As the project creator, I wanted to start off to clarify notability for players and other subjects. I've given each a seperate header below, please discuss: BrianZ(talk)13:31, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Players
- I consider anyone in the Volleyball Hall of Fame notable. The article for the Hall of Fame has a lot of red links that can be fixed with this project.
- Anyone who has ever medaled on more than one Olympic team and gone on to compete or coach the sport. This would rule out the guys that play in the Olympics, medal with one team and never play the sport competitively again.
- Top money makers on the AVP Tour should be added as well to start. Once these players are more thorough, we can add the lower rank guys and girls.
- International players that are popular in their countries can be added/translated too. This is a main reason for the project. There are alot of articles for players in foreign countries that we can translate to English but I only know one language.
- I do not consider high school phenoms notable and should not be added until at least their senior year of college or when they play for the national team. BrianZ(talk)13:31, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm gonna join your project but I want to make sure that this article is not to USA oriented, which the above text suggests. the Volleyball Hall of Fame is a typical american institution (just like almost all hall of fames are), but volleyball is a very international sport. There should definitely not be too much focus on american players or the AVP. -Catneven09:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
I absolutely agree with your International take. I'm from the US and know american volleyball well, but part of the reason I started this project is to learn more about International play. I would like professional leagues from all over the world to be recognized, I just don't know much about them yet, so I haven't mentioned them. I mention Hall of Fame because it's a start and the HOF does recognize international players and coaches who affect the sport. It's an american instition because the sport was invented here. I hope that at some point we have members on the project that can help out with the international articles. BrianZ(talk)13:28, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Subjects
Notable volleyball subjects include all world leagues and professional tours. Any amateur leagues or tournaments should not be included, i.e. Church leagues, Joe Shmoes USAV club team, etc. Variations on the sport are also notable
I do have a question for anyone reading. Do you feel we should have articles for rulebooks? I don't think so but I'm researching other sports projects to see what they have. BrianZ(talk)13:31, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
And here as well; a tiny bit of USA orientation. In the Netherlands (my home country) the national volleyball league is very notable and has earned a lot of international respect as being one of the better leagues. It is however for the majority an amateur league.-Catneven10:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Same as my above agreement, I only mention US organizations and leagues because that's all I know now. Let's get the international recognition going. BrianZ(talk)13:29, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
About the rulebooks. I think we hould have one major article about volleyball rules, which should contain the IFVB rules. We can have seperate (small) articles about the differences in different countries (usa, netherlands), variations (Beach, impared).-Catneven10:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
I agree, that might be tricky but we can use color background to differentiate between differing rules. For instance, USAV follows FIVB rules but has changes to specific rules highlighted in grey when they differ for junior levels. As long as the colors aren't too distracting, that might be a great article. BrianZ(talk)13:36, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't know. I just checked the baseball rules article and it's grotesque. Perhaps we can modify the section from the volleyball article, shorten it in the main article and then revamp a new article based on the "main" rules and add variations there.. Cheers, PaddyM01:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
This last remark should be put on the article talk page itself. I think something like this was proposed there as well.-Catneven09:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Meaning that the creation of a rules article can be discusses here, but that the 'revamping' of the volleyball article should be discussed there.-Catneven09:46, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
In volleyball it not a common practice to keep statistics, other than uses for opponent analysis. The public is mostly not too interested in them.-Catneven09:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I disagree, as a coach I use them constantly and many young players are asked to record stats while on the bench and alot of people are unaware of how statistics are used and why. I look into it further and maybe create a draft article for everyone else's review. BrianZ(talk)14:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
