 500 years ago and he surely have also German anesters so you have at least to say "partly Sorbian ancestry". You also do not claim all people which have a name of German origin are of German ancestry - if you would nearly all of the East European Jews would be claimed as of German ancestry. Fewer than 10% of the people in Lusatia are Sorbs (and the Germans are the majority for most parts of Lusatia since 1400), many others may have some Sorbian ancestors but were assimilated and mixed with Germans more than 300-700 years ago. In fact the Sorbs live mostly in the area northwest of Bautzen. In Görlitz lives nearly no Sorbs anymore since some hundred years. I don't care if Ballack is a Sorb or not but I have never heard from that and I am form the region myself. Thatswhy someone should indicate a source. --Knarf-bz 23:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hope it's better this way. I am a Serb actually, and Ballack is very popular in Serbia for his name and appearance: he does not SOUND German (Balak is Slavic), he does not LOOK German (dark hair and typical South Serb complexion), so the people use to say: Look at him! A real brother Serb from Lusatia! Funny, ha? We can recognize the masked Sorbs. As we were taught in school, Nimitz, Leibnitz, (and football players Littbarski) were also Sorbs, as well as all the people with their surnames ending with -OW (Karl Krolow, Lisa Kudrow, Genschow etc.). Was Bismarck a Sorb too? It was mentioned in my school too. You know, the fact that you Sorbs have lost your language doe not mean a thing. I am surprised with this thinking. It does not matter how many people speak Sorbian. In my history class my teacher said that 70% of East Germany was inhabited by the decendents of Polabski Serbi and Lužički Serbi. Dresden, Berlin, Brandendburg, these are all Slavic names. We were taught that we actally came from Branibor to the Balkans. Zhix 00:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just because there is one leter difference, this does not mean Sorbs and Serbs are the same nation. Sorbs are western Slavs, Serbs are southern. End of story.

well it's not quite the end of story, Sorb and Serb is how they are known in English, Slovenes and Slovaks both refer to themselves as Slovenski and have a slight alteration for the other people in their respective languages. As for being West Slavic as opposed to South, that only reflects the direction taken by their ancestors, it doesn't mean that they were not related earlier. I am not one of those who struggles to establish links between people and groups with SRB as part of their name, and others with the HRV+T (RVT) connections (known to Croats). As you can see, the Sorbs are referred to as Srbi of a kind in Serbia, my point is not that Sorbs and Serbs are descended from a common ancestor unrelated to other Slav groups, that is everything I argue against, my point is that as people do move away, their names alter as does the language and there is certainly no evidence to suggest that Lusation Sorb and Balkan Serb have different routes. --Evlekis 17:16, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Norum 5.07.2006

That only show how bad your history teacher is - sound like a German teacher 60 years ago - a concept of race which can't stand science of today. It's true that 70% of East Germany was inhabited by Slavic people in 700/800 (which by the way mixed a little bit with Germanic people which inhabited the region before) and then there was a big immigration of Germans and in most of East Germany this immigrants have been a much larger number than the Sorbs. In Lusatia it's a little bit different, but even there at least 50% have a Germanic backround. By the way the German nation in this time was still in becoming and for sure the Germans have also a slavic backround (even the Nazi-history books claimed that) This ancient Slaves mixed with a greater number of different Germanic tribes and slowly the "German" nation was formed. In fact I am very sure that all Sorbs are much more related to the Germans (the Germans and the Germanic tribes are NOT the same - the Germans are a nation formed a long time ago of maybe 75% Germanics 15% Slavics and 10% others - and in 300 years you will have Germans (if not Europeans) with African an Turkey backround) than to the Serbs. The families are related and mixed all over the years (genetical mix and cultural mix with a little bit cultural domination of the Germanic part), some relation to the Serbs is at least more than 1400 years in the past. The names are an relict which shows that there is a conection to Slavic people - not more - the same way many parts of East Europa and also the Balkan have some German or Austrian history, which you will at least find if you search in some important national liberies. If you want you can say that the Germans (not only the Sorbs) are related to the Serbs in some way. And how look a German? There are many people which look like Ballack (also among the Neo-Nazis ;-) - only 10% are real blond (Hitler had dark hair to) and in Serbia there are also blond people - by the way the great number of dark haired Serbs is not only related to the Slaves but also to the mix with roman and arabian people - Slaves are not alway typicaly dark haired - have you ever been in Russia? - many people which say today that they are Sorbs are also blond others have German family names - by the way there have been also cases that Germans took slavic names not only the other way around) Maybe this indicates some south European influence long time ago (the German nation is one of the most mixed nations in Europe by the way but after more than 1000 years it would be nonsense to construct a relation to the Serbs which mixed themself with other etnics - by the way the roots of all humans are in Africa, which you can see when you look at Serbs and Germans - all are humans. --141.30.134.200 11:29, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless, none of the information on Ballack's ancestry in the article has been shown as verifiable from any authoritative source, and its inclusion seems to violate WP:NOR. Feel free to return when you have properly sourced information. Gail Wynand 05:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This way the Kennedy's are "Italians" or so does the book "Italians in North America" claims. Apparently their ancestors moved from Italy to Ireland in 13th century, but this does not make them Italians anymore. Same thing with George W. Bush. He says to have some czech background from the middle ages, but this does not make him Czech.

