Template talk:Infobox college sports rivalry

Comments on new template

{Copied discussion from Template talk:Infobox college rivalry which may be merged with this template per Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_November_27#Template:Infobox_college_rivalry.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:00, 2 December 2011 (UTC)) First I would suggest that you drop a note on a half dozen project pages noting the discussion going on here. WP:HOCKEY, WP:CBB, WP:LAX, WP:SOCCER, WP:MLB, WP:SPORTS and WP:UNI should also be sought for comments.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:05, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

• Note that I have added the sports that I edit plus Soccer. I know many important rivalries in other sports exist like women's softball or Iowa–Iowa State wrestling rivalry, but the list could be fairly open-ended so I stopped above in terms of template tags and suggested commentary request locations.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:29, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
  •  Done--Mackensen (talk) 22:45, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

In the last two weeks I have created Penn–Princeton basketball rivalry, Michigan–Michigan State basketball rivalry and Michigan–Michigan State ice hockey rivalry. I will be commenting based on needs from those as well as Paul Bunyan Trophy, which I have worked from a bit.

• You will need subseries_name, subseries_start_date and subseries_record fields (See Paul Bunyan Trophy, where part of the series is important as a subseries)
  •  Done--Mackensen (talk) 22:45, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
    • I think you may want to make two or three subseries. E.g., at the Michigan–Michigan State ice hockey rivalry, it is probably relevant both what the series is since they have both been in the CCHA and what the record of the annual Joe Louis Arena series is.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:01, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
• Following last_meeting and last_meeting_result, you will need win_streak_number and win_streak_start_date fields
• I also recommend unbeaten_streak_number and unbeaten_streak_number_start_date fields (important for hockey and maybe lacrosse or soccer).--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:49, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
• I would present about ten or twelve fields with generic_field_name1 and generic_field_record1 (See Penn–Princeton basketball rivalry)--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:51, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
• I would add a sport_team1 and sport_team2 fields for things like Michigan State Spartans football, Michigan Wolverines men's basketball and Michigan Wolverines men's ice hockey. Then rework layout so that you present the three different fields of school affiliation.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:59, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
• Consider adding these fields: Michigan-Notre_Dame_rivalry#Series_facts.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:05, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
• Consider venue1 and venue2 fields for home field, stadium or arena information. Then add venue1_last_victor, venue1_last_score, venue1_last_date, venue1_streak_number, and venue1_streak_start_date.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:08, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
• Also venue1_streak_extension could signify streak is a continuation of a streak started at a prior venue named in this field. E.g., if Michigan wins the next event in the Little Brown Jug (American football) series it will be a continuation of a Minnesota home field streak started at a prior venue.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:11, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
• Not sure if you want to make this multiteam to handle things like Philadelphia Big 5 and Beanpot Tournament, but if you get up the energy, you might make this all encompassing or create another template. Not sure what to suggest because I don't do any multiway rivalries.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:59, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
• You may want to make this multisport to handle things like Clean, Old-Fashioned Hate. That again may also be better handled by a distinct template.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:26, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
• How about adding "tie_total" and "tie" to list individual years that have had ties. — X96lee15 (talk) 18:40, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
• What are the parameters "school1" and "school2" used for? I don't see them getting used in the football version. — X96lee15 (talk) 18:40, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
• I think the "v.d.e" feature should be removed from the template. Very rarely is someone going to want to edit the infobox template from a rivalry page. — X96lee15 (talk) 18:44, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
• Please fix the logos at Michigan–Michigan State ice hockey rivalry and Michigan–Michigan State basketball rivalry.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:31, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Wishlist

I'd like to see a field to list each teams longest win streak. Additionally I'd like to list the highest scoring and lowest scoring games. --ben_b (talk) 02:43, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposed redesign for proposed merge

A TfD merge of Template:Infobox college sports rivalry with Template:Infobox sports rivalry at the July 7 TfD discussion here. A side-by-side comparison of the existing college rivalry infobox with the proposed merged rivalry template is shown here. In my considered opinion, the proposed merged template design is not an improvement over the existing college-specific rivalry template, and the following specific design issues need to be addressed:

