Template talk:Football kit/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This 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.

Discussion

For a (hopefully) complete list of patterns, check out User:Johan_Elisson/football_kits. --Elisson 18:21, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

I have moved Johan's list here. ed g2s • talk 14:51, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

I've edited my list according to the style here and linked to my page as a template. That way, I won't have to go here to update it. And it can be used on more pages without having to update all of them. Feel free to edit my page if you find new styles. I've decided not to include a few because they either look not very good or are using the wrong syntax in the names. :) --Elisson 16:30, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

I have moved your list to a proper template file (updating works better) which is a more suitable namespace. ed g2s • talk 17:00, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This template produces inelegant results for me in IE (one-pixel coloured lines across the top and above the socks) and downright shocking results in a variety of browsers when the text size is increased (blocks of colour at sides of table cells).

The reason seem to be this: as the width of the {{{Title}}} grows with the text size, the bottom cell becomes wider than the kit, and determines the width of the whole table. Then the table cells with the kit in have to stretch to fit the total width, but the images in them keep their size, revealing some (coloured) background.

I've been experimenting with an alternative template, at Template:Football kit/temp. You can see the effects at User:Rbrwr/sandbox (the grey sides are in order to see the position and size of the extra table cells I've added). It works perfectly in Moz but still has one one-pixel horizontal line in IE, and breaks in "largest" but not "larger" size in IE. It breaks with large font sizes in Opera, but that's OK because you normally zoom instead. --rbrwr ˆ 14:18, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Broken

This template is currently broken after the upgrade to MediaWiki 1.5, I think because of this bug - images with missing metadata are being displayed at 1px x 1px by default in some browsers. Apparently they're on the case and the image metadata are being updates as a background process. In the meantime I've experimentally updated the template with image widths hardcoded, but this might not work for all kits, so feel free to revert my edit. Qwghlm June 28, 2005 10:09 (UTC)

Now that the bug has been fixed, I've reverted the template back to its original form. Qwghlm June 28, 2005 16:29 (UTC)

New kits

How do you add new kits to this template and to Wikipedia? The reason I am asking this is Willem II. The article about this club shows the body of the shirt as having red/blue stripes, whereas the shirt in reality has red/white/blue stripes, after the Dutch flag. It's similar to , but obviously with blue stripes instead of black. Aecis 1 July 2005 19:23 (UTC)

create the image file, named Kit_body_red_white_blue_stripes.png. ^wS;✉ 15:50, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Hi! I tried to create a new template: I created the image , but, when I put it in the table above it doesn't work... why? CapPixel 08:13, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

shorts and socks

How do you fix own patterns for shorts and socks on a team? Arnemann 13:52, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Not currently possible. -- Elisson • Talk 16:36, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

The template is designed to give an overview of the team colours. Socks and shorts are not usually patterned enough to be considered part of the decription of the team colours. ed g2s • talk 14:32, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

And I agree on that. -- Elisson • Talk 15:01, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Currently then it is impossible to show the Liverpool Champions League kit. It's mostly white, but with a green strip all along the right hand side of the shirt (including one green arm) and shorts (see here). aLii 17:41, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

There appears to be an assumption that socks are a single colour. Disregarding minor trim details many socks have a different colour top. Couldn't a calf colour be added. The image appears to cut the bottom off any way. Barfbagger 06:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Problems with Kit colour and IE

I have come across a problem with some of the coding in the template and it's rendering with IE. Apparently the bgcolor= variable doesnt allways work in IE, causing some colors to either render incorectly or not at all. So i have switched from bgcolor= to style="background: whcih seems to solve the problem in IE, and shows no effect in Firefox, which handles the bgcolor= variable ok. I am not sure what effects if any it will have with other browsers, but if someone has a problem with the new rendering then please say so. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 20:41, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

de:Vorlage_Diskussion:Football_kit

Clevedon Town F.C.

Could someone do the home kit (scroll to the bottom) of Clevedon Town F.C.? There are the 'diamonds' in the table above. Thelb⁴ 11:45, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Like this, maybe? Wiggy! 00:06, 3 January 2006 (UTC)





Clevedon FC home kit

Female version (field hockey kit)

Can anyone tell me if there is a female version (with skirt) of this template, for use in a women's field hockey team? Thanks! ironcito 17:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I think I've got the basics roughed out based on the football kit. You can use existing arm and body patterns or add your own to the starter at Field hockey/pattern list. Skirt.png supports solid colors as is, but I would imagine you'll need to support patterns there as well? That would be the first required enhancement, I suppose. Socks are socks. General syntax is the same as football's.

