Jump to content

Talk:2018 NCAA Division I baseball tournament: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
+wpore
No edit summary
Line 9: Line 9:
Cheers, 18:43, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Cheers, 18:43, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
:I tried that in the past and everyone seemed to hate it although it makes more sense, and can be easily communicated on the CWS bracket which Super Regionals pair up before the names are known. [[Special:Contributions/205.142.232.18|205.142.232.18]] ([[User talk:205.142.232.18|talk]]) 19:06, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
:I tried that in the past and everyone seemed to hate it although it makes more sense, and can be easily communicated on the CWS bracket which Super Regionals pair up before the names are known. [[Special:Contributions/205.142.232.18|205.142.232.18]] ([[User talk:205.142.232.18|talk]]) 19:06, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

== Separation of conference records ==

If statistics for conference records are kept separately, wouldn't it be useful to remove any w-l numbers when a conference played itself? Maybe a new column to show how a conference does against all other conferences? As it sits, anytime a game happens where a conference plays itself, the win percentage will always slip toward .500 boosting the numbers for weak conferences and dragging the powerhouses down. [[Special:Contributions/205.142.232.18|205.142.232.18]] ([[User talk:205.142.232.18|talk]]) 16:44, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:44, 29 June 2018

WikiProject iconBaseball: College Start‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject College baseball (assessed as High-importance).
WikiProject iconOregon Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball

There was a subsection for a "Clemson Super Regional" with a speculative statement. This is a blatant violation of the policy WP:CBALL. I understand why it's attractive to provide mental "hooks" for SRs without knowing who's going to win them; I can almost, almost, almost accept that naming the section by the national seed is OK when that seed is still favored to win. (But no, not quite. That's still very bad.) What's absolutely not acceptable is speculation that a certain team might just win the next three games (as Clemson would have to do in this case). That's completely unacceptable under WP:CBALL.

I know Super Regionals #1 through 8 are kind of an ugly name for headings but until the sites are determined, they're the best solution I can think of that's consistent with Wikipedia policy. Cheers, 18:43, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

I tried that in the past and everyone seemed to hate it although it makes more sense, and can be easily communicated on the CWS bracket which Super Regionals pair up before the names are known. 205.142.232.18 (talk) 19:06, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Separation of conference records

If statistics for conference records are kept separately, wouldn't it be useful to remove any w-l numbers when a conference played itself? Maybe a new column to show how a conference does against all other conferences? As it sits, anytime a game happens where a conference plays itself, the win percentage will always slip toward .500 boosting the numbers for weak conferences and dragging the powerhouses down. 205.142.232.18 (talk) 16:44, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]