1. Template width: the narrower width of the proposed post-merge template causes unnecessary line-wrapping of both parameter labels/field names and input data. Line-wrapping of the parameter labels/field names makes the text more difficult to read, especially in the absence of colons at the end of the labels/names. The narrower width also compacts the linked team names and logos together, making it difficult to discern one team name from another.
2. Parameter labels/field names: the shortest available parameter labels/field names should be used, and unnecessary words should be avoided (e.g., "Last meeting" is shorter than "Most recent meeting"; "First meeting" is shorter than "First contested"; "Total meetings" is shorter than "Number of meetings"). Longer labels/names contribute to the problem of line-wrapping discussed immediately above. Once the shortest coherent parameter labels/field names are selected, the merged template should include no-wrap coding to prevent line-wrapping of labels/names in actual use.
3. "Statistics" sub header: the "statistics" subheader artificially subdivides the infobox, adds nothing to reader understanding, and makes the infobox two text lines longer than it otherwise needs to be. It should be removed.
4. College-specific parameters: in order to preserve existing functionality for college sports rivalries, the merged template needs to include parameters for "Sport", "Current streak" and "Trophy". There should be no optional "free entry" parameters/fields for individual editors to add additional parameters/fields and datapoints; such options have contributed to college rivalry infoboxes being ridiculously long and overly detailed in the past.
5. Graphic divider: the existing tool-line divider, immediately below the logos and team links, provides desirable visual separation of the logos and team links from the data fields.

These are my comments based on the existing proposed merged template design (16:52 GMT, 7 July 2015). I may have further design comments as the merged template design evolves based on the input of other editors. I will support the proposed TfD merge of templates if these design issues are addressed in a manner consistent with my comments above. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:54, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I believe I've addressed all of these, with the exception of the "Statistics" header, which I don't think is artificial. Alakzi (talk) 16:33, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Alakzi: Follow-up questions to most recent round of changes to proposed post-merge template:

1. Can we use the shorter parameter labels mentioned above, including "Last meeting"?

2. Can we get greater separation of the linked team names under the logos?

3. What does the "Statistics" subheader add -- other than two additional text lines? How is "Trophy" a statistic?

4. There are at least eight parameters of the current Infobox sports rivalry which probably should be excluded from college-specific use. (The "generic" infobox was clearly designed for association football.) Do you propose to create a college-specific wrap? I would be happy to help write the college-specific instructions. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:17, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

1. I did shorten them where it made sense. "Last" could be interpreted as the very last, i.e. the teams have folded or the competition has been abolished, etc., which is usually not the case.
2. I'll take a look.
3. It provides compartmentalisation, which makes it easier to consume the information.
4. No, trophy shouldn't be in there.
5. We can trust our editors not to use parameters they don't need. We could also provide per-sport instructions at {{Infobox sports rivalry}}. Alakzi (talk) 17:32, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Alakzi: We could simplify and shorten parameters with "First game," "Latest game," and "Next game."

"We can trust our editors not to use parameters they don't need." No, sadly, we can't trust all of our editors to correctly chose parameters. That's one of the reasons why the college-specific template was created in the first instance, because we had a small number of editors who wanted every optional parameter imaginable included, so that it became excessively trivial. Removing any options became problematic, leading to contentious discussions, and wasting unnecessary article maintenance time. Recombining these templates without limitation simply recreates that original problem. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:10, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

@Dirtlawyer1: We could track parameters depending on the value of |sport=, but making them inoperable probably isn't gonna fly with many people. Alakzi (talk) 16:23, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

@Alakzi: I've got to ask: what are we doing here? We have an existing college-specific template that was created and revamped after extensive discussion and a TfD to serve the needs of the college sports WikiProjects, as determined by a consensus of college sports editors. The existing template has served the needs of the college sports projects well for over two years since. Now, we have a proposal to merge the college-specific template into the generic template, and we're being told we should accept the optional parameters of the generic template which the college-specific template was designed to exclude? Do you not see a problem with non-users telling the users to accept new infobox parameters that a majority of the users didn't want and intentionally excluded? I'm doing my best to work with you on this, but I need you to understand and accept the concerns of the users. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:02, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I'd not been aware of this concern when I nominated the infobox for merging. If you'd like to keep it as a wrapper, that's fine with me. Alakzi (talk) 21:26, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

@Alakzi: Under those circumstances, I can support a merge. Logistically, do we do separate template pages, or a single template page with two sets of instructions and examples? What's your preference? Current instructions are non-existent. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:44, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Separate pages, usually. Besides, if what you say is true, they'd probably be tempted to use the non-college infobox if both were on the same page. Alakzi (talk) 22:49, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Good point. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 00:04, 9 July 2015 (UTC)