Norum 4.07.2006

Just to come back to the point. Ballack has a Slavic route, nobody has disputed that, but there are two observations. Firstly the double-L is a Germanisation, the other being that if Michael identified as Wendish, he might have insisted his surname be pronounced /balla ts k/ (giving the Slavic 'c' the 'ts' sound). The dark hair connection is irrelevant, lots of Germans have dark hair, and in any case, the Slavic nations in Germany's vicinity tend to be lighter haired anyhow, where one tends to find the dark hair among more people is further south in Europe. --Evlekis 17:22, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"German" doesn`t mean "Germanic": At least one third of all Germans have slavic roots which obviously doesn`t make them Poles, Czechs or Russians. The German population east of the Elbe has always been a Germanic/Slavic mongrel race, with the Slavic strain dominating. Germany is nowhere as purely "Germanic" in its ethnic makeup as Holland or the Scandinavian countries are, and far from being a tiny Slavic minority within a predominantly "Germanic" population, the Sorbs are actually an ethnic group that has retained its Slavic language and group consciousness. Their non-Sorbian neighbours are every bit as Slavic as the Sorbs are, with some Saxon blood thrown in here and there. East Germany and Germany`s eastern neighbours are by no means divided along ethnic or - horribile dictu - "racial" lines. Poles and East Germans stem from the same stock - the line that separates them is lingual and cultural, not ethnic. Names like "Ballack" or "Littbarski" most likely hail from Slavic tribes like the Prussians or Obotrites from which most of the East German population is descended. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.168.207.33 (talk) 00:52, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

30 % of all Germans bear Slavic family names. That`s a well-known fact to anyone casually acquainted with this country (My name, for example, is Malinowski).

His father is/was a Bulgarian immigrant in der former GDR ("DDR").

That´s why he looks like he looks and has sucha name - which is NOT Lusitian/Serbian/Sorbian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.139.155.194 (talk) 16:41, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What facts are being disputed in this article? Kingjeff 13:26, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorbian ancestry? See above on the disussion page --Knarf-bz 13:36, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure his girlfriend's name is Simone Lamb.

u r absolutely right. I guess some crazy fan has put her own name.What a shameless nut!

Is the red card against Liverpool Ballack's first red card in his career or his first STRAIGHT red card in his career? I seem to have sources for both cases. Anyone can confirm either way? --Han Sheng 17:13, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Ballack agreed to join Chelsea on a Bosman transfer on May 15, 2006.[1] During his last season as a Bayern player there were rumours of" I don't have a link but I think someone should fix it. Yonatanh 15:53, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted in this edit, where the named reference that is still being called in the current version was deleted. I've put it back into the article in full now. Robwingfield ^(talk) 17:52, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to Ballack's official website, he is not married to Simone. --Muchness 23:47, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and I know on the Bayern Munich website, it said how he was single and had a girlfriend. Kingjeff 23:52, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A recent edit (diff) changed Simone Lambe's description to "civil-law" partner – is this a synonym for common-law partner? I can't find a reference describing her in this way on Google, and I am reverting to the previous description (simply partner). Can someone either shed some light on their relationship status or provide a source that clears this up? --Muchness 18:39, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that Ballacks full potential will be shown when he plays for Chelsea. The EPL has talanted and great players like Henry, Rooney, C.Ronaldo and his teammate Lehmann. Playing alongside Lampard, Robben, Makalele will surely only help him to show his skills better. Germany deserved a place in the finals, specially after Ballack missed the finals of the 2002 edition due to a red card.... two goals at the brink of extra time took the cup away from Germany. if it had gone to the penalties, i am sure germany would have won.

