Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wbm1058 (talk | contribs) at 02:18, 24 February 2021 (→Responsive template: oops, I forgot to sign this). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Football Template‑class

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball Template This template does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Template:Football squad player is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories. Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases.

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Add postion Field Player (FP)

Hey! Can the position FP be added to the template, as I was using this template for a futsal squad and players other than goalkeepers are usually referred as field players in futsal.--Anbans 585 (talk) 17:16, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Anbans 585, from looking at Futsal positions it seems like field player isn't listed there. Is there an article that I could link to describing the position of field player, as there is for the four positions currently in the template? It would look slightly weird if the link to Field player were a redirect.

Actually, since the template would link to the football definition of goalkeeper, do you think it might also be advisable to create a separate {{Futsal squad player}}? Enterprisey (talk!) 04:35, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Enterprisey, no I don't think we require to create a separate template for it. Actually the template {{nat fs start no caps}} contains a parameter 'Field Player' which now redirects to Futsal positions. Though you are right that futsal has outfield positions like defender, forward etc, but in futsal terms they are usually known as ala, pivot, etc. Though when any futsal squad is announced for a competition, if the position of the player is unknown (the player is not a goalkeeper) then he is usually referred as a 'Field Player', that is why I wanted that if possible a 'FP' parameter can also be added to this template, as this template is usually used for displaying a club squad.--Anbans 585 (talk) 10:49, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Can the above request be completed?--Anbans 585 (talk) 14:18, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Redesign RfC

There was recently a TfD disscussion about merging {{Football squad player}} and {{Football squad player2}} which I closed with consensus to merge the templates. There were however no consensus on how to merge these templates with some redesign of the template being necessary to implement the TfD consensus. To achieve a consensus on the many points that have to be addressed here this discussion is split into several subsections each addressing a specific design decision. If anyone wants to add additional sections feel free to do so. ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 17:37, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related discussions. S.A. Julio (talk) 18:54, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Note: Input to this discussion may have been affected by a non-neutral canvassing message. Comments received between 00:14 and 10:59 (UTC) on 17 February 2020 may have been as a result of this. Number 57 11:01, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Should the country's name be written beside the flag or not?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

{{Football squad player2}} currently write out the country name while {{Football squad player}} doesn't

• Comment Related to this issue, should the country name be linked? This is generally regarded as WP:OVERLINK. S.A. Julio (talk) 18:50, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
• Yes But only if the flag is displayed. The flag is not needed. Ever but if it is present, it should not link to a nation and only to the national team if the player actually appeared on it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:33, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
• No However, if there is no definitive consensus on this, I would suggest a compromise where trigrammes are used to minimise the width taken. Number 57 01:24, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• No WDM10 (talk) 01:45, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• No Just a flag with the name as a hoverlink is enough. --SuperJew (talk) 15:42, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• No - At least, not the country's full name. The flag should usually be enough to identify the country. If further investigation is required, the flag should be clickable to either the country's article or that of the national football association. – PeeJay 17:38, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• No - or use a trigramme as suggested by N57. GiantSnowman 17:59, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• Comment Have none of you paid attention to MOS:ACCESS? It is the whole reason we are here. You cannot have images without accompanying text. Ever. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:11, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

On the continental competition pages there is no text accompanying the flags on the team lists. Likewise, in the top scorers section of the World Cup pages, there is no label for the flag. So if the club and player names are the accompanying text there, then the player is accompanying text is this case. WDM10 (talk) 00:22, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

That too should be addressed. Feel free to point to additional violations that need to be corrected. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:23, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: for access don't screen readers read out also the hovertext (that's what I seem to recall people saying in some of the discussions about it)? If so, having the name as well as hovertext seems like making access life harder. --SuperJew (talk) 08:15, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Screen readers read out alt text in place of the image, which can be omitted if the image is purely decorative (e.g. the name is there as well). How would anyone using a mobile device read the "hovertext"? --RexxS (talk) 16:14, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

When I was testing websites for accessibility, the two screen readers I used could not be configured to read hovertext at all. They read out the alt behind the image. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:44, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz and RexxS: What is the problem then with tweaking the flag template so that the alt text and hoverlink both have the country name, and then that solves the access problem? --SuperJew (talk) 19:27, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Good question, but not one for this template to resolve. If you're going over there to ask that, why not ask for a variant that allows the ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 code from being displaye (even when the full nation name is supplied)? Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:30, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: I don't think this template is meant to resolve Misplaced Pages-wide access issues. If there's an access issue with hovertext of the flag template, take it up there and stop pushing that agenda on this template. I am not going over there to ask it, because I don't edit in access issues, and I have no idea what ISO you are talking about. --SuperJew (talk) 20:37, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

I'm not asking you to fix the other template, I'm suggesting that because it cannot be adequately fixed that we either offer an alternative here (by providing the ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 code next to the nation) or not use the flag at all (jingoism, superfluous information, etc.).

I'm not entirely sure why nationality for players is even relevant in the table. For some leagues, particularly those in Canada and the US, there is limitation to the number of "foreign" players, but those leagues calculate nationality differently than the way the FOOTY project does, so nationality always ends up in an conflict war. So my preference is not to include the flag at all, but no one even assumes that to be an option. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:56, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@SuperJew: the problem is that anybody using a mouseless device, such as a mobile phone, i.e. over half of our readers, still wouldn't be able to see the alt text or the hoverlink, so still can't see the country name. If you want them to know the country name, you have to write the country name, or an acceptable abbreviation. --RexxS (talk) 22:14, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

• Yes Over 50% of pageviews are now from mobile devices. There is no such thing as a "hoverlink" on a mobile device. That means that readers who wish to know which country a player belongs to either has to learn 211 different flags, or they have to follow a link, download another page, and then return to the first page, often on a slow data link. Using a flag instead of the name of a country is simply sending a message to over 50% of our readers that "we don't care about you". --RexxS (talk) 00:31, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
  • While it is interesting to note that most views these days come from mobile devices, we need to consider the types of views on those devices. I feel like most people who access the site on mobile are doing so to perform a quick check on something rather than doing it to perform extensive research. I think you're being a little hyperbolic to say that preferring desktop users means we "don't care" about mobile users, we just need to be conscious of how different people use the site on different devices. – PeeJay 07:53, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

    If there are different preferences for desktop and mobile it's possible to have two different layouts depending on skin. I'm not sure if it has been done before, but it's certainly possible in the same way it's possible to hide navboxes on mobile. ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 08:06, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

    @PeeJay2K3: It's wrong to make assumptions about how how the mobile site is used especially based on your hunch. A lot of the world only has access via cellular devices. If we make life difficult for our mobile readers thoughtlessly or deliberately, it's a certain message that we don't care about them