Image:Kit short left arm blackshoulders.png		Image:Kit short right arm blackshoulders.png



Test field hockey kit

Template:Field hockey club info box (needs to be edited to add/remove the info you want)
Template:Field hockey kit
Field hockey/pattern list (master pattern list for your needs)

I would guess that you should also expect to set up the requisite talk pages for this stuff and leave the football stuff to the football folks. Wiggy! 23:13, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Okay, added support for skirt patterns and will update pattern list. Try it out. Wiggy! 23:44, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I haven't tried the skirt patterns, but it works great! Check it out at Las Leonas if you like. Thanks! :) ironcito 02:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Heh. Very cool. Have fun with it. Wiggy! 06:10, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Error with a couple of templates?

I've just been trying to amend the Spurs away shirt, by using the following:

However the main part of the shirt is not white - but that amusing grey colour - hence when you try and overide the colour by amending the 'body' colour it still remains the same. See here for an example. I'm not entirely sure how to make the body a white colour like the rest, yet keeping the yellow trimming. For example:

Any ideas? Cheers! --Cavs 19:33, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't really understand what you want to do? You want the away shirt to be white but with yellow sides? -- Elisson • Talk 19:39, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry - should have made myself more clear - The shirt should be blue with yellow trimmings, but when you set the base colour to blue, it does not appear, only the grey colour with the yellow trimming above....This doesn't seem to be right! Hope I make sense...

--Cavs 19:45, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

The away shirt on Tottenham Hotspur F.C. is blue with yellow sides. At least to me. -- Elisson • Talk 19:51, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I think its got to do with the colour profile and software you are using to do the work. I'm using Opera as a browser and all the kit bits show up clean with the proper transparencies. If I use IE then a number of the shirts and other elements show up grey where they should be transparent.

So ... I pick up a clean piece of the kit that I want to use with a good transparency and I modify it under Adobe Photoshop. When I load the file it asks me if I want to colour manage it by changing the colour profile. I reply no and that leaves the transparency intact.

So you need graphics software that'll make a proper job of managing transparencies. I've fixed a couple of the elements in the kit, but only really as I've needed them. Hope that offers a few clues, or maybe someone more technically attuned can take it from there ... Wiggy! 20:24, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I had the same problem trying to put the yellow sides onto Bewdley Town F.C. - the body of the short went grey (I also see the Spurs away shirt as grey) - I am using IE. In the end I just left the yellow bits off the Bewdley shirt.... ChrisTheDude 08:55, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

You need to save your PNGs as paletted (256 colours), with a single transparent colour. IE6 still does not support 8-bit transparency, and will show up as grey. Even better, switch to Firefox. ed g2s • talk 15:25, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

SC Villa

Could someone please make the homekit of SC Villa for me? I'm having real trouble. Home Kit: Maroon shirts, Maroon shorts, White socks. Away kit: Cyan shirts with a white horizontal bar across the middle, Cyan shorts, White socks. Dodokiwiemu 16th June 2006





Home colours





Away colours

Like this? Pinkfloyd123 02:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Silkeborg IF

Could someone do the away kit of Silkeborg IF? There aren't the funny green things in the table above. Kalaha 09:24, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

All away shirts showing as black?????

Currently (at least on my screen, running IE6), all away shirts are showing as having a black body - anyone know why this is???? ChrisTheDude 13:39, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

whatever it was seems to be fixed now..... ChrisTheDude 14:27, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Valenciennes

I've got a kit that I'd like to get some help making.

Valenciennes, a French club to be promoted to Ligue 1 in 2006-07, has a rather unusual kit. The kit picture currently in the article, taken from the French article on the same club, does not reflect the current design. I'll try to describe it in words:

Home:

Red body
Red right sleeve (that would be the left side when facing the kit)
White left sleeve (right side when facing the kit)
White horizontal stripe, but...
- The stripe is narrower than the one in the standard "whitehorizontal" template. It's aligned so that the bottom of the stripe coincides roughly with the bottom of the sleeve hole.
There's also a white stripe on the opposite side from the white sleeve.
Making it even more complicated, the horizontal stripe curves into both the white sleeve and the side stripe.
The shorts also have a white stripe on the opposite side from the white sleeve.
Socks are the same shade of red.