Simply a clarification here on this point "Ballack missed the finals of the 2002 edition due to a red card." He actually missed the 2002 World Cup final due to "accumulated yellow cards." He got the first yellow against Paraguay (92') in the round of 16, and a second yellow against S. Korea (71'). Two accumulated yellows equalled a 1 game suspension in knock-out rounds of the World Cup. I believe that this rule (2 yellows = 1 game susp) has been modified so that more star players will be available for the finals of such tournaments (World Cup and Euro Championships). Can anyone confirm this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.167.247.162 (talk) 17:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Good article nomination for Michael Ballack has failed, for the following reason(s):

I am failing the article as GA for now. Although the article has many qualities, it is still too much of a fluff piece trying to portray Ballack as a football wiz. Mind you I have absolutely nothing against Ballack but the overall tone of the article should be more factual and neutral rather than overly positive. There are also a few grammatical errors which although not crucial (I've fixed a few) still pull the article down just below what I feel should be the GA standard. Pascal.Tesson 03:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Completely agree - it's a long way from Good Article status - and far to 'newsy' for a start, IMHO. --Gavinio 13:54, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was announced days after signing with Chelsea, that he would be handed the number 13 shirt, even though William Gallas currently wore that number. So a change is in order for his number.

At the start of his career in the German 1. Bundesliga, Ballack had the shirt number "3", when he played for 1. FC Kaiserslautern. As a proof, refer to these pictures from the Champions League season 1998/1998: http://www.jamd.com/image/g/52938523 and http://www.jamd.com/image/g/71574582 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.173.167.194 (talk) 11:44, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the number '1' fell off.

Haha...

I don't know it for sure, but I think in the Champions League the numbers may have been different from the Bundesliga numbers back then. --Berntie (talk) 11:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then again, I noticed that the second pic is from a Bundesliga match. Strange… --Berntie (talk) 11:41, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"though his reputation in Germany has suffered recently because of the considerable unpopularity of his decision to leave Bayern for English club Chelsea."

That's not true. He has lost reputation in Munich, but not in Germany. the broad public and the press understands and respects his decision.

Thephoto given by you is not up to the mark... the photo should display him as either a chelsea or german player... he sould have some good expressions of determination and grit on his face this would make the page more attractive and more people would edit and access it resulting in the promotion of this article..... but your photo dosent seem to mathup to any off the standards....

If you can find a free image that can be used in the article that shows him in Chelsea uniform then that would be fine. It's not ok to use a fair use image when there is a free alternative, however. See Wikipedia:Fair use. jaco♫plane 13:01, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone name the source of Michael Ballack's middle name? I've never heard that he even had a middle name, let alone it being "Avlot"! This information isn't even on his official site!! --SaraFL 18:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard of any middle name of Ballack either. Kingjeff 19:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ballack has been at Chelsea for half a season and yet there is huge amount of detail in his career description at Chelsea. I feel that this section should be made more concise. What about his childhood? Tirupraveen 05:05, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do we know anything about his childhood? Kingjeff 05:12, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure there's quite a bit in his book. --SaraFL 18:09, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bit ridiculous. While I appreciate that a detailed resource is much more valuable than just a brief overview, I don't think there is a need for as much detail as exists in this section. Wikipedia isn't about detailing every action of every person. It should be about the significant and relevant parts. Having said all that people come to Michael Ballacks page to get information about him, the overview at the top gives them a good overview, and if they want to know more they can read further.

