Template talk:Draw key

Template-protected edit request on 29 December 2024

Addition of a "NG" entry type/label to indicate players that have entered tournaments thanks to the ATP's [Gen Accelerator program]. PurpleCoffinMan (talk) 04:40, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Apologies, I mean the Next Gen Accelerator Program PurpleCoffinMan (talk) 04:41, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Have players started to use this as an entry method yet? I don't see any in the 1st week of the new season. Iffy★Chat -- 15:17, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

PurpleCoffinMan, please edit the template's sandbox to show where this new link should go. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Done PurpleCoffinMan (talk) 09:28, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, players have used it to enter tournaments since the start of 2024. Notable examples this year include Learner Tien, who used the program to enter the 2025 Hong Kong Open. PurpleCoffinMan (talk) 09:25, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

To expand, players use this program to enter events at ATP 250 level if they are ranked inside the top 250, and ATP 125 or below if they are ranked inside the top 350 of the world. So far this year, Learner Tien used it to enter Hong Kong, and Martin Landaluce used it to enter the Canberra Challenger. PurpleCoffinMan (talk) 09:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

This is also only for players aged 20 and below. PurpleCoffinMan (talk) 09:31, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Last year, Luca Van Assche used the program to enter Brisbane, Shang Juncheng used his to enter Delray Beach, Jakub Menšik used his to enter Doha, Henrique Rocha used it to enter Båstad, and Coleman Wong used it to enter Almaty PurpleCoffinMan (talk) 09:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't know how to edit these but be aware I edited these wrong, it should be Jakub Menšík using his ranking to enter Doha PurpleCoffinMan (talk) 09:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

So these abbreviations keep being added, but then aren’t used in those draws. What’s the point of this excercise then? Tvx1 16:59, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

@Tvx1: They are used quite frequently in Challenger draws: for example, 2026 Little Rock Challenger – Singles, where both the NG and CO options are used. I don't think the annotations are used that often on the main tour. Adamtt9 (talk) 21:51, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

None of the articles that were mentioned in this discussion that allegedly needed them actually use them. That's way I posted my comment. Tvx1 22:54, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

 Done – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Edit request 1 January 2025

Description of suggested change: a JA section for a Junior Accelerator Programme entrant, a programme that has been used to enter players in ATP 50 and 75 challengers since the beginning of 2023, and a CA section for a College Accelerator Programme entrant, which was launched in September 2023

Diff:

−

===Key=== <div class="div-col " style="column-width: 25em;"> * Q = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Qualifier|Qualifier]] * WC = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Wild Card|Wild card]] * LL = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Lucky Loser|Lucky loser]] * Alt = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Alternate|Alternate]] * SE = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Special Exempt|Special exempt]] * PR = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Protected Ranking|Protected ranking]] * ITF = [[Glossary of tennis terms#ITF|ITF entry]] * JE = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Junior exempt|Junior exempt]] * w/o = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Walkover|Walkover]] * r = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Retirement|Retired]] * d = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Default|Defaulted]] * SR = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Special ranking|Special ranking]] * NG = [[Next Gen ATP Finals#History|Next Gen Accelerator Program entrant]] </div>

+

===Key=== <div class="div-col " style="column-width: 25em;"> * Q = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Qualifier|Qualifier]] * WC = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Wild Card|Wild card]] * LL = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Lucky Loser|Lucky loser]] * Alt = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Alternate|Alternate]] * SE = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Special Exempt|Special exempt]] * PR = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Protected Ranking|Protected ranking]] * ITF = [[Glossary of tennis terms#ITF|ITF entry]] * JE = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Junior exempt|Junior exempt]] * w/o = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Walkover|Walkover]] * r = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Retirement|Retired]] * d = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Default|Defaulted]] * SR = [[Glossary of tennis terms#Special ranking|Special ranking]] * NG = [[Next Gen ATP Finals#History|Next Gen Accelerator Program entrant]] * JA = Junior Accelerator Programme Entrant* CA = College Accelerator Programme Entrant</div>

PurpleCoffinMan (talk) 07:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

• I just want to point out that I have never seen NG, JA, or CA used in an official draw. Players have entered the tournament using these different programs but those notations never show up. Adamtt9 (talk) 13:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

  You're right. Please remove the Next Gen Accelerator programme listed entrant notation.

