College football Project‑class | |||||||
|
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
I am reviewing Notre Dame Fighting Irish football under Tyrone Willingham for Good Article status. I placed it on hold for a few minor changes. The nominator has been away from Wikipedia for the last nine days, so I am hoping that somebody from this project can help address my concerns. Any help would be appreciated. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan ( talk) 16:20, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
A user by the name of SportsMaster (formally called SportsMasterESPN) keeps moving LSU athletics related articles to articles with "Louisiana State" in their name. For example, he has moved this article from LSU Tigers football (which is the consensus reached naming standard for this article) to Louisiana State Tigers football (which is not the accepted standard). He has done this multiple times over the past 6 to 8 months and every time its been corrected. I have asked the user to stop this but he continues to do it. Louisiana is the only state in the union that begins with the letter L. Therefore, LSU is not ambiguous whereas as MSU or OSU would be ambiguous. (i.e. Ohio State, Oregon State, Oklahoma State). No one refers to the LSU athletics program as Louisiana State and even the official website is LSUSports.net. I am tired of having to correct these article name changes. Is there anything that can be done to stop this user? He is becoming a nuisance. Thank you. Seancp ( talk) 12:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
The Featured Article and Reatured Article Review processes have put out a call for reviewers. Any editor can review an article and contribute to consensus on whether that article is of FA status. A lot of college-football related articles are nominated for FA status, and sometimes these nominations are closed because there are not enough reviewers. This week's Signpost Dispatch, located at
, explains the advantages of being a reviewer and details the aspects of reviewing that are critical to maintaining WP's high standards. Hope to see some new faces at FAC or FAR soon! Karanacs ( talk) 14:49, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
work is being done, would love some assessment on the article and any suggestions.-- Nolephin ( talk) 20:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
The new inductees were announced today. Check this article for info: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g7DNF1BFb3081Rj_6EnfU7pT8Z6gD90CV3A80 Seancp ( talk) 17:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
The
College football WikiProject Newsletter Issue VI - May 2008 | ||
|
Welcome to the latest issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter! I hope that you're enjoying regular updates about the goings on of college football on Wikipedia, but if not, feel free to add your name to the "no delivery" section on the newsletter signup page. I encourage everyone to make regular visits to the College Football Portal and perhaps make it your Wikipedia entry page instead of using the Main Page as your gateway. Nominations for selected articles and pictures are always welcome, and can serve as a great way to show off that new article you just shepherded to Good Article status or the great picture you took the last time you were at a game. Comments and suggestions on improving the newsletter are always welcome, and help me improve it on a monthly basis. Keep contributing and editing, and don't hesitate to contact me or post on the College Football Wikiproject talk page if you need help or just want someone to look over your article. | |
| ||
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 22:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm working on a page for Gwinn Henry, a football coach from wayback... I'm finding that this guy coached at least at five schools! I have information on some but not all... specifically, Howard Payne University. Anyone got any information to chip in on this page?-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 02:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I think the mainpage is in need of cleanup. This is what I think needs to happen:
I would like other peoples opinions since this is a collaboration page. Thanks, PG Pirate 18:54, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Following the excellent work that CrdHwk began with Iowa Hawkeyes football seasons, I started working on Appalachian State Mountaineers football seasons last December. I recently nominated it as a featured list candidate, but I need some help getting it passed and working through the recommendations that The Rambling Man has suggested. I've pretty much followed the conventions that the Iowa and East Carolina Pirates football seasons have used, but he's bending me over with his lengthy list of suggestions. Any help would be greatly appreciated. I'm on the verge of shrugging my shoulders and delisting the page. Geologik ( talk) 17:03, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
User User:Stifle has been deleting head coach pages without providing an opportunity for discussion. In a matter of a few minutes, the user wiped out all work I had completed on coaches for Prairie View A&M University, including coach Ronald Beard, the worst performing coach in NCAA history (4 years as a head coach without a single victory).-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 19:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
All Project Members: please go to the deletion discussion and comment ( here's how). I recommend Overturn (undelete) and give reasons as you see fit.
Sample reasons: please make up your own, too!
The admin speedy-deleted 22 articles in 6 minutes.
These are just some samples, please enter your own words! And also, please enter on each coach that you can. Specifically, Ronald Beard had a record of 0-44 in 4 years to post the worst lifetime record as a head coach, and the school has the longest losing streak in college football.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 20:51, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
What's next Now the admin (he?) is doing individual AFDs for each article. We have to go to each article page and insert comments on the pages as he makes them. Fortunately, we can wait just a bit because it will take him some time. And also fortunately, there's a cool NAVBOX at the bottom of each coach's page so we can enter our comments that way.
All the admin is really doing is creating a lot more work for an issue that could have been easily resolved.
I believe that the administrator is being totally unreasonable, and several others have made similar comments. I will be researching on how to get assistance from a different administrator on this matter and will keep you posted.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 22:10, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
As an admin myself, I encourage nobody to bother bringing this up at WP:ANI, as like Stifle says, nothing will come out of it. The initial deletions were done improperly, but that's already been reversed at DRV, and AfDing them is entirely appropriate if he thinks they should be deleted in good faith. If you want to voice your opinion, you can do so at the AfDs, this doesn't really need to go to ANI. VegaDark ( talk) 23:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I started a new project in a sub page but I asked a user if it was good enough to be a project, he said I should ask y'all. I would just like to say that it's well known that the Razorbacks are good historically in sports and this would make it so much more easier to keep up with all the article's. So what do you think? <font-family:"Tahoma"> #1 Metallica Fan Your Hancock 21:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
For the third time, Oscar Dahlene has been proposed for deletion. What gives?-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 13:38, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Some things to consider:
My point is that this project has been dancing around what is a significant coach for as long as I can remember. It is kind of like pornography, you know it when you see it. What is pornography to one person is art to another. All I know is what listed on the Notability page is not very useful. something needs to be done. 09er ( talk) 15:58, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I've just put the final touches on the first draft of Wikipedia:WikiProject College Football/Notability. It's ready for review and discussion. Please use the notability talk page for discussion.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 03:05, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Looking pretty good... but we need more input. Come on, folks! I don't think you want just me and Paul drafting guidelines, here. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 09:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't want to take it on... but what do you guys think about Sprint Football as being a part of our project?-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 01:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Currently, the templates at Category:American college football venue navigational boxes (both the "by state" and "by conference" sets) use the following formatting: Bold for the stadium name followed by the common name of the university non-bolded in parenthesis.
Here is an example:
An issue has been raised at {{ Michigan college football venues}} (see the edit history) that this formatting interferes with the auto-bolding of the current article and it has been suggested that it be changed to this:
I, personally, have no preference, but do feel that all 77 (48 in the "by state" subcat and 29 in the "by conference" subcat) of the templates should match and not have just the Michigan one be formatted differently. So, I bring the topic here for discussion. Thoughts would be appreciated. -- Gwguffey ( talk) 04:59, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
(follow-up comment) The bolding format is currently the standard used in the college basketball templates in Category:College basketball venue templates and the three college baseball facility templates in Category:American college sports venue navigational boxes. -- Gwguffey ( talk) 05:13, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
I've just started Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Reliable Sources, an essay on use of reliable sources within our project. Everyone please take a look and jump in with comments or adding to it!-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 19:22, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Currently, 1571 articles assigned to this project, or 10.2%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 18 June 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page. -- B. Wolterding ( talk) 12:18, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I have a question about three featured list: Lists of Michigan Wolverines football passing leaders, Lists of Michigan Wolverines football receiving leaders, Lists of Michigan Wolverines football rushing leaders. Does anyone else think the intro is too Michigan Wolverines football centered? I believe it should be more about each list. It even says in the FLC that the user pretty much copied each intro verbatim. I hate to rag on a CFB featured content, but I am curious to everyone else thought.
