Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/1 point player"

From blackwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>PeterJeremy
(Reorder links and add my comments)
imported>Mandarax
m (mv comments to the bottom and rm empty "Comment")
Line 14: Line 14:
 
{{*mp}}... that disability sport classifications include '''[[1 point player]]''', '''[[2 point player]]''', '''[[3 point player]]''', '''[[4 point player]]''', '''[[4.5 point player]]''', '''[[S1 (classification)|S1]]''', '''[[S2 (classification)|S2]]''', '''[[S3 (classification)|S3]]''', '''[[S4 (classification)|S4]]''', '''[[S5 (classification)|S5]]''', '''[[S6 (classification)|S6]]''', '''[[S7 (classification)|S7]]''', '''[[S8 (classification)|S8]]''', '''[[S9 (classification)|S9]]''', '''[[S10 (classification)|S10]]''', '''[[S11 (classification)|S11]]''', '''[[S12 (classification)|S12]]''', '''[[S13 (classification)|S13]]''', '''[[T11 (classification)|T11]]''', '''[[T12 (classification)|T12]]''', '''[[T13 (classification)|T13]]''', '''[[T20 (classification)|T20]]''', '''[[T31 (classification)|T31]]''', '''[[T32 (classification)|T32]]''', '''[[T33 (classification)|T33]]''', '''[[T34 (classification)|T34]]''', '''[[T35 (classification)|T35]]''', '''[[T36 (classification)|T36]]''', '''[[T37 (classification)|T37]]''', '''[[T38 (classification)|T38]]''', '''[[T40 (classification)|T40]]''', '''[[T42 (classification)|T42]]''', '''[[T43 (classification)|T43]]''', '''[[T44 (classification)|T44]]''', '''[[T45 (classification)|T45]]''', '''[[T46 (classification)|T46]]''', '''[[T51 (classification)|T51]]''', '''[[T52 (classification)|T52]]''', '''[[T53 (classification)|T53]]''' and '''[[T54 (classification)|T54]]'''?
 
{{*mp}}... that disability sport classifications include '''[[1 point player]]''', '''[[2 point player]]''', '''[[3 point player]]''', '''[[4 point player]]''', '''[[4.5 point player]]''', '''[[S1 (classification)|S1]]''', '''[[S2 (classification)|S2]]''', '''[[S3 (classification)|S3]]''', '''[[S4 (classification)|S4]]''', '''[[S5 (classification)|S5]]''', '''[[S6 (classification)|S6]]''', '''[[S7 (classification)|S7]]''', '''[[S8 (classification)|S8]]''', '''[[S9 (classification)|S9]]''', '''[[S10 (classification)|S10]]''', '''[[S11 (classification)|S11]]''', '''[[S12 (classification)|S12]]''', '''[[S13 (classification)|S13]]''', '''[[T11 (classification)|T11]]''', '''[[T12 (classification)|T12]]''', '''[[T13 (classification)|T13]]''', '''[[T20 (classification)|T20]]''', '''[[T31 (classification)|T31]]''', '''[[T32 (classification)|T32]]''', '''[[T33 (classification)|T33]]''', '''[[T34 (classification)|T34]]''', '''[[T35 (classification)|T35]]''', '''[[T36 (classification)|T36]]''', '''[[T37 (classification)|T37]]''', '''[[T38 (classification)|T38]]''', '''[[T40 (classification)|T40]]''', '''[[T42 (classification)|T42]]''', '''[[T43 (classification)|T43]]''', '''[[T44 (classification)|T44]]''', '''[[T45 (classification)|T45]]''', '''[[T46 (classification)|T46]]''', '''[[T51 (classification)|T51]]''', '''[[T52 (classification)|T52]]''', '''[[T53 (classification)|T53]]''' and '''[[T54 (classification)|T54]]'''?
  
