Module talk:Sports table/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Sorting

Is sorting based on class_rules or is that just never used? 2014–15_BeNe_League#League_table does not sort first 3 places correctly. -Koppapa (talk) 06:47, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I get it now. There is no sorting at all. Positions are set by team1=... and so on. -Koppapa (talk) 09:24, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's correct, I followed the standings on the BeNe League website, but it's easy enough to change. Hopefully you find the new format easy to understand and edit. CRwikiCA talk 13:50, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

An easy way to get around this confusion is to add comments in the table, such as <!-- Team positions --> above team1, team2 parameters and so on to explain what each section does and what the parameters are for (as many users dont read documentation). QED237 (talk) 14:31, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

That could be a solution yes. CRwikiCA talk 15:11, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Head-to-head results

@CRwikiCA: The documentation seems to indicate that notes entered in |hth_TTT= will appear in the points column, but nothing shows up in the example or in my sandbox. -- Jkudlick (talk) 17:58, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Something went wrong when implementing the option to create different styles of tables. I'll try to find the issue and let you know when it's fixed.CRwikiCA talk 19:01, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

@Jkudlick: I reverted the live version, so the functionality works now. I will resolve the issue in the sandbox and then bring it to the live version once it fully works. CRwikiCA talk 19:12, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

I now resolved the issue and implemented it in the live version. CRwikiCA talk 19:26, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Awesome. Great work! -- Jkudlick (talk) 14:58, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

res_col_header

For res_col_header= can you also have Comments as per 2014–15 Ukrainian First League ? Brudder Andrusha (talk) 05:28, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

@Brudder Andrusha: Yes, see reply at WT:FOOTY:

Pos	Team	Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts	Comments
1	FIFA World Cup Dream Team	5	5	0	0	10	0	+10	15	New

Updated to match(es) played on unknown. Source:

It can be customized that way, although you might want to indicate the new status with footnotes instead:

Pos	Team	Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts	Qualification or relegation
1	FIFA World Cup Dream Team	5	5	0	0	10	0	+10	15	1974 FIFA World Cup
2	Team 2	5	3	1	1	3	2	+1	10
3	Team 3	5	3	0	2	3	3	0	9
4	DDD	5	1	1	3	1	4	−3	4
5	Gibraltar	5	0	0	5	0	6	−6	0

Updated to match(es) played on unknown. Source:
Notes:

I hope this answers your questions. CRwikiCA talk 15:17, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Passing parameters via template calls

Would it be possible to write the code to allow for parameter values to be passed via template call? I'm specifically thinking of |only_pld_pts=, which is presently coded so that a truncated table is displayed if called (even if no value is assigned). If you look at the UEFA Group Stage tables on the 2015 WWC qual article you can see that the tables are truncated to fit better in the article, but the tables are full size on the main UEFA article and on each of the group articles. Could the coding for |only_pld_pts= be changed to require a specific yes or true value to activate? If that can be done, would passing the value via the template call be possible, e.g. set |only_pld_pts={{{trunc}}} in the module and call {{2015 FIFA Women's World Cup Group A table|trunc=true}}? -- Jkudlick (talk) 12:38, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

@Jkudlick:This would be possible, do you want me to implement it for the group A to see whether my idea works? I think having values yes, y, true, t and 1 (independent of case) would catch all options, or should there be more options? CRwikiCA talk 15:21, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA:Those options should be enough. If you want to test it on Group A, I have no problem with that. -- Jkudlick (talk) 15:37, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

@Jkudlick: Done: Template:2015 FIFA Women's World Cup Group A table Template:2015 FIFA Women's World Cup Group A table I kept the same parameter name to keep it easier to follow if people end up reading the Lua code. CRwikiCA talk 17:29, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

• You rock! -- Jkudlick (talk) 17:33, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Last updated and source

I would be in favour of this being changed to <small> text, in line with some of the other templates used on football pages (I'm not aware for other sports), such as Template:Fb rs (footer is at Template:Fb rs footer). I don't know if there's any guidelines or policies on the use of small text here, but I'd be in favour of a change. - 97rob (talk) 17:51, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Using <small></small> in table footers is likely a violation of MOS:FONTSIZE, thus the reason the footers in the module are not as small as many editors are accustomed to. -- Jkudlick ^tc_s 18:28, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

The size was indeed brought up in one of the discussions leading up to the introduction of the module. It is now set at the user-defined reference list size, which has 90% as default. Some small text on Wikipedia does indeed seem to violate MOS:FONTSIZE. CRwikiCA talk 20:38, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

About other sports

As this module is called "Sports table", are you going to prepare it for other sports (e.g., deleting the draws column for basketball, different point criteria at rugby union or volleyball, etc)? Great job, btw. Asturkian (talk) 11:42, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

@Asturkian: That is the idea, when it has been rolled out to the football project and everything is working well (no errors) the plan is to spread the module to other sports as well. For example the table is currently called with |style=football but also |style=WL OT works (mainly as test) which is for tables without draw and has overtime wins (OTW) and overtime loss (OTL) instead (those names can be changed to i.e. shootout). The columns are decided in submodules (for example Module:Sports table/football or Module:Sports table/WL OT). I can give you example of thos kind of table.

For |style=football we get

Pos	Team	Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts
1	FIFA World Cup Dream Team	5	5	0	0	10	0	+10	15
2	Team 2	5	3	1	1	3	2	+1	10
3	Team 3	5	3	0	2	3	3	0	9
4	DDD	5	1	1	3	1	4	−3	4
5	Team 4	5	0	0	5	0	6	−6	0

Updated to match(es) played on unknown. Source:

For |style=WL OT we get

Pos	Team	Pld	W	OTW	OTL	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts
1	FIFA World Cup Dream Team	5	5	0	0	0	10	0	+10	15
2	Team 2	5	3	0	1	1	3	2	+1	10
3	Team 3	5	3	0	0	2	3	3	0	9
4	DDD	5	1	1	0	3	1	4	−3	5
5	Team 4	5	0	0	0	5	0	6	−6	0

Updated to match(es) played on unknown. Source:

So as you see there are already ways to make new tables and there is plan to expand, just taking it one step at the time and start at football to see if any issues comes up. QED237 (talk) 13:56, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

@Asturkian: When I have some time, I plan to generalize the documentation to make it easier for people to create sport specific versions. The module is created with sub-modules, so it should be relatively easy to change the columns (and their headings) for specific sports while keeping all the advanced options that are created by the core of the module. I don't think I have time for that until mid January, that should also lead to enough time to iron out the last issues that will come up from implementing the module in various football articles. One more major issues is to generally be able to switch between goals for/against/diff to points for/against/diff to reduce the need for a multitude of style modules that are almost identical. CRwikiCA talk 17:14, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Adjust points

@Jkudlick and LRD NO: Based on the December discussion I reworded |adjust_points_TTT= for points adjustments (while leaving the old startpoints option in, but removing it from the documentation). CRwikiCA talk 20:25, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Cheers, CR. Top work as always. LRD 22:57, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Great work. This is definitely more intuitive. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 01:34, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Exporting the template to other sports

I exported the module to the 2014–15 Primera División de Futsal article, league that works with the same pointing rules as in football. I don't know if you have a control of where is the module being used. Asturkian (talk) 09:39, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Also exported to handball at 2014–15 Liga ASOBAL as a first try. Maybe it would be good to ask to the handball editors if they'd like to use the new template at the competitions of this sport. Asturkian (talk) 15:19, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

In hindsight I should have named the football-style WDL for win/draw/loss (maybe I will still do that with football grandfathered in). The long term plan is indeed to add some other styles as well. CRwikiCA talk 16:34, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

"Source:" text 'on' by default

Why was it decided to have the "source:" text there by default? It would look better (in my opinion) if the source text only appeared if there was a citation in place. TheBigJagielka (talk) 15:06, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I guess it comes fro the league tables that were always sourced and honestly I see no reason for why it should not be. All statistics must be sourced, it is good practise. If not sourced tables might/should be removed as unsourced content. QED237 (talk) 15:18, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

The source text appears in combination with the {{citation needed}} template when no source is given. It is pretty much a given that any table without sources can be very easily challenged, so per WP:PROVEIT the citation needed tag is added automatically as a friendly reminder. CRwikiCA talk 15:35, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Goal average

Football leagues used to use goal average instead of goal difference (see 1965–66 Bundesliga). Goal average is calculated by dividing goals for by goals against. Is there a way to implement this in these tables? EddieV2003 (talk) 02:45, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

@EddieV2003: I'll add it to my to-do list and will let you know when it's functional. CRwikiCA talk 15:19, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

@EddieV2003: This is now implemented, use |use_goal_ratio=yes to display a goal ratio rather than goal difference. CRwikiCA talk 20:04, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

First try for basketball

I made in a sandbox a first try of the module for basketball (and sports without ties) purposes here: Module:Sports table/WL/sandbox and its results are at the moment in my sandbox. The only problem I have is I can't convert GF and GA into PF and PA (and maybe it would be better to show points by default). For this table I established by default 2 points per win and one point per less, like it is written in FIBA rules. If you don't agree with it, please delete it. Asturkian (talk) 15:19, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

The other table I want to do for basketball is for competitions that don't use points and only work with wins and losses like, e.g., 2014–15 Euroleague, 2014–15 Eurocup Basketball and Spanish 2014–15 ACB season, without points column and bolding the number of wins but this seems too complicated for me. Asturkian (talk) 15:19, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

@Asturkian: It seems fine to me, I fixed the points for/against/difference issues and it displays fine now on your sandbox. I will extend this module to be able to bold wins (and no points), to use win percentage instead of points and to be able to show games behind. It is on my to do list, but there are a couple of other things on there as well. I moved this style live as well. CRwikiCA talk 15:44, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA: BTW, is there any possibility to delete the "Qualification or relegation" column? Asturkian (talk) 16:26, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

@Asturkian: That column is automatically removed when no "resultN"-parameter is used (N is position). HAve you found a place where is is not needed?. QED237 (talk) 17:30, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Yes, but it doesn't color the row. In example, for competitions of a lot of groups, like UEFA Europa League, could be better and less redundant than showing always "Qualified to the next stage". BTW, instead of the dash it could be better in the matches table to color it in grey like in {{fb r|r=null}} Asturkian (talk) 13:38, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

@Asturkian: I find that a grey box is more visually distracting in the match table, because it visually draws your eyes to that rather than the actual match scores. Colour should not be the only identifier of a table cell/row per MOS:COLOR. You can always use |splitN= if you want a different option to create a break in the table. CRwikiCA talk 15:23, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

@Asturkian: I get the idea it might be redundant, but we should not only use color to explain things but we must also used informative text (readers might be colorblind) and also in EL case (and many others) just must also think about the fact that the table is used on many other pages where it is only one table (for example on the teams individual pages). About the grey color I must say I am torn, it might also be good to have grey together with the dash to say, it is impossible for the teams to meet. QED237 (talk) 15:29, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

This is what it looks like now in table format:

Home \ Away	A	B	C	D	E
Team A	—	2–1	1–0	1–0	1–2
Team B	2–1	—	1–0	1–0	1–2
Team C	2–1	1–0	—	1–0	1–2
Team D	2–1	2–1	1–0	—	1–2
Team E	2–1	1–0	1–0	1–2	—

What would be the exact suggested change, and what would it look like (it's easy to change some of the style parameters)? CRwikiCA talk 18:21, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

	MFF	JSIF	AFF	HFF
Malmö FF	—	vs	vs
Jönköpings Södra IF		—	vs
Assyriska FF			—	vs
Hudiksvalls FF	vs	vs		—

@CRwikiCA: This was how 2014–15 Svenska Cupen looked next to standings table before I added the new module. It made dark background as well as the dash on the diagonal and dark areas on matches not played. I dont know if this is the best or what is best. On the template based result-tables it is grey on those boxes you set "null" (look at 2014–15 Premier League#Results table) and that is done when teams can not meet eachother. Maybe this should even be discussed on WT:FOOTY. QED237 (talk) 23:58, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA: @Qed237: I like how it works currently with the "Fb r" templates. It would be a good idea to have the possibility of creating "null" games if only one leg is played in the group like, e.g. in the 2014–15 UEFA Women's Champions League#Qualifying round. Anyway, simply with having a darker color in the games not played as Qed237 suggests would be enough for me. Asturkian (talk) 07:13, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

@Asturkian: I implemented some changes into the WL style (and will do some more). I haven't created proper documentation, but |ranking_style=wins would highlight the win column (and omit the pts column). Using |ranking_style=percentage would replace the points column with a percentage column instead. It also changes the hth note to the win column instead of the points column for tiebreakers. CRwikiCA talk 18:08, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

@Asturkian and Qed237: The games behind functionality is implemented now as well (documentation will still need to follow). Is having losspoints default to |losspoints=1 the logical choice though? We should probably have the shading of the match table in a separate discussion. As always with these updates, watch out for bugs flying around. CRwikiCA talk 21:15, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA: It is perfect as it is now. GB depends on the leader's games as it says in the GB article. BTW, really this concept is rarely used out of the USA. Asturkian (talk) 21:46, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

@Asturkian: Very well, we'll leave it as is, the losspoints can always be adjusted for individual tables. I have only seen the GB used in the USA, but I figured it should be included for completeness to give this style even more versatility. CRwikiCA talk 15:15, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

GF-GA-GD columns

Could it be made possible to totally omit the GF-GA-GD columns. Would be good for this match racing table: User:Smartskaft/sandbox. // Smartskaft (talk) 16:55, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

@Smartskaft: I implemented this for the WL style and added it to your sandbox tables. It can be done by setting |for_against_style=none. CRwikiCA talk 20:01, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA: Thank you very much. // Smartskaft (talk) 22:14, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Showing team and templates

Hi, people. Could it be possible to keep the option of showing any team without creating a new template for the table? E.g., in 2014–15 Segunda División B I changed the tables for the new modules, but the showteam option is not available for these, for adding in the team season articles there are of three teams of the league. If possible, I don't want to create templates for the tables. Asturkian (talk) 11:45, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

@Asturkian: You can still use the |showteam= in those cases outside of the template, e.g.:

Pos	Team	Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts	Qualification or relegation
1	Gimnàstic	22	12	6	4	23	13	+10	42	Qualification to group champions' playoffs
2	Lleida Esportiu	22	11	5	6	31	20	+11	38	Qualification to promotion playoffs
3	Huracán Valencia	22	9	10	3	23	16	+7	37
4	Hércules	22	9	8	5	23	14	+9	35
5	L'Hospitalet	22	9	7	6	26	18	+8	34	Qualification to Copa del Rey

Updated to match(es) played on 25 January 2015. Source: Futbolme.com
Rules for classification: 1) points; 2) goal difference; 3) number of goals scored

All template functionality can be called/used without putting the table in a template. CRwikiCA talk 15:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA: So, it seems the editor must copy every week all the table for using the template. Thank you for the information. Asturkian (talk) 18:58, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

@Asturkian: Yes, either have the table in a template, or copy the relevant parts to the team articles where applicable. CRwikiCA talk 19:58, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

It is always best to use a template if a table is used on more than one place (at least in myh opinion). QED237 (talk) 13:18, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

I have to agree that a template for the table is best if it is going to be referenced on multiple pages, especially league tables. This way, the information is updated in one location and is immediately transcluded to the appropriate pages. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 00:23, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Beach soccer

Moved from Module talk:Sports table/WDL

 – Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 07:55, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA: Would it be possible to add an option to change the headers for beach soccer to W, W+, L instead of the default? Looking at the code, it seems as simple as adding an option for |beach=yes, y, true, t, 1, then when creating the header, adding a simple If..Then..Else statement. I was about to being working on FIFA Beach Soccer World Cup when I noticed that they have no draws in beach soccer. |draw_TTT= doesn't need to change, and I know we can easily set |draw_points=2, but the header is the visual element that would need to change.

I'd do it, but I'm not comfortable enough in Lua to make changes without thinking I'll break it. I know I can simply revert, but I'd still rather not possibly break dozens of articles and templates, no matter how temporary. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 13:31, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

@Jkudlick: I would prefer to create an option to overwrite the draw column header instead with a custom header, that would reduce the clutter in the Lua-code and be a more versatile solution. I have also toyed with the idea of renaming the football style WDL, to give it a more generalized function (not every sport needs their own style, it should depend on the match result options). Would such a solution work in your eyes? CRwikiCA talk 16:33, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Versatility is why the module was created, right? I like your option to be able to create custom headers. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 16:52, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

@Jkudlick:I added the option |draw_header= to adjust this, example:

Pos	Team	Pld	W	W+	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts

Updated to match(es) played on unknown. Source:

That will work perfectly! Thanks! — Jkudlick ^tc_s 19:38, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA: And of course, FIFA has to go and complicate it this year with a 3-2-1-0 point structure (Regulation Win-AET Win-PKSO Win-Loss). All previous World Cups were the standard 3-2-0 point structure used in beach soccer (Regulation Win-AET/PKSO Win-Loss). I was about to change the tables in 2015 FIFA Beach Soccer World Cup when I noticed the change. I'll look at WL OT to see if that could be used. *sigh* — Jkudlick ^tc_s 13:24, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

A similar change could probably be made there to accomplish that. :) CRwikiCA talk 21:16, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

2015 FIFA Beach Soccer World Cup

Moved from Module talk:Sports table/WL OT

 – Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 07:55, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA: Might I impose upon you to perform the same magic here that you performed on the "Football" sub-module? My most sincere apologies for the request, but FIFA (many expletives left out of this statement) had to "improve" the system. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 13:38, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

I hope I can get to that soon, today my time is limited unfortunately... CRwikiCA talk 21:18, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

No rush. The tournament doesn't start until July. :) — Jkudlick ^tc_s 21:45, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

@Jkudlick and Qed237: I brought this style fully up-to-date with all the new features, including the custom OTW and OTL headers to make it more versatile. This could be used directly for European hockey competition I think (assuming consensus etc), the American leagues might need a style of their own, depending on the exact desires for their formatting. CRwikiCA talk 21:37, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, it looks good. I'll play in my sandbox for a bit before using it in the article. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 01:52, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Customising OTW and OTL headers

Moved from Module talk:Sports table/WL OT

 – Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 07:55, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I want to use this table for a competition that had penalty wins (PW) and penalty losses (PL). How do I change OTW/OTL to PW/PL? Hack (talk) 06:15, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

@Hack: use

{{#invoke:Sports table|main|style=WL OT
|OTwin_header=<abbr title="Won after penalties">PW</abbr>
|OTloss_header=<abbr title="Lost after penalties">PL</abbr>
}}

To get:

Pos	Team	Pld	W	PW	PL	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts

Updated to match(es) played on unknown. Source:

CRwikiCA talk 15:36, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Great, thanks for that. Hack (talk) 16:00, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Hide "results column header" through template parse

Can it be done? I couldn't seen an option to hide it. I only want to hide that column, and keep the match_results.

This is how it looks at the moment for the 2017 tournament qualification page using your template: Template:2017 UEFA European Under-21 Championship qualification Group 1

This is how it looked for the 2015 equivalent using the old template: Template:2015 UEFA European Under-21 Championship qualification Group 1

On the page 2017 UEFA European Under-21 Championship qualification, the show_matches will be passed through the template.

I don't think it'll look right once the fixture dates are announced and put into the results table on the right hand side. I'd like an option to hide the 'results column header' when calling the template but I can't seem to find one. Is it possible to have an option similar to 'show_matches=' such as 'show_results_column_header='? TheBigJagielka (talk) 12:46, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

@TheBigJagielka:. The column has been discussed on several occasions and will most likely not be removed or be able to remove. This because MOS guidelines states that readers may be colorblind so we should not use only color to describe qualifications (which is why column is added). If you want you can try reading in WT:FOOTY archives and/or opening a new discussion at WT:FOOTY regarding this. Is there any other thing you want to have changed? Any suggestions are welcome. I have myself considered asking for change to the matches section as this should also be used for example at 2014–15 Arsenal F.C. season#Results where there are grey boxes on diagonal when teams cant meet themselves instead of current dash.

In the new format it would be

Home \ Away	A	B	C	D	E
Team A	—	2–1	1–0	1–0	1–2
Team B	2–1	—	1–0	1–0	1–2
Team C	2–1	1–0	—	1–0	1–2
Team D	2–1	2–1	1–0	—	1–2
Team E	2–1	1–0	1–0	1–2	—

While old Svenska cupen looked like

	MFF	JSIF	AFF	HFF
Malmö FF	—	vs	vs
Jönköpings Södra IF		—	vs
Assyriska FF			—	vs
Hudiksvalls FF	vs	vs		—

And as I siad there was grey boxes on diagonal for regular articles so I am considering an own discussion about this. QED237 (talk) 13:05, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

That makes sense. I was comparing it to the 2015 U21 competition and it looked vastly different. Had I looked at the Euro 2016 table template. I'd have realised that the column was in use there. I just wanted it to match what was already in place. :)

The only suggestion to the code I have is adding a "sortable" attribute to the table header on Module:Sports table/WDL to sort columns but I know some people don't like the idea. It took me a while to get used to but I prefer the format of this module to the old table template method.

Pos	Team	Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts	Qualification
1	Team A	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	Result outcome 1
2	Team B	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	Result outcome 2
3	Team C	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
4	Team D	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
5	Team E	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
6	Team F	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

First match(es) will be played: unknown. Source:

The non-code suggestion I have is to have a 'blank template' (similar to above) put into the Module:Sports table/WDL/doc file. I've added this module to several pages and it's become a bit of a nuisance having to alter what's already there (pre-existing totals etc). I'd like a next to empty template to copy and paste and make changes from that point onwards.TheBigJagielka (talk) 16:14, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

A sortable option should be switchable if implemented (defaulting to off). It should then be left to editors for individual articles whether to include that or not. I also see the point of a tool to create the core of the tables. I am relatively busy the next two weeks. But after that I can probably cook something up. CRwikiCA talk 19:00, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

I am one of those not seeing why you should be able to sort a standings table. I can understand other stats tables like scorers in a club season article becuase then you may want to sort after competition to see who scored most in league, cup and so on but a standings table is standings they are ordered in the order teams are positioned. No need to sort a standings table. About the blank template I totally agree, I will look at it tomorrow and see if I can set it up. Should it be with win_AAA or just win_? if I add AAA then it is easy with "find and replace" but empty is easier if editors want to write team everywhere themselves. QED237 (talk) 21:41, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

For the exact same reason you think scoring tables should be sortable. You might want to see what team scored the most goals, had the most goals scored against them, who has the most wins (in some sports that isn't the first place team), what team has the best/worst winning percentage (not always exactly the same as the standings order) and so on and so forth. In many sports that is one of the most important aspects of a standings table. -DJSasso (talk) 13:22, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

@Djsasso: So it would be best if a sortable option can be turned on in general for all styles (which defaults to off)? CRwikiCA talk 14:46, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

But why sort a standings table? They are what they are, STANDINGS, and those should never be reordered. Also if you want to see who scored most goals it is not that hard, you dont have to sort table for that. QED237 (talk) 15:00, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Because standings are more than just the place a team is in. Maybe they don't do it in the sports you follow, but in the sports I follow they often talk about the rank of teams in various stats which is a form of standings. You just have to go to any website that does hockey standings and most will be sortable. I assume its true for more than just hockey. Users will expect to be able to sort the columns. Removing sortability takes away a large part of the function of the table. I sort standings tables almost every time I look at them. -DJSasso (talk) 15:20, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA I personally would have it the default as on, I can't imagine a time when you wouldn't want to allow a user choice. But as long as there is the ability to turn it on I am happy. -DJSasso (talk) 15:21, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

When there there are lots of teams such as in the Template:2014–15_Premier_League_table, I think the sortable option is quite useful, not so much when there's only three or four teams. As for the blank template, I prefer the 'AAA' option so I can 'find and replace' using notepad++. TheBigJagielka (talk) 11:09, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

@TheBigJagielka:, sorry it took so long, I have been busy. What do you think about User:Qed237/sandbox#Empty table? I was thinking about how much info to add with comments and other info and thought I could add and then editors can remove. Is it to much or would it work? Feel free to edit it until you feel it is okay. QED237 (talk) 16:44, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: It looks good to me. TheBigJagielka (talk) 23:11, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

"for_against_style" stopped working

This parameter stopped working and in all tables now appear Goals for, goals against and goal difference instead of points (e.g.). Asturkian (talk) 19:41, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

@Asturkian: Do you have a quick example? And did you just notice it? CRwikiCA talk 19:48, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA: E.g., at 2014–15 ACB season#League table, where "for_against_style=points" is written and is not shown. Asturkian (talk) 19:50, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

@Asturkian: It should be fixed now, an IP added a frame option which overwrote the point option. CRwikiCA talk 20:03, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Confusion due to use of colour

I like the unified colour scheme, which makes a great deal of sense, but I don't believe it should be applied to all columns of the table from the start - I think only the final "Qualification" column should be coloured until a team actually secures their place. The addition of letters to identify whether a team has qualified or not is confusing and I can't see how this makes things clearer for the reader. For example, I believe the table here would be much clearer if only the "Qualification" column of the 2nd place row was coloured light blue because I believe the current format could confuse many people into thinking that Slovenia had already secured that place - that was the case when I first looked at it. I'd also be in favour of colouring eliminated nations red while the tournament was in progress because again I believe this is much easier to understand than the bracketed letter E after their name. There's a similar issue with 2015_AFC_Champions_League - to me displaying the tables like this suggests that the teams coloured green have already progressed. There are numerous similar dissenting comments on other articles such as 2014/15 UEFA Champions League: Talk.