@Trialpears: Skins change css, which of course can hide content. However I do not believe there is way to use css to turn two inner tables which are cells in the same row of an outer table into a single-column layout. If you claim otherwise, knock up a demo and show us. There's a lot of pie-in-the-sky speculating in this debate that amounts top a refusal to face accessibility issues. Show an accessible two column layout before claiming that it's a solution. --RexxS (talk) 16:14, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

RexxS, see my sandbox where I have made a version of Arsenal F.C.'s rooster that use {{Football squad player}} when viewed in the vector skin and {{Football squad player2}} when viewed on mobile. There should be a separate class here and not just abusing other classes, but it shows the basic idea. ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 17:22, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@Trialpears: So your solution is effectively to use the two existing templates/layouts: one for desktop and one for mobile. You do realise that this whole discussion was created because of a TfD decision to merge the two templates: ("There is a consensus to merge the templates to use a consistent design"? --RexxS (talk) 18:07, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@RexxS: consistent between clubs, not between devices. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 20:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: That's not what the close said. And I don't see anywhere in the TfD discussion that anybody suggested continuing to use two templates. --RexxS (talk) 22:07, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@RexxS: @Trialpears isn’t suggesting to keep both templates, but to merge both into one that displays differently based on the device one is viewing it from. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 22:37, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Why not have one template that displays correctly, with respect to MOS:ACCESS and platform of browser, regardless of the platform of browser? Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:41, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: You need to let Trialpears speak for themselves. Did you examine the wikitext in his sandbox solution? Thought not. He has both templates in there with css to hide one or the other depending on whether you view using the default desktop or mobile skin. I use monobook, so I see both. It could be improved by using a container template along with TemplateStyles to create custom hide/show classes, but honestly, using two different templates and switching them is a kludge, not a solution. You really need to write properly accessible, responsive templates from the start. --RexxS (talk) 23:34, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

RexxS If something like this were to be used it would be templated and not use all this div mess in articles creating one template that can have different layout depending on device. It could probably be made workable with screen readers by having only the one column version read by screen readers, but ultimately I agree with RexxS; you really need to write this from scratch. My demo was just intended to show that it's definitely possible to make it device dependent, not a serious suggestion for a solution. For the close question I was not referring to consistency between devices, that wasn't discussed at TfD, just the consensus that we shouldn't have two templates doing the same thing or consistency between articles. ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 08:02, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

• Yes - very surprised there are admins in this discussions that just dismiss the MoS (this comment is true for other sections). Whether or not the flag is needed is a different issue, but the MoS is clear that if you use it, you need to use it with text.
• Sort of – The flag alone is not sufficient, it's not reasonable to expect an average reader to have an encyclopaedic knowledge of world flags, nor to have the visual acuity to distinguish between the various defaced Blue Ensigns that are in use. Also MOS:ACCIM states that in general images should have some kind of caption. That being said however, writing the full name of a country significantly increases the width of the table (which is bad news for viewing on mobile devices) and the variation in lengths of country names has the potential to make things look quite messy. I think using the FIFA country code trigramme, as suggested above, is a reasonable compromise here. — GasHeadSteve  08:44, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@Gasheadsteve: Seriously when was the last time you saw a soccer player on a squad listing whose FIFA nationality is a UK Overseas Territory? (except Bermuda and Gibraltar which are more frequent, but they use other flags anyway so it's beside the point) --SuperJew (talk) 09:23, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@SuperJew: To be fair, they do pop up from time to time (e.g. Leek Town F.C.#Current squad). Don't forget that Australia and New Zealand use Blue Ensigns as well, and people frequently get those muddled up. — GasHeadSteve  09:34, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@Gasheadsteve: Point is they seem rare and quite silly to base a guideline off of the rare cases. --SuperJew (talk) 10:06, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

• Yes per MoS. If the nationality is important enough to justify the presence of a flag, then those of us who don't recognise every flag, or who are colour-blind, or use a device without hover capability, shouldn't have to fiddle about hovering or going off to another page to access this important information when using text is a simple and straightforward alternative. Struway2 (talk) 10:19, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@Struway2: I don't think importance has to be binary as in important or not important. Importancy is more on a scale. Therefore, I would say nationality is important enough to include in the squad list (affects visa etc. in leagues which limit foreigners), but not the most important thing on the squad list, so shouldn't be IMO given too much space. --SuperJew (talk) 11:07, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

• Yes per MoS. ....dont make readers hunt for meaning.--Moxy 🍁 15:26, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
• No , as stated above. P0g0.try (talk) 23:42, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
• Yes though I would show ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 code instead of full country name as suggested above, purely because of design issues. Also I think that it would be good idea to have an option in template to exclude nationality column altogether. Also maybe have those flags / country codes link to the national team page instead of country page? Though that would not apply to the majority of players who never had their international caps. Nightfall87 (talk) 12:05, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
  • National team page? This templates are used on women's teams such as Olympique Lyonnais Féminin and FC Bayern Munich (women), and there are players who have only played for a U-23, U-21 or lower-level national team, and some have never represented their nation in international play. This is another example of editors not thinking about those who are not the biggest names in the sport. And finally, linking is not required at all as it violates WP:OVERLINK and WP:REPEATLINK. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:02, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
• Yes Not all readers can identify a player's country just by seeing the flag only. Idealigic (talk) 13:28, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Isn't it fortunate, then, that flags can be linked? – PeeJay 14:59, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
    • Isn't it fortunate that there's no consensus as to what it should be linked? The nation would be a clear violation of WP:OVERLINK, but you've shown that don't care about community consensus so that doesn't motivate you. The senior men's national team would not make sense as not all players have represented the nation at that level and makes a mockery of the women's team. I suppose it could be linked to the national association, but that may not make any sense. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:04, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
• Yes per MoS. ....I mostly use mobile, and a significant number of people do, Trigram is OK by me, but something, flags are often two small to distinguish between some. and link to Nat football team, thats what is relevantClubOranje 09:38, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
• Yes per RexxS. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
• Comment Wouldn't this fall under MOS:ICON as opposed to MOS:ACCESS? WDM10 (talk) 01:19, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

  There's no contradiction between the two. MOS:ICON has a section titled "Accompany flags with country names" and MOS:ACCESS states "images should include a caption ... The caption should concisely describe the meaning of the image and the essential information it is trying to convey." The essential information a flag is trying to convey is the name of the country. --RexxS (talk) 02:27, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