NCAA Division I-A National Football Championship is obviously in need of a major rewrite and renaming. This has been discussed for months and over the winter I put together a massive list using the best resources available. I took a wikibreak following the creation of that list, and upon my return noticed that the article has gone from bad to worse to downright terrible, full of POV and patched-up sections. The "By year" list alone has been redone dozens of times, and the current list is unacceptably sparse. I originally uploaded my new list to my user page and recently took the liberty of creating a whole new quasi-article for the subject, on my user page, complete with a lot of good information and two new "Most national championships" lists. I would not expect this new article to replace the current one, but it is a great start and I hope we can get some discussion going about how to salvage one of college football's most important yet most deteriorating articles. Iowa13 ( talk) 18:57, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
One more note: as, right now, it doesn't seem as if any change will come about on this issue, I would advise anyone looking for REAL and GOOD information about the national championship to skip the bullcrap and go here. Peace Iowa13 ( talk) 03:25, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
I've added a few more acceptable categories to Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Notability#Players, specifically adding the guideline "Goes on to play in the American Football League, Canadian Football League, or other comparable professional league" such as the United States Football League. Please review and give opinions. Is it too broad? Not broad enough? Worded differently?-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 13:21, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
All the Pro Leagues I think it's safe to say we can divide all the pro leagues into categories:
League Division | Example | Player Notable? |
---|---|---|
existing, recent, or historic professional league with project team |
National Football League Canadian Football League |
If the project team (NFL and CFL) says the player is notable, then the player is notable. No need for us to "add a second layer of notability" If the project does not declare notability for players (AFL and AF2), then why should we? |
existing, recent, or historic professional league without project team | United Indoor Football | If the league isn't picked up by a project (not even Wiki Sports) then the league is barely notable, so how can a player in the league be notable? Notability rules would still apply--if someone wins the Heisman then goes to play in the UIF, then they're notable. |
Semi-pro or "minor leauge" league | Mid Continental Football League | Nope. |
In short, if there is a project that says that a college player goes on to play professionally, and that project calles the player notable, I don't want to argue. If that project does not call the player notable, then that player would have to stand on its own notability achievements outside of that league. The problem is that we're left with the same problem--how do we determine if a specific college player is notable? I don't want to say that no players are notable, but I also don't think that "only players who go to the NFL" are notable either...-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 14:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
I've been working on Template:CFNotability, a notability message template. It's designed to go in the TALK page of a user that questions notability. However, I don't know a lot about templates, and I'd like to get some feedback anyway from others on the project. Please review.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 14:50, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot ( Disable) 22:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Are George McLaren (football coach) and George McLaren the same person? Neither have a date of birth but both coached college football teams in the same era. Crickettragic ( talk) 02:09, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Nice work, 09er! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 03:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
In connection with the History of Northwestern University, I created the article for the 1949 Rose Bowl based primarily off of the template for the '48 game. However, someone more experienced should probably give it the once over to make sure everything meets this Project's standards and criteria. Madcoverboy ( talk) 05:26, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
There are two college football Featured List candidates that are about to expire for lack of support: Virginia Tech Hokies football seasons and List of Arkansas Razorbacks in the NFL Draft. Your help is needed to get these articles to featured list status. Without your comments and support, they'll be forced to go through the process again. It only takes a minute or two to suggest some changes or give your support, and your assistance is highly valued. Thanks for your time. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 19:37, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
A big thank you goes to everyone who offered comments and/or support. Both articles have passed review and are now featured! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 06:44, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Correct me if I have come to the wrong place, but I would like the opinion of some of the members of this project to take a look into the Mythical National Championship. This article cites no sources and does not seem notable. It seems to me more like taking a jab at the term National Championship. The term is also in the first line of the article for NCAA Division I FBS National Football Championship. I vote that the page should be deleted but in the very least, the term be removed from any other pages such as the NCAA pages. What are some other opinions? Thanks. Brinkley32 ( talk) 20:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm proposing to renaming each of the coach navbox templates to remove ambiguity from what the templates contain. Currently, the name is of the form: "<mascot>Coach" If there is are two schools with the same mascot, then it is the form: "<some non-standard school abbreviation><mascot>Coach" The ambiguity lies in the fact that the navboxes do not say what sport the coaches are for (the college basketball coach templates are the first thing that jump to mind) and the "<team mascot>Coach" can be very confusing in some cases, such as {{ OrangeCoach}}, {{ VolunteersCoach}} and {{ UKyFbCoach}}. The new naming scheme would be "<school name minus 'university of' or 'university'> <mascot> football coach navbox". For example, {{ AFFalconsCoach}} would be {{ Air Force Falcons football coach navbox}}. It's a bit long, but I think it's more intuitive than the current system. It also more closely follows the naming convention for the football articles (e.g. Air Force Falcons football). — X96lee15 ( talk) 22:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Over my creation of college football season articles, I have encountered Memorial Stadiums young and old alike. However, there seems to be no standard format for saying which University the Stadium belongs to in the title of the article. I have encountered:
same with War Memorial Stadiums (to a lesser extent)
which leads me to guessing and hoping I don't get redlinked. Are there naming conventions (or could there be some put) in place to prevent this? Brandonrush Woo pig sooie 00:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Good question. I suggest the following:
Description | Generic Layout | Example |
---|---|---|
Easily unique name | Stadium Name | Jacksonville Municipal Stadium |
Name with possible disambiguation | Stadium Name (stadium) | Rose Bowl (stadium) |
More complex name with multiple locations | Stadium Name (owner/operator) | Memorial Stadium (Kansas State) |
Demolished/renamed stadium | Stadium Name (owner/operator-current/old/1920-1955/etc) |
Don't forget all the Stagg Field locations across the country, too!-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 01:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I just posted a first draft of Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Images -- it's an essay on image use in the project. We need more photos!-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 19:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
I tested the idea of attending a fall practice this past Friday and it was a smashing success --I was able to get photos of almost every major USC player and coach. While its unusual for all practices to be open to the public, most programs at least have one or two open practices or scrimmages and (even if not) you can wait until the end of practice (which is usually posted publicly) and ask for photos as players and coaches leave (there are often kids who wait for autographs outside anyway). The flip side is I also witnessed a major team storyline as the starting QB dislocated his kneecap at the same practice, leaving me with photos of first instances of the previous back-ups practicing with the first-team offense. So, in summary: consider hanging around an open practice or hanging around after a practice gets out and you'll find college players and coaches are usually pretty friendly (though a bit tired) and willing to smile for a photo. -- Bobak ( talk) 16:09, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
As part of GA Sweeps, I am reassessing the Ralphie article. The talk page indicates that the article is within the scope of this project, so I am letting the editors know that the article will be on hold for seven days to allow for the improvements I have listed on the talk page. Thanks. Nikki 311 23:19, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Would a coaching tree be appropriate for Wikipedia? If so, would one generation backward and forward be enough? i.e. Here is Skip Holtz tree:
Hello everyone, I've been working on the 2007 USC Trojans football team season article for the past year or so (not continuously), and last February a well-meaning editor pushed it for peer review well before it was quite ready for review --in a positive result it garnered good tips from Phydend (which have been followed). Now, after some delays on my part, I think the article is ready for a good examination by peers before applying for GA status. The original peer review is still open here, please feel free to chime in there or in general. I hope to one day achieve the same level as 2005 Texas FA, which, in conjunction with 2005 USC GA (mostly by Phydend), I used as models for 2007 USC. -- Bobak ( talk) 16:54, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
The article was elevated to GA status today; however the WikiProject tag on the talk page still assesses it as a "Start" with an open Peer Review... Could someone more knowledgeable with the tag close the peer review and archive it? (and maybe give the article an higher assessment ;-) ). -- Bobak ( talk) 23:09, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
After a general peer review, I've nominated 2007 USC Trojans football team for FA. If you have time, please come by and take a look and offer any feedback --I think its to the point set by 2005 Texas Longhorn football team. -- Bobak ( talk) 18:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
