Template talk:Infobox sportsperson/Archive 1

Fields
Can someone add an "alternate name" and/or "birth name" fields for sportspeople who have used other names competitively? 70.20.73.2 (talk) 01:04, 16 August 2009 (UTC)


 * What about using the nickname parameter, or using the fullname parameter like this: "John Smith (also known as Jack Smith)" or "John Smith (competed as Jack Smith)"? — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 07:28, 16 August 2009 (UTC)


 * In some cases, it is not a nickname or full name. A popular example would be women who changed their names then they got married. Less popular would be a case like Munkhbayar Dorjsuren, which is the German-ified version of her birth name, Dorjsurengiin Mönkhbayar, with her patronymic changed into a surname. 70.20.73.2 (talk) 15:18, 16 August 2009 (UTC)


 * ✅. Fair enough. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 16:20, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Residence
Please change the display order so that residence comes after date/place of birth/death params and before height and weight, per discussion at Template talk:Infobox athlete and the corresponding change of Infobox athlete itself. GregorB (talk) 16:40, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 01:18, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Show-medals
Following a discussion at "Template talk:Infobox athlete", the medal table at Infobox athlete has been altered so that it is displayed by default. I would like to make the same change here (see Infobox sportsperson/sandbox), as this infobox and Infobox athlete should generally operate in the same way. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 08:41, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


 * ✅. Is this a change we should be considering for similar sportsperson bio infoboxes? Both the football and basketball bios now use this medal code as well, and both default to collapsed presently. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 10:00, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Should there be a wider debate about this? The discussion I mentioned in my e-mail was in respect of Infobox athlete, but participants of the individual WikiProjects might want to weigh in on the subject before we start changing their infoboxes (Infobox sportsperson is a generic template not tied to any specific WikiProject). Where would be a good central forum for the debate? "Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports"? — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 10:26, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm wary of suggesting that we really have a hierarchy which could be consulted here. You could try the Village Pump. Other than that, posting on the individual WikiProjects (WikiProject Football and WikiProject NBA respectively) would be fine. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 10:33, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Are a lot of infoboxes involved? If it is only a handful, then discussing the matter on the individual template talk pages is fine by me. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 10:34, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


 * It's probably only a handful at most, yeah. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 10:50, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Last updated
editprotected Please add "last updated" or smth like that at below. Pelmeen10 (talk) 22:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


 * There was a previous discussion about this at "Template talk:Infobox athlete/2009 archive", and the conclusion was that such a field is not a good idea. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 11:27, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Small changes
A request from Dirtlawyer1:
 * Can you also default collapse the "show medals" function for Infobox sportsperson? Also, please reduce the displayed field name from "College/university team" to just "College team"the longer field name is mangling the internal spacing within the displayed Infobox sportsperson and causing unnecessary line-wrapping.

If no one objects over the next few days then I'll make those changes. -- WOSlinker (talk) 06:56, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No objection to making show-medals collapsed by default, though I should point out that I had originally made it such but it got changed along the way. See the discussion above – it appears the reason for the change was that the field was shown by default in Infobox athlete so a similar change was made here to keep the two templates aligned. We may want to discuss this issue further before changing it back. As for the second request, much of the world calls them universities and not colleges. I suggest two separate optional fields, collegeteam and universityteam (or uniteam?), so that editors can pick the one appropriate to each article. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 16:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Generic biography fields
It would be good if this template included more of the generic fields used by Infobox person, for example:


 * honorific_prefix
 * honorific_suffix
 * native_name
 * native_name_lang
 * resting_place
 * resting_place_coordinates
 * monuments
 * ethnicity
 * citizenship
 * education
 * alma_mater
 * occupation
 * years_active
 * employer
 * organization
 * agent

and probably others. It should be possible to lift-and-shift them and their associated logic from the source of that infobox, and renumber accordingly. Anyone fancy doing so?