  I apologise for the disruptive editing. I won't make any changes to pages at this scale again. PurpleCoffinMan (talk) 13:46, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Never say never, editor PurpleCoffinMan. If mistakes were bees, then I'd be covered with them. We all make mistakes, we all learn from them and move on. Anyway, I'm confused as hell – do you want to withdraw this request and delete the NG? What about the usages you gave for the NG in [the previous section]? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 22:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

I did give them, but Adamtt9 is right, it does have uses but the official draw doesn't use them. It's possible that the draws will use them in the future, but right now, they're not being used. PurpleCoffinMan (talk) 12:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Okaythen, editor PurpleCoffinMan, I've disabled the edit-request template, and feel free to reopen if and when you think these additions can be revisited. Thank you for your time and trouble! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 17:05, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

• I just wanted to reintroduce this conversation. It seems that the ATP has finally began using the Junior Accelerator Programme Entrant notation in the official draws, but the players are labelled as JR instead of JA. Would it possible to add just that piece to the key? Here is an example of it being used in a draw in one of the Challenger tournaments. Adamtt9 (talk) 11:17, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

  It has supposedly replaced the junior exempt program according to this which is mentioned earlier in the key. Adamtt9 (talk) 11:22, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

  They have also began using the College Accelerator Programme but players are labelled CO, not CA. And the NG spot is now used as well; it was temporarily added to the key before being removed but it can be reinstated. Adamtt9 (talk) 17:02, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

  If it's replacing the junior exempt program, then it would be easier for us to just use JE and rename the key to "Junior entry", most readers won't care about the details of the program and this will help future-proof the template. Iffy★Chat -- 17:34, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

  The only issue with that is that the official draw is using the "JR" notation instead of "JE". I think they both will have to appear on the key. Adamtt9 (talk) 17:38, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@PurpleCoffinMan and Adamtt9: Is there a specific order for them, or does the current sandbox look good enough? Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 10:48, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

I just added a link describing one of the programs a little more. But I think the order is just fine like that. Thanks. Adamtt9 (talk) 11:38, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

@Adamtt9:  Done. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 14:33, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

References

Template-protected edit request on 10 October 2025

Is there some way to tweak the attribute of this template so it is not nested as a separate header? When we have something like 2025 WTA 1000 tournaments it seems silly to have the key on the same level header as the tournaments. We need the key but sometimes not the header "===Key===". That way we could do it more like this edit if we choose. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:43, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

The subheader is changed to a bold "Key" in the sandbox. Is that what you want, editor Fyunck(click)? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 02:47, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

PS. Usage of a semicolon in that way is prohibited by H:DL. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 02:51, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

I just did it with a semicolon kinda quickly. Bold like that without a header is exactly what I was aiming for. But perhaps some might like it the way it is now for some things with a header (though I can't imagine why off the top of my head). Most keys we use for tennis items do not come with a built in header, they would go under a header like you created in the sandbox. So perhaps something like {{draw key|bold}} or {{drawkey|noheader}}? Otherwise I could simply make a separate template, but it seems an extra parameter would be best. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:38, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

The way you did it in the sandbox seems reasonable, although having a parameter like |header=no (using {{yesno-yes}}) could be more intuitive and consistent with how it is usually done in templates. Does this work for both of you? Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:45, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps you do know a better way, editor Chaotic Enby? The problem I'm having is that when I place the subheader within an #if or #ifeq function, I don't see an [ edit ] link for the subheader. I've made test cases on the testcases page and in my sandbox. In all cases while the subheader appears in the ToC, it does not have an [ edit ] link. Perhaps you should take this one over? I would appreciate it very much. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 11:23, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

This appears to be a known issue (cf. Help:Section#Sections within parser functions) although the documentation isn't up to date... Not sure how to fix this one – I would say the "edit" link isn't a priority as the template is template-protected, but it would still be a big visual change, so I prefer additional eyes on the issue.