My personal opinion is that stats aren't interesting to the general reader. While it would be possible to make a page on the collection and use of volleyball statistics, I think that would be verging on being an instruction manual, not an encyclopedic article. That said, there do seem to be some academic papers on volleyball statistics, which could be used as the basis for an article. Cheers --Pak2114:38, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I also think we should not work towards a too detailed description of the rules. The bottom specifics of the rules can then be found in the links we provide too official rulebooks. This shoudl remain an encyclopedia and does not necessarily need to encompass an entire rulebook.-Catneven09:46, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Check out the page I created (Volleyball rules) Let me know what you think. My idea is to have articles for at least each section and break down rules, as well as major differences among larger organizations with color coded footnotes to the FIVB rules listed. BrianZ(talk)14:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Drop the "What is Volleyball" section; that is duplicating information in the main article for no particular reason. I'd also say that the listing of every section of the FIVB rulebook is unnecessary: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a reference manual. My personal view is that the page should focus more on the evolution of the rules over the years and the reasons for the changes, rather than just being a summary of the rulebook. Cheers --Pak2114:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I agree with that deletion. I saw it when I was assessing some of the million or so vball-related pages and had a note to nominate it myself.BrianZ(talk)19:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
College Coaches
I'm currently involved in a dispute over notability and could use some feedback. Vera Shaver (volleyball coach) is the page in question, and it is a part of Malone College Athletics. One Wikipedia editor believes this article should be "speedy deleted" because of notability. My stance is that she was a college coach and deserves at least a stub to match the other coaches of the program, if only to prevent redlining in coaches Navbox and team records. Naturally, this article will likely be expanded as time goes on. Opinions?--Paul McDonald (talk) 16:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
My other question: why just this one coach? There is a Navbox at the bottom of the page, and you can find other coaches that were only there one year. Why was this coach singled out for deletion? And if several of the other coaches are deleted, then we would have an incomplete information on this particular volleyball program. Plus, as time goes on, we may find that these coaches have moved on to other coaching positions at other colleges and the articles can be further built.
I hit Random Article and that is the article that came up. I didn't go any further and review articles that were linked from the article. After the question was raised, I followed some of the links and there are other, IMO, non-notable coaches, but I thought I would see how this came out before going any further. Jons63 (talk) 16:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I saw these on Special:Newpages earlier and worried about them as well. Wikipedia's basic notability guideline requires non-trivial coverage in independent publications, and I don't see any sign of this on any of the articles. That said, I don't think it's a speedy as there is an assertion of notability, but equally, it wouldn't stand up at AfD in its current form. With regards to the other coaches, other stuff exists is not a good argument. --Pak21 (talk) 16:53, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I have declined to delete Vera Shaver on a speedy basis, in the hope that some sense can be worked out here. However, in my view, if there's nothing to say about them apart from dates and win/loss record, list the coaches and their records in another article. That way, at least their stats can be more easily compared. Some references would be nice too... BencherliteTalk20:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the confidence in the delay. That will give some time for the Malone College sports information department to forward information and for other data to be compiled. This will prevent having to re-make pages and we can still have a complete "package" of pages for coaches.--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:48, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
That looks very nice, let's add it. How about the image? I like it and might change the Project template image to this, but I think it's a little blurry when viewed larger, can you sharpen it? BrianZ(talk)13:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Just a heads up to anyone who is in the business of creating a lot of articles for this project - try not to link to [[World League]] as it is nothing more than a DAB page. Instead, make the link point to Volleyball World League instead. I don't mind fixing the DAB links, but its so easily avoided. Cheers, PaddyM16:34, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
That looks good, but maybe a more universal color, green seems too dark for the header. I think that works for indoor players. I'd like to see one beach players on the FIVB circuit as well as AVP in America and other pro leagues in other countries. Maybe a stat for years played and finishes. Some AVP pros have a template already but not something created by this project. BrianZ(talk)16:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
This sounds like a great idea, but I have a few questions. What kind of players are we talking about- olympic, famous,historical, or just any players..? And would we just allow anyone to contribute? How would we know when to delete their information? Or would we delete it at all? Kds57 (talk) 18:09, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Questions about articles
It would be good if this project could figure out some good standardizations between people and leagues and subjects so that coverage could be more balanced. I just made the Dax Holdren article, and I'm not sure what conventions to use to improve it further.
