Wikipedia

Talk:2018–19 A-League

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Hack in topic Visa players - proof
Learn more about this page

Date format in "Home and away season" section edit

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Being Australian this article should (and mostly does) use D-M-Y format for dates. But sadly, the whole "Home and away season" section uses the American style M-D-Y format. I really can't be bothered changing them all. I note an edit earlier today removing the whole section, with an Edit summary of "No fixtures". This strike me as the correct approach. The 2017-18 article doesn't have them. This was reverted by an IP editor, with no Edit summary. I shall again remove them, and try to alert the IP editor to the problem. HiLo48 (talk) 06:34, 24 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Is it soccer? edit

Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Clearly there is some dissatisfaction with the way Wikipedia deals with the name of the sport. I have commenced discussion at Naming_conventions (Football in Australia) and I invite contributions. --Pete (talk) 06:53, 9 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Why does this have to be brought up again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again ? If it changes now after all this time, it will generate a similar problem from those that want to change it back, and off we go in circles. The answer to your question is YES, it has been 'settled' for Australian articles on en Wikipedia, now let's move on. Matilda Maniac (talk) 12:46, 30 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
There's currently an edit war, so apparently it does need at least clarification for newer editors. The article is about an Australian league so editors should use Australian English. It is indeed soccer, at least in Australia. Ifnord (talk) 13:06, 14 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Home and away season edit

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

According to this discussion, please do not add this kind of content to article, thank you Hhkohh (talk) 10:39, 6 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I suggest you also trawl through the archives to find the conversation which actually discussed the rationale and decision not to add this level of detail to the season article. It needs a more detailed explanation to assist someone who has gone to a lot of trouble to add these 135 matches. Matilda Maniac (talk) 10:52, 6 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Top-flight? edit

Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I find it irritating to see this slang expression in the first sentence of the article. Would there be anything wrong with simply saying "national level"? HiLo48 (talk) 07:06, 19 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Be Bold. Matilda Maniac (talk) 07:43, 19 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
Done! HiLo48 (talk) 10:17, 20 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

