Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Golf/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Golf. 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.

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

→

Need help writing Dale Morey's article

I need help writing the golf career section of Dale Morey over at my sandbox draft. I'm a basketball editor who doesn't follow golf and have no interest in it (Morey played professional basketball and was LSU's head coach, which is why I'm writing about him). However, Morey is one of the most distinguished amateur golfers I've ever heard of and I need WP:GOLF editors' expertise in writing it before I post it to article mainspace. You'll notice I've already found a bunch of reliable sources about his golf career and only need that section written. Does anyone want to take a stab? Jrcla2 (talk) 03:06, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

So no one? Jrcla2 (talk) 23:05, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

I'll help, added some, more prose later. Tewapack (talk) 23:55, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Tewapack. Jrcla2 (talk) 03:50, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

I think I'm finished. Tewapack (talk) 17:53, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Great work, I really appreciate it. Jrcla2 (talk) 21:47, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Career performance tables

Hi WP Golf,

Recently I was involved in updating the tennis Australian Open pages as results came in, including updating the career performance pages of individual tennis players. What I was struck by was how clean and tidy their tables looked compared to the ones on all of the golf players' tables that I've seen. Because of this, I adapted their tables for golf players and would like your opinion of them. I'll use Phil Mickelson as my test case.

Current:

Tournament	1990	1991	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	1999
Masters Tournament	DNP	T46_LA	DNP	T34	DNP	T7	3	CUT	T12	T6
U.S. Open	T29_LA	T55_LA	CUT	DNP	T47	T4	T94	T43	T10	2
The Open Championship	DNP	T73	DNP	DNP	CUT	T40	T41	T24	79	CUT
PGA Championship	DNP	DNP	DNP	T6	3	CUT	T8	T29	T34	T57

Tournament	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009
Masters Tournament	T7	3	3	3	1	10	1	T24	T5	5
U.S. Open	T16	T7	2	T55	2	T33	T2	CUT	T18	T2
The Open Championship	T11	T30	T66	T59	3	T60	T22	CUT	T19	DNP
PGA Championship	T9	2	T34	T23	T6	1	T16	T32	T7	73

Tournament	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014
Masters Tournament	1	T27	T3	T54	CUT
U.S. Open	T4	T54	T65	T2	T28
The Open Championship	T48	T2	CUT	1	T23
PGA Championship	T12	T19	T36	T72	2

Proposed:

Tournament	1990	1991	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	1999
Masters Tournament	DNP	T46_LA	DNP	T34	DNP	T7	3	CUT	T12	T6
U.S. Open	T29_LA	T55_LA	CUT	DNP	T47	T4	T94	T43	T10	2
The Open Championship	DNP	T73	DNP	DNP	CUT	T40	T41	T24	79	CUT
PGA Championship	DNP	DNP	DNP	T6	3	CUT	T8	T29	T34	T57
Tournament	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009
Masters Tournament	T7	3	3	3	1	10	1	T24	T5	5
U.S. Open	T16	T7	2	T55	2	T33	T2	CUT	T18	T2
The Open Championship	T11	T30	T66	T59	3	T60	T22	CUT	T19	DNP
PGA Championship	T9	2	T34	T23	T6	1	T16	T32	T7	73
Tournament	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014
Masters Tournament	1	T27	T3	T54	CUT
U.S. Open	T4	T54	T65	T2	T28
The Open Championship	T48	T2	CUT	1	T23
PGA Championship	T12	T19	T36	T72	2

As you can see, my proposed tables add a lot of at-a-glance information that the current tables lack. The current tables make no distinction between being cut, finishing in 11th, and not appearing in the tournament at all. My proposed tables displays this information easily, allowing you to get a much better picture of a player's career performance. In addition, individual years and tournament years where the player made the cut are wikilinked, which is always beneficial. Like the current tables, I would include some form of key alongside them to explain the color coding and meanings of LA, DNP, and CUT. I may decide to fix all of the column widths so years where the player was an LA do not stagger the display. While the white space where 2015-2019 would go is a bit awkward, the current tables are (I believe) exactly as awkward already, and is a product of the fact that my tables align the edges of the rows which the current system does not. Finally, my proposed tables are Wikitables which are used throughout the rest of players' articles and their appearance reflects their style, creating a more seamless article.

All that being said, what is your opinion of them? If I receive community support (or at least am convinced that the community isn't wholly against them) I'll roll them out to players' articles myself (all that I can, that is, I don't plan on rolling them out on every player in Category:Golfers, but rather the more well-known golfers). Please let me know what you think, or if you have any ideas on how to improve the table! Deadbeef 11:20, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

I have several comments about your suggestions:

Too much color. I've always felt that the tennis pages go overboard in their use of colored cells. With the golf tables, only two thing are highlighted, wins and top-10s, and that's really all that matters performance-wise. (Years ago, I'd toyed with highlighting top-25 finishes with a third color but decided against it.) Most prominent players have had a summary table added that summarizes performance by major and that is preferable to added color to the table.
Overlinking. The individual tournament pages have tables that list the top-10 finishers, those are the only results that should be linked in this type of table. Otherwise, you are linking to a page that most likely doesn't even mention the player. Also, with any color scheme, that fact that individual cells are linked is not at all obvious unless you mouse-over the cell.
The standard in presenting these files is by decade, unless the player has played less than say 20 years of majors, then they are presented in one long table. You example is convenient in that Mickelson started in 1990 - what would you do with say Jack Nicklaus#Results timeline's first three years? Also, the senior and women's majors have natural breaks were a certain major has started or stopped, leading to non-decade breakdowns. I don't think there is a clean way to avoid the awkwardness.
The links in the header rows to individual PGA Tour seasons won't work, the majors are also events on the European Tour, Japan Golf Tour, etc. Some players have links to "20xx in golf" in the header which is marginally better but I consider these low value links too (there is only one paragraph on the "year in golf" pages about the majors).
I like the idea of using wikitable and a standard key. I've thought for years that a template could be developed that would automatically color the cells based on the finish but it is complicated by the linking to individual years.

I'd appreciated hearing other WP:Golf members thoughts on your proposal. Tewapack (talk) 19:12, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Regarding highlighting: I feel that something more than what we have now would be nice; it is hard to tell a CUT from a DNP from a T11 at first glance. For an example, see Mikko Ilonen. The top-10's are easy to see, but everything else tends to blend together. However, I agree that the example above has too much color.

Also, I've noticed the linking of top-10's is very inconsistent right now (see same article). pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 20:01, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Maybe a solution might be not to include any text in the "did not play" boxes but highlighted them in a grey with a key to show that this indicates that the player did not play in this event. See idea based on Phil below

Tournament	1990	1991	1992	.....	2012	2013	2014
Masters Tournament		T46_LA		.....	T3	T54	CUT
U.S. Open	T29_LA	T55_LA	CUT	.....	T65	T2	T28
The Open Championship		T73		.....	CUT	1	T23
PGA Championship				.....	T36	T72	2

Tracland (talk) 20:47, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

I like this idea. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 21:32, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Regarding the points above:

I don't personally believe that the "number" of colors presents an issue. If the table appears too gaudy, perhaps come more pastel-like colors could be used: for example, 1 , 2-10 , 11+ . I suppose DNP and CUT could share a color if the number really is an issue, but I personally feel they should be distinguished.
Fair enough.
If that is the standard (I am mostly an outsider to the wikiproject) then I would suggest a revision in which the standard is changed so that the 20+ year players' careers look like Mickleson's regardless of what number the year is (i.e. Nicklaus' first row would be 1957-66). Your latter point may be valid; again, I'm an outsider here. However, the tennis tables have a provision for "Not a major", "Not held", etc. which may be useful here.
Fair enough, that was a carryover from the tennis tables.
I thought about that as well, but that would likely be a very syntax- and labor-intensive template (including creating it); it would take near 100 parameters for some golfers like Nicklaus, would probably have to involve subroutines (do those exist in WP templates?), and seems rather unfeasible for anyone's purpose. The labor intensity here is in creating tables for individual golfers, not in maintaining them; after the initial creation for Mickleson, for instance, it would only need four updates per year of maintenance (like the present).

