Talk:Premier League Darts
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Premier League Darts article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Qualification
[edit]I thought that from 2005-2008 the World Grand Prix was the cut off point & it was only 2009-2015 the cut off point was the World Championship.
Mobile mundo (talk) 18:56, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Full Protected
[edit]@ItsKesha and Penepi: I have no interest in blocking either of you, so I have protected the article. Please discuss your content dispute rather than continuing to revert one another. Star Mississippi 11:22, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Why would I be blocked for removing a clear violation of WP:STATISTICS? All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 11:27, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- because you're both edit warring, and it doesn't matter who is "right". Discuss it, get a third opinion if needed. Star Mississippi 11:49, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Explain to the folks what an edit war is. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 11:57, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- It is not a clear violation. Once again, you're messing around with some rules and at the end of the day it turns out that you're manipulating them as you please and you're not right at all. Penepi (talk) 11:55, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Messing around with rules... manipulating them". How? How am I doing this? All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 11:57, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- You apply them to cases (articles/sections) to which they should not apply at all. Penepi (talk) 12:01, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- In this situation, how exactly am I doing this? An unsourced, unwieldy table titled "Premier League players and performance" which is a violation of WP:NOTSTATS. You have been explained this policy before, by the way. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 13:17, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- You apply them to cases (articles/sections) to which they should not apply at all. Penepi (talk) 12:01, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Messing around with rules... manipulating them". How? How am I doing this? All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 11:57, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- because you're both edit warring, and it doesn't matter who is "right". Discuss it, get a third opinion if needed. Star Mississippi 11:49, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- The usefulness of this section is undeniable (for me subjectively the most informative part of the entire article, but that is not essential). The important thing is that this table allows me to see in one place which players played in which year and I don't have to click through the articles of the individual 20 seasons. Furthermore, it enables statistical insight. See different streaks (in participation or in standing terms) and I could go on. Penepi (talk) 12:04, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- This could easily be achieved in a far more readable and wieldy manner. This table is awful to look at and read. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 13:18, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Then let's discuss how to achieve a better table - and not delete it all arbitrarily. I would definitely keep the content as such that the table provides. Penepi (talk) 13:31, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Something like those at List of Formula One drivers or List of Premier League clubs. Get rid of the colours. Mark Dudbridge played in one year, he doesn't need 18 columns saying did not play. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 18:48, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- However, the use of this type of list would not allow, for example, to see which individual players competed in which year. It is clear to me that for graphical reasons it is not possible to maintain the current table type for 50 years, but for now I think it is fine. I agree with the other suggestions. Penepi (talk) 12:07, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- I concede to retaining the usage of the table, but I propose new formatting (similar) to below
- I concede to retaining the usage of the table, but I propose new formatting (similar) to below
- However, the use of this type of list would not allow, for example, to see which individual players competed in which year. It is clear to me that for graphical reasons it is not possible to maintain the current table type for 50 years, but for now I think it is fine. I agree with the other suggestions. Penepi (talk) 12:07, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Something like those at List of Formula One drivers or List of Premier League clubs. Get rid of the colours. Mark Dudbridge played in one year, he doesn't need 18 columns saying did not play. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 18:48, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Then let's discuss how to achieve a better table - and not delete it all arbitrarily. I would definitely keep the content as such that the table provides. Penepi (talk) 13:31, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- This could easily be achieved in a far more readable and wieldy manner. This table is awful to look at and read. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 13:18, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
| Player | # | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Phil Taylor
|
13 | W | W | W | W | SF | W | SF | W | RU | SF | 5 | RU | SF | × | |||||
| Colin Lloyd
|
3 | RU | SF | 5 | × | |||||||||||||||
| Peter Manley
|
4 | SF | 6 | 6 | 6 | × | ||||||||||||||
 Roland Scholten
|
3 | SF | RU | 8 | × | |||||||||||||||
| Mark Dudbridge
|
1 | 5 | × | |||||||||||||||||
 John Part
|
3 | 6 | × | 8 | 6 | × | ||||||||||||||
| Wayne Mardle
|
4 | 7 | 7 | × | 5 | WD | × | |||||||||||||
| Raymond van Barneveld
|
14 | × | SF | SF | SF | SF | 6 | SF | 5 | SF | W | SF | 7 | 6 | 6 | 9 | × | |||
| Table Legend | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| W | Won in playoffs | RU | Runner-up | SF | Lost in the semi-finals | # | Place in table, not qualified for playoffs | ||
| # | Place in table, relegated | WD | Withdrew before tournament | WD | Withdrew during tournament | C | Challenger | × | Did not play |
- Gold is a universal symbol of sporting victory, similarly silver for finishing second/runner-up, and bronze for third. In fact I propose this for the entire project. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 14:01, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, this looks good. Penepi (talk) 17:20, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Gold is a universal symbol of sporting victory, similarly silver for finishing second/runner-up, and bronze for third. In fact I propose this for the entire project. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 14:01, 19 March 2023 (UTC)