Template talk:Football squad player2

Usage

Feel free to try this out on Watford. As football articles go it's about as stable as they get. --WFC-- 11:02, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

If you haven't done it by the time I get back I will, but just waiting for Chris to fix alignment issues in sandbox (ref testcases edit summary) which will need transferring to this template as well.--ClubOranje^T 12:06, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Cosmetic change

What do people think about reducing the width of the Position column by using the abbreviation Pos. in {{Fs start2}} and then centering the position abbreviations (GK, DF, MF, FW) in the column (rather than being left justified as they currently are) by modifying this template? DemonJuice (talk) 22:07, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Further to that, please could the squad number and playing position both be centred within their columns? The right-aligned squad number crammed up against the border between the columns crammed up against the left-aligned position looks very messy, and isn't easy to read. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 20:31, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

I've made changes to this effect; I centre aligned the numbers, and expanded upon positions, because "pos." would probably require a key. The advantage of spelling out positions is to remove the key that was already there. This should not have any space implications on current implementations, because "position" + the sort icon was as long as the longest position ("Goalkeeper"). Given that space is not at a premium in this template, we may as well use the extra width on offer. —WFC— 20:48, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Heading colour

Does this really need to be customisable? One of the big wins for this template over the old one is that it's a regular wikitable. It's not as if readers are likely to forget whose squad they're looking at unless the header is in club colours. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:37, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

It isn't customisable at the moment, although I'm in favour of customisation as an option, and indeed have worked on this in userspace. If a navbox is readable and the same colours are used, I don't see issues on that front. —WFC— 20:24, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Aha. sorry about that: I'd assumed at a glance that Watford F.C. was using {{football squad start2}} and not a manual wikitable for the basic structure. There is a practical aspect to colourising navbox headers in that with nesting it makes it easier to pick out the club navbox (although I am in general opposed to colour in navboxes unless very strongly associated with a subject to avoid Technicolor Mess Syndrome). There's no such requirement in tables within an article: it's just extraneous decoration, and the result is inevitably more distracting than the deliberately-subdued wikitable defaults. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 13:14, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Adding support for dates and references to the template

I have created a modification to {{football squad start2}} at {{football squad start2/sandbox}}, which would add support for dates and references within the header. Implementation can be seen at Template:Football squad start2/testcases. —WFC— 05:31, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Passing on a valid complaint

I've heard this complaint from a few editors, but I don't have the problem. The only issue is that rosters are now too large to be displayed on a single screen page when viewed at say 1024 x 768. It also depends on the number of players in the roster and the number of toolbars in the viewer's browser, but if we could reduce the cell height slightly, this may help. I recognize that this may be a standard used across all of wikipedia and so it can't be changed. We shouldn't diminish the user experience for sighted readers for the sake of making the roster more accessible. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:11, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

I dare say that given the choice of slightly diminishing the user experience for sighted readers or significantly diminishing it for sight-impaired readers, the former is a far more ethical tradeoff. Additionally, anecdotal evidence suggests that the new format displays better on at least some mobile browsers. Wider deployment will hopefully give a better idea of the general consensus on that front. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 16:19, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Layout

Is it just me or do anyone else think that the template would better with having the nationality column before position instead of the current order? The template would look like this: Number, Nationality, Position and Player. I think the current order is misleading since the nationality column is the most noticeable column when having a quick look at the template, we should be listing players, not nationalities. --Reckless182 (talk) 06:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

I'd rather not have it at all. The rest of the information is valuable to the player on the team: club number, position, and linked name. But what specifically does the nationality help in the club's player roster? It doesn't rally change anything about the player nor does it inform the reader about the players style of play or anything else valuable. It's unadulterated nationalism. If it's going to be included at all I think it's best at the end of the line. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:12, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Nationality is something of obvious importance and relevance in both club and international football. National teams are an obvious example, the fact that certain leagues have certain rules regarding players born outside of EU etc is another good example. Nationality should definitely be featured in the template, just not in the position it is now. --Reckless182 (talk) 15:20, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Nationality was deliberately moved to the end of the line in order to deemphasise its importance. The vast majority of players with Wikipedia articles do not have international caps and their nationality is of only relatively minor clerical importance (and of almost no importance for post-Bosman Europeans). That said, at present there is no consensus to excise it from the template altogether as Walter suggests, though an option to do so (as with squad numbers) is certainly welcome. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 16:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Moving it to the far right side is actually putting even more emphasis on it than having it after squad number to the left. Having a quick look at the template, the first thing the eyes of the reader sees is nationality to the right. I see no point in having the player column in the middle of the template with two large columns to the left and one large column to the right. Also, do you mean that you would like to remove squad numbers from the template as well? Both player nationality and most certainly squad number is of importance to the reader. I don't think its sensible for the reader having to click on the player article to find out additional facts that can easily be listed in the template. --Reckless182 (talk) 16:39, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

No, I wouldn't remove squad number, only nationality.