  That makes sense. I seem to have glossed over the part relating to using the name and flag first and then just the flag next. I could see something like {{flagathlete}} working. WDM10 (talk) 02:57, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

  I've never seen flagathlete, but it looks like it has the country name with hovertext. The problem with hovertext is that it's useless to mobile/touch users who generally can't hover; they can only click in a location. The other problem is that most athletes have never represented a nation—they are only citizens of that nation—and that seems to be what this if for. There might also be a sort issue. It's a good start though. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:23, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

  Wouldn't the three letter code be enough however? Also the nation can just be their FIFA recognised nation like it is now. WDM10 (talk) 03:28, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

  I believe that ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 is the standard. For most nations, yes. There are a few that are confusing for the initiated. What are like DEU and ESP? And sometimes the first three letters of the nation are used, like NIC is Nicaragua, but not always: NER Niger, NGA Nigeria. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:40, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

  Shouldn't FIFA acronyms be used considering this is football or are they entirely separate cases? WDM10 (talk) 03:44, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

  If we're incorporating that template, it might be possible; if we're simply basing a replacement template on the principles of that template, then it makes sense to do that. Is there a definitive list of FIFA nation acronyms? Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:55, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

  This page has all the codes. WDM10 (talk) 05:01, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

  Here I've created something that could potentially be used. WDM10 (talk) 05:20, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

  Thanks. I see how you achieved that as well, it's {

  I've changed it up a slight bit just fixing the MOS issues. Where can I find yours? WDM10 (talk) 19:50, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

  I didn't make a copy, I edited yours but didn't save it. It was just a test. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:36, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

• No. We need no country names or flags, just player names. Ludost Mlačani (talk) 11:37, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Should the template display the table in one or two columns?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

{{Football squad player}} currently use two while {{Football squad player2}} use one

• Two columns or responsive, as it's easier and more practical to view all the players in one single screen, without having to scroll up and down to compare between players. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 19:45, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Question: what sorts of comparisons are you making between players in the roster? Understanding this would be helpful in designing the new roster template. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:00, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
    • I might want to compare data in Misplaced Pages with data from another website (say, the club’s official player list on their website). Having to go up and down to see players in specific positions is problematic. I might want to see all foreign players in one single screen, making it clear how many quota players there are in the club directly. I might want to see how many forwards there are in the club, or how many midfielders, without having to scroll up and down. These are just a few examples. Anyway, I’m in favour of having 2 columns for PC, and 1 for mobile. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 23:09, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
• Responsive Forcing a width has already been demonstrated as problematic. By removing the table formatting and making the formatting flow, mobile devices can be accommodated. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:33, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

  That sounds like the optimal solution. I'm a bit uncertain about the implementation though. There is no way for a template or module to directly know the screen size but it may be a possibility in css, but I don't know since I'm not very well versed in css. I know it's possible to make it skin dependent so it displays as single column for mobile users and double column for desktop. ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 21:04, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

  With tables, it's difficult, and so by avoiding tables we could lose the ability to sort. With that said, responsive is done with {{reflist}} and can be applied to lists using {{div col}}. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:21, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

• Two columns Number 57 01:24, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• Two columns WDM10 (talk) 01:45, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• Two columns so the whole squad can easily be seen without scrolling, and also leaves less dead whitespace. --SuperJew (talk) 15:43, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• Two - Football squads can be quite big, so it makes sense to be efficient with the amount of space we have available. – PeeJay 17:45, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• Two columns as above. GiantSnowman 17:59, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• Responsive or One whichever you find possible. Two columns make the table too wide to see on my mobile phone without horizontal scrolling. We should never be delivering content that requires a reader to scroll horizontally; it's utterly amateurish web design. --RexxS (talk) 00:36, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

  @RexxS: having to scroll vertically to see the full list is annoying as well. The mobile website is adapted as it is to the mobile (with the "m." prefix) - so it should adapt two columns properly, not that we have to change the way we format things on all squad listings. --SuperJew (talk) 08:16, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

  @SuperJew: Everyone using webpages, wordprocessors, pdf readers, etc. is accustomed to scrolling vertically. So no, it's not annoying because as you read down you move downwards with the scrolling each page. Contrast that with having to horizontally scroll back-and-forth every line to read the end of the line, which no sensible UX designer would allow. The mobile website does not adapt a layout that is made of two individual tables side-by-side as cells in an outer table, which is what the current template delivers. You only have to look at the example in the template documentation on a mobile phone to see the horizontal scrolling. Why not try it before proclaiming what it should do? You'll soon see that you have to change the way you format squad listings, because there is no magical technical solution to rescue content from the old-fashioned, inaccessible idea of using tables to create format – other than getting rid of it. The onus is on the editors creating templates to ensure that they behave well when viewed on mobile, and the current template with tables hard-coded in doesn't do that. --RexxS (talk) 14:44, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

• One (or responsive if possible). Vertical scrolling is always better than horizontal scrolling, especially as on desktop scrolling a non-issue and on mobile vertical is the standard. --Gonnym (talk) 08:34, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
• Responsive or One. So long as the implementation can be parsed correctly by screen readers, and doesn't involve horizontal scrolling. Struway2 (talk) 10:21, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
• Responsive or Two. especially if we stick to showing only # / position / country / name set of data. Showing only those 4 columns in single row while listing 30+ players in first team squad, and 6/7 reserve players below that, and 15+ more players on loan below that would create tons of non used space on large screens. For example take a look at the number of players being listed on Chelsea or Red Star roster. Nightfall87 (talk) 12:29, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
• One column I find it more useful and easier to decipher in a single column. Also ....I mostly use mobile, as do a significant number of people and most mobile viewing is portrait. allows me to turn screen to landscape and get it slightly bigger to read with my ageing eyes ClubOranje 09:43, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
• Two columns Idealigic (talk) 21:44, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
• Responsive or One per RexxS. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Should the nation be displayed after the number or in the last row?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

{{Football squad player}} currently displays it after the number while {{Football squad player2}} displays it in the last row

• Comment, last row if we decide to show the full name for the nation, after the number if we don't show the name (basically, the way, respectively, Fs player2 and Fs player are set out to date). Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 19:50, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
• Before the name --SuperJew (talk) 15:44, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• After the number - I like how the flag currently breaks up two items of text (the number and the position). This isn't such an issue with the position and the name, since the name is easily identifiable as such without needing to be set apart from the other info in the table. – PeeJay 17:47, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• You probably mean "column" and not "row". Also, regardless of the position {{Football squad player}} is not setup correctly as the "nation" column header is missing. A table should not have empty cells, especially not in the header. While it might be confusing somewhat for people who can actually see the table, for those that use a screen reader, it will just be much harder to understand.
• After the number - Nightfall87 (talk) 12:32, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
• Last Column I just prefer that. more important to me to see number and name together. When I need the country I can look right, or scroll over if need be on a mobile, but thats better than having to scroll to see the players surname ClubOranje 09:47, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Should abbreviations be used for the position or not?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