Away:

There are two away kits. The primary away kit, which I plan on using, uses colors exactly opposite from the home kit—white with red striping. No info as to the socks. The third kit substitutes black for red and yellow for white.

You can find a picture of the current shirt in the club's official catalog.

Think someone could help me out? — Dale Arnett 05:15, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Something wrong with the image

I made a new body pattern, with a white stripe on the right, for the Indian national football team. But there's some problem with it, two white dots on both sides of the stripe that refuse to go. I've redone the image 3 times but can't seem to get rid of it. -Aabha (talk) 18:52, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I see no dots or anything else that looks wrong. Did you purge your cache after re-uploading the image? – Elisson • Talk 18:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah..looks fine now. Aabha (talk) 20:18, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Burnley F.C.

Im not very good with code and i had a good at making the new burnley kits so i wondered if someone could please make this. The kits are here (bottom for full kit)--Childzy 10:48, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Panathinaikos

Could someone add the kit to the PAO page? Thanks! --Jeffcole 03:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Watford

What's going on with the Watford kit? ChrisTheDude 13:30, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Fixed. – Elisson • Talk 13:33, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Hockey Jersey Templates

Could somebody make a template for a hockey jersey? We don't have to include the logos of hockey jerseys if you guys don't want to. It could work if we try to do the jersey designs on the hockey pages in addition to the football pages. How about it?Toonmon2005 03:08, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Are hockey jerseys significantly different from football jerseys.....? ChrisTheDude 20:12, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

You are right ChrisTheDude. They aren't. I just wanted to get that out in the open so people could start posting the hockey jersey kit images on the hockey pages. I know about the "Be Bold" policy but I'm not that good with images.Toonmon2005 04:04, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Greece National Team

Ive made the new kits for the greece national team but they are in JPG format and I am not sure how to put them on the page...any help would be great

SVG

Time to convert the images to SVG? =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:45, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps, but IE still doesn't support 8-bit transparency. I'm waiting for a parametised SVG extension. ed g2s • talk 18:24, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Soviet kits

I know that minor details should not be included in the kit, but I believe the CCCP inscription in the Soviet kit is a relevant feature, so, I created the following two pictures:

If you don't find them useful, please discuss with me before removing. Thanks! Afonso Silva 22:42, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

The inscription was not a major characteristic of the jersey. Having it is like saying that Brazil jerseys should sport the technical sponsor logo.--Kwame Nkrumah 23:16, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

For many decades the inscription was the only thing on the shirt, apart from the dye and the numbers on the back. Slumgum T. C. 23:35, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

For many decades teams had only their emblems on their shirts, yet we do not put emblems on the kits.--Kwame Nkrumah 00:19, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

There are several reasons for that, but CCCP is a very notable exception. Perhaps you should try to get a consensus before continually removing popular edits. At least 4 users want the CCCP logo, so you currently seem to be in the minority.

I have an idea. List the two kits at WP:IFD and we will be obliged to accept the consensus. Slumgum T. C. 01:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a democracy. A wrong decision is still wrong even if you gather 10 friends of yours. And note that the rule that no decoration should stay in team kits has been backed by more than 4 people.--Kwame Nkrumah 11:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I second Slumgum's request, unless we're all happy with Afonso Silva's jersey (with which I personally am). --Palffy 17:36, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I think this kit is definitely the one that is highly recognizable and and is of very high importance.–Vitriden 19:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Looks like my response goes unheaded, [1] and [2]. What do you guys think we should do? --Palffy 14:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I also support the CCCP, as it has always been a major aspect of Soviet sporting uniforms, something that transcends "simple writing". _└ ^OzLawyer / _talk ^┐ 19:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

A major aspect of any football team is to have its emblem on the shirt. Are you going to support also emblems on every team jersey?--Kwame Nkrumah 00:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I would support it. But, this is of even more importance. I can't see anyone supporting your proposal, and, therefore, I'm reverting it back. You don't own Wikipedia, you know. –Vitriden 08:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

That is true. And for sure, it does not belong to people who "personally would support", but they don't since nobody else is supporting. Nobody owns WP, but, at the same time, WP is not a democracy: the end result is that a wrong interpretation is wrong even if supported by a majority.--Kwame Nkrumah 10:17, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