92 years and 7 days ago... The title says it all: A FOOTBALL FEAST TO BE SET FORTH. Come, fellow college football Wikipedians, and share in the ancient scribblings of our beloved game. I'm currently working on a Peer Review, and in searching for an old article I ended up stumbling upon this pretty awesome article in The New York Times, previewing the 1916 season. Remember, this was a time well before the success of the NFL, when college football dominated the news and was still considered a bit high brow. This article is available here, click on "view full article" to get the PDF scan of the original piece from August 14, 1916... See your favorite teams like Virginia Poly (before it was more commonly known as Virginia Tech) challenge the powers at Yale; Notre Dame versus the Michigan Aggies (now known as the Michigan State Spartans); Georgetown versus Louisville; the Carlisle Indian Schools is looking weaker this season; Chicago versus Minnesota; California (a powerhouse) versus the upstarts from Southern California; "South California" (sic) versus Oregon; and gate receipts that could surpass the incredible sum of $200,000! This is a fun read for college football buffs, and if anyone is working with articles from that era, there might be some fun information to mine out of this piece. -- Bobak ( talk) 15:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm also working on a 1997 season article for a team that, well, sucked. This bowl summary doesn't help me, but if you want to read up on the final season before the BCS system "solved" everything, here's CNN/SI's old-school webpage which is still on their server: [10] -- Bobak ( talk) 23:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I have reviewed this article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have left a small list of tasks to complete to maintain the GA status of this article. The article will remain on hold for seven days (starting today) for improvements. Nikki 311 17:47, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
In order to better organize our college football season articles, I have created this category. It is pretty much the college football version of the similar NFL cat. Whenever you guys have the time, please add the team season pages to this cat (be sure to create a sub-cat for the team first). BlueAg09 ( Talk) 18:45, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Gang, feel free to use this userbox... -- Paul McDonald ( talk) 16:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
{{
User:Paulmcdonald\amfootsocbox}}
User:Paulmcdonald\amfootsocbox
Remember, if you're going to a game --consider taking photos. Here are some great tips and suggestions. Cheers for a good season. -- Bobak ( talk) 21:34, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:NOTED PLAYER for a proposal about making Notable Player sections into official guidelines. RGTraynor 17:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I would like to get outside opinions on the discussion at Talk:2008_Florida_Atlantic_Owls_football_team#Game_notes. Thank you! Johntex\ talk 02:14, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Why is this necessary? Can we get rid of it? I noticed it because it was added after I used the template for a CFB schedule at 2008 Louisville Cardinals football team (if I was clever I'd use Template:cfb link in this sentence, but I digress). Isn't this exactly the intended use of this template? Most of the pages in this category seem to use it for schedules in this way. Oren0 ( talk) 07:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, A.C. Ransom, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A.C. Ransom. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Stifle ( talk) 16:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey all -- I'm currently preparing 2005 Sugar Bowl to undergo the FAC process, and if you have a moment to look it over and leave a few comments before I add it, I'd be extremely grateful. Sweat now saves blood later. I should also mention that Bobak's FAC, 2007 USC Trojans football team is still ongoing and could use your help as well. I'd like to get as many comments as possible before Saturday, since I'm sure we'll all be kinda busy after then. Thanks! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 09:10, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:05, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Project team: Please review Articles & Pages being considered for deletion immediately. There are currently 48 articles going through the AfD process. Of course, each and every one may make their own comments and contributions as they see fit. However, awareness of this issue is important as most editors are currently busy with current events of the 2008 season that is now under way.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 18:25, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
The problem I have is that they are trying to use this to delete every college coach stub. The funny thing is that the article that started this whole thing, Walter J. West was notable per WP:ATHLETE since he was the leading rusher for the Cleveland Rams in 1944. [12] [13] [14] Sorry, I did not find this out until he was deleted. 09er ( talk) 02:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
User:Stifle is attempting to set the precedent that college football conference season articles should be deleted as unencyclopedic. Your comments would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2002 Mountain West Football Season.
Thank you. SashaNein ( talk) 15:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
I've grown weary of being harassed, ridiculed, and personally attacked by a few editors outside of this project and have become over-stressed with all the AfDs I'm expected to respond to (including 18 more that I just discovered this morning). I'll be taking a break for a while, not sure how long. I do plan to return--maybe a few days, maybe a few weeks, maybe longer. Please will everyone continue to "watch the store" around here for a while?-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 16:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello there, the article Colt McCoy, which falls under the auspices of this Wikiproject, has come under review as part of GA Sweeps and a number of problems have been identified and listed on the talk page. If these problems have not begun to be addressed by seven days from this notice, the article will be delisted from GA and will have to go through the GAN process all over again to regain its status once improvements have been made. If you have any questions, please drop me a line.-- Jackyd101 ( talk) 23:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you guys have quite a few shortcut redirects beginning with CFB:. These cross-namespace redirects have been deprecated and I would suggest moving them to WP: shortcuts (e.g. moving CFB:N to WP:CFB/N and so on). If I hear no objections I will begin moving them in the next week or so, although any redirects that are excessive or inappropriate are liable to be sent to WP:RFD instead. Stifle ( talk) 10:30, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Myself and an anonymous user have become involved in a dispute. I claim that, due to SECsports.com and ESPN.com standings, Alabama finished 5th in the SEC West standings. The anonymous user says that, according to the Alabama media guide, Alabama finished 3rd in the West. However, I feel that the SECsports.com record and even our own 2007 article should be regarded as the official standings, as opposed to that of just the University of Alabama athletic department. Please help to get this situation resolved. (Please reference my talk page and the IP user's talk page to look at the external links.) – Latics ( talk) 00:05, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Here is a link to Secsports.com Media Guide. If you will notice, on page 23 it lists Alabama as finishing 4-4 tied for 3rd in the west. http://www.secsports.com/doc_lib/fbc_2008_mediaguide_sec1.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.113.65.140 ( talk) 00:36, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
2006-2008 Southern Oregon Raiders football teams has been nominated for deletion. Reviewing the article and its 2008 season section, your comments would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2006-2008 Southern Oregon Raiders football teams. SashaNein ( talk) 20:15, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Please help me with this page. The bottom half is centered, when it shouldn't be. I have an idea it might have something to do with this page. Thanks for your help. Topgun530 ( talk) 17:15, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
The article Walter J. West has been restored by the deleting admin, stating that the article now meets WP:ATHLETE.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 22:56, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
The article Alured Ransom has been restored by the deleting admin, stating "significantly improved since AfD"-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 04:55, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I've put up an essay at Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/West precedent that I'd like some input on. Let me know what you think...-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 05:13, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I created a page for Ian Cambell, but I spelled the name of the page wrong. His last name is spelled "Campbell". Can someone fix it for me please? Topgun530 ( talk) 18:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
AfD discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don Lee (college football) for articles Don Lee (college football), Norman Joseph, and Scott Highsmith was closed as "no consensus" which normally calls for keeping the article. Subsequently, the articles have been erased and replaced by a redirect. You can participate in the deletion review at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 October 22.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 17:52, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
The college football article 2000 Sugar Bowl is currently a featured article candidate. Any comments, concerns, or support would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 03:56, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Check this out! Ross Fiscus has been restored, the guy was one of the first professonal players ever! Played with William Heffelfinger at Allegheny!-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 01:35, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
The last remaining coach article for Dickinson College, J. William Williams has been restored after a deletion review.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 11:18, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Is it appropriate/necessary to have game-by-game statistical narratives for a college player? -- ZimZalaBim talk 02:45, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to report some major success in the West-related deletions. As of the restoration of Wally Bullington after deletion review, just over 25% of those articles deleted have subsequently been restored or merged into existing articles! Many of the coaches have been found to have professional careers and even at least one member of the hall of fame.