Also, in an unrelated question, does the beach volleyball world tour have an article on here anywhere? I wanted to link to it in regards to Holdren's past participation, but I can't seem to find it anywhere. matt9148623:40, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
We are in the process of figuring out standardizations. You are welcome to help out with these for the articles. As for the beach volleyball league, do you mean the FIVB Beach Volleyball league? I know the FIVB has a beach league, but the article doesn't really mention it. BrianZ(talk)02:58, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm honestly not sure which one I meant; his AVP page references the 'World Tour' and I'm not familiar enough with non-AVP play to know what precisely that refers to. In an additional question, is there any way to simplify the coding for the beach volleyball player infobox? I'd start adding it to players pages to get it started in use, but I'm just not sure where to begin with it. matt9148621:14, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
I wonder if you guys could take a look at VBC Galina – newly created, I just saved it from a speedy deletion and sort of managed to assert notability. It still needs a lot of work, and I've no expertise at all in that area. Thanks — alex.muller (talk • edits)20:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable)21:32, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Project still active?
If anyone on this project is still active, with the Olympics going on now it would be a great time to create some articles and improve some others because media sources will be especially easily obtained. This would most impact articles that can be found at Volleyball at the 2008 Summer Olympics, but it would be great to get some articles on older players created as well. I'm up for helping if anyone wants to work on some bigger projects as well. matt91486 (talk) 17:33, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Volleyball
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot23:14, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Coordinators' working group
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:57, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
P.S.: See Wikipedia's collection of outlines at WP:OOK.
GAN backlog reduction - Sports and recreation
As you may know, we currently have 400 good article nominations, with a large number of them being in the sports and recreation section. As such, the waiting time for this is especially long, much longer than it should be. As a result of this, I am asking each sports-related WikiProject to review two or three of these nominations. If this is abided by, then the backlog should be cleared quite quickly. Some projects nominate a lot but don't review, or vice-versa, and following this should help to provide a balance and make the waiting time much smaller so that our articles can actually get reviewed! Wizardman23:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
WP 1.0 bot announcement
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 04:08, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
The WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons (UBLPs) aims to reduce the number of unreferenced biographical articles to under 30,000 by June 1, primarily by enabling WikiProjects to easily identify UBLP articles in their project's scope. There were over 52,000 unreferenced BLPs in January 2010 and this has been reduced to 32,665 as of May 16. A bot is now running daily to compile a list of all articles that are in both Category:All unreferenced BLPs and have been tagged by a WikiProject. Note that the bot does NOT place unreferenced tags or assign articles to projects - this has been done by others previously - it just compiles a list.
Your assistance in reviewing and referencing these articles is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please don't hestitate to ask either at WT:URBLP or at my talk page. Thanks, The-Pope (talk) 17:14, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi folks, the templates {{vb start}} & {{vb end}} which are used to nest and restrict the width of the footer navboxes in articles were originally derived from the equivalent templates {{fb start}} & {{fb end}} used in football articles. The folks over at the football project have bitten the bullet and converted over their templates to be full width and to not require the use of these templates. You can see the discussion on this here. They are in the process of removing the many usages of the templates at the moment. Some of your project articles use the football templates, these could be changed to use the volleyball templates, but it would be good for consistency for your project to follow the lead of the football people and eliminate the use of these templates. Any comments? Keith D (talk) 23:40, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Volleyball articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.
We would like to ask you to review the Volleyball articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.
We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!
While editing the volleyball pages of the 2008 Summer Olympics, I noticed that the template Template:Volleyball was included in virtually every page, despite that the pages were not linked to from the template. I assumed this was a copy-paste mistake, so I started removing it. In my opinion, templates should only be included in pages that the template links to, however there might be another concensus here. Is there such a concensus?
After removing the template from some 20-30 messages articles, I got a notice message from Mohsen1248, questioning my removal of the template, and threatening to keep re-adding it if I keep removing it.
Before this blows into a full-scale edit war, I'd like to start a discussion on this issue here (on where the template should be included, not on edit-warring). I hope this is the right place for the discussion.