Below is an example of what I mean - I'm not a big html expert so I've just tweaked the first table I could find that didn't use the new template.

At the start of the season the table would look like this.

Later in the season, it might look something like this.

This seems to me to be a better option than the current mixture of colours and letters, particularly for small groups/leagues such as those found in the Champions League and World Cup qualifying. If people don't find that appropriate for domestic league competitions, then I'd argue that there's a case for having a slightly different template for group stages of knockout cup competitions. Craig1989 (talk) 00:26, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

It is most confusing when there is no standard, like in the old setup with differences between leagues and groups. In my opinion there is no reason why there should be a difference there, because that makes things confusing for people reading both styles of articles. I understand there is an adjustment period with the new module, but to go back and recreate a difference does not seem right to me. Whatever would change should apply equally, regardless of the type of table. CRwikiCA talk 14:19, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

If that's the consensus on different table formats then fair enough, but what about the overall adjustment I suggested? It's just a minor tweak on the new module which I think might be helpful in avoiding confusion. I think the use of letters on the table should be kept to a minimum - perhaps just (C) for Champions, (P) for Promoted and (R) for relegated. When you start having various letters for "Eliminated", "Advances to further Round", "Will finish at least 2nd but not assured of advancing", "Only able to qualify for play-offs", "Qualified for play-offs but may still qualify directly" then the whole thing becomes a lot less intuitive, particularly if one team has more than one letter.

Different wikiprojects might prefer different formats. Since you are interest in football tables, you could probably best take this discussion to WT:Footy with some more details. CRwikiCA talk 17:03, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

My issue with the tables isn't specific to football, which is why I felt it was more appropriate here. I'm not a regular editor of Wikipedia - I just want to get involved on a subject that I feel strongly about - so I don't really know how all these various pages operate. I gave an example of a potential tweak to this module which I think might improve the clarity of the module across all sports, so putting it on a football discussion page would miss out on a fairly large chunk of the module users. However, if you still think it's more appropriate to put something there then I will.Craig1989 (talk) 00:27, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

You won't find to many people responding here, and different sports have different usages, the module is mostly a wrapper to allow a wide variety of formatting options. Split colours for a line is currently not implemented, but it could be left blank (with what the position qualifies for) until a certain stage is reached. Letters can easily be left out as well. But what would be most appropriate for football articles would need to be discussed on WT:FOOTY. I would be open to a variety of ideas, as long as leagues and groups would be treated the same. CRwikiCA talk 18:46, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Problem with positions

Hi again. I see there is a problem with the module here and here. These sections start counting positions not from the first and because of that, teams are not shown. Is there any possibility to fix it? Asturkian (talk) 20:26, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

@Asturkian: What you can do at the moment is to use the pos-parameter for every team, for example pos_TTT=12 if team with shortening TTT has position 12. Perhaps it is possible to add a startpos parameter but that has not been implemented. @CRwikiCA: what would you say about a parameter that can be used as a startvalue for team positions? For example startposition=11 and then the positions are given as 11,12,13 and so on? 11:21, 7 April 2015 (UTC)QED237 (talk)

That might work indeed, to start counting from a different number. CRwikiCA talk 15:50, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

@Asturkian and Qed237: Using |highest_pos=N solves this now, as I implemented for those examples you quoted. CRwikiCA talk 18:12, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Statusletters on league tables

On many league tables there has now been some questions what letter to use when teams have secured at least "playoff" to higher level league but is currently on direct promotion spot, but also in tables were teams have qualified for some sort of european competition but not decided if CL or EL. What are the appropriate statusletters for this? should we use statusletter for those occasions? I know last season in England the letters were not used until it was clear. Should T be used or should we have new letters with better explanation? QED237 (talk) 11:27, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA: what do you think? QED237 (talk) 11:28, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: I don't know whether there is a perfect answer for this. There are the X, Y and Z wildcard letters for the WDL-style which can be used in this case, I think. Is there an active talk page discussion somewhere? CRwikiCA talk 15:52, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA: No discussion, just a question on my talkpage after some reverting on the english tables. QED237 (talk) 20:55, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Okay, there are the wildcard letters available, when default text is not sufficiently clear. That might be the best option. CRwikiCA talk 15:02, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

I did change {{2014–15 Eredivisie table}} to use the wildcard letters instead. That should clarify what is going on. CRwikiCA talk 16:21, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237:, I'm fine with the use of wildcard letters (X, Y, Z) for teams that have qualified for playoffs and yet may also be promoted as champions. Cheers. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 16:50, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: There needs to be some indicator that a club has at least qualified for the playoffs. It doesn't matter at all what that indicator is, or if that club can still qualify for something better, but ignoring the fact that a club is certain to make the playoffs is poor. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:02, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm at a total loss as to why an 'X' is considered better than a 'Q' when they perform exactly the same function. The presence of a 'Q' and the lack of a 'P' for promoted explains the situation perfectly for all but the most challenged readers, I suspect. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:07, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Q is "Qualified to the phase indicated", if a team is at a promotion spot "the phase indicated" is promotion but they have not secured promotion. QED237 (talk) 17:22, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

That's why we have 'TQ'. In any case, I'd say it was very obvious if promotion hadn't been secured due to the lack of a 'P'. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:29, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

On a similar note, could there be preference to have these letters show up before the team names? like x–AAA? Another option is using asterisks or other symbols such as daggers †? –HTD 11:40, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

@Howard the Duck: This option exists, call |status_pos=before in the module call as seen in {{2014–15 NHL Central Division standings}}. CRwikiCA talk 14:07, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

The alternative is to use the standard footnote structure that can be used after the team name (the symbols are letters then). CRwikiCA talk 14:13, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes eventually the alternative footnote structure would have to be used in the end in this regard. How about asterisks and daggers? –HTD 15:05, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Because numbering etc is all done automatically for footnotes one of the sets of WP:EXPLNOTE would have to be used in the current existing footnote structure (lower-alpha is currently used). The current TTT (X) might be used to incorporate none letter symbols as well for selected styles, but it would need to be tested to see how that would hold up. Is there a particular reason you would want to use these symbols? CRwikiCA talk 15:55, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

The dagger (†) is used prominently in US NCAA basketball standing tables. See 2014–15 Big East Conference men's basketball season and its sister articles. It's been in use for such a long time. I dunno where asterisks are used to denote something else other than footnotes, though. If this would ever get to have universal use it would have to be flexible enough to be accepted by every sports WikiProject. –HTD 16:20, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Those standings are a bit of an oddity anyway, because it uses a smaller font (for whatever reason?), and the style of the table is completely different (no lines, etc). I see other US college sports use a similar format. It beats me why the most important content of the page is reduced in size (it also seems to violate MOS:ACCESS). I would, however, think that the editors who edit those articles have a strong opinion about keeping that format. Outside of the US college sport tables anomaly, do other tables use the dagger? CRwikiCA talk 18:58, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

AFAIK there aren't any other leagues that use daggers. Other American leagues use x, y and z. –HTD 09:46, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

I think converting American college tables would take some extensive discussions, because the format is so different. So I don't know whether it is worth it to include that at this point. CRwikiCA talk 14:57, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes but it could be a project somewhere down the road. The tables are quite different, but could be done on this format. It's basically two "simple" tables together: one for conference opponents and one for all opponents. Basketball uses PCT but football ones don't (just straight up wins and losses). College basketball usually includes all teams in the conference playoffs, where the winner gets the "dagger"; in this case the playoff qualification colors aren't needed since everyone gets in, unless you're going to denote byes. College football usually makes the team at the top of the table the conference champion, unless it is divided into divisions where the two division winners play off for the conference championship. We could use the playoff qualification colors (or letters) as well. –HTD 15:09, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

It's not hard technically, the issue will probably to find consensus with the editors of those articles, because they might not be willing to make such wholesale changes. If they are, then it would be easy to move forward. CRwikiCA talk 16:01, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

While I'll probably wait for their tables to look like everybody else's it's always handy to have these features working just in case... –HTD 17:40, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Having a dual W-L style (conference and overall) is feasible. I would base that on the current WL style then (so maybe without the dagger for now, if footnotes/status letters work). CRwikiCA talk 19:02, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Tiebreaker column/s

Is this in the pipeline? I've noticed that tiebreaks are denoted by footnotes but this could be unwieldy if the process is particularly complex one. I'd also particularly like to limit footnotes to point deductions, withdrawals and other rare events. –HTD 13:19, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm agree with you. Footnotes are for rare events. When in an article there is a results table and also the rules for tiebreaking in a footnote, I don't see the need to add a footnote explaining the tiebreak. Asturkian (talk) 13:24, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Currently only the WL OTL tiebreak style contains a tiebreak column. Is there a particular example you have in mind with this? Footnotes can be placed in various places, some tiebreak columns sometimes get unwieldy. But an example might clear things up a bit. CRwikiCA talk 15:02, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I particularly liked the system used on La Liga season pages before. There, the first tiebreaker was head-to-head points and not GD so they used a separate column for tiebreakers. There are some instances were you'd need multiple columns, or cram everything into one tiebreaker column. I was going to cite a tournament where the tie was broken on the final criterion: overall goal average but I can't find it.

Honestly I'm on the fence on "tiebreaker columns" as tiebreakers are not usually denoted this way. Either they're totally left out, or is at the bottom of the table (but not via footnotes). What I like about them is that they're pretty straightforward and you wouldn't have to scroll up and down unlike footnotes/notes. Plus the fact I'd reserve footnotes on something more important. –HTD 15:23, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

When consensus was formed to implement these tables for football articles, the vote was to use footnotes to indicate how ties were broken if necessary instead of having a separate (mostly empty) column. (Archived discussion with unanimous support). CRwikiCA talk 16:05, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, WP:CCC, but that's football. There are supposedly many other sports that would be using this module, so I dunno how a discussion solely by football enthusiasts would be binding to rugby or hockey followers. Either way, it's a good bet that these templates were, for a lack of a better word, imposed on these articles (just as what we've been doing nowadays), and people just kinda liked it, were indifferent, or those who didn't, supporters would just point out the discussion with uninamous support that most people hadn't heard about until now.... so no more chance for a change because the same people would come out and say "UNANIMOUS SUPPORT BRO, JUST DEAL WITH IT."

(Don't think that itself was wrong; there was no chance every football Wikipedian enthusiast would've heard of a discussion happening somewhere, and that a, for lack of a better word again, clique would do whatever it takes to impose what they've agreed upon because no one likes another round of discussion that could amend or undo, no matter how little the chances are, the changes. I did the same thing for basketball articles for the old standings template with a separate "tiebreaker column", and no one that I knew started a discussion to change it. This is unlike to say, what happened at Talk:2015 AFC Asian Cup#Remove superfluous info.) –HTD 17:48, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't have a problem adding the option to add a switchable tiebreaker column (off by default) to some of the styles. It is up to individual table editors or wikiprojects to determine in which cases (if any) those should be used. CRwikiCA talk 19:07, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

2015 IIHF World Championship

This new table system is complicated. I would like to return to the old one. (at least at 2015 IIHF World Championship)
Maiō T. (talk) 17:34, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

@Maiō T.: What is complicated? Can you please be a bit more constructive? Maybe we can help. QED237 (talk) 22:56, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

If somebody doesn't know, there is/was disscusion here. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 07:03, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Every team must be written 9 times: team1=SWE, win_SWE, OTwin_SWE, OTloss_SWE, loss_SWE, gf_SWE, ga_SWE, name_SWE={{ih|SWE}}. I just want a simple table, like 2014 IIHF World Championship#Group A. Maiō T. (talk) 15:14, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

But you can simply update the numbers for wins, losses, GF etc., and update the team positions, if they have changed. You don't need to make some updates in |name_SWE= field. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 15:34, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

There are differences between the data input and the way things are displayed. Initial set-up for the data is a bit more complicated, but you only need to change individual numbers in the same way as in the old tables. The way the table is displayed is highly customizable, and independent of the table input. Are there any specific things that you would like to see different? CRwikiCA talk 14:35, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA: Yes - we want border lines instead of bgcolor - see Talk:2015 IIHF World Championship#Tables. Maiō T. (talk) 22:00, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

@Maiō T.: I don't see consensus for that and that seems to violate WP:COLOR. The objections is that wording is awkward in the table, maybe there is a better wording that makes it clear that a position gives the right to the next round rather than the the team has qualified for it already. CRwikiCA talk 16:10, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Proposal

Propose using Module:Yesno instead of such code:

show_matches_val=='y' or show_matches_val=='yes' or show_matches_val=='t' or show_matches_val=='true' or show_matches_val=='1'

--Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 11:17, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

And maybe this module could replace these two: Module:MLB standings and Module:IndianPremierLeague/GroupStageTable (and see other pages under Module:IndianPremierLeague). --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 16:03, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

I like the idea of the MLB template for the parameters showing |57|23|18|12| instead of win_XXX=57|los_XXX=23 etc. For how do I use the template in the articles where I am the main editor, this way would be easier to start and to update. Asturkian (talk) 20:03, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Those ideas could work. Asturkian, so do you agree or disagree with the MLB template change? I could help you with implementing the module for cricket tables, is there a particular example article you would want to start with? CRwikiCA talk 15:49, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

@Edgars2007: The module and its submodule now all use Module:Yesno. CRwikiCA talk 19:00, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed Module talk:Yesno#Render T as true as well? :) --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 19:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Some comments.

