Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Aston Villa F.C. players

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: 16 days, 5 support, 0 oppose. Promote. Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:20, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since the main article Aston Villa got FA status me and Woodym555 have put our efforts into pages such as this one Captains and managers. I would be grateful for feedback and what needs doing to this article but i feel it meets all the criteria! User:Everlast1910 21:42, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Neutral
• Appearances, goals, nationalities do not sort correctly.
  • They do if you click them twice, don't ask me why, they just do.
• Notes should not be sorted, IMO.
  • removed section, replacement section is not sorted.
• Format your references. {{cite web}} template may help.
  • References now formatted correctly
• It would be better if you had a See also section where you could list all those "for...,see..".
  • I have now added one in.

--Crzycheetah 22:52, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can't make one column non-sortable. Either all the columns are, or none. There's no issue with it, really, except the fact the column is not necessary to begin with. Circeus 17:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you can. You can just add class="unsortable" before the title of that column. See Nadir Afonso artworks for an example.--Crzycheetah 17:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Summary of my recent edits: I have removed the notes section, was primarily trivia that should be in own articles. I have now added the unsortable tag in to the records section that is the replacement for the notes section. I have added a see also section. I agree that the "for..." was getting a bit unsightly.Woodym555 19:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose
  • No images
    • FL guidelines state "It has images if they are appropriate to the subject," I dont think that it needs any images, they wouldn't add to the list. Also any images would disrupt the table format and other related featured lists do not have any (including List of Arsenal F.C. players which was the basis for the article).
  • For the most parts, the "notes" are entirely unnecessary. The captains, if included, would be best placed in a separate section. Other articles (Central Coast Mariners FC and Queensland Roar FC) have sections for "notable players" and "records" instead. Keep the table short and sweet.
• Circeus 17:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Summary of edits in reply: I agree with the statement about the notes, they were unneccessary and as such i have removed them. A colour coded system is now in place. With regards to the FLs that you have listed i do not think that they are relevant to an English Club. They seem to cover recent players only. I have based the list around the featured List of Arsenal F.C. players. With all due respect the list will be as long as it needs to be to ensure that it remains comprehensive.Woodym555 19:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Still oppose. Information that should have been placed in separate sections from the beginning are now only available via color, which is even worse for accessibility. Besides, the captainship years should have been kept. Circeus 15:38, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Could you please elaborate on "information". As far i know, no information has been lost. Can you suggest any separate sections? The "notes" section had degenerated into trivia, the statements that weren't trivia are dealt with elsewhere in wikipedia more accurately. The List of Aston Villa captains deals with all of the information regarding Captains. This page should not become a duplicate of that page. With regards to accessibility "Especially, do not use colored text unless its status is also indicated using another method such as italic emphasis or footnote labels." The footnotes deal with what the colours mean. There not that much information covered by the colours really, hall of fames and captaincy are the only things. Woodym555 15:53, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • neutral Circeus 19:25, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak support List has seen tremendous improvement since my previous neutral, but I'm still iffy with the use of color. Circeus 17:28, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose
  • Bill Walker (214 goals) is described as the club's top goalscorer, but Harry Hampton is listed as having scored 242 goals. Either somethin's wrong, or something hasn't been explained clearly enough.
    • It has now been corrected, (FYI Bill Walker scored 244 goals)
  • Further to Crzycheetah's comments, notes and rerfersnces should be in a seperate section; and anything denoting multiple spells at the club should go in the "Aston Villa career" column.
    • Removed the star (*) denoting multiple spells, they were unnecessary. Also separated notes and used correct format for references.
  • "Notable" is not defined in the article
    • I think it does define it. The main lead paragraph defines it as such: over 100 appearances and/or a special record. These "special records" are noted in the notes section.Woodym555 19:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  Tompw (talk) (review) 21:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  I feel my concerns have been dealt with, but the points made by others still apply. Tompw (talk) (review) 15:53, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment There is a new thing that I didn't like. The footnotes in the claret color don't look very well, especially when they get purple after use. I understand your desire to use the club's official colors, but maybe you could use a lighter color to represent club record holders? --Crzycheetah 20:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree, i had been trying to change the wikilink colour in my sandbox but it didn't work out. Anyway the claret was harsh on the eye so i have changed it to green, works better now. Woodym555 21:06, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment
  • The appearances and goals columns don't sort properly. The reason being, the first entry "n/a" isn't a number, so it forces the column to sort alphabetically rather than numerically. The sort mode is dependent on the first entry in the column to be sorted at the time the sort button is clicked. See Help:Sorting.
    • I have added the sm=n syntax but it still doesnt work correctly. As such i have asked for help on the sorting table talk page.
      • Format the numbers using {{nts}} eg {{nts|95}}. Then they will sort correctly first time. Tompw (talk) (review) 15:53, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The white on blue isn't very clear for those like myself with less than perfect colour/contrast vision - to me, it looks blurry (I realise I may well be the only one for whom this is a problem). Struway2 | Talk 11:00, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have turned the text black now to avoid any problems. Looks better for me as well actually Woodym555 14:16, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Question Why do Walter H. Price and George Ramsay have "n/a" in the apearences and goals columns? Tompw (talk) (review) 18:12, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Simply put: the information is not available. Every source that i have looked at does not have the information listed. As far as i know the information is not listed. Ramsay in particular is more famous for his secretary/advisor/Vice-President/directorship roles at the club than for the actual games played. Hope that helps?Woodym555 18:21, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • In which case, add a note to that effect - "N/A" means not applicable, which isn't the case here. Tompw (talk) (review) 19:43, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Fair enough. Must have had a mind blank. The N/A was originally put in to avoid the sortable problems. I have provided an explanation at the top (in the key). Woodym555 19:54, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Neutral a couple of quick points

