Template talk:Football kit/Archive 2

Detail level in kit reproduction
I am bringing here a discussion started elsewhere.

The question is if the kits should reproduce as close as possible the current kits of the teams, or if they should generically show the "traditional" designs without the seasonal "particular" design. --Kwame Nkrumah 19:21, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


 * In terms of traditional vs. particular, most articles that I'm familiar with show a representation of the current season's design within the infobox. However, some articles feature a separate kit within the article to show a team's traditional, original, or alternate colors (see here, here, and here). - Pal 20:35, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Maybe my question was not clearly formulated. What I mean is: if a team has a dark blue jersey, and for a single season it sports some decorations that are not a significant change in jersey design should we depict them, or should we stick with the traditional design (incidentally, avoiding uploading another design and avoiding out-of-date pages). For an example of what I mean with "non significant change in jersey design", see the Argentina away jersey, opposed to the traditional blue jersey.--Kwame Nkrumah 12:31, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * My view is that the kit shown should be a reasonably close depiction of the current general design (e.g. if a team who normally wear a plain blue shirt decide to add a broad white band across the chest, the white should be added on here) but should avoid trying to add microscopic details like badges, sponsor names, tiny bits of piping, etc ChrisTheDude 07:27, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * My view is the same as the person above me. -- Je suis t\c 02:06, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


 * So you are supporting the fact that every season for clubs and every two seasons for national teams we should probably produce a new kit design and update it? Do you think of the huge number of pages quickly becoming out-of-date?--Kwame Nkrumah 16:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Keeping club pages up to date isn't really a problem, there are usually a few people watching and updating every club's page. Clubs' details (e.g. manager, squad) change all the time, no reason why a kit change should be any more problematic. ArtVandelay13 17:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


 * And what about the countless kits that will be produced every season?--Kwame Nkrumah 16:59, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

If you believe in pursuing this then make a poll as was suggested earlier and this can all be determined democratically, since I highly doubt that anyone will convince you of anything otherwise. -- Palffy 21:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I definitely think it's no problem for 'watchers' (i.e. users who are fans of clubs) to amend the team kit when the new strip is launched. Home strips especially rarely change dramatically so it should not be an issue.

Fedgin 15:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Really? Adidas, Nike, and Puma change national team jerseys every two years, and club team jerseys every year. In a short time there will be countless designs (look up in this page, search for "new" national team jersey design by Puma, and user who want to add them), the information in some, low-traffic pages will be outdated, and there will be inconsistency in detail level of the jerseys along the articles. All of this, because someone wants to keep the tiny yellow stripe added for this year kit of his favourite club? I truly believe it is a high price to pay for such tiny bit of information.--Kwame Nkrumah 10:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Note this: "The template is designed to give an overview of the team colours" (top of this page, June 2005). So, direct question, are the spikes in Ukraine part of the "overview", or are just decorations? If they are just decorations, they should go away, if they are part of the "overview" of the kit, why nobody (neither ArtVandelay13 nor Fedgin) are updating with the same degree of precision countless of other national football team kits?--Kwame Nkrumah 19:48, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Have you noticed that you are fighting on like 5-6 fronts with like a good 10-20 posters on these same issues? You're getting very little to almost no support on this. Dude, just drop it. You parents must not have taught you this yet, but you need to know when to give up on something and allow others with more experience handle this. -- Palffy 19:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

How about changing the general colours and patterns (e.g., Scotland has changed from navy/shite/black+red in 1960 to all royal blue now) but ignoring the manufacturers' features, e.g., wavy lines on adidas, 'spikes' on lotto kits, etc. These manufacturers features are, after all, not unique to the club/country but used on many/most/all of there customers' kits. In short: differentiate between changes in team colours/trim and changes in manufacturer branding. This definition would allow incorporation of "CCCP" on the Soviet kit but preclude sponsors' logos on club shirts. -- secallen 12:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * This is what it was designed for, how it should be and - whenever I get my hands on a page - how it is. ed g2s &bull; talk 14:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Agreed. – Elisson • Talk 14:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Thats a great suggestion by secallen. Is there a way we can make everyone aware/agree with this? -- Palffy 15:41, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree. This would mean removing the spikes from Ukraine kits and adidas decorations from German  and Argentinian  kits?--Panarjedde 18:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

In response to Panarjedde's removal of detail from the away kit design from Sheffield Wednesday F.C. and Sheffield Wednesday Ladies F.C., I reverted these edits as no consensus has been reached on this issue. Panarjedde's so-called policy agreement was actually two separate discussions (not polls) where the issue became rather heated and there was clearly no consensus reached. As per Wikipedia policy if no consensus is reached the article should be left as it is, hence why I reverted (and will continue to revert) the removal of the kit design from these pages.