No results table? edit

Latest comment: 5 years ago25 comments3 people in discussion

Why not we add results table? Hhkohh (talk) 10:41, 28 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Since nobody reply here, I have inserted some Hhkohh (talk) 12:05, 31 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
Sorry, I'm still catching up after my forced break ;) I see no reason not to have a results table. We've had in previous seasons too. But there is objection to a full fixture list on the league's season page. --SuperJew (talk) 15:15, 31 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
SuperJew, which discussion? We just removed detailed results lists Hhkohh (talk) 22:17, 31 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
Yes Hhkohh, I saw it was dealt with :) I think I saw the discussion on WT:FOOTY --SuperJew (talk) 22:19, 31 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
SuperJew, so... I still do not know why you and J man708 do not add this. This table is a very standard table in WP:FOOTY Hhkohh (talk) 22:29, 31 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
I said I see no reason not to have it, and we have had it in previous seasons. Personally, I didn't add due to my unfair and badly timed block. --SuperJew (talk) 22:30, 31 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
SuperJew, I think the only thing to do is waiting J man708 a reasonable reply Hhkohh (talk) 22:44, 31 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
Beats me why it's not on there. Normally the page is created by just copying a very early version of a previous season's page and then changing dates and stuff. So it probably just fell through the cracks somewhere is my guess. - J man708 (talk) 23:13, 31 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
@J man708 and SuperJew:, can you help me insert some results for round 1 and 2? Thanks Hhkohh (talk) 09:15, 1 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Hhkohh: I added the round 1&2 results. I changed the format to same format as last season. Someone should go through the second half to correct which teams double up and which don't (I just copied from last season and don't have time too look right now). --SuperJew (talk) 14:06, 1 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
SuperJew, why did you use {{fb r2 header}} and so on templates? These templates are being deleted per TfD outcome, so we only orphan fb r templates and convert to Module:Sports results but not newly use the old templates Hhkohh (talk) 14:37, 1 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
I copied what was in last season. The format before that had the tables split and didn't look good, and I didn't understand how to update it. (and on a side note I think the move to delete those templates is not a good move so...) --SuperJew (talk) 15:32, 1 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
SuperJew, it is not a matter. See 2018 Philippines Football League 2018 Liga 1 and 2018 K League 1 and so on. These articles are using this module Hhkohh (talk) 22:09, 1 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
I think you can easily convert it to module Hhkohh (talk) 22:11, 1 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Hhkohh: Be my guest. 💁🏼‍♂ --SuperJew (talk) 23:27, 1 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
SuperJew, converted to module Hhkohh (talk) 08:33, 2 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Hhkohh: You didn't convert it only. You also changed it. It's now in two tables, split, which as I said beforehand doesn't look good. Also it looks better when games which don't happen (like club against itself and in the second half of the season) are greyed out, not marked with a dash. --SuperJew (talk) 08:37, 2 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
SuperJew, you can see 2018 Philippines Football League and 2018 K League 1. They use dash not using grayed out. And splitting 2 tables is a standard format in those 2 articles Hhkohh (talk) 08:40, 2 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Hhkohh: The fact that they do it there doesn't mean it's the correct way to do it. Please give me an actual reason. The split and the use of dashes instead of greying out make the table harder to read in my opinion. --SuperJew (talk) 08:43, 2 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
SuperJew, I will post your suggestion on module talk page Hhkohh (talk) 08:45, 2 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Hhkohh: Okay. You're welcome to tag me in the discussion. But until the decision is made there or you argue why the way you're suggesting (split table and not greyed out) is preferable, I'm reverting back to the format used for last season because it's easier to read and is consistent with A-League seasons. --SuperJew (talk) 08:53, 2 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
Also I don't know where it should be changed, but the note "For coming matches, an a indicates there is an article about the match" should read "For upcoming matches" etc. --SuperJew (talk) 08:38, 2 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
SuperJew, it is not a matter to me. The meaning of two words is almost same to me. If you want to change coming to upcoming, you can go to Module talk:Sports results Hhkohh (talk) 08:43, 2 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
SuperJew, Module updated, so I convert again Hhkohh (talk) 14:15, 3 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Source for crowd edit

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hey guys,

Which source do we use for crowd stats (when they differ)? This edit changed from 7,064 as was reported on ultimatealeague.com and by commentators during the match to 5,364 as reported on a-league.com.au. --SuperJew (talk) 13:11, 10 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 17 March 2019 edit

Latest comment: 5 years ago33 comments9 people in discussion
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Procedurally closed per Special:Diff/889276060. (closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 17:36, 24 March 2019 (UTC)Reply


– Per WP:WikiProject Football/League season, if the league is decided by a knock-out tournament after the conclusion of the regular season, the word "season" should be attached to the title. The project page specifically mentions the Australian A-League on one that should include the word season. All seasons linked in this RM included a playoff/knock-out tournament. BLAIXX 16:07, 17 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

