Talk:2019 WBSC Premier12

Deletion of results.

An editor deleted the results reflected I. Text here. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2019_WBSC_Premier12&diff=924932748&oldid=924929740

His reason? He deleted the part of the title referencing results. And then wrote “this is about format, not results.”

The logic there is perhaps somewhat scant. There is zero reason it should not reflect results.

He reader should be aided by an entry that in the text (not just by examining a chart) lets him know what teams are in the succeeding round. Nothing in the editor’s deletion satisfactorily argues for why such a deletion is required, let alone helpful. --2600:1017:B80A:B6C7:609D:7599:E207:2D02 (talk) 01:34, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

A format section is for the format. Results are in the results section. There is zero reason it should reflect results. Is that easy. Nobody besides you looks in the format section for results.--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 09:34, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Group C

If Cuba wins, Cuba qualifies for the 2nd round (Super Round) (obvious :-).

If Cuba loses, there is a 3-way-tie decided by TQB:

• Aus 0.067
• Can 0.046
• Cuba -0.105

Aus will qualify.
--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 10:44, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Apologies for the earlier edit; I mistakenly calculated the TQB for AUS and CAN based on all group games, rather than just the games between the teams that would be tied. Edin75 (talk) 11:12, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Everything OK  :-) --Anaxagoras13 (talk) 11:15, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Not redundant

This deletion is not appropriate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2019_WBSC_Premier12&diff=925310259&oldid=925310147

The reason given was it is “redundant.”

True, it is also reflected in part in the lede. But the lede is meant to be redundant of the most material parts of the text below the lede. See Wp:lede.

The deletion should be restored. --2604:2000:E010:1100:9035:9CA8:7C3E:BA58 (talk) 08:36, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

This is absolut redundant. You see this information in the tables!--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 09:38, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

But I know, you like redundant information: [1]. lol--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 10:26, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Scores

Please review previous international baseball (and really any other team sport) tournaments to see how scores are listed. There should be no space in between the dashes as this violates WP:MOS. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:29, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

There is no problem using spaces around the dashes. It looks more comfortable for readers.--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 09:36, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

"Please review previous international baseball (and really any other team sport)" that is very funny, because if you do that, you will find, that often spaces are used around dashes, very often!--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 08:12, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Teams 7-12

Do we have a source yet reflecting the order of teams 7-12? As they have been eliminated already, it should be something we can know. And then reflect. --2604:2000:E010:1100:3049:48B7:5679:B584 (talk) 04:49, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

As long as there is no official source we can't do anything about it. But wikipedia is always great in doing Original Research in such things. In the 2015 edition, according to WBSC Italy is tied 11th, but in wikipedia Italy is 12th. That about following official sources.--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 10:35, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Edit request Nov 15, 2019

Change Mexico 3 wins 1 losses to Mexico 3 wins 2 losses. Source: [2]--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 13:38, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Edit request Nov 15, 2019

Change South Korea 2 wins 1 loss to South Korea 3 wins 1 loss. Source: [3]--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 13:38, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Controversies section

This seems weak. I vote for deleting it as not wp-worthy. --2604:2000:E010:1100:99C3:702B:CBF3:EB80 (talk) 18:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)