There is no good reason to remove detail from the away kit, the design and colour of the kit changes simultaneously every season or two, hence detail on the kit is integral to the design. As has been mentioned several times before there are no shortage of people to watch these pages and make sure that the kit designs are kept up to date; these pages even have their own Wikiproject that will ensure that the kit design is changed when necessary. It should also be noted that removing content from Wikipedia without good cause is considered vandalism. Dan1980 (talk | stalk) 21:30, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The discussion above looks like a consensus to me, and it corresponds to the instructions at the top of this page which represent the status quo. Unless there is a consensus to change that, then we'll stay with simple kit colours. Also calling other users vandals when they are clearly acting in good faith is not very civil. ed g2s &bull; talk 22:40, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I would hardly call an agreement between four contributors a consensus when there were a total of ten contributors in this discussion alone. Also the status quo for the Sheffield Wednesday F.C. page was to use detail in the away kit designs. They have included away kit detail for at least two seasons without any complaints and I have still to hear one good reason why this should be changed! Dan1980 (talk | stalk) 16:59, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I would call 4 to 0 (or even 4 to 1) consensus. If you do not like this outcome, gather consensus for your POV, but do not change pages unilaterally.--Panarjedde 20:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Till today, I did not know anything about this discussion. Four contributors' votes are clearly not enough to estabilish a consensus. I do not support you: if there are better versions of these jerseys, such as in U.S. Città di Palermo, they should appear in the article. About the design "suggested" by the sponsor, well, every shirt is created by a technical sponsor (Adidas, Nike, Puma and so on), so I don't see the point: should evident differences appear in the jersey, all of them must be included in the correspondent kit template. --Angelo 10:40, 2 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The fact you did not know the existence of this disccussion is not relevant.
 * Four contributors' votes are significant, if nobody is against.
 * This template was created to show the kit colours, not the kit technical designs.
 * If you do not agree, just find consensus and change the status quo.
 * --Panarjedde 11:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Firstly, it's untrue nobody is against: I am. Secondly, if your opinion is to use this template just to show the kit colours, you should agree we must delete every single bitmap associated to kits, since they're all something more than just kit colours. They are all technical design, you can agree or not, but that's the truth. Endingly, it's hard to discuss without to even know the existance of the discussion. A good place for better examining the issue is WikiProject Football. --Angelo 11:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * First, I wrote "4 to 1", including your (late) vote. Second, the stripes of AC Milan jersey are part of the kit, the spikes on Palermo jersey are not: the latter will most likely change with next year desing, the former will not. Third, I am not putting the blame on you for not knowing this discussion, but you can't put the blame on me for not letting you know it, since this is the talk page of the template we are talking about.--Panarjedde 13:02, 2 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I think for example on home kits, anything that changes from season to season, i.e. underarm spikes, shoulder stripes, sponsor, collar colour, crest, the exact shade of colour, or material pattern, should not be matched on the wikipedia version. Basically the depictions should be good enough for you to recognise the kits, but not so good you can practically use it to reproduce the kits! Philc  TECI 17:54, 2 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree, however I feel that away kits are a different matter. The colour and design of them change almost every season anyway, so if the kit has a stripe running down it then this should be included on the kit on Wikipedia. Dan1980 (talk | stalk) 18:12, 2 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I do not feel that away kits are different from home ones. If the colours change every season, then change it, but the ban on sponsor-originated details should stay.--Panarjedde 19:00, 2 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I do not have a problem with sponsor-originated details being omitted, however the stripe on the Sheffield Wednesday away kit is not a sponsor-originated detail so why do you keep removing that? Dan1980 (talk | stalk) 19:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Not a sponsor originated?? Take a look at other Diadora jerseys, and you will notice they all have that stripes.--Panarjedde 19:23, 2 October 2006 (UTC)


