![]() | This 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. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 |
I recently made edits to the Argentine Masters page. I noticed there is an "Amateur Winner" column. I am not sure if it should exist. I know the "low amateur" status matters at some professionals tournaments (i.e the Masters, US Open, and British Open). But even at these it still doesn't look like we note it anywhere on the table. Basically I don't think this column should exist for the Argentine Masters - a clear example of WP:OR.
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 03:51, 30 July 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
Inbee Park's Wikipedia page does not have her Olympic gold medal listed under "Other". It has its own listing. But for Xander Schauffele, his gold medal is listed under "Other", meaning that his gold medal does not have its own listing. Doesn't it make sense to have both the men and women either both have their Olympic wins listed under "Other", or have neither one of them listed under "Other"? Why have two different standards for men's and women's Olympic gold medal winners? See this ... /info/en/?search=Inbee_Park#Olympic_Games_(1) Johnsmith2116 ( talk) 15:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
The special listing for Park's medal had been there for five years. Strange how no one else noticed until now. Johnsmith2116 ( talk) 20:06, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
An IP user has been highlighting the Olympics in this color in results tables on tour season articles and win tables in player articles. I don't have an opinion one way or the other, but there has been extensive edit warring so it needs to be discussed here. pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 05:10, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
It just seems pointless to me. It’s an unofficial event with no real significance above other events as of yet (if it did it would at least count as a PGA /European Tour win). Maybe in the future it will be and therefore it may be appropriate to highlight then, but as of now I think it’s unnecessary. Jimmymci234 ( talk) 06:44, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
There's always a suspicion with these sort of edits and comments, that it's our favourite sock-pucket User:DooksFoley147 back in action again. Correct me if I'm wrong. Nigej ( talk) 08:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Almost certainly the same individual is also attempting to change results table formatting to have tournament names in a new end column, e.g. diff1, diff2. wjemather please leave a message... 12:23, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Looks like the OWGR is going to have a revision. see http://www.owgr.com/news/2021/august-press-release/governing-board-announcement and the PowerPoint presentation http://www.owgr.com/Archive/Announcement/OWGR%20-%20Updated%20System%20Information%20-%20FINAL.pdf. Shouldn't really affect us too much, except that the OWGR page will need an update. Nigej ( talk) 15:06, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
What happened to the nationalities chart? It was mentioned on this page months ago that it would be there. Johnsmith2116 ( talk) 22:11, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
"I'd suggest the composite table (i.e. the one not split by continent..."). wjemather please leave a message... 09:57, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Last night I created a page for the Pennsylvania Amateur Golf Championship. I used the table for the U.S. Amateur as a template. Overall, I like the table for the U.S. Amateur. However, I noticed that "Venue" is the second column, before winner. To me, the "Winner" column should definitely be before "Venue." In addition, I think that "Venue" should be relegated to the final column. Thoughts?
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 17:20, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
Tewapack is suggesting that small brackets shouldn't be used within winners tables to show multiple wins per MOS:SMALLFONT. Is everybody else in agreement with this? If so, then why have we been using the small brackets coding up until now if it goes against MOS? It also means that so many pages are going to have to be updated if this is proposed. Jimmymci234 ( talk) 18:18, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
I recently made a page for the South African Amateur Championship (golf). It's pretty complete but there are a few issues:
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 01:32, 30 August 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
Currently the Ryder Cup player tables include the captains. For the Presidents Cup, assistant captains are also included. I would like to suggest that captains of any kind not be included in these tables... after all, the tables are labeled "Players", not "Players and captains". pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 22:47, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
Since it seemed like a clear consensus here, I just went through and removed captains from the tables for the last few Ryder Cups. These changes were reverted by User:Tomrtn. pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 03:14, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
According to the infoboxes, the major championships have been sanctioned by the Japan Golf Tour since 1998. Yet I've noticed that we have not included these wins in the Japan Golf Tour subheading within the "Professional wins" sections for any of the players. For example, we have included the major championship wins in the "European Tour wins" subheading for Mark O'Meara and Payne Stewart despite the fact that they were never members of the European Tour (though won on that tour). Relatedly, I think we should include the major championships in the Japan Golf Tour subheading if major winners have ever been a member of the Japan Tour or ever won on that tour.
However, I think we should maintain the precedent of not creating new tables for wins at co-sanctioned events by non-members. For example, major championship winners Adam Scott and Graeme McDowell have never been members of the Japan Tour (as far as I know) and therefore we shouldn't create a separate table for them. But a number of major championship winners (e.g. Harrington, Clarke, Garcia, Koepka) have also won events on the JGT and already have a table. So I think we should add their major wins to that table the same way we have added major wins to the "European Tour wins" subheading of ET champions (irrespective if that person is a member of the European Tour).
Thoughts?
