Template talk:2008 ANZ Championship ladder

2008 ANZ Championship ladder 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 articles

Women's sport

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Women's sport (and women in sports), a WikiProject which aims to improve coverage of women in sports on Wikipedia. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Women's sportWikipedia:WikiProject Women's sportTemplate:WikiProject Women's sportWomen's sport articles

Netball (inactive)

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Netball, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.NetballWikipedia:WikiProject NetballTemplate:WikiProject NetballNetball articles

Goal percentage statistics

Recently, the goal percentage (G%) statistics on the table have been twice changed to reflect the numbers from the ANZ Championship website, accurate to two decimal places. In theory, this seems logical enough, and normally I wouldn't have a problem with it. One problem is that the added decimal places distort the table formatting somewhat, but this can be easily fixed.

A larger problem is that in the case of the NSW Swifts, the goal percentage number given in the ANZ Championship website ladder is incorrect. This seems to stem from differing accounts of a Round 10 game between the Swifts and the Mystics. The final score, at the end of extra time, was 64–62 in favour of the Swifts (see TVNZ report) Some reports, including the ANZ Championship results page, incorrectly give the score as 63–62 (I say incorrectly because I remember watching the game and seeing the final score). The FOX Sports report can't seem to make up its mind, although the video in that report is telling: the final score shown on the broadcast is 64–62, but the news commentator seems to think it was a one-point victory for the Swifts. Using the latter score of 63–62, the final goal percentage stat for the Swifts is 111.35%, which is used in the ANZ Championship website ladder. The correct goal percentage stat, based on a score of 64–62, is 111.50%, which is used in the Wikipedia table, rounded to 112 (I've never considered decimal places as necessary for this statistic, especially when taking formatting into account; far more important is the points tally).

Perhaps the easiest thing to do is to change the Swifts' goal percentage stat. But if we do decide to fly in the face of WP:NOR for one team, then I see no problem using derived goal percentage data for the rest of them, which lies at the heart of the matter. Throughout the season, I've used derived data on Wikipedia purely for convenience, and conveniently enough they generally do match the figures on the ANZ Championship website. Derived goal percentage data are directly calculated from GF and GA stats, which are widely published; the formula for deriving goal percentage is widely known and used in netball (see your friendly local netball centre for more information; I even found a published source that shows how to calculate it!). In the case of the Swifts' goal percentage stat, I would persist with derived data, if only because I detest adding information that I know is wrong, even if it is published.

If we decide not to disregard WP:NOR (and for that matter WP:VERIFY), one's first instinct is to favour the published data. However, if we also take into account WP:QS (part of WP:VERIFY) the reliability of the ANZ Championship website ladder can be called into question. Having kept track of ANZ Championship statistics throughout the 2008 season, I've found this to be true of the ANZ Championship website ladder quite a few times, in addition to the aforementioned error. I suppose it could be argued that, since the only published source is not entirely reliable, the statistic should be removed from the Wikipedia table entirely. I may have to do so if this is confirmed as the most appropriate action, though I'd prefer to keep the derived (and rounded) goal percentage data. Comments welcomed. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 04:16, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]