You don't give a damn about other people's opinion, do you? You have broken the 3RR, you are in minority so minor it consists only of yourself, you don't listen to what other people have to say and you don't deserve to be here, as far as I am concerned. I have nothing to talk with you about. Goodbye.–Vitriden 11:51, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I actually care about other people opinion, otherwise I would not read and answer them (I am not aswering Palffy comments for other reasons), while you have written a post only to tell me you have nothing to talk with me about. I also care about "consensus" — not "majority", note — but only when it has been elaborated on non-arbitrary basis. There is a basic concept about football kits, that says that football kits were been introduced to show the general appearing of a kit, without regards to details (ever wondered about why there is no possibility to introduce details in shorts and socks?). The only reason that seems non-arbitrary is the recognizability of the jersey, which, however, is easily discarded with the reasoning that if we were aimed to easy recognizability we should put photos, or at least put the emblems on the shirts.

On a final note, please appreciate how I am not answering to your personal attacks, telling you, and everyone here, how much I dislike you.--Kwame Nkrumah 13:03, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

So if its not a democracy, is it a dictatorship with you in charge, eh Kwame? =) Why don't you show me proof of this basic concept that you have found? The CCCP insignia is highly recognizable on the jersey and should certainly be included. And you're last statement is ironic because with that statement, you've openly implied that you dislike Vitriden. --Palffy 17:51, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Well actually the Italians do put team emblems on the shirts. It's not really hard to do, yet the effect looks mightily awesome :P (They have nicer pants and socks too!) --Lorenzarius 18:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Kwame, you can tell whatever you want, all I could see on your user page are personal attacks. I'll answer you once again. Is a white line on the Indian kit important? Well, that white line covers about the same space as the CCCP sign on USSR kit, and it's significant. That IS personal opinion, not a fact, the same as your opinion is just that, not a fact. So, when we are dealing with opinions (whether something is significant or not), we can get out of it by voting only. Once again, you can be right or wrong about the facts, but when it comes to opinions, you cannot claim the right to be right. –Vitriden 17:58, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Baseball kit

Thanks to everyone who has worked on this template and all its accessories... it is really fantastic. I created a template for baseball uniforms that replaces shorts with "pants," "normal" socks with funny baseball socks, and adds a badly drawn cap. Here is an example...






Home

Rolando 00:24, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Iran national football team kit

Could someone design the kits for Iran's team? I have no idea how to do this. At the very least could they make some generic PUMA templates? This is the home jersey. The away kit has red instead of white, and the red stripes on the back become green. Thanks in advance. Nokhodi 18:37, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

PUMA

Are we going to start having some costumized PUMA kits, like we have on a lot of adidas kits? Abreuzinho 16:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Are you talking about subtle elephants a la Côte d'Ivoire? Other than that, these jerseys (e.g., Iran, Côte d'Ivoire, Cameroon, Italy, Ghana) seem like easy, single color efforts.Rolando 15:29, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

It would be cool if we could get the subtle little drawings in. Someone has already done it for Bulgaria. Nokhodi 22:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the same someone has done it for Bulgaria as well as Côte d'Ivoire (see 13 June edit by Mattzaliar). I was able to dig up the elephant jersey, but it was removed from the Côte d'Ivoire strip by the next edit. Maybe you can contact the user who seems to have created these images.

That being said, I do question the wisdom of adding these details. Quoting from above, "Avoiding creating patterns for minor details on a kit, the template is for showing basic team colours. It is not supposed to be an accurate drawing of the kit." As the apparel companies faithfully tinker with the strips every two years, we'll be on the hook for keeping up with their whims. Rolando 02:31, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Shorts and socks

Is there a way to make custom designs for the shorts and socks? -- Earl Andrew - talk 17:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Nope. See this discussion from further up the page ChrisTheDude 20:29, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Goalkeeper kits

Hey everyone. I'm working on some Goalkeeper kits, just in case we ever need them. I'm doing national teams, and I've got Template:ALBf to Template:ARGf right now. Please add more national teams (or even club teams) if you can. Thanks. - Kookykman|(t)e 18:00, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

This was suggested and rejected before as most teams have about 3 or 4 GK kits, and seem to choose them randomly regardless of home/away, sometimes changing them mid-season. This template is for "team colours", not an accurate representation of every kit a team might wear. ed g2s • talk 13:50, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Thickwhitestripes

The transparency on this image wasn't working, so I uploaded a fixed version at Kit_body_thickwhitestripes2.png. I don't know how to get this to replace the actual failed image. ArtVandelay13 15:16, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Striped kits

I've noticed as of late many striped shirts, ex. Inter Milan, aren't exactly right. Look at this for example . See the middle of the collar and how theres a black stripe coming off it, well there should be a black and white stripe coming off it take a look at the actual thing [3]. Can any one make a proper version.