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 04:04, 5 September 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
I'm thinking we ought to change the "Nationality" text used in {{ Infobox golfer}}. We're not actually saying anything about a player's nationality, we're simply replicating the flag that sits next to the golfer in leaderboards, etc. Perhaps "Sporting nationality" or "Golf nationality" or "Sporting nation" or "Golf flag" would be more apt. Suggestions? Nigej ( talk) 07:16, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
“Sporting nation” sounds the best to me. But happy to see what others have to say. I do think it’s something that needs amended as it seems to confuse some non-golf editors. Jimmymci234 ( talk) 07:28, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Based on the above discussion, I think that "Sporting nationality" just about comes on top. It also has the merit of being the term used at MOS:INFOBOXFLAG and the term that we've generally used in a number of previous discussions here about this issue. See {{ Infobox golfer/testcases}} for what it would look like (don't bother about the actual content there, which is way out of date). It doesn't generally make the infobox any wider, so should have minimal impact. Nigej ( talk) 06:19, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
I've also added "sporting_nationality" as an optional name for the "nationality" parameter, which is used in the first example in the testcases. I'm assuming that we'd want to make a gradual change to this. Nigej ( talk) 06:29, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
I was wondering if these events should be included in the "Professional Wins" or "Amateur Wins" section. I assume so for skins games but I assume not for medalists in qualifying events. I don't believe this has been confirmed yet, however.
In addition, I know we have referenced this in passing, but I would like to directly confirm with other editors that we do NOT include wins in these categories: schoolboy championships, junior championships, trainees championships, pro-ams, purse events, and club championships. If anyone disagrees, however, please state that.
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 17:01, 1 October 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
(split from above) I notice the tournament in Vegas is now the Shriners Children's Open, a much-needed shortening of the name. That's one of the few PGA Tour event articles we have under a sponsored name when a non-sponsored name (Las Vegas Invitational) is available, so it seems like the sensible thing would be to move it there. However, I'm not convinced that this is a clear primary topic for that title over the basketball tournament, so Las Vegas Invitational (golf) may be best. pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 22:44, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
With The Match continuing, first without Tiger, and now without both Tiger and Phil, and since the individual editions (except maybe the first) are not notable on their own, as I see it we have two options:
I lean towards option 2 but before going ahead, I'd like to hear what others think. Thanks. wjemather please leave a message... 10:20, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
Yeah I think option 2 would be better. Jimmymci234 ( talk) 10:35, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
The PGA Tour isn't making Wikipedia's job easy. With the apparent demise of the WGC Invitational, TPC Southwind moves to its third different PGA Tour event in the last five years. It's called the FedEx St. Jude Championship, not to be confused with the WGC-FedEx St. Jude Invitational or the FedEx St. Jude Classic. Theoretically, the FedEx St. Jude Championship is the tournament formerly known as the Westchester Classic and not the tournament formerly known as the FedEx St. Jude Classic and the Stanford St. Jude Championship. Simply put, this is a mess when it comes to tournament history and article titles.
I don't know if this would help us any, but should we consider splitting the articles for the first Playoffs event and the Westchester Classic? The fact that they're considered the same event by the Tour isn't necessarily a determining factor... we have separate articles for the BMW Championship and the Western Open, which have a similar situation and are considered the same tournament by the Tour. pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 22:52, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
They’re definitely challenging us this year! I would support splitting the Westchester Classic and The Northern Trust, if that makes the most sense to do so. I also think the Mexico Championship will require a new page as although it is supposed to be a continuation of the WGC-Mexico Championship, to me that doesn’t mean it’s a continuation of the WGC Championship (if that makes sense). Also not to be confused with the Mexico Championship on the Korn Ferry Tour! Jimmymci234 ( talk) 06:04, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
It feels like the tours sometimes make it up as they go along and even contradict themselves sometimes. Like even this week on the European Tour with the Hero Open. They are saying it is a continuation of the Hero Open from last year and Sam Horsfield is the defending champion. Even though last year when the Hero Open was added to the schedule it was the English Open which was then being sponsored by Hero, but this year it is being played in Scotland and is obviously not part of the English Open, as that is now called the Cazoo Classic for this year. So it’s hard to follow the treatment of tournaments by the tour(s). Jimmymci234 ( talk) 12:36, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
I was just watching the WGC-FedEx St. Jude Invitational and at the final green they announced Harris English as the "2013 Memphis champion". I thought that was interesting.
