Talk:2015 AFL draft

Australia: Australian rules football Low‑importance

	Australia portal 2015 AFL draft is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian rules football (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Use of Icons for National Draft

What are peoples thoughts on using icons for the clubs in the national draft. I think it is much easier to see where the picks lay, especially the clubs who have multiple first rounders. Thejoebloggsblog (talk) 08:31, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not necessary, the AFL club/drafted to column is enough for identification purposes, plus sorting gives the same info such as multiple first round picks. Flickerd (talk) 11:38, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rookie Upgrades

Why does this keep being deleted after the draft list? These players have all been announced as being elevated to their respective senior lists, their names won't be called out on draft night and it's consistent with the 2014 AFL Draft page — Preceding unsigned comment added by MGR9883 (talk • contribs) 11:33, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

Not entirely sure what's been done to the page, but in moving the picks around due to the bidding system the notes seem to have gone entirely out of whack. Jenks24 (talk) 12:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I worked on it now trying to make sense of the draft and fixing it up. Right now the original draft pick number is in brackets and the note refers to the original pick. Academy/f-s bids are bracketed as "(b)". Picks which I think were used for the bids or were passed I commented out and wrote in Capitals what I thought the case was (can be seen in the source). Regarding the points, I don't have a clue what's up with them so I left them attached to the original picks as they were before the draft. --SuperJew (talk) 18:18, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

IMO having two numbers creates confusion, I think it's something that will make sense in due time as this new draft system establishes itself, having the two numbers tries to make sense of it based on the old system. Plus it doesn't really make sense to me having someone like Ben McKay as 21 (17), at the end of the day he is the 21st selection in the draft and the number 17 becomes irrelevant. Plus it's not a distinction that has been made with any of the other draft lists [1], [2], [3], [4]. I think this note "For the first time, live bidding occurred during the draft for selections made under the father–son rule and from the northern state's development academies, whereby each draft selection is allocated a points value. Clubs nominating a player were forced to use their existing draft selections to match the points value of the pick used by the club bidding for the player" is enough for clarification, and having "academy player" and "father-son selection" in the notes column is enough. Like I said before, I think it's something that will make sense in due time and trying to make sense of it more than what is listed on other draft lists creates more confusion than clarification, it's not something that we want to over-complicate. In terms of the points, it was only relevant prior and within the draft for these academy and f/s selections, and I believe over-complicates it by listing it after the draft occurs, as they aren't relevant to non-academy and non-f/s selections, and there's no point having some selections with points and others without (and isn't listed in aforementioned links). As for the trades in the notes section, I'll go through them at the same time and compare to the pre-draft revision and try tidy it up a bit. Flickerd (talk) 07:03, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 2015 AFL draft. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:37, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]