The version at Inter Milan looks close enough to me. All it's intended to do, after all, is show that they wear blue and black stripes, not worry about the exact width/alignment of the stripes themselves......... ChrisTheDude 07:47, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Detail level in kit reproduction

I am bringing here a discussion started elsewhere.

The question is if the kits should reproduce as close as possible the current kits of the teams, or if they should generically show the "traditional" designs without the seasonal "particular" design. --Kwame Nkrumah 19:21, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

In terms of traditional vs. particular, most articles that I'm familiar with show a representation of the current season's design within the infobox. However, some articles feature a separate kit within the article to show a team's traditional, original, or alternate colors (see here, here, and here). - Pal 20:35, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Maybe my question was not clearly formulated. What I mean is: if a team has a dark blue jersey, and for a single season it sports some decorations that are not a significant change in jersey design should we depict them, or should we stick with the traditional design (incidentally, avoiding uploading another design and avoiding out-of-date pages). For an example of what I mean with "non significant change in jersey design", see the Argentina away jersey, opposed to the traditional blue jersey.--Kwame Nkrumah 12:31, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

My view is that the kit shown should be a reasonably close depiction of the current general design (e.g. if a team who normally wear a plain blue shirt decide to add a broad white band across the chest, the white should be added on here) but should avoid trying to add microscopic details like badges, sponsor names, tiny bits of piping, etc ChrisTheDude 07:27, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

My view is the same as the person above me. -- Je suis _t\^c 02:06, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

So you are supporting the fact that every season for clubs and every two seasons for national teams we should probably produce a new kit design and update it? Do you think of the huge number of pages quickly becoming out-of-date?--Kwame Nkrumah 16:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Keeping club pages up to date isn't really a problem, there are usually a few people watching and updating every club's page. Clubs' details (e.g. manager, squad) change all the time, no reason why a kit change should be any more problematic. ArtVandelay13 17:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

And what about the countless kits that will be produced every season?--Kwame Nkrumah 16:59, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

If you believe in pursuing this then make a poll as was suggested earlier and this can all be determined democratically, since I highly doubt that anyone will convince you of anything otherwise. --Palffy 21:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I definitely think it's no problem for 'watchers' (i.e. users who are fans of clubs) to amend the team kit when the new strip is launched. Home strips especially rarely change dramatically so it should not be an issue.

Fedgin 15:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Really? Adidas, Nike, and Puma change national team jerseys every two years, and club team jerseys every year. In a short time there will be countless designs (look up in this page, search for "new" national team jersey design by Puma, and user who want to add them), the information in some, low-traffic pages will be outdated, and there will be inconsistency in detail level of the jerseys along the articles. All of this, because someone wants to keep the tiny yellow stripe added for this year kit of his favourite club? I truly believe it is a high price to pay for such tiny bit of information.--Kwame Nkrumah 10:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Note this: "The template is designed to give an overview of the team colours" (top of this page, June 2005). So, direct question, are the spikes in Ukraine part of the "overview", or are just decorations? If they are just decorations, they should go away, if they are part of the "overview" of the kit, why nobody (neither ArtVandelay13 nor Fedgin) are updating with the same degree of precision countless of other national football team kits?--Kwame Nkrumah 19:48, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Have you noticed that you are fighting on like 5-6 fronts with like a good 10-20 posters on these same issues? You're getting very little to almost no support on this. Dude, just drop it. You parents must not have taught you this yet, but you need to know when to give up on something and allow others with more experience handle this. --Palffy 19:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

