This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
This article is part of WikiProject Uruguay, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to sport in Uruguay. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives.UruguayWikipedia:WikiProject UruguayTemplate:WikiProject UruguayUruguay articles
I have a few suggestions for the qualifying scheme. First is the Apertura-Clausura champions highlight. It's a bit too strong on my screen; would it be alright to tone it down with the "gold" color that was traditionally used in Argentine seasons. Second, should the aggregate table display the qualification of the top two berths for Copa Libertadores? The aggregate table doesn't qualify the top two berths; that's the job of the half-year tournaments. Finally, replacing the relegation color with the "FFCCCC" color; the current red is too "strong". --MicroX (talk) 18:20, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I put a note on Nacional's and Penarol's qualification to explain that they didn't qualify through the aggregate table, but rather by being the finalists (winning the Apertura and the Clausura didn't guarantee them a spot in the Copa Libertadores). I'm still trying to figure out a right shade of yellow to show that a team advanced to another stage in the season (for all leagues). I can think of two different shade off the top of my head in two different articles. I like the red used in the relegation table, especially for direct relegation. Digirami (talk) 01:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What about the 2009 Paraguayan aggregate table? It leaves out those teams that qualified through the half-year championships. --MicroX (talk) 01:33, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure we can find instances where we it is and isn't done. Now which way is better is the larger question. On one side, if a team doesn't qualify that way, it probably shouldn't be mention of a qualification. On another side, placing a qualification with a note explains why that team is skipped (for lack of a better). Digirami (talk) 03:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