Alphonsediregiano (talk) 14:05, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox says 3 in 13 goals for Chelsea, career stats says 4 in 7? Whilding87 23:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And the national team goals count doesn't add up. Infobox says 35 of 79, the 'Total' column in the national team table of career stats section say 39 of 75 but in fact in that same table the friendlies -> goals column is summed to 15 when it should be 14. The whole thing should be updated and worked out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.65.175.59 (talk) 14:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who posted the comment about Ballack getting married to Simone Lambe this summer? There's no accreditation and nothing about it ANYWHERE else, so I presume it's complete fictitious and suggest it be removed. --SaraFL (talk) 22:19, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't post it and I also suggest to remove it (as it is irrelevant), but there are sources (unfortunately only in German): Fußballstar Ballack heiratet, Masterplan mit Michael, Der Ballack-Plan. According to Google Germany's yellow press reported it.--Jaellee (talk) 09:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the "sources" say he will marry her (possibly) in the middle of July. but you're right, it's yellow press stuff. somehow or other, at the moment they aren't married but live in a "nichtehelicher Gemeinschaft" what means something similar to common-law-marriage as suggested under point "marriage" above (Barfuss im park (talk) 12:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Can anyone give his name's pronunciation in IPA? I'm sure that we can't pronounce his name like English[1], but giving IPA for his full name is the best for readers. Vinhtantran (talk) 01:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

['mɪçaːʔeːl 'balak] 62.226.134.191 (talk) 14:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How did the club pay in Euros, wasn't even aware anyone was using it back in 1999. Come on the Mothers (talk) 21:32, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing its the equivalent of €4.1 million. Hubschrauber729 (talk) 22:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article is protected for 3 days due to edit warring over the units.

• This is not an endorsement of the current version.
• Use this time to come to an agreement on the most appropriate version.
• If revert warring resumes when the 3 days are over then edit-warriors can expect to be blocked even if they do not technically violate the three revert rule.
• In particular, editors who commence revert-warring without even attempting to engage in discussion (which is all recent disputants at the moment) will regarded be particularly darkly.

CIreland (talk) 02:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been watching the page, but not taking place in the editing conflict over units. From what I've seen, both get listed either way. My personal opinion is that since he lives and plays in the UK, and this is the English Wikipedia, English units should be preferred. Vincent Valentine 02:13, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this is the English Wikipedia, but then based on that point, we would have to change every page with metric first. Secondly on that point, not all English speaking countries use the imperial system. On your point that he plays in the UK, I stongly disagree. Yes he does play in England, but he is still German, he is still a German International, and just because he currently plays there and has for the last 2 years, he still spent most of his Career in Germany and that is where he became an established player. Final thought: Yes the article is related to the UK, but it is more strongly related to Germany, a country using the Metric system. Hubschrauber729 (talk) 02:24, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, the template for players in the football WikiProject lists feet and inches first, with metres second. Vincent Valentine 02:55, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

True, but you can only have one of the two and to be honest, that template looks to be extremely Anglocentric to begin with. Hubschrauber729 (talk) 03:14, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Vincent Valentine's sentiments.Londo06 10:13, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From WP:UNITS#Which units to use:

In general, the primary units are SI (37 kilometres (23 mi)); however, US customary units are the primary units in US-related topics, and it is permissible to have imperial units as primary units in UK-related topics.

This doesn't sound to me that imperial units are recommended or even even mandatory. Also, most of Ballack's life is not related to the UK at all.