How about changing the general colours and patterns (e.g., Scotland has changed from navy/shite/black+red in 1960 to all royal blue now) but ignoring the manufacturers' features, e.g., wavy lines on adidas, 'spikes' on lotto kits, etc. These manufacturers features are, after all, not unique to the club/country but used on many/most/all of there customers' kits. In short: differentiate between changes in team colours/trim and changes in manufacturer branding. This definition would allow incorporation of "CCCP" on the Soviet kit but preclude sponsors' logos on club shirts. --secallen 12:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

This is what it was designed for, how it should be and - whenever I get my hands on a page - how it is. ed g2s • talk 14:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. – Elisson • Talk 14:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Thats a great suggestion by secallen. Is there a way we can make everyone aware/agree with this? --Palffy 15:41, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. This would mean removing the spikes from Ukraine kits [4] and adidas decorations from German [5] and Argentinian [6] kits?--Panarjedde 18:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

In response to Panarjedde's removal of detail from the away kit design from Sheffield Wednesday F.C. and Sheffield Wednesday Ladies F.C., I reverted these edits as no consensus has been reached on this issue. Panarjedde's so-called policy agreement was actually two separate discussions (not polls) where the issue became rather heated and there was clearly no consensus reached. As per Wikipedia policy if no consensus is reached the article should be left as it is, hence why I reverted (and will continue to revert) the removal of the kit design from these pages.

There is no good reason to remove detail from the away kit, the design and colour of the kit changes simultaneously every season or two, hence detail on the kit is integral to the design. As has been mentioned several times before there are no shortage of people to watch these pages and make sure that the kit designs are kept up to date; these pages even have their own Wikiproject that will ensure that the kit design is changed when necessary. It should also be noted that removing content from Wikipedia without good cause is considered vandalism. Dan1980 (talk | stalk) 21:30, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

The discussion above looks like a consensus to me, and it corresponds to the instructions at the top of this page which represent the status quo. Unless there is a consensus to change that, then we'll stay with simple kit colours. Also calling other users vandals when they are clearly acting in good faith is not very civil. ed g2s • talk 22:40, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I would hardly call an agreement between four contributors a consensus when there were a total of ten contributors in this discussion alone. Also the status quo for the Sheffield Wednesday F.C. page was to use detail in the away kit designs. They have included away kit detail for at least two seasons without any complaints and I have still to hear one good reason why this should be changed! Dan1980 (talk | stalk) 16:59, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I would call 4 to 0 (or even 4 to 1) consensus. If you do not like this outcome, gather consensus for your POV, but do not change pages unilaterally.--Panarjedde 20:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Till today, I did not know anything about this discussion. Four contributors' votes are clearly not enough to estabilish a consensus. I do not support you: if there are better versions of these jerseys, such as in U.S. Città di Palermo, they should appear in the article. About the design "suggested" by the sponsor, well, every shirt is created by a technical sponsor (Adidas, Nike, Puma and so on), so I don't see the point: should evident differences appear in the jersey, all of them must be included in the correspondent kit template. --Angelo 10:40, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

The fact you did not know the existence of this disccussion is not relevant.
Four contributors' votes are significant, if nobody is against.
This template was created to show the kit colours, not the kit technical designs.
If you do not agree, just find consensus and change the status quo.

--Panarjedde 11:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Firstly, it's untrue nobody is against: I am. Secondly, if your opinion is to use this template just to show the kit colours, you should agree we must delete every single bitmap associated to kits, since they're all something more than just kit colours. They are all technical design, you can agree or not, but that's the truth. Endingly, it's hard to discuss without to even know the existance of the discussion. A good place for better examining the issue is WikiProject Football. --Angelo 11:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

First, I wrote "4 to 1", including your (late) vote. Second, the stripes of AC Milan jersey are part of the kit, the spikes on Palermo jersey are not: the latter will most likely change with next year desing, the former will not. Third, I am not putting the blame on you for not knowing this discussion, but you can't put the blame on me for not letting you know it, since this is the talk page of the template we are talking about.--Panarjedde 13:02, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I think for example on home kits, anything that changes from season to season, i.e. underarm spikes, shoulder stripes, sponsor, collar colour, crest, the exact shade of colour, or material pattern, should not be matched on the wikipedia version. Basically the depictions should be good enough for you to recognise the kits, but not so good you can practically use it to reproduce the kits! Philc _T^E_C^I 17:54, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree, however I feel that away kits are a different matter. The colour and design of them change almost every season anyway, so if the kit has a stripe running down it then this should be included on the kit on Wikipedia. Dan1980 (talk | stalk) 18:12, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I do not feel that away kits are different from home ones. If the colours change every season, then change it, but the ban on sponsor-originated details should stay.--Panarjedde 19:00, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I do not have a problem with sponsor-originated details being omitted, however the stripe on the Sheffield Wednesday away kit is not a sponsor-originated detail so why do you keep removing that? Dan1980 (talk | stalk) 19:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Not a sponsor originated?? Take a look at other Diadora jerseys, and you will notice they all have that stripes.--Panarjedde 19:23, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