 * It's not a "sponsor-originated" matter. If a detail, even if imposed by the technical sponsor, is fully, clearly, undoubtedly visible, then it must be included in the kit. That's all. --Angelo 20:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * That is your opinion. The consensus here is to keep the colours and style of the kit, without going after each year designer taste.--Panarjedde 20:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Whre is this consensus? Please stop editing the kit at Shelbourne F.C. If anybody else wants to revert it to the original, please do as I don't wish to break the 3RR Dodge 23:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC)


 * It was established on 29 August. If you do not like it, gather counter-consensus, up until then the policy stays as it is.--Panarjedde 00:37, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


 * No, you and 3 others decided to enforce it on everyone. I'm going to decide on a policy now to only refer to you as Muppet. One to nothing. Huzzah! Policy is now enforced! Muppet, please stop tampering with others work - it is not helpful, and only serves as a nuisance to those who have worked hard on their pages. For the record, I disagree with this proposed nonsence, and dicated tripe. EnDai 23:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Let me chime in that I also have a problem with Panarjedde's insistence that "kit colours only be represented". He's messed up the kit on one article that I deal with to the point where he's agreed that side colours are not sponsor-included features, but then rejected a proper depiction of them, so now two sides of a jersey are coloured on the article when only one is coloured in actuality.  This is a wildly inaccurate depiction, and cannot be allowed to stay (even if there is consensus that it should stay).  Also, Panarjedde does not seem to understand how consensus on Wikipedia works.  A significant number of votes are required before one can argue that consensus has been reached.  Four votes for a proposition (even if there were no other votes in the poll) does not a consensus make.  The very small number of participants clearly shows that not enough people were informed of the existence of the poll (and is someone saying there wasn't even a poll?), and so the results are likely to be highly skewed.  The only correct place for a poll like this is, in fact, not at Template talk:Football kit, but at WikiProject Football, where a significant number of people can see and make their voices heard.  I think that four now have complained that they do not agree with the "consensus" that Panarjedde claims has been reached (Dodge, EnDai, me, and Dan1980), so there's clearly no consensus. └ OzLawyer / talk ┐ 12:39, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * "Also, Panarjedde does not seem to understand how consensus on Wikipedia works. A significant number of votes are required before one can argue that consensus has been reached." I am assuming good faith, so I make a proposal to you: you find any reference in WP rules that say that "a significant number of votes are required before one can argue that consensus has been reached" and I will ignore all this matter in future; if there is no reference, you step back and do the same. What about this?--Panarjedde 14:39, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * You will not find any official declaration that you need a significant number of "votes", but this does not mean that such is not required. AfDs with few votes are often closed as "no consensus" even if the "votes" are largely in favour of one opinion, since few "votes" shows that not enough people have been informed of the issue (and the swing from one side to the other could be more "sampling error" than actual consensus).  Common sense plays into Wikipedia as much as hard and fast rules, and it makes no sense to assume that four comments, made within a 24 hour period, shows consensus.  Especially considering that you're ignoring contrary opinions presented just above the "four votes", and assuming the "poll" took place only within those 24 hours on August 29th, as though everyone's objections prior to that point were mooted by that one day's commentary.  Finally, polls are sometimes considered "evil", but in this case a poll is exactly what was required for a proper discussion of the issue, an issue which affects many hundreds (thousands?) of articles on Wikipedia.  A poll, however, is exactly what we did not get.  Not that I don't think that the view propounded by the four is not the correct way to go (although I think that in your conflict with me you're interpreting that view incorrectly), but there was no consensus reached that is capable of being binding on the entire Wikipedia football community.  For that, a fair portion of the Wikipedia football community needed to be consulted.  They were not. └ OzLawyer / talk ┐ 15:05, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

As I'm seeing a different evolution in the issue than Panarjedde's claimed one, I propose to start a new voting process. --Angelo 15:06, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Before votes, there should be a discussion, don't you think?--Panarjedde 21:07, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Real Betis
On the Real Betis page the away kit is wrong. The colours are correct but there needs to be a white stripe down the right side, same as the India national football team. Can anyone do it as I couldn't figure it out? --159.134.48.25 01:17, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Done. Rolando 20:04, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks --159.134.48.25 01:17, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Internet Explorer Problems
I never usually use IE, but as someone mentioned on Talk:Liverpool F.C. that the kit was being displayed with grey arms, I thought I'd investigate. Most kits do display the correct arm colours, but mostly have other problems under IE6. Generally it's coloured lines coming from the join between shirt and shorts, sometimes there is a coloured line along the very top, and sometimes along the very bottom.