 * If you would make the changes in the sandbox, I'm sure someone would be willing to copy them over. -- WOSlinker (talk) 22:32, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I am not that sure we need them. Many of them make no sense and would most probably not used. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:30, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Which make "no sense"? How, do you suppose, can they make sense in but not here?  Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:52, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No reply? Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 14:25, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Changes. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 14:25, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: I'm not seeing a consensus for this change. Please reactivate if/when this is established. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:34, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Only one, vague objection from, an editor who didn't respond to a request for clarification. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:06, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Still no objections, so reactivating. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:46, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I have no general objections. The only one I'm wondering about is ethnicity. Is this important enough to include? WP:MOSBIO says "Ethnicity ... should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability". — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 11:29, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It's deemed so for infobox person; I'm trying to standardise on that, for non-sports specific properties. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:44, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I have no strong objections to its inclusion. I suppose if some editors start including ethnicity in every sportsperson's infobox, this can be dealt with by referring them to WP:MOSBIO. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 12:56, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- WOSlinker (talk) 19:40, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Can I suggest that you change " " to " " so that we can see the new parameters in the template at the top of the description page? Thanks. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 10:39, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- WOSlinker (talk) 11:18, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 17:59, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:49, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

More than one sport
Any way of including parameters to help editors list more than one sport in this infobox? For example Jovesa Naivalu represented Fiji in Track and Field and the USA in rugby union. There are countless more athletes in the same position that currently have two infoboxes. --Bob247 (talk) 16:38, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Would it not be a little confusing to try and incorporate all the information into one infobox? You'd have to provide information about two different sports for each parameter – unless you are suggesting that the infobox be expanded so there is a different set of parameters for each sport (e.g., sport, event; sport2, event2, and so on). — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 18:59, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * sport2, event2 etc is where I would think it should be. --Bob247 (talk) 19:19, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No need for such a change, since an easier solution is to simply add " (track & field)" and " (rugby union)", thereafter " (t&f)" and " (ru)" after the relevant information. Use or  to format the multiple entries. Adding several numbered variants of each will vastly increase this template's parser call overhead, making it unusable on a number of richly-developed bios. — SMcCandlish    Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  23:00, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Nickname
Nickname is not usually included in infoboxes, why is it here? I mean it's not really encyclopedic and nicknames are probably arguable. Pelmeen10 (talk) 12:21, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It's in more broadly, so you'd need to take that up there.  (And for sportspeople, their nicknames often have more public currency than their real names anyway.) — SMcCandlish    Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  11:22, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Display name of field too long
Greetings, template coders. Would it be possible to rename the display name of the "collegeteam" field/parameter? The field's display name is currently "University/college team." The field's display name takes up two lines of text in the infobox and it's still wider than the field display name for all of the other fields. At its present length, it screws up the internal spacing of the infobox. Would it be possible to reduce the name of the field's display name to just "College team?" Simpler is usually better. . . . Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:38, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I would support that if we add say "universityteam" which would have the display name of "University team". Frietjes (talk) 20:32, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * "College team" is shorter, and shorter is better. When the display names of the fields stretch half way across the infobox, they invariably force a line-wrap of the substantive information in one or more infobox fields.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:12, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I am suggesting we add both. Frietjes (talk) 21:29, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Please change

to
 * label29    = College/university team
 * data29     =
 * label29    =  team
 * data29     =
 * which will add support for either universityteam or collegeteam, but not both, and make the label specific depending on which parameter is used. Frietjes (talk) 21:32, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


 * F, as you know, in the United States, we pretty much refer to all undergraduate intercollegiate athletic teams as "college sports," regardless of whether the team is sponsored by the College of William & Mary or the University of Virginia. What's your logic for including field display names for "University team" AND "College team?"  Are your trying to account for non-American undergraduate teams who refer to themselves as "university teams," not "college teams?"  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:50, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Presumably that would be the reason. To be clear, are you objecting to this request? Tra (Talk) 12:52, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Tra, I'm not objecting per se, but I did want to understand Friejtes' reason for including what appears to be a somewhat redundant display name option for the field. From my perspective, I suppose it really doesn't matter as long the shorter "College team" display name for the field is also available.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I think we should retain the ability to specify a "university team" for those countries where it is not the norm to use college to refer to a tertiary educational institution. I would support Frietjes's suggestion. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 15:23, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Tra (Talk) 00:12, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

partner and formerpartner
I agree with the spirit of this change, but I would prefer it if the default labels are just 'Partner(s)' and 'Former partner(s)' without the 'synchro'. we can make the synchro part optional, for example, how about if we use
 * label33 =
 * data33 =

or make the field specifically called 'synchropartner' and 'formersynchropartner'. Frietjes (talk) 20:37, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * label34 =
 * data34 =

I certainly agree. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:47, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I updated the infobox. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:55, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * What on earth is a "synchro" anyway? — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  11:23, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Convert
Should this be converted to an instance of, like most other bio infoboxes have, and that template updated with fields peculiar to this one? — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  11:24, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Never mind; I think that would be too complicated. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  23:39, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Add league parameter
This infobox seems to have been written primarily with football (soccer) in mind (there are a lot of telltale signs). One side effect of this is that a crucial parameter is missing: league. There's only one notable professional association football league in the world, FIFA, but for many other sports this is not the case at all (pool for example).

