![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Archives
| |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Since there is no internationally agreed upon definition of a level of dominance needed before a "dynasty" is/has taken place, any entry to this list must have a citation that verifies it is considered a dynasty, not just a citation verifing their success. If a citation does not exist calling their success a dynasty, it's precense on this list is WP:OR, as we are including it based on our intepretation of what does/does not constitute a dynasty, which is exactly why we end up having disagreements about what should and should not be included on this list. Most recently, see the discussions about the Kansas City Chiefs (resolved after the outcome of Superbowl LVIII) and the Golden State Warriors. With this in mind, over the coming days I will be going through and removing all the original research from this page, even if it means getting rid of most of it (which will probably happen as dynasties seem to be an almost exclusivly American concept). I just thought I would give this heads up now, so that when I remove half of the entries, my reasons are spelled out here in full rather than just a limited edit summary. SSSB ( talk) 06:54, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
I significantly reduced the size of the article. Thanks in advance for any feedback. Townlake ( talk) 05:04, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
If I may place my two cents. A similar discussion was held at Talk:Winning streak and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winning streak about how these types of articles become WP:INDISCRIMINATE with list-type articles. Ideally, the article in its current state ought to be renamed as suggested above, but if we would rather discuss the topic of a dynasty, then this article should be WP:TNTed, keeping the most notable dynasties. Conyo14 ( talk) 08:02, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
I would like to add my two cents and just say that while the concept of a dynasty may predominantly be a North American invention, North American do indeed watch international sports too. That it's a North American invention can be established in the article without erasing the bulk of the article.
I think the page as is has a lot of historical value to it that you can’t really find anywhere else in such a compact and concise structure. If people are going to remove it, then I think those same people need to also be willing to make not only a list of argued dynasties article, but also make an article for every single one of the individual dynasties listed. And that all should be finished before it’s removed on here. If not, keep it as is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.251.208.43 ( talk) 19:45, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Archives
| |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Since there is no internationally agreed upon definition of a level of dominance needed before a "dynasty" is/has taken place, any entry to this list must have a citation that verifies it is considered a dynasty, not just a citation verifing their success. If a citation does not exist calling their success a dynasty, it's precense on this list is WP:OR, as we are including it based on our intepretation of what does/does not constitute a dynasty, which is exactly why we end up having disagreements about what should and should not be included on this list. Most recently, see the discussions about the Kansas City Chiefs (resolved after the outcome of Superbowl LVIII) and the Golden State Warriors. With this in mind, over the coming days I will be going through and removing all the original research from this page, even if it means getting rid of most of it (which will probably happen as dynasties seem to be an almost exclusivly American concept). I just thought I would give this heads up now, so that when I remove half of the entries, my reasons are spelled out here in full rather than just a limited edit summary. SSSB ( talk) 06:54, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
I significantly reduced the size of the article. Thanks in advance for any feedback. Townlake ( talk) 05:04, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
If I may place my two cents. A similar discussion was held at Talk:Winning streak and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winning streak about how these types of articles become WP:INDISCRIMINATE with list-type articles. Ideally, the article in its current state ought to be renamed as suggested above, but if we would rather discuss the topic of a dynasty, then this article should be WP:TNTed, keeping the most notable dynasties. Conyo14 ( talk) 08:02, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
I would like to add my two cents and just say that while the concept of a dynasty may predominantly be a North American invention, North American do indeed watch international sports too. That it's a North American invention can be established in the article without erasing the bulk of the article.
I think the page as is has a lot of historical value to it that you can’t really find anywhere else in such a compact and concise structure. If people are going to remove it, then I think those same people need to also be willing to make not only a list of argued dynasties article, but also make an article for every single one of the individual dynasties listed. And that all should be finished before it’s removed on here. If not, keep it as is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.251.208.43 ( talk) 19:45, 29 June 2024 (UTC)