Talk:Dean Shiels

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dean Shiels. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120115025352/http://www.doncasterroversfc.co.uk/page/News/0%2C%2C10329~2573592%2C00.html to http://www.doncasterroversfc.co.uk/page/News/0%2C%2C10329~2573592%2C00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:26, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Ex-pat categories
I'm still unsure that the ex-pat categories are accurate. Someone playing for a Canadian team for only 4 months does not mean they are an ex-pat who moved to Canada. Temporarily in a country doesn't mean they've emigrated. Additionally they're now back in their home country, so they are not an ex-pat any longer even if they could have temporarily been considered one. Canterbury Tail talk 13:17, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I understand your point, but his article follows the current convention for every football/soccer player around the world; I have limited exposure to other sports so can't confirm if it is the standard practice there. But for football, as soon as a player signs with a foreign club, they have the relevant expat categories added (or should do if amending the bio fully) regardless of how long they eventually stay or whether the move is in the past or the present. Not sure if that was the intended use of the cats at the outset but it's definitely how they're being used since I started editing. If you think it's being misapplied for sportspeople in this field, please raise the concern at WP:FOOTBALL. Thanks. Crowsus (talk) 15:26, 26 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I think it is being misapplied, as ex-patriate means something specifically and this doesn't appear to be it. It should be noted that the ex-pat categories are for people who are citizens of countries and residing in countries other that those they were born in, see the master category of category:Expatriates by country of residence which is the master category and all sub-categories must conform to it. So it fails the category on two counts, 1) he's not resident in Canada and 2) isn't a citizen of Canada. Either way since he's not resident in Canada at the moment he can't fall into that category. It also appears to fail the policy WP:CATDEF as it's not defining and not what the article subject is known for, and unfortunately projects cannot override wikipedia policies. I'm not interested in going around and changing all articles, I just came across this one but the category is clearly not appropriate in my view. Canterbury Tail talk 15:42, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually, I've looked into it now to make sure I wasn't misinterpreting the term myself. But the opening sentence in the Expatriate article reads An expatriate (often shortened to expat) is a person temporarily or permanently residing in a country other than their native country. In common usage, the term often refers to professionals, skilled workers, or artists taking positions outside their home country, either independently or sent abroad by their employers, who can be companies, universities, governments, or non-governmental organisations.. And the covering sentence for the patent category simply states Expatriates are citizens of a country other than the one where they reside.


 * During his spell in Edmonton, Dean Shiels, a citizen of the United Kingdom (specifically Northern Ireland in a sporting context) was residing in Canada. So he and other footballers fall exactly within the interpretation. The only time when I can think it wouldn't apply is where the person was in the country for such a short period that they might not ever have been living there, or where the borders are so close that they could continue to live in one country but work daily in another (thinking of Ned/Bel/Fra for example). Not checked how they apply it to AS Monaco players! But in general, if its safe to assume that they would have to relocate to the new location and would pay taxes on their wages to the new nation, then the expat categories should apply, and as there is no mention in the parent category that it should only apply while the native of Foo is working in Bah, I see no reason why the previous situations should not also remain on the list. Crowsus (talk) 16:21, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes that is the definition of the expatriate article, but not the definition being used by the top level expatriate category of category:Expatriates by country of residence which is master over all sub-categories. But anyway the fact is that he is not currently an expat, so he shouldn't be in the category as it's a present tense category, not a historic category. To anyone reading the article using the category implies they current live there, which is clearly not true. Plus, as mentioned above, it fails the defining category policy. Canterbury Tail talk 18:28, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 * [edited, was a bit uncivil, apologies] I can't see that stipulation. It might be there somewhere. But if that is the case, there's really no point just amending this article leaving it inconsistent with the thousands of others like it. I would again refer you to the project, I totally agree that wiki policies override any guidelines made by them and the regulars will also agree. But they are the ones with bots, task lists and whatnot to remove the erroneous cats from all the articles (and it is, I think, the biggest bio type as well as the most used for these cats, so it's the best way to get it looked at). But I would point out that articles like Zlatan, Ronaldo and Neymar with their hundreds of watchers all have expat categories for nations they no longer play in, and recently an admin with 1 million edits created a new set of 'foo expatriate sportspeople in bah' subcategory and applied it to everyone, so it seems unlikely that so many would have overlooked the fact that the category should only apply to the person's current situation. Crowsus (talk) 22:35, 26 February 2019 (UTC)