Code to add this parameter (and another to fine-tune it) is in the Template:Infobox sportsperson/sandbox. Tested and working fine in Template:Infobox sportsperson/testcases.

The documentation should be the following:


 * align=center|league
 * The name of the sport league(s), federation(s) or other sanctioning system(s) under which the sportsperson plays/played. It is not necessary to add this parameter if the sport in question has only one such notable organization. For play under/membership in a regional (e.g. continental) federation, it may be useful to name that body and the parent organization, e.g.
 * align=center|league_type
 * Change the "League" heading to another word, such as "Federation", "Association", etc., to match the terminology used in the sport.
 * align=center|league_type
 * Change the "League" heading to another word, such as "Federation", "Association", etc., to match the terminology used in the sport.

— SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  18:41, 2 May 2012 (UTC)  Updated 02:47, 3 May 2012 (UTC)


 * This was created independently of the football bio box (for track-and-field athletes, originally) and has never been used for footballers AFAICT, but I imagine there was probably a design influence. Anyway, I've synced from the sandbox and updated the docs. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:37, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Merge club and team fields? Alternative?
The  and   parameters should be merged. They serve the same purpose ("club" in this sense and "team" are synonymous). For things like membership in country clubs or other meanings of the word "club", that's what the  parameter is for. The best way to do this is probably to make,   and   for that matter be synonymous in the code to the extent that they trigger the same stuff to happen, except that the word that appears as the heading would change depending on which variant was used. Example code:


 * label31    =
 * data31     =
 * class31    = org

The only cleanup to be done would be to track down instances of this template using both  and. Since that's clearly an error to begin with, I'd say it's up to people to check the articles they work on for this mistake and to fix it; it is not a change that bollixes any legitimate extant code.

If there aren't any objections, I'll can set up test code in the sandbox for this. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  18:59, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Update : An alternative idea has come up, a bit below. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  02:03, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure "club" and "team" are interchangeable. For instance, in table tennis it seems to be the case that players can play for a club in one league, and at the same time be on a national team. (See, for example, "Feng Tianwei".) — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 00:22, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * They're still teams, and can be handled in the same parameter, with ubl or PL. The problem is that "club" has at least 6 different meanings in sports (aside from "stick or bat", of course), but one of them is hard-coded here. Most often it simply means "team", while the second most common usage is "public venue for sport", the third is "private, members-only venue for sport and socialization", and the others are "set of teams sponsored by the same party or hosted at the same venue", "league or federation", and "sport governing body". There are surely others.  Meanwhile I'm unaware of any sport in which one could  be on a local league team and a national team. It would be remarkably difficult to ever get on a national team without a history as a great player on local/regional teams, whether you want to call them "clubs" or not.  Further, the term "club" is very often applied to professional, not local amateur, teams, especially in association football, which is completely the opposite of the usage you noted with table tennis.


 * Alternative: If we're going to keep the fields separate, they need to be clearly defined, because of the obvious and almost overwhelming ambiguity of "club", even in one variety of English (e.g. a football club and a snooker club are nothing alike in British English). One sane way to do this would be to simply deprecate them entirely so people stop using them over time, and map team to a new country-team and club to a new local-team (or vice-versa - I'm not convinced that when an infobox uses both, it is most likely to follow the pingpong example rather than the soccer one). This would be much, much clearer, for all sorts of things, like US pro players with long histories on teams like, say, the Brooklyn Dodgers or DC United or the Dallas Cowboys being pulled into national all-star, Olympic, etc., teams. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  02:03, 3 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Any opinions on this? We obviously have a serious problem with "club", because it doesn't even mean one clear thing in the same dialect of English. I've suggested a couple of ways to approach this problem, and favor the version where use country_team and local_team (or something like that) instead of team and club. — SMcCandlish    Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  17:36, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Propose removing the other-interests field
I can't find other infoboxes with this essentially trivial and fannish parameter, other-interests. Template:Infobox person has nothing like it. If it's a professional interest, add it to occupation. If it's a charitable interest, add it to organization. If it's an other sport and the subject is actually notable at it, add it to sport. Otherwise, it's simply trivia for the  section and has no business in the infobox. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  00:42, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * No objection to this (when was it even added?). — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 00:49, 3 May 2012 (UTC)