Other coach articles have been slightly improved and anyone who would like to assist can navigate to userfied articles here. It's been loads of fun and I've really learned an awful lot about football coaching around the early 1900s!-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 12:53, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
can people help me with the Javon Ringer article? I need help on expanding the lead, more suggestions on what to do to help can be found here and the [Wikipedia:Peer review/Automated/November 2008#Javon Ringer|automated peer review page]]. With some help, i think i could get this up to GA standards. - - ' The Spook ( TALK) ( Share the Love with Barnstars) 19:11, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Robert Park, a college football player for Syracuse, later moved to Pennsylvania, where he coached football and was a professor at Geneva College. This edit adds American football players from Pennsylvania: is this considered appropriate? After all, he didn't play football and live in Pennsylvania at the same time. Nyttend ( talk) 13:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello! I recently created template:FloridaGatorsFootball, and I was wondering what everyone thought of having a template like this for all the teams. It combines the seasons and head coaches templates and adds a bit more links to related pages. In some cases, such as Florida-Florida State rivalry, it could be used in place of template:University of Florida, because it is more specific to the topic. I would like to create one for every team, but would like to ask the Wikiproject first! Richmond96 ( talk) 00:08, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
(UTC)
What about Quarterbacks? Should this be used or the QB navbox? ~ Richmond96 t • c 13:44, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
A fact from Francis Dunn appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on November 21, 2008.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 00:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Alright, Rich Rodriguez did an interview with Michigan Today which is an online magazine for alumni of the University of Michigan. It was part of a big feature article by John Bacon, a lecturer at Michigan who has written for Time, ESPN, Sports Illustrated and a best selling book about Bo Schebemchler. The article can be found here: [16]. In it, Bacon makes the out of left field assertion that Rodriguez was born in Chicago. Rodriguez then discusses moving to West Virginia in the second grade. Now, I updated his article with this as this is a reputable source and the words are coming from his own mouth, but it's contantly (poorly) changed whenever I do, always by new accounts who provide no rationale. Can anyone here offer help/advice. -- MichiganCharms ( talk) 12:12, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi everyone, I have been having a problem with an anon on the Egg Bowl article. He is insisting that the article only cover games from 1927 to present (from the year the game was officially called the "Egg Bowl"), however, that is unusual to say the least, considering the Apple Cup, Battle for the Iron Skillet, Iron Bowl, Crab Bowl, etc, all cover the entire series.
I have been trying to open a line of dialogue on the discussion page with him, but he has not done so. I've also tried opening on a dialogue on his talk page, but he blanks it every time I write something there. No other editors have interjected, and now it's turning into an edit war, and I'd appreciate others' opinions. Thanks! CH52584 ( talk) 04:07, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
I've noticed that we often find AFDs started by well-meaning editors from outside the US who assume that a college sports league (and its key players) must not be all that notable because its not a professional league. The confusion is magnified by the existence of the NFL. What they don't realize is, unlike CFL or Arena, college football is often the other major league other than the NFL. In order to create some factual ammunition for disputes over D-I FBS (top-level) college football, I found the following data from credible sources that I'd like to share so that others can use it to educate user when needed:
I hope these figures will help, and if anyone can find more numbers to throw in --please do! -- Bobak ( talk) 16:25, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
ATTENTION WP:ATHLETE is being re-written. There is a very big discussion here. The re-writing is focusing mainly on amateur athletes. You may well wish to participate.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 16:46, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
The Dave Meggyesy article that I started needs some help. I can find lots about his book and the related controversy, but almost nothing about his college and NFL careers. The pro football databases do not have defensive statistics for the 1960s, except for the number of games played. There are a couple of Google News hits that say he was an All-American at Syracuse, but I'd have to pay for an article in order to see the details--such as whose list he was on. If anybody has access to sources of Meggyesy's performance at St. Louis or at Syracuse, please add it to the infobox or start a new section. The article still seems stubbish for the NFL and college football projects, although I classified it as at Start for WP:BIO.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hjal ( talk • contribs) 12:30, November 12, 2008
Alright, as most of you know it has pretty much been a unwritten standard that you don't link a specific rank from one week (just talking about the number itself) to the main NCAA rankings article for that entire particular year. I have came across a non-registered user who is insisting that the numbers under rankings in info boxes and coaches career templates be linked, he is only doing it on Ole Miss related pages though ( 2008 Ole Miss Rebels football team and Houston Nutt) which leads me to believe he or she is just a fan of a particular team and doesn't really have an interest in what works for this project. He isn't linking the poll (coaches or AP) he is linking the actual numbers. (ex 20, 14 etc) This seems very silly to me and would create more confusion to a regular viewer than it would help them. It is like linking a specific game to a general season article. Just not very logical in my opinion. Just wanted to get some other opinions on this. Thanks. Rtr10 ( talk) 18:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Does a policy currently exist for which rankings to use when citing what a team was ranked at a given point in the season? If not, I believe one should be created so it is documented and standardized across the board for all football articles. I propose that for weeks where the BCS rankings are available that the BCS rankings be used and that when these are not available that the AP poll be used, followed by the Coaches poll. Comments? ---- Rodzilla ( talk) 22:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
"Im An Asian" made an edit on the Alabama Crimson Tide football page to the number of national titles, changing the number from 12 (the number the school recognizes, as well as most media outlets), to 7 (the number of "wire" titles...AP + UPI titles), and threatens anybody who changes it back with a vandalism warning.
It seems to me that there is nothing that dictates the source of the number of national titles, simply that it be the number that is "generally accepted," not from a specific organization, and it seems to be beyond the scope of this project to dictate which number should be used.
And, I might add that the BCS champion is only guaranteed the USA Today/Coaches national title, not the AP title (see LSU in 2003, who won the Coaches/USA Today Poll, but USC won the AP), so, in that case, LSU did not win what "Im An Asian" would consider a wire title.