{{Football squad player}} currently uses abbreviated versions while {{Football squad player2}} uses the full titles

• Comment, this really depends on how the template looks after all else has been decided. If having full titles for the positions, for example in a two column version, forces the rows to have double the width, then I would rather have abbreviations. If, instead, having full or abbreviated versions doesn't change the way the template is displayed, then full would be preferred. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 19:48, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
• No Players are often placed in multiple positions. Players who are listed as midfielders on the official roster have been used as defenders on occasion and other midfielders as forwards. Some editors want a more specific "striker" or "winger" rather than a generic "forward" or "midfielder" and the various titles for defenders is similarly long. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:33, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
• Yes It'll be unnecessarily wide and have full words repeated numerous times. Number 57 01:24, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• Yes The words will be unnecessarily long and the abbreviations are linked if anybody is unaware of the meanings. WDM10 (talk) 01:45, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• Yes if including positions at all. Since positions are versatile (apart from GK), it can usually not be displayed properly in one description. --SuperJew (talk) 15:51, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• Yes - Also, I have no problem with including positions. Most reliable sources will divide squad lists into positional categories, usually going for the basic "Goalkeeper/Defender/Midfielder/Forward" categories. – PeeJay 17:56, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• Yes - long established with no problems. GiantSnowman 18:00, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• I'm leaning to on "No" here, but would like to see the final table first. If the table width isn't too big, I don't see any issues with using the full text.
• Yes - Nightfall87 (talk) 12:50, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
• Yes if including positions at all. Having the same word written out in full a dozen times seems unnecessary. As a total football advocate I disagree with having positions as they are flexible, particularly for some players who may be wingbacks, wingers or backs, holding midfielder or centre back. all a bit arbitrary ClubOranje 09:51, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Regardless of your philosophy on total football, players' positions are usually verifiable by reliable sources and should probably be included, but only to the extent of GK/DF/MF/FW. – PeeJay 10:41, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
• Yes It is necessary, so that the words will be shortened — Preceding unsigned comment added by Idealigic (talk • contribs) 21:49, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Only necessary if the unnecessary two-column template is used. If one column is used, it's not. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:08, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

What should be the default background color for the table?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

{{Football squad start}} currently uses #AAD0FF blue while {{Football squad start2}} uses the MediaWiki default

• MediaWiki default as there's a reason for the default across the project. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:33, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
• Comment This appears to be about the squadlist header rather than the background of the table (which is transparent). This isn't really a big deal in the scheme of things – a more major difference between the versions is whether the table should have gridlines (Football squad start2) or be completely transparent (Football squad start). I'd prefer the latter. Cheers, Number 57 01:24, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• The blue color seems to pass AAA from a site I checked, so that's fine. --Gonnym (talk) 08:34, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
• MediaWiki default - with option to specify font and background color Nightfall87 (talk) 12:52, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Should the table have gridlines or not?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

{{Football squad start2}} uses gridlines, while {{Football squad start}} doesn't

• No gridlines Number 57 01:24, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
• Gridlines: I personally am in favor of gridlines as it makes it easier to scan rows. --Gonnym (talk) 08:34, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
• No gridlines Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 12:39, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
• No gridlines. GiantSnowman 08:24, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
• No gridlines just personal preference. As a side note, if the data is going to be left justified, the header title should too. Particularly with flexibly wide tables. Jens Lehmann's name doesn't even fall under the title of the column on my device in that columnless example. ClubOranje 09:56, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Implementing these changes

To implement the requirement of the country being linked (as per the outcome above), a few editors agreed that using the trigramme would be an acceptable compromise. To that end, I've created {{FIFA Country codes}}, which will create a trigramme that links to the Football Associations of each nation. This works for both country names and trigramme entries, and I've trialled it at the sandbox. What do people think? Number 57 16:12, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

I think I would rather see the short name of the country. If space is an issue, drop the flag icon. All the best: Rich Farmbrough (the apparently calm and reasonable) 22:02, 3 May 2020 (UTC).

I think full country names would make the tables a bit of mess due to the difference in length of names and the lack of gridlines (which was agreed above). The advantage of trigrammes is that they are all about the same length, so would make for a more consistent column. Number 57 22:17, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Trigrammes are potentially obscure. We should not assume that anyone reading a football article (especially a domestic football article) is familiar with FIFA codes, anymore than we should assume they are familiar with flags. I am open to the idea that the nationality column could be optional, but if it's there it should be easy to understand. All the best: Rich Farmbrough (the apparently calm and reasonable) 22:42, 3 May 2020 (UTC).

I've made an adjustment to the sandbox to use {{fba}} for the nationality column (should trigrammes be used), which is more flexible by using the flag template system (therefore utilising the titles in Category:Country data redirects). This also allows for flag variants to be used. S.A. Julio (talk) 20:42, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

@S.A. Julio: Where is the base data (the association names) for that template? If we're going to use it, it needs to be clear to editors where to make changes if and when a country's association is renamed (I tried to trace it through the coding, but couldn't work out where it was pulling the data from). Cheers, Number 57 10:12, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Number 57: It's listed on the first line of the documentation, the data is at Template:Fba/list. S.A. Julio (talk) 15:51, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Ha, thanks. No idea how I missed that... Number 57 15:59, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Test in sandbox

Please check out Template:Football_squad_player/sandbox for a test with default wikitable layout. Its optional to use {{Football squad mid}}. If using {{Football squad mid}}, sorting will only work in the column. If the browser windows is to small fit both columns it will move it below. Tholme (talk) 20:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

@Tholme: Is it possible to also see a version without the gridlines? Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 20:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

@Nehme1499:Please check out Template:Football squad player/testcases for example with no grid. Tholme (talk) 21:20, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

I've moved the nationality to between the squad number and the player's name. I think the additional text after player names (such as loan status etc) makes it awkward to have any columns after the player name, as it creates a large whitespace for much of the table. However, I wasn't sure how to do the coding that excludes the column heading if no nation is added.

