Talk:2013–14 Pro12

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

Round by round?

edit

Is it worth including a round by round table to show the progress of the teams. I know people disagreed with it in the Six Nations Championship article, the main reason is because standings wouldn't change that much. On that note, in theory the standings would change significantly round by round and I just think the table below would be nice. If a match is rescheduled, then a note will be included and the rescheduled match would be backtracked into that weeks column. Rugby.change (talk) 21:28, 6 September 2013 (UTC)Reply

Team Progression – 2013-14 Pro 12
Team R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 R10 R11 R12 R13 R14 R15 R16 R17 R18 R19 R20 R21 R22
  Benetton Treviso
  Cardiff Blues 1
(4th)
  Connacht
  Edinburgh Rugby
  Glasgow Warriors 4
(2nd)
  Leinster 5
(1st)
  Munster
  Newport Gwent Dragons 4
(3rd)
  Ospreys
  Scarlets 0
(6th)
  Ulster 1
(5th)
  Zebre

The table above shows a team's progression throughout the season.
For each round, their cumulative points total is shown with the overall log position in brackets.
Key: win draw loss
Absolutely not! It is of no use whatsoever. Hamish59 (talk) 22:09, 6 September 2013 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I like the one in 2013 Super Rugby#Round-by-round. It shows current form and winning and losing runs. Jowaninpensans (talk) 22:44, 6 September 2013 (UTC)Reply
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 2013–14 Pro12. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:47, 20 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2013–14 Pro12. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:34, 14 September 2017 (UTC)Reply