Even the very cheap trick of adding <div style="display:none;"> in the parser function (instead of the header itself) doesn't seem to work correctly without spurious linebreaks, and wouldn't be an ideal solution even if that wasn't the case. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:44, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

True this. We really have no need for an edit link on the key when placed in an article. It's protected and edits could be requested at the template itself, not the article. Sort of like what we do at the far more used template "Performance key" we use at every single bio like at Roger Federer. It has no edit feature as it's added with the performance table. Why is this template created with an automatic level two header? I figured with an added parameter none would be affected unless we actually added the parameter. I could however bring this up at WikiProject Tennis to see if everyone wanted to eliminate the header attribute completely. I thought this would be easier at first and not require a future full project rfc. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:46, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

The added parameter is fine, but, if you want to make it the default (which does make sense), bringing it up on the WikiProject works with me! Regarding the header, {{Performance key}} uses a wikitable header, which we can't use here as, well, we don't have a table (this one instead uses {{div col}}). The best equivalent would be '''a bolded pseudohead''', which is MOS-compatible and has a similar effect besides the semantic markup. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 04:58, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Ok, I asked at Tennis Project and also pointed them to this discussion. Perhaps everyone will want the change with no header and we can do it plain and simple. We can revisit in a week to see what the fishing pole reeled in. Cheers. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:17, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm temporarily marking the edit request as answered so it doesn't show up in the queue – we can reopen it with a more specific idea in mind depending on the WikiProject's input. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 07:42, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

@Fyunck(click), can't you just substitute the template and change the == with '''? 8rz (talk) 13:40, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

It's a protected template so no, it has to be okayed. And this template is used as is with === on thousands of articles so changing it to bold without tennis community input is wrong. Maybe there was a reason they wanted the key wrapped in a heading that I can't think of and that's why I thought a simple parameter addition might work. But in discussing it here, and without me being able to think of a reason why it should be in a subheading, I thought it best to bring it up at WikiProject Tennis to see if anyone is averse to changing it to bold. That way everyone is aware of the proposal. Fyunck(click) (talk) 17:54, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

@Fyunck(click), I meant {{subst:Draw key}} on a live page and then replace the === in the substituted template code with ''', like so.

You edit the whole page in source to be able to substitute it. Clicking on the edit on the template's level-2 header will only bring you to its protected source page, which is not what you want. 8rz (talk) 18:26, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

I know I can do that, but for the future I thought it would be much easier to fix the coding at it's source. Otherwise every time we add the template we have to re-edit the page to fix the header issue. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:00, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Drawing inspiration from the German Wiki, we could convert it into a module -> template and call the template from there (example). Since it's on smaller pages, it shouldn't use a lot of data to exceed WP:PEIS. 8rz (talk) 16:41, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

• Since the query has been sitting at WikiProject Tennis for over two weeks with a yes and zero negatives I assume we are good to change the template from ===Key=== to Key as in this templates' sandbox. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:41, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

 Done Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:57, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Yay. 8rz (talk) 22:59, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Making the elements optional.

Could it be possible to make the inclusion of the different abbreviations optional? The amount of abbreviations in this template has really spiralled and as a result many draw articles now include abbreviations in the key that are not even used in them at all. I think it would be better if the template were changed so you can simply define in the parameter which abbreviations are displayed and then only those are displayed in the relevant aryicle. Tvx1 15:08, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please detail the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:35, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

I want all the elements included in this template to be optional, so that they don’t automatically appear in all articles the template is used in. I don’t understand how I can explain that more clearly.Tvx1 21:28, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

I understand what you want, but this is just a key for draw sections. It is expected to show all the possible abbreviations that can be utilized. I look at, for example, 2005 US Open – Women's singles#Draw, and I do not see a problem. It's a small key relative to the tables that use the abbreviations. You seem to want to make editors list just the abbreviations that are used in a given article. That would not only make this template far more complicated than it has to be, it would also over-complicate the way editors would have to use this template. I'm so sorry, but I don't see this edit request as an improvement to this template. If you want to try to garner consensus for this, you are welcome to do so; however, please accomplish that before you use the {{edit template-protected}} template again. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 01:49, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Not all tournaments use every abbreviation that is provided in this template. At present Wimbledon is ongoing and the its events use barely a quarter of the abbreviations in this template. This results in them articles having key that takes way too much space. Making this change is actually not that complicated and I would have applied it already if it weren’t protected.