Separately, can we also make the squad numbers column optional, as many leagues do not have them. Cheers, Number 57 21:32, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

The table has problems on mobile or narrow browsers. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:05, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

WP:REPEATLINK problems aside. Also, having two tables, side-by-side means you cannot spot the full roster, only one side or the other. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:09, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

What are the problems on mobile? I just had a look at the testcases page on my phone and it looks fine (even the existing table which still is side-by-side) fits to the width of the screen, although it's bunched up a lot); the responsive table doesn't have two side-by-side (are you looking at the right bit of the testcases page? The bit under the headings "Sandbox" and "Sandbox no grid" are what the proposed version looks like). Number 57 10:06, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Depends on which mobile. On narrow screens, you have the second table draw below the first rather than beside it and you end up with a second heading. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:08, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

I think that's idea, of it being responsive. It shows the two tables side by side on PC, while one above the other on mobile. If, somehow, there were a way to "remove" the {{Fs mid}} effect during mobile (effectively merging the two tables into one), it would be perfect. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 04:42, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

@Number 57: Also, regarding the large whitespace caused by the extra text (e.g. loan), the best thing to do is to remove the "until 30 June 2020", which is unnecessary and takes up too much space. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 04:48, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

One last comment: the tooltip for the positions is an overkill as, on mobile, it doesn't work, while on PC, hovering over the text already shows the article it's linked to. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 04:50, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Look at the references section of a major team, then narrow the window. As the page narrows, the contents reform. The heading remains the same. If this were a truly responsive table, it would become a single table, not a second one. "Responsive" is not working so single column should be used instead. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:55, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

You seem to be a bit too defeatist. All we need to do is figure a way to "disable" the effects of {{Fs mid}} on the mobile version, and we're good to go. Also, the consensus we reached was: "Responsive (if possible) or two (if not)." Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 06:32, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

You're equating being a realist with being a defeatist? Odd.

Members of the football project wanted a multiple columns. The accessibility project wants this to work for people who have accessibility issues. The multiple, separate tables, each with its own heading would be an unmitigated disaster for them. Don't put too much effort into tables as they are not appropriate and a different approach should be found. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:23, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

As Nehme1499 says, the RfC (which was open to all editors and was not only commented on by football editors) was closed above with the conclusion to use responsive tables if possible, or two columns if not. If you don't like the two columns outcome, it's in your interests to make the responsive table work.

@Nehme1499: The whitespace isn't an issue now; the table just looked very odd when the flags had been moved to the right of the players' names. Number 57 11:33, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Was it only commented on by football project members? I can say for certain I'm not and I don't think RexxS is, so please check your facts. It's going to be a problem for the accessibility project. If you can't make two separate tables work it is not in my interest at all to make it work as 1) I'm not a coder and 2) there's a viable alternative: one table. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:43, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

You're the only one talking on behalf of a community you aren't a part of (the accessibility project). If they have a problem with the current solution, they should be the ones to express their thoughts. Also, I really don't see how having two tables (one on top of the other) on mobile is that horrible. How does it violate accessibility? It is working, all we need to do (and again, I've repeated this three times) is to fix the {{Fs mid}} issue. If it can't be fixed, it's still a good compromise. I would much rather have 2 tables side-by-side on PC and 2 tables (one on top of the other) on mobile, than one table on all devices. The PC needs two tables separated by fs mid, as there is way too much unutilized space to the right. The mobile just needs not to have the tables side by side, which, for now, we have accomplished. The fact that a second "header" appears on the mobile version isn't that big of a deal, and I'm sure its fixable. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 20:59, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Walter, you've misread what I said – I said it was "not only commented on by football editors". Anyway, I've asked a template code expert to have a look at it. Number 57 21:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

In this case, there are limitations on how responsive an HTML table can be. The responsive columns in a reference section is a different matter, not at all comparable to tables. It is possible to make the second (right) table/column "collapse" below the first, but there is no way for the tables to responsively merge into one with the duplicate headings removed (this would require more advanced coding that could not be implemented here). I do not know if a Lua module could provide a different output depending on the size of the screen, but this would not be truly responsive either. S.A. Julio (talk) 22:45, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

@S.A. Julio: Are you able to resolve the issue whereby if one player does not have his nationality included, that cell collapses and the player's name moves across (compare the location of Gerard Pique in the tables here. I suspect this is an issue with {{football squad player/sandbox}}. Cheers, Number 57 23:03, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Try adding a nonbreaking space if |nat= is blank, something like:

• | {{#if:{{{nat|}}}| style="padding-right:15px;"{{!}} {{fba|{{{nat}}}|variant={{{natvar|}}}|name=code}} |   }}

--RexxS (talk) 23:14, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

@Number 57: Was there an intent to optionally not have a nationality column for some articles? If so, then to solve the issue you mentioned, there would have to be a way to pass the information that the column does not exist on a given page, for example |nat=n or |nonat=y (which would need to be present in each instance of {{fs player}}). Or another template could be created, say {{Football squad player no nationality}}, to call this template while passing the parameter |nonat=y. S.A. Julio (talk) 00:26, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@S.A. Julio: The disappearing cell was introduced by Tholme when they edited it, but I don't think it needs to disappear, and it sounds like it is going to be difficult to make it work if it does (so I think your suggestion of a separate template for no nationality is best, if it's actually needed). I've edited it myself to make sure the nationality column always appears, but I couldn't do it using the {{fba}} template you added. Cheers, Number 57 10:09, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2) A Lua module can't do that sort of job with the current MediaWiki software because it runs server-side and the server code it runs inside doesn't know how big your screen is. Even if it did, we'd have no ability to do caching of the html served and everything would be running a lot slower. You could use client-side JavaScript to recompose two adjacent tables into one, but that would require everybody to run the JavaScript. Changing MediaWiki:Common.js is a long process starting with creating the code and then getting consensus at Village Pump. That assumes that everybody's mobile platform runs the JavaScript, of course. The solution you presently have is simply to have two separate tables (not two "columns"), regardless of where they are placed on the display. Each of them is going to need a unique caption, so perhaps some thought needs to be put into that as well. --RexxS (talk) 23:06, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

I guess I was referring to the original structure, where two separate tables are placed within the columns of an outer table. This seems to have changed in the sandbox, though having an outer table would make a caption easier. And yeah, JavaScript is not a realistic option for such an issue. S.A. Julio (talk) 00:26, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Accessibility

Seeing as Walter mentioned it... One major reason the {{fs player2}} family of templates was created in the first place, and why some club pages still use them, is because the underlying html of the {{fs player}} templates was unable to be parsed correctly by screen readers, so people who needed to use such devices couldn't read the squad lists properly. Do (any of) the proposed implementation(s) address this problem? cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:05, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Adding @Tholme:. Struway2 (talk) 08:15, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I belive the proposed implementations in the sandbox solves these problems. Tholme (talk) 18:40, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

It addresses the flags, not the repeat linking but the over linking, not the layout issues. You now have two separate tables and this is going to be a problem. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:22, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Repeat linking is not necessarily a problem in tables. And football squad has always been in two tables (when fs mid has used, which has the effect of creating a second table alongside the first) – this is not a fundamental change to how it functions – the only change is to make it possible to display the second below the first.