So, that being as it is, I am going to change it back, and I would appreciate others opinion on this. CH52584 ( talk) 01:08, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Actually, we've been going off of wire titles for a long time now. THere have been discussions on changing back to non-wire, or rather "claimed titles" (especially since the wires only started naming champions in the 1930s) but no consensus was ever reached. Alabama is notorious for its 12 claim. --
Bobak (
talk) 20:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Okay, as we can see from the above conversation, we're getting people who want the school's claimed national titles versus the wire national titles --this time with citations. We really need to figure out a uniform position because some articles are following the CFB policy of using wire and others are not --this is problematic because people are, in good faith, giving and receiving vandalism warnings to people who may not know of one policy or the other. How should we move forward? I have not been happy with the current policy, but regardless we need to have consensus and uniform implementation (and, if necessary, enforcement). -- Bobak ( talk) 16:07, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
I propose the use of the AP poll across the board for all locations throughout wikipedia where football team rankings are listed. This proposal stems from the discussion above and I believe that Johntex did an excellent job of summarizing the pros of the AP poll (the very last post above). Please post agree, disagree, or comment (neutral). ---- Rodzilla ( talk) 02:11, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
There's a problem developing in the Category:College football seasons area. User Maple Leaf is creating new FBS categories for seasons already covered by I-A. I've noticed that Ohio State season articles are being put into these new categories. A few days ago I nominated two of the categories for deletion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 December 10#Category:1997 NCAA Division I FBS football season. Can someone help out here and leave the guy a note and get the incorrect categories deleted? -- Geologik ( talk)
Hey all. There's a new college football featured article candidate up for review right now. I posted 2006 Gator Bowl for comments, criticism, and support, and anything you'd care to add would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 07:41, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Without any warning, a handful of editors had a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content today and decided for everyone in the Project that there is a so-called "severe overuse problem" with college football logos. This is hardly the first time its come up, and its been heavily discussed and we've come to the current system with one logo per season page. While they're acting in good faith, they've gone and made changes across the CFB spectrum, even changing the Template:NCAATeamFootballSeason. I'm trying to keep the sudden changes to a minimum and encouraging them to come discuss the matter here. -- Bobak ( talk) 22:33, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
What a fackin' toolbag. I hope he's not older than 16. Jesus Christ. How do you expect anyone to take your arguments seriously when all you've done is express your views in a condescending and immature manner? How about working to improve pages instead of crusading against the use of logos? *facepalm here* -- Geologik ( talk) 21:38, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
Can someone take a look at The Game (Harvard-Yale)? I added logos like every other rivalry mentioned in that article, added good fair use rationales, and Hammersoft came by and deleted it, claiming that there was "no consensus" for adding logos. I understand she is trying to change the consensus, that is her right, but to say that there is no consensus for that type of edit belies her whole argument against the existing consensus. Can someone here take a look at her recent edits?-- 2008Olympian chitchat 01:52, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
This project would probably be interested in the debate on Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(people)#WP:ATHLETE reform: the other side, concerning the wording of WP:ATHLETE. You may also be interested in the debate on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Devon Kennard, an AfD seeking to delete numerous articles on college football players. - auburnpilot's sock 08:00, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
There is a discussion occurring about whether certain college-football related pages should include a logo. You are invited to participate in the discussion if you wish. permalink to discussion as of this point in time. Johntex\ talk 20:40, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Any thought to articles on non Division I-A programs? The Ivy League, to take the most prominent example, has a long and storied football history, and currently there aren't even specific articles for Ivy League school athletic programs as a whole, much less football teams individually. Compare coverage of I-AA football with, for instance, single A minor league baseball or lower ranks of the English football system (e.g. Conference National teams), and it seems like these programs get very short shrift. Princeton played in the first game of American football ever played, and has a program going back 140 years, but all we have about it is a single paragraph. The same is more or less true for all the other Ivies' football teams. And beyond the Ivies, I-AA teams regularly provide players to the NFL, are occasionally televised, and draw thousands of fans - oughtn't coverage be better? john k ( talk) 15:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
I'd love to see more people get involved with creating and editing articles for teams below I-A. I know Paul has done a lot of the Division II, III and NAIA page creations. I mostly spend my time on Division I-AA, especially the
Appalachian State Mountaineers football and
Southern Conference related articles. I updated the infoboxes for all the I-AA conferences awhile back but the pages themselves could use some work. Take a look at the
Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/MasterTeamTable as it'll give a good idea on what's been created and what hasn't. I've spent a lot of time organizing it and trying to find as many team and season articles to link as I could. I keep tabs on and organize
List of NCAA Division I FCS football programs and over the last few days I've been working a bunch on
List of NCAA Division I FCS football stadiums. I also started
List of NCAA Division I-AA football seasons. We've got articles for the
2006,
2007, and
2008 seasons so far. I also created the I-AA playoff templates found here:
Category:NCAA Division I FCS playoffs navbox templates and the {{
Division I FCS National Champions}} template. More help is always appreciated. --
Geologik (
talk) 19:24, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
We've got an interesting situation: there's an article about a USC reserve of absolutely no notability, Steve Gatena, but somehow it got by an AfD without consensus ( 3-3, with one of the keeps being a new account and the other its PR-titled creator; the WP:CFB voters were 2 for delete and 1 for no opinion). Let me be clear, I am a firm supported of notable college athletes being worthy of inclusion --but if this precedent holds, any player on any D-IA team will be fair game for an article. I don't think the greater Wikipedia community at-large is going to go for this, I'm trying to prevent things from getting out of control. The article is a puff-piece and the photos are call CP-violations desperately trying to show some notability when, as someone who has a huge knowledge of USC football (just see the FA I made of the 2007 season), this is not a notable person. If this had slipped by with another team, I may not have caught it, but this is an article of nothing. Am I being out of line here? This ended up slipping through because of lack of attention --Would the fellows of WP:CFB be willing to chime in if this gets renominated? -- Bobak ( talk) 17:37, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
I realize people are a bit distracted by the Non-free content discussion, but I have gone ahead and re-nominated the Steve Gatena article for AfD. Please participate (one way or the other), the last AfD had a total of 6 votes which --given the significance of this notability decision for a walk-on-- is far too low. -- Bobak ( talk) 18:24, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Can someone please help me with the 1998 Big 12 Championship Game page? The game went into double OT, and I can't get the infobox to show the two overtime periods. K-State scored 3 points in each period, and A&M scored 3 in the first, and 6 in the second period. Thanks in advance Topgun530 ( talk) 19:57, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Users opposing the use of College Football team logos being used in articles through out the College Football project have filed a Request for Comment trying to ban use of team logos. As I am sure you know our current standard/system of using logos legitimately with fair use rationales do not violate any wikipedia policy. It would be appreciated if you could take a moment and voice you opinion on the subject here: RFC: Use of logos on sports team pages. Thank you in advance and thank you for your contributions to the College Football Project. Rtr10 ( talk) 04:31, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Everyone remember to keep a cool head. Given how adamant both sides are, this could end up moving up in the dispute resolution process. Acting badly isn't going to help us, and will harm individuals (and arguable the whole). In the meantime, if you want to get more attention on this important discussion, you can place a notice, similar to the one JohnTex used above, on the discussion pages of affected articles, to let people know there is a conversation going on that will influence those articles. Remember, as per WP:CANVASS, you have to keep it neutral. This is a variant of how JohnTex did it that you can use: "There is a Request for Comment occurring about whether certain college-football related pages should include a logo. This is an article that would be affected by the decision. You are invited to participate in the discussion if you wish. permalink to discussion as of this point in time." (feel free to use it) I recommend avoiding individual user talk pages and reviewing the WP:CANVASS guideline before going forward. I think we will prevail on the merits of our arguments, we just need people involved in areas such as college football and college basketball to know what's going on. Let's just keep it cool, and to it the right way. -- Bobak ( talk) 21:16, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
As the NFCC talk page was becoming difficult to navigate (it was 400K), I have moved the RFC to a subpage at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/RFC on use of sports team logos. If you had the talkpage watchlisted, you may wish to add the subpage also. Best, Black Kite 11:31, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
I have counted 11 national titles, but the person who is controlling the USC Trojans football page counts 7. What gives?
