Template talk:Infobox AFL biography/Archive 1

Player numbers
Moved from Template_talk:afl-infobox: Should this template include a jumper number(s) part with all known information about what number they wore, and when. This could be ignored for players who had several numbers when numbers were given out according to alphabetical order in certain teams.

For example Nathan Buckley: Jumper Number: 5 (Collingwood), 11 (Brisbane Bears)

Matthew Lokan: Jumper Number: 39 (2003), 29 (2004-2005)

Syd Coventry: Jumper Number: Various (1 mostly as this was the captains number)


 * agree--Rulesfan 02:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Height and weight
Should we include height and weight? YearOfTheDog = I believe it should be included
 * I note that this has just been done, but this now means that nearly 400 articles now have in their infobox. Is there going to be a concerted effort to have these missing values entered? --The Brain of Morbius 10:32, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I just fixed it using the new qif function. Where there is no heightweight value, that row is skipped.--The Brain of Morbius 06:50, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * is deprecated. I've replaced it with {&#123;#if:}}. — Apr. 24, '06 [06:07] <[ freakofnurxture]|[ talk]>
 * I've just edited the "Height and weight" to be simply "Height/Weight" as in line with the inputted figures, which are separated by a "/" --User:Boomtish 8:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Image problems
It seems images are restricted to 200px. Is there anyway to make pages like Andrew Mackie so that images can be adjustable?
 * Now the images don't show up at all? Pages like Jack Worrall which had images are now gone. Help !  R o  gerthat  Talk  01:52, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Can somebody fix the images thing, please? I was trying to put an image of Fryzie on his article, and I was wondering why it wasn't appearing.  I would have a go at the template, but no doubt I'd have some angry villagers at me with the flaming pitchforks if I did...  Anyway, so yeah.  I'm going to put the image in the article text instead, for now.  -- JD [ don't talk|email ] 09:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Good news guys, I got the image thing working. It's probably not done in the best way, but it works.  -- JD [ don't talk|email ] 12:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * It actually needs some work, something to stop the image syntax from appearing when there isn't an image on the article. I can't do that though.  -- JD [ don't talk|email ] 13:09, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I reverted all the work I did, as it wasn't great. I'll ask somebody to look at it later.  -- JD [ don't talk|email ] 13:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

The #if for the image didn't have quite the right syntax (missing the "|" separating the condition from the "then" clause). It's fixed now. -- Rick Block (talk) 17:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * While we're at it, is there any way to specify the pixels of the image? I noticed all images are set to 200px with no option to change. Thanks for your help Rick and JD, very much appreciated. Cheers!  R o  gerthat  Talk  11:20, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, there is, but removing it at the moment would affect all the images on all the pages, making any large ones huge. J Ditalk 16:11, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Original Club
This section should be further clarified. Note that the rugby league player info box (see Andrew Johns) has Current Club, Youth Club and Professional Clubs. Furthermore, each club should include the state or country in which the club played so that there is consistency in the articles.--Rulesfan 02:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


 * further to this, check out Adam McPhee. Someone used an info box called "Football Player" which seems to be generic and based on a combination of the rugby and soccer info boxes which looks and reads much better.  Does anyone favour converting some of the existing infoboxes to this new format ?  please discuss ... --Rulesfan 00:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, this infobox could do with a bit of reworking, but we need someone who's good on the technical side of things to help redeisgn it.  R o  gerthat  Talk  03:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Playing Position
Should we put a field in for their preferred playing position ? --Rulesfan 02:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed, and duly added -- User:Boomtish 08:34, 2 October 2007 (2007)

Problems with putting things on the same line with a comma in between
", " for example, leaves a stray comma when the latter is missing--see Percy Wilson, which has the same problem, due to missing information, also on the "Debut" line. Seems like things should be on lines by themselves, or the comma should only appear when the following thing has a value (unfortunately I have no idea how wikicode ifs work). Sohelpme 04:00, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Images
I've just changed the image links, based on the Template:Infobox_musical_artist info box syntax. Use image size = XXX (only the number, don't put in px) and image capt = blah blah blah. ie:

| image size = 150 | image capt = abc fhd fhdj

Both are optional. Hope it all works without any issues. The-Pope 08:54, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup
I've done some cleanup on the template. Extra |- create whitespace above the text of the main article and many articles had this. If the thing about extra commas and so on in the debut match is still posing a problem, let me know and I can fix this for you. SeveroTC 13:27, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Helpme: Ron Evans and Bizarre New INFOBOX (possibly an idiosyncratic intrusion, rather than WikiProject AFL Policy)
This may not be the correct location for this WikiProject AFL question. Unfortunately, if there is a more appropriate place, I can not find it.

I refer to recent work I have performed on the article about Ron Evans. Yesterday, the INFOBOX on the article looked like this.

