Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tennis/Article guidelines/Archive 4

Timeline charts in articles

Timeline charts

Men's singles Weeks as No. 1 leaders timeline Year span Leader Date achieved Duration Record 2021–present Novak Djokovic March 8, 2021 3 years, 8 months 450 2012–2021    Roger Federer July 16, 2012 8 years, 7 months 310 1999–2012 Pete Sampras August 2, 1999 12 years, 11 months 286 1990–1999 Ivan Lendl July 30, 1990 9 years 270 1975–1990 Jimmy Connors May 5, 1975 15 years, 2 months 268 1973–1975 Ilie Năstase August 23, 1973 1 year, 8 months 40 Current record in bold. No. 1 leaders timeline Men's doubles Weeks as No. 1 leaders timeline No. Leader Date achieved Duration Record No. Debut 1. Bob Hewitt March 1, 1976 2 months 6 / 2. Raúl Ramírez May 31, 1976 2 years, 3 months 62 12 April 1976 3. Frew McMillan September 4, 1978 2 years, 3 months 85 23 August 1977 4. John McEnroe December 15, 1980 30 years, 11 months 269 3 January 1983 5. Bob Bryan Mike Bryan December 12, 2011 10 months 299 8 September 2003 6. Mike Bryan November 5, 2012 12 years 506 8 September 2003 Current record in bold. No. 1 leaders timeline Women's singles Weeks as No. 1 leaders timeline Year span Leader Date achieved Duration Record No. Debut 1975–1985 Chris Evert 3 November 1975 9 years, 6 months 238 / 1985–1985 Martina Navratilova 27 May 1985 0 months, 28 days 240 10 July 1978 1985–1986 Chris Evert 24 June 1985 9 months 260 3 November 1975 1986–1996 Martina Navratilova 31 March 1986 10 years, 1 month 332 10 July 1978 1996–Present Steffi Graf 21 May 1996 28 years, 5 months 377 17 August 1987 Current record in bold. No. 1 leaders timeline Women's doubles Weeks as No. 1 leaders timeline Year span Holder Date achieved Duration Record No. 1 Debut 1984–1985 Martina Navratilova September 4, 1984 1 year 27 / 1985–1986 Pam Shriver September 30, 1985 7 months 44 18 March 1985 1986–present Martina Navratilova May 26, 1986 38 years, 5 months 237 10 September 1984 Current record in bold. No. 1 leaders timeline References

Do the following charts meet the tennis article guidelines? Qwerty284651 (talk) 04:14, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Tables good. Datacharts need to answer the question of whether they are accessible for readers across every platform (i.e. mobile readers). Unnamelessness (talk) 08:01, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

@Unnamelessness, both work as intended in the wiki app, on desktop and mobile browsers. Qwerty284651 (talk) 08:35, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Then I would say both are good to go. I would slightly prefer the datacharts, because I see the potential of automation, though the only concern here is it could be affected by random techinical issue. Unnamelessness (talk) 08:43, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

I know what you mean. had to take down a malfunctioning graph from ATP no.1 singles page, the one with oldest number ones {{graph}}, because of a security bug in Phabricator. Qwerty284651 (talk) 09:13, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

@Graham87:, do your screen readers clearly describe the graphs in this section? Qwerty284651 (talk) 08:40, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

@Qwerty284651: The HTML tables work fine but the timelines do not; the output of the timeline tag is not (and never has been) accessible to screen readers. Graham87 (talk) 09:12, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

@Graham87, how do you propose this gets fixed? Report it to Phabricator? Qwerty284651 (talk) 09:15, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

@Qwerty284651: It won't ever be fixed with that particular extension. See this discussion from 2011, which references bugs from 2006 (Phabricator was at Bugzilla back in 2006/2011). EasyTimeline was supposed to be replaced with the graph extension, but that doesn't work right now. Graham87 (talk) 10:48, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

@Graham87, do you then propose we remove the charts for the foreseeable future if/when the graph bug gets resolved? Qwerty284651 (talk) 11:29, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

@Qwerty284651: Yeah, probably a good idea. Graham87 (talk) 14:51, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

@Unnamelessness and Fyunck(click):, do we remove them? Qwerty284651 (talk) 17:16, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

I have never been a fan of these particular timeline charts. Kinda foo foo to me. But we have to remember something. If possible we should try and accommodate accessibility issues. It's only right to do the best we can. If a chart is quite useful to sighted viewers and we can't figure out a way to make them better, we don't just remove them and hammer 90% of readers that find them very useful. These particular timelines I find frivolous but many of our millions of readers may not agree. Fyunck(click) (talk) 01:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

How are we to know that the millions of readers will disagree with their removal? I created them a few days ago using the men's singles one as a template. Qwerty284651 (talk) 02:25, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

I didn't mean these particular charts, just that we don't automatically remove something useful just because it has issues with accessibility. Sorry about the confusion. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:53, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

In other words, keep them until somebody complaints and removes them. In which case we start a convo on a talk page. Qwerty284651 (talk) 13:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Not really. There is not always a reason to remove them. If they aren't useful, of course we should remove them. If they are useful to 90% of readers we don't remove them at all, no matter if someone complains. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:29, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

WP:BRD is the path. Unnamelessness (talk) 03:22, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

@Unnamelessness, meaning? Qwerty284651 (talk) 06:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

"Making bold edits is encouraged, as it will result in either improving an article or stimulating discussion. If your edit gets reverted, do not revert again. Instead, begin a discussion with the person who reverted your change." Unnamelessness (talk) 06:53, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Qwerty284651 (talk) 13:37, 13 February 2024 (UTC)