From my knowledge of templates, I don't believe the repeat linking can be resolved while squadlists are created using separate fs player templates, as the separate templates cannot see what a previous template is doing. It might be possible to do it if a single squadlist template was created, but this would involve replacing how it is coded on every page it's used.

Anyway, in the meantime, are people happy with implementing the current sandbox version, which at ticks off one outcome and does the best job anyone's been able to manage so far with the other? Number 57 19:43, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

That's the point: they have not always been in two tables. MLS articles, Atlanta United FC#Roster for example, use a correct single-column table. Even the current accessibility challenged version is a single table. See Chelsea F.C.#Squad for example. People are not happy with implementing the current sandbox version. Two columns, while space saving, is not going to work. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:28, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Who are these people who aren't happy with the sandbox version being implemented? Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 20:32, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

The outcome of the discussion above was to have a responsive table (if possible) or two columns if not. If you're not happy with the responsiveness of the sandbox version, then for now you're going to have to accept the two columns version. Number 57 21:56, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Govvy made the case, in a different discussion, that MOS:FLAGS doesn't apply to tables. Regardless of that, I don't think the positions need a tooltip, given that it doesn't work on mobile, and on PC you can just hover over the linked positions and it will show you the article it refers to. Other than that, it seems good to go. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 20:30, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

(after edit conflicts) Football squad being hacked into two tables is what caused the problem for screen reader users. Nothing to do with flags, nothing to do with repeat linking. That's the main reason why the alternative single-column layout was created, and if that problem does still remain unsolved, then unfortunately there's still a need for the alternative version to exist. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 20:34, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Agreed. Those who use screen readers. See MOS:ACCESS Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:00, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

I am not sure what's going on exactly, what type of screen readers do people have a problem with? Is it the speech recognition system? Because the current version of my speech reader doesn't actually tell you what nationality a player is in the default football squad player template. Govvy (talk) 08:52, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

I installed one (a Chrome Extension) yesterday to check what the complaints were, and it reads out the nationality for the default template. However, I am wondering what exactly the issue is with the two-column format as it read out the squadlist fine (from my perspective). The only thing I noticed was that it read out the second header. Is this the problem that people have with it? Number 57 09:22, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

The "problem" is that when it's two columns, the headings get read twice and so there is no "middle". It is better than the current format as it's all one big table that is read left-to-right. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:07, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

I was actually looking at an article in the current format. The screen reader read it out the correct order and didn't jump from one side of the table to the other until it got to the bottom of the first column of players. Number 57 17:48, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

I've got a user of a a series of screen readers in ACCESS project that disagrees with that. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:22, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

It's not a case of disagreeing – the screen reader I installed (ChromeVox Classic) read it as I described. Perhaps the question is whether all screen readers behave the same way. Can you ping that editor so they can join the discussion? Number 57 20:56, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

The new template works with as many columns as you want, if you only want one column, then just skip using {{Football squad mid}}. Tholme (talk) 16:07, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

That does not solve the problem of consistency across articles then. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:07, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

I think I've managed to create a responsive table (which doesn't include splitting a table into two separate ones) here. The impact of fs mid is not to create a separate table alongside the first, but instead just colours a normal row (which you have to place in the correct place in the list to get it to display at the top of the second column like a header). The list remains a single table but splits midway through as it uses {{div col}}. For screenreaders, this should appear as a single table, just as lists split by div col read out as a single list. I am trying to work out whether div col allows for genuine headers that would only repeat if the table splits in two (currently when the table displays in a single column with a second header added, the second header appears midway through the list). However, having a second heading might not be such a terrible outcome, as it will only appear midway through a table when a list is forced into a single column on a narrow screen, so can act as a reminder heading for long squadlists. Still I definitely would like to be able to force the columns closer together on wide screens. If anyone is able to help, please have a go. Cheers, Number 57 21:52, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

It displays in a two columns in Chrome when the canvas is around 1500 pixels wide. When I make it smaller, it's a single column, but the heading redraws halfway down the page. In Firefox, it is always a single column and Chrome goes to three columns when it's just a bit wider than that. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:11, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

I have fixed the code so that this example now will show maximum two columns, and not three or more if the canvas is bigger than ca. 1600px. Tholme (talk) 22:33, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Nice! Thanks. Still a single column in Firefox at all resolutions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:14, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion has stagnated for over a month. Has everything been agreed on or is there something else we need to discuss? Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 20:45, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

I think there is, yes. It's not working as a collection of tables. Another approach should be tried instead. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:22, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: If there is consensus from editors that any of the proposals discussed are satisfactory, they can be implemented. I would suggest in the absence of anyone else stepping in to help design a new, improved template (which perhaps could be done via a lua module, which is well beyond my capabilities), the version in the sandbox should be implemented as it at least introduces the country name, which was an outcome of the RfC. Number 57 10:44, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Why not ask at MOS:ACCESS as they will give you feedback on accessibility. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:09, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

You and others have already given feedback here and you have previously requested input from there on several occasions, so I'm not sure what yet another request would do right now (unless it's some kind of delaying tactic?). The sandbox version does not appear to introduce any new issues but does at least introduce some of the changes required by the RfC outcome. I suggest we implement it as a first step. If anyone knows any editors who are good with modules, then we can ask them for help for a longer-term solution. Number 57 19:35, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

I think @Frietjes is pretty good with templates. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 19:41, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

My feedback is from a web testing position. ACCESS will give you accessibility feedback. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:08, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Implementation

Any news? Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 21:22, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

It seems no-one is willing to help try and create a version that ticks every box. In the meantime, I suggest we adopt the improvements that at least tick some of them (i.e. adding the country codes). Number 57 22:08, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

As long as we merge this template with {{Football squad player2}}, I'm fine. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 22:16, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

What does "merge with Football squad player2" even mean? It's closer to meeting ACCESS. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:06, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

By merge I mean that both templates become the same template. We shouldn't have separate templates for the same usage. By "merge with Fs player2" I don't mean that we should be looking for a solution closer to Fs player, rather that one template becomes a redirect to the other. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 17:54, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I understand it now. Walter Görlitz (talk)

Is anyone here capable of merging the two templates, adopting the sandbox version? Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 13:44, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

