Template talk:Infobox Rugby biography

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Requested move 1.1 Survey 1.1.1 Survey - in support of the move 1.1.2 Survey - in opposition to the move 1.2 Discussion 2 Move 3 Fix template please 4 Microformat and DoB 5 Questions on using this template 6 Amateur 7 Current club 8 Clubs 9 Years 10 children field 11 Proposed Changes to Template for International Career

[edit] Requested move

[edit] Move

• I would support the move suggested above.Alexsanderson83 (talk) 23:21, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fix template please

This template needs a code update so that it recognizes when the update fields are empty and doesn't display them at all. Retired and deceased players do not need these fields at all. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 22:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Microformat and DoB

I have updated the template to emit an hCard microformat. hCard's optional date-of-birth parameter will only be included in the microformat if {{Birth date}} or {{Birth date and age}} are used in the infobox; but the current configuration prohibits this, because it wraps the field's contents in square brackets. Any suggestions? Andy Mabbett 19:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Questions on using this template

I tried using {{Birth date and age}} for Maurice Brownlie, but it reported his age as 110 (he died in 1957) - what is the correct procedure for someone no longer alive?

Secondly, for earlier players the template needs to distinguish between appearances for the National team and test matches, as tours were predominantly games against provincial sides until around 1980 (those games have now all but disappeared). Again, taking Maurice Brownlie as an example, he played 61 games for the All Blacks, but only 8 were tests. There also doesn't seem to be any support for number of games as captain. Dramatic 07:20, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

If the person is no longer alive, you should use the {{birth date}} template in the dateofbirth parameter, and then use {{death date and age}} in the dateofdeath parameter. Secondly, I think the infobox only takes Test matches into account, so in Brownlie's case you should put 8 as the number of his national team appearances. As for the number of games as captain, I don't believe that's relevant to an infobox, and would be more suited to the main body of the text. - PeeJay 09:00, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Amateur

players who have played in the amateur era have their clubs listed in that space, and today the amateur section is often filled with players youth clubs. Any thoughts?Alexsanderson83 (talk) 23:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, both are, by definition, amateur. Do you think that we should inclde youth clubs into the document and remove amateur, replacing with clubs. I could change the setup to rename the amateur section Clubs, if no other parameters delineating club sides are used. How would that sound. --Bob (talk) 00:19, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Would it be possible to have both amateur clubs for when a player plays at a lower level, goes on loan to get some game time, makes a meteoric rise or fall alongside youth clubs. I think both would be an addition to the infobox. This is also a problem in the other infobox and also the rugby league one it is derived from.Alexsanderson83 (talk) 00:46, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Current club

An issue that I have raised here on the discussion page seems relevant. When a player agrees to a move, which will become more frequent towards the conclusion of the current season, it may become confusing which club they are playing for.Londo06 (talk) 18:14, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, so only note it when it has gone through and the player has been unveiled. Also, current club is difficult for rugby union, as southern hemisphere players can be registered for two teams at the same time - provincial and super. However, the case also arises when the player does not play for a club, only a franchise (super team). --Bob (talk) 19:36, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Easier for league as their seasons take place in one calendar year, play concurrent seasons in Northern and Southern hemispheres and sign contracts that are confirmed by governing bodies, leagues and clubs. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 20:47, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Might be worthwhile as the Super 14 club players are not that well fleshed out, and not really that many regional players out there. I know there would be issues; are they being called up to S14 or being sent down to provincial level. Reckon it would be worthwile having the current club on this infobox. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 21:07, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

They actually play in both... For instance, the bulk of the Blues (Super 14) actually play for Auckland in the Air New Zealand Cup and many are still contracted down to a lower level club. For example: Troy Flavell. So current club?? Do we put down the lowest level club that they are contracted to? For George Gregan that would have been Randwick DRUFC for most of his career... And then we have the Irish, with their provinces... --Bob (talk) 16:18, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I also think it would help to show what club a player is at when there are no years on the infobox, or when clubs are side-by-side instead of below. Also all the other boxes show a players earliest clubs first and then follow below with later clubs. Alot of rugby infobox ones flow upwards. I would add in the current club section to help improve the clarity of this infobox.Alexsanderson83 (talk) 03:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Placing ????-present in the years parameter would remove any ambiguity... --Bob (talk) 05:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I think that a current club addition just below the players position and locking that section off with the blue band would take the best element of the rival infobox and in my eyes essentially end the need for a new infobox to run alongside this one or supercede it. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 06:11, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

What would we put for Current Club in the case of Troy Flavell?? Or David McCall (Scotland U20 who plays for Heriot's and Edinburgh) or Cameron Ferguson (Edinburgh Rugby & Dundee HSFP)?? These players play for more than one team during a season, switching back and forth between them, which one is current? I have gathered from your repetitious stating that a current club heading is what you are looking for, but you have failed to address the concerns I, and possibly others have with such a box. Can you please address what one places in current club for someone like David McCall ?? Also, why is a current club box required if the time period is stated in the club section? Is it not repetitious?? --Bob (talk) 06:14, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

The question of whether a player such as Brad Thorn is signed to a provincial side and available to the Crusaders franchise in the Super 14 is a worthy one. I would venture that players from provincial, regional, lower grade would suffer with notability issues and that it is an area that is worthy of investigating as this infobox has taken massive strides over a short period. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 06:41, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

The parameters ru_currentposition = and ru_currentteam = have been added. This could be expanded to the rl parameters if it works ok. Look at Nick Mallett or Brad Thorn for usage. --Bob (talk) 07:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