 * No, definitely not. See Chrissie Wellington for example. She happens to be a very successful triathlete, possibly the very best ever, but triathlon is not, and never has been, the most important part of her life; it's merely a stepping-stone to her main, much more serious objectives. That's why this parameter was introduced. --NSH001 (talk) 16:19, 11 May 2012 (UTC)


 * The fact that in some small number of cases someone can think of a reason to use this parameter is not a justification for the parameter, especially when it is prone to misuse for trivia. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  01:41, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


 * If this is a parameter that's only going to be used in a very small number of cases, I agree that it's probably best to remove it. Where Chrissie Wellington is concerned, no doubt the article itself already contains the information in some detail. It's unnecessary to have it in the infobox as well. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 09:38, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


 * That's indeed what I'm getting at. The WP:NPOV-problematic idea that this parameter is for things that people are arguably partially notable for but which aren't "the most important part of [their] li[ves]" or their "main, much more serious objective" clearly indicates why this is problematic. WP cannot encyclopedically offer any opinion at all about what is "important" or a "serious objective" in someone's life. WP is not People magazine. — SMcCandlish    Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  15:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * PS: What I said in the opening post of this topic pre-refutes NSH001's rationale: If Wellington is primarily notable for a sport other than triathlon, the latter gets added as a secondary sport under sport; if Wellington is equally notable for something other than sporting, such as founding a charity or company, that goes in the organization or occupation parameter, respectively, assuming this infobox is even the most appropriate one to use. If Wellington is primarily notable for something other than sports, this is the wrong infobox to be using, and her sporting factoids can be added to a notes field in the other infobox, or a minimal form of this infobox can be hooked in as secondary one via that infobox's module. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  18:03, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Provide synonyms of some other parameters - not all sports use identical terminology
This exact same  structure mentioned above can be used to add other synonyms. The university and college team parameters are the most obvious candidates for handling this way, if this hasn't been done already. Another would be adding a  synonym of   ("event" is used in many Olympic sports, but "discipline" is used in many others, including cue sports.)  Example:
 * label##    =
 * data##     = {{{discipline|{{{event | }}}}}

For more complicated cases, like,  ,   and maybe something I'm not thinking of, as synonyms of the   parameter, it's better to have a second parameter like league_type (see thread a couple of discussions above this one) so that the left-column heading for it in the infobox matches the terminology of the sport in question. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  18:59, 2 May 2012 (UTC) Updated: 02:55, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Going twice! Any objections? — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  17:37, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The discipline/event case is now in the sandbox. Any others that obviously need to be added? — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  14:13, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The universityteam parameter has too much priority
The  parameter is being weirdly emphasized by being very high up in the "Sports" section of the infobox, above even professional  /. It obviously needs to move down. Barring any objections, I'll integrate this fix into the next round of sandboxing, after the  editprotected is done. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  19:09, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * No objection to this. I guess it should be adjacent (immediately after?) collegeteam. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 00:22, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * They're the same parameter. The issue is that however it is named, it is appearing before, as if more important than, the professional equivalent. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  01:40, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Going twice! Any objections? — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  17:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Now fixed in the sandbox. It is below the pro club/team stuff, just above turned_pro. — SMcCandlish    Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  14:14, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Record handling
The handling of world records as simply something to mention (in abbreviated, obtuse form even) under "personal bests" is weird. As far as I can tell, the entire concept of "personal bests" is almost entirely a track and field, swimming and other athletics one, with the phrase being mostly applied to timed or accuracy events (how fast the dash was run, what score was attained in shooting the targets). It's not generally used outside of T&F athletics and Olympic contexts. A severe problem with it, even in those contexts, is that it does not account for cumulative records (most wins, etc.), only per-event performances (i.e., the definition of "personal bests").

In order for this template to actually serve its purpose, as a generic sportsperson infobox for any sport, there an alternative is needed, a  parameter, that allows simple freeform entry, like:

or if you like plainlist better:

The output would be a left-column heading called Record(s). Documentation for the parameter would note that  and    are usually mutually exclusive, except in cases where a T&F athlete or Olympiad has a record that is not of a personal-best nature, such as a cumulative one.

If there aren't any objections, I'll add this into my next round of upgrades on this template, in the sandbox. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  23:29, 2 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I'd say we should retain pb because it is a well-known term, but by all means add a record parameter. If I understand you correctly, that's what you're suggesting. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 00:22, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Right, we wouldn't remove pb; it definitely is relevant for the sports to which it pertains. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  01:39, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Going twice! Any objections? — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  17:42, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * This has been added, in the sandbox. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  14:16, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Singular headings
All the left-column headings that have singular names but which can and often do take multiple values need to be parenthetically pluralized, the way Personal best(s) is; thus Team(s), Club(s), etc. Barring any objection, I'll work this correction into the next round of sandboxing. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  23:29, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * No objection to this. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 00:13, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Going twice! Any objections? — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  17:41, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * This has been fixed in the sandbox. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  14:17, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Consistency
All parameters that are using hyphens need to be renamed with underscores. The hyphenated versions would still work, but never be mentioned in the /doc, so they die out. Any parameters that don't match Template:Infobox person would be made to do so. Missing parameters from Template:Infobox person that aren't totally off-beat would be added (e.g. native_name_lang, without which native_name which was already added is only half-functional). — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  00:42, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * No objection, if this is the general usage in templates. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 00:49, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * It is, per every case at Template:Infobox person/doc and most other non-sloppy infoboxes. This one is sloppy, and randomly using  and      (I don't think I detected any of , but I wouldn't be surprised). The most obvious conflict with the main Infobox_person is that this one is using partner (not for all that long, so hopefully easy to fix) for something sporty, while in all the other bio infoboxes is has the more obvious meaning. That will have to change here, even if for not other reason than to keep it from being "incorrectly" used (i.e. used the way 99% of editors will expect); see new thread below about this problem in particular. — SMcCandlish    Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  03:00, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Is this really the prevailing style? In my experience both runtogethertext and parameters using regular spaces are significantly more common than using underscores these days. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 15:56, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm talking about usage in infoboxes. If I'm wrong and some other format is more common, then let's use that. I'm making a "let's be consistent" argument, not a "my punctuation is better" one, just to be clear. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  17:53, 19 May 2012 (UTC)  Update :  consistently uses underscores as do most other infoboxes I looked at, though some of them allow other values, e.g.  . I've fixed it up this way in the sandbox. — SMcCandlish    Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  13:38, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Fixed in sandbox. All the multi-word parameters now use an underscore by default. Any pre-existing spaced, dashed or run-together variant has been kept as an alias, but I have not (per WP:CREEP/WP:BEANS) tried to add every imaginable variant, only underscore, and what was previously in the /doc. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  14:19, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The partner parameter needs to be changed
This template's misappropriation of the "partner" parameter for a use almost no one will find intuitive is a potentially major problem that basically can't be resolved except by changing the parameter name here and manually fixing its deployed uses. Even AWB would be hazardous for anything but identifying articles that use the parameter and then manually reading their text and sources to see how this parameter is being used at each of those pages. It's essentially guaranteed that various articles have used that parameter to mean "partner in a doubles sport discipline" as not documented but implied here, while others, knowing what this parameter means in the other bio infoboxes, have used it for the more obvious "life partner", so it can't simply be renamed via a tool to sport_partner or whatever. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  17:53, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Half-fixed in sandbox. Now defaults to sport_partner, and its wording is clearer. The partner name still works, but needs to be hunted down article by article and changed to sport_partner where this is how it is being used, or left as-is if being used as, etc., all use it. At that point, partner can be re-implemented as its own parameter for life partners, and I think actually having it default to life_partner would be a good idea, to prevent any further misuse. The basic spouse parameter is also conspicuously missing for some reason.  Basically, a lot of basic stuff from  needs to be added. Or maybe there's a way to "module" infobox sportsperson into infobox people, or something. — SMcCandlish    Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  02:28, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Addition of "Caps" parameter
[Transferred from "User talk:Jacklee".] Could you please add "Caps" line in sport section (after "Country")? --Kasper2006 (talk) 17:08, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * What type of information is supposed to go into this field? (By the way, I can't edit the template any more. It's now fully protected and can only be edited by administrators. You should request for changes on this template talk page.) — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 17:39, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Could you answer the question posed by Jacklee? (And maybe give it a day before applying editprotected to allow time for others to comment.) &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:43, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I would think that it is to do with Cap (sport), possibly the number accumulated during the career (as in List of footballers with 100 or more caps).
 * Caps are an objective measure of importance, gauged by the number of times that the player represented their country at the highest level. -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:03, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Is this a term widely used in many sports, or only in a handful such as cricket, football and rugby? If the latter, it should be inserted into infoboxes relating to the relevant sports rather than into this one. (By the way, why is this template only in "Category:Templates needing substitution checking"? Shouldn't it be in a category with other sports-related infoboxes as well?) — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 19:09, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The cats - and a whole bunch of other stuff including the interlanguage links - went missing with . I've put them back now. -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:31, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Redrose64. I should just point out, in case it was not clear from above, that generally I have no objections to a caps parameter. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 11:45, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Module and Module2
Could the editor who added the parameters module and module2 please document their usage on the documentation subpage? Thanks. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 09:52, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * that would be this edit. Frietjes (talk) 14:18, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It's got the same amount of documentation as Template:Infobox person has on the same subject, which is where the feature was copied from. An example of the usage can be seen by looking at the code for Template:Infobox swimmer. -- WOSlinker (talk) 14:27, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, then the documentation for Infobox person is lacking too. It's not very helpful to have these parameters and then not describe how they are supposed to be used. Sorry, I don't understand your reference to Infobox swimmer – module and module2 don't appear in that template. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 15:32, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree that the documentation is lacking, but I believe this parameter is mostly used when creating other infobox templates which use this one. so, we may not want to encourage the use of this parameter directly in articles, but I'm not sure. for example, check the code for infobox swimmer and see how it uses this template, but then adds some more information that is specific to swimmers.  Frietjes (talk) 15:35, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If you edit Infobox swimmer then you will see the module2 parameter in use within the template. -- WOSlinker (talk) 15:39, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, didn't see it the first time around. Perhaps we should have a note stating that the parameters are for transcluding this template into other templates (with a link to Infobox swimmer as an example), which is best done by editors with experience working with templates. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 16:13, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I've updated the docs now with some extra info on the module params. -- WOSlinker (talk) 17:58, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that's great. I note there are a few other undocumented parameters marked as such – hopefully the editor who added them can get to those too. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 20:01, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Undocumented parameters typically fall into three groups: (i) those which should have been documented, but this action was overlooked; (ii) those which exist primarily so that other components operate correctly; and (iii) parameters which are deprecated, either because they no longer work as intended, or because better alternatives now exist. I'm generally in favour of documenting all of these, if only to add a note along the lines of "Do not use this because ..." (for example, see the category parameter on Template:WikiProject Beer). To these we may add (iv) parameters which were provided at some point in the past, but are no longer present in any form, so don't fall into group (iii). These I'm not in favour of documenting. -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:26, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Parameter table overflows
Any idea why the parameter table at "Template:Infobox sportsperson/doc" overflows on the right side? I can't figure it out, and it's driving me nuts. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 19:42, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * it was the  within the table. for some reason, you can use overflow auto just fine outside of a table, but not inside the table?  I changed them to a fixed width, and it sort of fixes the problem, but not in a satisfying way.  someone with more knowledge of css could certainly do better. (just search for the width:500px and fix those). Frietjes (talk) 20:52, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. I think I'll edit the table and remove the  tags as they are causing problems. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 21:50, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Native name
For subjects like Paraskevi Papahristou, aka (, this template should have native_name and native_name_lang as used in several other biographical and other infoboxes. It should be possible to copy or adapt the markup from Infobox person. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:14, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * These parameters are already in the template. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 21:49, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * But not in the blank copy; I've added them Thank you. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Medal table is not collapsed by default
The documentation for the 'show-medals' parameter says that the medal table should be collapsed by default. For some reason, however, this is not currently the case, which makes for some very long default infoboxes, and 'show-medals=no' has no effect. CanadianJudoka (talk) 04:57, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * example? I just added tried adding no in Jesse Owens and it collapsed the medal table. Frietjes (talk) 14:34, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I tried again, and it looks like I misplaced the parameter the first time around. The question still remains why this isn't the default when it is supposed to be, though. CanadianJudoka (talk) 15:15, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * if you want the default to be collapsed, then make an edit request. I can't change it since the template is fully protected.  I did change the documentation to match the current default functionality, but have no opinion on what the current functionality should be.  depending on how long it has had the current default functionality, we should be careful, since changing it could create an unexpected change in a large number of articles. Frietjes (talk) 17:37, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Please change the medal table default to 'collapsed'. Some profiles have many medals listed, and having this portion of the infobox collapsed by default will help make things more orderly without any risk to article content. CanadianJudoka (talk) 17:57, 30 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Some time back, a discussion took place at "Template talk:Infobox athlete" (now merged into this template), and a decision was taken to make the medal table display by default. I then modified this infobox for consistency with that infobox: see "Template talk:Infobox sportsperson/Archive 1". However, I can't recall the reasons for the decision, and have no objection if the default is changed back to "hide". I agree that very long medal tables can cause alignment problems if they are displayed by default. (On the other hand, since infoboxes are meant to summarize key information, if medal tables are extremely long editors should consider whether some information should be trimmed from it. Also, as noted above, the medal table can simply be collapsed using " ".) — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 18:07, 30 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the correction. I think that a summary of the athlete's major accomplishments is covered by parameters such as 'olympics'. It seems like the medal table is best used for a list that does more than just repeat these major accomplishments, and therefore is likely to be a long enough list that hiding by default is a good idea. I think that a very long infobox is especially problematic for athletes, whose articles are often on the shorter side. CanadianJudoka (talk) 18:55, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Sorry, but I don't think there's a consensus to make this change right now. I've undeleted the discussion pages where the previous conversation took place, though, so now you can go and look at what was actually said. I'd say that this needs a discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Athletics, and possibly an RfC if an initial discussion doesn't show a clear consensus. Feel free to reactivate the request if you feel a consensus has been shown. Thanks — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 15:22, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for undeleting the discussion pages. CanadianJudoka (talk) 19:06, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

