From AcaDec Scores and Information Center
Jump to navigationJump to search

Question about colors[edit]

Just wondering if we need the second and fourth identifiers. Why not just use the first one (team that advances because of winning their region) and the third one (team that advances because their score was good enough). The "likely to advance" is speculation and will disappear in a couple weeks(if it shows up at all), and not advancing to state is implied by not being colored blue, yeah? - Adam 22:13, 19 January 2008 (PST)

KortEverettJackson 10:17, 20 January 2008 (PST) Repsonse[edit]

I kind of like the idea of being able to predict who advances, and I kinda like to have a color to mark non-advancing teams. Besides, even though the predictions would vanish, they would still be in the edit history for all to see. I'm just trying it out this year. -The main namespace is for scores, not speculation. gil 17:44, 23 January 2008 (PST)

Region VI[edit]

Is there a reason that region VI doesn't appear on the page at all?

  • Looks like someone went edit-happy with Region VII and in the process made VI disappear. Magic!! Let me put it back.Collegebookworm