I have copy-pasted the discussion between me and Mohsen1248 below (from my talkpage).
We can't have this template included on every page mentioning volleyball. A template is typically included on the pages that it links to. "Template:Volleyball" does not link to the individual occurrences (years) of the tournaments. Thus, the template should be included on pages FIVB World League, FIVB World Grand Prix, etc, but not the indiviual years such as 2011 FIVB World League, 2011 FIVB World Grand Prix, etc. Please start a discussion to obtain concensus, but don't revert until one is reached (and only if it ends up favouring your opinion). Cheers. HandsomeFella (talk) 15:00, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
why we can't ? what's the logic ? I know the 3RR rule and I won't break it. it's common, if you have problem start discussion and then remove it from all sports pages. as of now, I will revert your edits as much as rules allow. then I wate 24 hours to revert it once again and I won't stop it. cheers. Mohsen1248 (talk) 15:21, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Don't be so childish. If you know the 3RR rule, then you know it should not be perceived as if everyone has "a right" to revert the same page 3 times within 24 hours. It's still edit-warring, and furthermore, it could be viewed as gaming the system. Besides, you can spend your time and effort more constructively than following me around and reverting my edits.
I'll explain the logic to you. If you have a template called "Events at the 2003 Pan American Games", it's logical that it links to all events of those games. It's also logical that it is included in the pages covering the events, e.g. "Volleyball at the 2003 Pan American Games", thus enabling simple cross-navigation between the different events.
Following the same pattern, "Template:Economy of Europe" links to articles like "Economy of Germany", "Economy of Greece", etc. It is included in exactly those pages, but not in every page mentioning "Europe" or "economy" (or possibly both).
The same goes for Template:Volleyball (although I think it should be named Template:International volleyball). It links to the main international regulatory bodies, the recurring international tournaments, etc. It does not link to the individual tournaments (years), and thus it should not be included in them. The reasons: 1) it's not logical, per above, 2) it will make virtually every single issue of every single tournament link to the pages in the template, thereby pointlessly overwhelming the "what links here" pages. If you take a look at Template:Economy of Europe, you'll find that the number of pages including that template is rather limited (to the number of countries in Europe, to be exact).
This minor difference of opinion seems to have got heated really quickly! A bit of relaxation is needed. In my opinion, the guidelines at WP:NAVBOX are quite good ones. Specifically: "The articles should refer to each other, to a reasonable extent." The links on Template:Volleyball do not get reasonably referred to in 2011 FIVB World Grand Prix, for example (as a matter of fact, of the 35 links present in that template, only one article – FIVB World Grand Prix – is linked in the article at the moment). It is not foreseeable that more than two or three of these topics will ever be linked.
A more satisfactory solution would be to create a new template based upon the articles in Category:2011 in volleyball – it's a lot more likely that someone reading an article about a specific year's event will want to know what else happened that year, rather than find general information on completely different competitions. SFB18:34, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
According to WP:NAVBOX Navigation boxes should be included only in those pages that have links on it. I hope everyhing will remain calm and effort is made when needed and where needed. We have a lot of articles needing wikification, unreferences BLP, and many more. Being aware of removing and including an infobox where is not belong, simply is a waste of time. Oscar00:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
It heated up quickly, you're right about that (check my talkpage, more was added after I copied it here). Right from the start Mohsen set out to revert me, without bothering to wait for an explanation. But things seem to have calmed down now. I have stopped removing the template until there is a consensus here, and Mohsen stopped short of reverting me a fourth time within 24 hours.
Great idea, a template based on years in (international, I assume) volleyball. From a "Template:2011 in international volleyball" we could have all international tournaments of the year collected. HandsomeFella (talk) 07:48, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
I interpret the discussion above as support for my position that "Template:Volleyball" should be removed from the individual occurrences (years) of international tournaments, and that templates for each year in volleyball instead could be created and added to the same articles. Anyone against? HandsomeFella (talk) 20:32, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:Volleyball will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in volleyball. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch (talk) 21:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Avignon Volley-Ball is pointing to the missing file File:Kit_body_FFFFFF.png and after a little bit of investigating, I noticed that the dead link is caused by the Volleyball kit template generating links to images which do not exist.