Deadbeef 21:05, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

The discussion here kind of petered out. Would there be any support to roll out some version of the tables above? I'd be ok with watering them down, I think anything would be an improvement over the current ones. Deadbeef 04:12, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I was just now looking at Peter Hedblom's article, and trying to read his results table reminded me of this discussion. I still support User:Tracland's suggestion of graying out DNP's. Compare the following table with the existing one.

Tournament	1990	1991	1996	1997	1998
Masters Tournament
U.S. Open
The Open Championship	CUT	T96	T7	CUT	CUT
PGA Championship

Tournament	2004	2005	2006	2008	2009
Masters Tournament
U.S. Open		T11	T21
The Open Championship	CUT		CUT		CUT
PGA Championship				CUT

Tournament	2010	2011	2012	2013
Masters Tournament
U.S. Open				T65
The Open Championship
PGA Championship

CUT = missed the halfway cut
"T" = tied

Did not play

Top-10

Any thoughts on this? pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 17:53, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

I think this looks a lot neater and could be happy for you to roll this out, thanks Tracland (talk) 17:51, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

NOTICE: Persondata has been officially deprecated

Persondata has been deprecated and the template and input data are subject to removal from all bio articles in the near future. For those editors who entered accurate data into the persondata templates of professional golfers and other bio subjects, you are advised to manually transfer that data to Wikidata before the impending mass deletion occurs in order to preserve accurate data. Here are three examples of Wikidata for notable golfers: Greg Norman, Nancy Lopez and Ben Hogan. If you have any more questions about the persondata removal, Wikidata, etc., please ping me. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:25, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Listing World Cup of Golf wins in golfers wins list

There is inconsistency in how wins in the World Cup (men's golf) are list/counted in individual golfers pages. Participation in these events and wins are generally listed under the "Team appearances" section along with Ryder Cup, Presidents Cup, Royal Trophy, Alfred Dunhill Cup, etc. From 1955 to 1999, there was also an individual trophy awarded to the low individual which had a separate, much smaller purse (for top 5) at least in the later years but maybe from the beginning. From 2000 to 2011, there was no individual award. Beginning in 2013, it is primarily an individual event with a much smaller team purse (top 3 teams only).

The same inconsistency with team wins appears with the Alfred Dunhill Cup (played 1985 to 2000) and maybe other team events, some are listed/counted as "Other wins", some aren't.

Questions:

Should the team wins be listed with other pro wins (usually under "Other wins") and counted as pro wins in infobox?
Should the individual wins be listed with other pro wins (usually under "Other wins") and counted as pro wins in infobox?

My opinion: 1 - no (listing in team appearances is sufficient), 2 - yes Tewapack (talk) 22:20, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I think the world cup wins should be listed in other wins section as it is different to other team events like Ryder or Presidents cup

Copyright Violation Detection - EranBot Project

A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest (if such a copyvio is present).--Lucas559 (talk) 16:13, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Cabot Links and Cabot Cliffs

I am looking at tidying up Cabot Links but not being a golf enthusiast I seek advice from this project's members as to whether this should be handled as one article ( ie Cabot Links & Cabot Cliffs), or two separate articles. Are there any precedents on Wikipedia for articles about two adjacent courses, run by the same business? Derek Andrews (talk) 18:16, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Proposed move: Vicente Fernandez (golfer)

As this is the only golfer article I know of that does not include the appropriate diacritics, I have proposed a move to Vicente Fernández (golfer) at the talk page. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 15:24, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Canadian Golf Magazine - Is this a notable magazine?

Dear golf enthusiasts: There are plenty of news articles which talk about this magazine, but they all mention the ranking of various golf courses on its "Top 100" list, and little else. Perhaps someone here will know where to look for references for a magazine - it's unlikely that the other golf magazines will write an article about a competitor.—Anne Delong (talk) 21:43, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

The Best (European) Ryder Cup Team

The 1981 US Ryder Cup team has been widely regarded as the best US Ryder Cup team in the history of the Ryder Cup History and arguably the best in the history of the Ryder Cup. A team which includes the likes of Jack Nicklaus, Tom Watson, et al, it is hard to argue against. However, what was the best European Ryder Cup team?

There have been some astonishing performances both individual and team by European golfers. Nevertheless there have been some teams which have been bristling with talent and others where the players, on paper at least, have been inferior to the opposing team. It is hard not to ignore a team consisting of Ballesteros, Woosnam, Langer, Olazabal, Faldo and also Montgomery. Indeed the 1991 and 1993 European teams had these players but lost both matches! In fact, the 1993 European team contained the World number one player (Nick Faldo) and also number two, three, five and nine in the World Rankings.

So the next team where it could be argued has the potential of being the best ever European team is the 2014 team. The The Ryder Cup was played at Gleneagles, a quintessentially Scottish type golf course. The European team consisted of Rory McIlroy who was also the World number one player, Justin Rose, Henrik Stenson, Sergio Garcia, Martin Kaymer, et al. The nucleus of the side ranked one, three, five, six, twelve, eighteen, twenty three and twenty five in the official world rankings, which makes this the strongest European side since the world rankings came into being in 1985. The 2014 European team won the Ryder Cup by a significant margin 16 and a half to 11 and a half points.

Statistics in the form of the World Rankings alone do not make a great team but they are arguably the only objective way to show the ability of a team. That said, extra weight should be given to the top six - eight players because these golfers are likely to be the nucleus of the four sets of pairs matches. All data has been obtained from the Wikipedia Ryder cup pages.

Need consensus

Hello, on a golf topic an editor has been consistently reverting me instead of making the effort to politely engage in conversation. I get the impression they are more interested in being right than in making sure the page is as good as it can be, which will keep the page from ever getting to "good article" status. I'd rather avoid taking them to arbitration over the repeated reversions, since they seem like a well-meaning editor overall and banning would be unfortunate. So a second opinion would be great: But here's the issue: on the Jane Blalock cheating controversy page, he's filled the "aftermath" section with details of her one-time coache's career, which occurred years after the conflict in question. I argue these infractions belong on the Bob Toski page, not as vague editorial on an unrelated event. This editor even included the word "ironically," and if that's not insertion of editor opinion, well I'm not sure what is. Earflaps (talk) 14:09, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

England–Scotland International Professional Match

Between 1903 and 1938 English and Scottish professionals played an annual match, organised by the PGA. The match was generally played a few days before the Open Championship.. The match was played from 1903 to WWI and then restarted in the 1932, dying out with WWII. I'm looking for a suitable name for an article I'm planning. There wasn't any particular trophy, so there is a nice short title available like Ryder Cup. Before WWI it was generally called the "International Professional Match", but that title was also later used for the 1921 and 1926 GB v USA matches. Maybe England–Scotland International Professional Match would be a suitable name. Or: England v Scotland ... or: England vs Scotland ... Nigej (talk) 08:00, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

I have gone for England–Scotland Professional Match since the word "International" seemed superfluous. Nigej (talk) 19:35, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Frys.com Open

Frys.com Open is changing sponsors, and with that, it's being renamed to the Safeway Open (http://espn.go.com/golf/story/_/id/13918688/frys-safeway-2016-tourney ). The next tournament is October 2016, and tickets are already on sale. Could someone with more experience revise and rename (move) the Frys.com Open page? (I'm guessing that it will be renamed rather than a new page created for the Safeway Open, but perhaps I'm wrong?) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 16:41, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

News of the World Match Play

I'm planning to add individual season by season articles for the News of the World Match Play tournament. I'm just wanting to see if anyone objects to this, since we don't usually encourage these. I'd be doing 1903 to 1913 initially (11 articles). During this period it was, by some margin, the most important PGA tournament and second only to the Open Championship in importance. It was as important as the PGA Championship which started in 1916 with a broadly similar format (although all 5 rounds were over 36 holes, while the News of the World was 18 holes for the first 4 rounds).