I have implemented the sandbox version in the original fs squad template, so the country trigramme now displays, plus the colour agreed at the RfC has been implemented. Number 57 16:24, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi guys, just seen the merger, noticed a lot of Irish players are listed under the nationality 'IRE' for Republic of Ireland under the old template. This is linking to the Irish Football Association (Northern Irish football association) and the flag is the Saint Patrick's Saltire. Is there a way of fixing it or do all Irish players now have to be corrected to IRL. Thanks. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 19:34, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Rugbyfan22: Basically, prior to these changes, "IRE" used to display the same result as "IRL"? Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 19:56, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: Correct, Previously "IRE" linked the same as "IRL", whereas now "IRE" links the same as "NIR" but with the old-flag of Northern Ireland (Saint Patrick's Saltire). Basically "IRE" is now linking to Northern Ireland football association instead of Republic of Ireland. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 20:00, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Number 57: Do you know how to fix this? Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 20:05, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

No, but S.A. Julio should, as he wrote the code used for that element. However, I suspect it may be the case that the articles have to be fixed (as they are using the wrong trigramme). It should be possible to identify which articles are using it via a tracer. Number 57 20:15, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Actually, I'm just doing a quick review via AWB of all pages that link to Irish Football Association to see if any have nat=IRE and fixing them. Number 57 20:27, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Nice, good work! Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 20:31, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

OK, think it's mostly sorted now. Around 520 articles were using IRE instead of IRL and have been fixed. There may be some still out there, but I can't find them with AWB. Number 57 22:06, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, IRL is the official country code used by FIFA. When using {{fb}}, IRE/EIR is used to link to the Ireland national football team (1882–1950) under the Irish Football Association, so for consistency I maintained this in {{fba}}. S.A. Julio (talk) 19:02, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Multiple issues

Why have we truncated the template? Also, I don't like the deviation on the background colour from plain page to a different background, having issues with that. Also, the alternative code is gone for the flag icons and that needs to be reinstated. Govvy (talk) 12:45, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

@Govvy: Do you mean the alternative text? It is already present for the flag icons. S.A. Julio (talk) 14:22, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

@S.A. Julio: I can't see any alt text when I hover over the flags (e.g. here). I'm not sure what Govvy means by 'truncated' though? If anything the new version is slightly larger as it now includes the trigrammes. Number 57 14:29, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

I think the nationality isn't being read out because the idea is that it's not the nationality being displayed, rather the nation's football federation. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 14:45, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

@Number 57: The alt attribute is present for the flag icons (you can view this in the source code). However, the flag icons themselves are not linked (the accompanying FIFA trigramme instead is). Normally you see the text "England" when hovering over because it links to England (done by the software), while no mouseover text displays over the flag icons for  ENG or  England. However, if desired I can add mouseover text using the title attribute (though I have not usually noticed this used in flag templates). S.A. Julio (talk) 15:15, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

On my 15" screen it looks, I don't know, truncated to me, I find the hover over text really very helpful, especially when I am not sure of the flag colours, and the three letter's afterwards, I am not really sure about that, it should be a whole name or not at all in my opinion, the three letters might be confusing to certain readers. Govvy (talk) 16:01, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

I am in agreement with that, the three letters doesn't tell you which country the player comes from does it? REDMAN 2019 (talk) 16:56, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

If it's the full name, the template will be a mess when you have players from countries with long names. The idea behind using the trigrammes was that they are consistently three letters. Number 57 17:29, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't know about other people, but I am not a fan of the three letters, nor the over-linked squad positions. Govvy (talk) 18:13, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't think it's possible to automatically de-link multiple instances of positions. As for the trigram, it's the only aesthetically pleasing solution because, as N57 pointed out, some countries (such as Trinidad and Tobago) would mess up the table width. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 19:26, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

I didn't think there was anything wrong before the changes. I would say if it ain't broke don't fix it!! :/ Govvy (talk) 19:43, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

I would also prefer for there to only be a flag, without text. However, it apparently violates MOS:ACCESS, so we needed to add some text. As for the positions, I don't think it's different than before? Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 19:50, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, the positions were linked on every line in the previous version. Number 57 20:36, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

The flags and the country codes seems like massive overkill and just makes the template look crowded and clunky. Do we really need country codes? NouveauSarfas (Talk page) 00:33, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Per the RfC above, we can't put only the flag without the country's name (or code) next to it, per MOS:ACCESS. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 00:38, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Oh, bugger is all I can say. Can we at least change the background back to normal? Govvy (talk) 21:04, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with this, but the outcome of the section RfC on this was to use MediaWiki default (albeit not with a terrible amount of consensus). I'm also not sure how to change this. It looks like the code is looking at something that defines "wikitable football-squad", but I have no idea where this is. I assume Tholme knows where it is? Number 57 21:25, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

The real problem is that this template is not suited for this to start with. The cramped layout when accessibility was correctly considered was a primary motivator when {{Fs player2 sort}} was created 12 years ago. It is wider and longer, but does not look cramped, and you get the full nation name not a TLA. While the other template still needs to be fixed so it links to the association, not nation, it's a better fit for accessibility. I'll also remind readers here that the trigram with a tool tip is still a minor issue as tablets cannot hover easily to get the tool tip.

I suppose, you could make each side of this template a wider to avoid this cramping. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

What I don't understand is, why was {{Fs player2 sort}} created 12 years ago? Why weren't changes made directly to {{Football squad player}}? I'm not saying one is better than the other, but I really don't see why we now have Saudi, American, and a handful of other countries only using Fs player2, while 99% of other leagues use Fs player. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 12:11, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

From memory, fs start/player/end2 was initially created as a form of a sandbox version to showcase a potential change, but there was insufficient support to change the main template to that format. However, rather than it being left as a dead end, some editors began using v2 instead. It's a mess that should never have been allowed to happen, but there is a bit of a history of North American editors doing things their own way (I recall at least one threat to start a breakaway WikiProject after a dispute over wording in {{Infobox football club}}), and lower profile leagues are often prone to a single editor implementing changes across a wide number of articles without discussion (I guess this may have happened with the Saudi ones). Number 57 14:03, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Maybe it should just be one table like the fs player2 sort, and in one column. I think being able to sort the table is very useful. There will then also be space to use the full name for nations.