As for the template for players, it is obvious that editors do not strictly follow it, as the – changes show. --Jaellee (talk) 15:18, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that nobody wants to dicuss. If I don't see any comment within a week or so, I will revert the units back to the metric system. --Jaellee (talk) 17:17, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't put my name to any words because I thought it was a fairly cut and dry thing; he plays in England he uses that system, he plays in Australia he gets cm first and if he plays in France he gets m first. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 17:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would this also apply to UK players in playing in metric countries? And what should be done when they retire? --Jaellee (talk) 17:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, thats why it should be based on who the player is, not where he/she is from. If the player is English, use imperial, if they're German, use metric, American, use imperial, Canadian, use metric. Simple solution. Hubschrauber729 (talk) 18:08, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Uniformity should be the key here. If a foreigner comes to the UK they adopt the dominant system. If a British citizen goes and plays in Germany then they would adopt that system, in order to fit in with their new team. There is also the fact that the height is taken from his official profile by the club that own him, and they give it in feet and inches.Londo06 09:11, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't metric be put first in any case, simply because it is the most common use of measurement worldwide? Not only that, but as far as I can see, the metric system is used in the UK. Even if both metric and imperial are used, the most commonly used unit worldwide should be used because Wikipedia is a "World" oriented site not a British site. Hubschrauber729 (talk) 18:16, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the neutrality tag. The article is still a mess (Chelsea section too long, international section too short, language and style issues, etc.) but it restricts itself to facts. --Berntie (talk) 19:35, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DAFINA RUGOVAJ VRELL KOSOVA 17.04.1992 PEJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.80.174.155 (talk) 11:40, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where is it??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.81.8.210 (talk) 15:36, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No one ever provided a reference so it got deleted. Providing references is crucial as it proves that the information is true. If you want to add it back please give your source by pasting the url at the end of the sentence between [ brackets ]. Thanks. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 21:07, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.242.210.218 (talk) 02:01, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Partially restored. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 15:09, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've overhauled the lead to full size. The main article could still do with expansion outside of the Chelsea section. Heavy reference work is needed: it's quite sad that (excluding height) the third citation in the text is to verify his transfer to Chelsea. It's a pretty lop-sided article. I hope that a German or Blues editor looks to resolve this situation sooner rather than later. It's pretty lame that this article has to wait for "SillyKoppiteBoy" to fix things (not to mention Drogba and Mourinho!). Come on Chelsea boys: don't let the side down! Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 02:05, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Things like that need a reliable source. Without a source I'll remove it. --Berntie (talk) 19:38, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have to mention ballack's assists!!91 assists exactly for the clubs. http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/michael-ballack/bilanz/spieler_63.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ray1313 (talk • contribs) 16:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fellow editors, we must add to Ballack's page the number of assists. Ballack has made lots of assists in his career (91) and the number of assists is very important for a footballer. Because they judge a football either by the number of goals or assists. So we must add it! There are lots of footballers' pages in wiki which contain the number of assists, why not ballack?! There are lots of sites containing the number of assists like http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/michael-ballack/bilanz/spieler_63.html . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ray1313 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't agree with you. Assists are not that important for a footballer and besides, different sources often have different numbers for assists because each source defines an assist in its own way. Adding assist columns to a statistics table with only one sourced data point and lots of empty cells looks quite ridiculous in my opinion. This topic was discussed a short time ago on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football, you might have a look at the discussion there. The fact that he has made a lot of assists in his career might be mentioned in the text (with a source), but as he is still playing, such information might to be obsolete after a short time. --Jaellee (talk) 22:12, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I just found out that Michael has won a couple of honors and individual titles in a site that are not mentioned in wiki. The site is in French, translate and check it out http://www.espacefoot.net/ballack.htm . What do you think? Shouldn't we add them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ray1313 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Who deleted my edit?! I added for the individual honors "goal of the year award 2008", "ranked 5th in the Ballon D'or award" and "Bayer Leverkusen team of the century". Three important honors. And three of them have a good source since 3 of them have been mentioned in Wikipedia. Why? Other editors, please add them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ray1313 (talk • contribs) 21:14, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That was me. First, you can't use Wikipedia as a reference, because it is not a reliable source and second, "ranked 5th in the Ballon D'or award", "Bayer Leverkusen team of the century" etc. are in my opinion not not so important. He has won "real honours" (where he made first place, not fifth) and we don't have to include everything here. --Jaellee (talk) 22:20, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, they are important. You see, Ballack is not important and famous for his individual honors, at all. Michael, plays for the team, and his career highlights his team integrity, sacrifices and others. So to be a member of a "team of the century" is quite important. Can you imagine, century! Its a footballer dream! For Ballon D'or, as we know, Ballack never won one. However, he was always nominated to it, always. And in 2002, he accomplished the impossible! He led Bayer and Germany to the final! Who won the Ballon D'or back then? Ronaldo, who won both of these finals with Madrid and Brazil. Thus, in my opinion, A Ballon D'or must be awarded to a man who never gives up, a man who puts behind the difficulties such as being very young and playing with the underdogs. Also, it must be awarded to man who needs recognition to his hard work, not to a man who won the Champions League and World Cup in the same year like Ronaldo. Finally, for the goal of the year award, did you see the goal?I don't think so. Ballack scored a fabulous goal from a free kick, when Germany needed that goal to qualify to the knockout stage. Also, this award proves that Ballack is a ruthless goal scorer, who scores when the team really needs that goal, and that he is one of these players who can score very nice goals. And for the sources, Wikipedia is of course a reliable source! If you these information are false, how are do they exist in other wiki pages?! So at the end, you can use Wiki pages as sources. Please, reconsider, and add these awards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ray1313 (talk • contribs) 17:33, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:Reliable Source and especially Wikipedia:Reliable source examples#Are wikis reliable sources? for why Wikipedia cannot be used as a reference.

