![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject AFL/Archive 1 |
The 2006 season article was originally named Australian Football League season 2006, before I renamed it to 2006 Australian Football League season after noticing that it is customary on the majority of Wikipedia sport annual articles to put the year at the start (my examples were 2006 NFL season, 2004-05 NBA season, 2006 English cricket season, 2006 Commonwealth Games, etc.). The 2006 season article has since been named back to the original name because that is the standard for the other AFL season articles (see Category:Australian Football League seasons). I think it would be a good idea to get a decent consensus on how we should name the season articles, especially before anyone starts doing decent work on the previous seasons (which are fairly barebone at the moment).
Which format do you prefer - the year at the start or the end of the season article name and why? Please sign your name at the end of your vote with ~~~~. Once it is clear which one is preferred, we can either leave it as is or rename the articles. Remy B 12:58, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Update - It might also be a good idea to get votes on whether we should have 'Australian Football League season' (long) or 'AFL season' (short) in the article name, so feel free to add votes for that option as well. Remy B 13:05, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Result - OK it seems reasonably clear that the consensus is to format the articles in the style of 2006 AFL season. I'll rename the existing articles and make some sort of navigation template like Template:Australia at the Commonwealth Games to put at the bottom of the articles. Remy B 08:48, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Should red links to small country footy clubs (for example Moulamein Football Club be cured by replacing them with piped links to the town (as Moulamein Football Club) or by putting a redirect at the club article pointing to the town article? -- Scott Davis Talk 13:12, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
I've changed nine links to country town clubs in Golden Rivers Football League to link to the town instead, and still got seven red links—no way those town articles will get too big to not have the footy club in the same article! Most already had at least one other link (from list of postcodes). -- Scott Davis Talk 14:26, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
How about having the links like so: " Dandenong Football Club"? The thing is once there are enough links to a club (eg Dandenong Football Club) all those players could be listed under a section of "players to come from this club"... R o gerthat Talk 11:25, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
This issue has drawn a lot of attention over the past 9 months or so. In this morning's The Australian newspaper, Patrick Smith, a regular columnist, writes:
I understand that this is neither here or there, and that the article isn't about a popularity contest. At the same time, we do get a lot of ill-informed criticism (and out and out vandalism) in this article, and so it's not a bad little extract to keep up our sleeves for the next time this argument flares up again. ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 22:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Participants may wish to vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of nicknames used in Australian rules. -- I@n ≡ talk 00:52, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
I've moved the 2006 ladder at this location: {{ 2006 AFL season/Ladder}}. Anyone got any thoughts on possible additions to the ladder? There might actually be a reason for people to view it ahead of The Age's ladder if we include stuff like "Interstate wins/losses", "Wins under/over 7 pts" "Wins under/over 40 pts" etc. R o gerthat Talk 03:22, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
The Australia page has made it look like Australian football is as lowly supported as soccer and that Rugby and cricket are more popular. Please everyone go there and try to make it look fairer. Re-word it.
Tried that, anubis, they can't accept it. They must have rugby first and afl stuck with soccer. Just shows how obviously Sydney-based that section is becoming.
Everything in that category seems a little disorganised. Anyone have any suggestions on how we can separate all the competitions? I'm thinking along the lines of competitions within each country. R o gerthat Talk 07:03, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Please remember that logos tagged with {{fairuse}} can't just be used anywhere. Fair use is strictly forbidden in templates and outside the main namespace. It is also not permitted to use it for decoration (e.g. of a table or list). Please read WP:FU. For sports logos, the only required use should be on the team's article, and perhaps an article about the history of the team in which the logo is discussed. Thanks, ed g2s • talk 10:42, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
If you want to keep some decoration you could make some boxes alluding to the guernseys instead of using the logos. -- ThirdEdition 01:47, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Well the Australian Football Hall of Fame is up for the Collaboration of the Fortnight but needs 2 more votes by tomorrow to stay in contention. Vote now, quick! R o gerthat Talk 14:00, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
The lyrics to culb songs are the copyright of the author (unless the author has been dead for over 50 years), and as such cannot be reproduced in Wikipeida - it is Ok to quote a small section of the song is discussed in the article. Please remove full lyrics from articles where they occur.-- Peta 02:16, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Currently they are not acknowldging that Australian Rules Football is the most popular sport there. They say we need more stastistic on the other sports there. They must be delusional if they think it isn't. Funny how they can say rugby is the most popular in QLD, NSW and ACT (where union is) without stastistic, but we have too.
