Talk:Copenhagen Derby

Denmark Low‑importance

	Denmark portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Denmark 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.DenmarkWikipedia:WikiProject DenmarkTemplate:WikiProject DenmarkDenmark articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Football Low‑importance

	Association football portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Help of an expert"[edit]

Why this box? I suspect it to be vandalism. I will revert it, unless the anonymous editor explains himself. Reading my comment below, we need an expert on Wikipedia editing if anything. Not an expert on Danish football. Christianvinter 20:36, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Referring to statement at the Danish version - the statistic provided does not provide a full picture not including all official matches in its present form:

"Der mangler opgør fra den tidligere Supercup og Liga Cup i oversigten. Statistikgrundlaget er tydeligvis useriøst som gyldighedskriterium, idet det som FCK-site forholder sig selektivt til inddragelsen af relevante kampe. Alle officielle kampe bør inddrages for at få et sigende billede."

Fair enough. You wouldn't know a better or more describing template? One to the effect of "This article or section is not complete and lacks information for a complete picture" or something like that? Alternatively, at least fix the one already used -- it renders weirdly. Christianvinter 21:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Table of overall statistics[edit]

	FCK wins	Draws	BIF wins	Sum
DSL	22	9	16	47
DC	1	1	4	6
RL	3	2	2	7
Sum	26	12	22	60

Clearly, that last little statistics table, I made, is not working well, and is not easy to understand. I thought it would be smart to have the overall statistics presented in a summary, but I admit, this is likely not to be the best possible solution. Does anyone (perhaps with a bit more Wiki experience) have a better idea?

1) Write it out in words? 2) Delete it? 3) Add a legend? 4) Change the markup? 5) Add examles in text below the table? 6) Something else?

Anyway, here is how it is meant: The sums at the left are sums of the horizontal lines. That is: How many matches have been played in each of the turnaments. The sums at the bottom indicate the total of how many matches have resulted in victories for FCK, BIF or a draw. The sum in the bottom right corner is the sum of the three numbers in the bottom row (in the example above 26+12+22=60), but should also equal the result of the right column (47+6+7=60).

After a new match has been played, one needs to edit four fields. Say the result in the Danish Cup results in a draw, the table should be changed to:

	FCK wins	Draws	BIF wins	Sum
DSL	22	9	16	47
DC	1	2	4	7
RL	3	2	2	7
Sum	26	13	22	61

Christianvinter 09:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The statistics in the Danish version and this don't seem to match? What source is used and why the difference?

User:ksjohansen 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I just added up the numbers from the big table on this page. If some matches are represented in one and not the other, there's the problem. I have recounted several times, but invite you double check. --Christian Vinter

General brush up completed[edit]

I've added the remaining official matches to the statistics, so by now it should reflect the full picture of the new firm to the best of my knowledge.

User:ksjohansen 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Fantastic work! Thanks. Christianvinter (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 23:55, 2 January 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks! Although you are not quite happy with the format here, I think it should precede the Danish version. The Danish site is full of errors and way too complicated for updating. Yours works much better. I suggest we change the Danish version accordingly. ksjohansen January 25th 2009 (UTC)