Talk:Tournament Results
From Mcgill Debate
Seanhayward (Talk | contribs) |
|||
| (6 intermediate revisions not shown) | |||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
I think we might as well include all the information we have. If this is going to be the central repository of DU info I think it should go into as much detail as possible - [[User:Magnus|Magnus]] 21:17, 13 August 2007 (EDT) | I think we might as well include all the information we have. If this is going to be the central repository of DU info I think it should go into as much detail as possible - [[User:Magnus|Magnus]] 21:17, 13 August 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | If we're going to do every tournament, we need some nicer organisational system. Like ways to delineate between larger tournaments or something. Novice should definitely have it's own page. What if we had multi-links off of past results? One for Novice In-House, one for worlds, one for title tournaments etc.? | ||
| + | --[[User:vinay|vinay]] today. | ||
| + | |||
| + | If we include all information, including my 82nd finishes last year, then this is going to become unreasonable long. I think we should vote on my proposed criteria, then decide on the format of the information. The table coding, which seems to be correct, is throwing all sorts of errors. Using bullets may be easier. | ||
| + | |||
| + | --[[User:Seanhayward|Seanhayward]] 17:10, 26 August 2007 (EDT) | ||
== Title == | == Title == | ||
Also, maybe this page should be renamed (or rather, moved) to something like "Tournament Results"? -[[User:Magnus|Magnus]] 21:31, 13 August 2007 (EDT) | Also, maybe this page should be renamed (or rather, moved) to something like "Tournament Results"? -[[User:Magnus|Magnus]] 21:31, 13 August 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Done...--[[User:Seanhayward|Seanhayward]] 17:10, 26 August 2007 (EDT) | ||
== Order == | == Order == | ||
| Line 19: | Line 27: | ||
-[[User:Magnus|Magnus]] 02:12, 14 August 2007 (EDT) | -[[User:Magnus|Magnus]] 02:12, 14 August 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Man, I was trying to do the same thing, and I'd get the 1995-1996 to be directly under the other year which looked tres weird. Sean, use some of that html gibberish! | ||
| + | |||
| + | Vinay, sign your comments by putting <nowiki>four tildes (~~~~)</nowiki> after a comment | ||
| + | |||
| + | -[[User:Magnus|Magnus]] 13:29, 14 August 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I can flip it around tomorrow, and put up more results. Once I figure out how to place comments in the coding I'll make it easier to code for the layman. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Plus there is an error in the coding so I'll fix that as well. | ||
| + | --[[User:Seanhayward|Seanhayward]] 02:44, 26 August 2007 (EDT) | ||
Current revision as of 21:10, 26 August 2007
Are there any suggestions about how much information to include?
Proposed Criteria
- Teams which placed in the top fifteen
- Individuals which placed in top twenty
- Public speakers which placed in top five
- Only external tournaments (Novice In-House should have its own page)
--Seanhayward 17:20, 13 August 2007 (EDT)
I think we might as well include all the information we have. If this is going to be the central repository of DU info I think it should go into as much detail as possible - Magnus 21:17, 13 August 2007 (EDT)
If we're going to do every tournament, we need some nicer organisational system. Like ways to delineate between larger tournaments or something. Novice should definitely have it's own page. What if we had multi-links off of past results? One for Novice In-House, one for worlds, one for title tournaments etc.? --vinay today.
If we include all information, including my 82nd finishes last year, then this is going to become unreasonable long. I think we should vote on my proposed criteria, then decide on the format of the information. The table coding, which seems to be correct, is throwing all sorts of errors. Using bullets may be easier.
--Seanhayward 17:10, 26 August 2007 (EDT)
Title
Also, maybe this page should be renamed (or rather, moved) to something like "Tournament Results"? -Magnus 21:31, 13 August 2007 (EDT)
Done...--Seanhayward 17:10, 26 August 2007 (EDT)
Order
Maybe it would make more sense to have the more recent results closer to the top of the page? I tried to get the 1996-1997 results up above the 1995-1996 but kept running into a weird formatting error.
-Magnus 02:12, 14 August 2007 (EDT)
Man, I was trying to do the same thing, and I'd get the 1995-1996 to be directly under the other year which looked tres weird. Sean, use some of that html gibberish!
Vinay, sign your comments by putting four tildes (~~~~) after a comment
-Magnus 13:29, 14 August 2007 (EDT)
I can flip it around tomorrow, and put up more results. Once I figure out how to place comments in the coding I'll make it easier to code for the layman.
Plus there is an error in the coding so I'll fix that as well. --Seanhayward 02:44, 26 August 2007 (EDT)