'Rank' parameter
Hello. I've been been adding this infobox to articles about judoka, and I was wondering if we could add a 'rank' parameter so that the box can indicate their rank in Judo. CanadianJudoka (talk) 20:36, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Nobody seems to object to this, so I am requesting the edit. It should be displayed immediately after the sport parameter in the template. CanadianJudoka (talk) 22:11, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * No objections from me. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 07:39, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 * So. . .what's a guy gotta do to find an administrator around here? :) CanadianJudoka (talk) 02:53, 5 September 2012 (UTC)


 * ✅; please update the docs. I've added a little lee-way with the parameter numbering to make it possible to add future paramteres without having to renumber every subsequent entry as well. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:04, 5 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I just noticed that the rank parameter is listed several parameters into the 'Sport' section. It would be preferable if it was listed immediately after the sport parameter, so that in the 'Sport' section it first lists the sport, then the rank, then club or whatever else. CanadianJudoka (talk) 15:18, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

By the way, the " " tags are not necessarily "cruft". They make it possible to view the infobox on the template page. I think it's useful for editors to be able to see what the infobox looks like. Do other editors feel the same way? — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 11:31, 5 September 2012 (UTC)


 * That's what the documentation page is for. Mixing presentation with the template logic makes it harder to edit the code, introduces subtle bugs and doesn't obviate the need for documentation anyway, so I routinely remove it. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:36, 5 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for making the change. I don't know enough about templates to comment on whether it's a good idea to use certain comment tags or not. CanadianJudoka (talk) 14:58, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

European Athletics Championships?
For a Track and field athlete, where should details of European Athletics Championships appearances be entered? Best Regards. DynamoDegsy (talk) 08:42, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
 * What sort of details? If medals were won, you can use the medal table. Other significant titles can be indicated using regionals. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 11:36, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Type of Disability and Disability Class
Can someone please insert the above two lines in the infobox? --Kasper2006 (talk) 06:40, 8 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I support this, but maybe just 'Disability' instead of 'Type of Disability' to keep things short. CanadianJudoka (talk) 16:53, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * so, how about


 * disability =
 * disability_class =
 * and where does this go (before/after which fields?). Frietjes (talk) 17:13, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * May also be useful to have a link on the class to Disability sport classification. -- WOSlinker (talk) 17:46, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Are perfect the lines suggested by Frietjes, I would say that its can put after "sport". But there is someone who takes charge of it? --Kasper2006 (talk) 07:35, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I support this. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 11:25, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Everyone who has commented supports this change, so I've made an edit request. CanadianJudoka (talk) 15:49, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry to be a pain, but could someone put the required code in Template:Infobox sportsperson/sandbox and make sure it's working as intended. Then reactivate request and I'll copy it over. Thanks &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:28, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I tried in sandbox, but I do not think I succeeded. --Kasper2006 (talk) 06:23, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, you did it correctly. But I moved the parameters under sport as suggested above, and added some links. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 08:13, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * All done. Could someone update the documentation? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:31, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 16:21, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Tnx. Used here. ;-) --Kasper2006 (talk) 16:57, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