It's not a "sponsor-originated" matter. If a detail, even if imposed by the technical sponsor, is fully, clearly, undoubtedly visible, then it must be included in the kit. That's all. --Angelo 20:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

That is your opinion. The consensus here is to keep the colours and style of the kit, without going after each year designer taste.--Panarjedde 20:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Whre is this consensus? Please stop editing the kit at Shelbourne F.C. If anybody else wants to revert it to the original, please do as I don't wish to break the 3RR Dodge 23:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

It was established on 29 August. If you do not like it, gather counter-consensus, up until then the policy stays as it is.--Panarjedde 00:37, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

No, you and 3 others decided to enforce it on everyone. I'm going to decide on a policy now to only refer to you as Muppet. One to nothing. Huzzah! Policy is now enforced! Muppet, please stop tampering with others work - it is not helpful, and only serves as a nuisance to those who have worked hard on their pages. For the record, I disagree with this proposed nonsence, and dicated tripe. EnDai 23:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Let me chime in that I also have a problem with Panarjedde's insistence that "kit colours only be represented". He's messed up the kit on one article that I deal with to the point where he's agreed that side colours are not sponsor-included features, but then rejected a proper depiction of them, so now two sides of a jersey are coloured on the article when only one is coloured in actuality. This is a wildly inaccurate depiction, and cannot be allowed to stay (even if there is consensus that it should stay). Also, Panarjedde does not seem to understand how consensus on Wikipedia works. A significant number of votes are required before one can argue that consensus has been reached. Four votes for a proposition (even if there were no other votes in the poll) does not a consensus make. The very small number of participants clearly shows that not enough people were informed of the existence of the poll (and is someone saying there wasn't even a poll?), and so the results are likely to be highly skewed. The only correct place for a poll like this is, in fact, not at Template talk:Football kit, but at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football, where a significant number of people can see and make their voices heard. I think that four now have complained that they do not agree with the "consensus" that Panarjedde claims has been reached (Dodge, EnDai, me, and Dan1980), so there's clearly no consensus. _└ ^OzLawyer / _talk ^┐ 12:39, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

"Also, Panarjedde does not seem to understand how consensus on Wikipedia works. A significant number of votes are required before one can argue that consensus has been reached." I am assuming good faith, so I make a proposal to you: you find any reference in WP rules that say that "a significant number of votes are required before one can argue that consensus has been reached" and I will ignore all this matter in future; if there is no reference, you step back and do the same. What about this?--Panarjedde 14:39, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

You will not find any official declaration that you need a significant number of "votes", but this does not mean that such is not required. AfDs with few votes are often closed as "no consensus" even if the "votes" are largely in favour of one opinion, since few "votes" shows that not enough people have been informed of the issue (and the swing from one side to the other could be more "sampling error" than actual consensus). Common sense plays into Wikipedia as much as hard and fast rules, and it makes no sense to assume that four comments, made within a 24 hour period, shows consensus. Especially considering that you're ignoring contrary opinions presented just above the "four votes", and assuming the "poll" took place only within those 24 hours on August 29th, as though everyone's objections prior to that point were mooted by that one day's commentary. Finally, polls are sometimes considered "evil", but in this case a poll is exactly what was required for a proper discussion of the issue, an issue which affects many hundreds (thousands?) of articles on Wikipedia. A poll, however, is exactly what we did not get. Not that I don't think that the view propounded by the four is not the correct way to go (although I think that in your conflict with me you're interpreting that view incorrectly), but there was no consensus reached that is capable of being binding on the entire Wikipedia football community. For that, a fair portion of the Wikipedia football community needed to be consulted. They were not. _└ ^OzLawyer / _talk ^┐ 15:05, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