• Currently if |source=, Source: is showed up. Maybe change code to treat it differently, so Source: isn't showing (when |source= is used, but is blank).
• maybe disable {{cn}} if |update=future?
• Maybe use Module:navbar instead of {{navbar}}?
• Maybe there could be something done in such cases, that users don't have to use <nowiki></nowiki>

--Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 08:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Does the Latvian wiki use the code from here? The idea is to have the {{cn}} show up automatically when no source is provided, because statistics are supposed to be cited. So calling cn is working as intended. The other two points are valid points, although I don't see why a single line does not suffice, because the list makes the rules as high as the table itself. CRwikiCA talk 14:55, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Latvian Wikipedia uses code from here. As for cn – I understand why it is needed, but I'm talking about cases, when actually there are no statistics (or everywhere are 0), that is, when tournament hasn't started yet. But ok, that was only a comment. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 16:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

It's nice to see the use of it spread. I will put the other issues on the to do list as well. Is it standard for the Latvian wikipedia to have a numbered list for the classification rules, rather than the numbered sentence that is used on the English version? CRwikiCA talk 17:16, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Standing tables aren't so much at Latvian Wikipedia, so we don't have tradition to none of those formats. I personally like numbered list, but I start to think, that sentence version would really be better :) --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 06:46, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Noticed, that if you have matches in your table and sortable table option, then also those match columns sorts. To my mind, it is useless. They don't sort properly, and what would be correct sorting? Maybe add class="unsortable" for those columns?

Pos	Team	Pld	W	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts		AAA	BBB	CCC	DDD	EEE
1	Team A	0	0	0	0	0	0	0		—	1–0	0–1	16 Nov '14	3 Sep '15
2	Team B	0	0	0	0	0	0	0		B–A	—	3 Sep '15	B–D	3 Sep '15
3	Team C	0	0	0	0	0	0	0		16 Nov '14	C–B	—	16 Nov '14	C–E
4	Team D	0	0	0	0	0	0	0		D–A	3 Sep '15	D–C	—	3 Sep '15
5	Team E	0	0	0	0	0	0	0		E–A	9–5	16 Nov '14	E–D	—

Updated to match(es) played on unknown. Source:

Also noticed |status_text_L=. But I suppose it isn't working. Because it isn't showing in such simple example. Or I'm using it not correctly?

Pos	Team	Pld	W	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts
1	AAA (L)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Updated to match(es) played on unknown. Source:
(L) Lorem ipsum

BTW, wouldn't it be possible to redefine status letter texts? I think that in some cases it would be useful. And, shouldn't there be added some tracking category where X, Y, Z are used but without text added to them? --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 07:01, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

And shouldn't the {{Central}} be used and other disscusions should be moved here? I hope I'm not too intrusive :) --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 07:25, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Having a centralized discussion would probably be best, feel free to set the {{Central}} templates up. There are only a finite number of status letters defined, which might be different for each style, the L is not defined for WL style. It should be relatively straightforward to add the unsortable class to those columns, I'll add it to my to-do list. CRwikiCA talk 14:29, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

 Done (the centralized discussion thing). --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 07:59, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Colouring of top row for standalone WDL style templates

The 2015 Windward Islands Tournament is a standalone tournament, no team qualifies for another round and no team is promoted or relegated. The top team alone is the outright champion. In these instances, should the top rows be coloured? At the moment there is only a (C) in the first row but I think it may look better coloured. What are your thoughts ? TheBigJagielka (talk) 19:20, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure what others may say, but I would think first place should be green1. Equineducklings (talk) 03:36, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

If it would be coloured, it should be green1. Whether it should be coloured is a matter of personal preference, I have no strong opinion about it. CRwikiCA talk 14:41, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Some people had used gold, silver and bronze bgcolor, but those are ugly and I personally hate it, that's I why I asked to use the icons to replace the numbered list. –HTD 15:21, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Champion but no Promotion/Qualification

Hi, regarding the case for SC Ritzing in the 2014–15 Austrian Regional Leagues, where they failed to get license for the Austrian Football First League, why does their row colored in white and not the default grey color? MbahGondrong (talk) 18:59, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Nevermind, figured it out. MbahGondrong (talk) 19:00, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Advice on tables if last placed teams get to some kind of knockout round

If the last placed team gets to play after the group stage (not necessarily for the championship, or the consolation or classification round), that means all teams automatically qualify for that round, necessitating the use of "T" for all teams that aren't in last place, which gets a "Q". Is this correct? What happens if the team can no longer qualify for the championship, and can only (or had) qualify to the consolation round and having "QE" is all kinds of awkward? See for example, Basketball at the 2015 Southeast Asian Games – Men's tournament. –HTD 22:54, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

@Howard the Duck: I would not use T at all (what tournament have they qualified for?), and then use A for those in knockout stage and Q for the others when they qualified for the row they are on. For certain scenarios like "Team can not reach knockout stage, but may qualify for 5th-place match or 7th-place match" the extra letters X, Y and Z can be used. Qed237 (talk) 00:36, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

As for your 1st question, they qualified for what ever playoff the last-placed team qualifies? All teams in Group A had qualified for the 7th place match, and all Group B teams qualified to the 8th place match. For group A, "Team can not reach knockout stage, but may qualify for 7th-place match" doesn't make sense since all teams qualified for this stage. This is also the case for the 2015 FIBA Asia Championship for Women, where there are six teams in Level I, then the top 4 progress to the semifinals, and the bottom 2 play in the promotion/relegation round: All teams qualify to the promotion/relegation round by virtue of being there.

As for your suggestion it's feasible except for the instance I cited above. –HTD 01:07, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Okay so lets take this step-by-step.

• T (Tournament qualified but round not decided) – Should be used when there are qualification for tournament and when round has not yet been decided, for example in league tables when team has qualified for Champions League, but may start in group stage or playoff round. There is no sense in using it when all teams qualify for something.
• A (Advance ti further round) – Used tournaments or qualifications when teams move on to further round or next qualifying round.
• Q (Qualified to phase indicated) – Used when we know what round team will play in. When a team has a Q, it will play in the round displayed on that row and can not qualify for an other row/round. For example if we know team will play 5th-place match and they are on that row, then we add Q.
• X,Y,Z (extra letters) – These extra letters can be set manually to explain further scenarios for example "team can not be relegated", "team can not advance to knockout stage" or whatever you want

Does this clear something up? Qed237 (talk) 09:12, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

"There is no sense in using it when all teams qualify for something." Yeah, this is my question. When all teams qualify for something, it's "T", no question. I know how the other letters work, so thanks, I guess? –HTD 12:51, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

• @Qed237:, you reverted my changes of (A) to (Q). This is SOP, semifinalists get a (Q). This was what was done in the 2015 AFC Asian Cup and 2015 Africa Cup of Nations page. I'm of the impression that (A) is used for things such as promotion/relegation playoffs in leagues. What's up with that? –HTD 14:04, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Apparently, (A) is used, which is weird. (Q) is the most logical as the team "qualified to the semifinals". That's what even the description says. (A) "advances to further round" is unnecessarily ambiguous. –HTD 14:16, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

@Howard the Duck: A is when you advance to next round and Q is when you qualify for something, like in 2014–15 UEFA Champions League teams that advanced to knockout got A and the third-placed teams that qualified for Europa League got Q. In qualification stage you get A when moving to next round and a Q when you qualified for main tournament. Qed237 (talk) 15:38, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Further guidance on the use of (A) and (Q). In the ongoing World Cup qualification, (Q) goes to the teams that qualify outright, and (A) goes to the team that plays in the playoffs. Is that correct? –HTD 21:06, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes that is true, if a team qualifies for main tournament (2018 FIFA World Cup) use Q, if they qualify for next round/playoffs use A. Qed237 (talk) 00:13, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

PCT mode

I have a few suggestions on improving this module in "PCT mode".

• Omission of leading zeroes

• Leading zeroes are omitted on a majority(?) of websites and Wikipedia articles that use them. It's not used in Yahoo Sports, ESPN.com, MLB.com, NFL.com, 2014–15 NBA season and 2014 NFL season, but is used in NBA.com and 2014 Major League Baseball season.

• Regular typeface for PCT column

• AFAIK, no major website or Wikipedia article boldface the PCT column.

• Capitalization of "PCT"

• Yahoo Sports, ESPN.com, MLB.com, NBA.com, 2014–15 NBA season, 2014 NFL season, 2014–15 PBA season, 2014–15 Big East Conference men's basketball season (and other NCAA division I basketball conferences) all capitalize "PCT", while NFL.com, 2014 Major League Baseball season, 2014 KBO League season and 2014 Nippon Professional Baseball season don't ("Pct."). However, only NFL.com has its table headers in Title Case (or Sentence case as they're all just one word), so you'd argue that "Pct." just follows that pattern. For Wikipedia articles, they're also in Title Case but PCT is still in ALLCAPS (save for baseball leagues). Maybe use "Pct." for baseball and "PCT" for basketball and American football?

• Eventual addition of more columns ("Home", "Road", "Conf", "Div", etc.)

• This a pipeline further down the road, but seeing US league use these columns, they should be added eventually if this would be universally used.

–HTD 11:27, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

All these changes are possible technically, I would like to add the default value when no games are played in the mix. Currently this displays an em dash (—), is this fine or should it be something else? CRwikiCA talk 14:11, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Default value in what column? For GB, the #1 team is traditionally denoted with an emdash. For wins, losses PF, PA and PD, it's always zero. PCT's trickier because other people have edit warred on me because division by zero isn't zero but they insist it to be zero (I wanted it to be left blank; I could live with an emdash too). –HTD 15:02, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

I referred to the PCT column here, the others seem okay as standard. If there are no objections to your suggestions, I will start implementing them starting with the least controversial ones. @Asturkian: has implemented the percentage style tables on some articles and might have an opinion about these points. CRwikiCA talk 15:59, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

The question isn’t really whether divide by zero is technically zero, it’s how that stat is usually indicated. —Wiki Wikardo 12:44, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

@Howard the Duck: I made the suggested changes: Pct→PCT; no bolding of the percentage column; and omitting the leading zeroes. Adding optionally a home/road column as well can also be done, do you have a particular position for these columns in mind? CRwikiCA talk 17:39, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

For basketball, looking at some popular websites, there is a variance of orders:

• NBA.com: W-L-PCT-GB-CONF-DIV-HOME-ROAD-L10-STREAK
• ESPN: W-L-PCT-GB-HOME-ROAD-DIV-CONF-PPG-OPP PPG-DIV-STREAK-L10
• Y!Sports: W-L-Pct-GB-CGB-Home-Road-Div-Conf-Last 10-PF-PA-Diff-Streak
• Wikipedia: W-L-PCT-GB-(Home-Road)-Div-GP (Home & road records omitted in conference standings)

It's universal that W-L-PCT-GB, in that order, are the first 4 columns. There's a disagreement on what comes next: Home-Road (always in that order) or Conf-Div (could be reversed). Conference GB only appears on Y!Sports' division standings, but it becomes the "default" in conference standings. PF (PPG)-PA (OPP PPG)-Diff (PPG and OPP PPG being averages of PA and PD respectively) only shows up in 3rd party websites, and Wikipedia doesn't (shouldn't?) have "Last 10" and "Streaks" (which are pretty much worthless). Wikipedia has the "GP" (Games played) column in the end for conference standings but it should be before "Wins" if ever that'll be included.

