Talk:Tennis Masters Series singles records and statistics

Recent edits on the masters stats

Hi Qwerty

I've just noticed you made a couple of edits on the masters stats page after our last discussion, let's go one by one

1. You replaced the diamond with the spade, because it's "daltonist-friendlier". I don't agree with your reasoning here and I still think the diamond was the better option but fine, I can leave it as it is.

2. You made the bolded figures underlined as well. It's not the first time you do it and I haven't ever understood why you keep doing it. Boldface and underlining are two different attributes which are used to indicate two different kind of info so please keep the figures just bolded with no underlining, boldface is clear to see and read whether on desktop or mobile. Also, you keep underlining the figures but not the names of the active players even when the note says "Active players and records are denoted in bold"!

3. You replaced
with plainlist template which made the sourcecode a bit messy but if
really creates a pause in screen readers then I can understand.

4. You replaced "List of champions" with "Most titles won by player" and while I agree that "Most titles won by player" is a better header title than "Most titles won", I still prefer List of champions for this kind of charts and it goes well with the other wikipedia lists we have. If it's that important to you, you can start a discussion on the Wikiproject tennis, either we title them List of champions on all pages or replace them with Most titles won by player everywhere. ForzaUV (talk) 19:25, Today (UTC+1)

Hey, there, @ForzaUV. It's good to have you back. How you've been?

Back to the topic at hand:

1. I checked the WCAG AA level ratio for the diamond compared to the background color and then the spade color to the background color of the legend box. The latter had a higher contrast, so I went with that, so it is, in my words, "daltonist-friendlier", i.e. complies with the WCAG more. If you wish to revert back to diamond, be my guest. I am not gonna nitpick.

2. I have been underlining the numbers so they I stood out more. Admittedly, I have never underlined the currently active players as stated in the footnote, and as you have probably noticed, applied this across all 4 articles. We can either underline and bold both titles records and active players or omit the underlining. This means across all 4 to keep it universal. Your call.

3. {{Plainlist}} first caught my attention when I was making my first draw pages some time last year, having later realized
was causing breaks.

We should really keep the usage of
to a minimum across all Wikipedia for screen readers, but most editors are lazy and it's easier for them to use break line (also a cleaner look), instead of plainlist. Yes, it's messier. True. But it just takes time getting used to. The same way we have scope, and other related scr. read.-friendly code, we implement in tables...

I have been planning to start a discussion on said topic on WP:TENNIS. I guess this is as good as time as any.

4. Krmohan had changed the title to "Most titles won" to have it unified across all 4 Masters/WTA 1000-related articles. So, I added 'by player', to the title to keep it within the section's scope (which you and I have different opinions on). To prevent another unwanted yo-yo edit warring over the same section over and over again, I agreed with him and left it at that.

Since you insist on having the "List of champions" title, since it's always' been the case, I will fire up a discussion on the project's talk page. Qwerty284651 (talk) 23:37, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Discussion started. Qwerty284651 (talk) 23:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

The N/A's

@Qwerty284651 I had to restore the older N/A's because the dark N/A's looked obtrusive next to the figures in the table. The focus inside those cells should be on the # of titles not the N/A's so I think the lighter N/A's is a good compromise for the dark N/A's and the two unnecessary keys added by Krmohan. Are you good with that? ForzaUV (talk) 20:56, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

@ForzaUV, I have to disagree, unfortunately, because the font color to background color just doesn't meet WCAG AA standards, using {{N/A}} meets that criteria. I have applied this across all articles, I've come across. See relevant discussion on Tennis Project's talk page. Qwerty284651 (talk) 22:21, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

@ForzaUV, The keys were added long back as per inputs. This was subsequently seen by all others and rearranged by Qwerty284651 also beautifully. I do think it is necessary to explain with keys about the surfaces and events properly for the readers. Normally, we indicate with some key if it is not applicable and with '0' if the event is not won. Hence, it is better to indicate...Cheers.. Krmohan (talk) 04:32, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

I am a bit against the addition of the 2 legends for not played/not won tournaments, since it is self-indicative from the table itself. I moved the 2 legends to the far most right, so they don't mix with the surface legends. But I am inclined for their removal.

P.S. We know clay is outdoors. There is only 1 type of clay events are played and defunct is obvious and clear as day, adding "events" is redundant. Qwerty284651 (talk) 19:59, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Just kept the surfaces and events in two seperate lines and to maintain width. But your order and wording is fine. Ideally keys would not be necessary if directly indicated '0' for no titles and 'X' for not applicable. But keys have got significance in player's career in this table... Krmohan (talk) 01:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Hmm.. but where is it said that it HAS TO meet the WCAG AA? I always use a tool recommended by MOS to check if everything looks right for people who are colorbline https://colororacle.org/ and I didn't notice an issue with the how it was implemented. I still think the lighter N/A is the way to go as the lighter shade is also used in player's charts with NH/NMS etc and there was never an issue with them. It's in the tennis project guidelines. You can check the tool I linked and give it a try. ForzaUV (talk) 05:22, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

@Fyunck(click) and Wolbo:, do you think we should have lighter versions of N/A, NH/NMS or not? Do the tennis project's guidelines allow for non-WCAG compatible text to background contrast ratio for players' performance timelines? I otherwise disagree, but what're your thoughts on the matter? Qwerty284651 (talk) 13:25, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

On first recollection, the performance timelines passed ALL accessibility issues when we made them, and though some of accessibility changed through the years, the timelines passed everything mandatory. Some items are just suggestions and we have to balance those with sight issues and those with no sight issues. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:41, 22 January 2023 (UTC)