Tournament infoboxes
I understand your points about the most recent details of a defunct tournament being included in the infobox, I sort of agree that it can be unhelpful to the reader. However, it doesn't seem right to me that a current tournament can include these details irregardless of previous editions, surely applying the same logic then this would be unhelpful to the reader as well. Thoughts? Jimmymci234 (talk) 19:48, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- My view is that we should provide details a reader would expect to see. As such, current details are helpful for current tournaments, but final edition details are unhelpful for defunct tournaments (unless the tournament had a permanent home). wjematherplease leave a message... 19:57, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Flag counting
I had hidden the flags so that they did not show on the page. I left a note there saying that if anyone wanted to see it, they could unhide it. Therefore, it is not disruptive. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 16:36, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- It is not a valid use of hidden text since there is consensus against your flag-counting tables. Persisting with inserting them into articles (hidden or otherwise) is therefore disruptive. Some might view your edits in this regard as gaming the system and not being here to build an encyclopedia. Please be mindful and stop this now. Thanks. wjematherplease leave a message... 16:43, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- No problem. I have three questions though. First, what about the "Past Champions" grid, should it be in the article at all, hidden or unhidden? Second, when creating a new page for an annual event, what about the issue of copying the text from a previous year to make a new page for this year, does it really need a note along with it now? For many years, we always used to to copy the text and no one ever had a problem with it. And third, is everyone who copies the text for a new page getting a warning these days, or are only a few people getting the warning? Johnsmith2116 (talk) 16:55, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Consensus was reached to remove the "Past Champions" (note: they are noted in the full result anyway) unless we have child articles on the field (we generally don't). As such, these should also not be in the article, whether hidden or not.
- Yes, there has always been the requirement for attribution when copying content within Wikipedia, but it isn't always something that has been picked up on. There are many way to add attribution; the simplest being to simply use the edit summary. If you've forgotten to do that, you can make a dummy edit in order to add such an edit summary (best if there are not too many intervening edits). The alternative is to add the {{copied}} template to the talk page. And lastly, I generally add a note or template to the talk page of anyone I notice copy-pasting without attribution; I can't speak for what others do. wjematherplease leave a message... 17:08, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- No problem. I have three questions though. First, what about the "Past Champions" grid, should it be in the article at all, hidden or unhidden? Second, when creating a new page for an annual event, what about the issue of copying the text from a previous year to make a new page for this year, does it really need a note along with it now? For many years, we always used to to copy the text and no one ever had a problem with it. And third, is everyone who copies the text for a new page getting a warning these days, or are only a few people getting the warning? Johnsmith2116 (talk) 16:55, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
The template
I did not refuse to acknowledge a template. I've been busy for days and haven't been able to make time to edit in Wikipedia, and am still trying to catch up. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 17:00, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Apologies, that was a poor choice of words on my part. wjematherplease leave a message... 17:09, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
maintenance tags
Hey,
I saw your message of User: Nigej's talk page. Yeah, you're probably right, the pages I have been creating have probably grown too long (and perhaps way too long).
I would just like to go over my line of thinking to clarify things. Basically, I find all this information on an individual golfer but in piecemeal fashion in daily newspaper reports. I usually find very little overarching information about the golfers in my research which would help narrow the search. So I end up creating a page in a piecemeal fashion as it can be sometimes difficult to determine what is important and what is not. (So I usually end up determining that everything is important...) I'm not sure if you're aware of a magazine search engine - something like that would help me. Magazine articles are more likely to go over a golfer's career and they would help me focus on important themes and synthesize material. If a search engine like this does not exist, I still need some method to help me focus and narrow the search. Please let me know what you think.
Anyway, I checked out WP:NOTEVERYTHING. It looks like the section "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information" is most applicable to me, specifically the "not a summary" subsection (as you seem to imply). I will look more into it later.
Also, I think you mentioned somewhere that regional and national newspapers were strongly preferred over local sources. If so, this might serve as a useful filter for me, especially regarding Israelson's early amateur career in high school.
Any advice would be helpful.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 06:51, 16 March 2022 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
- FYI I have begun making serious edits. I am probably half done. I will let you know when I am complete - should be done by the end of this week.
- Oogglywoogly (talk) 04:56, 23 March 2022 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
- Hey, I'm pretty much done revising Israelson's page. I strongly suspect the amount of edits I've done will not meet your expectations. Nonetheless, for the time being, that's the most I want to do. Please let me know your thoughts.