Since a full blown template would likely include, aside from the default 4 columns, Conf, Div, Home and Road records, and that Conf and Div records are actually used as tiebreakers, and that it would be used in "Division" standings where "Div" records are the next tiebreakers after head-to-head, I'd suggest W-L-PCT-GB-Div-Conf-Home-Road. PF and PA are optional columns that would always be there no matter what, so if someone wants that it could easily be added. These are all optional columns so we'd have flexibility on what to include. –HTD 18:00, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

At least for NFL tables, I don’t think I’ve ever seen DIV–CONF before HOME–AWAY, and NBA’s site seems to be in the minority.—Wiki Wikardo 12:44, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

However, being as Pct is not completely unknown, and being as this template is also used for non-North American leagues, that capitalization seems more appropriate to me as it fits by analogy with Pts as well as consistency with Pld. Usually headings are in all-caps, otherwise Pct is not.

I should also point out that keeping track of home and away records is not unique to US sport, though international football leagues usually denote it differently (i.e. 6 more identical columns, not two columns of W-L-T). —Wiki Wikardo 12:44, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah I'm indifferent now on "PCT" vs. "Pct". Some countries use "Win%" or some other variation. Perhaps this should be customizable. Same with which comes first between Div-Conf and Home-Away.

As for home and away records, most tables, such as the BBC's don't provide home and away records, although it's true that I had stumbled upon tables with such stats. In U.S. sports home and away records are always given. –HTD 22:54, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Varying the order of Home–Away and Div–Conf would be more work for whoever has to program it, I’d think, for very little gain (and at the cost of consistency, I might add). Home and Road records seem to be more prominent in sports like American football and basketball, but less common in MLB tables.

There’s also a slight distinction in how PCT is calculated versus Win%—draws count for .5 of a win in American sport, whereas a win percentage is simply the percentage of wins to total games played (and is actually expressed as a percentage). (In AFL standings, however, Win% is a measure of points difference.) —Wiki Wikardo 07:44, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

A - Advances to a further round" - can we customize this to "Advances to knock-out stage", etc.?

Hi, wonder if we can customize the "A" status code - "Advances to a further round" to "Advances to knock-out stage", or even better "Advances to knock-out stage"?

I think this is the relevant function:

function pp.status(Args)

-- Declare status options
-- ------------------------------------------------------------
-- NOTE: If you add to status_code, also add to status_called and status_letters!!
-- Or functionality will be compromised
-- ------------------------------------------------------------
local status_code, status_called = {}
status_code = { A='Advances to a further round'
...

Thanks for considering and keep up the great work! Facts707 (talk) 12:48, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

We should be able to use this on many places, for example in 2018 FIFA World Cup qualification, teams that qualifies from second round to third round must also be able to use the A and then knockout stage is wrong. Qed237 (talk) 17:44, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

After a closer look I think we would only have to add the bold line below:

function pp.status(Args)
   ... (existing code here)
-- Read in custom status options
if Args['status_text_A'] then status_code.A = Args['status_text_A'] end
if Args['status_text_X'] then status_code.X = Args['status_text_X'] end
if Args['status_text_Y'] then status_code.Y = Args['status_text_Y'] end
if Args['status_text_Z'] then status_code.Z = Args['status_text_Z'] end

Facts707 (talk) 19:29, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

@Facts707: That is not possible as we would need to define A every time it is called and the backwards compability with all other tables where the letter is already used would be compromised. Qed237 (talk) 20:25, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Technically it is possible to have specific letters' description overwritten per your proposal. Whether it is desirable is another issue. Currently the details are listed in the last column, is it necessary to repeat that in the footer as well? CRwikiCA talk 18:05, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Starting with some number

I'm here, again :) Wasn't it possible to start numbering with some other position, not with 1st? So that in this example Canada would be in pos2, China – pos3 etc. (in this example there wouldn't be pos1). |highest_pos=2 is completely something else.

Pos	Team	Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts
2	China	3	1	1	1	3	3	0	4
3	Netherlands	3	1	1	1	2	2	0	4
4	New Zealand	3	0	2	1	2	3	−1	2
5	Canada	3	1	2	0	2	1	+1	5

Updated to match(es) played on unknown. Source:

--Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 12:49, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

@Edgars2007: Yes, you are correct, I changed the table you posted to show this. (Obviously there is no team1 defined now.) CRwikiCA talk 14:01, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

I feel quite stupid right now :) Will have to remember to do double-check before asking something (i either forgot to include |highest_pos=2 or renumber teams). Sorry. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 14:31, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Automatic pass through of parameters

I just made some updates to this module so that this now works. the old syntax is still supported, but now you can (a) set |section= and it will check for a match with |transcludesection= (if both are defined), and (b) many parameters are automatically passed through from the transcluding pages (if I missed an important parameter, we can add it). Frietjes (talk) 13:59, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Converting

I have created a subpage of my userpage, that helps a lot to convert old tables to new module version. Basically, one can use it like this (see pre tag at the top of the page). The output of that can be seen in the next table. In the next edit one can clean-up things, so after that it looks pretty. I think this idea could be developed (if module would be used, then probably you could make everything in one edit), this was just a fast version. It really helps a lot, if you know some tricks (find and replace from old table format etc.) --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 11:25, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Some other ideas

Some other ideas, maybe to consider. If I propose something, that already exists, then sorry.

• in some cases, |title= would be useful, for example in this article (for Positions before the final round and Final positions)
• for some old tournaments, where is lack of information, some extra fields, that users can fill by themselves, would be useful. For example, in these tables (OK, it isn't old and not enwiki, this was just an example) the point difference. So maybe some one column for free text?
• it would be useful to add tooltips for status letters. I'm not suggesting deleting the footer text, just adding tooltips, so it won't break accessibility (sometimes it takes time to understand, what for stands that or another letter, specially, if it's X, Y, Z and the table is huge). So there would be:

  Team A (A)

• enabling something similar to Module:Check for unknown parameters would be cool, I think.
• Noticed that in Greek basketball league tables there are extra columns for home/away games. See 2014–15 Greek Basket League#Standings.
• in some far, far future maybe module can be converted to use mv.html library?

For this round it's all, I think. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 11:25, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

There are some good ideas in there. Lately I haven't had much time to spend on Wikipedia, so that created a bit of a backlog of stuff to do. I don't know whether I can get to this any time soon though. CRwikiCA talk 17:06, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, sure. Do what you want and when you want, I'm just proposing things :) --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 09:10, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Team number limit

Is there a team number limit? I will do a table of 50 teams and want to know in advance if it will work. --MicroX (talk) 16:17, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

@MicroX: I think there's not limit. At least, looking to the code, there is no mention to any limit. Asturkian (talk) 18:30, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

@MicroX: I believe a table of 50 teams is possible, though it would definitely be unwieldy. Try it out in your sandbox before making it live. That way, if there are any problems with it, it won't affect any existing articles. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 00:27, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

There is no limit in the code. I think there is a soft limit on the amount of memory or number of parameters that could exist in Wikipedia-Lua, but I don't know at which point you would reach that. I would think that 50 teams should work though. As said before, you might want to make it in your sandbox to ensure everything goes right. CRwikiCA talk 16:07, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Auto Sorting?

Is it possible to add a |sort_by= parameter, so people can just update the win/draw/loss/GF/GA values and it would automaticly sort based on the declared header to sort by?  #FF9600  talk 19:37, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Why would we want to sort a standings table? They are what they are, standings, and highest ranked team should be on top. Qed237 (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

That's what the request is about i think. So, not updating the positions as this is done automatically. Would be a nice feature to have. Kante4 (talk) 22:44, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

That's what I understood the question to be, not wanting to have to update team1=AAA etc. I guess that could save a little time, but I imagine it could be difficult to deal with tiebreakers. Equineducklings (talk) 23:26, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Oh, okay then I probably misunderstood the question, sorry about that. I am not sure how that could be implemented in the code, but as Equineducklings says, the main issue is the amount of different tiebreakers being used and in different orders. Sometimes it is by matches won, sometimes head-to-head or goal difference and so on. Qed237 (talk) 23:56, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Here's a thought then, how about adding a |sort_by= parameter and the accepted values will be the what is already defined based on organizational or league rules? For example, if the value Bundesliga is declared with |sort_by=, the module sorts based on the rules defined in |sort_by= portion of the module based on the Bundesliga's rules for determining a leader in a league (at least the first three rules, after that it will still need to manually sorted unless additional parameters are added).  #FF9600  talk 13:52, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

We should probably worry about the coding behind it before discussing the semantics about how to name it in the module. It might be possible to implement it, effectively it needs and added piece of code to order position according to some criteria. I don't know what sorting options there are in Lua, but it should be possible to incorporate it one way or another. CRwikiCA talk 15:45, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to discuss the semantics, I was clarifying how I feel it may be possible to implement, where each league/organization has their sorting "hardcoded". ;)  #FF9600  talk 23:25, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

There are to many leagues and other tables to have it league specific. The way I imagine it would work best would be to first order by points and then have something like |tiebreaker1=, |tiebreaker2= and so on. If teams have same points look at tiebreaker1, then tiebreaker2 and so on. As said above, the issue would be how to account for head-to-head points and other special criterias. Qed237 (talk) 23:47, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Probably, new parameters would be needed, |hth_points_TTT=, |hth_goals_for_TTT=, |hth_goals_against_TTT=, |hth_away_goals_for_TTT= and whatever more that will be needed. For other leagues also others like |awarded_against_TTT= would be needed. Qed237 (talk) 23:53, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

And of course a variable to sort automatically instead of the "standard" manually. Currently I am making a computer program (in C++) to calculate possible scenarios to see when teams have qualified or been eliminated and more info (highest and lowest possible points, highest and lowest position and highest and lowest points excluding last placed team and so on). Therefore I dont have time now but it could be a future project, if we can find out how to sort in LUA. Qed237 (talk) 23:58, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

The only problem I see is the limited input/output options and the overall processing limits to modules. Some leagues (e.g. in basketball) sort by wins first, so I would have |sort1=, |sort2= or something and use that. If there are head-to-head tiebreakers or a coin toss, or something that is not explicitly stated in the table. Then I think that tie should be broken manually instead of introducing elaborate league-dependent routines. This could be done by introducing a manual tiebreaker parameter |man_tie_order_AAA=1, |man_tie_order_BBB=2, etc.. We should keep the code as light and simple as possible. CRwikiCA talk 15:21, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea, have some different ways of sorting like goal diff, matches won and other "easy" tiebreakers while the others are done manually. However, by looking at the code I see a complex situation when team name is in main function and the points and info for that team is being printed in submodule. If we should sort the information, everything should be in the same place? Or perhaps that is not needed, I need more time in LUA if I should do it and currently I have a personal medical issue (hospital included) so I dont know when I will have the time and power so I cant do anything in nearby future if anyone else wants to look at it. Qed237 (talk) 15:19, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Actually there is a clever workaround in existence already. In the current iteration of the main module we have.

	-- Read in number of consecutive teams (ignore entries after skipping a spot)
	while Args['team'..N_teams+1] ~= nil do
		N_teams = N_teams+1
		-- Sneakily add it twice to the team_list parameter, once for the actual
		-- ranking, the second for position lookup in sub-tables
		-- This is possible because Lua allows both numbers and strings as indices.
		team_list[N_teams] = Args['team'..N_teams] -- i^th entry is team X
		team_list[Args['team'..N_teams]] = N_teams -- team X entry is position i
	end

Were the team codes are linked to the position. The position is queried from the input, but this could instead be calculated from tiebreakers rules. Changing this small part and incorporating the tiebreaker rules (possibly with some default rules) would do the trick. Because different styles have different default numbers of points, some of that information might need to be reordered somehow to make it work for any different number of points per win/draw/OT loss etc. I think even partial tables would be done right automatically, when the team_list parameter is built differently, but some rigorous testing would need to be done. The biggest issue will be to have an efficient implementation that also allows it to be used for different styles, some interplay and maybe some reordering of information in the styles might be needed. In particular, default values (|winpoints=3, etc..) should only be defined once in a submodule. CRwikiCA talk 15:59, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Converter

I'm wondering if anybody has come up yet with an easy way that will let you copy and paste a table from another website into the Module:Sports table, similar to, lets say, the Copy & Paste Excel-to-Wiki Converter on Wikipedia:Tools? I have made myself a little excel spread sheet for the use of creating tables in historical German season articles (like 1959–60 Oberliga) and it works resonably well for me but does have some flaws. My skills with excel are pretty limited. I'm happy to email it to other users for improvements or use. Or has somebody else already come up with something better? Calistemon (talk) 09:34, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm pretty handy with Excel. Could you send me what you have so far, and I'll see what I can do? It will probably be a few days since I'm going out of town for the weekend, but I should be able to put some time into it before the New Year. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 10:56, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

There is just one little problem. The email this user feature does not seem to allow me to attach any files. Know any way around that? Calistemon (talk) 11:10, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

In cases where a game is a draw, group stage games go to extra time and penalties

The recently announced Caribbean Cup group stage games will include extra time and penalties unless there is already a match winner. What's the best way to represent this in a table if at all ? TheBigJagielka (talk) 19:37, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

@TheBigJagielka: I would probably use submodule Module:Sports table/WL OT and if needed modify the "OTW" and "OTL" columns to include both overtime and penalties. That would mean 4 columns: win, overtime/penalty win, overtime/penalty loss, loss. However I am not sure how the points will be handed out in this tournament? In many sports it is 3pts for win, 2pts for overtime win, 1pt for overtime loss and 0pts for a regular loss. Qed237 (talk) 20:40, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Or if there is no difference between win and loss in OT and regular time submodule/style Module:Sports table/WL may be used. Qed237 (talk) 20:43, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

If two or more teams are in the same position?