Later, when I went to check on something else (namely, the accuracy of the links that, supposedly gave Evans' particulars as an individual connected with SPOTLESS, and found the supplied link to be "dead") I discovered that User 121.222.160.84 (Talk) had dramatically changed the appearance of the article with what he/she had coded as "Infobox afl player NEW".

It does not appear that this new table comes under the general umbrella-term of VANDALISM, but, in the nature and form that it presently has, it certainly does de-stabilize the transfer of knowledge to a naïve and uniformed reader.


 * (1) Is this some new policy -- namely, that this sort of INFOBOX must now be used?


 * (2) Does it intentionally have one of these totally-inappropriate-to-earlier-times 2008 generic designations (shorts, talls, etc.) in calling Evans' (195s and 1960s) position "Forward", rather than what it actually was when he played at Caulfield Grammar, at Essendon (whenever he played a full senior game, rather than as a reserve), and at West Perth: namely, that of "Full Forward"?
 * To me, is just as absurd as refusing to allow other accurate and specific-to-earlier-times designations such as "flick-pass", "drop-kick", "place-kick" to appear on a page in a VFL or AFL article simply because these terms do not apply to the game in 2008.


 * (3) Next, and this is what is causing me great personal distress. . . Why is it the case that, with this strange and unusual new INFOBOX, the career highlights of Evans are (as a default!) automatically hidden from view?
 * And, to further compound my distress and disquiet, this "default" of "HIDDEN" must be identified, disengaged, and converted to "SHOW" on every single occasion I visit the page.


 * (4) Can somebody please explain why, apparently as Wiki policy (i.e., the policy of something that presents itself as an Encyclopaedia), the extraordinary decision has been made -- if, in fact, it has been made at all (which would be the case if this strange infobox is simply an idiosyncratic usage by User 121.222.160.84 (Talk)) -- to make the Career Highlights box default "SHOW", rather than "HIDE".
 * This choice, of having "SHOW" rather than "HIDE" as the default, when viewed from any sort of structured thinking perspective must be one of the strangest choices that could have been possibly made, given the fact that a large number of the INFOBOXES within the articles of those players from earlier eras have nothing at all in the "Career Highlights" section; and, thus, I am required to do an enormous amount of extra work, simply to discover that there is nothing there.
 * Surely from any sort of knowledge provision perspective, one should automatically assume that, in all cases, all readers want all information immediately; and, consequently, provide a means for the unusual reader, who does not require all information at all time, to specify such conditions in their own particular case. In other words, the default should be one of "I opt in", rather than "I opt out".


 * (5) Can somebody please explain why all the details of the player's debut game, debut stadium, debut team, and debut opponent are no longer considered important by the WikiProject AFL??

Anyway can somebody with some authority and some knowledge of the WikiProject AFL please look at this matter for me, and explain to me what is going on??? (Obviously, if this is nothing more than some idiosyncratic attempt by User 121.222.160.84 (Talk) to alter the state of play, the 5 questions above do not apply, and either you or I can simply reverse his/her work.)

