User talk:Kennelf
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
February 2026
Hi Kennelf! I noticed that you've made several edits in order to restore a version of New Zealand men's national football team records and statistics. The impulse to repeatedly undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure that you're aware of Wikipedia's edit warring policy. Repeatedly undoing the changes made by other users in a back-and-forth fashion like this is disallowed, even if you feel what you're doing is justifiable.
All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages in order to try to reach a consensus with the other editors involved. If you are unable to come to an agreement at Talk:New Zealand men's national football team records and statistics, please use one of the dispute resolution options that are available in order to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of repeatedly reverting other editors' changes can help you avoid getting drawn into edit wars. In line with the bold, revert, discuss cycle, I have restored the previous version of the page and would be happy to discuss with you further on the talk page. Have a good day. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 17:48, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
- Hi Stevie, I am the one trying to edit this page I have been updating this page for a while you are the one who keeps changing it back and won't let updated. the way I have done it looks better and is up to date. please keep it the way i have done it. the other is not updated correctly, all the information is correct. thankyou Kennelf (talk) 02:51, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
- no one has made changes to this part of the New Zealand men's head-to-head page I am the one who normally updates the stats after every game and most other teams have this same lay out it looks better and up to date and is less confusing. Kennelf (talk) 02:55, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
- There are one or two others who edit other parts of the New Zealand men' football team, and they do their part I primarily do the head-to-head and haven't noticed anyone updating it but me. sorry Stevie you are one not letting me update it.. Kennelf (talk) 03:07, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
- I was the one editing and one other person and you kept on changing my edit back. the other person it was vandalism but i explained what I was doing & so far, he's hasn't changed it back. I am new to talk pages, and I didn't see your reply I tried talking to the other person but no response.  Kennelf (talk) 03:27, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
- There are one or two others who edit other parts of the New Zealand men' football team, and they do their part I primarily do the head-to-head and haven't noticed anyone updating it but me. sorry Stevie you are one not letting me update it.. Kennelf (talk) 03:07, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
- no one has made changes to this part of the New Zealand men's head-to-head page I am the one who normally updates the stats after every game and most other teams have this same lay out it looks better and up to date and is less confusing. Kennelf (talk) 02:55, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for your reply. You may wish to have a look at Wikipedia's policy on ownership of content (in short, neither you nor I has the right to dictate to anyone how a page may look). Editing is done through consensus. I have reverted the changes you made in line with the bold, revert, discuss cycle so that we may discuss it first. The issue with the table you have introduced is that it is outdated. Module:Sports table (which you have replaced) has specifically been designed to display these tables. It is highly customisable so I would encourage you to look at the module and test it out in your userspace, you may find that what you are trying to achieve is doable with the module. Unfortunately, 'it looks better' is a personal opinion and not an argument for inclusion or exclusion. If you have any questions, let me know and I'll be happy to help if I can. Have a good day. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 08:31, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
- sure! we can discuss, what exactly are you objecting to? It's not the how it looks is the main problem one piece of data I want to change. Australia and Israel's number of games played against NZ are split over two confederations because Australia use to play in OFC now AFC and Israel use to play in AFC now back to UEFA and I want to combine them to have their true number of games played and I need the table to show as it won't work on the other table. it doesn't make sense to have them split and it's confusing and all other Head-to-head tables have them combined and a similar lay out to my table. a simple note next to their name will simply clarify the number of games played in each confederation.  Kennelf (talk) 04:42, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
- all other information is correct it just will be in a non-confusing lay out Kennelf (talk) 04:45, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
- I understand what you mean. The page has used this format since it was created 14 years ago and, as far as I can see, you're the only person to ask why they aren't combined. To me, that would suggest it ain't broke. Plus, there is a note to explain the situation and give the full record against Australia and Israel which is the same as what you've suggested just the other way around.
- It's easy enough to combine the tables into one if you wanted to try it and see how it may look. A similar example is on the Scotland page. For me, breaking the tables up makes it easier to read and understand in a global context which is why I hadn't attempted to alter the format when I first started editing this page in 2020.
- Thanks for being constructive and coming here to discuss. Have a good day. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 10:27, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
- It is broken Stevie maybe I just have a better attention to detail, and I like things tidy and to me it is untidy and needs tidying there no sense in having them separate just look at Australia they don't have their table split for NZ and Israel and no other country does and to be honest it looks amateurish. it is not hard to read for us because we know the stats but for someone new it's a long scroll to the bottom of UEFA. I am willing to compromise we can try the Scotland table because we might end up having a good old fashioned wiki war until we both get banned.  Kennelf (talk) 05:59, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks, it's good that you're willing to discuss compromise. I'd hope we can be constructive about it. Unfortunately, "amateurish" is a personal opinion and not an argument for inclusion or exclusion. This style of table is used on thousands of articles though so I would doubt you would describe all of them as such.
- As I said before, take a look at Module:Sports table. It is a very useful tool on Wikipedia and can be customised to create what you are looking for. Combining the tables using the module is not too difficult if that is what you want to do (personally, I would consider an edit like that one of those pointless edits on Wikipedia that makes no difference to the content and no difference to the reader experience but is equally pointless in reverting so I wouldn't do so).