As most of the world does actually use (sadly) Internet Explorer, shouldn't these bugs be fixed? aLii 11:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


 * As the individual who pointed out that the kit was displaying with grey arms, I would like to say in my defence that I wouldn't normally use IE by choice, but I am using an office computer at the moment! Robotforaday 15:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

ADIDAS - PREMIERSHIP
Can anybody update the Chelsea, Liverpool & Newcastle home/away/european kits? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.188.120.219 (talk • contribs).

Request
As I can't fathom for the life of me how to make one of these, can I please request a maroon horizontal template - for Motherwell F.C. Erath 17:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Dark Green arms
Can some one make some dark green arms for and if possible a dark green half, Thanks (Gnevin 12:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC))
 * Also halfs for these kits also

 (Gnevin 12:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC))
 * Any chance anyone can do this for me (Gnevin 10:49, 2 October 2006 (UTC))

Help please
Can someone tell me what I'm doing wrong please?! I've been adding infoboxes to lower league clubs, starting in the Isthmian league - but when I specify colours, they seem to come out completely wrong.

For example - I tried to add kits for Folkestone Invicta F.C. (home colours: Amber & Black stripes; away colours: White and Blue) using the following code:

pattern_la1 = _black_stripes | pattern_b1 = _blackstripes | pattern_ra1 = _black_stripes | leftarm1 = DarkOrange| body1 = DarkOrange| rightarm1 = DarkOrange| shorts1 = black | socks1 = DarkOrange | pattern_la2 = _blueshoulders| pattern_b2 = _blueshoulders | pattern_ra2 = _blueshoulders| leftarm2 = white| body2 = white | rightarm2 = white | shorts2 = blue | socks2 = white |

... but when I preview this, it comes out as red (not orange) and black stripes, yellow (not black) shorts and red (not orange) socks for the home kit and blue (not white) shirt, red (not blue) shorts and blue (not white) socks for the away kit.

What on earth is going on?!

--MLD 15:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The problem, I believe, is that you were using named colors rather than their hex equivalents. So, you should use 000099 (or so) for "blue," ffffff for white, etc. I took a crack at the colors on Folkestone Invicta F.C.. Here is a decent page listing 200 "safe" colors. Not exhaustive, but should help you get the hang of it. Rolando (talk) 23:39, 30 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I personally use colr.org. Daniel.Bryant 03:52, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Archive? Requests?
Might it be time to archive the discussion here? Also, is it worthwhile to have a link to a Requests-only page (e.g., Template talk:Football kit/Requests), to reduce some of the clutter here? Not that it will work! Just a couple of thoughts... Rolando (talk) 06:12, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

