Template talk:Halifax RLFC - 1986–87 Challenge Cup Final winners

Rugby league Template‑class

	Halifax RLFC - 1986–87 Challenge Cup Final winners is within the scope of WikiProject Rugby league, which aims to improve the quality and coverage of rugby league football related articles. Join us!Rugby leagueWikipedia:WikiProject Rugby leagueTemplate:WikiProject Rugby leaguerugby league articles
Template	This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Yorkshire Template‑class Low‑importance

	Yorkshire portal Template:Halifax RLFC - 1986–87 Challenge Cup Final winners is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
Template	This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This template has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

point mein the direction of somewhere it states we deviate from the standard setup and I will cease and desist, and gladly admit my fault.Londo 06 14:12, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike you, I don't need an MoS to tell me that there was one, not two, Chris Andersons on the team. It's pretty simple stuff, I don't know why you can't grasp it.--Jeff79 (talk) 14:18, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand there is only the one Chris Anderson (rugby league) in question. My issue is with the formatting. In the alternative guise it does look pretty abysmal. I am open to suggestions, that would allow to move away from the standard formatting, whilst still looking professional, eg. (captain/coach) written out in full, or something like that. I will at this juncture hold fire and wait for a reply or counter-proposal.Londo 06 14:30, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Usually when the whole words are written out in prose it's "captain-coach". I've already been through this and thought that "(Ca./Co.)" was less disruptive yet still quite clear. I think "(C/C)" or "(C-C)" isn't clear enough to those not into footy, so I added the 'a' and 'o'. So there are a number of options. If any of these are more agreeable to you than just "(Ca./Co.)", then I'll definitely accept that over having the same person listed twice (which is obviously unacceptable).--Jeff79 (talk) 15:30, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Captain/Coach is fine with me. The ca/co bit was unacceptable to me. We've come together to get an agreeable outcome. Sorry to be a little obtrusive. Silly, but we got there eventually.Londo 06 16:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with that is it might raise the question of whether all the "(c)"s in most navboxes should also be changed to "(Captain)". That's why I settled on "(Ca./Co.)".--Jeff79 (talk) 16:34, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]