I have heard the USC Trojans football dept claims 11 national titles. (1928, 1931, 1932, 1939, 1962, 1967, 1972, 1974, 1978, 2003, 2004)
For the 1939 team:
"The 1939 Trojans were presented with the Knute Rockne Intercollegiate Memorial Trophy, at the time emblematic of the nation's No. 1 team. The trophy (originally called the Rissman National Trophy) was given to the team that finished atop the Dickinson System, a mathematical point formula devised by Illinois economics professor and nationally-respected football analyst Frank G. Dickinson. His system crowned a national champion from 1926 to 1940 (with predated rankings in 1924 and 1925). It was the first to gain widespread national public and media acceptance as a "major selector," according to the NCAA Football Records Book."
http://usctrojans.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/072604aaa.html [/quote]
Teams such as Michigan, Stanford and SMU have claims championships solely using the Dickinson System as well, and they are not disputed. USC should have the same right. ( Phenix621 ( talk) 22:24, 1 December 2008 (UTC))
Is there any reason we couldn't just split up the "national titles" section on the infobox into multiple sections? So USC's infobox would say Dickinson National Titles X, AP National Titles X, BCS National Titles X and so on. It would add a little more length to the infobox but it seems to me like the easiest way to defuse a reoccurring problem we have regarding this issue and provide a lot more clarity on where the total number championships listed came from Ryan2845 ( talk) 16:59, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
See below for the newly-minted RfC. — Scien tizzle 20:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
I don't think splitting "wire" (which isn't used very often in the media) and "claimed" is a good idea, and I also don't think an RfC was necessary. But here we are :-) -- Bobak ( talk) 21:26, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
If you look on the sporting news alamanc regarding NCAA titles for college football, they grant USC 10 titles (1939 goes to Texas A&M). Not only that, but they USC the Dickinson System as a legitimate and a major determinate for the national title.
http://www.sportingnews.com/archives/almanac/nfl/cfbnatch.html
And moreover, if you want to remove USC's 4 titles pre-AP, then you should remove them for Stanford, Michigan, Notre Dame and SMU as well. I have listed my arguements under the USC trojans talk page(under USC titles again.....). TO be fair, either we grant USC claims to the 4 titles they say, or remove all title given. Phenix621 ( talk) 00:10, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Edit warring consistently occurs regarding the appropriate number of national titles to be listed in a team's infobox when the number of AP/Coaches/BCS titles, claimed titles and/or other externally awarded titles varies for any particular team. I've detailed much of this in a thread above, but will lay out everything as clear as possible here.
Template:NCAAFootballSchool is the widely-used infobox for college football school articles. On February 29, 2008, Allstarecho ( talk · contribs) removed the "wire" from "Wire national titles", which had been added back on December 30, 2006, by PassionoftheDamon ( talk · contribs) (during this Dec 2006-Jan 2007 discussion). The topic was broached once on Template talk:NCAAFootballSchool, referring to the aforementioned Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football thread, which seems to be the largest centralized discussion on the issue.
What makes this a problem is that Div-1A football is the only college sport in which the NCAA doesn't run a championship, and therefore they don't "recognize" any particular claim to a championship; the best we get is a list (starts on p.81) of every selector's yearly pick. While this is a reasonable way to go in terms of quality sourcing with minimal external bias, many years list multiple teams that most practical fans would not consider that year's (co-)champion--i.e., only 8 of the last 50 years list a true consensus champ. The situation is clearly muddier prior to the introduction of the AP poll in 1936, compounded by the fact that the two major polls took their final votes before the bowl games until '67 (AP) & '73 (Coaches). Thus, in any given year, there are commonly multiple teams that have some arguable claim to a national title; some schools accept and promote all of these claims, some only recognize the "major" selectors.
This is a case where each potential listed number has problems and benefits, particularly regarding WP:NOR in whether and how Wikipedia should filter these different categories:
Assuming that "national titles" is a field that has wide support for inclusion (in some way) in the infobox, I propose a few options that may address this issue and help (re-)establish consensus on Template:NCAAFootballSchool:
Option 1: Leave the template as it currently is and list wire titles. Although, re-adding "wire" (or maybe "poll"?) to the infobox with a link to NCAA Division I FBS National Football Championship would likely help ease terminological confusion.
Option 2: Leave the template as it currently is and list the number in the NCAA record book.
Option 3: Change the template to "Claimed national titles" and allow schools' individual claims to be listed.
Option 4: List both wire & claimed titles
National titles X wire (Y claimed)
Wire national titles X
Claimed national titles Y
Further suggestions are welcome. — Scien tizzle 20:21, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
I was bored for a few minutes, so I made this. The image is one that I took myself at a Georgia Tech football game. Its included in a GT Football article, and I thought it made a good fit.
This user is a member of WikiProject College Football. |
{{User Project CFB}}
Fell free to add it to your user page.
Ndenison
talk 23:50, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
I restored another " West incident" article at John D. Schwender. Turns out there's some good sources (washington post, chicago trib, etc) on the faculty of the school voting to discontinue the program for a year due to excessively rough practice sessions. Anyway, we're now at 35% of the West deletions getting restored.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 06:01, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Can someone check Special:Contributions/72.208.8.229? The IP has been adding incorrect information to hockey articles. I tried double-checking the football edits, but I have no idea how to verify what they've added.- Wafulz ( talk) 16:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Chas Henry is a Sophomore not a Senior on the Florida Gators roster. How can this be changed? I cannot edit the page. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Rwbannon (
talk •
contribs) 23:26, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Seriously though, I noticed there were issues with incomplete fair use rationales for the WVU logo, but then I noticed they had some older teams (that certainly predated their current logo), so I went through and found the old logos online. Now the two relevant teams, 1975 and 1969, have the actual team logo from those years. Anyone else thing this is a good idea for older team pages? The actual trademark on these logos is almost certainly abandoned, though the copyright ownership (unless they were made pre-1923), would be active. Thus an abandoned logo from pre-1923 would be straight-up public domain, not sure how many of those there are. -- Bobak ( talk) 21:26, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
While the FedEx/Big Ten logos are more creative, the threshold for originality is exceptionally low. The US case that is now cited is the Supreme Court decision in Feist v. Rural (1991, text here). It was a case over one phone book literally copying another (not original), but in reaching the decision in laid out a good summary of how low the threshold actually is:
The sine qua non of copyright is originality. To qualify for copyright protection, a work must be original to the author. . . . Original, as the term is used in copyright, means only that the work was independently created by the author (as opposed to copied from other works), and that it possesses at least some minimal degree of creativity. . . . To be sure, the requisite level of creativity is extremely low; even a slight amount will suffice. The vast majority of works make the grade quite easily, as they possess some creative spark, "no matter how crude, humble or obvious" it might be.(from Feist)
So my point is that the old WVU logo could arguably fall into this minimum degree of creativity, "no matter how crude, humble or obvious" it might be. As such, we should be careful and assume that it is remains under copyright and used under fair use. -- Bobak ( talk) 19:07, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm getting flustered by some Wikians who are using the short names in some of the yearly bowl game pages. I, for one in the last couple years have used the full name of the school and team nickname (i.e. "Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Hokies") while some use the shorter version (i.e. "Virginia Tech Hokies") in the game summeries on the annual pages, NCAA football bowl games, 2007-08 as a most recent example. However, this year, I feel that we should not do one or two sentance recaps on that page, rather than that, have a summary on each bowl game page with the full school name. Examples include 2008 Armed Forces Bowl, 2009 Cotton Bowl and 2009 BCS National Championship Game, of which I have put the proper name but instead use the short version. In such cases, I would like to see the following schools (such as Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, LSU, etc.) be listed as folows with a back link to the team that year (such as ((2009 Ole Miss Rebels football team|University of Mississippi (Ole Miss) Rebels)) (using the Wikilink brackets):
These are the only schools that I know of with this problem, and complicating matters, both Southern California and South Carolina share the "USC" initals, hence "Southern California" is usually used in the recaps and stories in lieu of the USC initals. Please take this under consideration, and thanks. NoseNuggets ( talk) 2:54 PM US EST Jan 12 2009.