I reckon that the template should be changed so that it clearly throws an error if the images don't exist (and possibly create a link to upload an image for that kit colour).
Since there is not a notability guide exclusively for volleyball under the Wikipedia:Notability (sports), I am proposing a draft here, that we should discuss. Feel free to give your own ideas. Please be open and bold when entering the discussion. Extensive participation is encouraged. Osplace17:05, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Professional and college players
How are domestic volleyball leagues shown on TV? How many have most of their matches shown on free TV? Basic cable? Premium cable, etc? How about U.S. NCAA volleyball players? How about competitive national volleyball teams that can't quite win a medal?
The reason I'm asking this is if a volleyball league has most of its games aired on free TV, that means there's a large enough following for it; therefore, its players must be more notable than say, leagues showing on cable or not at all. –HTD05:15, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
What is your proposal about this? Remember this is English Wikipedia. How would a proper line read to take your idea into account? Osplace16:48, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Playing on any professional team for any sport makes someone notable doesn't it? Volleyball isn't any different than other sports, just less popular as far as viewership is concerned. DreamFocus01:18, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
We can read about this topic in Wikipedia:Notability (sports). Association Football for example, and baseball also. Volleyball leagues are not a big deal beyond Brazil, Europe and some asian countrys. How would we include this? Accept any domestic league winner? Probably not. Please elaborate this topic with proposals. Thanks. Osplace03:07, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
As what was said here, volleyball leagues aren't that popular; volleyball competitions are more into national teams. As for domestic volleyball leagues, there must be a handful of leagues that are aired on free TV. If there are such leagues, mere participation (or playing at least one game) should be enough. –HTD03:55, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
We should have a list like this WikiProject Football list. Giving notability to every participant will be really wide, but we should consider this proposal from Howard. But what about USA NCAA Volleyball division I for men and women players/coachs? This college league is really strong, receive quite a big cover on the media and have very organized official reports. Should we give notability to every participant? Just the NCAA winners? What about the Universiade? Osplace22:07, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
AFAIK, the USA NCAA basketball and football players aren't automatically notable unless they did something (something to what is being proposed here). As for the Universiade, I dunno about volleyball, but basketball is essentially a "national team" of under-23 players.
Just how many teams are there in professional volleyball leagues? If there are only a few, and there are also a few professional volleyball leagues that are truly notable (air on free TV), then we'd only have a small pool of automatically notable articles. Now the question is if the rest of Wikipedia is willing to have sub-stubs of an article like the French communes such as this one about volleyball players. –HTD01:35, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Meant Universiade Volleyball notability dropped? About Pro-Players I would like to recall the List of Professional volleyball leagues. Osplace03:30, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
I dunno about Universiade as that's still an Under-23(?) tournament. As for a list of pro volleyball leagues, this is a good way to go; football already has a list. If a player didn't play on any league on that list, s/he's not notable unless s/he played on a FIFA-recognized national team. –HTD08:54, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Individual award winners
One of the things that all Volleyball competitions have are Individual player awards, maybe players that have won numerous awards in mayor competitions should be included in the list, an example is Lise Van Hecke. --ShadowMkfTalk05:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
I don't think we should base notability on winning individual awards on a team sport, or even the achievements of the player's team to find out whether s/he is notable or not. I'd be swayed if this was on a sport played by individuals such as tennis or even beach volleyball, where individual performance is the difference between winning and losing. –HTD19:53, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
National team participants
Hi Osplace! Thank you for your invitation. I'm not much experienced in discussing of guidelines. However, I guess instead of mentioning "Pan American Games, Asian Games" explicitly, it should be wiser to cover them by general definitions, such as "continental championships, games etc.". Otherwise, a detailed list is necessary to avoid disputes. Cheers. --CeeGee 18:16, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
