Template talk:Infobox football club

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Football (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

location along with ground or stadium parameter[edit]

I have seen a great many football club articles list the location of the club's ground after the location for the stadium.

All MLS clubs have it. Very few English clubs have it. Should we state that it should not be present in the documentation or should was state it is optional and not proffered, or something else? Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:27, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Actually I think the majority of English club articles do have it. However, it appears that an IP ( (talk · contribs)) removed it from Premier League/Football League club articles in September earlier this year. I think their edits need undoing. Number 57 21:36, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
It's chaos regarding this thing. Let's say 50% of League X teams have |ground=stadium X, location X while the other 50% have only |ground=stadium X. I see the author of this section reverted my edits, because he thinks The documentation doesn't state it should not contain location. Then I may ask – what's the purpose of documentation? In my opinion, documentation is there to give a CLEAR idea of how something should look like and nothing should be invented without discussing first. – Sabbatino (talk) 22:07, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
How is that chaos? I reverted because you claimed a fact when it wasn't. The documentation is a guideline, not a fact. And since the docs do not state that location should not be included, I'm not sure how you can think it should be removed if present. If you can show me that wording the present documentation, I would be happy to self-revert my removal of the content. What you have is an absence of location, but that does not state anything about whether it should or should not be present.
I don't care if it is present or not. I think the documentation should state whether it may be present or not and I would argue it's not a bad thing to have. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:38, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
I don't really care either way, but there should be consistency between club articles whatever the final decision is. Regards, Vaselineeeeeeee (talk) 22:45, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Agree on consistency. A fine example would be NBA, NHL, NFL and MLB teams. – Sabbatino (talk) 11:08, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Read again what I wrote Walter and maybe you'll then understand what I mean by chaos. No consistency = chaos. Here's the definition of guidelinea general rule, principle, or piece of advice. Since documentation is a guideline and in my opinion – a general rule – it should be discussed FIRST before adding location under the stadium. Or better else – |location= parameter should be created to avoid unnecessary edit wars. It's not my problem that the creator of this documentation didn't state something clearly. I think that this needs to be taken to Wikipedia:WikiProject Football if we want to reach a consensus faster. – Sabbatino (talk) 11:08, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
I did read what you wrote and you didn't read what I wrote. if you want to continue to play stupid games go ahead. It is Wikipedia's problem when you claim that the documentation supports your actions when it doesn't. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:20, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
I did read. And you're the one playing stupid games. I follow the guideline which only includes stadium and not location (since there's no mention about location). Guidelines are created for a reason. It's not my problem that some people like to create their own rules. And it's also not my fault that guidelines aren't clear to some people who like to interpret things their way... – Sabbatino (talk) 23:51, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
This is one of your edits: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vancouver_Whitecaps_FC&diff=697602504&oldid=697489322 "Per Template:Infobox football club documentation". Now if you would be so good as to show me where in the documentation it states that city and other content should not be in the template.
As a counterpoint, I offer Template:Infobox album where there are three parameters: "recorded", "venue" and "studio". Next to the first it clearly states that "and where - deprecated - see below" should not list the location of recording as that parameter has been split into venue and studio. So if you were to go around deleting studio and city from the recorded parameter, or preferably, moving it to a venue or studio parameter, you would be following the template's documentation.
Whereas Template:Infobox person has locations for birth and death and those could be a city, or some other venue because it's not clearly stipulated. Biographies, such as that of Abraham Lincoln have venues along with cities, yet by your supposed argument, because the example only displays a city name the article I just linked is wrong and the Good Article status it bears should be taken away, as should the location.
So perhaps, instead of pretending that the documentation supports your deletion, editing based on the partial examples, then trying to cover your ass and accusing others for the problem, perhaps you could be constructive and clarify before you waste your time and that of others. it might be best to admit that you may have been wrong in deleting the cities from the MLS articles as you did then try to focus on determining if cities should or should not be listed in templates for all teams. Currently, it seems as though we're in favour of having it and I have proposed that a separate parameter should be supplied. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:07, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
1. This is it – "ground — The name of the club's home ground (use stadium to label as stadium for American clubs)." It clearly states that stadium's name should be included here. No mention about location. 2. You try to show me an example and fail in doing so. I'm referring to Template:Infobox album example. I have |venue= parameter in mind. The description for this parameter is "Place where a live album was recorded." LIVE, LIVE, LIVE... Looks like someone misread and didn't see that this parameter is used only for LIVE albums. 3. As previously – failure in showing an example and your loss of arguments just begins to grow. A person is not a stadium – he/she migrates from one place to another. Country borders change all the time, city names change, etc. Furthermore, for example, when you have in mind London, it can have different meanings as shown here. 4. But documentation DOES SUPPORT my actions. I'm not accusing anyone of anything as I only stated facts by telling what is clear and what isn't. 5. You are starting to take all this very personally which is not good. I advise you to stop it. You're the only user on whole Wikipedia that made an issue of out of this small thing. 6. I was the first one to propose that |location= should be created. Don't take all the credit for yourself. – Sabbatino (talk) 11:40, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
So you're arguing that because it does not list city in the template it should not be included in articles. Since you updated MLS clubs, I'll stick to the word stadium thanks. You're wrong and you know it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:25, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
I don't see any mistakes in my edits and I'm not wrong. You wanted arguments for my actions, I gave you arguments. If that doesn't satisfy you – it's your problem. This isn't the place to make personal attacks. I will start to classify your messages towards me like that, because I see that you're starting to get personal against me (already mentioned in my message above). If you'll start to try and find a way out of this nonsense (which you started) instead of arguing then the personal attack tag will be gone. – Sabbatino (talk) 21:00, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Going back to the topic. It's a mixed bag regarding this matter. I just checked 2015–16 Bundesliga page and 16 out of 18 teams list only stadium and no location. However, when I went to 2015–16 Ligue 1, 2015–16 Serie A and other major football leagues, things started getting really interesting and the result between stadium and stadium+location was about ±50%. As I said before – it's chaos and there's no consistency whatsoever. So we are here for a reason – to determine what should or shouldn't be listed in the infobox.Sabbatino (talk) 21:00, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
WP:FOOTBALL has been notified of this discussion. The comments from Struway2 below suggest it should be included as there was no consensus for its removal. Number 57 13:00, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
For information: the example in the documentation used to contain the location, until it was changed from a real club to a generic one, without discussion, some years ago. I'm guessing most people wouldn't have noticed its disappearance, and those that did notice wouldn't have inferred that we should stop including locations. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:34, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Let's restore it. It might be worthwhile to include a separate parameter so that we can format it correctly. We should also make it clear to avoid WP:OVERLINKs. Any suggestions on updates and new wording? Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:20, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Proposed change[edit]