Just wanted to give you all a heads-up that I've submitted 2008 ACC Championship Game to be a featured article. Any comments, questions, concerns, criticism or support you'd care to add on the review page would be appreciated. Thanks! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 05:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Would anyone else be interested in having a "Part of a series on.." template for college football? (describing the major aspects of it) For examples of what I mean, and ways in which this sort of template can be used, see Template:Judaism, Template:History of Australia, Template:Censorship, Template:Islam, Template:Love table, Template:BibleRelated, Template:Creationism2, etc... I could create one for college football fairly quickly to see what people thought of it before implementing it, if anyone would be interested. Cardsplayer4life ( talk) 06:09, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
<---I was messing around with a template for one, but I started thinking, should this be a template about all of college football or just Division I? I say that because if it were on all of college football, then it would need to be much more general and include links to Division II, Division III, and NAIA stuff as well, and likely could not contain information on, say, the BCS and whatnot. (Well, not as detailed information on it anyway, since it would be more of an overview) I don't know what the best format would be. Anyone have any ideas? Cardsplayer4life ( talk) 07:42, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry I didn't mention this earlier, but another new college football bowl game FAC has been submitted — and this time, it's not by me. Strikehold has submitted 2008 Humanitarian Bowl to FAC, and more reviewers and commenters are needed. Thanks! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 11:48, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
|
I thought this WikiProject might be interested. Ping me with any specific queries or leave them on the page linked to above. Thanks! - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 21:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
There is a thread on the administrators' noticeboard which may affect editors involved in this WikiProject. Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Lyrics. CrazyPaco ( talk) 01:06, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
There is another vote going on to determine the way college and university logos can be used in sports articles for those interested. Cardsplayer4life ( talk) 23:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Would a few eyes, uninvolved of course :), mind taking a look at just the lead section and how it is curently crafted. I would rather remove the phase "well-known" per WP:PEACOCK, but have been met with pretty feirce resistance. I am sure there is a better way to write this material so that term is avoided but still covers this factually. Thanks in advance. -- Tom 13:54, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to let everyone know that I've signed up the project for article alerts, an automated notification of events like AfDs and things like that. It's been linked in the project navigation toolbar. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 11:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot ( Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:09, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
The project almost has full inclusion for Division I FBS team articles, with 109 (91%) by my count. We're also very close on 2008 season articles for Division I FBS teams, with 101 (84%). Anyone interested in helping close the loop on these? Strikehold ( talk) 01:35, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Please refer to my comments made here about the 2009 Sugar Bowl article's neutrality. I'm debating on removing the entire game summary section, as I believe it might just be clever vandalism. The entire section is unreferenced, and has some wild slanting in Utah's favor, in my opinion. Help and comments would be appreciated. :) – LATICS talk 18:29, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Someone from here might want to look over the article on Chris Beatty and comment at the afd, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Beatty, it'd be useful for those of us with less of a clue to help voice an opinion. Ta. Hiding T 11:49, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows ( full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to
report bugs and
request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a
"news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none
parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at
Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Thanks. — Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 08:58, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)
College football Project‑class | |||||||
|
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
I am reviewing Notre Dame Fighting Irish football under Tyrone Willingham for Good Article status. I placed it on hold for a few minor changes. The nominator has been away from Wikipedia for the last nine days, so I am hoping that somebody from this project can help address my concerns. Any help would be appreciated. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan ( talk) 16:20, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
A user by the name of SportsMaster (formally called SportsMasterESPN) keeps moving LSU athletics related articles to articles with "Louisiana State" in their name. For example, he has moved this article from LSU Tigers football (which is the consensus reached naming standard for this article) to Louisiana State Tigers football (which is not the accepted standard). He has done this multiple times over the past 6 to 8 months and every time its been corrected. I have asked the user to stop this but he continues to do it. Louisiana is the only state in the union that begins with the letter L. Therefore, LSU is not ambiguous whereas as MSU or OSU would be ambiguous. (i.e. Ohio State, Oregon State, Oklahoma State). No one refers to the LSU athletics program as Louisiana State and even the official website is LSUSports.net. I am tired of having to correct these article name changes. Is there anything that can be done to stop this user? He is becoming a nuisance. Thank you. Seancp ( talk) 12:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
The Featured Article and Reatured Article Review processes have put out a call for reviewers. Any editor can review an article and contribute to consensus on whether that article is of FA status. A lot of college-football related articles are nominated for FA status, and sometimes these nominations are closed because there are not enough reviewers. This week's Signpost Dispatch, located at
, explains the advantages of being a reviewer and details the aspects of reviewing that are critical to maintaining WP's high standards. Hope to see some new faces at FAC or FAR soon! Karanacs ( talk) 14:49, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
work is being done, would love some assessment on the article and any suggestions.-- Nolephin ( talk) 20:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
The new inductees were announced today. Check this article for info: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g7DNF1BFb3081Rj_6EnfU7pT8Z6gD90CV3A80 Seancp ( talk) 17:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
The
College football WikiProject Newsletter Issue VI - May 2008 | ||
|
Welcome to the latest issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter! I hope that you're enjoying regular updates about the goings on of college football on Wikipedia, but if not, feel free to add your name to the "no delivery" section on the newsletter signup page. I encourage everyone to make regular visits to the College Football Portal and perhaps make it your Wikipedia entry page instead of using the Main Page as your gateway. Nominations for selected articles and pictures are always welcome, and can serve as a great way to show off that new article you just shepherded to Good Article status or the great picture you took the last time you were at a game. Comments and suggestions on improving the newsletter are always welcome, and help me improve it on a monthly basis. Keep contributing and editing, and don't hesitate to contact me or post on the College Football Wikiproject talk page if you need help or just want someone to look over your article. | |
| ||
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 22:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm working on a page for Gwinn Henry, a football coach from wayback... I'm finding that this guy coached at least at five schools! I have information on some but not all... specifically, Howard Payne University. Anyone got any information to chip in on this page?-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 02:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I think the mainpage is in need of cleanup. This is what I think needs to happen:
I would like other peoples opinions since this is a collaboration page. Thanks, PG Pirate 18:54, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Following the excellent work that CrdHwk began with Iowa Hawkeyes football seasons, I started working on Appalachian State Mountaineers football seasons last December. I recently nominated it as a featured list candidate, but I need some help getting it passed and working through the recommendations that The Rambling Man has suggested. I've pretty much followed the conventions that the Iowa and East Carolina Pirates football seasons have used, but he's bending me over with his lengthy list of suggestions. Any help would be greatly appreciated. I'm on the verge of shrugging my shoulders and delisting the page. Geologik ( talk) 17:03, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
User User:Stifle has been deleting head coach pages without providing an opportunity for discussion. In a matter of a few minutes, the user wiped out all work I had completed on coaches for Prairie View A&M University, including coach Ronald Beard, the worst performing coach in NCAA history (4 years as a head coach without a single victory).-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 19:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
All Project Members: please go to the deletion discussion and comment ( here's how). I recommend Overturn (undelete) and give reasons as you see fit.
Sample reasons: please make up your own, too!
The admin speedy-deleted 22 articles in 6 minutes.
These are just some samples, please enter your own words! And also, please enter on each coach that you can. Specifically, Ronald Beard had a record of 0-44 in 4 years to post the worst lifetime record as a head coach, and the school has the longest losing streak in college football.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 20:51, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
What's next Now the admin (he?) is doing individual AFDs for each article. We have to go to each article page and insert comments on the pages as he makes them. Fortunately, we can wait just a bit because it will take him some time. And also fortunately, there's a cool NAVBOX at the bottom of each coach's page so we can enter our comments that way.
All the admin is really doing is creating a lot more work for an issue that could have been easily resolved.