- I'd add as well that you should always include reliable sources when adding/changing content, even with tables. The edit you've done removes the sources so any other editor could tag the page as unsourced or remove the table because it is unsourced (something neither of us would like to see, I'm sure).
- I hope that helps but any questions, just ask. Have a good day. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 10:59, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- thanks Stevie I'll have a look at it; I'm not describing the table as amateurish I'm describing the fact that Australia and Israel are still separated when no other country have them not even Australia. can you give me a hand if i need help? Kennelf (talk) 11:23, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Yeah, of course. Just ask. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 11:55, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- I want to use the table exactly like the one already in use but I want the confederations next to each country, so how do you change the format to include that extra box?  Kennelf (talk) 12:10, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Yeah, of course. Just ask. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 11:55, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- So what exactly are you objecting to/ my table has all the same information and all the confederations. you have with me Stevie because I am changing it!  Kennelf (talk) 11:56, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- thanks Stevie I'll have a look at it; I'm not describing the table as amateurish I'm describing the fact that Australia and Israel are still separated when no other country have them not even Australia. can you give me a hand if i need help? Kennelf (talk) 11:23, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- It is broken Stevie maybe I just have a better attention to detail, and I like things tidy and to me it is untidy and needs tidying there no sense in having them separate just look at Australia they don't have their table split for NZ and Israel and no other country does and to be honest it looks amateurish. it is not hard to read for us because we know the stats but for someone new it's a long scroll to the bottom of UEFA. I am willing to compromise we can try the Scotland table because we might end up having a good old fashioned wiki war until we both get banned.  Kennelf (talk) 05:59, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- all other information is correct it just will be in a non-confusing lay out Kennelf (talk) 04:45, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
- sure! we can discuss, what exactly are you objecting to? It's not the how it looks is the main problem one piece of data I want to change. Australia and Israel's number of games played against NZ are split over two confederations because Australia use to play in OFC now AFC and Israel use to play in AFC now back to UEFA and I want to combine them to have their true number of games played and I need the table to show as it won't work on the other table. it doesn't make sense to have them split and it's confusing and all other Head-to-head tables have them combined and a similar lay out to my table. a simple note next to their name will simply clarify the number of games played in each confederation.  Kennelf (talk) 04:42, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for your reply. You may wish to have a look at Wikipedia's policy on ownership of content (in short, neither you nor I has the right to dictate to anyone how a page may look). Editing is done through consensus. I have reverted the changes you made in line with the bold, revert, discuss cycle so that we may discuss it first. The issue with the table you have introduced is that it is outdated. Module:Sports table (which you have replaced) has specifically been designed to display these tables. It is highly customisable so I would encourage you to look at the module and test it out in your userspace, you may find that what you are trying to achieve is doable with the module. Unfortunately, 'it looks better' is a personal opinion and not an argument for inclusion or exclusion. If you have any questions, let me know and I'll be happy to help if I can. Have a good day. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 08:31, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
Basically that the sports table module was designed for these tables and this page has always used it. Changing it away from the module would just see someone else change it back. WP:FOOTY had a task force for converting them when it was first introduced but that was more than 10 years ago and most were converted at the time. There are still some which haven't been converted but then, Wikipedia will never be finished.
To add the confederations to the table, we could do something like this:
| Con | Team | Pld | W | D | L | GF | GA | GD | WPCT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OFC |  Fiji |
41 | 32 | 4 | 5 | 122 | 26 | +96 | 78.05 |
| Total | 41 | 32 | 4 | 5 | 122 | 26 | +96 | 78.05 |
Source: The internet
What do you think? Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 16:10, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- ok we can use this table I mind I was just wondering if we need to add the confederations like the one I did. Kennelf (talk) 19:10, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- ok we can use this table I don't mind, but I was wondering if we need to add the confederations in but that would require an extra box probably after the win percentage. Kennelf (talk) 19:15, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- oh sorry I didn't see the confederation on the right, I just woke up, how do you add that, and do you think we need too?  Kennelf (talk) 19:41, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- I mean the left.  Kennelf (talk) 19:58, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- No worries. To add Confederations in like that example, you'll need to add |show_groups=yes |group_header={{Abbr|Con|Confederation}} into the module code. Then, for each team, add |group_XXX=YYY. Replace XXX with the country (in Fiji's case, FIJ) and replace YYY with the respective confederation.
- I don't mind if the confederation is included or not. If you like how it looks and don't mind spending a wee bit extra time on it, then go for it. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 20:20, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- thanks Stevie I appreciate your help and input; I'll have a play with it when I time during the week.  Kennelf (talk) 04:41, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- I mean the left.  Kennelf (talk) 19:58, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- oh sorry I didn't see the confederation on the right, I just woke up, how do you add that, and do you think we need too?  Kennelf (talk) 19:41, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- ok we can use this table I don't mind, but I was wondering if we need to add the confederations in but that would require an extra box probably after the win percentage. Kennelf (talk) 19:15, 28 February 2026 (UTC)