pʰeːnuːmuː →
pʰiːnyːmyː →
ɸinimi →
fiɲimi
22:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
So... is there a better solution than retitling Safeway Open to Fortinet Championship? pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 02:55, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
So how are we going to deal with the FedEx St. Jude Championship? The current situation is really unacceptable. Readers reading the article on the 2021-22 PGA Tour who click on the wikilink for the FedEx St. Jude Championship are led to an article that does not mention anything whatsoever about a "FedEx St. Jude Championship". Meanwhile, the lead of FedEx St. Jude Classic has a whole paragraph connecting it to the new FedEx St. Jude Championship. In my view, we should either deal with the FedEx St. Jude Championship in the article of the Classic, after all it is more or less the same tournament, or create a whole new article for the FedEx St. Jude Championship. The current situation though is an unacceptable mess and cannot remain. Therefore, just waiting is not an option. T v x1 23:47, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
Although on the PGA Tour website schedule, Tony Finau is listed as the defending champion of the FedEx St. Jude Championship - which I know is not clear cut but does give us some sort of clue. Jimmymci234 ( talk) 10:10, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Should we move his page to be Matt Fitzpatrick rather than Matthew. His European Tour, PGA Tour and OWGR all refer to him as Matt. Jimmymci234 ( talk) 13:28, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
I recently created a winner's table for the Connecticut Open (golf). My main source says the event began in 1931. I also have another source, from 1955, that lists champions beginning in the year 1932. So it looks like the modern event began in the early 1930s.
On the bottom of the page, however, there is a link says that the famous English golfer Jim Barnes won the 1916 event and that it was a PGA Tour-level event that year. However, I cannot access that link to get more information. Also, for what it's worth, this is confirmed on his Wikipedia page under "PGA Tour wins" (no citation however). Not sure what other editors make of this.
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 02:18, 27 November 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
I am going to make a table for the Connecticut Open (golf) later today. I noticed on the current page, under the "Winners" section, we have red links for every player that does not already have a Wikipedia page. Unless there is something I don't know, these red links imply there is a good potential that these players could have a Wikipedia page. If this is the implication, it is obviously false; most of these players are super-obscure and will never have a page. This is an issue on many other pages too (e.g. South African Amateur Championship (golf)). Not sure what other member's thoughts are about "red links"...
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 18:26, 16 November 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
The South African Amateur Championship (golf) table actually needs more red links towards the top, in my opinion. Anyone successful in amateur golf recently has a decent chance of becoming notable enough for an article. pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 00:42, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
Creating all the Espirito Santo Trophy and European Ladies Team Championship articles, I've noticed that in many cases, the same female players appears under different red links, after coming back with a new last name. I think it's valuable for the reader to identify players correct. Usally in golf historical publications, female players are identified in the same way through their careers. EEJB ( talk) 20:15, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Maybe that's a reason to be restrictive with red links, but thats's easier with players from earlier years. You can't be sure who will be a star of those at recent amateur championships. EEJB ( talk) 22:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I recently put up a tag for this article. It is the "third party" tag - being too closely related to the subject.
Basically, I think someone a bit too emotionally invested in Yale Golf Course created a relatively nice but overly detailed page. The page feels more like a work of journalism (or even advertising) than an encyclopedic entry. I am thinking about severely condensing the tournament section and deleting most of the college golf stuff. In addition, I am thinking of deleting the Course section (which includes a sub-section for each hole). Also, I will probably change a lot of the effusive language ( WP:FLOWERY) in the intro and history sections (e.g. "Yale is notable for its scale").
The reason I am bringing it up here is because I have never made such extensive edits to a page like this before (or, I think, to any page). I wanted to get some consensus first about what I want to do and perhaps some advice. Any help would be welcome.
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 03:48, 15 December 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
There are two golf pages I recently came across that I think should be deleted.
The first one is Connecticut Golf Hall of Fame. I'm not sure if a golf hall of fame for small state that is not really known for pro golf should have its own page. In addition, there seems to be an inadequate amount of reliable third-party citations.
The other page is List of Canadian winners on the PGA and LPGA Tours. Strikes me as obvious WP:OR and "synthesis."
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 20:38, 3 December 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
As the originator of List of Canadian winners on the PGA and LPGA Tours, I'm here to defend it. WP:OR says, ""original research" (OR) is used on Wikipedia to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist," which is not the case in the list because all of the wins are a matter of record and are referenced. WP:OR goes on to say "This includes any analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not stated by the sources," which cannot be the case here because the sources say Brooke Henderson has 10 wins, George Knudson and Sandra Post and Mike Weir have 8, etc, etc. Regards, PK T(alk) 01:24, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
I intend to attempt to delete these pages very soon. However, I haven't done this before and don't know the protocol. Does anyone have a link with instructions?
Thanks, Oogglywoogly ( talk) 04:04, 9 December 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
I would appreciate it if other golf editors like Nigej, Tewapack, Jimmymci234 responded on the deletion page for List of Canadian winners on the PGA and LPGA Tours. In addition, PK, you are free to defend your page - right now it is 2-0 against you.
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 06:13, 16 December 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
First off, I was wondering if a page like this should even exist. There are not many college golf team pages like this on Wikipedia (though there are a few). I could not find separate wiki pages for leading college golf teams like Oklahoma State University–Stillwater, Arizona State University, or UCLA. Even the golf team of Stanford University (where Tiger Woods went to college) doesn't have its own page. Not exactly sure if Yale deserves one...
