Talk:2009–10 Elitserien season

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ice Hockey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ice hockey 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.Ice HockeyWikipedia:WikiProject Ice HockeyTemplate:WikiProject Ice HockeyIce Hockey articles

Associated task forces:
/
	This article is supported by European Ice Hockey task force.

Sweden Mid‑importance

	Sweden portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles 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.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The outdoor game

I'm just thinking about the wording about the outdoor game in the article. Will it really be the first outdoor game in Elitserien history? I'm quite sure there were a lot of outdoor games in the 70's and 80's, or do I remember completely wrong? --claes (talk) 14:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question about the 2009–10 Elitserien standings template (english version)

Why didn't you start updating it from the beginning?

Fråga om 2009–10 Elitserien standings-mallen (svensk version)

Varför uppdaterade inte du mallen från början?

The playoff game log

The playoff game log looks crazy with the colours. Why not use standard colours and conform to other similar articles on Wikipedia? I think it's better that ice hockey articles look the same so it will be easier to read and navigate. For example look at this article: 2009 Stanley Cup playoffs. All NHL articles have the same look. --claes (talk) 10:41, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Less colours makes it easier to read, thus I think we should conform to the style of the NHL articles. Tooga - BØRK! 15:31, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was basically a copy from the swedish Wikipedia. I think it is way nicer, so I think we should stay with that. Why keep it "plain and simple"? As the years passes, we have to stick with the technology (ies) that are available for us today. Therefore, I think we should stick with my design. I am on both the swedish Wikipedia and the english Wikipedia. So I don't have much time to answer. I'm spending most of my time on the swedish Wikipedia. But WHY did it take so long time for you to notice this? /Heymid (talk) 18:14, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think your design is difficult to read. I like it plain and simple and Wikipedia has a plain and simple design overall. Having that said, I also think that articles should have the same look. All ice hockey articles should conform to some form of standards, otherwise it will be very confusing for the casual reader. By the way, does it really matter why it took long time to notice it? Maybe we have other things beside Wikipedia in our lives. --claes (talk) 20:17, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The game log we have here is way different from the one on Swedish wikipedia. The most obvious thing is that the one on sv wiki doesn't include colours at all, probably because there isn't any need for it. The current design is less tidy and readable than the design in the NHL articles. The colours does not provide any information and is therefore purely decorative, this is why I think we should conform to a simple standard with black text on a white background. Tooga - BØRK! 19:34, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 2009–10 Elitserien season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:08, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]