If I may make a suggestion. The link to Disability sport classification is clearly useful and pertinent, but Disability is just a simple English word and should probably be delinked per WP:OVERLINK. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:22, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I added the link because I thought it would be useful, but do not object if you wish to remove it. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 12:31, 19 September 2012 (UTC)


 * There haven't been any objections to Martin's proposal for removal of the "Disability" wikilink, so I've gone ahead and updated the version in the sandbox. Would an administrator please update the template accordingly? Thanks. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 11:40, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done -- Red rose64 (talk) 16:05, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Can we have Achievements and titles?
Like in Infobox sportsperson biography (here used). --Kasper2006 (talk) 08:03, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Why do we even have two infoboxes? What are the circumstances which should favour the use of one (either one) over the other? -- Red rose64 (talk) 13:04, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Simple. This infobox has more parameters of the other, in a sense, experimental. --Kasper2006 (talk) 14:40, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Spouse parameter
I suggest we add a "spouse" parameter as in infobox person. It's not uncommon that sportspeople are married to other notable persons and we should be able to show that in the "Personal information" section of this template. Any thoughts? De728631 (talk) 15:14, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
 * fine with me, should probably add some non-married equivalent as well. Frietjes (talk) 15:58, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, that would be  as in the "person" template. De728631 (talk) 16:15, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
 * No objections. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 17:03, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Where would you like the new parameters to be added? Could you give a description of what parameters should come before or after, or maybe update the template sandbox with the relevant code? Best — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 17:27, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I think similar to "infobox person", these parameters should be quite at the bottom of the "personal information" section, i.e. between "weight" and "other interests". Since the template already has a parameter |partner for professional sports partners, I suggest we use |spouse and |life-partner instead for the personal details. See the updated sandbox and the Andre Agassi box at the testcases page. De728631 (talk) 19:08, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * PS: I can also add those to the real template myself (admin), so unless your question was not about actual layout concerns, I'm going to do just that. De728631 (talk) 19:14, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Too late, I did it already. :) — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 02:22, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps for consistency with Infobox person we should stick to partner and change the existing parameter to sports_partner. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 05:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Heh, thank you, Mr. Stradivarius. @JackLee: that would require a bot run to replace existing instances of the old partner parameter. But you're right, there should be a certain level of consistency. De728631 (talk) 14:52, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

That shouldn't be too difficult. Just file a request at "AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks". By the way, I think the new parameter should be life_partner rather than life-partner: see this discussion "Consistency" above. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 18:45, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * yes, underscore rather than dash per life partner. Frietjes (talk) 20:13, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Agreed, I've made it a life_partner for the time being. I'm going to look for a bot to swap the relevant "partner" paramenters. And while they are at it, they can also replace other-interests with other_interests. De728631 (talk) 20:57, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * yes, use the underscore version. Frietjes (talk) 21:42, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Cool. I wonder if it is a good idea to fix any occurrences of Infobox Sportsperson to Infobox sportsperson (if any), while we're at it. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 12:05, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I figured out how to request this at "AutoWikiBrowser/Template redirects". — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 15:30, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Excellent. And I have added a few tasks at AutoWikiBrowser/Rename template parameters. De728631 (talk) 15:38, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Embedding voice files
A project I'm running, and a related event in mid-January will soon add around a thousand recordings of article subjects' voices to their biographies. I'd like to embed those in the relevant infoboxes, as in (using Infobox person). Can we add the necessary parameter to this template? Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:22, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * No, please - give them their own little box. Much too crufty and against WP:INFOBOX principles. Of course adding them is an excellent idea, but not in the main box. Johnbod (talk) 18:03, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes please. Nobody except Johnbod would prefer to . It works well with infobox person, and it should be just as useful in this template. --RexxS (talk) 20:12, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Position?
Any chance of getting position added to the template? Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * as in top/bottom or as in occupation? Frietjes (talk) 16:23, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I guess as in quarterback, midfielder, goalie, batsman, etc. De728631 (talk) 16:44, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is what I meant. I wanted it for basketball players. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:03, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I see, so below sport and above team? Frietjes (talk) 21:54, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * and any particular reason why infobox basketball biography doesn't work for basketball players? Frietjes (talk) 21:55, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Several. It is set up for American basketball and is missing other fields that I use for wheelchair basketball players, like disability_class. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:16, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * let me know when you decide where it should be placed within the template. Frietjes (talk) 00:03, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Below sport and above disability_class would be fine.  Hawkeye7 (talk) 04:09, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * added. Frietjes (talk) 15:12, 30 April 2014 (UTC)