Nonetheless, let's say that the Yale Golf Team does deserve their own page. (It does look like they were pretty good in the early 20th century.) This page is still awash with third-party issues. I checked out the page history and, as I suspected, it was created by the same guy who created Yale Golf Course. This user created a nice page but, like Yale Golf Course, it is far too detailed and written in an overly "journalistic" style. In addition, there are a few other small problems. For example, most of the infobox is in bold (I assume this is against something in WP:MOS) and he even uses Wikipedia as a citation at one point - flagrantly against our rules.
I put up a tag and will start making edits later in the week. But if anyone wants to get a head start on this be my guest.
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 07:06, 22 December 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
Thank you for the link User:Nigej. Far more universities have golf team pages than I knew about. And now that I think about it, even though Yale hasn't won a NCAA title since 1943, given that they were so dominant in the early 20th century (21 NCAA titles) it seems clear that they deserve a page. (We must respect WP:RECENTISM here).
My only real remaining reservation dealing with the general viability of the article has to do with including both the men's and women's teams on the same page. All existing golf team pages that I see here distinguish between the men's and women's teams. This makes sense because - as far as I know - the genders are never integrated in college golf. This Yale page should probably be split in half.
Otherwise, though the article should generally stay, there are many other problems, mainly on the same lines as Yale Golf Course. The history section needs to be trimmed and its journalistic style has to go. The tables, like the tables on the golf course page, can be deleted. The notable players section strikes me as obvious WP:OR and should also be deleted; some of the worthwhile information can be merged into the history section.
Lastly, pʰeːnuːmuː, you mentioned that the title did not adhere to Wikipedia's standards. I changed the infobox title to the appropriate title, "Yale University Bulldogs golf," but I don't know how to change the page title. I tried using "Source editing" but did not see any option. Any help would be much appreciated.
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 06:39, 23 December 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
Following on from discussion at Wjemather's talk page. The OWGR has updated tour abbreviations for PGA and European Tours to PGAT and DPWT respectively. I suggested updating the PGA Tour's new abbreviation on all event winners tables etc, but not for European Tour abbreviation in line with WP:COMMONNAME as ET is still the common name for the tour and not DP World Tour so we should still keep using EUR abbreviation for now. Jimmymci234 ( talk) 17:31, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
I would also support using PTLA for PGA Tour Latinoamérica... I don't know if we have any articles that use an abbreviation for PGA Tour Canada, but I'd advocate distinguishing it from the Canadian Tour. pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 20:25, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
I just created a draft for Tim Rosaforte, an American golf journalist who recently died. Any help would be appreciated. Thriley ( talk) 20:21, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
A new proposal is now pending to add language to NSPORT providing, among other things, that "meeting [NSPORTS or NGOLF] would not serve as a valid keep argument in a deletion discussion."If you have views on this proposal, one way or the other, please feel free to add your comments at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Subproposal 1 (NSPORT). Cbl62 ( talk) 15:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
I am in the process of creating an article for a professional golfer and came across the page for Minnesota State Junior Boys' Golf Championship. I am not sure if all of these tournaments should be listed on the same page as they may not all be referring to the same event. Some of these tournaments are continuous with the others but there are sizable overlaps for some other tournaments (e.g. the Minnesota Jaycee Junior Golf Tournament goes from 1947 to 1975 while the MGA Junior Golf Championships runs from 1961 to 2001). Perhaps separate pages should be created for some of these tournaments.
Any advice would be helpful as I am unfamiliar with these junior tournaments and do not have a good idea how some of these tournament titles may relate to others.
Thanks, Oogglywoogly ( talk) 07:01, 24 January 2022 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
I noticed for leading amateur golfers like Francis Ouimet and Bobby Jones (golfer) we have a comprehensive Tournament Wins section that compiles all of their wins. However, it seems to be consensus that we maintain separate Amateur Wins and Professional Wins sections for all golfers. Therefore separate sections should probably be created.
I have one reservation however: the continuity of their triumphs would be broken up. For most golfers that is not a problem - most play as amateurs during high school and college and then turn pro in their early 20s and remain pro from thereon in. With Ouimet and Jones and other notable amateur golfers, however, the chronology would definitely be broken up if we create separate sections. Not sure what other members think we should do and if there is some already established consensus regarding this issue for lifelong amateur golfers.
Thanks, Oogglywoogly ( talk) 07:38, 24 January 2022 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
I have been doing some research on a page for a pro golfer from Minnesota. In the course of the research I have been trying to identify whether the Minnesota Open was entitled the National Car Open during the late 20th century. According to this link it says that George Shortridge won the National Car Open in 1966 and 1981. And on our Minnesota State Open page it says he won the state open those years. It also says that Bill Israelson won the National Car Open in 1991 which aligns with the Minnesota Open page.
Basically, I'm pretty confident these titles are referring to the same event but don't know for sure yet. If anyone can provide verification that'd be great.