Probably rugby league fanatics who can't stand the fact that those states play our game, not theirs.
There have been two articles that have appeared in the sports section of The Age newspaper over the last two days that are of great interest to us. In yesterday's edition, I read that Australia Post is about to release a series of stamps to celebrate the Socceroos' attempt to embark on the impossible dream (not meaning to be disrespectful, simply an honest assessment). This new series of stamps is entitled "Soccer in Australia". When the General Manager of Australia Post was asked why use the term "soccer", he simply said that it was Australia Post's view that that is the name used by the majority of Australians, and that the word football is saved for the more dominant code of a particular area, i.e. aussie rules or league.
In today's edition, there was a great article about the proposal to heritage list the Melbourne Football Club, the oldest football club in Australia (in any code) and the third oldest in the world (in any code). It was formed in 1858, the year in which we have the first recorded game of aussie rules, the game being codified in the following year, making the game older than Association Football. Interestingly, it was once thought that the Geelong Football Club was the second oldest club in Australia (formed in July 1859), but there is now new evidence indicating that the Castlemaine Football Club was in fact formed in June 1859. That makes it the 5th oldest club in the world, and Geelong the 6th oldest club in the world. I thought to myself as I read this: How appropriate that a club evocatively called "Castlemaine" (part of a gold mining region in central Victoria) should have such an honour. It is possible that the Football article may need to be reviewed, but I mention it here just in case: 1. I run into difficulties (as I undoubtedly will), and 2. Someone out there has access to a better (or simply another) reference than this Age article. ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 04:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
The wikipedia foundation, through OTRS, has received a response to an enquiry sent to the AFL regarding the use of their logos. I have not been able to determine who initiated this enquiry, or for what purpose, but the response from AFL is:
You would definitely require approval to use any of the AFL and AFL Club logos and these are the intellectual property of the AFL. We would need to know what they are being used for and for how long.
I am responding to them now, explaining that the logos are being used under Wikipedia "fair use" guidelines, and pointing them to this project page and the main AFL page. Thank you. Bastique▼ parler voir 14:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Great work from Bastique there. I've updated those that I felt needed updating due to poor quailty (Hawthorn, Collingwood), size (Richmond), colour (Fremantle, Kangaroos, West Coast) or they just weren't right (Carlton). Seth Cohen 06:37, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
I've asked about this once before, and I think it is worth asking again: how is it possible that the only photo of aussie rules we have, in the whole of wikipedia, is something that looks like one of those old Sun spot the ball competitions? Let's find something that really shows our game - please!! ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 10:22, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Apologies if this has already been discussed. For the VFL/AFL season summaries, are we only going to include end of season stats, ladders, etc., or can we also include a few brief paragraphs detailing notable or important happenings of each season?
I think that the season articles need the following: The Grand Final result, the pre-season result, an end-of-home-and-away-season ladder (or as recent as possible), as many awards as possible, a link to and possible summary of the All-Australian Team of that year (if their was one) and any NOTABLE matches. I think this is the real problem with the 2006 AFL season article. I don't feel we need to list every single result that happened, just the notbable ones i.e. Richmond beating Adelaide, the ANZAC Day clash, the Derbies and the Showdowns. Apart from that I don't think anything else belongs in there. Normy 06:24, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Just a reminder that Australian Football Hall of Fame is the Australian collaboration of the week, and could do with a bit more work. Also, there are a few legends that deserve much better articles than they currently have. ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 23:16, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Just want to get the word out there about a project which I think complements WikiProject AFL - Footy Wikia. I understand there are some things that belong on there that don't belong on Wikipedia, and vice versa. I have added some information on many of the previous VFL/AFL drafts. If this is considered "advertising" let me know, but I would object to that as I would consider these sister projects. R o gerthat Talk 10:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
The lack of pictures able to be used is really limiting the quality of AFL footballer articles. Most sportmen articles seem to have that problem, with images only up a short time before they are removed by Wikinazis. Now I'm not blaming the rules, Wikipedia has to cover themselves legally, however we need to find a good source of pictures for use. AFL.com.au and the club sites primarily run by Tesltra Bigpond are currently the best source and the only half decent source. I suggest we send emails to the AFL asking for permission to use the images on their site. We could also take it up with Telstra bigpond but them being a corporation they are unlikely to cooperate.