There are continental and regional games, we should try to find the appropiate text to cover each one. For example: Pan American Games are different category from Central American and Caribbean Games, but we also have Central American Games, way inferior category. Our notability guide should be clear about notability under each category. Continental Games medalist, Regional games gold medalist, and so on. Osplace19:57, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
For convenience, I propose a notability table in the form shown in the "example" below. I guess this can be very useful for beginners, prevent disputes and helpful for checks. --CeeGee 10:35, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Here we have, dear CeeGee, the problem I mentioned before, there are a lot more Games, and there are many different categorys. According to a general guideline in Wikipedia:Notability (sports), participating in a Senior World Championship is enough for being notable. Note: This means Senior competitions, not Junior Championships neither world not continentals. In the other hand, we have to work with WP:MOS and probably this colorful table would not look appropiate in Wikipedia:Notability (sports), but probably we may include this one in the main WikiProject Volleyball page. Osplace16:17, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
As for national teams, football (soccer), basketball, rugby, cricket and perhaps handball's notability "floor" for national teams is to play at least one game. Is there a FIVB equivalent for FIFA's "Class A" national team matches? –HTD03:55, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
The FIVB accounts National Team participation adding junior and senior level. We can find in a profile with Olympic, World Championships and Others national caps. FIVB do not make any difference between Junior/Senior caps. This would really be a problem taking this into account, but is something. We discussed above Howard, another proposal about National team participants. Can you please join this discussion? Thanks. Osplace22:07, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Since we have to draw a line on somewhere, why not making anyone that competed in the Olympics, World Championship, World Cup, World Grand Champions Cup and qualifying matches to those automatically notable? Just that no one's should make an article for every person who has played one match right now? A national team appearance for other team sports usually means that the athlete is automatically notable. I'm willing to be convinced for the World Cup and World Grand Champions Cup but I'm not into using team or individual achievements as the basis of notability in team sports. –HTD01:44, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Another option is instead of having a "awards-based" system on determining notability, why not a "merit-based" system? For example, instead of limiting it to gold medalists in a continental championship such as the Asian Volleyball Championship, why not limit it to players who have played at least four times? In that way, we leave the door open to teams which can't quite barge into the top 3, but are "veterans" in the said tournament. –HTD13:35, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
According to WP:LEAD, The lead section (...) "should define the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable"... Then we would have something like: Garaotos Jurney is a Japanese volleybal player who four times played the Asian Volleyball Championship. ???? I would not like to see this. Yes, I would like to stay in Olympics, and WCH participations and medals. Osplace03:30, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
In several team sports, qualifying to the continental championship is a big deal. I know volleyball isn't as big as football or even basketball but restricting it to Olympics and World Championship participating teams restricts the number a far great deal. "Garaotos Jurney is a Japanese volleybal player who four times played the Asian Volleyball Championship." certainly establishes that player's notability. A national team member playing in a continental championship is a big deal. –HTD08:56, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm almost agree with these tables, but I don't think tournaments like "Islamic Games" or "Mediterranean Games" deserve any importance at all, even for gold medalists. and on other hand, World Championship is the 2nd important tournament in the world. I think even participating in World Championship can make them notable. Mohsen1248 (talk) 03:51, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
The computation of the FIVB World Rankings it seems that their most important tournaments are Olympics, Senior World Championships and World Cup (all three have the same weight), followed by World League and World Grand Prix. I can't find how continental championships get in the mix. Since we have this information, the lowest number of points a team can get from the "Tier I" tournaments is 20 (except for the 5 points for the World Cup laggards). I'd say winning "20" points in the rankings is a good idea for a minimum for being notable, if you guys are going into the "achievement" route. This eliminates the regional championships and games. With 20 ranking points as the minimum, we'd get:
All teams in the World Championship
All teams in the Olympics
Top 8 teams in the World Cup
Top 6 teams in the World League and World Grand Prix
Top 3 teams in the continental championships
None for everything else (regional and continental games, regional championships, qualifying for the world championship, Olympics and continental championships)