Thanks, Oogglywoogly ( talk) 06:59, 30 January 2022 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 |
I recently made edits to the Argentine Masters page. I noticed there is an "Amateur Winner" column. I am not sure if it should exist. I know the "low amateur" status matters at some professionals tournaments (i.e the Masters, US Open, and British Open). But even at these it still doesn't look like we note it anywhere on the table. Basically I don't think this column should exist for the Argentine Masters - a clear example of WP:OR.
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 03:51, 30 July 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
Inbee Park's Wikipedia page does not have her Olympic gold medal listed under "Other". It has its own listing. But for Xander Schauffele, his gold medal is listed under "Other", meaning that his gold medal does not have its own listing. Doesn't it make sense to have both the men and women either both have their Olympic wins listed under "Other", or have neither one of them listed under "Other"? Why have two different standards for men's and women's Olympic gold medal winners? See this ... /info/en/?search=Inbee_Park#Olympic_Games_(1) Johnsmith2116 ( talk) 15:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
The special listing for Park's medal had been there for five years. Strange how no one else noticed until now. Johnsmith2116 ( talk) 20:06, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
An IP user has been highlighting the Olympics in this color in results tables on tour season articles and win tables in player articles. I don't have an opinion one way or the other, but there has been extensive edit warring so it needs to be discussed here. pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 05:10, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
It just seems pointless to me. It’s an unofficial event with no real significance above other events as of yet (if it did it would at least count as a PGA /European Tour win). Maybe in the future it will be and therefore it may be appropriate to highlight then, but as of now I think it’s unnecessary. Jimmymci234 ( talk) 06:44, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
There's always a suspicion with these sort of edits and comments, that it's our favourite sock-pucket User:DooksFoley147 back in action again. Correct me if I'm wrong. Nigej ( talk) 08:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Almost certainly the same individual is also attempting to change results table formatting to have tournament names in a new end column, e.g. diff1, diff2. wjemather please leave a message... 12:23, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Looks like the OWGR is going to have a revision. see http://www.owgr.com/news/2021/august-press-release/governing-board-announcement and the PowerPoint presentation http://www.owgr.com/Archive/Announcement/OWGR%20-%20Updated%20System%20Information%20-%20FINAL.pdf. Shouldn't really affect us too much, except that the OWGR page will need an update. Nigej ( talk) 15:06, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
What happened to the nationalities chart? It was mentioned on this page months ago that it would be there. Johnsmith2116 ( talk) 22:11, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
"I'd suggest the composite table (i.e. the one not split by continent..."). wjemather please leave a message... 09:57, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Last night I created a page for the Pennsylvania Amateur Golf Championship. I used the table for the U.S. Amateur as a template. Overall, I like the table for the U.S. Amateur. However, I noticed that "Venue" is the second column, before winner. To me, the "Winner" column should definitely be before "Venue." In addition, I think that "Venue" should be relegated to the final column. Thoughts?
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 17:20, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
Tewapack is suggesting that small brackets shouldn't be used within winners tables to show multiple wins per MOS:SMALLFONT. Is everybody else in agreement with this? If so, then why have we been using the small brackets coding up until now if it goes against MOS? It also means that so many pages are going to have to be updated if this is proposed. Jimmymci234 ( talk) 18:18, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
I recently made a page for the South African Amateur Championship (golf). It's pretty complete but there are a few issues:
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 01:32, 30 August 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
Currently the Ryder Cup player tables include the captains. For the Presidents Cup, assistant captains are also included. I would like to suggest that captains of any kind not be included in these tables... after all, the tables are labeled "Players", not "Players and captains". pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 22:47, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
Since it seemed like a clear consensus here, I just went through and removed captains from the tables for the last few Ryder Cups. These changes were reverted by User:Tomrtn. pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 03:14, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
According to the infoboxes, the major championships have been sanctioned by the Japan Golf Tour since 1998. Yet I've noticed that we have not included these wins in the Japan Golf Tour subheading within the "Professional wins" sections for any of the players. For example, we have included the major championship wins in the "European Tour wins" subheading for Mark O'Meara and Payne Stewart despite the fact that they were never members of the European Tour (though won on that tour). Relatedly, I think we should include the major championships in the Japan Golf Tour subheading if major winners have ever been a member of the Japan Tour or ever won on that tour.
However, I think we should maintain the precedent of not creating new tables for wins at co-sanctioned events by non-members. For example, major championship winners Adam Scott and Graeme McDowell have never been members of the Japan Tour (as far as I know) and therefore we shouldn't create a separate table for them. But a number of major championship winners (e.g. Harrington, Clarke, Garcia, Koepka) have also won events on the JGT and already have a table. So I think we should add their major wins to that table the same way we have added major wins to the "European Tour wins" subheading of ET champions (irrespective if that person is a member of the European Tour).
Thoughts?
