Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian rules football

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This page is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Australia / Australian rules football (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon WikiProject Australian rules football is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This page is supported by WikiProject Australian rules football.

Single game award navboxes[edit]

Looking through Category:Australian Football League awards navigational boxes I'm seeing quite a few navboxes that are unnecessary at best. I'm planning on TfDing a few, but thought I'd bring it here first to see what others think. Surely Template:Archer-Hird Medal, Template:Ian Stewart Medal, Template:Jason McCartney Medal and Template:Rose-Sutton Medal can go as short-lived medals that most have never heard of, aren't given out any longer and were only awarded for run-of-the-mill games. I'm also a bit unconvinced by the need for navboxes for other individual game medals, e.g. Anzac Day, Dreamtime, intrastate rivalries (Showdown, Derby, etc.). Your thoughts? Jenks24 (talk) 08:41, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Those three are now at TFD, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 June 30. Still interested about what people think of the others. Jenks24 (talk) 04:16, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
I'd delete the others as well (although that will probably surprise nobody, since I've been pushing an unsuccessful barrow to delete the whole article pages for Showdown Medal, Marcus Ashcroft Medal, Glendinning Medal etc. into the main game articles). I believe they are being afforded a level of coverage out of step with the actual notability and wider coverage of the awards. Aspirex (talk) 11:19, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
I personally don't see the need for the best on ground articles and templates (obviously apart from the Norm Smith), at the moment, the rivalries seem to be the only BOG awards with pages and the only ones that are met with any opposition when it comes to merging/redirecting. There's no point in TfDing the rivalry templates while the pages still exist. I do vaguely remember a merge was attempted for the rivalry medals and the discussion didn't really go anywhere, is there any worth in AfDing them to try and move the discussion along and try reach a result? As there seems to be a greater move recently to tidy the project and remove unnecessary pages/templates. In terms of the Anzac medal, it does not have a page therefore that one should meet NAVBOX #4 and I'd nominate that one. Flickerd (talk) 12:29, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Cricketers who played Australian rules football (and vice versa)[edit]

Wikipedia doesn't seem to do well with sportsmen who played both football and cricket - and there were a lot of them: see List of Australian rules footballers and cricketers. So we have Max Walker who played 85 VFL games, but that fact doesn't appear in the article. There are people like Walker and Simon O'Donnell, who are far more notable for playing cricket, while others like Craig Bradley are far more notable for football. Some are most notable for neither - Jim Wilkinson (Australian politician) is most notable for being President of the Tasmanian Legislative Council. But it seems to be that we could still improve coverage of these players' minor sports. Can we have an infobox that includes both football and cricket? Should we have two infoboxes in the article (as we have with Keith Miller, which is a GA)? I am posting a link to here from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket. StAnselm (talk) 10:00, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Michael Clark (sportsman) and Doug Gott are two more articles with two infoboxes, although some might object that the articles are too short to warrant that. StAnselm (talk) 10:11, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm sure I've seen an article with the two infoboxes combined into one. I think it used a parameter called module, or something similar. For the life of me, I can't find the article in question, but it looked a lot better than having two individual infoboxes. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 11:46, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Walker's article used to go into his footy career more, someone must have trimmed it. I agree that having two infoboxes generally looks poor, I was actually considering removing it from Miller's article when I edited it the other day. In general I've always tried to pick whichever they're more notable for and just use that infobox, but of course there are borderline cases. I think to embed one in another you can use the module parameter of Template:Infobox person, but I've never tried it to confirm. Jenks24 (talk) 13:36, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Just added the combined infobox at Todd Breman. I think the colour of the Aussie rules section may need some tweaking. Hack (talk) 04:01, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
I think the combined infobox is the best solution. For another sort of example, albeit one combining cricket and association football, see Brian Close. Jellyman (talk) 16:49, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

I worked on the Miller GA, but I like Jellyman's approach. Where a sensible independent person would say that one of the careers was more prominent, it'd make sense to put that infobox first. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 09:36, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Australian rules football stubs[edit]

Hey folks. I recently combed through the articles in Category:Stub-Class Australian rules football articles as part of researching whether we're failing to classify articles into appropriate stub categories in the mainspace even though they've already been identified as stubs by WikiProjects. Turns out we are. There are around 4,500 articles in that category (out of a little over 13,000) which aren't tagged with any stub template despite being under 1,500 characters (including infobox source code, etc, so these are unambiguous stubs). Is there any objections to me running a bot through and placing them within the Category:Australian rules biography stubs category tree using appropriate stub templates? I can automate this based off of the birth categories they're already in. Any input would be appreciated. ~ Rob13Talk 02:15, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Aidan Parker notability?[edit]