  • support per nom Hhkohh (talk) 16:12, 17 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
  • oppose I don't see the point of the change. It just makes the page name longer and less simple with no apparently good reason. And please list your reason, don't just point me to a MoS/essay which also doesn't list the reason. --SuperJew (talk) 16:33, 17 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
I'm not sure if you will consider this a valid reason, but I do think there is merit to having consistency between related articles on Wikipedia and there has been long standing consensus for this title format (discussions from 2011 and 2013). BLAIXX 01:15, 18 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
As an Australian, I would seek consistency with other Australian sports, such as 2018 AFL season. HiLo48 (talk) 02:04, 18 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
@Blaixx: Thanks for the links, but I'd hardly call that discussion or consensus - It's 2 editors quoting the same MoS proposal you mentioned. My question is what is your underlying reason for it. Consistency-wise, seems much more consistent to not include "season" when the majority of the articles don't include the word. In other words, you (and the proposal) are saying this should be an exception from the consistent main, so what is the reason to have the exception? --SuperJew (talk) 05:18, 18 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
Sorry for the lack of explanation. Those links weren't meant to show discussion, simply that people have been using that guideline for almost 8 years now. In fact, it was actually that 2011 comment chain that led to someone adding the line in question to the "League Season" project page. The more I think about it though, the more that style guideline seems strange to me. If this RM fails, I think it would be a good idea to have a real discussion on league season naming conventions at WikiProject:Football. BLAIXX 11:47, 19 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the thoughts Blaixx. I agree that there should be more of a discussion about it, especially as it seems no one knows/has reasoning for it and only going by the fact that it is written. --SuperJew (talk) 17:41, 19 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
  • support for consistency. Matilda Maniac (talk) 23:18, 17 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose How does this change add anything of value? Having the date in the title already implies a season, adding the word is just redundant. The Wiki project proposal is not policy and is not even finalised. Even if it were to be implemented unless there is a proposal to have separate articles for the home and away season and the finals then this move is completely unnecessary. - Nick Thorne talk 23:31, 17 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
Think Nick Thorne has hit the nail on this one - adding the word "season" is only useful if there are separate articles for H&A and for finals. --SuperJew (talk) 05:20, 18 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose Adds clutter, and no more clarity. HiLo48 (talk) 00:16, 18 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
@HiLo48, SuperJew, and Nick Thorne:, we have 2018–19 Indian Super League season and 2019 Major League Soccer season and so on. These league season have Final series Hhkohh (talk) 11:22, 18 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
@Hhkohh: We also have 2018–19 Premier League, 2018–19 Serie A, 2018–19 Ligue 1, 2018–19 La Liga, 2018–19 Eredivisie, and so on. Again, consistency-wise the more correct move is to keep these as they are (and if anything move the MLS and ISL to name without "season"). No one has explained why having a finals series merits the addition of the word "season". --SuperJew (talk) 17:02, 18 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
SuperJew, these leagues have no final series, so no need a season Hhkohh (talk) 22:05, 18 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
@Hhkohh: you're still not explaining the difference. Why does a league with a final series need the addition of the word "season" to the name page? --SuperJew (talk) 22:38, 18 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
@Hhkohh: So? How does there being a finals playoff necessitate adding the word series? It is entirely non sequitur. - Nick Thorne talk 08:33, 19 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
@SuperJew, Nick Thorne, and HiLo48: see here. This is a prior discussion Hhkohh (talk) 12:49, 19 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
@Hhkohh: Yes, I read that discussion (and it has been linked above already). Like you here, the "discussion" merely re-words what is written in the MoS proposal but doesn't explain the reasoning of why there being a finals playoff necessitates adding the word series. --SuperJew (talk) 17:39, 19 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
@Hhkohh: I would appreciate it if you could actually answer the question. That discussion involving half a dozen edits by even fewer editors and does not include any reasoning. Without actualy substantive reasons that explain exactly why it is necessary to include the word "season" in these article titles, I can only draw the conclusion that it necause you like it, which is not a reason at all. - Nick Thorne talk 01:52, 20 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
  • Support per nom, standard naming convention. GiantSnowman 11:23, 18 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. Hhkohh (talk) 11:24, 18 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
Standard where? HiLo48 (talk) 20:44, 18 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
ping @GiantSnowman: Hhkohh (talk) 12:49, 19 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/League season, as the nominator states. GiantSnowman 12:53, 19 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
I am always happy to challenge a standard that makes no sense. That's how the world progresses. I am also always trying to make Wikipedia a better encyclopaedia. What is the point of the word "season"? And before you answer, note that "We've always done it that way" is one of the worst reasons to keep doing something. HiLo48 (talk) 00:19, 20 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose Similar to @HiLo48, SuperJew, and Nick Thorne: 1. The standard cited makes no sense. Why does a league (e.g., A-League) that consists of regular season and then playoffs requires the word "season", while another league (e.g., Premier League) that has no playoffs does not require the word "season"? In the real world, the word "season" can be applied to both the A-League or the Premier League (both "2018–19 A-League season" and "2018–19 Premier League season" are totally acceptable), so why does Wikipedia make this distinction that simply does not conform to any standard that is used in the real world? 2. Tons of leagues have complicated structures that can be regarded as different stages. For example, the 2018–19 Belgian First Division A has the regular season, the Championship play-offs and the Europa League play-offs. You can even argue that the 2018–19 EFL Championship has promotion playoffs, so by the standard cited both should be renamed with the word "season". 3. It causes naming inconsistency between league season to season. For example, the 2015 J1 League and the 2016 J1 League seasons have two stages and championship playoffs, while the 2017 J1 League and 2018 J1 League seasons use the regular double round-robin format. By the standard cited, the 2015 and 2016 articles have to be renamed with the word "season", while the 2017 and 2018 articles remain unchanged. This is confusing to regular readers who do not know the policy behind this inconsistency and makes Wikipedia look unprofessional. Chanheigeorge (talk) 16:43, 20 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
    @Chanheigeorge, HiLo48, SuperJew, and Nick Thorne:, did you read the guideline: If there are two separate championships played over the course of one season (for example, in many Latin American countries with their Apertura/Clausura system) OR the season is decided by a knock-out tournament after the conclusion of the regular season (e.g. Major League Soccer, Australian A-League), the word "season" should be attached to the title. in WP:WikiProject Football/League season before voting? If you think the guideline is poor, I suggest you should propose a new guideline in WT:FOOTY first Hhkohh (talk) 17:21, 20 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
As the people who opposed the move have said, all of us have read the guidelines, but are opposed to it. I would fully agree with proposing a new guideline, because the current one is poorly conceived, not widely consulted with contributors, confusing to readers and editors, and also often not followed by many articles as I cited above. Chanheigeorge (talk) 17:27, 20 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
@Hhkohh: did you read my comments above: Yes, I read that discussion (and it has been linked above already). Like you here, the "discussion" merely re-words what is written in the MoS proposal but doesn't explain the reasoning of why there being a finals playoff necessitates adding the word series. before replying? (Two can play at this silly game). C'mon mate, it's quite clear from people's comments that they've read the guideline, but the guideline, discussions leading to the "consensus" for the guideline, and the comments supporting the guideline --> All of them don't explain a reasoning (other than "that's what the guideline says"). --SuperJew (talk) 20:49, 20 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

