 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
"Club" perhaps applies to some countries, but not to the southern hemisphere nation, where club rugby is a tier well below the provincial teams and the Super-14 franchise. The Stormers, Bulls, etc, are never referred to as "clubs".
The terminology should either change to something more generic, or be able to be set when the template is called. Greenman ( talk) 19:04, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed. There should be an option to refer to club/franchise/province. Also three other issues up for discussion: 1. In a national template, referring to nationality by adding flags are useless. 2. Date of birth AND age is too much. Either would be good but not both. My vote is for age alone. 3. A sortable table would be very useful, as the media frequently refers to (eg) the amount of "new caps" or the amount of players from a certain province. - Sahmejil ( talk) 11:09, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
I generally agree with comments above:
- I think there should be the option to enter either or all of club, franchise and/or province but tagged such that they appear in a relevant column or with a relevant label.
- As for age, if date of birth could be entered (flexible enough that only month and year or only year could be entered) but then the age automatically calculated and displayed depending on when the page is viewed.
- I suspect the nationality flag option is there for multinational teams like British Lions, Pacific Islanders and East Africa, so keep.
There's one HUGE problem with the sorting:
It sorts by first name. Typically, sorting of names is done by family name.
Shouldn't the template be fixed so that names are sorted by the most common criterion? — Dale Arnett ( talk) 07:41, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
| This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
"Club" perhaps applies to some countries, but not to the southern hemisphere nation, where club rugby is a tier well below the provincial teams and the Super-14 franchise. The Stormers, Bulls, etc, are never referred to as "clubs".
The terminology should either change to something more generic, or be able to be set when the template is called. Greenman ( talk) 19:04, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed. There should be an option to refer to club/franchise/province. Also three other issues up for discussion: 1. In a national template, referring to nationality by adding flags are useless. 2. Date of birth AND age is too much. Either would be good but not both. My vote is for age alone. 3. A sortable table would be very useful, as the media frequently refers to (eg) the amount of "new caps" or the amount of players from a certain province. - Sahmejil ( talk) 11:09, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
I generally agree with comments above:
- I think there should be the option to enter either or all of club, franchise and/or province but tagged such that they appear in a relevant column or with a relevant label.
- As for age, if date of birth could be entered (flexible enough that only month and year or only year could be entered) but then the age automatically calculated and displayed depending on when the page is viewed.
- I suspect the nationality flag option is there for multinational teams like British Lions, Pacific Islanders and East Africa, so keep.
There's one HUGE problem with the sorting:
It sorts by first name. Typically, sorting of names is done by family name.
Shouldn't the template be fixed so that names are sorted by the most common criterion? — Dale Arnett ( talk) 07:41, 5 January 2012 (UTC)