I suggest we change the example to be:

| ground        = [[Example Stadium]]<br>[[Olonkinbyen]], [[Jan Mayen]], Norway
| coordinates   = {{coord|70|55|19|N|8|42|54|W|display=inline,title}}
| capacity      = 500

Alternately, we could use a real stadium that has multiple, shared tenants such as Wembley Stadium or similar. I chose Olonkinbyen because it's essentially uninhabited. Then in the TemplateData section, we update the documentation to read "The name of the club's home ground and location, separated by a break. Do not link nation per WP:OVERLINK." We then make similar changes to the Stadium parameter.

I would do away with the break; (a) it's unnecessary, and (b) it looks ridiculous in wide infoboxes when there is a short stadium and town/city name. I would also omit anything except the stadium and town/city names. Country and district is unnecessary. Number 57 15:00, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment. We should only list stadium. However, if there's an agreement on listing something more besides stadium, we should list |ground=Ground, City. Although, for US/Canadian teams we should list |stadium=Stadium, City, State in order to keep consistency with the biggest sports leagues. – Sabbatino (talk) 12:45, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
    • Why should we only list the stadium? The vast majority of articles list the stadium and the city, as that is the way it has largely been done up until now. Removing the city denies the reader useful information (for instance, where clubs play at grounds not in their home city). Number 57 13:10, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
      • Readers can click through to the stadium article for the city, etc. I'm not in favour of ground only, but that would be a valid reason. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:37, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
        • You're commenting my first sentence. In the next sentences I explained what formation I would favor... – Sabbatino (talk) 15:57, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
          • Your comment is written in a way that makes it clear that you favour omitting the city, but you would accept it if other people are in favour. Or have you changed your mind? Number 57 16:40, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
            • Looks like I wrote the sentence starting with however, didn't I? I'm in favor of listing only stadium, but if people agree on listing city alongside stadium then it should be listed as I've shown above. – Sabbatino (talk) 18:30, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose. It's the stadium that matters and not the city. – Sabbatino (talk) 12:20, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Alternative suggestion[edit]