The "old" template had it after the number because they incorrectly included only the flag and not the country name (see WP:MOSFLAG). If you include the country name, it's obtrusive after the squad number because of its potential maximum width. If you mean that it's not sensible to click through to find the player's country, then you'll have to explain two things: 1) why it's even important. I thought I explained why it's irrelevant but you don't seem to agree, but your logic escapes me. 2) why we don't include birth date and age, previous club, and the myriad of other information that's included in the player's article. My opinion on that is that it's not important in a club roster, and quite frankly, I can say the same about country of birth (or in some cases, FIFA affiliated country). In short, for a club's roster, we need to have the player's name, their position, and their club number. Everything else is superfluous, but I'm willing to listen to your arguments for the inclusion of other data. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:05, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

As I explained earlier, nationality plays an important part in football (and I'm talking about FIFA affiliated country here). In some leagues such as the Premier League and the MLS you can only feature a certain number of foreign players in a squad, starting eleven, match squad and etc. The reader is surely interested in this information when browsing the club article and reading the squad section, he or she shouldn't have to click on each individual article to find out the information, other information such as date of birth and previous clubs are not relevant to the squad template, nationality certainly is. I think I have made myself as clear as I can and hopefully you will see my point. My original point here was that the player name should be listed in the far right so that the reader sees the name first and then shift focus to nationality, number and so on. We need to emphasize the player name more than nationality in the template but nationality should certainly not be removed. --Reckless182 (talk) 17:13, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

No. Player name should not be on the far right since English is a language where we read left-to-right. So if you want it to be read first, then it should be on the left side. What you're explaining is a response to the old template style where the name was on the right and that is where you have become accustomed to looking for the name. I suspect that you will become similarly accustomed to looking in the name column on the new format just as easily and leave randomly changing size nationality column where it is, on the right, so it can be ignored by those who don't care for it at all. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:27, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Adding club teams to MLS All Star Roster?

In the 2013 MLS All-Star Game Roster section, there is a heading for Team, but I couldn't get that to populate. Anybody know how to do that? Is there a better template to use for this purpose? Lieutenant pepper (talk) 15:15, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Status

Work on this template seems to have stopped. Is it now in a state where we can merge it back into that from which it was forked? (Ping|Thumperward}}; @ClubOranje: Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:25, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

If my merge you mean get rid of either template and have one only, I don't see why. If by merge you mean leave the two templates as they are and bring some of the improvements over to the old one, then yes. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:04, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

This template's documentation says "It is derived from Template:Football squad player, with additional features and changes which aim to resolve WP:ACCESS with that template". If those issues are now resolved in this template, why do we still need the original? if not, why do we need this one? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:50, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

You appear to have missed the discussion at the football project: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 79#Roster formats. It didn't get far enough either. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:09, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Wrong Interwiki

There is a wrong interwikilink at Template:Football squad player2/doc. I do not understand why the interwikilink to id.wiki appears... Maybe someone can fix it. (I think this might be the reason why 2013 Women's Lacrosse World Cup is also linked to id:Templat:Football squad start2.) -- 188.115.16.98 (talk) 17:20, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Sorting of positions

As the template stands at the moment, when you click the sort button on the position column it sorts players in the order Defender, Forward, Goalkeeper, Midfielder (i.e. alphabetically). I think it would make more sense for the sort order to be Goalkeeper, Defender, Midfielder, Forward. When team lists are given in the media players tend to be listed in this order, and it seems sensible to sort this way here.

This could be done by replacing

| MF       = [[Midfielder]]
| DF       = [[Defender (association football)|Defender]]
| FW       = [[Forward (association football)|Forward]]
| GK       = [[Goalkeeper (association football)|Goalkeeper]]

with something like

| MF       = {{sort|3|[[Midfielder]]}}
| DF       = {{sort|2|[[Defender (association football)|Defender]]}}
| FW       = {{sort|4|[[Forward (association football)|Forward]]}}
| GK       = {{sort|1|[[Goalkeeper (association football)|Goalkeeper]]}}

Does anyone else agree? — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 23:04, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

It's currently an alphabetical sort. It would be a lot more work to maintain. I would argue that if we could find a way to create an enumerated list in the order we want or force the sort in some other way without resorting to the forced sorting, that would be better. If you raise it Wikipedia:Village pump (technical), you might get some interest. This could also be applied to the other template as well. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:33, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

nonumber

Hi, when setting |nonumber= to yes when present in {{football squad start2}}, the "Where a player has not declared an international allegiance, nation is determined by place of birth." text disappears, and the remaining "Squad correct as of" text is in a smaller font. Could someone with the technical know-how fix this? Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 16:41, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

nonat

On what articles should the "nonat" parameter be set? --Jimbo^[online] 22:31, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

natvar parameter

Why does the natvar parameter not work? I need to use it, but I can't figure it out. Nobreadsticks (talk) 03:20, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Just to clarify, Template:Football squad player has the ability to use a national variant as documented at Template:Flagicon/doc. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:05, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Template talk:Football squad player#Redesign RfC

 You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Football squad player#Redesign RfC. User:Trialpears (talk) 18:45, 15 February 2020 (UTC)