Template talk:Infobox rugby union biography

A few things
Firstly, I like this template, it does seem more useful than Template:Infobox rugby biography. I had a look at the history of the template, doesn't seem as if weight was ever in there, I thought it was just an omission. Also, the value is set up in some pages that link to this template. Is there any particular reason not to have this in? Also, are there any objections changing "club" to "team", so that it could be used worldwide (it does say "team" under "senior career", can this be extended to say "current team" instead of "current club", "Senior team appearances and points", etc.)? In southern hemisphere rugby, in order of importance, you have national teams, then Super Rugby franchise teams, then domestic provincial teams (in the ITM Cup and Currie Cup competitions) and then club teams. In Irish rugby union system, the main teams are also called "provinces" instead of "clubs", with club rugby a tier below that. So, since club rugby does not have the same status throughout rugby, I propose a change to "team" would be more generic and usable for worldwide rugby.TheMightyPeanut (talk) 12:25, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The situation you've just described makes things really difficult to standardise on a global scale, but yes, I think changing 'Club' to 'Team' makes perfect sense. As for weight, I don't think this is a necessary parameter, but that's just my personal opinion; since a lot of club sites include it, feel free to add. – PeeJay 20:40, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Proposal
Would there be any objections to adding in an "Amateur Team" section? This can be used to show amateur teams that a player might have played for before he turned professional, or after his retirement?

These games would obviously not have First Class status, so it would seem incorrect to include them in the "Senior Career" section and they are obviously not Youth or Representative games.

If nothing is specified, it won't get displayed.

See one example with this included and one with this excluded (which looks like the former version) below. Any thoughts?

As a second suggestion, please see the new two boxes, containing a coloured title bar along with a graphic (which is currently in use for Wikipedia in other languages. Any thoughts about that???  TheMightyPeanut (talk)


 * This seems like a very good suggestion to me, particularly for categorizing Varsity Cup matches in South Africa which I believe are important enough to include in rugby player's biography but as you say clearly aren't "Senior Career" appearances.  I also think the coloured title bar looks pretty cool and is a nice way of neatly separating information. JNicol (talk) 11 April 2013 14:28 [UTC]
 * I disagree about the new titlebar and have undone the addition of the pictogram and the change of colour. The rest of the changes make absolute sense though, and I endorse them completely. – PeeJay 15:04, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Rugby sevens proposal
Is there a possible chance we could add a rugby sevens section? Kidsoljah (talk) 20:38, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Kidsoljah, this template is being merged with Template:Infobox rugby biography, so it will once they are merged. Frietjes (talk) 12:53, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Given that rugby sevens is now part of the Summer Olympics, I take it that the merged template will be capable of dealing with medal templates?  Schwede 66  23:34, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Testcase check
check my work? I think I've got it to a point where I've got compatibility going both ways. My plan going forward: Any thoughts about or modifications to the plan are appreciated. Thanks! Primefac (talk) 13:46, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) Alt param names for existing rugby bio params to account for r.u. bio params (already done)
 * 2) Alt param names for all r.u. bio params -
 * 3) Do a massive AWB run to:
 * 4) Convert existing rubgy bio (singular) params into the numbered "r.u. bio" style ru_clubcaps→ru_clubcaps1 etc
 * 5) Give numbered params the ru_ prefix found in rugby bio clubcaps1 → ru_clubcaps1
 * 6) Remove "singular" params (i.e. clean up) and alternate names.
 * Primefac, if I recall, SporkBot was approved to do a similar conversion from delimited lists to numbered parameters.  are you proposing to do that with your AWB run, or are you planning to just rename the parameters, but keep the  delimited lists?  do you have any examples in the testcases which are using the old  delimited lists?  for infobox football biography we support both types of syntax, but we have deprecated the  delimited lists, and the SporkBot task was to convert to the new syntax.  Frietjes (talk) 14:18, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * , I did not know the SporkBot task existed, good to know. Currently all pages calling infobox rugby biography use lists. With 8550 transclusions, I think it would be best to actually replace those lists with the numbered parameters of the existing rugby union bio template (even though it only has 1440 transclusions) to get the ACCESS issues sorted. I would consider it to be part of the merging process. Primefac (talk) 14:25, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Primefac, yes, we should definitely replace the lists if possible.  the reason why I mention that bot task is that (1) it's similar, and (2) there was another bot approved to do the same task, but with AWB, and that other bot [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Beresford_(footballer)&type=revision&diff=426139494&oldid=421698791 horribly mangled the articles trying to do the conversion].  basically, you have to be able to process multiple  lists at the same time, make sure the are the same length, and then convert them.  if there are different numbers of  tags in the two lists, you have to let a human do it to make sure the alignment is correct.  we might be able to get SporkBot to do this one, if Plastikspork still has the code used for the infobox football biography conversion.  that is, unless you have AWB code that can do that conversion in a failsafe manner. Frietjes (talk) 14:30, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'll ping PS and see if the bot code is still kicking around. Primefac (talk) 15:07, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks a lot for your work on this. It looks good and I think it a big improvement! If there is a "massive AWB run" to be done, I'd propose that the term "caps" be replaced with "apps" throughout. There was a discussion about this some time ago, which was supported, but never implemented. Obviously it will be easy to simply change the label on the template, but I think it would make sense to change the actual parameter names too to reflect this. (The The first proposal in that section will also be addressed with this merger, so it's all good!) I would actually also propose reversing your proposed change with the ru_ prefix, i.e. ru_clubcaps1 → clubcaps1, since rugby league has its own infobox, but that will probably have to be run by WP:RU. TheMightyPeanut (talk) 14:42, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I was just about to make that same point about "caps" vs "apps". Clubs don't usually award caps, and it's not always clear whether a national team has either, so we should perhaps stick with "apps" throughout. – PeeJay 14:57, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * , I actually had the intention of putting the two templates up for merger. infobox rugby biography already has the functionality to handle rugby league (with the "rl_" prefix), so why not have a single box for everything? Primefac (talk) 15:07, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Labels changed all around, will obviously have to wait until the bot run to change existing param usage. Primefac (talk) 16:17, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, that's definitely a discussion worth having. The only problem with merging them is that the two infoboxes pertain to two completely different sports. Each sport generally has its own infobox derivative. There are a lot of cases where players play in multiple sports, not sure where to draw the line. TheMightyPeanut (talk) 12:00, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * That might have been why the template includes the RL options. But yes, that will definitely be an interesting discussion. Primefac (talk) 12:06, 22 March 2017 (UTC)