To quote from the AFL.com.au copyright policy: "1.3 You must not otherwise reproduce, transmit (including broadcast), adapt, distribute, sell, modify or publish or otherwise use any of the material on the site, including audio and video excerpts, except as permitted by statute or with Telstra's prior written consent.".
A nicely worded letter to the AFL, stating that this would help promote the game in the world's biggest online encyclopedia may appeal to them. It is a longshot but perhaps it could work.
This has probably been done before though.
Jabso 13:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Seth Cohen found/uploaded/otherwise compiled a table of uniform colours. The article it was in is up for deletion, so here it is. I'll leave one of the project members to put it on the main project page (but not in the article space).
These icons represent the main/home jumpers of each of the 16 Australian Football League clubs, as well as the past clubs. These can be used for 'decoration' to represent the clubs or their players/officials instead of the official club logos, which wouldn't be allowed under the fair usage policy. Also available in .png format.
— C.Fred ( talk) 00:53, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Apparently under terms of
Wikipedia:Fair use criteria item #9, "the use of fair use tagged images is not permitted on templates." As a result, currently there is no club log on
Template User Sydney Swans (or whatever the Swannies user box is). Can somebody do something about that please - it is making my user page look crap and I'd rather have it there with a nice logo than take the user box off, but I'm not the person to make a professional-looking logo... is the image itself a copyright problem, or only if we copy it from their website (ie, if we make something that looks like theirs does, do they still own it even though someone else made it?)
Ga
rr
ie 22:56, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but 7 of these images are simply three stripes and I'm sure no club owns copyright on that. The Essendon, Melbounrne, Richmond, South Melbourne and University designs are also simple geometric patterns, which several (hundred?) other clubs also use. I can see why the Carlton image was removed as it was almost the club logo and maybe the Brisbane, Western Bulldogs and Fitzroy (defunct) images should be removed as well. I'm not sure about Fremantle, Port Adelaide and Sydney. Most of the images should be okay, though, and in the cases that are not simpler images could be used. For example, Carlton are the (Navy) Blues, so why not a blue square? (Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer) -- ThirdEdition 05:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
What are everyone's thoughts on having a category of Category:Australian rules footballers by position or Category:VFL/AFL players by position? Would this be too hard to manage since players seem to play any number of positions these days? How would we manage it etc? R o gerthat Talk 04:02, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm a participant in Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Quiz and thought that a similar quiz on Australian Rules football could be interesting. What do others think? -- Roisterer 09:19, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Haha, AFL sucks. JRA WestyQld2 11:51, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
The quiz is at Wikipedia:WikiProject AFL/Quiz. I hope my opening question isn't too hard! -- I@n ≡ talk 13:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
I think we should get to work on the 1996 Fitzroy-Brisbane merger article - one of the biggest events in VFL/AFL history deserves an article, maybe include the members of the last Fitzroy side among other things. There's a series on the 10th anniversary of their demise starting today in the Herald Sun, which got me thinking. R o gerthat Talk 12:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone have a good primary source relating to the birth place of the above? See talk:Tom Wills. -- I@n ≡ talk 14:35, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Im trying to find the location of the consensus which meant when you search for "Australian national football team" it goes to the soccer team. I have found several discussions on this issue but none come to a consensus. I am beginning to think that the soccer mafia had more time to put into the discussion, and maybe had more people with the adminastrator tag. I firmly believe that it should be a disambiguation page. This is not because of the All-Australian team, but more because of the rugby teams.
