![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
|
There are still two rounds left in Réunion's qualifcation rounds, but only one left before the 7th round. This pdf shows the final as being before the 7th round. The matches listed in the First Round on this wiki page are listed as a "preliminary" round in the calendar I linked. Should we create a different subsection before the first round to fit all of Réunion's rounds in? Gricehead? -- Nobreadsticks ( talk) 08:45, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
So, I started the Martinique sections, and it appears that there are two different groups and the teams will never play each other if they are in different groups. Should I somehow show the difference between Group A and Group B in the article, or is it not that big of a deal? -- Nobreadsticks ( talk) 20:35, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi Nobreadsticks. I took the fact that both teams qualified from the 6th round from French wikipedia [1] although admittedly this is unreferenced. It is also the most logical explanation (two teams qualified last year, and there we would be one team short in the 7th round otherwise).
The situation will be clarified by the Overseas component of the 7th round draw, which is today at 16:30 French local time (14:30 UTC).
A note ahead of the fixture in the 6th round section would be a sufficient explanation once verified. Cheers, Gricehead ( talk) 08:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
This page is 690,244 bytes long, which is far too big. What's the best way to subdivide it? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:37, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
It's honestly quite daunting to split this article by region, even when using the amalgamated regions created from the 2016 reforms, which comes to about 60 articles for the three of these articles above 600,000 bytes. I think in the meantime at least, we can simply split the first round off from these articles given that the first round takes up almost half of the article and is also the least important round. If we want to split it further we can come back to it later, and it would be better to split them regionally than to split every round. Onetwothreeip ( talk) 04:37, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
The article is now down to 421,675 bytes - thank you - but that's still far too big. What more can be done? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:04, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
|
There are still two rounds left in Réunion's qualifcation rounds, but only one left before the 7th round. This pdf shows the final as being before the 7th round. The matches listed in the First Round on this wiki page are listed as a "preliminary" round in the calendar I linked. Should we create a different subsection before the first round to fit all of Réunion's rounds in? Gricehead? -- Nobreadsticks ( talk) 08:45, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
So, I started the Martinique sections, and it appears that there are two different groups and the teams will never play each other if they are in different groups. Should I somehow show the difference between Group A and Group B in the article, or is it not that big of a deal? -- Nobreadsticks ( talk) 20:35, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi Nobreadsticks. I took the fact that both teams qualified from the 6th round from French wikipedia [1] although admittedly this is unreferenced. It is also the most logical explanation (two teams qualified last year, and there we would be one team short in the 7th round otherwise).
The situation will be clarified by the Overseas component of the 7th round draw, which is today at 16:30 French local time (14:30 UTC).
A note ahead of the fixture in the 6th round section would be a sufficient explanation once verified. Cheers, Gricehead ( talk) 08:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
This page is 690,244 bytes long, which is far too big. What's the best way to subdivide it? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:37, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
It's honestly quite daunting to split this article by region, even when using the amalgamated regions created from the 2016 reforms, which comes to about 60 articles for the three of these articles above 600,000 bytes. I think in the meantime at least, we can simply split the first round off from these articles given that the first round takes up almost half of the article and is also the least important round. If we want to split it further we can come back to it later, and it would be better to split them regionally than to split every round. Onetwothreeip ( talk) 04:37, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
The article is now down to 421,675 bytes - thank you - but that's still far too big. What more can be done? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:04, 20 September 2019 (UTC)