If I might suggest an alternative:

| ground        = [[Example Stadium]]
| location      = [[Olonkinbyen]], [[Jan Mayen]], Norway
| coordinates   = {{coord|70|55|19|N|8|42|54|W|display=inline,title}}
| capacity      = 500

The template could use a line break for now to separate the ground and location parameters if that is the common formatting used now, but individual articles should be updated with separate parameters. Then the template can be revised from time to time if desired, for example, to separate ground and location with a comma or to place location on a separate row (similar to the coordinates)—or even hide/deprecate location altogether. Clever wikipedians may even figure out how to tailor the display to suit their preferences. sroc 💬 17:27, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment. This would be better. I already made it clear that a separate parameter for location should be created. In my opinion, only City, Country should be listed for European, Asian, Oceanian, African and Latin American clubs. Whereas, American and Canadian clubs should be consistent with clubs of major professional sports leagues in the United States and Canada and list City, State (for US)/Province (for Canada). – Sabbatino (talk) 18:41, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
    • Country shouldn't be listed. Number 57 18:59, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
      • Why not? Country is usually included in infoboxes for people. The league name does not necessarily identify the country, either: Wellington Phoenix FC is based in New Zealand, but the league name A-League doesn't clearly name the country and, in fact, it is primarily Australian (the A). sroc 💬 03:54, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
        • Because in 99.99% of articles it's unnecessary. Perhaps it could be mentioned in the 0.01% of articles where clubs play outside their countries, but enforcing this on all articles is pointless. Number 57 12:04, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

I was think about that, but parameters can be anywhere and "location" could be the location of the club if misplaced. I was going to suggestion "ground_location and "stadium_location" but that requires a bit more work to the template, but makes sense. As for country, it doesn't have to be listed. There are three Canadian clubs in the US-based MLS and two in US-based NASL. Monaco in La Liga, etc. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:36, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Location parameter should be attributed to club's location. For example, in my country there's a club called FK Trakai and of course they're from [[Trakai]. However, they don't have a stadium that meets UEFA requirements, so they play their home games at LFF Stadium in Vilnius. – Sabbatino (talk) 21:00, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
That's not the point. The parameter is for the ground or stadium, not the club. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:41, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Read again what you wrote above my message and I stated my opinion on that matter. This discussion is a dead-end as far as I'm concerned. Only 3 people (+1 who left one message) engaged in this discussion and WP:Football just archived this notification long ago... – Sabbatino (talk) 08:05, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Three is enough to make the change. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:11, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 20 March 2016[edit]

| label17     = Succeeded by
| data17      = {{{succeeded by:|}}}

for next club

| dissolved           = 15 September 1999
| succeeded_by        = [[FC Barcelona]]

ThecentreCZ (talk) 00:54, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Pictogram voting question.svg Question: As an editor unfamiliar with the subject matter, I request that you please provide a complete and specific description of what it is you wish to accomplish with this change? An example of where it might be used would help. fredgandt 01:23, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: @ThecentreCZ: As Fred Gandt says, we will need more information to carry out this request. At the moment, it's not very clear what you want. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 02:41, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Number of championships won, etc[edit]

Shouldn't there exist a parameter (sequence of parameters) for the number of championships (championships, cups, etc) won? SoSivr (talk) 10:18, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

No, no, no. This would only lead to the pathetic edit wars we've seen articles like Liverpool F.C.–Manchester United F.C. rivalry. Completely unnecessary. Number 57 10:32, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Alternatively, we can assume good faith and add whatever enriches the articles, and deal with content disputes on case by case bases. Fred Gandt (talk|contribs) 11:44, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
It's nothing to do with good faith, it's about experience of similar scenarios. The number of championships is already covered in the article, and there is no need to go into that level of detail in the infobox. Number 57 12:03, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
It is probably the most important statistic, though (especially for the top teams) ! SoSivr (talk) 13:34, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
I agree with Number 57. Besides, which competitions would you include? Just the domestic league? League and cup? Then you've got differences between nations whereby some have more competitions to play for than others. And what about the inevitable grandstanding of the so-called smaller clubs, which would list all the minor competitions they've won just to get on an even keel with the "bigger" teams? – PeeJay 19:59, 11 May 2016 (UTC)