Talk:WTA 1000 tournaments/Archive 1

Merging Singles champions tables into 1
The singles winners tables of WTA Tier I, Premier 5/Mandatory and WTA 1000 series all display the winners vertically, which is counter-intuitive and a bit confusing. So I made a table which combines all tables into 1 by listing the winners horizontally and in chronological order of the tournaments per year with notes of time slot changes of various tournaments.

I am asking whether I can replace the original tables with the new merged one? Qwerty284651 (talk) 17:40, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

WTA 1000
OR


 * While I agree in principle, the new proposed table is almost unreadable in my browser (chrome). The old tables fit easily widthwise on the screen and the new table overwhelms the width and piles the cells with overlap. The "years" column name is shifted. Why can't we have the same four tables but done in your style with the years in columns? Or perhaps we do it the exact same styling as we do the mens at Tennis Masters Series singles records and statistics? Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:06, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the years column. Fixed it. Bad editing on my end. Maybe nowrap could be used to fix the overlap. I was trying to go for the the same styling as in Tennis Masters Series singles records and statistics, but since there have been 18 different tournaments, it was impossible to squeeze even 9 in 1 year. I minimized it to 13 columns altogether, which is better than 19, but still. Qwerty284651 (talk) 19:26, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Years in columns is too confusing for me. I am used to looking for winners by year in rows from left to right. Looking at winners top-down is counter-intuitive. Qwerty284651 (talk) 19:42, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Maybe I wasn't very clear as I agree with you. Having a single year column, like the mens, is best. But it should be a max of nine tournaments across the row or it becomes too wide and maybe that's why it's done the way it is. For one thing the Dubia/Qatar Open is the same event that switches location each year... that should be one column just like we do on player performance timelines. Also, in reading through complaints on wikipedia, using nowrap is becoming a big issue. See one example here. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:03, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * How about this option? I used overlow-x:auto to fit any overflowing/overlapping text within page's width margins via a scrolling table. This only works without the cot/cob templates. Qwerty284651 (talk) 20:11, 12 October 2022 (UTC)


 * To add: between 2004 and 2007 there were 10 WTA Masters events played. So, you can't have only 9 columns, but at least 11, 1 for the years column and 10 for the 10 tournaments, because of San Diego in those 4 years. I read the link to the discussion you sent me. I could remove the nowrap from the table, but then we come back to the same problem of the table overlapping. Qwerty284651 (talk) 20:25, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I had to fix the font-size to 85% rather than just 85 or nothing happened. But even that blows past the edge of my 24" monitor. I had to go 75% to see everything. I'd hate to see it on a phone. There is never more than nine events in any year so why cant we have nine slots? And the original subtable of "WTA Premier Mandatory / Premier 5" has 13 columns yet easily fits on the screen but your changes don't. Like the men's, the tournament name at the top should be a bigger font than the players names. A minor thing... when you create a table (or anything) on the talk page that has references, could you put a  template beneath it? Otherwise the refs get separated and are always on the bottom of the talk page. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:43, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I removed nowrap. It should look better now. There were, in fact, 10 Tier I tournaments between 2004 and 2007. Blame it on San Diego. I am not making this stuff up. I would gladly have nine columns, i.e. nine slots, but there were 10 events in that 4-year period. Just look at the second original table above. The thing with the women's "Masters" is that the number of events varied from year to year. It started with 6, moved to 8, than to 9, to 10 and then back to 9. It's not consistent and because of that, my table has all these intermediate rows showing when new tournaments were introduced or swapped places, which makes it look all wonky. That's why I used footnotes do explain all of the changes/time slots swaps.
 * Also, thanks for using ref talk for both discussions on Tennis wikiproject and here to fix the references I used on talk pages. Will keep that in mind for next time. Qwerty284651 (talk) 21:15, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Increased the tournament name's size. Qwerty284651 (talk) 21:28, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * It certainly looks much better now. I need to look a little closer to see if there are any anomalies. I had forgotten there were ten events for those four years. I hate that those four years cause the entire 32 years table to be an extra column wider forever and ever. Every year we add new players we have a blank cell at the end. Maybe a split table after 2005 (or after 2008 where we can lose the Charleston column too). The next option incorporates those issues. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:12, 13 October 2022 (UTC)


 * We could have split it after 2011 but after 2008 was when a really major shift happened. This helps for a much larger and easier-to-read font to be used throughout the second chart. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:59, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * , I made some modifications to the tables. In the first 1: I moved Philadelphia to Moscow; switched Moscow and Zurich columns, so the row after 2000 and Philadelphia column is removed; removed caption "Singles". In the second table: I switched Canada and Cincinnati columns in rowheaders, thereby removing the row after 2010. Added some missing  and bottow column tournaments at the first table. Also, set the font-size in both tables to 85%. And used ref talk...shock of all shocks, I know.
 * Here's both tables' improved versions below.

Singles



 * This should fix all the minor issues. Qwerty284651 (talk) 22:46, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * It seems to be mostly fine. There are two issues, one visible and one not. The visible item is there is a separator between 2013 and 2014 between Miami and Rome that should be removed. This also affects after 2014 and 2021. The non-visible fix is an HTML/accessibility error. Since you are creating a new table might as well fix it to begin with. We should not use the header "!" in the middle of a table by itself. Lone ! header designations are usually only for the top of a table. Away from the top, the "!" should only be used with the scope="row" command. So we would have ! scope="row"| header title". It won't make any visible difference but can help with accessibility screen readers and is proper html. I changed the 1990 row in the chart as an example. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:50, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you and I both overlooked the separator pipeline character when removing the Charleston column. We should also use scope="col" for column headers as stated on scope help page. ! mid-table can be replaced with color code for headers, bold and  to mimic the style of a header and you are good to go. Qwerty284651 (talk) 16:49, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I applied the changes mentioned above to the latest tables. Added scope=row and scope=col to rows and columns, respectively, and replaced the "!" in data cells with "↓ Tournament ↓" with "background color #EAECF0 align center", since it's mid-table and is neither row nor a column. Qwerty284651 (talk) 18:55, 14 October 2022 (UTC)