A fifth place in a Ballon D'or is not really an outstanding honour (it's not bad, lots of footballers would be glad to come so far) but it's just a fifth place. A fifth place in a championship for example is not considered a honour worth mentioning. If you think he would have deserved the first place, you'd have take it up with the Ballon D'or jury.

He led Leverkusen and Germany to the finals in 2002, but that he was a runner up in the Champions League and in the 2006 World Cup is already mentioned in the honours' section. You could write something about it in the text sections, but be careful to keep a neutral point of view. --Jaellee (talk) 19:24, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well I see you are not a Ballack fan, are you? Still, it seems you are not convinced about the ballon dor. Ok, disregard that, but there are still two more awards that must be mentioned. So I will add today "the goal of the year in Germany award" and "Bayer Leverkusen team of the century" ( assuming that you are convinced that they must be mentioned). So I wish I won't have any problem editing these honors. Also, thx for the tip you sent me, I will take it into consideration when I find reliable sources to edit these changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ray1313 (talk • contribs) 14:59, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of information are missing in this part, and nobody continued?! In the next couple of the days, I will rewrite the whole part adding everything. However I'm not quite sure how to write it?Of course neutral point of view, but should I mention references and others? Can someone tell me the whole guidelines I should follow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ray1313 (talk • contribs) 19:14, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

==Awards ballack got voted uefa team of the year 2006 by uefa users, someone add it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.129.120 (talk) 18:22, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just saving this link for future reference: http://www.espnmediazone3.com/us/2012/02/24/former-german-national-team-captain-michael-ballack-joins-espn-for-uefa-euro-2012/. Is it enough (yet) for an “off-pitch” section? It may be too soon for a “post-retirement career” section. —ThorstenNY (talk) 18:24, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Minor problem, he made 18 appearances not 25 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.129.120 (talk) 16:31, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