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 04:04, 5 September 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
I'm thinking we ought to change the "Nationality" text used in {{ Infobox golfer}}. We're not actually saying anything about a player's nationality, we're simply replicating the flag that sits next to the golfer in leaderboards, etc. Perhaps "Sporting nationality" or "Golf nationality" or "Sporting nation" or "Golf flag" would be more apt. Suggestions? Nigej ( talk) 07:16, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
“Sporting nation” sounds the best to me. But happy to see what others have to say. I do think it’s something that needs amended as it seems to confuse some non-golf editors. Jimmymci234 ( talk) 07:28, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Based on the above discussion, I think that "Sporting nationality" just about comes on top. It also has the merit of being the term used at MOS:INFOBOXFLAG and the term that we've generally used in a number of previous discussions here about this issue. See {{ Infobox golfer/testcases}} for what it would look like (don't bother about the actual content there, which is way out of date). It doesn't generally make the infobox any wider, so should have minimal impact. Nigej ( talk) 06:19, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
I've also added "sporting_nationality" as an optional name for the "nationality" parameter, which is used in the first example in the testcases. I'm assuming that we'd want to make a gradual change to this. Nigej ( talk) 06:29, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
I was wondering if these events should be included in the "Professional Wins" or "Amateur Wins" section. I assume so for skins games but I assume not for medalists in qualifying events. I don't believe this has been confirmed yet, however.
In addition, I know we have referenced this in passing, but I would like to directly confirm with other editors that we do NOT include wins in these categories: schoolboy championships, junior championships, trainees championships, pro-ams, purse events, and club championships. If anyone disagrees, however, please state that.
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 17:01, 1 October 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
(split from above) I notice the tournament in Vegas is now the Shriners Children's Open, a much-needed shortening of the name. That's one of the few PGA Tour event articles we have under a sponsored name when a non-sponsored name (Las Vegas Invitational) is available, so it seems like the sensible thing would be to move it there. However, I'm not convinced that this is a clear primary topic for that title over the basketball tournament, so Las Vegas Invitational (golf) may be best. pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 22:44, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
With The Match continuing, first without Tiger, and now without both Tiger and Phil, and since the individual editions (except maybe the first) are not notable on their own, as I see it we have two options:
I lean towards option 2 but before going ahead, I'd like to hear what others think. Thanks. wjemather please leave a message... 10:20, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
Yeah I think option 2 would be better. Jimmymci234 ( talk) 10:35, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
The PGA Tour isn't making Wikipedia's job easy. With the apparent demise of the WGC Invitational, TPC Southwind moves to its third different PGA Tour event in the last five years. It's called the FedEx St. Jude Championship, not to be confused with the WGC-FedEx St. Jude Invitational or the FedEx St. Jude Classic. Theoretically, the FedEx St. Jude Championship is the tournament formerly known as the Westchester Classic and not the tournament formerly known as the FedEx St. Jude Classic and the Stanford St. Jude Championship. Simply put, this is a mess when it comes to tournament history and article titles.
I don't know if this would help us any, but should we consider splitting the articles for the first Playoffs event and the Westchester Classic? The fact that they're considered the same event by the Tour isn't necessarily a determining factor... we have separate articles for the BMW Championship and the Western Open, which have a similar situation and are considered the same tournament by the Tour. pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 22:52, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
They’re definitely challenging us this year! I would support splitting the Westchester Classic and The Northern Trust, if that makes the most sense to do so. I also think the Mexico Championship will require a new page as although it is supposed to be a continuation of the WGC-Mexico Championship, to me that doesn’t mean it’s a continuation of the WGC Championship (if that makes sense). Also not to be confused with the Mexico Championship on the Korn Ferry Tour! Jimmymci234 ( talk) 06:04, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
It feels like the tours sometimes make it up as they go along and even contradict themselves sometimes. Like even this week on the European Tour with the Hero Open. They are saying it is a continuation of the Hero Open from last year and Sam Horsfield is the defending champion. Even though last year when the Hero Open was added to the schedule it was the English Open which was then being sponsored by Hero, but this year it is being played in Scotland and is obviously not part of the English Open, as that is now called the Cazoo Classic for this year. So it’s hard to follow the treatment of tournaments by the tour(s). Jimmymci234 ( talk) 12:36, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
I was just watching the WGC-FedEx St. Jude Invitational and at the final green they announced Harris English as the "2013 Memphis champion". I thought that was interesting.
pʰeːnuːmuː →
pʰiːnyːmyː →
ɸinimi →
fiɲimi
22:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
So... is there a better solution than retitling Safeway Open to Fortinet Championship? pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 02:55, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
So how are we going to deal with the FedEx St. Jude Championship? The current situation is really unacceptable. Readers reading the article on the 2021-22 PGA Tour who click on the wikilink for the FedEx St. Jude Championship are led to an article that does not mention anything whatsoever about a "FedEx St. Jude Championship". Meanwhile, the lead of FedEx St. Jude Classic has a whole paragraph connecting it to the new FedEx St. Jude Championship. In my view, we should either deal with the FedEx St. Jude Championship in the article of the Classic, after all it is more or less the same tournament, or create a whole new article for the FedEx St. Jude Championship. The current situation though is an unacceptable mess and cannot remain. Therefore, just waiting is not an option. T v x1 23:47, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
Although on the PGA Tour website schedule, Tony Finau is listed as the defending champion of the FedEx St. Jude Championship - which I know is not clear cut but does give us some sort of clue. Jimmymci234 ( talk) 10:10, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Should we move his page to be Matt Fitzpatrick rather than Matthew. His European Tour, PGA Tour and OWGR all refer to him as Matt. Jimmymci234 ( talk) 13:28, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
I recently created a winner's table for the Connecticut Open (golf). My main source says the event began in 1931. I also have another source, from 1955, that lists champions beginning in the year 1932. So it looks like the modern event began in the early 1930s.
