Template talk:2023 Cricket World Cup points table

We shouldn't be putting article content on a template, even if previous instances did the same Spike 'em (talk) 16:51, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Agree. It should be transcluded by other means. A template is unnecessary. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 10:35, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

What is the point of having a marker to indicate whether a team can qualify through its own results or whether it needs other teams results to qualify? I can't see that this serves any purpose at all? Bcp67 (talk) 21:34, 30 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I noticed the use of this type of status during the FIFA World Cup qualifiers. The advantage of this is that through this the reader can get an idea about the actual status of the teams. Abazizfahad (talk) 03:00, 31 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

No use to this "could qualify based on other's results" at all, and it is unsourced/WP:OR, which isn't permitted. Wait until teams actually mathematically qualify or are eliminated and add that as appropriate. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:34, 31 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Shouldn't it be "Advanced to the Knockout Stage" instead of Semi-finals. 𝓥𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓷24𝓑𝓲𝓸 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 02:55, 31 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

There are only semi-finals and final in the knock out stage. Therefore, So the semi-final was written instead of the knock out stage. However, the knockout stage can be used if desired. Abazizfahad (talk) 03:05, 31 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Arithmetically SA has not qualified and SL not eleminated

Source: https://www.cricketworldcup.com/news/3764287

Marvingonzapa (talk) 15:11, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan and Afghanistan can all overtake South Africa by reaching at least 12 points, so they haven't qualified yet. Sri Lanka looks to have been fixed, I agree that they're not yet eliminated. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:09, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

I checked both ICC and Cricinfo points tables. Both don't indicate eliminations. Netherlands case is doubtful at the moment I am writing this. Please, clarify. Chanaka L (talk) 14:52, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm pretty sure they aren't eliminated, and I'm still holding out hope. They probably need to beat India with 299 balls to spare, though. StAnselm (talk) 15:14, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the reply. I thought you were an Englishman. Cheers, and good luck to the team you support. Chanaka L (talk) 15:29, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

I am Australian of Dutch ethnicity - so the Netherlands are the second team I support. StAnselm (talk) 15:42, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

The current format (with the colour descriptions abov the table rather than within) is non-complaint with wikipedia practice. Also, while it will not affect many, persons with particular types of colour blindness may be unable to interpret the table if the descriptions are not attached (this is one of the reasons the tables were adjusted in the first place). You may not find this a problem, but a number of people do. 165.12.252.116 (talk) 02:11, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Fair enough. Oppose proposed change in format to legend above. StAnselm (talk) 02:52, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Many Wikipedia articles do that. While multuple colors and elongated text are used, it is indicated with a legend above the table. Also it make the table appear more compact and readable in one stroke, for mobile viewers. Editor8220 (talk) 03:08, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

The Map on the Section "Qualification" in the main article, 2023 Cricket World Cup also uses a similar legend as I proposed, if that does not affect people with certain colour blindness, I don't think it is an issue that affects solely on a table. Also there are many articles that uses a similar legend on tables with multiple colour indicators on row. Editor8220 (talk) 03:25, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for letting us know the type of person you are. Wherever possible it is important to maximise accessibility to the site, and people OVER A VERY LONG PERIOD OF TIME have worked at that. On the "example" you used there are alternative methods of accessibility that can and are applied to graphics because of their inherent limitations, not because people aren't aware of them. Frankly, the arrogance of throwing all that aside because you feel superior to others is pretty sad, but not uncommon. I will bare that in mind in future interactions if I am unfortunate enough to experience them. 165.12.252.116 (talk) 03:41, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Same applies here too. There are alternate methods of accessibility to understand who qualified for semi-finals and for the Champions trophy. I don't think there is a need to make the table appear too wide for a text for a fewer number of people with certain colour blindness. There are many articles with tables with multiple colour indicators using a legend above rather than indicating what each colour means inside the table itself. Editor8220 (talk) 03:48, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Do we really need an additional letter (X) for those who qualify for the 2025 ICC Champions Trophy by finishing 5th-8th? We have so many different letters on the template right now that it's confusing. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:56, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply