Talk:2013–14 Eredivisie

League table

In line with some other league season articles it might be good to switch the table into a template format, so partial tables on club season pages do not have to be updated manually. I created this template at {{2013–14 Eredivisie table}}, see Template:2013–14 Eredivisie table/testcases for examples of use. How do you guys feel about using this template, so updates are incorporated across Wikipedia in one go. CRwikiCA talk 14:25, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes I think this is a good idea to do for every league as the league tables are used across several pages at once, So instead of doing everything manual we just edit in 1 place for all pages the template is on. I agree with this. --Skyblueshaun (talk) 14:49, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with the above statement, will be easier to edit. -Rafara13 (talk) 15:49, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Very well, I will include the template in the various articles then. CRwikiCA talk 14:41, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good! Is it any difference between this template and {{2013–14 Premier League table}}? Something that should be fixed in any of them to make them look the same to simplify updates? QED237 (talk) 14:29, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Ohh and by the way in the discussions we had in village pump we said to always show five teams for all parts of the table while this table sometimes show three or four? Should we make it five here to? I think it will be better if it is the same everywhere. QED237 (talk) 14:31, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

I take 5 as 2 before and 2 after. But I'll leave it up to some of the others to give their opinions about it too. CRwikiCA talk 14:42, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

I now have some time going through the old discussion and I will update the template to show at least 5 teams. I think it is otherwise visually the same as the English templates. One question I have though is with the highlighting colours for various competitions: Is there a list somewhere what colour is recommended when? CRwikiCA talk 19:32, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, 2 before and 2 after. Great! About the colors from what I know it has always been green for main competition, blur for next and red for relegation. "Dark" color for main tournament and brighter for playoff/qualification. I dont know any consensus for the exakt hex-numbers though but I guess it should be the same on all tables. WP:Color mighht be worth reading. QED237 (talk) 22:46, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

What is the purpose of the third row below the teams? The one with nowrap? That is the only difference between this template and the english ones? QED237 (talk) 22:48, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I intent to keep colours consistent. Although it is a question what to do with older seasons when there where 3 European tournaments. The no-wrap command avoids line breaks. In particular to be able to have each position on its own line (instead of having closing and opening brackets for different table position on the same line). The code is therefore clearer to read (in my opinion) because each table position is separate. CRwikiCA talk 23:37, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay I guess that is a matter of opinion, to me it is easier for unexperienced editors to just change the rows in the PL table but this probably works too. QED237 (talk) 23:49, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

By the way do you know how to make new cathegories? I was thinking to add a subcategory to Category:Association football league templates that you added to this template. Perhaps a subcategory called "League table templates" or something where we can list all league table templates. QED237 (talk) 23:53, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

I think both set-ups would work equally well for people editing the standings. The logical line-breaking comes into play when someone wants to create a similar template themselves, then it is easier to figure out what is happening and change it for an other use. I have not create many categories, what I find is easiest is just adding the category to one page, then clicking the red-link and then press create or whatever it is called.
On a different note: I realize there is a coding difference. I create the row-highlighting in the Eredivisie template based on the \p subtemplate, whereas the team codes are used in the PL template. Was this chosen in advance (for whatever reason), or did user experience indicate that using the team code was more useful? CRwikiCA talk 00:52, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

The team codes are used because it makes updating much easier when teams change the position. For the PL template the editor switches the rows of the teams and updates p,w,d,l..-parameters and thats it. In Eredivisie template the editor must also change the number in the ifeq-statement (for example Hereenveen gets to 4th place the editor must change {{Ere1314|5}} to {{Ere1314|4}} (in the PL version it would have been the team code on both). QED237 (talk) 01:18, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I changed that to have the same type of edits needed across Wikipedia. Good point, hopefully it will work well! CRwikiCA talk 17:19, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Ajax could have been Dutch champion Siiiiimz (talk) 19:35, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Eredivisie play-offs

This section also occurs in the 2013–14 Eerste Divisie article, should it appear in both places? If not, it might be more appropriate solely in the Eerste Divisie article, because it's mostly a promotion play-off. CRwikiCA talk 14:53, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Another alternative is to create it as a template that will occur on both pages. CRwikiCA talk 21:29, 9 May 2014 (UTC)