User talk:Kingjeff

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Do you want me to salt your userpage? That way you will never be able to reinstate it again to have it deleted yet again? Agathoclea (talk) 13:15, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Stats table at Jonathan Spector[edit]

Hello, and thank you for your note. First, I'm not sure why you say in your edit summary that "my" table isn't the standard: I'm fairly sure it is, or pretty close to it. As to your changes, I've no objection to using for the sourcing; it's probably reliable, it seems accurate, and the apps by competition breakdown certainly makes checking the totals easier. But the Soccerbase refs were used all over the article and removing them left the reflist full of big red error messages. You also removed, for no obvious reason, the helpful explanatory notes that identified which competition(s) the continental and other appearances were made in. And the note about the West Ham "goal" will have to stay, to deflect editors away from changing it to what Soccerbase (and his WHU profile) says: most British editors do use Soccerbase as stats source of choice.

The rowspan/colspan thing is the problem. You think the rowspanned version looks tidier; some would agree with you, while others prefer the clarity of repeated cells. But the table has been stable for some considerable time, which means you'd need a justification beyond personal aesthetic for changing its format. The sentence at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Players refers to, and stems from a discussion about, the specific question of whether the league division needed to be repeated. The conclusion was don't go round imposing repeated division names on an existing table with a rowspanned division column, because the slight gain in accessibility isn't worth the aggravation value. It doesn't justify imposing row/colspanned areas (and greater loss in accessibility than would be the case with a single column) all over an existing table with repeated cells.

I'll return the table to the previously stable format, with the addition of the Orlando City row and the generic column headings, and change the source to If you're still determined to have the row/colspanned areas, I'd advise moving this conversation to the article talk page and inviting comment from WT:FOOTY. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:02, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

On the accessibility thing, the discussion linked at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Players, which is here requested clarification from someone knowledgeable about the accessibility of various table formats for screen reader users. The quotations from that thread are exactly what he said, and we went along with it. As I said above, to change away from a stable format that complies with the project standard needs something more than an editor's personal preference for a different format. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:26, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
If active football editors devoted all their Wikipedia time to standardising stats tables, it'd take many months to finish the job, and if you added in all the likely follow-up discussions, it'd be more like decades. So it's hardly a surprise that many articles use different formats, particularly ones that were around long before the current standard was agreed. Newly created articles do seem to be using the current standard.
If you think it could be done better, please feel free to make suggestions at WT:FOOTY or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Players. But whatever happens, there'll still be just as many non-compliant formats until someone changes them, there'll still be just as little time or appetite for doing so, and there'll still be no consensus for changing from one acceptable variant to another. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:02, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/People[edit]

Ambox warning orange.svg Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/People, a page which you created or substantially contributed to (or which is in your userspace), has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/People and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/People during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Mr. Guye (talk) 22:11, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Canada 10,000 Challenge submissions[edit]

The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada will soon be reaching its first-anniversary. Please consider submitting any Canada-related articles you have created or improved since November 2016. Please try to ensure that all entries are sourced with formatted citations and no unsourced claims.

You may submit articles using this link for convenience. Thank-you, and please spread the word to those you know who might be interested in joining this effort to improve the quality of Canada-related articles. – Reidgreg (talk) 18:13, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Kingjeff. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

User page[edit]

Stop reinstating your user page with "retired" when it's evident that you're not. I think you've "retired" twice today alone. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:18, 13 December 2017 (UTC)