I do not agree the none for everything else position: This games are widely covered, are such a big deal regionally. Neither junior and youth championships, most of the player will not make it to any league or senior national team or any kind of notability at all, they should wait a little more to be notable. Osplace01:19, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, volleyball enthusiasts! I was trying to review the above article at Afc. It obviously needs some reliable sources, but I can't find anything about volleyball at WP:Notability (sports), and I wanted to add a comment about that. Can someone here give an opinion? —Anne Delong (talk) 17:01, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Dear volleyball experts: This article was created in Afc, but never submitted to be added to the encyclopedia. Is this a notable player, and should the article be saved from deletion as a stale draft? —Anne Delong (talk) 04:34, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello, volleyball experts. This old AfC submission will soon be deleted as a stale draft. Is this a notable player, or should the page be let go? —Anne Delong (talk) 11:51, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I was recently editing this article and noticed that the Peru flag is inconsistent. The use of the VBW template shows the flag without the middle band. However using a different template on the page gives the flag with the band. I think it should be consistent throughout. What are your thoughts on this problem? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 04:30, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
Persondata has been deprecated and the template and input data are subject to removal from all bio articles in the near future. For those editors who entered accurate data into the persondata templates of volleyball players and other bio subjects, you are advised to manually transfer that data to Wikidata before the impending mass deletion occurs in order to preserve accurate data. Here are three examples of Wikidata for notable swimmers: Ryan Lochte, Mary Wayte and Dara Torres. If you have any more questions about the persondata removal, Wikidata, etc., please ping me. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:03, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
We have a problem. Since User:DariaPoloniahave been working in many many articles with different layout that the one we have been using, we need to talk about it. The layout should be discussed here and the result must be a section in the main WikiProject Volleyball page.
I would like that User:DariaPolonia explain why she thinks that we should use the one shown here: Grzegorz Kosok.
The other version is one like this: Brenda Castillo. I will soon comeback working here. Please start talking about it. Osplace20:55, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
The Castillo article looks better to me because 1) There aren't countless flags in the infobox (I say there should be none) 2) The club section is better organized and friendly for the reader and just the layout itself is what i feel is "better" and more friendly. I reverted myself a few contributions from him to german volleyball players as they were suspect. Kante4 (talk) 21:16, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I've been asked to comment here and I agree to keep the flags to a minimum. Only the "Honors" section in the infobox has the default parameter for flags, so that's the one that could stay. –HTD12:06, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
I was also asked to comment here. I agree about the clubs section being better organised in the Castillo article. You don't need tables. My position about flags in articles about individual athletes is that the flags should always be shown with club names (it gives information which the reader likely needs) and only once or even not at all with national teams.It is better to have eg "Rabita Baku" with the Azeri flag than to occupy text space with "Rabita Baku (Azerbaijan)". But if you say "Azerbaijan" or "Poland" (national team) it is clear which country is meant and one doesn't need the flag. Also, filling the infobox with flags is not reader-friendly. Cristixav (talk) 12:55, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Sorry for problems with flags. I will try to correct it. I try to write correctly, but I'm still learning. I'll take your comments to heart. I have just thought that it looks good and helps when the name of the club is with the flag, because not everyone knows that, for example PGE Belchatow is Polish club.DariaPolonia (talk) 17:07, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, people are figuring out ways on how to solve this without using flags. I'd push for IOC codes... –HTD17:07, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Is not just about flags. The flag on Rabita Baku in Castillo's article is wrong. In the club section, the flag is displayed. If a casual reader actually reads the article, will notice that when mentioned, Rabita Baku is identified as an "Azerbajani or Azeri Club". This way, there is no need to add IOC codes. But I would like to recall the fix made to some articles like Jaqueline Carvalho. This is how the article looked like, and here is shown how the article was fixed. There, you have in both version the violation of WP:INFOBOXFLAG, but in the fix there is also WP:BOLDITIS. The correct use of bold is explained in the policy MOS:BOLD.