The final issue is what I should call them. The official title in the early years was something like "The Professional Golfers' Association tournament with prizes and medals presented by the proprietors of the News of the World" but quickly became known as the "News of the World Tournament". The word Championship was only officially added in 1946 when it had a tortuous title, something like "PGA Match-play Championship and News of the World tournament" but was often called "News of the World PGA Match-play Championship" or something similar. Pre-1946 it was sometimes referred to as being "regarded as the British Match-play Championship" or some similar wording.

My first idea was to use 1903 News of the World Tournament but News of the World Tournament is a disambiguation page so I'm thinking that 1903 News of the World Match Play would be less confusing. Nigej (talk) 14:05, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

I have no objects to these articles and I think 1903 News of the World Match Play is the most logical title. Tewapack (talk) 17:19, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Deletion discussion for Category:Men's major golf championship stubs

The related Category:Men's major golf championship stubs has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page.

Dawynn (talk)

DNPs in major results tables

In this discussion last year regarding major performance tables in golfer articles, Tracland suggested gray boxes in place of DNPs, an idea which I supported. The other editors in the discussion (Deadbeef and Tewapack) said nothing regarding this proposal. Last week I finally got around to implementing this in about 25 articles. Yesterday Brandonlw97 reverted all my edits, so I thought I'd bring up the topic here again and see what people think. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 15:46, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

I support the change from DNP to gray box. To avoid the grey/gray usage and to make the key clearer, I'd change the key to use this:

Win

Top-10

Did not play

Support. Seems sensible to use the grey. What about a the use of NT for No Tournament. Perhaps just a colour for this too.Nigej (talk) 17:30, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

I don't really have an opinion on that; I don't often edit/view articles of golfers of that era. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 18:10, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Also applies to 2001 WGC-Cadillac Championship, see eg Steve Stricker#Results timeline. I think an NT would look a little odd. Nigej (talk) 08:00, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Arnold Palmer Nominated at WP:INTHENEWS

An article that may be of interest to members of this project has been nominated to be linked on the main page under the In the News section. The discussion may be found here. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

1997 Sprint International

has been nominated for deletion. Please come on over and join in the discussion[1].

Oxhey Golf Course

Hi, Nice to see a page on Oxhey Golf Course, of particular interest to me as I grew up in the area and spent a lot of time playing on the public playing fields of the old golf course, affectionally known as "The Golf". I also have a Geocache hidden here with a puzzle element that includes finding the original yardage of the golf course. The current Wiki page wasn't active when I set the puzzle and I used the following page to find the original yardage:

http://www.ouroxhey.org.uk/page_id__184.aspx?path=0p4p79p

As you can see, this contradicts with the current Wiki page and is causing confusion with anyone trying to solve my puzzle! I wonder if the yardage was changed from the original value to what's in the above article before being shortened again for development on the east side?

I've never edited a Wiki page, nor would want to without contacting the developer of that page beforehand, nor understand how to HTML etc.

But I hope you find this useful and look forward to maybe finding out the answer and seeing an updated page.

Thank you, all the best, Antburn999 (talk) 10:48, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

It's not clear to me where the 6,539 yards comes from. Nigej (talk) 12:12, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps from here: http://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/image/epw020992 "1912 Oxhey Golf Clubhouse and the practice putting green, next to the 18th green, in a view looking west up the championship course. The full course measured a long 6,539 yards and the Standard Scratch Score was 78. The golf course was designed by Harry Vardon and the professional was fellow-Channel Islander, Ted Ray, who was appointed from 1912 until his retirement in 1940." Worth noting that the yardage is a somewhat nebulous number, generally being the current yardage off the championship tees (or similar). Nigej (talk) 12:16, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

The Times for 6 May 1912 mentions that it "measures 6,380 yards", so I guess that was the original yardage. Nigej (talk) 10:54, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Notable?

Hello there! Just need this person's notability assessed. Just came across the article and noticed the creator removed a PROD tag recently. Thanks! FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 17:37, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Clearly does not meet WP:NGOLF. Also very few news articles about him, and most are from minor newspapers. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 19:43, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

I nominated the article for deletion. The AFD can be found here[2]....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 20:06, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Playoff record for players with no wins

We have a style for the playoff record for players who have won on a tour. eg Wang Jeung-hun to pick a recent example, whereby the playoff record sits underneath the relevant tour wins table. However, we have a problem with those who have been in a playoff but never won. Phillip Archer has his "European Tour playoff record" sitting uncomfortably below his "other wins". Others have the playoff record missing (eg Gary Boyd (golfer)). Do we have a policy on this? The first decision is whether we should include the "playoff record" at all and if we decide to include it, where should it be and what style do we use. Obviously it's not a win, so it doesn't fit too comfortably in the "wins" section. Nigej (talk) 13:19, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

eg for Phillip Archer, we could go for something like:

Professional wins (4)

European Tour wins (0)

European Tour playoff record (0–1)

No.	Year	Tournament	Opponent	Result
1	2007	Omega European Masters	Brett Rumford	Lost to birdie on first extra hole

Challenge Tour wins (3)

etc

or perhaps as is it at the moment (below all the wins) but with an additional heading, eg:

Other wins (1)

2002 Marriott Hills (PGA EuroPro Tour)

Playoff record

European Tour playoff record (0–1)

No.	Year	Tournament	Opponent	Result
1	2007	Omega European Masters	Brett Rumford	Lost to birdie on first extra hole

Since it is not a win, I think it should come under any professional wins the player has. In practice, I haven't done playoff boxes for players without wins....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:12, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

I think your example with the "European Tour wins (0)" followed by the playoff record is a good choice. Having a playoff record for every non–winning golfer is a good thing, because that way, editors won't have to scramble to go to an external website to find a player's playoff record every time a player is in a playoff. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 14:39, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

It seems odd to me to have a "European Tour wins (0)" for a player without wins. My suggestion is to put the playoff record first, with its own subheading:

European Tour playoff record (0–1)

European Tour playoff record (0–1)

No.	Year	Tournament	Opponent	Result
1	2007	Omega European Masters	Brett Rumford	Lost to birdie on first extra hole

I definitely support having playoff records for non-winners. It's something that I once intended to do but didn't get around to. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 16:25, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

I prefer the plain "Playoff record" as a header, probably after any "wins" sections, since it isn't a win. Having "... wins (0)", while accurate, leaves a bad taste. Tewapack (talk) 21:10, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Summary

Seems to be general consensus to include rather than ignore

Seems to be general consensus to have separate section not ... wins (0)

Seems to be general consensus to have separate section called Playoff record

Nigej (talk) 14:31, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

1972 Lancia D'Oro tournament

The Lancia D'Oro tournament was played in Italy in the 1960s and 1970s. "Lancia D'Oro" means Golden Spear. Not quite sure of the significance, perhaps the trophy was a golden spear. There is a list of winners here: http://www.golfclubbiella.it/albo-doro/ which is probably complete, unless the tournament was played somewhere else (other than Biella GC) in other years. It seems it was an individual event from 1962 to 1973 and then a team event in 1976 - some of the photos at http://www.golfclubbiella.it/albo-doro/ show Tony Jacklin, Seve, etc in the 1976 event. There is a brief note on the 1973 "invitation" event here: https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=RJFAAAAAIBAJ&sjid=-KQMAAAAIBAJ&pg=4171%2C3413990 and The Times also has scores on the same day (D Swaelens 71, R Bernardin 73, D McClelland 73, D Sanders 73, J Benito 74 also get a mention).