* Do we need so many articles with repetitive content? Many sections like History, Getting classified are same, in case of swimming. "Sport" is similar, each with a definition of Jane Buckley in case of swimming. I suggest a merge into 3 articles: "Wheelchair basketball classifications" (with all point player article), "Disability swimming classifications" (with the S) and "Disability athletics classifications" (with the T).--[[User:Redtigerxyz|<font color = "red" >Redtigerxyz</font>]] <sup> [[User talk:Redtigerxyz|Talk]] </sup> 06:31, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 
* I think re-organising the swimming classifications as per the above makes it read better.  That said, I feel the DYK contains too much detail in its current form and something like "5 wheelchair basketball, 13 swimming and 22 track classifications" is a more reasonable level of detail for the general reader. Looking at the underlying articles, I tend to agree with [[User:Redtigerxyz]] that they contain a significant degree of overlap and could reasonably be merged into 3 articles.  --[[User:PeterJeremy|PeterJeremy]] ([[User talk:PeterJeremy|talk]]) 08:05, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 
 
<!--
 
<!--
  
Line 21: Line 19:
  
 
:*''Reviewed'': [[Template:Did you know nominations/UCF Knights women's soccer|UCF Knights women's soccer]]
 
:*''Reviewed'': [[Template:Did you know nominations/UCF Knights women's soccer|UCF Knights women's soccer]]
 
:*''Comment'':
 
  
 
<small>Created/expanded  by [[User:LauraHale|LauraHale]] ([[User talk:LauraHale|talk]]).  Nominated by [[User:Hawkeye7|Hawkeye7]] ([[User talk:Hawkeye7|talk]]) 10:17, 19 November 2011 (UTC)</small>
 
<small>Created/expanded  by [[User:LauraHale|LauraHale]] ([[User talk:LauraHale|talk]]).  Nominated by [[User:Hawkeye7|Hawkeye7]] ([[User talk:Hawkeye7|talk]]) 10:17, 19 November 2011 (UTC)</small>
Line 188: Line 184:
 
*{{DYKnom|T54 (classification)|Hawkeye7}}
 
*{{DYKnom|T54 (classification)|Hawkeye7}}
 
-->
 
-->
 +
 +
* Do we need so many articles with repetitive content? Many sections like History, Getting classified are same, in case of swimming. "Sport" is similar, each with a definition of Jane Buckley in case of swimming. I suggest a merge into 3 articles: "Wheelchair basketball classifications" (with all point player article), "Disability swimming classifications" (with the S) and "Disability athletics classifications" (with the T).--[[User:Redtigerxyz|<font color = "red" >Redtigerxyz</font>]] <sup> [[User talk:Redtigerxyz|Talk]] </sup> 06:31, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 +
:* I think re-organising the swimming classifications as per the above makes it read better.  That said, I feel the DYK contains too much detail in its current form and something like "5 wheelchair basketball, 13 swimming and 22 track classifications" is a more reasonable level of detail for the general reader. Looking at the underlying articles, I tend to agree with [[User:Redtigerxyz]] that they contain a significant degree of overlap and could reasonably be merged into 3 articles.  --[[User:PeterJeremy|PeterJeremy]] ([[User talk:PeterJeremy|talk]]) 08:05, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
  
 
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->
 
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->

Revision as of 09:40, 20 November 2011

1 point player



Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk). Nominated by Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:17, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


  • Do we need so many articles with repetitive content? Many sections like History, Getting classified are same, in case of swimming. "Sport" is similar, each with a definition of Jane Buckley in case of swimming. I suggest a merge into 3 articles: "Wheelchair basketball classifications" (with all point player article), "Disability swimming classifications" (with the S) and "Disability athletics classifications" (with the T).--Redtigerxyz Talk 06:31, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
  • I think re-organising the swimming classifications as per the above makes it read better. That said, I feel the DYK contains too much detail in its current form and something like "5 wheelchair basketball, 13 swimming and 22 track classifications" is a more reasonable level of detail for the general reader. Looking at the underlying articles, I tend to agree with User:Redtigerxyz that they contain a significant degree of overlap and could reasonably be merged into 3 articles. --PeterJeremy (talk) 08:05, 20 November 2011 (UTC)