If I have to place two or more teams at the same position, how could I show it on the module table? (e.g. Team A is the first ranked and Team B and C are ranked in the 2nd place) --Apzp79 (talk) 17:37, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

@Apzp79: The positions can be set manually with |pos_TTT=, for example if team "ABC" is in third place in the table but ties for second you can put |pos_ABC=2. Let me know if you need any more help. Qed237 (talk) 18:08, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

World Chess Championship 2016

After some complaints about the difficulty of updating the standing in the World Chess Championship 2016 article I looked for Module:Sports table as an alternative for chess tournaments. To replace the following old-style wikitable I have come up with the table below.

Standings of the Candidates Tournament for the World Chess Championship 2016

Rank	Player	Rating March 2016	1		2		3		4		5		6		7		8		Points	Tiebreaks
																				Head-to-head	Wins
1	Vishwanathan Anand (IND)	2762			½		½										1		2	0	1
4	Fabiano Caruana (USA)	2794	½										½		½				1½	0	0
1	Levon Aronian (ARM)	2786	½										½				1		2	0	1
4	Peter Svidler (RUS)	2757									½				½		½		1½	0	0
1	Sergey Karjakin (RUS)	2760							½				½		1				2	0	1
4	Anish Giri (NED)	2793			½		½				½								1½	0	0
7	Hikaru Nakamura (USA)	2790			½				½		0								1	0	0
8	Veselin Topalov (BUL)	2780	0				0		½										½	0	0

Pos	Team	Pld	Pts		KAR	ARO	ANA	GIR	CAR	SVI	NAK	TOP
1	Sergey Karjakin (RUS) (2760)	3	2		—			½		½	1
2	Levon Aronian (ARM) (2786)	3	2			—	½	½				1
3	Vishwanathan Anand (IND) (2762)	3	2			½	—		½			1
4	Anish Giri (NED) (2793)	3	1.5		½	½		—	½
5	Fabiano Caruana (USA) (2794)	3	1.5				½	½	—		½
6	Peter Svidler (RUS) (2757)	3	1.5		½					—	½	½
7	Hikaru Nakamura (USA) (2790)	3	1		0				½	½	—
8	Veselin Topalov (BUL) (2780)	3	0.5			0	0			½		—

Updated to match(es) played on 14 March 2016. Source: moscow2016.fide.com

The only thing I genuinely don't like is that it says team rather than player. Can this be altered? Or, could a separate module catering for chess tournaments be created? Calistemon (talk) 09:11, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

@Calistemon: There is functionality already for changing other headers but not the team header. However, it should not be to hard for me to add a parameter for it if you would like that (like |team_header= or something since we have |draw_header= for draw-column already). If there is more changes to be made with other columns and things like that, a new submodule could be created, but if only the header name is the issue I think a parameter in the current submodule is the best idea. Qed237 (talk) 12:16, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Also just as an idea, would it not be better to use WDL module and have those columns for wins, draws and losses, and the use Module:Sports results separate since they meet twice? Qed237 (talk) 12:21, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Changing just the header would be fine for me. The candidates meet twice but due to the neutral venue there is no such thing as home-and-away matches as such. The way the chess articles display the results table is a bit odd compare to football. I tried the columns for win, draw and losses but I could no get the goals for and against columns to go away with that option. Compare to the wikitable the World Chess Championship 2016 article is currently using the Module:Sports table is so much easier to edit and update, it just needs small adaptions to fit the purpose. Calistemon (talk) 12:35, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

@Calistemon: There is currently no functionality for removing only "GF", "GA" and "GD" columns, but that could be added as well if needed (I think) in the same way we remove the other columns in only_pld_pts. Then columns would be "Pos", "Player", "Pld", "W", "D", "L" and "Pts". I will look at the Team header. Are you sure nothing else should be adapted? Qed237 (talk) 12:49, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Pos	Team	Pld	Pts		KAR	ARO	ANA	GIR	CAR	SVI	NAK	TOP
1	Sergey Karjakin (RUS) (2760)	3	2		—			½		½	1
2	Levon Aronian (ARM) (2786)	3	2			—	½	½				1
3	Vishwanathan Anand (IND) (2762)	3	2			½	—		½			1
4	Anish Giri (NED) (2793)	3	1.5		½	½		—	½
5	Fabiano Caruana (USA) (2794)	3	1.5				½	½	—		½
6	Peter Svidler (RUS) (2757)	3	1.5		½					—	½	½
7	Hikaru Nakamura (USA) (2790)	3	1		0				½	½	—
8	Veselin Topalov (BUL) (2780)	3	0.5			0	0			½		—

Updated to match(es) played on 14 March 2016. Source: moscow2016.fide.com

Pos	Player	Pld	Pts		KAR	ARO	ANA	GIR	CAR	SVI	NAK	TOP
1	Sergey Karjakin (RUS) (2760)	3	2		—			½		½	1
2	Levon Aronian (ARM) (2786)	3	2			—	½	½				1
3	Vishwanathan Anand (IND) (2762)	3	2			½	—		½			1
4	Anish Giri (NED) (2793)	3	1.5		½	½		—	½
5	Fabiano Caruana (USA) (2794)	3	1.5				½	½	—		½
6	Peter Svidler (RUS) (2757)	3	1.5		½					—	½	½
7	Hikaru Nakamura (USA) (2790)	3	1		0				½	½	—
8	Veselin Topalov (BUL) (2780)	3	0.5			0	0			½		—

Updated to match(es) played on 14 March 2016. Source: moscow2016.fide.com

@Calistemon: I tried adding thew parameter in sandbox and is seems to be working. You can change it to whatever you want. Does the ranking within parentesis fill any use? Qed237 (talk) 12:59, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

By the way, you can also give two or more players the same position by using for example |pos_AAA=1. Qed237 (talk) 13:01, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

It has now been put to live use after testing. Please use |team_header=. Qed237 (talk) 13:28, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Thanks for the changes, much appreciated. From the (one) opinion voiced on Talk:World Chess Championship 2016 there is some interest there to use this module. As to the players ranking in parentesis I added it because it was in the existing table but, from what I can gather, it has no influence over the standings or even the qualifying for the tournament. Its possibly a nice thing to have but not essential. Calistemon (talk) 21:41, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

@Calistemon: No problem. I added the Chess article at my talkpage so I can follow that discussion. Just let me know if there is something else I can help with. Qed237 (talk) 21:48, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

As a compromise, given their seemingly low importance, I have now put the ranking in small script. I think the table looks good and is a lot easier to update than the old wikitable. Calistemon (talk) 22:40, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

AFL Ladder

I've noticed for quite some time that the AFL/VFL ladders are still mostly hardcoded. We have to input Games Played, Wins, Draws, Losses, Points For, Points Against, Percentage and Points. Out of these Played, Percentage and Points could be calculated based on the others (W+D+L, PF/PA*100, W*4+D*2).

I have been impressed by the module and it's simplicity for soccer. Would it be possible to create an offshoot for Australian rules football?

The differences between footy and soccer would be the worth of wins (4 points) and draws (2 points), and also instead of GF, GA and GD, there'd be PF (points for), PA (points against) and Percentage (PF/PA*100).

--SuperJew (talk) 18:09, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

@SuperJew: I suppose you are talking about 2015 AFL season#Ladder and similar tables? I you look at the documentation, some of this functionality already exists. If you look at the submodule the soccer tables use, and specially Module:Sports table/WDL#Customization you see that you can list L (loss) column before D (draw) by setting |loss_before_draw=true and also replace GF (goals for) and GA (goals against) with PF (points for) and PA (points against) by setting |for_against_style=points. For points, the default value is win=3, draw=1, loss=0, but these can also be changed with |winpoints=4 and |drawpoints=2 (or is losses actually 2 points, then what is draw?). What we need to look at is the percentage part, we have goal ratio (GF/GA) but percentage is definitely possible if you are interested. Qed237 (talk) 20:05, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

We have "point ratio" by using |use_goal_ratio=yes but then 100% is 1.000. Qed237 (talk) 20:14, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Wow! Thanks for all this. Yeah, I was referring to that ladder and all the ones here and also there are state league ladders. I've played with it a bit in my sandbox and it looks pretty great so far. The one issue still seems to be the percentage - goal ratio is the idea, but we'd need it multiplied by 100 and to change the heading to %. Would that be possible?

and yeah I had a typo with the points. It's 4 for a win and 2 for a draw.

Also is there a way to account for special occasions? For example, last season, due to the death of Phil Walsh a match was cancelled and each team awarded two points.

--SuperJew (talk) 21:10, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

@SuperJew: Note and points for special event is added in your sandbox (hope that is okay for me to edit). Points can be adjusted with |adjust_points_TTT= (where TTT is the team) and work both for positive and negative changes. A note can be added with |note_TTT= and if two teams have same note the second team can refer to the other team i.e. |note_AAA=TTT (where AAA is the second team). I will look in to the percentage. Would not P% or something be better to explain, than just having %? Qed237 (talk) 21:42, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Beautiful! No worries on editing the sandbox. I like it. Regarding % or P%, the hardcoded tables used % as does the official AFL site, so I think it would be better to leave it as % and the tooltip will help if anyone is lost. --SuperJew (talk) 21:49, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

@SuperJew: I have now added more code in the module sandbox for percentage that I think should work. We should probably test it out before going "live" so we dont break something. If I may also come with some hints, I suggest adding comments in the code later to help editors with the updating, for example like Template:2018 FIFA World Cup qualification – UEFA Group I table. Qed237 (talk) 22:17, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Looks really great! Any other way you'd want to test it? --SuperJew (talk) 22:52, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

@SuperJew: Honestly, not sure exactly how to test it properly, but code should always be tested a lot if it may affect many pages (this module is used on many places). It is just some extra if-statements and should not break anything. I have triple-checked the code without spotting any errors. Qed237 (talk) 22:57, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

@SuperJew: I did some more testing and cant see any errors so I implemented it. If problems turn up, we may revert. Qed237 (talk) 23:08, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: OK. Thanks so much for all the help! I'll run it by the people on the Aussie footy project and soon should start using it. --SuperJew (talk) 23:15, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

@SuperJew: No problem, only happy to help. Let me know if there is something else I can help with. This module has big potential. Qed237 (talk) 00:47, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: The changes in the code seem logical and I wouldn't expect that to break anything. It's nice to see how easily adaptable the module is to other sports. @SuperJew: The module has a lot of different options that might be useful, you can see examples in the many football (soccer) articles that use them as well as the extensive documentation. If you have any questions about any of the features, feel free to ask them. CRwikiCA talk 18:16, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: & @SuperJew: – good work on setting this up. My main gripe is the "qualification" column – it's unnecessary and distracting in a competition where the only qualification outcomes are playing finals or not playing finals (it's also inconsistent with previous ladders on Australian football pages). From my quick read of the module documentation, I can't see a current way to get rid of that column without losing the green shading as well. Could you code something in to give that column an on/off toggle? Aspirex (talk) 10:27, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

@Aspirex: Hi, and thank you. As you say there is no current way to get rid of that column and that is because of WP:ACCESS. Since readers may be colorblind we should not only use colors to explain things, hence the extra column. The column has existed before in some tables, but now with the module it exists everywhere to comply with wikipedia guidelines. Qed237 (talk) 11:27, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

@Aspirex: I'd also say that while to you who's familiar with footy, the top 8 highlighted teams (in previous format) intuitively means "qualified to finals", someone who is not familiar with footy might not know this. --SuperJew (talk) 12:52, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Font size parameter

Hi everyone,

As a regular Wikipedia user, may I change something on Module:Sports table? Is it okay if I can add a font size parameter to both Module:Sports table/WL and Module:Sports table/WDL for styling purposes, and test how will it effectively operate. Here's the purpose: default size will always be 100, but other users may have an option to adjust and lower the size. Thanks! Raymarcbadz (talk) 15:49, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

