Difference between revisions of "Template talk:Finals progress"
From Countdown
The Doctor (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
:: Showing those who have been confirmed in the progress chart - so that we can tell in advance who will/won't be playing whom? The episode table does this job at the moment.... -- [[User:Smjg|smjg]] 13:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC) | :: Showing those who have been confirmed in the progress chart - so that we can tell in advance who will/won't be playing whom? The episode table does this job at the moment.... -- [[User:Smjg|smjg]] 13:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
::: Following that argument, you might as well do away with the progress chart altogether - the episode table shows it all. The progress chart shows it in a more pictorial manner, and I would suggest that it could be used right from the moment that the first seed is confirmed in that position.--[[User:Drawoh|Drawoh]] 13:54, 13 December 2010 (UTC) | ::: Following that argument, you might as well do away with the progress chart altogether - the episode table shows it all. The progress chart shows it in a more pictorial manner, and I would suggest that it could be used right from the moment that the first seed is confirmed in that position.--[[User:Drawoh|Drawoh]] 13:54, 13 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
| + | ::::It is a bit more pictorial, that's definately agreed, but the question is is pictorial better? [[User:The Doctor|The Doctor]] 14:06, 13 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 14:06, 13 December 2010
Posted on my talk page:
- Hi.
- Is there a way of making it say "Jack Hurst (1) vs ?" The Doctor 10:50, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Not the way it's coded at the moment. Moreover, we should have a consistent format for all progress charts – either do this "Jack Hurst (1) vs ?" thing, or leave filling in each box until both contestants are known. So it would be a matter of recoding this, and similarly the CoC progress templates. I should have no difficulty implementing this change, but first, let's see what the consensus is.
| Jack Hurst (1) vs Peter Godwin (8) | ||
| Scott Gillies (5) vs Marcus Hares (4) | ||
| Daniel Pati (3) vs Tom Rowell (6) | ||
| Niall Young (7) vs Eoin Monaghan (2) |
or
| Jack Hurst (1) vs Peter Godwin (8) | Jack Hurst (1) vs ? | |
| Scott Gillies (5) vs Marcus Hares (4) | ||
| Daniel Pati (3) vs Tom Rowell (6) | ? vs Eoin Monaghan (2) | |
| Niall Young (7) vs Eoin Monaghan (2) |
Which do people prefer? -- smjg 12:30, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- I would slightly favour the one which shows one player before both qualified. In particular, even before all eight seeds have had their positions confirmed, it's useful to show those who have been confirmed in the progress chart. For series 63 that didn't apply, because all eight finalists had their seeding positions confirmed simultaneously, but that doesn't always happen. But in other recent series I've done it that way, which was possible in those days because we didn't have such a Template.--Drawoh 12:52, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- I think I'd agree with Howard as well. The 2nd option does look slightly odd to me. JRTerrier24 13:05, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Maybe tba instead of ? would look better in option 2.--Drawoh 13:38, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- You mean like this?
- Maybe tba instead of ? would look better in option 2.--Drawoh 13:38, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- I think I'd agree with Howard as well. The 2nd option does look slightly odd to me. JRTerrier24 13:05, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Jack Hurst (1) vs Peter Godwin (8) Jack Hurst (1) vs tba Scott Gillies (5) vs Marcus Hares (4) Daniel Pati (3) vs Tom Rowell (6) tba vs Eoin Monaghan (2) Niall Young (7) vs Eoin Monaghan (2)
- The Doctor 13:42, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Why is the "tba" in bold? We use it in this table to show who has won the game. And I'm inclined to think "TBA" would look slightly better....
- Agreed. Shouldn't be in bold. I only put it in bold in my comment to emphasise it within a sentence.--Drawoh 13:55, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Why is the "tba" in bold? We use it in this table to show who has won the game. And I'm inclined to think "TBA" would look slightly better....
- The Doctor 13:42, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Showing those who have been confirmed in the progress chart - so that we can tell in advance who will/won't be playing whom? The episode table does this job at the moment.... -- smjg 13:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Following that argument, you might as well do away with the progress chart altogether - the episode table shows it all. The progress chart shows it in a more pictorial manner, and I would suggest that it could be used right from the moment that the first seed is confirmed in that position.--Drawoh 13:54, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- It is a bit more pictorial, that's definately agreed, but the question is is pictorial better? The Doctor 14:06, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Following that argument, you might as well do away with the progress chart altogether - the episode table shows it all. The progress chart shows it in a more pictorial manner, and I would suggest that it could be used right from the moment that the first seed is confirmed in that position.--Drawoh 13:54, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Showing those who have been confirmed in the progress chart - so that we can tell in advance who will/won't be playing whom? The episode table does this job at the moment.... -- smjg 13:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