The 1972 event is not mentioned here, http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/tournament/Season=1972/index_full.html, and we do not currently include it as a European T event. However it gets 3 mentions: on the site: http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/news/newsid=186563.html, http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/news/newsid=189071.html (see Canizares, Townsend) and http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/news/newsid=176343.html (Canizares). The Times for 7 Dec 1971 says that "next year the PGA will recognise ... the Lancia d'Oro tournament".and on 19 Jan 1973 it says "the calendar, apart from the withdrawal of the John Player subsidiary event and one Italian event, the Lancia d'Oro, looks much the same as before."

The 1972 event was played from 19 to 22 October and there is plenty of coverage in The Times. On 19 Oct it says "The 1972 PGA circuit comes to a close this weekend with the £10,000 Lancia d'Oro open championship ..." and "The home countries are well represented in this, the 20th tournament that counts in the order of merit standings." and on 23 Oct "Townsend's second place can do nothing but improve on his sixth place in the British order of merit." (he finished 4th, see 1972 European Tour) The event was a 72-hole tournament with a 36-hole cut. First prize was £1,700.

Notwithstanding its absence from http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/tournament/Season=1972/index_full.html it seems it was a full European Tour event in 1972 and I'm planning to add it unless someone objects. Planning to use "Lancia d'Oro" (little d, big O) as title which is the style used in The Times. Nigej (talk) 15:23, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

It wouldn't be the only time a tournament was missing from the ET website. A few months ago, I noticed that the Guatemala Open, a Challenge Tour event for five years, is missing from schedules and player results pages. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 16:23, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Treatment of wins pre-New Year (European Tour)

I'm thinking here of how to handle the "date" column in the "European Tour wins" section where the year and season do not match.eg Lin Wen-tang:

First option is to make no comment but link to correct seaspm:

No.	Date	Tournament	Winning score	Margin of victory	Runners-up
1	23 Nov 2008	UBS Hong Kong Open	−15 (65-69-64-67=265)	Playoff	Rory McIlroy, Francesco Molinari

An alternative is as currently used:

No.	Date	Tournament	Winning score	Margin of victory	Runners-up
1	23 Nov 2008 (2009 season)	UBS Hong Kong Open	−15 (65-69-64-67=265)	Playoff	Rory McIlroy, Francesco Molinari

which could have the link changed:

No.	Date	Tournament	Winning score	Margin of victory	Runners-up
1	23 Nov 2008 (2009 season)	UBS Hong Kong Open	−15 (65-69-64-67=265)	Playoff	Rory McIlroy, Francesco Molinari

Another possibility has been tried:

No.	Date	Tournament	Winning score	Margin of victory	Runners-up
1	23 Nov 2008¹	UBS Hong Kong Open	−15 (65-69-64-67=265)	Playoff	Rory McIlroy, Francesco Molinari

¹ 2009 season

On the PGA Tour we used the first of these, ie make no comment but link to correct season. Nigej (talk) 22:54, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to make all these examples. It seems to me that all four options would be suitable. But, since we are using the first example for the PGA Tour events, it might be nice to use that one for the European Tour as well, in the interest of uniformity. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 23:10, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

The examples 1,2 , and 4 tend to violate WP:LINKCLARITY so I'd prefer the third example. Tewapack (talk) 05:10, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

My own preference is for 1 or 3. 1 because it is compact (single line usually) and consistent with the PGA Tour, 3 because it has the clearest link. Nigej (talk) 08:36, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Style of playoff record sections (especially colours)

I'm planning a wholesale update of the European Tour playoff sections (just collecting the data together) and it's an opportunity to change the style if we wish. Actually I quite like the style. First question is whether we should provide a link to the season? eg 2007. Second question is what colours should we use? I quite like the green (called "tea green") but find the red ("light coral") rather dark for a background colour (row 2 below). I've shown some alternative reds/pinks but any other suggestions are welcome. Of course if we went for something else we would be out of line with the PGA Tour sections. We do already use an alternative colour scheme (eg Arnold Palmer, List of career achievements by Tiger Woods, Mark McNulty, Bob Charles (golfer)) with wins shown in "powder blue", losses in "wheat" but it is rarely used for the European Tour at the moment (colours shown below as 11 and 12)

European Tour wins (x)

European Tour playoff record (x–y–z)

No.	Year	Tournament	Opponent	Result
1	2007	Omega European Masters	Brett Rumford	Win with birdie on first extra hole
2	2007	Omega European Masters	Brett Rumford	Lost to birdie on first extra hole
3	2007	Omega European Masters	Brett Rumford	Lost to birdie on first extra hole
4	2007	Omega European Masters	Brett Rumford	Lost to birdie on first extra hole
5	2007	Omega European Masters	Brett Rumford	Lost to birdie on first extra hole
6	2007	Omega European Masters	Brett Rumford	Lost to birdie on first extra hole
11	2007	Omega European Masters	Brett Rumford	Win with birdie on first extra hole
12	2007	Omega European Masters	Brett Rumford	Lost to birdie on first extra hole

Nigej (talk) 20:47, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

I have no preference except if you use powder blue for wins, continue to use wheat for losses. Those were the original colors I believe playoff boxes though some modern players had green and red. When doing playoff boxes, I used blue and wheat for players who are not modern. Don't know how many playoff boxes I've done, but if it isn't over 200 I'd be surprised....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 21:40, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Either 1 and 6 or 11 and 12. Tewapack (talk) 00:46, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Champions Tour major scores

Being that the senior majors don't have a page for each year, there's never a way in Wikipedia to see how the scoring unfolded at the tournaments.
What do you think about the idea of showing the scores for the final round top 10 players on the scoreboard for the most recent tournament played, at each of the five majors, on their corresponding Wikipedia page? For example, The Tradition page could show the final round top 10 players for the 2016 Tradition tournament, and then once the 2017 Tradition has been played, the page could then have the 2016 scoreboard be taken down and replaced by the 2017 scoreboard. This way, when people look at the five senior major pages throughout the year, they would always be able to see the final top 10 scoreboard of the most recently played tournament, instead of having to wonder who all were in the top 10. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 16:31, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

It's certainly true that a bare list of winners (plus the winning score usually) is not very inspiring so look at. This was the main reason for adding the margin-of-victory and runners-up columns which have been a big success since we've added them (anyway that's my view). Of the senior majors only the Senior Open Championship currently includes these extra column and I would certainly think we should add them to the other majors. I quite like your suggestion but the problem is that we don't (generally) add stuff that's then deleted a year later. An alternative approach is to start pages called something like History of the U.S. Senior Open or List of U.S. Senior Open Championships where we would have brief sections, one for each year - just the briefest of intros plus a table of the final top 10. This would look pretty bare to start with but, over time, would turn into something more substantial. This is a sort of half-way house where we could add some extra information but wouldn't clutter up the main page and also avoid the problems of creating/maintaining 100s of extra pages. Nigej (talk) 10:38, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Playoff record - clarification required

I'm confused about what text to use when a player is eliminated from a playoff. This can only happen when there are 3 or more in the playoff and, even then, it doesn't always happen (since A can get a birdie while B and C get pars). An example is David Whelan (golfer):

European Tour playoff record (1–0)

No.	Year	Tournament	Opponents	Result
1	1988	Torras Hostench Barcelona Open	Nick Faldo, Barry Lane, Mark Mouland	Won with par on fourth extra hole Faldo and Lane eliminated with birdie on first hole

My query is whether this means (a) that Faldo and Lane got birdies on the first hole but were still eliminated (which was my initial reading) or (b) that Faldo and Lane were eliminated because Mouland and Whelan got birdies and they didn't (which was actually the case). If (b) is what is meant, I'm not very keen on the wording which seems confusing to me, particularly the use of "eliminated with". "eliminated because Mouland and Whelan got birdies on first hole and they didn't" is too long, "eliminated by birdie" is better I think or "eliminated by birdies" (in this case, since 2 of the 4 got birdies). Any suggestions? Nigej (talk) 14:24, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

1- The box means a birdie eliminated both Faldo and Lane. The winning score is always used for 3 or more player playoffs for several reasons. First that sometimes a player doesn't complete the hole. If Players A and B make birdie, C misses his birdie putt, he picks up and doesn't putt out. Second, because scores can widely vary. Players B and C make birdie. Player A makes par, Player D hits the ball in the lake and picks up. Eliminated with the score that keeps golfers alive keeps it simple.