I was wondering what people's views are on Aidan Parker's notability, he fails WP:NAFL and I'm not sure if he meets WP:GNG. There are two links on his page to the Subiaco website and one to the WAFL website, which aren't independent, and three to footy goss and hotmag which aren't reliable sources, I'm thinking of redirecting him to List of Adelaide Football Club players as has been the case for drafted players who do not play a match (even though there isn't a section for delisted players who didn't play match, it can easily be created for Adelaide). I'm unsure if he is notable in WA and it is just a poorly referenced article, or if he does lack notability. Thoughts? Thanks, Flickerd (talk) 09:04, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Not at all notable as far as I can see. StAnselm (talk) 09:34, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Hmmm. This is an article I created almost five years ago; it's interesting to see how much my editing style has changed. It's probably not an article I would create nowadays. I think there is probably enough media coverage of the WAFL (and SANFL for that matter) to allow for articles to exist on top-level players (i.e. those who don't expressly meet the VFL/AFL one-game requirement). The West Australian (the major daily paper in Perth) generally has one or two articles per day during the season, and the two weekend papers (The Weekend West and The Sunday Times) both have two or three pages. Given Parker was a club captain and premiership player, I would imagine that he has been profiled in those papers a few times during his career (for milestone games, retirement, etc.). Running his name through Google News I found a couple articles from earlier this year where he is mentioned (which suggests some sort of enduring notability/interest, given he retired five years ago): one where he is mentioned as "[one] of the best WAFL players of the past 25 years", and another where he was interviewed in regards to his amateur coaching career. If you throw in the brief stint on an AFL list, I would probably argue for keeping if it came to an AfD, but I wouldn't be too upset if the consensus was otherwise. IgnorantArmies (talk) 12:33, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
I'd agree with IgnorantArmies. We set a low bar of notability with the one AFL game rule, and the level of WAFL coverage and AFL list coverage Parker has received should be enough to surpass that bar. Aspirex (talk) 13:58, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
I'd also agree with IgnorantArmies. On a separate note, is redirecting retired players to a club they never played for an appropriate move? I can understand it happening for listed players who are yet to play a game. But in Parker's case, he spent two years in Adelaide and never got a game. After that he returned to Subiaco, won three premierships and captained the club. So surely Subiaco would be a more appropriate redirect target. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 06:15, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Notice to participants at this page about adminship[edit]

Many participants here create a lot of content, have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the skills considered at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:

You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

Many thanks and best wishes,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:47, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

List of Port Adelaide Football Club players[edit]

Just wanting a bit of help from people on here. A bit of back story, I've been trying to improve the List of Port Adelaide Football Club players and believe that the page should be representative of Category:Port Adelaide Football Club players, which is a subcategory of Category:VFL/AFL players. In addition, before my contributions the page was very large (WP:TOOBIG) and I saw a reasonable split by having the SANFL listed players (before 1997) at List of Port Adelaide Football Club players (before 1997) which is also representative of Category:Port Adelaide Football Club (SANFL) players, and a subcategory of Category:South Australian National Football League players and the AFL listed players at List of Port Adelaide Football Club players. In addition the navbox at the bottom of List of Port Adelaide Football Club players says VFL/AFL players, and it seems logical to me to have that page as just VFL/AFL players, the SANFL players do still have representation, and I made sure not to just delete them all. There are multiple other issues with the page, such as the stats haven't been updated since 2012, the cap order is out of whack as some debutants have been added and others haven't (i.e. Jimmy Toumpas is listed as the 152nd player, when he in fact is the 158th player). I have also updated the debuts and ensured they were in correct order.

Thejoebloggsblog has been reverting my edits to the way he last had it, this brings up the obvious issues of the stats being out of date, a whole lot of debuts are missing, and the three players that have debuted since are just being deleted. I have explained my edits on Thejoebloggsblog's talk page, and he just completely ignored it and reverted it back to his last edit. I know there have been problems before where Thejoebloggsblog will not discuss and will continue reverting back to their preference, so I'm asking for help on here so I don't WP:3RR as I'm unsure if it can be constituted as vandalism. As I previously said, I believe there is a logical split in the page due to the large page size and representing the correct categories so if anyone does have feedback and can help the discussion process, please comment, but there shouldn't be reverts of updated stats and debuts. Thanks, Flickerd (talk) 13:21, 18 August 2016 (UTC)