User talk:Jaellee/Archives/2011/March

Re
Jaellee, I raised this issue several times, and no definitive rule on this was created. The issue I raised was about this exact case, like Petr Stoilov. The difference between the two infoboxes is minimal. You made the former infobox2 to a player who´s career information you only had starting with his age at 23! You know perfectly well that you have his early career missing. You also know that by the infobox2 it´s a real pain in the ass to add early clubs in that infobox. I found more info for his early career and we still have much missing, because he certainly didn´t started his career at 21, and we still have a Macedonian club name missing right before his arival to Germany. So, we have a footballer who´s early career was totally missing. I found part of it, and we still have clubs missing. It is much more easy to complete early careers with the former infobox, and whenever I am working with a player and I´m still missing his early career I will change it to the previous infobox so it will be easier to do it. The difference is minimal, the difference in the effort in correcting it is huge. Now, regarding Stoilov, I wan´t change the infobox now, obviously, but when I find his Macedonian club, or more Czech or whatever clubs at begining, I´ll post it here to you, so you do it, OK? FkpCascais (talk) 18:14, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Long time ago. I have no time neither patience to search it now for you. Listen, you are being kind of ingratfull. You make a pitty article with incomplete career, I make an effort to improve it, and you make me loose time. Go search it yourself. Regards, FkpCascais (talk) 18:50, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, I didn´t intended to be unpolite with you, but you aren´t properly acting the best way either. The article is not yours (WP:OWN, but no need to wikilink as we are no newees) and stop punishing people for doing things in a different way from the one that you like. The discussion was about the infobox and I raised the issue about the difficult that was adding or correcting early careers. People agreed that each infobox can be used for the most adequate ocasion, meaning, it is prefered to have the "new" infobox, but in case the older one is more adequate, it wan´t hert nobody. Now, for players with complete careers there are no doubts, the new one is used, but for these cases we can perfectly have the older one until we complete their careers. From my experience, it will be most probable that his career will be completed by time. I am willing to work on it, but if I find him one club in 3 months, another in 6, and so on, I am not willing to change the entire infobox each time. By that, you have no rights in saying whatsoever to me, and you can restore him the new infobox each time, it´s up to you. Now, if the screen readers will prevent an article to be completed that wan´t certainly be a good thing, wan´t be? You are basically "mad" at me because you had to make yourself the new infobox again, but I don´t know how can you expect that others do that job when improving an article with at least 5 years and who knows how many early career clubs missing? FkpCascais (talk) 19:15, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, we can perfectly discuss this again. If you wan´t me to be honest, your first approach wasn´t the best (read it yourself). I didn´t knew you created the article, so my comment on the edit summary is also to blame. But, I know how hard is to find early careers, so I never meant that you didn´t done your best, you probably did the best that was possible back then. But, you have to also expect that with time more info apears and those careers begin being completed. I don´t mind at all having an infobox that is easier to complete in the meantime, and converting it to the new one later after completed. Having a player with career starting at 23 is really a big gap. Regarding the issue, we discussed it at least twice, once when the infobox was created and once when someone raised several questions regarding the infobox. FkpCascais (talk) 19:57, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * But Jaellee, all I did was changing the years,clubs,caps(goals) parameter. The "Football player infobox" at top I just change it because I wasn´t sure if it would work if I kept it unchanged. It is eactly the same as the Template:Infobox football biography changed into years,clubs,caps(goals) withpout numbers. In other words, if you use the old way of ordering the years,clubs,caps(goals) in the new template, you´ll end up having the "Football player infobox" anyway... FkpCascais (talk) 20:17, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe missunderstanding... You asked me not to change numerical ordering of the years,clubs&caps&goals into the old non-numerical format, right? FkpCascais (talk) 20:33, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Not yet. Since we raised the issue now on Footy, for time being only GiantSnowman commented, so, let´s see more opinions. I am still not convinced that for such incomplete careers is so much worthfull having the numerical one thus making things much harder for editors to complete early careers. FkpCascais (talk) 21:01, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Listen Jeallee, I still didn´t apologised properly to you, so I apologise for my attitude. I am having a bad day. This issue is kinda silly and not so easy to explain. I think you understood me now, and I think I really wan´t do much harm for replacing the infobox while I check for the career of the player. We still have his Macedonian club (see Playerhistory) to find, and I wanted to check some Czech websites if his name appears and see for more clubs. If you notece, it is much easier to include in the article when found the site and the info, edit it, and continue searching. So it often happends to me to make 3 or 4 separate changes, which is much easier to do it that way. With numericals, I better writte the info down on papper or somewhere, make sure I join it all together, and then fix the infobox. So, it is basically a different method of reserch and editing, that I heredited from the previous infobox. Adding several times info to the n1 in the numerics is borring, that is why I find easier to replace the infobox, add all info I found all around, and fix the infobox at the end. Anyway, I hope you haven´t felt bad with all of this, and I´m sorry you had to make the infobox again. I´ll check next time to see if any article has been started by you, and let you know about it, OK? FkpCascais (talk) 23:10, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for being so comprehensive. Yesterday I was impossible, and I really brought the situation to the edge. My edit summary coment was completely unfair, and I was totally wrong. This was kind of acumulated anger of not being possible to solve an existing problem about the new infobox. If you notece we basically have all major footballers couvered already, so we are left with the less known ones, and I personally feel proud when I menage to get some player to have its wikipedia article career more complete than any other website on the entire internet, and those cases happend a lot lately. This new infobox just makes that work harder, and the entire point is if the amount of more effort needed is enough to make me give up in completing those careers, or not. By the old infobox was very easy, now is more difficult, and I´m just sad to think that this may make me, or others, give up, in cases of much work to include one or a few clubs at begining. Anyway, we can allways work things out, and I have no right to act the way I did towards a good editor like you, speacially because after all, our goal is the same, having the article in the best possible way. I apologise you once more for all, thank you again for your understanding, and I really hope I can compensate you in the future and we get the best articles we can. FkpCascais (talk) 16:29, 29 March 2011 (UTC)