On the bottom of the page, however, there is a link says that the famous English golfer Jim Barnes won the 1916 event and that it was a PGA Tour-level event that year. However, I cannot access that link to get more information. Also, for what it's worth, this is confirmed on his Wikipedia page under "PGA Tour wins" (no citation however). Not sure what other editors make of this.
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 02:18, 27 November 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
I am going to make a table for the Connecticut Open (golf) later today. I noticed on the current page, under the "Winners" section, we have red links for every player that does not already have a Wikipedia page. Unless there is something I don't know, these red links imply there is a good potential that these players could have a Wikipedia page. If this is the implication, it is obviously false; most of these players are super-obscure and will never have a page. This is an issue on many other pages too (e.g. South African Amateur Championship (golf)). Not sure what other member's thoughts are about "red links"...
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 18:26, 16 November 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
The South African Amateur Championship (golf) table actually needs more red links towards the top, in my opinion. Anyone successful in amateur golf recently has a decent chance of becoming notable enough for an article. pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 00:42, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
Creating all the Espirito Santo Trophy and European Ladies Team Championship articles, I've noticed that in many cases, the same female players appears under different red links, after coming back with a new last name. I think it's valuable for the reader to identify players correct. Usally in golf historical publications, female players are identified in the same way through their careers. EEJB ( talk) 20:15, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Maybe that's a reason to be restrictive with red links, but thats's easier with players from earlier years. You can't be sure who will be a star of those at recent amateur championships. EEJB ( talk) 22:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I recently put up a tag for this article. It is the "third party" tag - being too closely related to the subject.
Basically, I think someone a bit too emotionally invested in Yale Golf Course created a relatively nice but overly detailed page. The page feels more like a work of journalism (or even advertising) than an encyclopedic entry. I am thinking about severely condensing the tournament section and deleting most of the college golf stuff. In addition, I am thinking of deleting the Course section (which includes a sub-section for each hole). Also, I will probably change a lot of the effusive language ( WP:FLOWERY) in the intro and history sections (e.g. "Yale is notable for its scale").
The reason I am bringing it up here is because I have never made such extensive edits to a page like this before (or, I think, to any page). I wanted to get some consensus first about what I want to do and perhaps some advice. Any help would be welcome.
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 03:48, 15 December 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
There are two golf pages I recently came across that I think should be deleted.
The first one is Connecticut Golf Hall of Fame. I'm not sure if a golf hall of fame for small state that is not really known for pro golf should have its own page. In addition, there seems to be an inadequate amount of reliable third-party citations.
The other page is List of Canadian winners on the PGA and LPGA Tours. Strikes me as obvious WP:OR and "synthesis."
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 20:38, 3 December 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
As the originator of List of Canadian winners on the PGA and LPGA Tours, I'm here to defend it. WP:OR says, ""original research" (OR) is used on Wikipedia to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist," which is not the case in the list because all of the wins are a matter of record and are referenced. WP:OR goes on to say "This includes any analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not stated by the sources," which cannot be the case here because the sources say Brooke Henderson has 10 wins, George Knudson and Sandra Post and Mike Weir have 8, etc, etc. Regards, PK T(alk) 01:24, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
I intend to attempt to delete these pages very soon. However, I haven't done this before and don't know the protocol. Does anyone have a link with instructions?
Thanks, Oogglywoogly ( talk) 04:04, 9 December 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
I would appreciate it if other golf editors like Nigej, Tewapack, Jimmymci234 responded on the deletion page for List of Canadian winners on the PGA and LPGA Tours. In addition, PK, you are free to defend your page - right now it is 2-0 against you.
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 06:13, 16 December 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
First off, I was wondering if a page like this should even exist. There are not many college golf team pages like this on Wikipedia (though there are a few). I could not find separate wiki pages for leading college golf teams like Oklahoma State University–Stillwater, Arizona State University, or UCLA. Even the golf team of Stanford University (where Tiger Woods went to college) doesn't have its own page. Not exactly sure if Yale deserves one...
