Talk:MLS Cup 2002

Fair use rationale for Image:MLS Cup 2002.gif
Image:MLS Cup 2002.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 12:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

ACCESS
Can someone confirm that the hideous table-in-a-table format is fine for screen readers, etc? I hate to bare ping people, but hey,, any thoughts? Even from my perspective as someone who can visualise this as intened, it looks horrible. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:32, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, . It certainly does look horrible, but screen readers have improved over the years and tables-inside-tables are usually coped with quite well. The structure of the "Summary of results" could be re-arranged to something like:
 * {| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
 * {| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"

! colspan="7" | Los Angeles Galaxy ! colspan="7" | New England Revolution ! scope="col" | Pos. ! scope="col" | Club ! scope="col" | Pld. ! scope="col" | W ! scope="col" | L ! scope="col" | D ! scope="col" | Pts. ! scope="col" | Pos. ! scope="col" | Club ! scope="col" | Pld. ! scope="col" | W ! scope="col" | L ! scope="col" | D ! scope="col" | Pts.
 * + Regular season
 * colspan="7" | 1st place in Western Conference
 * colspan="7" | 1st place in Eastern Conference
 * colspan="7" | 1st place in Eastern Conference
 * 1 || style="text-align:left" |Los Angeles Galaxy||28||16||9||3||51
 * 1 || style="text-align:left" |New England Revolution||28||12||14||2||38
 * 2 || style="text-align:left" |San Jose Earthquakes||28||14||11||3||45
 * 2 || style="text-align:left" |Columbus Crew||28||11||12||5||38
 * 3 || style="text-align:left" |Dallas Burn||28||12||9||7||43
 * 3 || style="text-align:left" |Chicago Fire||28||11||13||4||37
 * 4 || style="text-align:left" |Colorado Rapids||28||13||11||4||43
 * 4 || style="text-align:left" |MetroStars||28||11||15||2||35
 * 5 || style="text-align:left" |Kansas City Wizards||28||9||10||9||36
 * 5 || style="text-align:left" |D.C. United||28||9||14||5||32
 * }
 * 4 || style="text-align:left" |MetroStars||28||11||15||2||35
 * 5 || style="text-align:left" |Kansas City Wizards||28||9||10||9||36
 * 5 || style="text-align:left" |D.C. United||28||9||14||5||32
 * }
 * }


 * {| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"

! ! colspan="4" | Los Angeles Galaxy ! colspan="4" | New England Revolution ! scope="row" | Conference Semifinals ! scope="row" | Conference Finals
 * + MLS Cup Playoffs
 * Opponent (Pts.)
 * 1st leg
 * 2nd leg
 * 3rd leg
 * Opponent (Pts.)
 * 1st leg
 * 2nd leg
 * 3rd leg
 * 2nd leg
 * 3rd leg
 * style="text-align:left" | Kansas City Wizards (6–3)
 * 3–2 (H)
 * 1–4 (A)
 * 5–2 (H)
 * style="text-align:left" | Chicago Fire (6–3)
 * 2–0 (H)
 * 1–2 (A)
 * 2–0 (H)
 * style="text-align:left" | Colorado Rapids (6–0)
 * 4–0 (H)
 * 1–0 (A)
 * style="text-align:left" | Columbus Crew (5–2)
 * 0–0 (H)
 * 1–0 (A)
 * 2–2 (H)
 * }
 * but I doubt you'll find much enthusiasm for changing the layout. --RexxS (talk) 00:58, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * but I doubt you'll find much enthusiasm for changing the layout. --RexxS (talk) 00:58, 12 December 2018 (UTC)