Talk:2009 NCAA Division I men's basketball tournament

message: In the Record by conference section, there's a column titled "Win %", but the #s listed aren't percentages.  Anyone have preference on changing the title or changing the #s?  If we change the title, what's the right thing to use -- "win ratio"? -Jcbarr (talk) 21:37, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That is how "percentage" is always represented in the sports world. I think it should be OK the way it is. Most major sports sites use the same notation. [ESPN for example]. Ryan2845 (talk) 21:48, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Just because ESPN has a bunch of jocks who can't add means we should represent incorrectly here? -Jcbarr (talk) 22:12, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is standard sports nomenclature to express certain "percentages" as the raw ratios. On base percentage in baseball is another example. Winning percentage is standard for newspaper sports sections. —C.Fred (talk) 22:53, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

text: ESPN was just an example of it's usage in sports, what I was saying was it's not incorrect notation given the context of the article. It's been recorded that way in sports for decades, who are we to change it now? Ryan2845 (talk) 23:36, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

text: ESPN is a reliable source for this matter so we can follow those bunch of jocks who can't add. –Howard the Duck 08:53, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Win %? 

message: In the conference record section, if we're gonna give Morehead credit for winning the opening round we got to mention SWAC as going 0-1. I tried this but it seems I'm no longer able to work tables... Redwolf24 (talk) 23:38, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Already covered: "The Big South, Big West, MVC, Southern, SWAC all went 0-1." —C.Fred (talk) 23:56, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  SWAC 

message: * User:B said: "Don't assume the reader is a 2009 American". If the readers are not 2009 Americans, can we assume that they know that "North Carolina" is a basketball team that can win the national championship and that a president's comment is relevant to this article of an American college basketball tournament?  :) Ucla90024 (talk) 15:44, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: We can assume that they read the rest of the article and have the context about North Carolina. More context may be useful if he's the first president to make picks this way. —C.Fred (talk) 16:24, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: 2009 American

message: I'm removing the records in the bracket, because they're not really necessary, and they exist in the list of qualified teams earlier in the page, so it's not as if any information is being removed from the page.  More importantly, though, with some teams playing with long names, the presence of records causes some formatting nightmares.  --fuzzy510 (talk) 18:44, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The information is easily-enough accessed, Ucla. It's redundant and cumbersome to list in the bracket. —C.Fred (talk) 15:46, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Records in bracket 

message: Can't we use this form instead: "Dayton, Ohio"? –Howard the Duck 04:48, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I completely agree - I was actually coming here to make that same discussion point.  I'll flip them now, and if anybody has any serious concerns, we can change it back.  --fuzzy510 (talk) 09:15, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we use the full state names? They won't wrap anyway, at least on my monitor (the resolution is pretty high anyway). –Howard the Duck 14:48, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

text: We can always change 2008's. –Howard the Duck 03:39, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That, and 2008's is the exception, not the rule.  2007 and prior do not have the arena listed. --fuzzy510 (talk) 04:05, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: So wait, arenas are listed at the bracket only at 2008 and 2009? I'd prefer my original proposal above, or using the state abbreviations; no one really remembers the arena but the city they played at in the long run. The arena name is listed elsewhere anyway. –Howard the Duck 04:10, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The arena links are more useful than the city links.  I personally like showing the arena names. Oren0 (talk) 04:30, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arenas in bracket 

message: Anyone want to do summaries like the 2008 article has.--Levineps (talk) 20:26, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  summaries 

message: In Australia theres a broadcast on Channel ONE 58.6.84.91 (talk) 12:36, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Added. Thanks. –Howard the Duck 04:35, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  International Broadcasts

message: Any reason why the championship game is done on a weekday unlike most other sporting competitions (some are Saturday but most are Sundays). –Howard the Duck 05:49, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monday? 

message: I have no objections to these being in the article, but in their current setup, they were being aligned with the wrong regional and were more confusing than anything else as a result.  If we can hold off on adding them until we can figure how to make them look right, I think that'd be best.  --fuzzy510 (talk) 00:47, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: So? I fixed the regional, that was an error on my part. I was going to expand the Elite 8 descriptions very soon. Chill, man. ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)</span>~ 
NOVA NATION 00:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm perfectly fine, thanks.  The fact, though, is that they're more confusing right now than helpful, because they line up with the wrong games.  --fuzzy510 (talk) 00:54, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: They used to. I fixed them. It was not hard. ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)</span>~ 
NOVA NATION 00:56, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linescore tables 

message: Isn't "blew out" too subjective?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.129.251.17 (talk) 17:25, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Language