User talk:Jmj713

This is Jmj713's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2: 31 days

iihf appearance table

got it done in my sandbox, probably needs some notations about nations that split/ceased whatever. the iihf contradicts itself on naming and handling of Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro/Serbia, I tried to make it as accurate as possible but I don't understand all the subtleties of that situation.18abruce (talk) 16:40, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That looks very good, the only thing is I'd separate the top level and the other Divisions. Jmj713 (talk) 15:39, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah crap, sorry, that is going to require a little more work, but maybe I will develop charts for all four tiers at the same time. Give me a little time.18abruce (talk) 18:09, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that's what I meant. For example, the US team has made appearances in the lower division as well as the top division. So it would be interesting to see that. Some teams will appear in several tables as they get promoted and/or relegated. Maybe we can also show a symbol like

/

for movement between divisions? Also, ultimately, I'd really like to have each team's record formatted in a way similar what somebody started doing here (the last two years). It seems to be a daunting task though... Jmj713 (talk) 13:50, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've got something workable and notated in my sandbox now, for all levels. See what you think.

This really looks fantastic! I'm assuming you have access to the IIHF record book, otherwise this would've taken enormous amounts of research. This is why I'd also like to get to each national team's year-by-year standings and turn them into usable and informative tables, like team season tables. Jmj713 (talk) 13:28, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I've just added an overview table there, I hope you don't mind. I think it helps to quickly gauge a given team's participation. Jmj713 (talk) 15:08, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. The one key thing I am missing is hosting history for the lower levels, I would have to go through year by year for that and I am not keen on attacking that right away, but maybe soon. I primarily used the IIHF record book along with Duplacey's Total Hockey.18abruce (talk) 21:30, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no rush. Is this a physical book you have? Also, as far as team season tables, I've started one for Serbia (because it was just quicker, I guess). Any thoughts on this? Jmj713 (talk) 15:09, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes both the primary resources I used are physical books, but neither contain hosting history for the lower levels, so I will go through the years online for the rest. The IIHF Media Guide and Record Book has a lot of handy tables and charts. I really like how that looks on the Serbia page. Some of the pages include the location of the tournament as well, don't know if that could be incorporated easily or not.18abruce (talk) 18:11, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I had actually forgotten able the IIHF WC appearance tables. I had added the lower division tables to the articles for those divisions, but for the top division I was unsure if it should replace content there, or be added. Then I forgot about it. I don't see anything that needs adding, just not sure where (or how) it would be best used. I notice (now) that I have a bunch of notes of how to do the lower tiers of the women's tournaments, but had not decided on anything yet. It also appears that I started crunching numbers for 2018 Olympic hockey, but I have no memory of actually doing that.18abruce (talk) 02:42, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Navboxes on author pages

Since you have over 100 edits at Stephen King, you might want to participate in the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Novels#Derivative_works_and_cultural_references_templates regarding including navigation boxes for adaptations of and related subjects to an authors works on the author's bio page.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:09, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ice hockey at the Olympic Games

There are two main issues at work here. 1) The first is that it is meant to be just a medal table. A short summary of the medal winners, that's it. Clogging it up with non-medal winners is unnecessary and I don't think I've ever seen a similar table on any Olympic page (though I could be wrong). Hence why it is not a "standard" table. All the expanded table does is include information already found elsewhere on the page and it makes things longer and more complex.

2) There was a discussion a while back ([1] and I think there was a longer one at WP:HOCKEY, but I'm not going to search for it) about splitting the table into men's and women's sections, and this was largely rejected again because of standards and because it is meant to be a simple summary. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 17:12, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From my point of view, I was striving to display an overall history of participation in a concise table, which means listing non-medaling nations. Just because it doesn't appear anywhere else, doesn't mean it can't be included (sort of a reverse "Other Stuff Exists" argument). As for men's and women's, I would prefer to keep those separate. I'm not sure what the rationale would be for combining the two. As a compromise, perhaps, a third table could be added, containing just medal winners and combining men and women. That could be useful. Jmj713 (talk) 17:40, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be. More people would be interested in a ranking of medal winners as opposed to every nation. After all, there is a much better listing of every nation and ranking. The problem I've seen with many wikipedia lists these days is that users get hooked up on summary tables. They assume wikipedia readers are incredibly stupid and need information chopped up and served to them in an easy format. All it does is add unnecessary lists and clog up pages. And again in the men & women issue, it is wikipedia custom to combine them. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:55, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the summary table that I added is a ranked table and is much easier on the eyes than the participation table above which is unwieldy. Jmj713 (talk) 06:00, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll go back in time and ask the IOC to stage less tournaments, then we can have a nice, wieldy and pretty results table for you. Are you actually saying the full results table is less useful than the summary one which contains 1/4 of the information? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:07, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Ice Hockey/League assessment

As an active member of the WikiProject Ice Hockey, you should be aware that there has been a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/League assessment concerning how NHOCKEY will be interpreted. Dolovis (talk) 14:27, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Olympic pages

Just trying to make them more aesthetically pleasing.1906cubs (talk) 19:44, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, but the smaller type, in my view, makes it less pleasing. When everything is uniform, it doesn't stand out, even though it is a long name to be sure. On the other hand, I would love to get more help with this project. I've been working on converting or creating medal tables for every Olympics participant NOC. Hopefully you can use that as a guide as to what needs work. Jmj713 (talk) 20:10, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already 1952?

Did the German Democratic Republic take part in the Olympic Games already 1952: talviolympialaiset 1952? --85.76.53.43 (talk) 21:47, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]