he has made 18 league appearances and 25 appearances overall. Kingjeff (talk) 17:22, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Found a new one, bayer leverkusen top scorer in 2001-2002 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.129.120 (talk) 17:43, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking of adding a couple of man of the match awards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.129.120 (talk) 12:56, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He´s the third german player to win the EPL. The source is a bit poor. Please find another source to keep this valuable information — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.25.14.185 (talk) 06:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I changed the source, now I don't want anyone to remove it, unless he wants me to give him a lecture of why this is important! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.34.27.244 (talk) 09:38, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well thx for not deleting the edit. Now I'm Ballack biggest fan and I'm keen on doing changes to his wikpedia pages untill it illustrate every single detail! Yes, in the next couple of month, I'm gonna add man of the match awards, individual awards and Bayer Leverkusen section. So please, do not delete any edit, I'll make sure the edits have good sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.31.85.155 (talk) 18:59, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok this is madness. Who the hell deleted my edit!? I added two individual awards; Bundesliga Bronze Boot (2001-02) and German Footballer of the year 2008 (Runner Up). Two very important awards. Now the one who deleted the edit will sure tell me "real awards are awards where he has earned first place". Well not for Ballack! You know what, I call all Ballack fans to edit his page,ONLY BALLACK FANS. Those who don't know Michael's career will never understand the importance of these awards. And I myself am not obliged to give a whole lecture to convince you the importance of each award. But I will do that one last time for the ignorant who deleted the post. Michael Ballack was a marvelous goal scorer in Germany. But when he went to Chelsea, he's fantastic goalscoring record has burnt into ashes. Michael is magnificent in front of goal! That's why keeping "Bronze Boot..." is a must! Imagine, a midfielder...one season...17 goals! Now for the "German footballer of the year 2008 (Runner up). He got another runner up! If you know Michael Ballack, you will sure know the runner up enigma. Do you? Michael Ballack has lots of silver medals. He was runner up for lots of competitions/awards. For those who think that a runner up is not important, well they're just stupid. Some would give so much attention to the winner and ignore the runner up. Doesn't the runner up deserve recognition!? Built an amazing journey to fall at the last minute. Well Michael's silver medal deserve recognition...at least on Wikipedia! So I'm gonna add these two awards in the next two days. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.31.230.215 (talk) 22:52, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone edit this section; it's incomplete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.129.120 (talk) 12:29, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to edit it with a new style. The source is very reliable and correct. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.129.120 (talk) 13:22, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I finished the table. It took me exactly 3 hours so please do not delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.129.120 (talk) 15:02, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Who deleted my table? This is unacceptable! There's nothing wrong with the table I added, it's accurate, correct and from a very reliable source. For the person who deleted the edit, may he not say his name because I'll report him and he will be banned from editing! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.129.120 (talk) 15:47, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted again; you thinks its a game? well i'm gonna keep adding it..no prob--77.42.129.120 (talk) 16:21, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a better table. It's already been called messy and I'm calling it ugly. Kingjeff (talk) 16:48, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kingjeff, oh really? it's messy and ugly? Can I ask you who are you to edit Michael's page? If you are a fan, well it seems your not a good one, or you're a random jobless, lifeless guy, who spends his time deleting people's hard work on Wikipedia. Michael Ballack's page doesn't need you. This table I added illuminates every single vital detail of ballack's career. It should be the new form of table for footballers. I'm gonna keep on adding it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.129.120 (talk) 17:03, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I feel bad for you that you wasted 3 hours on a table like that. Multiple people have reverted your table. Kingjeff (talk) 17:13, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anon IP: Please do not keep adding it. Transfermarkt isn't the most reliable of sources and your table is not helpful in its appearance. Jared Preston (talk) 17:26, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's over the top and indeed messy. The reformat makes little sense as the previous table is in chronological order by team season. Also, your version probably fails quite a few criteria, including WP:NOT. PS - if you click the tab labelled "history", you can see precisely who reverted your edits. Thanks, --Jimbo^[online] 17:30, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Look guys, Michael Ballack really means a lot to me. And I want everyone to know how great he really is. And I think this table will shut his critics. And not just this table, but I'm keening on adding much more. Wikipedia has no problem with the source, but it seems you do. Well don't be that spontaneous; when you look closely at the table, its not bad at all. It depicts every single detail that must be mentioned. I think Michael Ballack is the best player in the world, and I want his wiki page to be perfect. Perfect to the extent that its neutral of course. The edits I'm adding are not speculations, nor opinions; they are facts. And Fact defines Wikipedia no? Plz, do not delete it again; thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.129.120 (talk) 17:37, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're going to find it hard to find support since you're are essentially trying to violate the neutral point of view policy. Kingjeff (talk) 22:44, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think Ballack needs a Style of Play section? Portillo (talk) 11:10, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe put it in after his career is over.Simione001 (talk) 12:30, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He is retired now, so I might start working on one soon. Portillo (talk) 01:10, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Michael Ballack. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.chelseafc.com/page/PlayerProfileDetail/0,,10268~27923,00.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.chelseafc.com/page/NewsHomePage/0,,10268~1112631,00.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.chelseafc.com/page/LatestNews/0,,10268~1685169,00.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/06/en/w/player/177667_BALLACK_Michael.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:37, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Ballack is an ethnic Romani/Gypsy^[1]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:5A:F14:58CF:75B3:8959:DFF7:1645 (talk) 09:59, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

la Repubblica: 1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:5A:F14:5883:16D:EB46:2366:A4A2 (talk) 16:59, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]