A little bit of Wikiculture here. Project guidelines are not authorative and only have the standing of an essay and so each proposed change needs to stand on its own merits. I would advise anyone who seeks to impose this particular WikiProject essay here to read and digest Local consensus. - Nick Thorne talk 22:16, 20 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

  • oppose per Chanheigeorge comment after several days thinking Hhkohh (talk) 15:22, 24 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Visa players - proof edit

Latest comment: 5 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Fabio Ferreira is listed as a non-visa players despite multiple contemporary sources claiming that he is not an Australian citizen.[1][2][3] I would suggest that if you're going claim that a player has citizenship, proof is added to the article. Hack (talk) 04:34, 24 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Out of those I saw the Twitter one and this one but decided to trust J man708's opinon on which one is more correct. This SMH source and Advertiser source though are more recent and change my view, though I'd be happy to get more of a consensus. --SuperJew (talk) 08:14, 24 April 2019 (UTC)Reply
Gah, I hate it when we have conflicting links. What could we do to settle which is the correct thing to show? - J man708 (talk) 08:44, 24 April 2019 (UTC)Reply
He's directly quoted in the Advertiser article from March this year. "I could have already been a citizen by now. I applied and now it’s a matter of waiting, it’s taking a long time." It seems pretty clear cut that he's not an Australian citizen. Hack (talk) 16:49, 24 April 2019 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2018–19_A-League&oldid=1196767001"