As I'm seeing a different evolution in the issue than Panarjedde's claimed one, I propose to start a new voting process. --Angelo 15:06, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Before votes, there should be a discussion, don't you think?--Panarjedde 21:07, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Real Betis

On the Real Betis page the away kit is wrong. The colours are correct but there needs to be a white stripe down the right side, same as the India national football team. Can anyone do it as I couldn't figure it out? --159.134.48.25 01:17, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. Rolando 20:04, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks --159.134.48.25 01:17, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Internet Explorer Problems

I never usually use IE, but as someone mentioned on Talk:Liverpool F.C. that the kit was being displayed with grey arms, I thought I'd investigate. Most kits do display the correct arm colours, but mostly have other problems under IE6. Generally it's coloured lines coming from the join between shirt and shorts, sometimes there is a coloured line along the very top, and sometimes along the very bottom.

As most of the world does actually use (sadly) Internet Explorer, shouldn't these bugs be fixed? aLii 11:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

As the individual who pointed out that the kit was displaying with grey arms, I would like to say in my defence that I wouldn't normally use IE by choice, but I am using an office computer at the moment! Robotforaday 15:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

ADIDAS - PREMIERSHIP

Can anybody update the Chelsea, Liverpool & Newcastle home/away/european kits? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.188.120.219 (talk • contribs) .

Request

As I can't fathom for the life of me how to make one of these, can I please request a maroon horizontal template - for Motherwell F.C. Erath 17:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Dark Green arms

Can some one make some dark green arms for [7] and if possible a dark green half , Thanks (Gnevin 12:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC))

Also halfs for these kits also [8]

[9] (Gnevin 12:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC))

Any chance anyone can do this for me (Gnevin 10:49, 2 October 2006 (UTC))

Help please

Can someone tell me what I'm doing wrong please?! I've been adding infoboxes to lower league clubs, starting in the Isthmian league - but when I specify colours, they seem to come out completely wrong.

For example - I tried to add kits for Folkestone Invicta F.C. (home colours: Amber & Black stripes; away colours: White and Blue) using the following code:

pattern_la1 = _black_stripes | pattern_b1 = _blackstripes | pattern_ra1 = _black_stripes | leftarm1 = DarkOrange| body1 = DarkOrange| rightarm1 = DarkOrange| shorts1 = black | socks1 = DarkOrange | pattern_la2 = _blueshoulders| pattern_b2 = _blueshoulders | pattern_ra2 = _blueshoulders| leftarm2 = white| body2 = white | rightarm2 = white | shorts2 = blue | socks2 = white |

... but when I preview this, it comes out as red (not orange) and black stripes, yellow (not black) shorts and red (not orange) socks for the home kit and blue (not white) shirt, red (not blue) shorts and blue (not white) socks for the away kit.

What on earth is going on?!

--MLD 15:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

The problem, I believe, is that you were using named colors rather than their hex equivalents. So, you should use 000099 (or so) for "blue," ffffff for white, etc. I took a crack at the colors on Folkestone Invicta F.C.. Here is a decent page listing 200 "safe" colors. Not exhaustive, but should help you get the hang of it. Rolando (talk) 23:39, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I personally use colr.org. Daniel .Bryant 03:52, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Archive? Requests?

Might it be time to archive the discussion here? Also, is it worthwhile to have a link to a Requests-only page (e.g., Template talk:Football kit/Requests), to reduce some of the clutter here? Not that it will work! Just a couple of thoughts... Rolando (talk) 06:12, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

New Scotland Away Kit - Request

Not yet in use, but the current away kit is soon to be redundant: http://www.foxsoccershop.com/shop-by-country-scotland-scotland-national-team-scotland-2007-away-soccer-jersey.html -- Archibald99 20:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

It's ironic that they become y-fronts shortly after they stop playing pants. I think _sashonwhite is the nearest applicable existing pattern. sʟυмɢυм • т • c 21:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, it doesn't continue to the back which makes me think its more of a decorative watermark than part of the basic colours. ed g2s • talk 22:33, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with ed g2s.--Panarjedde 19:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

The sash is obviously there to mirror St. Andrews cross. The sky blue color has been a part of their away jersey since at least 2005, [10], and as shown by current WP page for Scotland NT. The design is also not a part of the typical Diadora jersey. --Palffy 06:53, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Categories: Template talk archives