The way editors would have to use it would actually not be complicated at all. The code placed in an article would be something like {{Draw key|abbreviations=PR, Alt, WC, Q, w/o, d, ret}. Tvx1 16:45, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Well, if you'll [sandbox] the edits, I'll have a look at them; however, What you're calling "not be complicated at all" I'm afraid I call "more complicated than editors should have to deal with". P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 18:01, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Making them optional would be a train wreck of complications for the average editor. However what if we do something like is done with the Performance key template? With that we have a regular version but also a short version. The following rarely get used:

• ITF = ITF entry
• PR = Protected ranking (maybe)
• SR = Special ranking
• SE = Special exempt
• JE = Junior exempt
• JR = Junior Accelerator Programme entrant
• CO = College Accelerator Programme entrant
• NG = Next Gen Accelerator Program entrant

Maybe protected ranking gets used more than the other seven (since players do get injured and come back with it), but we could make a short=yes option that excludes these fairly rare ones. Or, probably more in line with what Tvx1 would want... have {{Draw key}} as just the basics and have {{Draw key|long=yes}} include everything. If it was that way I might keep PR in the standard key. The only problem with doing it the latter way is it would change all the templates that we now have without knowing if they need "long" added. But I would guess 95% of our draws only need the short version. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:34, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

See Template:Draw key/testcases – can we get your opinion about this, editor Tvx1? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 19:18, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm going to post this at WikiProject tennis talk just in case someone has an opinion. If all we do is add a "short" parameter I can barely see a reason to mention it except maybe someone will want different parameters in short and long. Your test examples look nice a clear to me so thanks for doing that.Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:10, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Coming in from the WikiProject page, I just wanted to voice my support specifically for the option shown at Template:Draw key/testcases, where the default draw key template remains as is and editors can just add the "short" parameter if the other abbreviations aren't used in the draw. It would be easier for editors not familiar with this conversation to at least keep the default the same instead of shortening the default template and then having to search through the thousands of instances where the draw key template has been used previously and adding a "long" parameter for the cases where other abbreviations were used. Just my two cents. Adamtt9 (talk) 21:48, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

There are things like AWB or bots that can be used if a high volume of similar edits need to be performed. Tvx1 22:56, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Or JWB. 8rz (talk) 23:27, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

My problem is that by limiting the variations to just two options, we will still be left with many articles were abbreviations are displayed within the keys that aren't relevant to those articles at all. At the very least those rare abbreviations (SE, JE, JR, CO, NG and ITF) should be made optional. ITF is as far as I know only used for the Olympics, which is one tournament every four years. Ridiculous to have that in the key for every single draw. Likewise these special entry keys that are only used for challengers should not be in the articles of main tour events. Can anyone give an example of an event that used ALL of the abbreviations in this template?

Even the ones in the listed in the short version are rarely all used simultanuously. Looking at the Men's doubles draw of the ongoing Wimbledon Championships, it actually uses just four of these codes: WC, PR, ALT and w/o (there are no qualifiers for the doubles events and as a consequence no lucky losers either). I really don't understand why we need to impose a key with sixteen codes then? With the technologies that exist on Wikipedia in 2026 we can do a better service to our readers.

On a side note, PR and SR are used on an equal frequency. They are simply the ATP and WTA's respective equivalents for the same thing. Tvx1 23:16, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

It never bothered me to have unused parameters in a key. In most tennis legend tables there are some that aren't used by the player or tournament... it's always been like that. Now you made a good point that when half the key parameters are almost never used by most events, then it seems we need a cut-down version. That's why I asked at the project so that editors can come to an agreement on what to include for the vast majority of draws, and what to include in the instances where we have anomalies. It sounds like some are used exclusively in Challenger events.... so maybe we also need a {{Draw key|challenger}}?. Just so we have the right key for the right draw. I think we'll figure it out here if we put our heads together. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:36, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

I did some research on how many articles use {{draw key}} with each individual term: Total uses: 21128

• Q = Qualifier (20520)

• WC = Wild card (17272)

