Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian rules football

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

Upcoming change to Template:Infobox AFL biography[edit]

Please see this discussion for information about an upcoming fix to {{Infobox AFL biography}} which will change the parameters for teams/years/goals(games/wins). To address an accessibility issue which currently causes AFL infoboxes to be unreadable to those using screen readers, the following parameters will be replaced by numbered variants. Going forward, all entries of teams in the infobox should utilize the numbered parameters, with one number being used for each team. New parameters for total goals/games/wins have also been added. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Changed parameters:

  • years → years1, years2, ...
  • clubs → club1, club2, ...
  • games(goals) → games_goals1, games_goals2, ...
  • sooyears → sooyears1, sooyears2, ...
  • sooteams → sooteam1, sooteam2, ...
  • soogames(goals) → soogames_goals1, soogames_goals2, ...
  • nationalyears → nationalyears1, nationalyears2, ...
  • nationalteams → nationalteam1, nationalteam2, ...
  • nationalgames(goals) → nationalgames_goals1, nationalgames_goals2, ...
  • coachyears → coachyears1, coachyears2, ...
  • coachclubs → coachclub1, coachclub2, ...
  • coachgames(wins) → coachgames_wins1, coachgames_wins2, ...

New parameters:

  • games_goalstotal
  • soogames_goalstotal
  • nationalgames_goalstotal
  • coachgames_winstotal

~ Rob13Talk 03:16, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Automatic WikiData Sources for the Infobox[edit]

Recently I've been playing around in WikiData, and all 12486 VFL/AFL players, and quite a few non-VFL/AFL players, now have AustralianFootball.com and AFL Tables IDs in WikiData. Tonight I added code to {{AFL Tables}} and {{AustralianFootball}} so that if no parameters are used, then the value from the wikidata property (d:Property:P3547 or d:Property:P3546) is used automatically. I've tested those two templates on Tommy Hughes (Australian footballer). Note that I've used a direct parameter link to the properties, as used in {{IMDb name}} rather than a Lua module as in {{sports-reference}} or the #invoke term as is used in this template for images, mainly because I don't understand what the difference is, and this seemed simple and works. If this isn't ideal, then please improve - I'm not a coder and just learn by copying and experimenting.

I've tested the code below in the {{Infobox AFL biography/sandbox}} and have tested it in Tommy Hughes (Australian footballer) and previews it in other articles (as you need a live wikidata link for it to work, you can't test it in a sandbox). I've not included the option to manually provide a source to override the wikidata one. If people feel that there is a need, then it could be added, but whilst AFL Tables is solely VFL/AFL only, AustralianFootball does cover notable players from other leagues too. And of course, we've lasted this long without any sources in the infobox, having some players without an auto link isn't the end of the world.

The "below" style that I've used is from the {{Infobox cricketer}}, which I'll be proposing to add an automatic WikiData driven source link to CricInfo and/or Cricket Archive next, if WP:CRIC are in favour...

If anyone has any comments, improvements or things I've missed, please make them at the Infobox template talk link above. The-Pope (talk) 15:48, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Hampson-Hardeman Cup[edit]

Hi all, just wanted to get a gauge on whether people believe Hampson-Hardeman Cup should have its own page. The reason I bring it up is because of the similar discussion we had with the AFL matches of a similar nature a while ago and were redirected to List of individual match awards in the Australian Football League. The Melbourne-Western Bulldogs matches are probably the most notable of the matches in AFL Women's and did receive coverage during the exhibition series era or is the article WP:TOOSOON considering the AFL Women's league just started and do we redirect the page to AFL Women's. Thoughts? Flickerd (talk) 06:34, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

