Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Manchester United task force

Alex Ferguson

Thought I'd get the ball rolling: I think the first article for big improvement should be Alex Ferguson. For such a high profile and successful manager to have such a shocking page is awful. The whole thing focuses more on Manchester United's performance season-by-season than Ferguson himself. Makes me shudder to think about it. --El Pollo Diablo (Talk) 10:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely agree, Pollo. I've been meaning to do some work on it myself, but I just found the whole thing too daunting. There is a buttload of info in there that isn't even biographically related to the man himself. Shall we make Alex Ferguson our first "Collaboration of the Month" then? – Pee Jay 10:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Participants", not "Members"

Can I remind everyone that the list you added yourselves to is entitled "Participants", rather than "Members". This implies that you really should do some work on the articles that relate to this task force. Now, I know that most people who actually read this message will already be people who do a lot of work on Man Utd articles, but the only thing I know about the rest is that you support Man Utd. In summary, I shall review people's contributions soon and remove your names from the list of participants if your contributions are not deemed to have been enough. That is all. – Pee Jay 11:28, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added the "ManUtd" parameter to the {{football}} template last night, and a bot has added it to all of the articles in Category:Manchester United F.C. and its subcategories. The relevant articles can be viewed at Category:Manchester United F.C. task force articles. The task force has also been added to the list of projects monitored by the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team. Statistics regarding the quality and importance of all Manchester United-related articles can be viewed here. – Pee Jay 14:14, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will the stat box be displayed on the article page? Calebrw (talk) 15:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It can be. Currently it's only displaying in Category:Manchester United F.C. articles by quality, but I can transclude it into Category:Manchester United F.C. articles by importance and Category:Manchester United F.C. task force articles if you want. – Pee Jay 15:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking exactly what's at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Manchester United F.C. articles by quality statistics. Just to have a reference on the main article page. Calebrw (talk) 16:12, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see what you mean now. I can transclude that table into the task force's main page, certainly! – Pee Jay 17:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here:

Manchester United F.C. articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
Quality	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	???	Total
FA	1	1	4	3			9
FL			1	17			18
GA		2	22	23			47
B		16	33	16			65
C		5	110	76			191
Start			204	499		1	704
Stub			35	417			452
List			1	3		1	5
Category					27		27
Disambig					1		1
File					74		74
Project					3		3
Redirect					10		10
Template					8		8
Assessed	1	24	410	1,054	123	2	1,614
Total	1	24	410	1,054	123	2	1,614
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 7,285			Ω = 4.96

Calebrw (talk) 18:06, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Importance

Could we do a separate parameter for ManUtd importance in the template. Because SAF might be top importance in the ManUtd group, but not so in the main soccer group. Thanks, Calebrw (talk) 16:26, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought about that, but I wouldn't be sure how to implement it. I think that if we were a separate WikiProject, it would be easier, but as a task force, it becomes much more difficult. – Pee Jay 17:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know that certain work groups do this. For instance. "Wikiproject Manchester" might have a workgroup that is about "Education in Manchester," you will have the option of adding some along the lines of "edu-importance" or "edu-class." I just can't think of any examples off the top of my head that actually do so. — Calebrw (talk) 18:09, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The easiest way to do this would be to change the following code in the template -

{{#if:{{{ManUtd|{{{manutd|}}}}}}|
[[Category:Manchester United F.C. task force articles|{{PAGENAME}}]]
{{#switch:{{{importance}}}
 |top|Top=[[Category:Top-importance Manchester United F.C. articles|{{PAGENAME}}]]

To the following -

{{#if:{{{ManUtd|{{{manutd|}}}}}}|
[[Category:Manchester United F.C. task force articles|{{PAGENAME}}]]
{{#switch:{{{manutdimportance}}}
 |top|Top=[[Category:Top-importance Manchester United F.C. articles|{{PAGENAME}}]]

This would enable the field "|ManUimportance=" to the template. However, there may be a number of issues that could arise on the implementation of this.

You would need to consider whether you display this importance level on the template too, currently the template only displays the main "|importance=" field.
You would need to update all ManUtd article talk pages so that they use the new field.
You will need to keep an eye out for those that get confused between the old and new methods.
You should whip up a quick guide/criteria as to what the importance levels mean to this taskforce.

Hope that helps. 86.21.74.40 (talk) 19:25, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Importance Criteria

How should importance be judged, by status within the organization? Should SAF and Gary Neville be top along with the Main article, some of the main sub articles, history, and then the current season? Thoughts? Calebrw (talk) 16:26, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reserves importance?

Reserves & Academy article is currently at low-importance, but should it be bumped up to mid-class for the task force? – 'Latics ^(talk) 17:20, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that a task force specific importance rating is available yet. Calebrw (talk) 17:32, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so. Since the quality and importance parameters are currently common to both the Man Utd task force and WP:FOOTY, we have to assess articles on a global football scale. That said, I think Man Utd's reserve team might be deserving of a Mid-Importance rating, but it might be best to ask for a third party to comment on that. – Pee Jay 17:33, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]