Nonetheless, let's say that the Yale Golf Team does deserve their own page. (It does look like they were pretty good in the early 20th century.) This page is still awash with third-party issues. I checked out the page history and, as I suspected, it was created by the same guy who created Yale Golf Course. This user created a nice page but, like Yale Golf Course, it is far too detailed and written in an overly "journalistic" style. In addition, there are a few other small problems. For example, most of the infobox is in bold (I assume this is against something in WP:MOS) and he even uses Wikipedia as a citation at one point - flagrantly against our rules.
I put up a tag and will start making edits later in the week. But if anyone wants to get a head start on this be my guest.
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 07:06, 22 December 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
Thank you for the link User:Nigej. Far more universities have golf team pages than I knew about. And now that I think about it, even though Yale hasn't won a NCAA title since 1943, given that they were so dominant in the early 20th century (21 NCAA titles) it seems clear that they deserve a page. (We must respect WP:RECENTISM here).
My only real remaining reservation dealing with the general viability of the article has to do with including both the men's and women's teams on the same page. All existing golf team pages that I see here distinguish between the men's and women's teams. This makes sense because - as far as I know - the genders are never integrated in college golf. This Yale page should probably be split in half.
Otherwise, though the article should generally stay, there are many other problems, mainly on the same lines as Yale Golf Course. The history section needs to be trimmed and its journalistic style has to go. The tables, like the tables on the golf course page, can be deleted. The notable players section strikes me as obvious WP:OR and should also be deleted; some of the worthwhile information can be merged into the history section.
Lastly, pʰeːnuːmuː, you mentioned that the title did not adhere to Wikipedia's standards. I changed the infobox title to the appropriate title, "Yale University Bulldogs golf," but I don't know how to change the page title. I tried using "Source editing" but did not see any option. Any help would be much appreciated.
Oogglywoogly ( talk) 06:39, 23 December 2021 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
Following on from discussion at Wjemather's talk page. The OWGR has updated tour abbreviations for PGA and European Tours to PGAT and DPWT respectively. I suggested updating the PGA Tour's new abbreviation on all event winners tables etc, but not for European Tour abbreviation in line with WP:COMMONNAME as ET is still the common name for the tour and not DP World Tour so we should still keep using EUR abbreviation for now. Jimmymci234 ( talk) 17:31, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
I would also support using PTLA for PGA Tour Latinoamérica... I don't know if we have any articles that use an abbreviation for PGA Tour Canada, but I'd advocate distinguishing it from the Canadian Tour. pʰeːnuːmuː → pʰiːnyːmyː → ɸinimi → fiɲimi 20:25, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
I just created a draft for Tim Rosaforte, an American golf journalist who recently died. Any help would be appreciated. Thriley ( talk) 20:21, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
A new proposal is now pending to add language to NSPORT providing, among other things, that "meeting [NSPORTS or NGOLF] would not serve as a valid keep argument in a deletion discussion."If you have views on this proposal, one way or the other, please feel free to add your comments at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Subproposal 1 (NSPORT). Cbl62 ( talk) 15:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
I am in the process of creating an article for a professional golfer and came across the page for Minnesota State Junior Boys' Golf Championship. I am not sure if all of these tournaments should be listed on the same page as they may not all be referring to the same event. Some of these tournaments are continuous with the others but there are sizable overlaps for some other tournaments (e.g. the Minnesota Jaycee Junior Golf Tournament goes from 1947 to 1975 while the MGA Junior Golf Championships runs from 1961 to 2001). Perhaps separate pages should be created for some of these tournaments.
Any advice would be helpful as I am unfamiliar with these junior tournaments and do not have a good idea how some of these tournament titles may relate to others.
Thanks, Oogglywoogly ( talk) 07:01, 24 January 2022 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
I noticed for leading amateur golfers like Francis Ouimet and Bobby Jones (golfer) we have a comprehensive Tournament Wins section that compiles all of their wins. However, it seems to be consensus that we maintain separate Amateur Wins and Professional Wins sections for all golfers. Therefore separate sections should probably be created.
I have one reservation however: the continuity of their triumphs would be broken up. For most golfers that is not a problem - most play as amateurs during high school and college and then turn pro in their early 20s and remain pro from thereon in. With Ouimet and Jones and other notable amateur golfers, however, the chronology would definitely be broken up if we create separate sections. Not sure what other members think we should do and if there is some already established consensus regarding this issue for lifelong amateur golfers.
Thanks, Oogglywoogly ( talk) 07:38, 24 January 2022 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
I have been doing some research on a page for a pro golfer from Minnesota. In the course of the research I have been trying to identify whether the Minnesota Open was entitled the National Car Open during the late 20th century. According to this link it says that George Shortridge won the National Car Open in 1966 and 1981. And on our Minnesota State Open page it says he won the state open those years. It also says that Bill Israelson won the National Car Open in 1991 which aligns with the Minnesota Open page.
Basically, I'm pretty confident these titles are referring to the same event but don't know for sure yet. If anyone can provide verification that'd be great.
Thanks, Oogglywoogly ( talk) 06:59, 30 January 2022 (UTC)Oogglywoogly