It definitely meets WP:GNG. There's significant coverage of it as an actual event rather than just a single match from several of Australia's largest media outlets, and it has received this coverage for several years now. Even that alone would make it notable in my eyes, but I definitely feel that the additional facet of it being an integral part in the formation of the AFLW puts it beyond any doubt.
It's also worth noting that although the notability guidelines have fairly high standards on sports rivalries, they explicitly mention "All-star or similar exhibition games" as being notable, and the Hampson-Hardeman Cup is certainly more of an all-star/exhibition game than a rivalry, considering its history as a precursor to the AFLW and predominant amount of marquee players for future clubs. SellymeTalk 13:01, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
No, it shouldn't have its own page. Like all of the individual match awards already discussed, it does not meet WP:GNG, as all coverage that I have found falls under WP:ROUTINE. Discussion of its existence and the role of the exhibition series in general in the formation of of the AFLW is valid content for the AFL Women's history section; that alone isn't a reason to make a listcruft article full of results. Not averse to including it in the List of individual match awards... page, though. Aspirex (talk) 08:22, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
WP:ROUTINE regarding sports events is talking about results coverage, not general news - note the 'However, if an article goes into detail about the event it is not necessarily "routine" coverage'. A few paragraphs about the match mentioning the cup with the results wouldn't count as noteworthy, but many of the articles about the Western Bulldogs v Melbourne games are talking about it as a distinctly newsworthy event, rather than following the stock formula of just writing a few paragraphs on every match that happens that week. Here's some examples of news articles that are clearly distinct from what would be considered routine coverage - ABC News, Herald Sun. Additionally, the AFL refers to the Bulldogs v Demons matches (prior to this year of course) as "All-Star games", something that's explicitly mentioned in WP:GNG as being notable.
In summary, the Hampson-Hardeman Cup as it exists now wouldn't be notable, but because it was notable as an exhibition series means that it still is, as per WP:NTEMP. SellymeTalk 20:19, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
I disagree with your interpretation of the "all-star game" clause. Although the games pre-2017 do meet the functional definition of an all-star game, it has to be remembered that the league from which the all-star players were drawn was the VWFL – an amateur suburban competition which, prior to its co-branding with the VFL in 2016, received no more media coverage than any other suburban comp like the EDFL (and receiving coverage roughly on par with the VAFA from 2016 onwards). To argue that the Hampson-Hardeman Cup, as an all-star match for a competition with such a low level of coverage, meets the threshold to gain inherent notability under WP:SPORTSEVENT ignores the common-sense application of that point. (e.g. I could use the same clause to argue that the previously annual VFA Thirds match between North-of-the-Yarra players and South-of-the-Yarra players was inherently notable, but the SPORTSEVENT clause was not intended to be used in this manner).
The rest of your arguments can be equally well applied to all non-Hampson-Hardeman matches in the AFL Women's Exhibition Series: all of them received sufficient coverage, individually and collectively, to be considered notable. What I would suggest is to break out the entire 2013-2016 Exhibition Series as a new article (last time I checked, that content was part of the AFL Women's), rather than just the H-H games. I would then stand by the last statement in WP:SPORTSEVENT"For a games or series that is already covered as a subtopic in another article, consider developing the topic in the existing article first until it becomes clearer that a standalone article is warranted. Although a game or series may be notable, it may sometimes be better to present the topic in an existing article on a broader topic instead of creating a new standalone page;" given the main claim to notability of the H-H matches is in the Exhibition Series' role in the AFLW history, I think this statement holds entirely true here. Aspirex (talk) 09:53, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
I can agree that breaking out the exhibition series as a whole would serve as a functional replacement of the H-H article, but it is worth noting that the Dogs-Dees matches 2013 through 2016 received far more coverage than the other matches, as the exhibition series only started including other teams in 2016, and those teams lower priority picks from the talent pools. In a hypothetical AFL Women's Exhibition Series article the H-H Cup would certainly be a focal point. As for the validity of a lesser-covered All-Star game, there's an important difference between the Yarra VFA Thirds and an event which was the lead-in to a nationwide professional competition and provided many of the marquee players. SellymeTalk 16:47, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
Sounds like a consensus to me to create AFL Women's Exhibition Series as an article. The only remaining question would be where to redirect the Hampson-Hardeman Cup title – to a sub-section of the Exhibition Series article, or to the List of individual match awards in the Australian Football League. Aspirex (talk) 07:11, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

AFLW All Australian team[edit]

Was wondering if initial 40-woman squad of the AA team is notable enough to create 2017 All-Australian team (I'm thinking have the AFL and AFLW AA teams on the same page, any other thoughts?)? If not, will the final 22 (TBA Tuesday) be notable enough? --SuperJew (talk) 08:30, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

There's been enough coverage of the initial squad from independent sources Seven West Media, Fairfax Media, News Corp, so I don't see a problem with notability. I have had some thoughts since the announcement of the squad and I've been unsure whether it should be included on the 2017 All-Australian team page, but I think it's probably the best way to go (as long as the distinction is made clear in the intro) as I'm still unsure whether the AFLW team should have its own page, especially considering most players are redlinks. Flickerd (talk) 11:41, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, I'd agree that it's best to have them in the same article at the very least until an AFLW-specific article would be more than a collection of redlinks. SellymeTalk 18:44, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
Definitely needs to be created. I'd be inclined to have them on separate pages, rather than adding an AFL one to the same page after six months of having a list that would cover only the women's team. The Drover's Wife (talk) 19:24, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
I suggest putting the Women's All-Australian team in the 'Awards' section of the 2017 AFL Women's season page, rather than putting it into the 2017 All-Australian team page. It would be much more relevant to the surrounding subject matter if it's with other AFLW content than if it's mixed together with men's content. I don't agree with the notion that individual Women's All-Australian Teams are sufficiently notable for their own article, as all coverage of the team falls under routine; but an article like All-Australian team which becomes a repository for all AFLW All-Australian Teams would be a reasonable outcome. Aspirex (talk) 22:30, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
I'd wait until the actual team is announced. The squad is kind of nomination-level. Jack N. Stock (talk) 00:20, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

breakout standalone article?[edit]

for Women's team?, see Talk:Adelaide Football Club. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:41, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

I think the article will need to be split at some point (probably at the start of the 2018 season so that we have enough content to truly justify it and fill out the new article), but I don't think that winning a premiership is any kind of tipping point in that regard. If and when it's done it should be done for all teams, regardless of success. SellymeTalk 09:50, 25 March 2017 (UTC)