The AFL club sites update the profiles for their new list each year. Do you think it is possible for someone to write off to the clubs and request to use the players photos on wikipedia once they have updated their profiles in the new season. I know we cant get all the players this way, but at least it is a huge start and we will be able to keep the profiles at least one year in date. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.139.223.135 ( talk • contribs) 09:27, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
I'll admit that this is something that bothers me outside of Wikipedia as well, but anyway, here goes. I don't really like sides (especially the Victorian sides who still maintain their original name) being listed as "Collingwood Magpies" or "Essendon Bombers". I don't think that "American style" of sports naming is appropriate for australian rules football, and you'd never hear a person ever call them that in public. I'd rather have sides listed as just "Collingwood", "Essendon" etc. in results and tables. What are other people's thoughts on this? Blackmissionary 01:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
(moving tabs back to the start...) I've looked at it a bit more carefully and I agree with what you're saying. I'm happy for the change to be made. Remy B 13:53, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
In the current squad areas of the club pages there are Aborignial flags next to the names of Aboriginal players, and then some of the clubs have the flags from the state of origin of the other players. I think there needs to be something done about this. I don't feel that it is right to have Aborignal flags next to the Aboriginal players names, and then the state flags next to other players. The Aboriginal flag does not represent a state and therefore those players with a state flag are being represented as something different.
I think it has just been somthing that some people decided to do upon seeing other soccer club pages where they have the flag of the country of origin for their players. This is appropriate, as many soccer clubs around the world have players from different countries. AFL generally has just Australian people, with the odd Irishman, Brazillian and New Zealander.
I'm not sure what we can do to improve it, but I certainly don't think it should continue in its current form on some pages. Seth Cohen 09:49, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Many rugby league pages current squads feature the flags, despite the following overseas born player counts
Having 3 countries where the sport is played professionally does not really justify flags on all but 2 club pages. My point is that there it is typical to find flags for squad members on almost every other sport in Wikipedia ... why should Australia be any different ? There are almost as many people from overseas in Aussie Rules and the list will only increase as more players from non-Australian backgrounds filter through the system ! It will not be long before there are Sudanese, Indian, Lebanese and other such countrymen playing the game at the top level. Multiculturalism is something to be proud of not ashamed of. It is not POV, it is just plain fact. Latest statistics show a very high take up of non-English Why not have multiple flags on their player profile ? One for the country, one for the state, and an optional one for Aboriginal heritage ? -- Rulesfan 05:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
If we are going assign flags to players will we be adding American, Korean and Australian flags for Peter Bell or Austrian flags to Alex Jesaulenko? There could be an argument that the Aboriginal flags could be appropriate but it's not really the role of this place to make that sort of determination. It should be, if not the national flag, the state flag given that all professional Australian rules football is played in Australia.-- Hack 13:19, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
The current squad section of just about every team page (eg. Brisbane_Lions#Current_squad) has little flags next to each player, presumably denoting his country of origin. This all seems a bit silly because a) 99% of players are from Australia; and b) Indigenous Australian players have the Australian Aboriginal flag 20px|Indigenous Australian which is not a separate country, therefore making the list misleading. If its important to anyone, a players ethnicity can be seen by clicking on his article, where it presumably will be spelt out. I'd like to see these removed. -- I@n 05:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Per the above discussion and aparent consensus on club names and useage in Wikipedia, I've added my draft style guide to the project page. -- I@n 03:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I just saw Category:Australian rules football player rosters. Why not say playing lists or squads? Is it just me? -- I@n 16:07, 1 August 2006 (UTC) (grumpy old man!)
Hey. Im just wondering what the concept when a page is a disam page. Is it (footballer) or (Australian rules footballer) or what. Cheers, J a s rocks ( talk) 08:50, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I've created a finals diagram template that can be used on season pages, etc. It is at Template:AFL finals system. Example usage can be found on Template talk:AFL finals system. I'm not really an AFL follower so I'm not sure if it is 100% correct - please take a look at let me know. -- Chuq 15:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
One of my pet Wikihates for some time has been the use of venue names that include sponsors names, eg. AAMI Stadium instead of Football Park. Obviously, the majority of people refer to these grounds by their new sponsored monikers. However in the context of an encyclopaedia this is problematic. If the sponsor changes, as has happened several times at Geelong for example, then the article needs to be moved and every article amended to point to the new article (rather than point to a redirect which is against Wikipolicy) - a tedious and probably impossible task.
I'd like to put forward the suggestion that the official public name be used for the article titles of each venue (hence Football Park, Princes Park, Docklands Stadium et al), and the sponsored names (Football Park, Optus Oval or M.C. Labour Park or whatever, Telstra Dome) be set up as a redirect to the main article, so that someone searching on those titles will still be able to find the relevant article.
