Talk:2017 Damallsvenskan

	This article 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Women's association football portal This article is supported by the Women's football / soccer task force.

Football: Sweden / Season / Women's football Low‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Swedish football task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the season article task force.
	Women's association football portal This article is supported by the women's football task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Sweden Low‑importance

	Sweden portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

List limitations[edit]

Is there any certain rule that lists must not exceed 10 ranks? I made a few new entries to the highest attendances a while ago only to see the lower ones removed later. I think that was unnecessary. I know there must be some sort of limit so that lists don't flood an article, but my common sense think that that can be decided from case to case. In case a list really gets too long it can simply have it's own article. But in this case, when information is rather scarce anyway and the whole article is short, I think any relevant information should stay.

Particularly I think the full list of top scorers should be listed since only those who have made 4 or more goals are officially listed anyway, so there is a "natural" limit to it. In this particular case it means just one more name.

To me there is no such thing as 'too much information', you just divide and sort. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mango från yttre rymden (talk • contribs) 21:26, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, it turns out Soccerway doesn't count all names with a certain amount of goals but a certain amount of names. Here is the complete list. And well, I can agree with that even also just counting down to 4 goals will be a little longer list than most probably are interested in. There are already 14 names. But I still think a few more entries on the highest attendances list wouldn't hurt. --Mango från yttre rymden (talk) 23:54, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So I've given this some thought, and I think 15-20 entries in a list is ideal generally. 10 does not give the reader enough information to paint a good picture of what the overall situation looks like. There might be mostly outliars. 15-20 gives you enough information to get a good image of the whole situation while still being small enough to not dominate an article, even small ones. Also people are very unlikely to dig out more information in a foreign language. 20 entries would in this case also mean pretty much all games with at least 1000 spectators, which also is a good reference point in my opinion, as the average attendance for Damallsvenskan usually is around 850-900. Therefore I think the current number of 16 entries in the highest attendances list should at least be kept. --Mango från yttre rymden (talk) 22:13, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There's no rule that a list can't exceed 10 ranks, no, but what exactly is the point of listing more? Aside from the fact that 10 are more than adequate – if readers want to know more about the Damallsvenskan attendance, "the overall situation" if you will, they can visit the federation's website – the point of the "highest attendance" list is also not to "paint a good picture of what the overall situation looks like" – that's what the average home attendance table is for. The "highest attendance" list is for the records. And listing more than 10 is simply excessive and unnecessary. That's not about "ruining your work", that's just common sense. Additionally I'm fairly certain that this article's visitors don't primarily come for the attendance section, so this just seems like you're trying to start an argument on a non-existent ground. Cotillards (talk) 17:19, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]