The background is set in Commons.css for wikitable, but it is possible to overwrite with css styling on the individual rows. I belive the best would to use a more normal wikitable with standard grid lines and backgrounds. Tholme (talk) 16:49, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, the second template was made in an effort to address accessibility. The consensus us one large table is not preferred by most, and ideally a responsive table should be used if possible so that mobile viewers can see it better. I can't recall what the effect of having the "two column" view is on screen readers—the tool that those who have difficulty seeing text use to read the page to them—but if I recall, they read across the table, not down numerically. This is avoided with a single-column table. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:25, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Merge with {{Football squad player2}}

So, what is missing to merge the two? Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 21:27, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

MOS:ACCESS had to be met and ideally, WP:OVERLINK. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:53, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Didn't we already meed ACCESS? And OVERLINK doesn't apply to tables. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 14:15, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

You're confusing may be linked in tables with must be linked. If a reader of the roster would be helped by the link is the question. If we had used full names rather than the three-letter acronyms, is there any benefit to the links here Arsenal F.C.#First-team squad? Gabon is the only uncommon nation in the list. I can see millions of readers thinking, "I wonder if there's a Misplaced Pages article about the football association in Germany? Oh I know how to find it: Arsenal's keeper is German, I'll click through to the roster to get to it." Granted, the better squad listing also links it so it's not any better, but easier to solve. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:26, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

The positions and countries are linked for every player both versions of the squad template, so this is not an issue that is preventing a merger of the two.

A constructive answer is that there are two options to resolve this:

1. Manually change every article using fs player2 to the main template
2. Make fs squad player backwards compatible with {{fs player2}} and {{Fs player2 sort}} (e.g. enable {{fs player}} to process with firstname/lastname input) and deal with any article that is using a non-standard heading for the squad (you may be able to create a list of every article that uses. Once that's resolved, the template can simply be redirected.

Number 57 17:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

That won't work since it uses a single column and is preferable. Use the better template and ditch this one. It's really a lot easier, especially when you can just ignore the mid. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:04, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

• The replacement should be doable quite quickly semi automatically. 600 pages isn't that much and I or some other WP:TFDH regular should be able to do it without too much bother. --Trialpears (talk) 17:43, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  • As the modified fs player template meets all the criteria agreed in the RfC (country name next to flag, two columns (as a responsive table has not been possible to develop), abbreviations used for the position, and no gridlines), I suggest this starts. Doing it semi-automatically will also allow fixing the non-standard table headers. Number 57 17:49, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
    • I'll take a look. Haven't really been following this closely and am quite busy currently so I won't promise it to be quick. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trialpears (talk • contribs) 17:53, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
• After taking another look I think the best course of action would be performing the merger even though further tweaking may be desirable. This template is now significantly more in line with the consensus reached in the RfC tha the other version. I would be comfortable starting replacements this weekend if I have time and no one complains here. --Trialpears (talk) 22:33, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Still not ideal though. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:35, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
  • I'm ok with the merger. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 18:44, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Yes, it would be good to make a start. Cheers, Number 57 19:18, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@Trialpears: Any update? Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 02:34, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

No, because of the problems that remain. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:39, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

After seeing that several "football transfers" articles had landed in Category:Pages where node count is exceeded using many football squad player tables, I somehow fell into this rabbit hole, where I've been for the past two days. I've just noticed that Template:Football team 1 redirects to Template:Football squad start and Template:Football team 2 redirects to Template:Football squad mid and these templates are used in articles such as FA Youth Cup Finals of the 2000s, where each column in a 2-column table is for a different team. This throws a little monkey wrench at the idea that tables could be auto-split into two columns at the midway point on screens large enough to support two columns. – wbm1058 (talk) 23:41, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Wbm1058: This template shouldn't be used in that page. It should be formatted as such, using tables for the players. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 23:59, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

It shouldn't be too much work to change the usage of those. Just 1816 pages use {{Football team 1}} 16 pages use {{Football team 2}}. – wbm1058 (talk) 00:16, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Wbm1058: Yep, agreed. Regarding the merge of Fs player and Fs player2, do you think it's going to be complicated? Are there other things that have to be taken care of before they can be merged? Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 00:26, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

I've made several edits which bring the two into closer alignment, and so far nobody has reverted me or objected to any of my edits. See the next subsection. wbm1058 (talk) 04:37, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

It was bound to happen. One of my edits to Template:Football squad start was reverted, so I have made a corresponding edit to Template:Football squad start2. See WT:FOOTBALL#Fs start - template update question. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

{{{team}}} was added on 25 August 2012 to allow for some merging Template:Football team 1 & Template:Football team 2 (they had actually been merged on 7 June 2012‎ but support for the {{{team}}} parameter had been neglected). The February monthly TemplateData usage report shows {{{team}}} only used on 15 pages, which seem to be the same pages that use Template:Football team 1 & Template:Football team 2. So if we substitute those templates on these pages I think we'll just have the wikitable source code on those pages without the tables being generated by templates, and we can drop support for {{{team}}} as an unused parameter rather than merge that parameter into Template:Football squad start2. – wbm1058 (talk) 20:09, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

I haven't seen any discussions about the matter, but I suppose the reason for using templates to build a squad's roster is that membership is under constant flux, and it's easier for editors unfamiliar with wikitable syntax to add or remove team members when the implementation uses templates. But for matches the opposing squads for the match are what they were, and will never change, so it's better to just use wikitables as these will never need to be edited except to correct any errors. – wbm1058 (talk) 20:50, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Responsive template

The consensus was to make the table responsive to window width (if possible) or two-column (if not), but I can see from the discussion above that making it responsive is important to Walter Görlitz, so we should try again for that. I see that earlier attempts didn't find an acceptable solution. Below are transcluded discussions relevant to that from Number 57 talk. – wbm1058 (talk) 04:37, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Alternative text on ENG

At the moment when you hover over it, it just says The Football Association Can we change that to the The English Football Association? Govvy (talk) 10:39, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

I think this is one for S.A. Julio. However, it may not be possible to amend, as it's a general Misplaced Pages feature that shows the title of the article that the link is to. Number 57 10:55, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

The solution would be linking the redirect which I don't see any problem with. --Trialpears (talk) 11:00, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Not sure it's a good idea, as this will mean there are thousands of links pointing to a redirect. Number 57 11:05, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Can you not program the link to not point like an element |pointing=no or something? Govvy (talk) 17:17, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Why should it point to "The English Football Association"? There is no such organisation. We may not like the arrogance of them referring to themselves as The Football Association, but that's what they're called. – PeeJay 18:15, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

ref location

Can we shift the ref field to go after the |other= field, as we use that field for loans information also, is seems smarter to have the ref run after that maybe? At the end of the string line. I've used the feature on Tottenham Hotspur F.C.#Players for Out on loan players. Thought it would help, thoughts? Govvy (talk) 12:39, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Just put the ref outside the template at the end of the line as at Manchester United F.C. No need to put it in its own parameter of the template. – PeeJay 16:46, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

• Template-Class football pages
• NA-importance football pages
• WikiProject Football articles