What are others' thoughts?-- The Brain of Morbius 07:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject AFL/Archive 1 |
The 2006 season article was originally named Australian Football League season 2006, before I renamed it to 2006 Australian Football League season after noticing that it is customary on the majority of Wikipedia sport annual articles to put the year at the start (my examples were 2006 NFL season, 2004-05 NBA season, 2006 English cricket season, 2006 Commonwealth Games, etc.). The 2006 season article has since been named back to the original name because that is the standard for the other AFL season articles (see Category:Australian Football League seasons). I think it would be a good idea to get a decent consensus on how we should name the season articles, especially before anyone starts doing decent work on the previous seasons (which are fairly barebone at the moment).
Which format do you prefer - the year at the start or the end of the season article name and why? Please sign your name at the end of your vote with ~~~~. Once it is clear which one is preferred, we can either leave it as is or rename the articles. Remy B 12:58, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Update - It might also be a good idea to get votes on whether we should have 'Australian Football League season' (long) or 'AFL season' (short) in the article name, so feel free to add votes for that option as well. Remy B 13:05, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Result - OK it seems reasonably clear that the consensus is to format the articles in the style of 2006 AFL season. I'll rename the existing articles and make some sort of navigation template like Template:Australia at the Commonwealth Games to put at the bottom of the articles. Remy B 08:48, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Should red links to small country footy clubs (for example Moulamein Football Club be cured by replacing them with piped links to the town (as Moulamein Football Club) or by putting a redirect at the club article pointing to the town article? -- Scott Davis Talk 13:12, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
I've changed nine links to country town clubs in Golden Rivers Football League to link to the town instead, and still got seven red links—no way those town articles will get too big to not have the footy club in the same article! Most already had at least one other link (from list of postcodes). -- Scott Davis Talk 14:26, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
How about having the links like so: " Dandenong Football Club"? The thing is once there are enough links to a club (eg Dandenong Football Club) all those players could be listed under a section of "players to come from this club"... R o gerthat Talk 11:25, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
This issue has drawn a lot of attention over the past 9 months or so. In this morning's The Australian newspaper, Patrick Smith, a regular columnist, writes:
I understand that this is neither here or there, and that the article isn't about a popularity contest. At the same time, we do get a lot of ill-informed criticism (and out and out vandalism) in this article, and so it's not a bad little extract to keep up our sleeves for the next time this argument flares up again. ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 22:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Participants may wish to vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of nicknames used in Australian rules. -- I@n ≡ talk 00:52, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
I've moved the 2006 ladder at this location: {{ 2006 AFL season/Ladder}}. Anyone got any thoughts on possible additions to the ladder? There might actually be a reason for people to view it ahead of The Age's ladder if we include stuff like "Interstate wins/losses", "Wins under/over 7 pts" "Wins under/over 40 pts" etc. R o gerthat Talk 03:22, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
The Australia page has made it look like Australian football is as lowly supported as soccer and that Rugby and cricket are more popular. Please everyone go there and try to make it look fairer. Re-word it.
Tried that, anubis, they can't accept it. They must have rugby first and afl stuck with soccer. Just shows how obviously Sydney-based that section is becoming.
Everything in that category seems a little disorganised. Anyone have any suggestions on how we can separate all the competitions? I'm thinking along the lines of competitions within each country. R o gerthat Talk 07:03, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Please remember that logos tagged with {{fairuse}} can't just be used anywhere. Fair use is strictly forbidden in templates and outside the main namespace. It is also not permitted to use it for decoration (e.g. of a table or list). Please read WP:FU. For sports logos, the only required use should be on the team's article, and perhaps an article about the history of the team in which the logo is discussed. Thanks, ed g2s • talk 10:42, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
If you want to keep some decoration you could make some boxes alluding to the guernseys instead of using the logos. -- ThirdEdition 01:47, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Well the Australian Football Hall of Fame is up for the Collaboration of the Fortnight but needs 2 more votes by tomorrow to stay in contention. Vote now, quick! R o gerthat Talk 14:00, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
The lyrics to culb songs are the copyright of the author (unless the author has been dead for over 50 years), and as such cannot be reproduced in Wikipeida - it is Ok to quote a small section of the song is discussed in the article. Please remove full lyrics from articles where they occur.-- Peta 02:16, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Currently they are not acknowldging that Australian Rules Football is the most popular sport there. They say we need more stastistic on the other sports there. They must be delusional if they think it isn't. Funny how they can say rugby is the most popular in QLD, NSW and ACT (where union is) without stastistic, but we have too.