• LL = Lucky loser (5063)

• Alt = Alternate (4395)

• PR = Protected ranking (3149)

• SE = Special exempt (1081)

• w/o = Walkover (536)

• r = Retired (couldn't figure out how to set up the search query)

• d = Defaulted (same reason as above)

Least used:

• ITF = ITF entry (445)

• SR = Special ranking (134)

• JE = Junior exempt (116)

• NG = Next Gen Accelerator Program entrant (93)

• JR = Junior Accelerator Programme entrant (65)

• CO = College Accelerator Programme entrant (22)

With the above finding, I propose, we make the least used abbreviations: ITF, SR, JE, NG, JR, CO optional, and then have them applied as a single =long param or individual params, one for each term. The replacement can be done, as Tvx said, via AWB or bots. 8rz (talk) 00:46, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

It surprises me that SR has so little use. I can only imagine that most draws of the WTA events incorrectly use PR, which actually is an ATP code. But that is really a seperate issue to resolve.

Having investigated the search results a bit more, they appear to confirm that they Q and LL appear to be only used for singles events. So I think we should make a disctinction between singles and doubles. Tvx1 01:48, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Q and LL appear to be only used for singles events Not true. LL is used on 556/5063 doubles pages and Q on 10173/20520 doubles pages (50%). 8rz (talk) 02:23, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

LL is only used in a fraction of them though. And your search for Q turned out a lot of false positives through the word Quarterfinals.Tvx1 03:03, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Single-word search queries are false positives but I still think that we should focus on making the lesser used ones optional and not focus on distinguishing between singles and doubles. 8rz (talk) 12:09, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

There is no reason to focus

one one thing, when we can easily achieve both. Tvx1 12:33, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

I still feel that optional is making it too messy for editors. A short and long chart is all that's really needed here. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:39, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Agreed with Fyunck. A lot of the editors who are editing these draw articles are temp accounts or editors that are not part of the WikiProject and have no idea that this discussion is even happening. We don't need to make it potentially confusing. In this hypothetical, when someone withdraws from a tournament or let's say retires from a match, we expect editors to not only input the scores but also go back to the draw key template and edit it to activate the specific abbreviation they just added; I don't see many editors doing that. Just create a shorter version of the key that can be used for the main ATP/WTA tournaments that don't use NG, CO, JR, etc. that the Challengers use. Adamtt9 (talk) 19:03, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

you want all the terms be displayed by default and then the rare ones suppressed via a parameter or have the rare hidden by default and then invoked via a parameter? 8rz (talk) 22:27, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

All terms should be displayed by default with an option for a shorter key, either by adding a parameter or by creating a completely new template altogether. Adamtt9 (talk) 23:07, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

All terms should be displayed by default with an option for a shorter key  Done. See Template:Draw key/sandbox and Template:Draw key/testcases#Optional parameters. Anything else? 8rz (talk) 23:33, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

I think it should be the other way round. Only the basic terms should be displayed by default and the rare ones should be invoked by a paramater in the little articles that use them. Also SE should not be a default parameter, but SR should be since that is the WTA’s version of PR. In fact PR and SR could be merged into one line. Tvx1 12:08, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

I propose you make the listed changes in the sandbox so others can see the intended design. 8rz (talk) 17:51, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

We can easily have a notice advertising this discussion added to the template, which will display in all the articles that use it.

And who says that it is the responsibility of the drive-by editors to adjust the key? Those articles aren’t generally created by those drive by editors but by the regular ones and the creators are the ones who add the template.

I really think you all overestimate how complicated this would be and underestimate the skills of our editors. It would actually still remain a very simple template to use. Tvx1 12:17, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

We can easily have a notice advertising this discussion added to the template, which will display in all the articles that use it. That equates to 20000+ articles with the notice about the discussion, which, frankly, would be overkill. It's not even a TfD.

I really think you all overestimate how complicated this would be and underestimate the skills of our editors. Whilst I agree that it is a rather small addition to the template's code. Any extra step for regular and advanced editors is a detterent, i.e. less likely they would be aware of the change, as well as use said parameter(s). 8rz (talk) 17:56, 8 July 2026 (UTC)