New Scotland Away Kit - Request
Not yet in use, but the current away kit is soon to be redundant: http://www.foxsoccershop.com/shop-by-country-scotland-scotland-national-team-scotland-2007-away-soccer-jersey.html -- Archibald99 20:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * It's ironic that they become y-fronts shortly after they stop playing pants. I think _sashonwhite is the nearest applicable existing pattern. sʟυмɢυм • т • c  21:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm, it doesn't continue to the back which makes me think its more of a decorative watermark than part of the basic colours. ed g2s &bull; talk 22:33, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with ed g2s.--Panarjedde 19:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The sash is obviously there to mirror St. Andrews cross. The sky blue color has been a part of their away jersey since at least 2005,, and as shown by current WP page for Scotland NT. The design is also not a part of the typical Diadora jersey. -- Palffy 06:53, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Internet Explorer Problems
As most of the world uses IE, shouldn't the problem with transparencies be fixed, as with IE, the strips turn grey as IE doesn't support 8-bit transparency. Maybe there should be a concerted effort to make the standard template strips accessible to the largest number of people? --Bob 17:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I believe this problem has been solved in IE7. I also found the following website that describes a Javascript fix for IE 5.5-6:, which sounds interesting, and something that conceivably could be integrated into wikimedia (?!), but definitely outside the scope of discussion about this template. Are there particularly problematic elements (e.g., shirts which are widely used and whose transparencies do not work)? If it does not hurt the intended appearance of the strip, I think it would be acceptable to modify the file(s) so that it/they work for the greatest number of users. Rolando 16:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Added basketball kit
I added a basketball kit which can use all the body patterns here (no arms, of course). It seems to work on FF2 but have not tried it with other browsers. If you have some familiarity with basketball, some artistic ability, and find the basketball jersey I created (Image:Kit body basketball.png) horrible, please make a better one. The template is in use in a couple of random places. Rolando 04:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I made an improvement to the basketball shirt. Also added American football uniform. Rolando 07:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Is there an option, in English Wikipedia, to put a picture of body kit, like in Polish Wikipedia? Ex. http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lech_Pozna%C5%84 or http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zawisza_Bydgoszcz_%28pi%C5%82ka_no%C5%BCna%29 ђ

Green quarters
Please could someone make a green and white quartered shirt for the Billingham Synthonia F.C. page? I don't seem to have appropriate software available to me..... ChrisTheDude 21:52, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Fix Kit_body_redquarters14.png
This image should be transparent in quadrants 2&3, not infilled with white. I've uploaded a corrected file to Wikipedia Commons and requested that they replace the existing file. Wiggy! 13:33, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This is a problem with the transparency settings. See above for the discussion regarding this. It is not confined to just this image, but to many using this template. --Bob 23:14, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay. Thanks. That was the only one I was having trouble with and it's been replaced so should be good now (I hope). Wiggy! 03:27, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Bemerton Heath Harlequins
Can anybody make this extremely odd kit........? ChrisTheDude 21:38, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yup. Now available as _harlequin. Wiggy! 15:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Cheers Wiggy!, you da man :-) ChrisTheDude 15:55, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Vonwhitewide
Is there anyone who can make the above to go with whiteVwide please? insane in the brain 17:33, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Huh? Its not clear what you want ... Wiggy! 22:01, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

There is a kit pattern called whiteVwide, I was after one doing in the same style but a wideV on a white background insane in the brain 08:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Here you go. [[Image:Kit_body_wideVonwhite.png]] Wiggy! 15:44, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Cheers insane in the brain 09:17, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

That English team from Wigan
There isn't a pattern that looks like Wigan Athletic's real kit. Can someone make one? I'm not logged in.
 * The one currently in use seems close enough to me ChrisTheDude 14:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. The white sides are OK, but we need a kit that has shoulders that go far down and meet the sides.


 * It does seem fine to me as well. The purpose of the kit template isn't to be an exact copy of the kit, but only to give the reader a rough image on how it looks". The one used in the article does that just fine. – Elisson • T • C • 16:58, 6 February 2007

The English national team
Could somebody please make the English kit? There isn't a pattern for the home or the away  kit. There are some non-symmetrical horizontal stripes on the home shirt. The away shirt is plain red, but there are some designs on the shorts. Bluedevil04 12:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Too minor details to be included, IMHO. – Elisson • T • C • 12:54, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but they are present on the Spanish version. Bluedevil04 2:40, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, but this is not the Spanish Wikipedia. Another Wikipedia doing something doesn't mean we should do the same. The general opinion (here on the English Wikipedia) is that we should not include very minor details on the kits. – Elisson • T • C • 15:44, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

frusterated
ive uploaded 2 custom kits but i cant figure out how to use them

HOME AWAY

i want to put them on the Vancouver Whitecaps article —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Morbital (talk • contribs) 23:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC).
 * The first problem with the images above is that they are named incorrectly. Rather than Whitecapskithome.png, the name should be Kit_body_whitecapskithome.png and the template parameter should be _whitecapskithome.


 * That being said, editors here tend to dislike minute details on jerseys/kits/uniforms/etc. I edited Vancouver Whitecaps to use simpler, standard kit patterns. Take a look. Cheers. Rolando 06:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)