Eliminated with is the words used for playoff boxes across wikipedia. If its decided to change that, then all the boxes need changing. Also note if the playoff happened many years ago, details about what went down other than the score that kept players alive is often scarce....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:16, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

I take all your points and agree that we should use "birdie" since it doesn't matter whether the others got par, bogey, conceded or whatever, I'm only really saying that the use of "eliminated with birdie" certainly confused me. Nigej (talk) 16:09, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Changing "eliminated with" to "eliminated by" would fix the ambiguity. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 16:17, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Seems I'm not the only one who's confused: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chad_Campbell&diff=760930184&oldid=753678691 Nigej (talk) 10:43, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

US Majors in "European Tour playoff records"

The article http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/news/newsid=189071.html includes all Open Championship playoffs back to 1972 but it only includes playoffs in the US majors since 2000. It includes all playoffs since 2000 even, for instance, 2003 Masters Tournament for Mike Weir and Len Mattiace, although neither of these would have a "European Tour playoff record" section. I assume the reason for starting in 2000 is that given in "1998 European Tour" which says "the Masters Tournament, U.S. Open and PGA Championship being included on the schedule for the first time". (there were no playoffs 1997-1999)

The list doesn't include the following playoffs: Masters: 1979, 1982, 1987, 1989, 1990, US Open: 1975, 1984, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1994, PGA Championship: 1977, 1978, 1979, 1987, 1993, 1995, 1996. Most of those involved are Americans and, like Weir and Mattiace, won't have a "European Tour playoff record" section anyway. However Seve Ballesteros, Nick Faldo and Colin Montgomerie were involved in one or more of these playoffs as were some Australians and Ernie Els.

Seve's Masters wins in 1980 and 1983 are included in his European Tour win total of 50 (as per http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/news/newsid=176339.html) but his 1987 playoff is not included in his European Tour playoff record (as per http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/news/newsid=189071.html). Seve was 6th in the European Tour Order of Merit in 1987. Faldo doesn't currently have a European Tour playoff record section. Monty's playoffs in 1994 and 1995 majors are also not included in his European Tour playoff record section. He won the European Tour Order of Merit in both of these years.

Greg Norman lost US major playoffs in 1984, 1987 and 1993 and these are also not included in his European Tour playoff record section. Ernie Els won US majors in 1994 and 1997; 1994 in a playoff. His 1994 US Open playoff win IS included in his European Tour playoff record section, although it is not in http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/news/newsid=189071.html . David Graham (golfer) won the 1979 PGA Championship after a playoff. He doesn't currently have a European Tour playoff record section.

Anyway, after this long introduction, my point is to ask whether we should include these 1975-1996 playoffs in a player's European Tour playoff record section. Superficially it seems bizarre that in Seve's article we currently include his 1980 and 1983 Masters wins in his European Tour wins but exclude his 1987 Masters playoff defeat. My personal preference is to include them, as we currently do for Ernie Els, even though this puts out of line with the list of playoffs on the european tour website. Nigej (talk) 08:45, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I say go ahead and do it. There was the case of the PGA Tour omitting Jack Nicklaus playoff win at the 1970 British Open but at Wikipedia included it. I know there are a few other cases of WP having something right that one of the golf tours doesn't or didn't but subsequently corrected....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:34, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

OK What you say is certainly true. Sometimes you've just got to assume that the "official" site has made a mistake. Nigej (talk) 17:44, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red online editathon on sports

		Welcome to Women in Red's May 2017 worldwide online editathon. Participation is welcome in any language.
		"Sports"

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 12:41, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

RFC on sports notability

An RFC has recently been started regarding a potential change to the notability guidelines for sportspeople. Please join in the conversation. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 23:08, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Discussion about WP:NGOLF at WT:NSPORTS

There is an ongoing discussion about changing WP:NGOLF at WT:NSPORTS.Burning Pillar (talk) 22:33, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

When tournament results section should or shouldn't be split

We've had a little bit of a dispute on the WGC-Bridgestone Invitational page.

It seems to me we split for two reasons:

Firstly, for pragmatic reasons, often related to lack of information. Often we have more information for recent events and splitting makes sense, since the tables can have different columns.
Secondly, when there is a significant change in status. For instance: Women's British Open is split for this reason. WGC-HSBC Champions is an interesting example. Splitting when it became a WGC event certainly makes sense but there is also a split when it became a PGA Tour event. Our logic seems to be that if it becomes sanctioned by a more senior tour, thereby increasing its status, then that might be sufficient reason to split. Simply being sanctioned (or not) by more junior tours would not normally lead to a split.

It seems to me that, sometimes, we split unnecessarily. eg: Open de France looks better to me as a single unbroken table.

In the WGC-Bridgestone Invitational it seems to me that there no real change in status in 2016. The was a small spat between the two tours (a clash with the 100th Open de France) but its status was not significantly impacted for that one year. See: [Official World Golf Ranking#Event ranking]] when it still sits in 12th place, just below WGC-HSBC Champions. Nigej (talk) 09:43, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

New articles

Wikipedia:WikiProject Women's sport/Golf task force has picked up the following articles, which I have added to WP:GOLF: Lady Hilda Madeline Britten-Jones, Sky Sudberry, Ann Probert, Lana Lawless, Katy Jarochowicz, Corinne Clark, Lina Boqvist, Shasta Averyhardt. Some look of dubious notability. Nigej (talk) 21:42, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Deletion discussion

I have nominated 2016 Memorial Tournament for deletion. Here is the discussion. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 23:51, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Article "List of professional golfers who have hit an albatross"

I'd be interested in your views. See Talk:List of professional golfers who have hit an albatross. Nigej (talk) 17:33, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Wendy's 3-Tour Challenge

The IP user has asked me about this event. It seems to me that it was a team event and hence should be in that section rather than the wins section. Each team was representing a tour. Nigej (talk) 15:19, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Golf outing

It just struck me as very peculiar that there is no article on Golf outings. I'm not qualified to write it; can this be put under an AfC section of this WikiProject or somewhere similar? Thanks, $ɱ$ (talk) · vbm · coi) 05:31, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Tyco Golf Skills Challenge

Should wins at the Tyco Golf Skills Challenge be included in the "Other wins" sections of the events winners? See dispute at Peter Jacobsen, Peter Hanson, Justin Rose. This was an unofficial event run by the PGA Tour from 1992 to 2012. Tewapack (talk) 16:34, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

I'd lean towards not counting it. If Jamie Sadlowski were to win a stroke play tournament, would his long drive wins be counted alongside that? To me, the skills challenge falls into the same category as long drive: not exactly a golf tournament. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 17:13, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Some events aren't considered wins. The Masters Par 3 tournament, or finishing first at Q school....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:14, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Absolute nonsense to count this I've said that all along 31.200.130.228 (talk) 12:03, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Two Willie Hunters

There were (at least) two Willie Hunter notable enough for an article. The one we have at the moment (Willie Hunter (golfer)) is for William Irvine Hunter (born 1892, sometimes known as Willie Irvine Hunter or Wee Willie Hunter), the son of Harry. Harry had a brother William and this William had a son William (born 1878, a cousin of William Irvine Hunter) who was also notable, playing for Scotland v England and with some good finishes in the Open. This William was also known as Willie. To add to the confusion, William Irvine Hunter had a son William Irvine Hunter, Jr. (born 1924) who was also a professional golfer playing on the PGA Tour at times, I believe. Both Willies (1878 and 1892) ended up in the USA and died there.