Probably rugby league fanatics who can't stand the fact that those states play our game, not theirs.
There have been two articles that have appeared in the sports section of The Age newspaper over the last two days that are of great interest to us. In yesterday's edition, I read that Australia Post is about to release a series of stamps to celebrate the Socceroos' attempt to embark on the impossible dream (not meaning to be disrespectful, simply an honest assessment). This new series of stamps is entitled "Soccer in Australia". When the General Manager of Australia Post was asked why use the term "soccer", he simply said that it was Australia Post's view that that is the name used by the majority of Australians, and that the word football is saved for the more dominant code of a particular area, i.e. aussie rules or league.
In today's edition, there was a great article about the proposal to heritage list the Melbourne Football Club, the oldest football club in Australia (in any code) and the third oldest in the world (in any code). It was formed in 1858, the year in which we have the first recorded game of aussie rules, the game being codified in the following year, making the game older than Association Football. Interestingly, it was once thought that the Geelong Football Club was the second oldest club in Australia (formed in July 1859), but there is now new evidence indicating that the Castlemaine Football Club was in fact formed in June 1859. That makes it the 5th oldest club in the world, and Geelong the 6th oldest club in the world. I thought to myself as I read this: How appropriate that a club evocatively called "Castlemaine" (part of a gold mining region in central Victoria) should have such an honour. It is possible that the Football article may need to be reviewed, but I mention it here just in case: 1. I run into difficulties (as I undoubtedly will), and 2. Someone out there has access to a better (or simply another) reference than this Age article. ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 04:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
The wikipedia foundation, through OTRS, has received a response to an enquiry sent to the AFL regarding the use of their logos. I have not been able to determine who initiated this enquiry, or for what purpose, but the response from AFL is:
You would definitely require approval to use any of the AFL and AFL Club logos and these are the intellectual property of the AFL. We would need to know what they are being used for and for how long.
I am responding to them now, explaining that the logos are being used under Wikipedia "fair use" guidelines, and pointing them to this project page and the main AFL page. Thank you. Bastique▼ parler voir 14:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Great work from Bastique there. I've updated those that I felt needed updating due to poor quailty (Hawthorn, Collingwood), size (Richmond), colour (Fremantle, Kangaroos, West Coast) or they just weren't right (Carlton). Seth Cohen 06:37, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
I've asked about this once before, and I think it is worth asking again: how is it possible that the only photo of aussie rules we have, in the whole of wikipedia, is something that looks like one of those old Sun spot the ball competitions? Let's find something that really shows our game - please!! ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 10:22, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Apologies if this has already been discussed. For the VFL/AFL season summaries, are we only going to include end of season stats, ladders, etc., or can we also include a few brief paragraphs detailing notable or important happenings of each season?
I think that the season articles need the following: The Grand Final result, the pre-season result, an end-of-home-and-away-season ladder (or as recent as possible), as many awards as possible, a link to and possible summary of the All-Australian Team of that year (if their was one) and any NOTABLE matches. I think this is the real problem with the 2006 AFL season article. I don't feel we need to list every single result that happened, just the notbable ones i.e. Richmond beating Adelaide, the ANZAC Day clash, the Derbies and the Showdowns. Apart from that I don't think anything else belongs in there. Normy 06:24, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Just a reminder that Australian Football Hall of Fame is the Australian collaboration of the week, and could do with a bit more work. Also, there are a few legends that deserve much better articles than they currently have. ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 23:16, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Just want to get the word out there about a project which I think complements WikiProject AFL - Footy Wikia. I understand there are some things that belong on there that don't belong on Wikipedia, and vice versa. I have added some information on many of the previous VFL/AFL drafts. If this is considered "advertising" let me know, but I would object to that as I would consider these sister projects. R o gerthat Talk 10:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
The lack of pictures able to be used is really limiting the quality of AFL footballer articles. Most sportmen articles seem to have that problem, with images only up a short time before they are removed by Wikinazis. Now I'm not blaming the rules, Wikipedia has to cover themselves legally, however we need to find a good source of pictures for use. AFL.com.au and the club sites primarily run by Tesltra Bigpond are currently the best source and the only half decent source. I suggest we send emails to the AFL asking for permission to use the images on their site. We could also take it up with Telstra bigpond but them being a corporation they are unlikely to cooperate.