- Sincerely,
- Oogglywoogly (talk) 23:52, 24 April 2022 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
European Tour season pages
I'm thinking about tidying up the European Tour season pages regarding formatting as I have done with Aus Tour, Sunshine Tour, Asian Tour and Japan Tour so far. As these tables are fairly wide, do you think it would be acceptable to remove the "R2D points" column. This doesn't seem like necessary info to include in the winners table and would help with wrapping if removed. I think something similar to the PGA Tour articles regarding the FedEx Cup would work better, where points breakdown for R2D could be covered in the R2D section instead. We also don't include how many FedEx Cup points each event carries in the PGA Tour season pages. Thoughts? Jimmymci234 (talk) 19:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- Unlike earlier seasons (when points had a direct money equivalence) and the PGA Tour, since 2019 R2D points allocations have varied hugely for regular tournaments (i.e. except majors, wgcs, rolex series, etc.) which makes detailing them similar to FedEx points, where allocations are standard across all tournaments (alternate/team/regular/wgc/majors & players/playoffs), difficult; so I'd keep them. I've also never managed to find out how R2D points are broken down in recent years. wjematherplease leave a message... 20:04, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- Fwiw, I believe the R2D points are distributed in the same percentages as the prize funds are (correct me if I'm wrong). As broken down in this article [1]. Would this give any bearing to your breakdown table in User:Wjemather/European Tour? If so, maybe we would be able to complete this and may be worthy of inclusion in the R2D sections in the ET pages? Jimmymci234 (talk) 18:16, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
- No doubt they are similar percentages, but it's clear that if they are the ones in use, there is also some rounding going on (e.g. a 2000 point event gives 335 to the winner, but 16.67% is 333.4). Plus we'd need a reliable source detailing an explicit breakdown. wjematherplease leave a message... 18:38, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
- Fwiw, I believe the R2D points are distributed in the same percentages as the prize funds are (correct me if I'm wrong). As broken down in this article [1]. Would this give any bearing to your breakdown table in User:Wjemather/European Tour? If so, maybe we would be able to complete this and may be worthy of inclusion in the R2D sections in the ET pages? Jimmymci234 (talk) 18:16, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
take a look
Scroll down to the bottom and take a look at what you said here. You were in agreement with me. You said "Thanks for the note. That seems to fit just fine with the guidance" ... https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wjemather&direction=next&oldid=1014190894 Johnsmith2116 (talk) 19:37, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
- Please note, acknowledging possible (or even probable) compliance with a guideline is not an implicit agreement that such additions should be made (I didn't think they should then, and still don't). You really aren't saving anyone (usually yourself) any time or effort; indeed, you are actually increasing your own effort most of the time (and that of anyone checking through the article history). Surely, it's better to just wait until the matches are finished. wjematherplease leave a message... 19:58, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
PGA Tour Qualifying School pages
Hey,
Last year I brought up the possibility of creating pre-All Exempt Era PGA Tour Qualifying Tournament pages on your talk page. I believe you stated we should include a list of graduates in the pages but nothing else. When I created these pages that's what I did. However, Wikipedia users created tags prompting that citations should be added to justify these pages. Other members followed suit by adding text with citations in an effort to save these pages. Eventually, even I created some text (with citations) in an effort to maintain these pages. (If you think these apprehensions are unwarranted please see my talk page. An administrator did not approve my draft of 1965 PGA Tour Qualifying School graduates because it didn't include enough citations.)
So I know our intentions strayed from our original idea. Just wanted you to give you a narrative about how things have changed. I also wanted to know your thoughts.
Thanks, Oogglywoogly (talk) 05:24, 31 March 2022 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
1974 Australia Tour OoM events
Hey, I have a citation that states that the 1974 North Coast Open is one of the 13 events that make up the "Professional Golfers' Association Order of Merit circuit" in Australia. A few other events that are part of the OoM are mentioned. Here is the link: https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/254803176/28335847#.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 02:26, 2 April 2022 (UTC)Oogglywoogly
- Cool. Thanks. I'll take a look at it as soon as I get time. wjematherplease leave a message... 09:38, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
"Hole (golf)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Hole (golf) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 5#Hole (golf) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 05:23, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Table line breaks
Can't find any MOS or WP guideline which suggests line breaking should be removed in tables due to wrapping, unless you do? Obviously, if line breaks can be avoided then great, but surely if a tournament name is so long that it causes the width of the table to be so wide that it increases the wrapping on all displays, not just smaller ones. Is this not what line breaks are for? Jimmymci234 (talk) 16:37, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- In general, it's better to just let browsers take care of the wrapping and just control where wrapping shouldn't happen. Forcing line breaks often results in a mess (because of extra line breaks) at some browser widths unless the additional browser added line breaks are prevented – but then we get a sea of code that becomes harder to edit. See H:LINEBREAK for more, and how to prevent line breaks in undesirable places. wjematherplease leave a message... 17:05, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- Seems to discuss more about line breaking re paragraphs. Don't see how this relates to tables as much? Jimmymci234 (talk) 17:12, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- By re-adding line breaks, there is now an additional line of wrapping in several rows on narrower browsers; and because of where the breaks are, it also looks awful. Please revert. wjematherplease leave a message... 09:16, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Seems to discuss more about line breaking re paragraphs. Don't see how this relates to tables as much? Jimmymci234 (talk) 17:12, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
WP:NGOLF criteria
Hey,
I just responded to some comments in the thread. The discussion has been going on for a month now and I think we should be able to wrap things up soon. Could you try to finalize things?
Thanks, Oogglywoogly (talk) 03:32, 21 April 2022 (UTC)Oogglywoogly