"The Majors of Golf" (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=JAtHsOzOCoUC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false) is confused about these Hunters, referring to Willie (born 1878) as William Irvine Hunter, Sr. (this Willie never had the middle name Irvine) and Wee Willie (born 1892) as William Irvine Hunter, Jr. (when really he was Sr.) It also has a "W. H. Hunter" playing in the 1901 and 1902 US Opens who is actually Willie (born 1878).

Anyway the question is what to call the two notable Willie Hunters. My suggestion is to use "William Irvine Hunter" for the one born in 1892, since he is commonly referred to using his middle name. "Willie Irvine Hunter" is used sometimes and is a possibility. Or "Wee Willie Hunter" but that doesn't seem very encyclopedic. The other (born 1878) is currently a red link Willie Hunter, Sr. but that title seems all wrong. He is almost always plain William Hunter (although William George D Hunter when he married in 1903, but these additional names seem to been made up). He could perhaps take over the Willie Hunter (golfer) article. Or we could go for Willie Hunter (golfer, born 1878) and Willie Hunter (golfer, born 1892) which seem long-winded but have some merits.

See eg: http://www.antiquegolfscotland.com/antiquegolf/maker.php3?makerid=716 and http://www.australiangolfheritage.org.au/articles.html#hunters for more details. Nigej (talk) 08:14, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Splitting results table when official tour begins

There's been a dispute recently about whether to split the results table for the Open de France so that it is in 2 parts, post-1972 and pre-1972, 1972 been the year the European Tour was formed. A look at the 1972 European Tour events shows that, despite what one editor claims, we generally do not split these events pre and post 1972. Only a handful of the 23 events have the table split.

My proposal is that we should not split tables in such situations, unless there are other reasons for splitting (eg lack of data for earlier events). My reasoning is that, while 1972 was an important year for the European Tour, it was not a significant year for, say, the French Open. The 1971 winner is just as noteworthy as the 1972 winner. We generally mention the tour aspect in the text and infobox anyway and adding it again in the results table is to overemphasise it.

Comments would be appreciated. Nigej (talk) 10:41, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

In cases where it's split, chances are I was the one who split it. A while back, I took on the task of standardizing the year–winner–country–(venue)–score–to par–margin of victory–runner(s)-up format across European Tour events. My source was generally the European Tour website, which of course doesn't have information for pre-tour events. On the particular article in question, looking at the last revision before I reformatted it, I see that at the time most pre-1972 editions had no information regarding score relative to par or margin of victory. At the time, I decided it was best to leave that part the way it was, rather than add two blank columns, and split the table in two. Nigej has done a great job adding in margins of victory. I see, though, that the "score" and "to par" columns have been re-combined in order to join the two tables.

So I'd say I'm somewhat neutral in this case. The start of the tour is IMO not enough reason to split the table, but I wouldn't mind noting it in a ! colspan=7 (or 8) heading. Nigej mentions lack of data for earlier events as a potential reason to split; that could theoretically apply here (scores to par). I suggest that we leave the table as one and add a heading to note the start of the European Tour; I'd also prefer to split the score column again. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 14:49, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Personally I think there should be a split in the table to show tournament's history before it was not sanctioned by the European Tour or whatever Tour. Does it really look bad if the table is spilt up not for me it shows the history of the event. Also I am conducting research I am going to try and add Runners-up finishes for all players and add to their wiki pages like in Snooker and Tennis. I want to make sure events are not double counted. That can be easily done without a split table prior to a Tour Sanction. 178.167.176.131 (talk) 20:57, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

I see no reason to split a table just to show when the European Tour started - it inevitably leads to tables of different widths which ruins the esthetics of the page. Regarding runner-up finishes for golfers - this isn't tennis or snooker were tournaments are single elimination (knockout) events and being runner-up means that you lost in the final. Few golf tournaments are single elimination events - a runner-up could have lost in a playoff or finished 10 strokes behind or have been tied with five others for second place - far different from tennis or snooker. Runner-up finishes in golf are rarely notable except in special cases (Jack Nicklaus in the majors, Phil Mickelson in the U.S. Open, etc). Tewapack (talk) 22:37, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

You are talking absolute nonsense Runner-up finishes are vital in every individual sport. Why does golf count runners-up finishes at all then if they are not important.They would not bother at all. Who gives a shit if you lose by 10 shots or in a playoff. You could lose by 10 frames in Snooker or in a single frame Shootout. I know for one Nigej thinks it's a good idea. And Tewapack you don't have a monopoly on what goes on Wikipedia. I'm free to add them if I want. I am putting hard work into it. 178.167.176.131 (talk) 23:35, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure I said it was a good idea. I think I said it was an interesting one and you ought to discuss it here. You've never said in any detail what you're planning so it's impossible for me to judge. I like the margin-of-victory/runners-up in the tournament pages since they add interest and the table look better too. Just a bare list of winners is very dull. Whether we need a runners-up section in every players page is another issue. Remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a stats site.

An encyclopedia includes all information. If the stats can be gathering there should be no problem including them 178.167.176.131 (talk) 11:14, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

I mean a small section we don't need to list them all individually if that would take up too much room. Just a list of career totals whatever works best really and is easy to maintain 178.167.176.131 (talk) 11:18, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Are we talking all Tours from the PGA to the Sunshine Tour that have win boxes? Are we talking just recent golfers or you prepared to dig through reference books to do this thing for HOF players like Gary Player or Julius Boros? What's your sourcing going to be for these sections? Are you ready to tackle all 500 or more players with win boxes to make sure the whole WikiProject looks consistent....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:09, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Yeah all tours. Will try to cover all players obviously. I notice lots of info missing on the old South African Tour. It will obviously be harder to get info for older players compared to nowadays in the age of the net. It's a project but I think it can be achieved 178.167.176.131 (talk) 12:37, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

None of the tours track a player's 2nd place finishes with the exception of playoff losses. The data would be unreferenced and qualify as WP:OR....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:21, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

What are you talking about check out the European Tour and PGA Tour for a start it gives all players runners-up finishes. I don't know what you are talking about there. Everything will be referenced as is the case with all Wikipedia pages. it's quiet simple really. 178.167.176.131 (talk) 16:23, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

European Challenge Tour and Web.com Tour also list runners-up finishes BTW 178.167.176.131 (talk) 16:35, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Open Championship

Can we get 2017 British Open to redirect to 2017 Open Championship? I was surprised when I typed it in and Wikipedia didn't know what I was looking for. LordAtlas (talk) 23:09, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Done. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 23:27, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Senior major golf championships

On the Senior major golf championships page, I rearranged the order of the Senior Players Championship and the U.S. Senior Open columns because the U.S. Senior Open is now being played before the Senior Players Championship, for at least a couple of years. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 02:38, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Royal Porthcawl Golf Club in the sea?