May I ask why you want smaller size and where it would be useful? I have been reading Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Text (last paragraph), and it says reduced font sizes should be used sparingly as well as In no case should the resulting font size drop below 85% of the page fontsize. We should try and use normal size, if possible, to keep it easy to read. Qed237 (talk) 16:04, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

It would be useful only on the NOC pages to correspond to the similar style in other result tables of each sport section exclusive for each NOC. The rest of the team-based sport tournaments will always be adjusted to normal size. The font size of the template on the NOC would be adjusted to 95% only, which may seem readable for everyone. What do you think? Raymarcbadz (talk) 16:12, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

What do you mean by "NOC", what is that short for? Can you link to one of the articles it would be used? Qed237 (talk) 16:20, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

NOC stands for "National Olympic Committee". It would be used to a particular NOC competing in an Olympic edition (for example: United States at the 2016 Summer Olympics). Each of them has to be complied with the MOS Olympic standard. Raymarcbadz (talk) 16:22, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I see. I have not seen that guideline before and it is a project guidline so general wikipedia guidelines has higher importance. I see it has not been updated to use the new modules, but they should be used. Also I can not see anything about the size of the tables being smaller than normal? Qed237 (talk) 16:35, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Well the font size of the tables is slightly smaller than normal. Can I test the module by adding the font size parameter and see if this can be practically enough for the template being displayed only in the NOC page? Raymarcbadz (talk) 16:46, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

There is no harm in sandbox testing, but I can not see any use for it. Qed237 (talk) 17:25, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Qed237, do you think that adding font-size to the style at the start of the Module:Sports table would be impossible? Raymarcbadz (talk) 09:59 13 April 2016 (UTC)

I dont know if it is impossible or not as I have never even thought about doing it. Can not see any good reason for it. Qed237 (talk) 10:26, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Qed237, I did not edit anything on the Module:Sports table/sandbox, but I fairly did on the submodules supported to the module. Kindly check this one and investigate the code. I'm only focusing on the table style for this module, not on the standings and rules that you have developed. To see the results, you may view the difference on my sandbox. Thanks! Raymarcbadz (talk) 11:45 13 April 2016 (UTC)

I see the code and it should be working just fine, just like the examples in your sandbox seems to be working. But, once again, I see no reason from for using it. Qed237 (talk) 13:31, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

I see your changes and technically it seems okay. You do refer to the Olympics article guideline. Nowhere in this guideline is a reduced font size listed a guideline, it is only mentioned to use it for members of a winning team. I do not think there is a good reason to reduce the font size in tables. I don't know why that custom exists for these articles, but I think it is wrong and should not be done going forward. People set their font size on their computers, because they are comfortable reading like that, and article should not go against that. In addition, the whole purpose of these articles is to list these tables, so why should they be compressed. Are you yourself in favour of these reduced sizes? CRwikiCA talk 16:13, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

American football

Would it be possible to customize the module for use to American football seasons? The project currently still seems to use the wikitable format, as seen in examples like Template:2015 AFC West standings and Template:2015 CFL West Division standings. The specific article I would like to use it for is 2016 German Football League to replace the following wikitable:

GFL South
P	Team	G	W	T	L	PF	PA	PCT
1	Schwäbisch Hall Unicorns	1	1	0	0	26	21	1.000
2	Allgäu Comets	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.000
3	Stuttgart Scorpions	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.000
4	Saarland Hurricanes	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.000
5	Munich Cowboys	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.000
6	Marburg Mercenaries	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.000
7	Rhein-Neckar Bandits	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.000
8	Frankfurt Universe	1	0	0	1	21	26	0.000

Is the module aready capable to do this or would it require alterations or a new style? Calistemon (talk) 11:23, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I have an example of what currently can be done here

Pos	Team	Pld	W	D	L	PF	PA	PD	Pts	Qualification or relegation
1	Schwäbisch Hall Unicorns	1	1	0	0	28	21	+7	2	Qualification to play-offs
2	Allgäu Comets	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
3	Marburg Mercenaries	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
4	Munich Cowboys	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
5	Rhein-Neckar Bandits	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
6	Saarland Hurricanes	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
7	Stuttgart Scorpions	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
8	Frankfurt Universe	1	0	0	1	21	28	−7	0	Relegation to GFL2

Updated to match(es) played on 16 April 2016. Source: Football-aktuell, Scoresway
Rules for classification: 1) Winning percentage.

Unfortunately everything does not exist yet. Qed237 (talk) 12:13, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

@Calistemon: The winning percetage is currently only existing in the WL submodule and not added to the WDL module, which is needed in this case where matches may be tied. I dont think we realised that win percentage could be used also in a draw. OF course this can also be added to WDL submodule. Also I dont see any way to currently remove the "point difference" -column the WDL module has (you only have PF and PA in your example, we also have column for the difference. Does that column need to be removed (I see it exists on scoresway)? If it does I think I can sort that out fairly easy as well. Qed237 (talk) 12:14, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Now you mention the percentages, is there any possibility to bold it when it is used as the first criteria to tie-break? E.g., 2015–16 Latvian Basketball League#League table. Thank you! Asturkian (talk) 12:46, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

@Calistemon: Have a look at User:Qed237/sandbox#Table testing and see what you think. Some tables are extra for testing so I dont break anything and I would need to do more testing before putting it to use. Let me know what you think. Qed237 (talk) 12:58, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

@Asturkian: I just noticed that when I was working on the question above. Since it was not me that added it, I have to see what the best solution is. Currently points (when used) are always bolded, percentage never, and wins when used as tiebreaker. It should be a simple fix, but I have to make sure I dont break anything else. Qed237 (talk) 13:02, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

@Asturkian: Should be working now (I dont think I destoryed anything). Now that column is bolded all the time independent of showing points or percentage, which seems most reasonable. Qed237 (talk) 13:13, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: The table you created under Future table WDL sandbox would be suit the application really well. Having the points difference there is no disadvantage at all. As it is, various versions of the table exist, depending on the website. For example, the official GFL website does not use percentage at all but rather a point system similar to association football. It seems however that percentage is the more common system for points in American football. Calistemon (talk) 21:20, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

@Calistemon: Okay great, I will do some more testing tomorrow (first on my list) and then move the sandbox version to main when I am sure that no error will occur. I will let you know when it is ready for usage. Is there anything in Future table WDL sandbox that you want changed? Qed237 (talk) 22:38, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: It looks all good to me. Thanks for your help, your efforts in modifying this module and making it applicable for other projects are much appreciated. Calistemon (talk) 22:44, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Pos	Team	Pld	W	D	L	PF	PA	PD	PCT	Qualification or relegation
1	Schwäbisch Hall Unicorns	1	1	0	0	28	21	+7	1.000	Qualification to play-offs
2	Allgäu Comets	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	—
3	Marburg Mercenaries	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	—
4	Munich Cowboys	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	—
5	Rhein-Neckar Bandits	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	—
6	Saarland Hurricanes	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	—
7	Stuttgart Scorpions	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	—
8	Frankfurt Universe	1	0	0	1	21	28	−7	.000	Relegation to GFL2

Updated to match(es) played on 16 April 2016. Source: Football-aktuell, Scoresway
Rules for classification: 1) Winning percentage.

@Calistemon: Okay it has been tested and I double checked the code so everything should be working. I have added it to to the "real code" and it is now "live" and ready to use. Feel free to copy the code for the table above, and let me know if you need any more help. Qed237 (talk) 09:32, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Awesome work! Now added to the 2016 German Football League article. Hopefully the new module will catch on and be used in other American football season articles. Thank you, Calistemon (talk) 11:18, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

@Calistemon: Thanks. I think it will be used more over time, it keeps on expanding. I am working on all tables for the Olympic games now, and I think that will open the eyes for a lot of people that has not come across the module yet. Qed237 (talk) 13:56, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Standings Updater Excel Template

Hi guys, the past few days I have been in contact with Calistemon regarding his excel template that can simplify the updating of the module. Basically it requires setting up the teams for the season (Master sheet), copying data from Soccerway, updating the position standing and copying the respective parts to wiki. Only parts of the module that are regularly/weekly updated, are used in the template.

1. |update=
2. |win_ |draw_ |loss_ |gf_ |ga_
3. |team1=|team2=|team3=|team4=|team5=,....

We believe that this could be really helpful for other editors, who regularly update the module in their respective articles and makes the updating less time-consuming. Following is the link to the file: ModuleSports table updater v1. Please do check and try it out, and any feedback's are welcome. A lot of thanks to Calistemon for sending me his excel template and giving helpful advices to improve the template. Hopefully it can be useful also for other editors. Happy editing! MbahGondrong (talk) 00:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I forgot too mention that when the table is copied to the module and you click preview, it shows that the is are white-spaces between each line. This should be deleted manually. If anyone can help about this, please do share your solution. Cheers! MbahGondrong (talk) 00:57, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

After having had a bit of a look at it your template makes mine look pretty clumsy! Awesome work. Just as a note, the use of it is not just restricted to soccerway or football, it can be used and adapted for other sports and websites as well. The only issue I have come across in my original version was that German websites are problematic because of their (stupid) use of logos in tables, that throws it off. Calistemon (talk) 07:47, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Looks very, very, very nice. Probably the link has to be posted at WT:Footy and also send to some editors from other projects :) it shows that the is are white-spaces between each line. This should be deleted manually - tried with Latvia, there wasn't any unneeded blank lines. Calistemon, could you show such table with logos from website? --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 08:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

@Edgars2007: This Bundesliga table at kicker.de, for example, but it really is very common on German websites and even the German Wikipedia. I presume the copyright laws for logos must be different in Germany. MbahGondrong has already posted on the WP:Football talk page, so that has been taken care of. Calistemon (talk) 09:10, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

@Edgars2007: I would love to share it with other projects and editors, I don't know where to start though. The white-spaces occur to me like this, this happens when I click preview after I copied the table from Excel to Wikipedia. MbahGondrong (talk) 09:27, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

About white-spaces: maybe I'm simply lucky :D I will try to send this message (about excel file) to some people. About Germany and their flags — OK, I see them, but they don't seemingly disrupt everything here (except that the format is different etc.), because it's the same column. But OK, you can use other websites. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 10:24, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

@Edgars2007:Thanks a lot for your help. I really appreciate it. Could it possibly be like that because I am using WikED to edit Wikipedia articles? MbahGondrong (talk) 19:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I haven't used wikied so very much to be sure about it, but don't think it is the cause. You can try to disable it and then do some table update. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 19:34, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Still some manual editing to do, right? I was using my own version using vlookups, so it was just copy website, paste in openoffice, copy complete wikicode. -Koppapa (talk) 19:56, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

@Edgars2007: Okay will try it out. @Koppapa: Yes still some manual work which are deleting empty rows in wiki. Would you mind if you share your version? MbahGondrong (talk) 20:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Well, this is ugly and has the team-argument on same line, but should be ok for an example: www.filedropper.com/ modulesportstableupdaterv2 (delete spacing). Having it all in one cell also removes the whitespaceproblem. -Koppapa (talk)

@Edgars2007: I tried without WikED and it works perfect, the white-spaces are gone. Do you know where I could ask around about this issue maybe? @Koppapa: Apparently your version still shows whitespaces for me, if I enable WikED, like here. Your version looks actually more simpler than what I have done, having all the team name, position and records in one line could be confusing but I think it does reduce the work to only copying from website and then copy to Wikipedia. I would tend to use that approach. Do you use Soccerway as source or other website? MbahGondrong (talk) 13:08, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

It looks like wikied really has some problems with newlines. The author of wikied doesn't seem to be very active lately, but you can try tell here your problem. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 14:12, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that was from soccerway. For consistency though, I'd try to get all teamX in a line above. -Koppapa (talk) 18:24, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi guys, I have here a link to the latest version of the excel file, which uses the vlookup approach from Koppapa. I added a new QR column, where you can insert the latest status of each team. If there is any data there (so far only for CP, C, P, R), it will automatically add a |status_ in the relevant row. I have arranged the |teamX in one line, and |name in a separate part to be consistent with the commonly used format. I suggest and prefer to use the vlookup approach since it is way more simpler. Hopefully it can be useful for other editors also, and as always any input or suggestion are very much welcome. :) @Edgars2007: Thanks for the hint. MbahGondrong (talk) 08:56, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Promotion and qualification

There is no parameter 'PQ' (Promotion or qualification) in the list of parameters of results header. May someone add it, cause there are leagues without relegation? Martinklavier (talk) 10:30, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

@Martinklavier: Done. Thanks for letting me know. Qed237 (talk) 11:14, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Goals For/Against columns

Is there any way to add something so that the goals for and goals against columns are removed, but the Difference column still remains and the data can be inputted directly to that? I'm trying to use these to create a table for the 2016 American Ultimate Disc League season and the only sources there are for it just have the +/-, rather than the individual stats. At the moment, I've added the information by looking at the matches played so far (the season has only just started so there's not to many), but if there's no way to implement this, I'll just go back to using similar tables to in 2015. Thanks! 57purple (talk) 14:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

@57purple: At the moment no, there is no such alternative. But if it is really neccesary I guess I could try and add such an alternative. Is it a big issue so I should start looking at the module coding and see what I can do? Qed237 (talk) 12:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't think it's too important to get it added, its only for one page which isn't too visited at the moment, so it'll cope without, thanks! 57purple (talk) 21:22, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

This would be useful, I think. See also second point here. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 19:40, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

No 'points' column?