To quote from the AFL.com.au copyright policy: "1.3 You must not otherwise reproduce, transmit (including broadcast), adapt, distribute, sell, modify or publish or otherwise use any of the material on the site, including audio and video excerpts, except as permitted by statute or with Telstra's prior written consent.".
A nicely worded letter to the AFL, stating that this would help promote the game in the world's biggest online encyclopedia may appeal to them. It is a longshot but perhaps it could work.
This has probably been done before though.
Jabso 13:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Seth Cohen found/uploaded/otherwise compiled a table of uniform colours. The article it was in is up for deletion, so here it is. I'll leave one of the project members to put it on the main project page (but not in the article space).
These icons represent the main/home jumpers of each of the 16 Australian Football League clubs, as well as the past clubs. These can be used for 'decoration' to represent the clubs or their players/officials instead of the official club logos, which wouldn't be allowed under the fair usage policy. Also available in .png format.
— C.Fred ( talk) 00:53, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Apparently under terms of
Wikipedia:Fair use criteria item #9, "the use of fair use tagged images is not permitted on templates." As a result, currently there is no club log on
Template User Sydney Swans (or whatever the Swannies user box is). Can somebody do something about that please - it is making my user page look crap and I'd rather have it there with a nice logo than take the user box off, but I'm not the person to make a professional-looking logo... is the image itself a copyright problem, or only if we copy it from their website (ie, if we make something that looks like theirs does, do they still own it even though someone else made it?)
Ga
rr
ie 22:56, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but 7 of these images are simply three stripes and I'm sure no club owns copyright on that. The Essendon, Melbounrne, Richmond, South Melbourne and University designs are also simple geometric patterns, which several (hundred?) other clubs also use. I can see why the Carlton image was removed as it was almost the club logo and maybe the Brisbane, Western Bulldogs and Fitzroy (defunct) images should be removed as well. I'm not sure about Fremantle, Port Adelaide and Sydney. Most of the images should be okay, though, and in the cases that are not simpler images could be used. For example, Carlton are the (Navy) Blues, so why not a blue square? (Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer) -- ThirdEdition 05:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
What are everyone's thoughts on having a category of Category:Australian rules footballers by position or Category:VFL/AFL players by position? Would this be too hard to manage since players seem to play any number of positions these days? How would we manage it etc? R o gerthat Talk 04:02, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm a participant in Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Quiz and thought that a similar quiz on Australian Rules football could be interesting. What do others think? -- Roisterer 09:19, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Haha, AFL sucks. JRA WestyQld2 11:51, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
The quiz is at Wikipedia:WikiProject AFL/Quiz. I hope my opening question isn't too hard! -- I@n ≡ talk 13:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
I think we should get to work on the 1996 Fitzroy-Brisbane merger article - one of the biggest events in VFL/AFL history deserves an article, maybe include the members of the last Fitzroy side among other things. There's a series on the 10th anniversary of their demise starting today in the Herald Sun, which got me thinking. R o gerthat Talk 12:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone have a good primary source relating to the birth place of the above? See talk:Tom Wills. -- I@n ≡ talk 14:35, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Im trying to find the location of the consensus which meant when you search for "Australian national football team" it goes to the soccer team. I have found several discussions on this issue but none come to a consensus. I am beginning to think that the soccer mafia had more time to put into the discussion, and maybe had more people with the adminastrator tag. I firmly believe that it should be a disambiguation page. This is not because of the All-Australian team, but more because of the rugby teams.