I was surprised to find that (if one assumes that the hole (or is it the green) indicates the location of the course) the UK map of Royal Porthcawl Golf Club shows it in the middle of the Bristol Channel, This is, I think, because the location of the course is actually half-way up the pin and not where the hole/green is. All a bit confusing for me. See: File:Map symbol golf course 02.png which also shows that the hole/green has a shadow, which also seems a little odd. Nigej (talk) 14:01, 25 July 2017 (UTC) Amazingly I've just found this: File:Icona golf.svg which was only created in May this year by an Italian editor (hence the Icona, Italian for Icon). Perhaps a better option. There's also File:Golf flag icon.png which looks very crude but is ok when it's very small, although it has the same issue as File:Map symbol golf course 02.png regarding location. Used only on Irish Open (golf) map. Nigej (talk) 14:14, 25 July 2017 (UTC) See: Template:Infobox golf facility/testcases where I compare the two (with relief included and without). I've increased the size of the Icona from 25 to 40. Other sizes are available. Nigej (talk) 14:30, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Golf Galaxy Article Request

Hi All,

I work for DICK'S Sporting Goods, which has owned the Golf Galaxy retail chain since 2006. To avoid a conflict of interest, I recently used Articles for Creation to request a separate article be written about Golf Galaxy. Right now, internal Wikipedia searches redirect users to the DICK'S page, where there is a small blurb about Golf Galaxy. Since Golf Galaxy is now the largest specialty golf retailer in the U.S., I believe it is notable enough to have its own article. There are a considerable amount of unbiased articles from legitimate news sources about Golf Galaxy on the web, many written after DICK'S bought Golfsmith last fall. DICK'S has converted 36 Golfsmith locations to Golf Galaxy stores, bringing the total number of Golf Galaxy stores to 98.

If any of you golf enthusiasts are willing to take on writing the article, it would be much appreciated. Feel free to hit my talk page with any questions or concerns. 17:25, 2 August 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raymond.judy (talk • contribs)

OWGR Press Release

See: http://www.owgr.com/news/2017/august/press-release

"At its recent meeting at The 146th Open Championship, the Governing Board of the Official World Golf Ranking (OWGR) approved the inclusion of the Sunshine Tour Big Easy Tour (BET) into the OWGR System." starting 2018

"The Governing Board also announced that the Asian Tour’s Indonesian Masters is to acquire OWGR Flagship Tournament status in place of the Thailand Golf Championship, effective immediately. The winner will receive a minimum of 20 first place points." Nigej (talk) 16:09, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Popular pages

I signed us up for the "popular pages" utility. Updated monthly but it won't get done until the middle of the following month. See July data at: Wikipedia:WikiProject Golf/Popular pages. Nothing too surprising, dominated by The Open and those who came to the fore in that event. Nigej (talk) 07:52, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Can anything/person related, even loosely, to the game of golf be added to that page? Johnsmith2116 (talk) 01:05, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Also, are regular editors even allowed to add anything there at all, or are only certain people (such as administators) allowed to add to it? I noticed there are exactly five hundred entries on there. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 01:28, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

It's done by a bot. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 02:10, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, done automatically so not intended for user editing. Covers all pages that have {{WikiProject Golf|...}} in their talk page, so the way to get pages in/out it to add/remove them from WP:GOLF. I asked for the top 500. Maximum allowed is 1,000. Nigej (talk) 07:44, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Whether eg George H. W. Bush should be in WP:GOLF is an interesting question, but currently it is. Nigej (talk) 07:51, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I guess it's because he's in the World Golf Hall of Fame. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 15:31, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

True. Probably Donald Trump should be in too. I assume he'd be top of the "popularity" list if he was. Nigej (talk) 17:58, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

New European Tour website

The European tour website has been relaunched with a fancy new style. Seems to have made a mess of most of our links. eg Rory McIlroy who was at https://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/players/playerid=34024 is now at https://www.europeantour.com/en/players/rory-mcilroy-34024 so looks like the number is the same but it's got an extra bit in the name "rory-mcilroy-" and different directory structure (https://www.europeantour.com/players/rory-mcilroy-34024 seems to work too but not https://www.europeantour.com/en/players/34024). We have 853 transclusions to Template:EuroTour player which is less than I was expecting when I saw the "full list" at https://www.europeantour.com/en/europeantour/players/ mentions 17,377. I was hoping that some wizz-kid could take the name of the article and insert it into the address (changing 34024 to rory-mcilroy-34024) but this won't work in all cases, https://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/players/playerid=141 has become https://www.europeantour.com/en/players/christyoconnorjnr141 and https://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/players/playerid=729 has become https://www.europeantour.com/en/players/jos-mara-olazbal-729. The Template:EuroSrTour player needs to be abandoned, not heavily used anyway - 46 transclusions. Also issues with tournament pages I suspect. Not gone down that route yet. Nigej (talk) 09:21, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Just looking at Template:EuroTour player. This currently has "[http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/players/playerid={{{1|{{{id}}}}}} {{{2|{{{name|{{PAGENAMEBASE}}}}}}}}] at the [[PGA European Tour|European Tour]] official site" The "{{{2|{{{name|{{PAGENAMEBASE}}}}}}}}] at the [[PGA European Tour|European Tour]] official site" bit simply produces the text eg "Rory McIlroy at the European Tour official site" The important bit here is the "http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/players/playerid={{{1|{{{id}}}}}}" This uses the 1st parameter (or id= parameter) to generate the address. Struggling to find a simple solution. Nigej (talk) 10:31, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

I have a file that I created awhile back containing the articles of those involved in European Tour playoffs (about 410) which is almost half of the 850. Of these 75 use a 2nd parameter, mostly, I suspect, those with "(golfer)" in their title, even though the use of PAGENAMEBASE makes this unnecessary. The others 330-odd have no 2nd parameter. None of the 410 use id= or name= . Also checked the list of 850-odd articles. The only one with an unusual name is "Professional golf career of Tiger Woods" where the second parameter is useful. Nigej (talk) 11:48, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Progress report

I have changed Template:EuroTour player. Firstly, to simplify it, I have removed the id= and name= options that are never (i think) used. Parameters are now simply by position. As before parameter 1 is the number. Parameter 2 is now an optional prefix used in the address. If not given it uses the page name (with (golfer) stripped off if present). Parameter 2 is converted to lower case and spaces replaced with dashes. Parameter 3 is the old parameter 2. This new version works in most cases but there are plenty that don't. These need to have parameter 2 added by hand. Planning to do some tomorrow.

Rory McIlroy correctly goes to https://www.europeantour.com/en/players/rory-mcilroy-34024
Brian Barnes (golfer) correctly goes to https://www.europeantour.com/en/players/brian-barnes-10
David J Russell goes to https://www.europeantour.com/en/players/david-j-russell-174
Sergio García doesn't work because of the í, so still work to do.

Nigej (talk) 20:13, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

And now everything has to be undone. http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/news/newsid=329019.html pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 19:15, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Interesting. The new website has been a shambles. Nigej (talk) 20:00, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Have gone back to an old version of Template:EuroTour player (basically). Hopefully OK. Will leave in the unused extra parameters, just in case. Nigej (talk) 20:12, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

I took a look a minute ago, and I am relieved that they have put it back. It had been in a way in which you couldn't click on to see the players in the field by country in the days following the tournament, which means that if you were late getting to it, you lost your chance. Now we don't have to deal with that. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 20:36, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

I think pretty much everyone disliked the new site. The other day I was looking for the complete Q School Final Stage results from last fall and they were nowhere to be found. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 22:11, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Hopefully they are back now? Johnsmith2116 (talk) 22:13, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Yep! (The redesigned site would only show players who made the cut.) pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 22:26, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

"Missed the half-way cut"

I notice we are using the above term for those who missed the 54-hole cut in the Open from 1968 to 1985. Eg Gary Player 1985 was T61 after 54 holes. Some 400 instances - 18 years, about 22 average each year. Is this a problem? Could simply say "missed the cut" (even though there were 2 cuts) or have alternative cell entry eg CUT54 or C54 or CUT2 Nigej (talk) 20:12, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Maybe borrow the PGA Tour's MDF term? pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 21:13, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Hadnt thought of that. Has the merit of being 3 letters. Disadvantage is that its a confusing term and perhaps not historically correct. Nigej (talk) 21:26, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

That's a bad idea. MDF is only used in leaderboards, players stiil get a finish and money, etc. Tewapack (talk) 13:15, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Or simply add to the text, eg "Missed the half-way cut (54-hole cut in 1985 Open Championship)" Nigej (talk) 07:04, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

I think this has already been done with some players. Also applies to some PGA Championships in late 1950s, and early 1960s. Tewapack (talk) 13:15, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes you right. 5 times in PGA from 1958 to 1964. Seem to have been 90/60 cuts so about 5*30=150 instances. It is mentioned for Ben Hogan using a footnote style.