• Infobox has gone through a number of changes of the recent days, and looks better for it. Seems like this infobox is incorporating the best elements of the other one. Why would Brian BOD be listed as a University College Dublin player, surely for notability reasons and for the casual reader he a Leinster play who is registered at University College Dublin RFC. This is explained in the article, but I would say he is a Leinster player first and a University College Dublin second. I would say that the current team section should illustrate which franchise a player is with, not which local club he pledges allegiance to. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 01:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think current club should exist. The current club is just not going to do. Firstly they don't necessarily play for a club (Bob has mentioned this above), and secondly they can play for multiple teams in one season (Bob has mentioned this as well). As long as the infobox has the correct information, we shouldn't worry about giving a detailed description of the players' season. Many players play for their amateur clubs when coming back from injury, or when they have lost form, so current team can change from week to week. It's not worth the hassle of having to specify which they are playing for at a particular time. Troy Flavell is a good example. It says 2006–present for both Auckland and the Blues. This might seem counter intuitive, yet it is correct, and that's that. - Shudde ^talk 07:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Looks like the new navboxes help clear up any issues with Irish and Southern hemisphere players. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 11:00, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Clubs

I believe this may have been brought up earlier but I sound it out anyway. Which way are clubs meant to be listed; chronologically or in reverse order. I notice a fair few are listed backwards, ie current club, previous, earlier club, even earlier club, etc. Read through and there is nothing detailed to which way they are meant to be written. The predominant style for this and other infoboxes is for the timeline to flow chronologically down the infobox. eg 2001-2002, 2002-2005, 2005-06, etc. It's just it may cause confusion when a player has no dates next to the clubs. Londo06 (talk) 19:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think there are any hard and fast rules for this. I generally list teams chronologically earliest to latest, but if someone did it differently I would have no problem with it. - Shudde ^talk 22:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Years

Added line to fix alignment issues as an option to fix the issue for clarity.Londo06 13:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Please feel free to tighten up the language or offer up an alternative, not just remove the text.Londo06 17:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

0000, or four question marks ???? remains an option.Londo06 17:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Made a further attempt to appease an editor, but it may well be to the detriment of the article as I have now removed an example of how to fix the problem.Londo06 14:42, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] children field

The children field doesn't display (see Frank Oliver). Would somebody be able to fix this? Tomraider (talk) 10:13, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Londo06 for changing the article. I was meaning that the children field is in the template documentation but does not appear in the Infobox. Sorry for not being clearer. Tomraider (talk) 20:16, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed Changes to Template for International Career

While this template has extensive capability for documenting lower levels of particiaption, e.g. amateur and professional clubs, it is sadly lacking at international levels. It is necessary to distinguish between Test and other (usually tour) games for a player's national team - for example, there are plenty of All Blacks who have never played a test but had as many as 60 games as an All Black. (This happens much less in modern times due to the demise of long tours, but I have found instances from the 1980s). I am therefore making the following proposal.

1) That the following fields continue to be supported but are deprecated (not to be used in new infoboxes):

• ru_nationalyears =
• ru_nationalcaps =
• ru_nationalpoints =

(ru_nationalteam may as well be retained, it's the best name for it)

2) That the following fields be added:

• ru_testyears
• ru_testcaps
• ru_testpoints
• ru_testtries
• ru_nationalnontestyears
• ru_nationalnontestcaps
• ru_nationalnontestpoints
• ru_nationalagegroupteams (e.g. U19, U21, Junior)
• ru_nationalagegroupyears
• ru_nationalagegroupcaps
• ru_nationalagegrouppoints
• ru_rwccaps (rugby world cup)
• ru_rwctournaments
• ru_rwcpoints

3) That if possible a template error should occur if any of the above is used together with one of the deprecated fields

4) That a ru_points subtemplate be developed with the format {{rupoints|points=|t=|c=|p=|d=}} where points = total points, t=points from tries, c=points from conversions, p=points from penalty kicks and d=points from drop goals. The reason I have included a test tries field above is that there is quite a focus on this stat (and national records) but the two changes in the value of a try make it unclear how many tries a player has scored from the points count alone.

5) Since figures are often given as "x total caps for country including y tests" it would be good if the template could automatically total caps/points if there are entries for both test and nontest fields. (saves relying on users' ability to add)

6) I still haven't figured out how to cover "special character" teams such as New Zealand Maori or Barbarians

7) I'll do a mocked up display of the points stuff tomorrow.

Please discuss. dramatic (talk) 09:27, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I think there is a provision for youth representative rugby out there within the other template. My real concern would be the confirmation of non-test caps. The All-Blacks are very good at detailing this information, I'm not too sure on the other nations.Londo06 11:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

What "other" template? And if we have 1100 All Blacks whose infoboxes are potentially misleading or wrong, doesn't that alone make it worthwhile? Supplementary question - how do you currently cope with British Lions players in the infobox? (having test points for 2 different teams) - other than most of the Lions players having stub articles with no infobox at present.dramatic (talk) 18:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

the alternate Template:Infobox Rugby Union biography is the one I was referring to. With regards to British Lions players this would belong in the same place as a players full country details, with only the 3 official matches being recognised. Any midweek or warm-up matches are currently addressed within the body of the article. Once again it comes down to confirmation, with only the All Blacks website as a real strong source it seems that only New Zealand players would get the necessary treatment. I have absolutely no problem with the addition, it's just unlikely that records can be properly sourced with other nations for non-test matches and also when a match is confirmed as a non-test match.Londo06 19:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not a big fan of the proposal to add parameters for RWC appearances and points. Could someone please explain to me why they are needed? – PeeJay 12:16, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Agree with PeeJay on that one as well.Londo06 12:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Well the RWC fields are a low priority for me - there just seemed to be a big focus on stats during the tournament. dramatic (talk) 18:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)