The AFL club sites update the profiles for their new list each year. Do you think it is possible for someone to write off to the clubs and request to use the players photos on wikipedia once they have updated their profiles in the new season. I know we cant get all the players this way, but at least it is a huge start and we will be able to keep the profiles at least one year in date. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.139.223.135 ( talk • contribs) 09:27, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
I'll admit that this is something that bothers me outside of Wikipedia as well, but anyway, here goes. I don't really like sides (especially the Victorian sides who still maintain their original name) being listed as "Collingwood Magpies" or "Essendon Bombers". I don't think that "American style" of sports naming is appropriate for australian rules football, and you'd never hear a person ever call them that in public. I'd rather have sides listed as just "Collingwood", "Essendon" etc. in results and tables. What are other people's thoughts on this? Blackmissionary 01:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
(moving tabs back to the start...) I've looked at it a bit more carefully and I agree with what you're saying. I'm happy for the change to be made. Remy B 13:53, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
In the current squad areas of the club pages there are Aborignial flags next to the names of Aboriginal players, and then some of the clubs have the flags from the state of origin of the other players. I think there needs to be something done about this. I don't feel that it is right to have Aborignal flags next to the Aboriginal players names, and then the state flags next to other players. The Aboriginal flag does not represent a state and therefore those players with a state flag are being represented as something different.
I think it has just been somthing that some people decided to do upon seeing other soccer club pages where they have the flag of the country of origin for their players. This is appropriate, as many soccer clubs around the world have players from different countries. AFL generally has just Australian people, with the odd Irishman, Brazillian and New Zealander.
I'm not sure what we can do to improve it, but I certainly don't think it should continue in its current form on some pages. Seth Cohen 09:49, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Many rugby league pages current squads feature the flags, despite the following overseas born player counts
Having 3 countries where the sport is played professionally does not really justify flags on all but 2 club pages. My point is that there it is typical to find flags for squad members on almost every other sport in Wikipedia ... why should Australia be any different ? There are almost as many people from overseas in Aussie Rules and the list will only increase as more players from non-Australian backgrounds filter through the system ! It will not be long before there are Sudanese, Indian, Lebanese and other such countrymen playing the game at the top level. Multiculturalism is something to be proud of not ashamed of. It is not POV, it is just plain fact. Latest statistics show a very high take up of non-English Why not have multiple flags on their player profile ? One for the country, one for the state, and an optional one for Aboriginal heritage ? -- Rulesfan 05:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
If we are going assign flags to players will we be adding American, Korean and Australian flags for Peter Bell or Austrian flags to Alex Jesaulenko? There could be an argument that the Aboriginal flags could be appropriate but it's not really the role of this place to make that sort of determination. It should be, if not the national flag, the state flag given that all professional Australian rules football is played in Australia.-- Hack 13:19, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
The current squad section of just about every team page (eg. Brisbane_Lions#Current_squad) has little flags next to each player, presumably denoting his country of origin. This all seems a bit silly because a) 99% of players are from Australia; and b) Indigenous Australian players have the Australian Aboriginal flag 20px|Indigenous Australian which is not a separate country, therefore making the list misleading. If its important to anyone, a players ethnicity can be seen by clicking on his article, where it presumably will be spelt out. I'd like to see these removed. -- I@n 05:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Per the above discussion and aparent consensus on club names and useage in Wikipedia, I've added my draft style guide to the project page. -- I@n 03:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I just saw Category:Australian rules football player rosters. Why not say playing lists or squads? Is it just me? -- I@n 16:07, 1 August 2006 (UTC) (grumpy old man!)
Hey. Im just wondering what the concept when a page is a disam page. Is it (footballer) or (Australian rules footballer) or what. Cheers, J a s rocks ( talk) 08:50, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I've created a finals diagram template that can be used on season pages, etc. It is at Template:AFL finals system. Example usage can be found on Template talk:AFL finals system. I'm not really an AFL follower so I'm not sure if it is 100% correct - please take a look at let me know. -- Chuq 15:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
One of my pet Wikihates for some time has been the use of venue names that include sponsors names, eg. AAMI Stadium instead of Football Park. Obviously, the majority of people refer to these grounds by their new sponsored monikers. However in the context of an encyclopaedia this is problematic. If the sponsor changes, as has happened several times at Geelong for example, then the article needs to be moved and every article amended to point to the new article (rather than point to a redirect which is against Wikipolicy) - a tedious and probably impossible task.
I'd like to put forward the suggestion that the official public name be used for the article titles of each venue (hence Football Park, Princes Park, Docklands Stadium et al), and the sponsored names (Football Park, Optus Oval or M.C. Labour Park or whatever, Telstra Dome) be set up as a redirect to the main article, so that someone searching on those titles will still be able to find the relevant article.
What are others' thoughts?-- The Brain of Morbius 07:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)