For The Open the current style is to use "Missed the half-way cut (3rd round cut in ...)" 22 player pages use this style. Nigej (talk) 19:35, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm happy to look at this in a week or two. Some 550 instances but the bulk will be red links. My preference is to use CUT2 with explanation below, like CUT. Nigej (talk) 10:30, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Seems also that halfway is perhaps better than half-way. Nigej (talk) 10:30, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Articles for the individual years of regular PGA Tour events?

I noticed that the NASCAR portions of Wikipedia have pages for the individual years of regular events for the NASCAR season(s). This race is an example of how they make a page every week for their races, regardless of the status of the race. This got me thinking about something similar for the PGA.

Supposing that, much like the CME Group Tour Championship which shows the final round scoreboard, we were to make a final round scoreboard (which means creating a page each week) for the events each week on the PGA Tour. That way, people who want to know how a particular regular PGA Tour event finished in a particular year, they would have the option of going to such a page to see the results of the top 10 finishers, plus any noteworthy comments to be added. The pages would not have to be full on filled out like a major page, the work would be limited, and like the CME, only the final round scoreboard would be in there, not all four rounds, to minimize the work needed.

Also, in the info box, we could, as we do for major pages, put links to the previous event and the next event.

If we do it, we could start doing it with the upcoming season. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 21:09, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

How about having an external link for each tournament? Something like

Date	Tournament	Location	Winner	OWGR points	Purse ($)	Winner's share ($)	Notes	Scoring
Oct 13	Frys.com Open	California	Jimmy Walker (1)	28	5,000,000	900,000		Link
Oct 20	Shriners Hospitals for Children Open	Nevada	Webb Simpson (4)	36	6,000,000	1,080,000		Link
Oct 28	CIMB Classic	Malaysia	Ryan Moore (3)	48	7,000,000	1,260,000	Co-sanctioned with the Asian Tour	Link

Of course this would have to be updated when the link changes (e.g. due to a tournament name change) and I don't know if this can be found for defunct tournaments. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 22:18, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

You wouldn't want to have links to the pgatour.com because they get overwritten every year - no way to get the 2015 BMW Championship results for instance. Tewapack (talk) 22:34, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

http://www.pgatour.com/tournaments/bmw-championship/past-results.2015.html pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 23:06, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

In general, individual tournaments are not notable enough for a separate pages in my opinion. These types of pages have been deleted at AFD in the past several years. (I think the yearly individual NASCAR race and tennis tournament pages are overkill.) Tewapack (talk) 22:34, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Clearly the PGA Tour is the dominant tour so there is a good case to be made for treating it differently from the other tours in this respect. However, I agree with Tewapack. Seems to me that a better approach is to expand the 2017 PGA Tour page to include the information - i.e. a short section on each event like in 2017 FedEx Cup Playoffs. If this means that the page gets too big, we can split off into separate articles. I'm thinking like 2017 Wimbledon Championships where there is a 2017 Wimbledon Championships – Day-by-day summaries or the 2017 Tour de France where the daily detail is hived off into 2017 Tour de France, Stage 1 to Stage 11 and 2017 Tour de France, Stage 12 to Stage 21. We could have 2017 PGA Tour – Tournament results or 2017 PGA Tour, January to April results or whatever. This would mean 2, 3 or 4 articles for each season rather than about 40, which seems too many. Nigej (talk) 07:48, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

"Succession boxes" in Presidents Cup pages

We currently have "Succession boxes" in the individual Presidents Cup pages, eg in 2015 Presidents Cup#External links before the Template:Presidents Cup navigation template. Personally I find them pretty useless. The combination of the infobox at the top of the article with the navigation to the previous and next events and the Template:Presidents Cup at the bottom, seems to me to be enough, especially if the navigation template at the bottom is always expanded (through the state=expanded option). We seem to manage without them in the Ryder Cup and Solheim Cup. I'd be happy to remove them. Nigej (talk) 14:08, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

OneAsia

See: http://www.asiantour.com/2017/09/18/at-kga-to-sanction-2-events-in-2018/ which says that the 2 Korean Tour events co-sanctioned with OneAsia are to be Asian Tour events next year. Not sure about the Volvo China Open, the only other OneAsia event in 2017, but seems that OneAsia is probably a goner. Nigej (talk) 15:04, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Yep. It's surprised me that it's stuck around even this long. I could see this coming when the PGA Tour of Australasia started to switch co-sanctioning partners from OneAsia to the European Tour, and then when the Asian Tour returned to South Korea. I think the death knell came a few weeks ago when it became clear the Australian Open wouldn't be co-sanctioned with OneAsia. I haven't seen any signs of the CGA reconciling with the Asian Tour, so perhaps the China Open might adopt a sanctioning agreement similar to the Shenzhen International. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 15:58, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at NSPORTS

Hello all. In an effort to finally resolve the never-ending and annoying GNG v SSG issue, I've proposed a revision of the NSPORTS introduction. You are all invited to take part in the discussion. Thank you. Jack | ^{talk page} 06:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Doug McGuigan

See: Talk:Doug McGuigan if anyone knows anything about him. Nigej (talk) 13:46, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Caddy or Caddie

There a requested move at Talk:Caddy#Requested_move_19_September_2017 for those interested in the "correct" spelling of the word. Nigej (talk) 16:33, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

The main article is now Caddie which, in my view, is correct. See the rules of golf. Nigej (talk) 14:20, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Medalist

I notice that we have occasional mentions of "medalist" (eg Bobby Jones (golfer)) or "medalist honors". Not in the sense in: Medalist - someone who makes medals. Not even in the sense that's familiar to me: one of the top three who get gold, silver or bronze, but in the sense (as I understand it) of someone who wins at medal play (i.e. stroke play), specifically a qualifying event for a subsequent match play stage. Not used on this side of the pond, I think, and confusing for me. Can we have an entry for it in golf terminology. Does this term derive from "medal play" or does the person actually get a medal? Perhaps the term "medal play" derive from the fact the winner got a medal. Nigej (talk) 16:04, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

See here for an explanation. Tewapack (talk) 17:49, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

I've made some changes to: golf terminology. Nigej (talk) 10:02, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Although now that I look again I find "MEDALIST: Steve Stricker is coming home. The native of Wisconsin opened in 67 at Ridgeway and came home in 65 at Germantown to post 10 under and earn the top spot by one shot." (http://golfweek.com/2017/06/05/us-open-sectional-recap-steve-stricker-medals-in-memphis-to-reach-us-open-anyway/) which was a qualifying event for the US Open (a stroke-play event), at odds with the reference and what I've written. And I've not included "medal honors" which is perhaps a synonym for "medalist". Nigej (talk) 10:19, 29 September 2017 (UTC)