| Revision as of 01:06, 19 December 2013 editSpc 21 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users23,706 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:11, 19 December 2013 edit undoVanished user 201913 (talk | contribs)96,104 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| See mate SPC, i was not making up. Regards both. --] (]) 01:01, 19 December 2013 (UTC) | See mate SPC, i was not making up. Regards both. --] (]) 01:01, 19 December 2013 (UTC) | ||
| ::I fail to see the problem.... both mean the same thing with match played x date being easier on the eye than an odd looking time at which the match did not finish. ] (]) 01:06, 19 December 2013 (UTC) | ::I fail to see the problem.... both mean the same thing with match played x date being easier on the eye than an odd looking time at which the match did not finish. ] (]) 01:06, 19 December 2013 (UTC) | ||
| Just a matter of keeping things coherent, with "99" articles being displayed one way and "1" being displayed another way, that was all. --] (]) 01:11, 19 December 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:11, 19 December 2013
Infobox dates
Hi, the standard approach for updating the |pcupdate= or |club-update= infobox parameter is adding a timestamp by writing five tildes (~~~~~). This is laid out at Template:Infobox football biography#Parameters, which reads: "A timestamp at which the player's infobox club statistics are correct (not needed if the player has retired)." Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 00:50, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- So basically using match played is exactly the same and doesn't look as odd as some random time. I understand it's a highly controversial issue though. Cheers.... Spc 21 (talk) 00:59, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
See mate SPC, i was not making up. Regards both. --AL (talk) 01:01, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- I fail to see the problem.... both mean the same thing with match played x date being easier on the eye than an odd looking time at which the match did not finish. Spc 21 (talk) 01:06, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Just a matter of keeping things coherent, with "99" articles being displayed one way and "1" being displayed another way, that was all. --AL (talk) 01:11, 19 December 2013 (UTC)