@Island92: Please see Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2017 EFL Trophy Final/archive1 where MOS:ACCESS issues were raised with regard to the "standard" format for route to the final sections in some football match articles. Many aspects of this were questioned, particularly the use of nested tables and column headers in the middle of the table, hence why I switched to using simple tables against the sections of the teams concerned. This works properly on screen readers for the visually impaired. This has become the standard format for all FA-level match articles, including those from the Africa Cup of Nations such as 2017 Africa Cup of Nations final. Since this is currently a bolded article on the main page in the ITN section, it must adhere to the manual of style and quality requirements for main page content, and such tables which don't conform to MOS:ACCESS are not permitted. I'm aware there are quite a few of these in legacy format around the project, but that doesn't make it right... Thanks! — Amakuru (talk) 18:27, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Island92: I see you have reverted yet again, despite my comments in the edit summaries and here. Is there an issue with what I have said? Your version is not compliant with the manual of style, and this has been confirmed at featured article discussions. Please could you revert yourself. — Amakuru (talk) 18:29, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
- Oh, never mind, you didn't revert after all - sorry I thought this edit was another revert, but I see the correct table format is still in place. If you think my above comments are in error, please do let me know but for now I think the compliant version should remain. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 18:38, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
- I'm simply against it. A huge amount of football articles finals use the other case. The current case I saw it for FA Cup and English League Cup finals, only. Island92 (talk) 18:44, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
- A single FAC is not the appropriate consensus for a wide-ranging change, per WP:CONLEVEL. While there are ACCESS issues, it should be solved within the existing template instead of losing the group table and head-to-head view that the original table provides. SounderBruce 19:37, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
- It's not just a single FAC, it is numerous FACs that have taken place for football match articles, there are loads of them. The information you speak about is superfluous at this level anyway, the article only goes into detail on the individual matches played by the teams. The standard table is pretty poorly formatted anyway, even without the ACCESS issues. Like why does it have the headers in the centre. Just because something is copied and pasted around repeatedly doesn't mean it's the correct way to do something. — Amakuru (talk) 19:57, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
- This also comes up every time a match is proposed at WP:ITN/C, and there's never been push back before. MOS compliance is, after all, fairly fundamental to deeming the article quality. See for example 2022 FIFA World Cup final. — Amakuru (talk) 20:01, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