In this table (and probably in other cases, too), it would be good to remove "points" column. It doesn't have anything to do there. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 19:44, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

@Edgars2007: The eliminated teams are ranked based on their points... Qed237 (talk) 19:50, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

I still do think, that points for some teams are redundant in the table. At least, for 1st-4th place. And does really 5th-8th place is ranked by points? I'm not saying, that they're not. But OK, I do agree, that it's useful for at least some part of table. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 20:05, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Request custom Group title

I've just created a table for the promotion playoffs in South Africa. One team from the first division and two from the second division compete in A group stage to determine a group winner and achieve promotion/remain in the division. Is it possible to add an option to customise the 'Grp/Group' title? I'd like to use Lge/League if possible. Please see 2015–16_National_First_Division#Play-offs TheBigJagielka (talk) 10:23, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I have now made some modifications in the code, adding an option to to customise the 'Grp/Group' title. It works the same way as other headers and you set |group_header= to the header you want. This edit to 2015–16 National First Division is an example on how you can use the parameter. Will update the module documentation soon. Does this work for you? Qed237 (talk) 11:18, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

@TheBigJagielka: Sorry, forgot to ping. Qed237 (talk) 11:19, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Yep. Thanks! 12:38, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Result column

May I suggest to the creator of revising the source text to include the option of suppressing the res_col. This is to reduce the redundancy where qualification summary is already discussed within the article page. Thanks. TjBison (talk) 04:27, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

@TjBison: This has been discussed before and the consensus is that per MOS:ACCESS that column must exists due to the fact that we should not only use colors to explain what happens on the rows. But thanks for the idea. Qed237 (talk) 10:35, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

For/against in sets

Hey I was just trying to use this template for badminton and discovered there is no way to change the for/against column to sets. I would really appreciate if you could make this an option as it would be really helpful in making tables for badminton tournaments
F1lover22 talk 13:42, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Volleyball tables

In volleyball tables, why is the "Games Won" column bolded while the "Points" column is not? These are, after all, rankings by points and not by games won. Let me remind that in volleyball, unlike in basketball, the relation between games won and points won is not straightforward, and it is possible for a team to have won fewer games than another team but be ranked above it. --Theurgist (talk) 22:21, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

@Theurgist: Add |ranking_style=points and it will work. I added it at the Pool A standings for an example (here). Asturkian (talk) 22:49, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

@Theurgist and Asturkian: When the module was created I was told that the tiebreaker was matches won and not points. See Volleyball at the 2016 Summer Olympics – Men's tournament#Pool standing procedure. Qed237 (talk) 00:24, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

@Theurgist and Asturkian: And the source is here. Qed237 (talk) 00:26, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Thanks, that tiebreaking method is new to me.

@Asturkian: Thanks, now I know how to change it when necessary. By the way, in order for the {{ping}} functionality to work, a new signature has to be added to the page with the very same edit – and it has to be a completely new signature, not a new one overwriting the old one. --Theurgist (talk) 00:49, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

EFL Trophy - Penalty shootout victors during group stage awarded 2 points, other team still gets 1 point

In the 2016–17 EFL Trophy, a victory following a penalty shootout is worth 2 points while the team that lost the shootout will receive 1 point. What's the best way to represent this? @Qed237:

Clubs will be awarded 3 points for a win and 1 point for a draw. In the event of a drawn game (after 90 minutes), a penalty shootout will be held with the winning team earning an additional point.

— EFL.com

TheBigJagielka (talk) 10:42, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

@TheBigJagielka: There are different ways to do this. I am working on some examples in my sandbox and will show you soon. Qed237 (talk) 11:23, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Standard football table

Pos	Lge	Team	Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts	Qualification
1	L1	Walsall	1	1	0	0	5	2	+3	3	Qualification to Round 2
2	ACA	Leicester City Academy	1	0	1	0	2	2	0	2
3	L1	Sheffield United	1	0	1	0	2	2	0	1
4	L2	Grimsby Town	1	0	0	1	2	5	−3	0

Updated to match(es) played on 30 August 2016. Source: Sky Sports
Rules for classification: 1) Points; 2) Goal difference; 3) Goals scored.

Penalty columns

Pos	Lge	Team	Pld	W	PW	PL	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts	Qualification
1	L1	Walsall	1	1	0	0	0	5	2	+3	3	Qualification to Round 2
2	ACA	Leicester City Academy	1	0	1	0	0	2	2	0	2
3	L1	Sheffield United	1	0	0	1	0	2	2	0	1
4	L2	Grimsby Town	1	0	0	0	1	2	5	−3	0

Updated to match(es) played on 30 August 2016. Source: Sky Sports
Rules for classification: 1) Points; 2) Goal difference; 3) Goals scored.

Without draw

Pos	Lge	Team	Pld	W	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts	Qualification
1	L1	Walsall	1	1	0	5	2	+3	3	Qualification to Round 2
2	ACA	Leicester City Academy	1	1	0	2	2	0	2
3	L1	Sheffield United	1	0	1	2	2	0	1
4	L2	Grimsby Town	1	0	1	2	5	−3	0

Updated to match(es) played on 30 August 2016. Source: Sky Sports
Rules for classification: 1) Points; 2) Goal difference; 3) Goals scored.

@TheBigJagielka: The three different alternatives I can think of is now shown above. Either we use standard football table and ajust the points manually, or we use separate columns for penalty results, or finally we remove draw column (and adjust points manually). Not sure what is best. Qed237 (talk) 11:38, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

The only good source I could find for tables was Sky Sports, which display the standard version with draw (perhaps they can not modify their tables), but most information is shown in the second alternative with penalty columns. Qed237 (talk) 11:41, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

@TheBigJagielka:, @Qed237: I would say that the second example is close. In my opinion D column be left because that is a valid result and only have the additional column of WP of Won on Penalties. In this case Loss on Penalties is not needed because Draw is clear enough where the point came from. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 13:01, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

I'd go for the standard football table, and just add a footnote to teams that win a penalty-shootout. -Koppapa (talk) 20:33, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Way to retrieve data

Is there any way to use a league table template to retrieve the current position of a specific club? For example, {{2016–17 Bundesliga table|pos_BSC}} would give the value 2. Also if there are manually defined positions, could that value be used as well? (i.e. if |team7=FRE but |pos_FRE=6, then {{2016–17 Bundesliga table|pos_FRE}} would give the value 6. Thanks. Secret Agent Julio (talk) 19:38, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

@Secret Agent Julio: Sorry, from what I know there is no way to retrieve that information and I think the code has to be rewritten for it to work. I have no idea how to do that. Qed237 (talk) 22:00, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Additional colour

Requesting addition of the colour gold (signifying Club World Cup qualifiers), with the colour scheme #FEDCBA. This allows it to match the pre-existing tables here, here, here... - J man708 (talk) 05:48, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

@J man708: You can directly use a colour code if needed per Module:Sports_table/WDL#Indicating_results, so there is no need to add it to the default scheme. CRwikiCA talk 02:14, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

An example:

Pos	Team	Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts	Qualification or relegation
1	Team A	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	Qualification to World Cup

Updated to match(es) played on unknown. Source:

CRwikiCA talk 02:20, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Help needed

Does any of the regelar contributors/maintainers of this template speak Dutch? I'm currently trying to set up this module on the Dutch wiki but I need some help.Tvx1 18:44, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Anyone willing to lend a hand?Tvx1 22:10, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

@Tvx1: I can probably help you out a bit. But I am currently quite busy in real life, so I have very limited time on Wikipedia. Contact me on my English user talk page with details of what you are trying to do. I do not know how the Dutch wikipedia's Lua implementations are arranged, are they similar to the English ones? If that is the case, a direct copy of the en version is probably easiest, with potentially renaming some variables. Also note that I do not routinely check the nl Wikipedia, so always contact me on my en user talk to check the Dutch one if you would need my input on certain things. CRwikiCA talk 02:27, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Update:the issue is resolved now. The modules are up and running on the Dutch wiki.Tvx1 20:10, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Head to head results

I couldn't figure out an easy way to just show the head-to-head results with colouring that mimics {{Fb r header}}, {{Fb r team}}, ... so I cobbled together Module:Head to head. let me know if I am reinventing the wheel here. I tried to generally mimic the syntax used by this module to avoid inventing a new parameter language as well. currently, I have only deployed it in one article, 2016–17 Egyptian Second Division#Results tables where I was able to dramatically reduce the amount of wikicode in the article. Frietjes (talk) 18:29, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

@Frietjes: Looks a lot like Module:Sports results with the exception that sports results does not have the color coding, which is discussed at talkpage for that module. Unfortunately I should be asleep by now, so I can not look in to it more closely. Qed237 (talk) 02:53, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

From a quick glance it seems to copy the intention of Module:Sports results, which can be an added to the standings table itself per Module:Sports table/WDL#Matches. Colour is not implemented on purpose in the match results, because it does typically not provide clarity and tends to conflict with WP:COLOR. I currently limited time on Wikipedia, so I cannot compare the source code of both versions, your creation might have some valuable pieces that could be implemented in the existing module. CRwikiCA talk 03:01, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

User:Qed237, User:CRwikiCA, yes it looks like I did reinvent the wheel. the idea was to have it replace the {{Fb r header}}, {{Fb r team}}, ... system, complete with the same automatic colouring, cell sizes, font sizes, etc. one difference of what I created is that the "short_AAA" parameters are automatic, derived from the three letter team abbreviation and the full team name. but, given the intent of the two modules, I think they could be clearly merged. Frietjes (talk) 12:53, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

I will continue the merger discussion at Module talk:Sports results. thank you for your help and feedback. Frietjes (talk) 13:34, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Change order of column Pts

Hi there! I would like to change the order of column Pts. In Brazil, the standard is to show Pts right next to team, like this:

Pos

Team

Pts

Pld

W

D

L

GF

GA

GD

Could it be possible to add a parameter such as |points_first=yes to generate the table with that order of columns? That would help to increase adoption of the module in the Portuguese Wikipedia. Thanks. — Alan Moraes (talk) 02:27, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Absolute percentage parameter

A number of leagues use a percentage system instead of goal difference, where if you beat a team 10–5 you will have a percentage of 200%. The formula for this is 100/(points_against)*(points_for) and can be enabled in this module via |use_goal_percentage=yes in the WDL style. You can see this at Template:AFL_Ladder/2017 for a real-world example using the existing module.

However, some leagues (such as the SANFL) that use percentages use an absolute percentage system instead, where 100% is the maximum and means you scored 100% of the points in every match you played. The formula for this is 100/(points_against+points for)*(points_for). Would it be possible to have the `|use_goal_percentage=` param also accept "absolute" as input, resulting in the above format? Sellyme^Talk 12:46, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

teams tied on all tiebreakers

Is there any way for two teams to have the same "Position" number (because they happen to be tied on points and all tiebreakers)? I didn't see this possibility in any of the template explanations. --Sesameball^Talk 13:44, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@Sesameball: Yes it is possible. If you use position parameter (|pos_TTT= where TTT is your team) you can set the position manually. For example you can look at this example when I put team A2 and A3 in first position (same as team A1 has automatically). Qed237 (talk) 14:02, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@Qed237: Thank you so much for the help! --Sesameball^Talk 21:08, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@Sesameball: A further remark. You don't have to put simply a number in the Pos column with the pos_TTT parameter. I usually append an equals sign when teams are level on all criteria, for example see here from earlier in the current season. Indeed you can put anything you like in the Pos column. Drawoh46 (talk) 09:30, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Behaviour of Notes with only_pld_pts=yes

With the only_pld_pts=yes option, any notes added using note_xxx= are not produced in the footer. Yet any references embedded in the notes are still produced in the article reflist. See 2016–17 in French football#Championnat de France Amateur for example. I would expect one of: a) the notes and references to appear. b) neither notes or references to appear or. c) an option to make notes+references appear or not (but always both, not one or the other). Cheers, Gricehead (talk) 15:20, 29 June 2017 (UTC)