Talk:2019 AFL Women's draft

Priority selection mark-ups
Pinging contributers: I had a dilemma while updating the draft - once a pick is a priority selection, do we keep it marked that way after it's traded (case in point: Richmond's #1 pick traded to the Doggies)? On one hand, it is still a pick outside the regular order, on the other hand it isn't going to an expansion club anymore, on the third hand the expansion club got the pick's worth (or what they deemed is it's worth). --SuperJew (talk) 20:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Perhaps we could just mark next the club it was traded from in the notes column (e.g. ←Richmond!) to indicate it was that club's priority selection?  4TheWynne (talk) (contribs) 21:04, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Not sure I understood your meaning of how it'll look . Could you give an example? --SuperJew (talk) 21:07, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Ooops I see the e.g. now haha. Um, so would that be coloured too? --SuperJew (talk) 21:08, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * You can if you want, but I didn't think it needed to be (I think only boxes in the pick column should be coloured) – if you did, you would probably just highlight the text rather than the whole box (in case another club gets involved with the priority selection).  4TheWynne (talk) (contribs) 21:56, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I'm wondering if the text only is possible technical-wise... Regarding, I think only boxes in the pick column should be coloured, I noticed in 2018 AFL Women's draft that Player selected under Father–daughter rule and Inactive player compensation pre-listing are marked in the player column. --SuperJew (talk) 22:03, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Yeah, obviously those ones are fine, but I'm just referring to the examples regarding the picks themselves (compensation pick, etc.) rather than the players selected. I think just the icon next to the club (as in the above example) should suffice, and same goes with the other relevant icons.  4TheWynne (talk) (contribs) 22:27, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

I suppose if you wanted to have the club coloured and more than one club is involved, you could split into columns and format it like the table on the left; otherwise, if no more than one club is involved, you'd format it like the table on the right:

Obviously you wouldn't have to go with the first table if no picks trade hands more than once, but this is what you could do if that does eventuate.  4TheWynne (talk) (contribs) 23:35, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I like it (and seems the right thing to me). Have implemented in the article :) --SuperJew (talk) 06:56, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Players signed who aren't here (yet)
Hey, I was looking through squads and saw West Coast is pretty sparse so had a look on their site. Seems there's a bunch signed for them who don't appear here or on their squad list on Wiki. For example Emily Bonser, Beatrice Devlyn, Hayley Bullas, Ashton Hill, Danika Pisconeri and Emily McGuire were signed from their Academy on 27 August (all their players are here). I was trying to work out where this should go on this page. Any thoughts? --SuperJew (talk) 11:06, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, SuperJew, these players are already listed in the "Expansion club signing period" subsection "First period". The Eagles squad lists will have to be updated however, as I was updating this draft page independent of updates to the lists pages. DustyNail (talk) 11:23, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, missed that somehow :) --SuperJew (talk) 11:27, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I updated the squad lists, apart from Rosie Deegan's number which doesn't appear on their website (she doesn't appear) --SuperJew (talk) 11:42, 29 January 2020 (UTC)