Wikipedia talk:Userboxes/Sports/Football

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. 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 articles

Userboxes

Wikipedia:Userboxes/Sports/Football is part of WikiProject Userboxes. This means that the WikiProject has identified it as part of the userboxes system. WikiProject Userboxes itself is an attempt to improve, grow, and standardize Wikipedia's articles and templates related to the userbox system, used on many users' pages. We need all your help, so join in today!UserboxesWikipedia:WikiProject UserboxesTemplate:WikiProject UserboxesUserboxes articles

Add Yours/Request

Anyone who wants a national football team or club they support to be included in this list can make one for him/herself or place a request on this page.--Wikipedian DOG 12:13, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps one for Hearts of Midlothian relevent to the present situation at the club - 'This user thinks the politics at Hearts is bad for football', 'This user thinks Steven Pressley is a hero', 'This user thinks the situation at Hearts is a Joke'. Thoughts anyone? Dunk the Lunk 17:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What, no supporters for Mexico's El Tricolor? Hari Seldon 05:37, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitable

How about removing the class="wikitable" bit from the page code???, the templates don't look good when displayed inside tables due to the the css formatting of wikipedia pages!

Userboxes for player supporters?

Should we add Userboxes for player supporters at this page like

Kaká

This user is a fan of Kaká.

here?

-AdeKaka'

Fair use rationale for Image:Sporting Clube de Portugal.png

Image:Sporting Clube de Portugal.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:17, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Motherwell

I can't find the Motherwell one. Can someone point me in the right direction, or give me a helping hand in creating one if there isn't one out there on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Come on the Mothers (talk • contribs) 16:38, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Might be a bit overdue but I've made one. It's Malpass ⁹₃! (_drop me a ^___) 17:53, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of trouble

I just putting a userbox and also making a Honduras section while at it.

Template Overflow?

I'm not sure if this is just my browser, but some of the userboxes at the bottom of this page are coming up as redlinks. When I click on the "edit section" button for a particular section, however, these userboxes show up perfectly fine. Does this mean that there is a limit to the number of templates which can be displayed on a page? If so, does anyone know how to fix this? Thanks, Kithira (talk) 20:46, 20 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

I get the same. It's not this page's fault, so I submitted a bug at Bugzilla. This is the link:

https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25778

Red Bulls Fan (talk) 05:53, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All right, thank you. I know the same problem exists on the US and Canadian Sports page, so perhaps this report will take care of that too. Kithira (talk) 10:35, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It appears as if the Bugzilla discussion has gone dormant. If this cannot be resolved through that avenue, we may have to seek other options. One idea I have is to create subpages of this page, one for each confederation (Wikipedia:Userboxes/Sports/Football/UEFA, Wikipedia:Userboxes/Sports/Football/CONCACAF, etc.). I don't know what you guys think, but I would rather divide the page than see userboxes get lost at the bottom. I'd appreciate anyone's thoughts. Kithira (talk) 22:56, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One way to get around it is to enter the text into Special:ExpandTemplates, however it turns all the templates addresses into raw code. Splitting into confederations would be good, however, the UEFA page would be pretty big but the OFC would only have the New Zealand league. I suggest splitting to CONCACAF/CONMEBOL, UEFA, and AFC/OFC/CAF.Blueflashlight07 (talk) 02:17, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As you may have seen, I tried to correct it, without success. Any idea what's causing it? Oh yeah, and I thought multiple userboxes on the clubs were allowed, so why did you delete mine?It's Malpass ⁹₃! (_drop me a ^___) 09:12, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blueflashlight, I think the CONCACAF/CONMEBOL, UEFA, and AFC/OFC/CAF idea works well. Regarding the international teams, would we have 1) a separate "International" page to go along with the three confederations? Or would we have 2) an "International" section at the top of the three confederations pages with all the international teams in that confederation? I think the second makes more sense, but we're also putting more templates on each page with that one, making it more likely we'll run into the same overflow problems again (something we might avoid by going with option #1). Kithira (talk) 14:04, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to try to get this done today, with the federation divisions as discussed and option #2 from my last post. Kithira (talk) 12:21, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just finished it up. Please feel free to fix any mistakes or suggest other ideas for organization if you've got them. Kithira (talk) 15:47, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

UBX with 'fake flag'

If you want one specifically for your team, feel free to ask either here or on my talk. It's Malpass ⁹₃! (_drop me a ^___) 00:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]