This is important: User User:DariaPolonia also changed Wikiproject Volleyball layout in Awards and replace it with Sporting achievements. We should just use one layout in all volleyball articles if you all agree the way is everything organized in his way is an improvement, then we all should also commit to change our previous articles. This is another example of missconception of our newbie. DariaPolonia fails using WP:OPENPARAGRAPH. Four lines, just one sentence? The second is using the clubs table, this impacts in the article size, between text. All text should be first, then tables and schemes, including the Bachelor Polonia Restituta decoration. This should be treated like this: first text talking about this, when he received this and the proper reference. Then you should add this ribbon later on with his personal achievements.
We all should concern about when are we going to get a Wikipedia:Featured articles? We are not in this way acting like we are this days. We should organize ourself, work with the same goal: All volleyball articles should be promoted to FA. Please take a look to Sandy Koufax and Damon Hill, both of them are FA. Do you know how many FA articles are FA? None, not a single one. And we are not probably getting anyone any time soon. We should strive to take the same direction. If we split, doing whatever I thing it should be better, we will just continue harming WP. We are not even compeling to follow MOS:LAYOUT. Osplace02:31, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
There is still not an unified layout, DariaPolonia (talk·contribs) is still doing whatever he wants with his own layout, are we clear that we are getting away from our first goal, Standardize the appearance and layout of volleyball related articles. Are we ok with this? We agree on the flags, WP:INFOBOXFLAG is violated on every article, what are we going to do? Just stay? Osplace02:17, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
There is a raising concern about standard rosters. There are too many different models. Since the WP:VBALL goals are: Standardize the appearance and layout of volleyball related articles and Improve and generally guide the development of volleyball related articles, we should remember that the roster layout is still a problem. There is should be only one, please lets talk about this.
There should be just one standard layout for clubs rosters. We should discuss if colors should be added, taking into account the WP:COLOUR accessibility and/or color abuse.
I am in favor of the KPS Chemik Police and Dynamo Kazan model as well. Just the essentials and just the details that are easier to source (height, birthdate, nationality). Reach, spike, etc are too technical and also harder to source. Just the head coach/team manager can be stated in plain text before the table (see Fenerbahçe). No colors for standardization. While college sports are big in some countries (USA and Philippines) it isn't true for other countries so the column should be scrapped.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 16:27, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
I could get weight at cyclers, since climbing is a must. Libero here dont jump much. But otherwise spike and block are very must for me. So let have them all. While for Model KPS Chemik Police is good. --PetarM (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
I wanted all of you to express your opinions, before giving mine. I am in favor of KPS Chemik Police and Dynamo Kazan model, no colors. --Osplace16:23, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
No. I mean we should be selecting 1 model but, we should have all the details of each player. Like the spike and block. And the last team the player played for. Mmhuang (talk) 12:05, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
Oh wow! All the details, plus the last team the player played for. That would be really detailed @Mmhuang, Hariboneagle927, Arielslytherin, PetarM, and Rickt11:. It is too much work for existing and upcomming articles.
Hello. After reviewing your comments, I'd like to express my opinion. For me, Volero Zurich model is the best. Also, I could take KPS Chemik Police into consideration, but I'm not a fan of 'Date of birth' column as a last one. It looks much better and it is more clear when 'Date of birth' column is second, after names, and position is the last one in the table. Details such as an attack or block are important, but for quick information the most important is the number, nationality, name, date of birth, (optional: height), position. Do you think that 'shortened tables' could be included in club articles, and full of detailed tables only for rosters in the league or tournament? - DariaPolonia (talk) 19:21, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
In my opinion a compination of the WVC Dynamo Kazan and the Volero Zurich model would be great. I think the Volero Zurich model without the "Spike" and "Block" could work for clubs rosters. The Volero Zurich model is just too descriptive for clubs. I think it's the best for national teams but I don't really like it for clubs, it just looks too much for me. --Aster565 (talk) 22:19, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}