• Two players are listed as being "Utility" players without explaining what this means, it may be better to lose the term altogether or link them to Football (soccer) positions
  • Have added a note at the top of positions linking to Football (soccer) positions. Added wikilink for Utility player in columns.
• Consider creating stubs for those redlinks It's not essential and no it shouldn't be a bar for a Featured List
  • Will do when have time. I think over 90% are not but don't think it should disqualify the list.

 Done Stubs now made (Everlast1910 23:05, 7 August 2007 (UTC))

• See also - is there a need to have two links to the same article?
  • Nope there isn't so have removed Aston Villa F.C. which is linked in the intro anyway
• Captaincy column - shouldn't this use ndash's between years as in the career column?
  • Yes it should and now it does Woodym555 22:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-- Foxhill 21:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - List is well created, nicely laid out and comprehensive. Foxhill 22:46, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support The list got even better during this nomination.--Crzycheetah 18:31, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Good but I don't like the images or the see also section. Buc 06:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Deleted images in see also section as well as deleting see also section) Woodym555 11:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Well done. I don't think the "see also" section is needed, given that the Aston Villa template has the links already, but that's not enough to qualify my support. A couple of minor things that I fixed, in case someone wants to check: (a) changed "-" to ndashes (b) fixed the nationality sorting order problem (Serbia and Trinidad were first, before Australia) by using "<span style="display:none">England</span>" etc (is there a better way?) (c) consolidated references for e.g. FA Cup winning captains (d) for John Devey, removed the note that said "Won the First Division and 2 FA Cups" as this seemed to duplicate the following note "Won the First Division and 2 FA Cups as Captain". Bencherlite^Talk 09:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • (deleted see also, THANKYOU for fixing nationalities, (only way as far as i can tell) THANKS again.) Woodym555 11:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment
  • Use of colour/clarity is much improved, but any more use of colour would make the list look messy again
    • I agree, no need for anymore colour! Don't think anything else could be highlighted by colour to be honest.
  • Don't think the images at the bottom add anything to the list, and they distract from the notes section.
    • Given the persisitenet concerns, i have removed them.
  • Suggest removing the See also section - perhaps add a link to current squad at the top as on List of Arsenal F.C. players, and for the rest, there is already a navbox at the bottom of the article
    • Already removed
  • Clarify the note against Tom Waring - 50 goals in League, all comps? club record or English?
    • Clarified
  • Thomas Sørensen (158 League appearances) isn't here. Are you sure there aren't any more?
    • I have trawled through the Comprehensice Fansite and have added as many as i have found. There may of course be the odd one that has been missed, mainly current players. I am 99% sure that this list is comprehensive. Woodym555 09:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Struway2 | Talk 09:19, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral My concerns have generally been dealt with adequately and very promptly. I'm still not really very keen on colour being used as the major indicator of a particular piece of information, though the list as amended is much clearer and much less excessively colourful than it was. Struway2 | Talk 22:36, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]