Also, finally, can you please answer my question here, rather than somewhere else.Lindsay658 (talk) 23:16, 1 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I suggest you put brief notes in some of these places: Talk:Ron Evans, Template talk:Infobox afl player NEW (this last page doesn't exist, but you can create it) and User talk:121.222.160.84, inviting people here for discussion about it. Then discuss it with whoever shows up over the next few days, or if nobody except yourself does, then change it to the way you think it ought to be -- especially if you've made sure that 121.222.160.84 has been consulted.  I hope this suggestion is helpful to you. You might want to review the WP:CONSENSUS policy. --Coppertwig (talk) 02:54, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments. However, what you have said does not seem to help very much. Also, as far as I can tell, this page is the best page because it deal directly with the issue of the conventions of standardized INFOBOX use in AFL articles; and, to me, it needs somebody connected with the WikiProject AFL to instruct me in relation to the, to me, non-standard INFOBOX that (a) has been inserted unilaterally despite an agreed convention that might cover as many as 10,000 indiviual articles, and (b) does not allow all of its internal information to be shown immediately. (Also, I left a message at User talk:121.222.160.84 directing him/her to this page. I also "copied" my initial question to Talk:Ron Evans, requesting that any contributions be made here.) It would seem that to have this matter sorted out — which certainly seems to be one connected with me getting directions about the very WikiProject AFL conventions, innovations, etc. that are the subject of this page — are far better discussed here. So, in summary, my request for guidance still stands, and my request still occupies this location.Lindsay658 (talk) 04:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Further to the preceding, a further search reveal that matters discussed at and, especially, at  may have something to do with this over-zealous, anachronistic "2008-oriented" intrusion into an otherwise convention-abiding "earlier era of Aussie Rules" article. As you can see at, and at , I have also requested that User:Allied45 give us all the benefit of his/her wisdom on this matter.Lindsay658 (talk) 05:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I am fairly sure this is the work of User:Allied45, who might not have been logged in at the time. I don't think there was any sort of grand decision made by WikiProject AFL - in any case that is not important as there is no "authority" over these articles. WikiProject AFL has no more power than anyone else over improving articles. Editors often make big changes without discussion first because it can take too long to get a wide response, and often nobody really cares/minds all that much (although apparently not in this case). So my advice is that if you are convinced of an improvement that can be made - feel free to make it! Get in there and change the Career Highlights to show by default, etc. Wikipedia encourages you to be bold and make edits you think are an improvement. If someone harks up then bring the discussion into here. (It is a big shame that this template change was made as a new template instead of changing the existing one - it means it is not practical for you to revert the changes, and that until the full conversion is done there will be articles with the old template, and some with the new one.) Remy B (talk) 05:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok, firstly I didn't create the Infobox discussed. That was User:Boomtish, so you may want to get his/her say on this matter. I did implement the show/hide feature on the infobox, only because some articles had long infoboxes, but only short articles, so the fully extended infobox would take up too much space compared to the rest of the article. The show/hide feature is used in many infoboxes such as Template:Infobox actor for awards won, and Template:Infobox chef for various items. So this infobox is not alone. Also, nothing is stopping you from adding older footy terms for players of the relevant periods. I also think the players' debut details should be mentioned on the new infobox as the other infobox has, and you can certainly add these to the infobox if you want, as well as anything else you think is needed or not needed. - Allied45 (talk) 10:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I did create the infobox afl player NEW template, as was outlined in previous discussions here.... I had originally editted the orginal infox box afl player template, but was advised of the problem of then having 'dead' templates floating around whilst the changing of templates occured. Hence, I was also advised to create a new, separate template and work on implementing this template to player pages one by one, which is a process that is still ongoing as of now. To address one of your questions, and as Allied45 previously mentioned, there is no 'limit' to what positions you may wish to outline. Simiarly, Allied45 has kindly created the show/hide feature to help clean-up extremely long 'career highlight' sections. I am still struggling to understand, though, why this new infobox is deemed unapplicable to players from times prior to 2007?Boomtish (talk) 00:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to all for your input. My question was, in essence, one relating to conventions. It is now very clear from the above that, whatever might happen in relation to this new sort of INFOBOX, it does not apply to those who played VFL (or WANFL, SAFL, TFL, etc.) football -- or, as well, to those who played AFL football prior to, say, 2007.

One of the principal reasons for this difference is the plain historical fact that, although it seems from today's perspective that the VFL was, indeed, the highest standard competition in the land, it was not the elite Australia-wide competition that we see in the AFL of 2008.

And, moreover, there will never again be the phenomenon of "recruits" entering the competition at, say, the age of 24 (Malcolm Blight, North Melbourne Football Club, 1974) and most certainly there will never again be a "recruit" like Charlie Hardy, at 5'1" (155cm), a member of Essendon's famous "Mosquito Fleet", and later coach of Essendon from 1928 to 1930, who played the first of his 36 senior games with Essendon in 1921 at the age of 34.

You might say "But that was a different era!" That is precisely my point. Yet, it must be clear to you all that the fact that these things will no longer occur does not alter the fact that these sorts of things reflect previous times, and that the status quo of those previous times -- which reflect something like 12,000 individual players (in the VFL and AFL alone) -- must be clearly and unequivocally represented in any thorough historical record of the game's past. I will remove the imposed anachronistic INFOBOX from Ron Evans and, in its place, insert a slightly revised edition of the one it had replaced. Once again, thanks for your valuable input.Lindsay658 (talk) 18:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I was the bloke who consulted with Boomtish when he or she created this infobox and agree completely with Lindsay that it doesn't apply to players of a previous era. One of the main things I do with this Wikiproject is create player articles for those from the last century and am yet to once implement this new infobox on their pages. I still use the old one and haven't had a problem with anyone converting it to the other. So basically I wouldn't worry about it because we certainly didn't agree that it should go on everyone's page. The impression I got was that Boomtish, like more here, seems mainly interested in current players, or those from the 1990s. By the way I've noticed your creation and contributions to past player articles over the last month or so and your diligent work is much appreciated. Cheers Crickettragic (talk) 23:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I would still appreciate someone (preferrably Lindsay) telling me exactly what the original problem is/was. The new infobox template I created should not have destabilised any previous articles (who still have the older infobox template), as they are separate templates, and therefore have been implemented separately. If someone has gone and placed the new infobox template without editting it accordingly into older articles, then agreeably that is a cause for concern (but will simply require proper editting), but as far as I can tell, that is not the case. Additionally, for trivial sake more than anything, could someone also please kindly point out what major points prevent the implementation of this new infobox template into older players. As far as I can tell, they can be adjusted accordingly to suit retired players or those who don't fall in the drafting era of football. See Gary Ablett as an example of a retired player from the 80's/90's who was not drafted. Cheers. Boomtish (talk) 06:56, 5 March 2008 (UTC)