Comments
- You abbreviate AL but then refuse to use it...
- Already used once in "AL Wild Card", but used it again. The problem is it needs to be spelled out in American League Championship Series and American League Division Series. Staxringold talkcontribs 15:50, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "won a total of 40 American " never really saw a need for the redundant "a total of", and in this case, since you use "total" in the next sentence, I think it'd read better without it.
- Sections - you have a 3.1 but no 3.2, ditto for 4.1..
-
- Just don't understand why you have single subsections, but there's nothing against in MOS. It doesn't make much sense to me, but there you go. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:58, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- How would you have me alter it? Unite the two notes sections into one larger full section for notes? Staxringold talkcontribs 16:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Easiest way round this is to just use semi-colon rather than a normal section heading. That way you get bold text like a section heading but it isn't included in the TOC. If that doesn't work for you, don't worry, I need to stop being so nit-picky about these things... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Sounds good to me, done. Also, half done with the sorting. Just the post-69 table to sort now. Staxringold talkcontribs 16:24, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm getting a weird display of fractions in IE7... the bottoms are missing...
- That's the ((frac)) template's fault. It always does that in IE but not in any other browser I've tried. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 13:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Here's another good sorting query: when I sort by total in descending order I get the 32 Yankees on 107-47 before the 31 Athletics on 107-45. Considering they're tied on wins, I would imagine the Athletics should sort above the Yankees having lost two fewer games... this is where ((SortKey)) is your friend...
-
- 1994 colspan note should sort before 0, not between 0 and 1 (when sorting LW).
-
- My very inelegant solution was to make the zeroes actually sort as "0.1". It's messy, but it solves the problem. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 15:56, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Aren't most, if not all of your See also links already linked in the lead?
The Rambling Man (talk) 13:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
-
- To quote MOS : "Links already integrated into the body of the text are generally not repeated in a "See also" section"... that's where I'm coming from.. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:58, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah! I checked, actually ALDS was the only one linked in the lead. Removed that, NLCS/NL pennant winners/WS champs are all meaningful lists not otherwise linked. Staxringold talkcontribs 16:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|