This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Basketball Association, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the NBA 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.National Basketball AssociationWikipedia:WikiProject National Basketball AssociationTemplate:WikiProject National Basketball AssociationNBA articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Basketball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Basketball 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.BasketballWikipedia:WikiProject BasketballTemplate:WikiProject BasketballBasketball articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sports, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sport-related topics 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.SportsWikipedia:WikiProject SportsTemplate:WikiProject Sportssports articles
Assess : newly added and existing articles, maybe nominate some good B-class articles for GA; independently assess some as A-class, regardless of GA status.
Cleanup : * Sport governing body (this should-be-major article is in a shameful state) * Field hockey (History section needs sources and accurate information - very vague at the moment.) * Standardize Category:American college sports infobox templates to use same font size and spacing. * Sport in the United Kingdom - the Popularity section is incorrect and unsourced. Reliable data is required.
* Fix project template and/or "to do list" Current version causes tables of content to be hidden unless/until reader chooses "show."
Updated to match(es) played on February 20, 2021. Source: NBA.com e – Eliminated from playoff contention; x – Clinched playoffs; y – Clinched regular season
PCT and GB calculates by itself. Tiebreaking footnotes can even be added. Howard the Duck (talk) 13:40, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Howard the Duck: In theory, it looks fine, but I do have two concerns. How intuitive is it for less experienced editors to change the rankings? In the past when I have used "team#" parameters, these are frequently missed when the standing change (which they do every day with so few games this season). My second concern is the "Qualification" column. By default, it makes it appear that the top eight teams have already qualified, which, of course, they have not. Also, with they way this season is, there is always a chance there will be no playoffs if there is an outbreak (see 2020–21 NWHL season). Is there any way to hide this until the season is over? And it might be personal preference from how almost all other North American leagues use standings tables, but I prefer using the x/y/z nomenclature for when a team clinches a playoff spot. This style also matches how the league itself applies when a team has qualified for the postseason and applies MOS:RETAIN in relation to other seasons and primary sources. Yosemiter (talk) 16:40, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There has to be some level of competence doing this. I suppose having all teams ranked by PCT (just like what I did) will force other people to update the rankings as well themselves once they edit the article.
The playoffs can be removed by removing |result1=PO...|result8=PO. I'd prefer to show the "playoffs" qualification until it is absolutely certain there won't be one.
The xyz letters can still be used. I edited this this to show it works and shows up. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:47, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Howard the Duck: If there was a way to beef up Module:Sports table/doc to clarify usable parameters for a general audience, then it would probably be fine with me. Not everyone knows how to interpret the source code of the module to figure what parameters exist for the module or how they are used. I still don't really like the Qualification column as it seems excessive and presumptive; I prefer the simpler look of something like Template:2020–21 NBA East standings in that it just a line separation for the lowest qualifying spot. Yosemiter (talk) 16:15, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Yosemiter: I dunno what's the deal with hate on the qualification column. It's used in soccer season and basketball season articles in other countries; the basketball season is sorta the same with the G League's as the top x teams qualify to the playoffs, with no divisions/conferences (for an example, see Template:2020–21 EuroLeague table). Usage of the variant of this template for hockey does use lines (check out Template:2020–21 NHL West Division standings), or we can abandon that altogether and use letters. This is used in NHL and MLS, and I don't think this is as complicated as hardcoding everything. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:33, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Howard the Duck: Then I would propose the table below. The reason I don't like the column is that it does not match the parent leagues (2020–21 NBA season#Regular season) and it does not add any real info that a simple line cannot do more efficiently. I would also expect that the G League goes back to previous format when they return to normal operations in which only the division winners and one or two wild cards qualify, and that may not be suitable for this table in 2021–22. But that is a future problem. Yosemiter (talk) 16:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Updated to match(es) played on February 20, 2021. Source: GLeague.NBA.com x – Clinched playoffs
@Yosemiter: I'd support your suggestion 100%. As for doing this on their mother leagues, I actually suggested this on WT:NBA but it went nowhere (but people there were generally receptive of the idea, and User:Piranha249 made some hacks on the template for it to suit North American sensibilities.) You can also check out how it looks like once the season is over at Talk:2018–19 NBA season#New template (I've been pushing this for years lol).
As for when the G League reverts to the old format, we can have a separate table for each division, and another table for wildcard standings, still using the template. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:58, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Yosemiter:, additional question: If the regular season is done, would you prefer readding the "Qualification" column, solely use xyz letters, or both? Usually, for basketball leagues elsewhere, the xyz letters are omitted once the regular season is over; other leagues do leave some of these behind though, even after the "regular season" is done. Howard the Duck (talk) 21:41, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Howard the Duck: I think simpler is better in most cases, and that is why I am not fan of the empty space column of Qualified/Not Qualified. Most North American Leagues keep the x/y/z designations as it gives more info efficiently (normally: x=playoffs, y=division champ, z=reg season champ). If the y/z gives more info and the x is the same info, I see no purpose to re-iterate it. At the end of the reg season, I would just change "status_text_X=" to "Qualified for playoffs". Yosemiter (talk)