I believe that the administrator is being totally unreasonable, and several others have made similar comments. I will be researching on how to get assistance from a different administrator on this matter and will keep you posted.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 22:10, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
As an admin myself, I encourage nobody to bother bringing this up at WP:ANI, as like Stifle says, nothing will come out of it. The initial deletions were done improperly, but that's already been reversed at DRV, and AfDing them is entirely appropriate if he thinks they should be deleted in good faith. If you want to voice your opinion, you can do so at the AfDs, this doesn't really need to go to ANI. VegaDark ( talk) 23:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I started a new project in a sub page but I asked a user if it was good enough to be a project, he said I should ask y'all. I would just like to say that it's well known that the Razorbacks are good historically in sports and this would make it so much more easier to keep up with all the article's. So what do you think? <font-family:"Tahoma"> #1 Metallica Fan Your Hancock 21:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
For the third time, Oscar Dahlene has been proposed for deletion. What gives?-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 13:38, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Some things to consider:
My point is that this project has been dancing around what is a significant coach for as long as I can remember. It is kind of like pornography, you know it when you see it. What is pornography to one person is art to another. All I know is what listed on the Notability page is not very useful. something needs to be done. 09er ( talk) 15:58, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I've just put the final touches on the first draft of Wikipedia:WikiProject College Football/Notability. It's ready for review and discussion. Please use the notability talk page for discussion.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 03:05, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Looking pretty good... but we need more input. Come on, folks! I don't think you want just me and Paul drafting guidelines, here. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 09:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't want to take it on... but what do you guys think about Sprint Football as being a part of our project?-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 01:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Currently, the templates at Category:American college football venue navigational boxes (both the "by state" and "by conference" sets) use the following formatting: Bold for the stadium name followed by the common name of the university non-bolded in parenthesis.
Here is an example:
An issue has been raised at {{ Michigan college football venues}} (see the edit history) that this formatting interferes with the auto-bolding of the current article and it has been suggested that it be changed to this:
I, personally, have no preference, but do feel that all 77 (48 in the "by state" subcat and 29 in the "by conference" subcat) of the templates should match and not have just the Michigan one be formatted differently. So, I bring the topic here for discussion. Thoughts would be appreciated. -- Gwguffey ( talk) 04:59, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
(follow-up comment) The bolding format is currently the standard used in the college basketball templates in Category:College basketball venue templates and the three college baseball facility templates in Category:American college sports venue navigational boxes. -- Gwguffey ( talk) 05:13, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
I've just started Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Reliable Sources, an essay on use of reliable sources within our project. Everyone please take a look and jump in with comments or adding to it!-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 19:22, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Currently, 1571 articles assigned to this project, or 10.2%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 18 June 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page. -- B. Wolterding ( talk) 12:18, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I have a question about three featured list: Lists of Michigan Wolverines football passing leaders, Lists of Michigan Wolverines football receiving leaders, Lists of Michigan Wolverines football rushing leaders. Does anyone else think the intro is too Michigan Wolverines football centered? I believe it should be more about each list. It even says in the FLC that the user pretty much copied each intro verbatim. I hate to rag on a CFB featured content, but I am curious to everyone else thought.
NCAA Division I-A National Football Championship is obviously in need of a major rewrite and renaming. This has been discussed for months and over the winter I put together a massive list using the best resources available. I took a wikibreak following the creation of that list, and upon my return noticed that the article has gone from bad to worse to downright terrible, full of POV and patched-up sections. The "By year" list alone has been redone dozens of times, and the current list is unacceptably sparse. I originally uploaded my new list to my user page and recently took the liberty of creating a whole new quasi-article for the subject, on my user page, complete with a lot of good information and two new "Most national championships" lists. I would not expect this new article to replace the current one, but it is a great start and I hope we can get some discussion going about how to salvage one of college football's most important yet most deteriorating articles. Iowa13 ( talk) 18:57, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
One more note: as, right now, it doesn't seem as if any change will come about on this issue, I would advise anyone looking for REAL and GOOD information about the national championship to skip the bullcrap and go here. Peace Iowa13 ( talk) 03:25, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
I've added a few more acceptable categories to Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Notability#Players, specifically adding the guideline "Goes on to play in the American Football League, Canadian Football League, or other comparable professional league" such as the United States Football League. Please review and give opinions. Is it too broad? Not broad enough? Worded differently?-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 13:21, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
All the Pro Leagues I think it's safe to say we can divide all the pro leagues into categories:
League Division | Example | Player Notable? |
---|---|---|
existing, recent, or historic professional league with project team |
National Football League Canadian Football League |
If the project team (NFL and CFL) says the player is notable, then the player is notable. No need for us to "add a second layer of notability" If the project does not declare notability for players (AFL and AF2), then why should we? |
existing, recent, or historic professional league without project team | United Indoor Football | If the league isn't picked up by a project (not even Wiki Sports) then the league is barely notable, so how can a player in the league be notable? Notability rules would still apply--if someone wins the Heisman then goes to play in the UIF, then they're notable. |
Semi-pro or "minor leauge" league | Mid Continental Football League | Nope. |
In short, if there is a project that says that a college player goes on to play professionally, and that project calles the player notable, I don't want to argue. If that project does not call the player notable, then that player would have to stand on its own notability achievements outside of that league. The problem is that we're left with the same problem--how do we determine if a specific college player is notable? I don't want to say that no players are notable, but I also don't think that "only players who go to the NFL" are notable either...-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 14:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
I've been working on Template:CFNotability, a notability message template. It's designed to go in the TALK page of a user that questions notability. However, I don't know a lot about templates, and I'd like to get some feedback anyway from others on the project. Please review.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 14:50, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot ( Disable) 22:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Are George McLaren (football coach) and George McLaren the same person? Neither have a date of birth but both coached college football teams in the same era. Crickettragic ( talk) 02:09, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Nice work, 09er! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 03:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
In connection with the History of Northwestern University, I created the article for the 1949 Rose Bowl based primarily off of the template for the '48 game. However, someone more experienced should probably give it the once over to make sure everything meets this Project's standards and criteria. Madcoverboy ( talk) 05:26, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
There are two college football Featured List candidates that are about to expire for lack of support: Virginia Tech Hokies football seasons and List of Arkansas Razorbacks in the NFL Draft. Your help is needed to get these articles to featured list status. Without your comments and support, they'll be forced to go through the process again. It only takes a minute or two to suggest some changes or give your support, and your assistance is highly valued. Thanks for your time. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 19:37, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
A big thank you goes to everyone who offered comments and/or support. Both articles have passed review and are now featured! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 06:44, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Correct me if I have come to the wrong place, but I would like the opinion of some of the members of this project to take a look into the Mythical National Championship. This article cites no sources and does not seem notable. It seems to me more like taking a jab at the term National Championship. The term is also in the first line of the article for NCAA Division I FBS National Football Championship. I vote that the page should be deleted but in the very least, the term be removed from any other pages such as the NCAA pages. What are some other opinions? Thanks. Brinkley32 ( talk) 20:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm proposing to renaming each of the coach navbox templates to remove ambiguity from what the templates contain. Currently, the name is of the form: "<mascot>Coach" If there is are two schools with the same mascot, then it is the form: "<some non-standard school abbreviation><mascot>Coach" The ambiguity lies in the fact that the navboxes do not say what sport the coaches are for (the college basketball coach templates are the first thing that jump to mind) and the "<team mascot>Coach" can be very confusing in some cases, such as {{ OrangeCoach}}, {{ VolunteersCoach}} and {{ UKyFbCoach}}. The new naming scheme would be "<school name minus 'university of' or 'university'> <mascot> football coach navbox". For example, {{ AFFalconsCoach}} would be {{ Air Force Falcons football coach navbox}}. It's a bit long, but I think it's more intuitive than the current system. It also more closely follows the naming convention for the football articles (e.g. Air Force Falcons football). — X96lee15 ( talk) 22:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Over my creation of college football season articles, I have encountered Memorial Stadiums young and old alike. However, there seems to be no standard format for saying which University the Stadium belongs to in the title of the article. I have encountered:
same with War Memorial Stadiums (to a lesser extent)
which leads me to guessing and hoping I don't get redlinked. Are there naming conventions (or could there be some put) in place to prevent this? Brandonrush Woo pig sooie 00:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Good question. I suggest the following:
Description | Generic Layout | Example |
---|---|---|
Easily unique name | Stadium Name | Jacksonville Municipal Stadium |
Name with possible disambiguation | Stadium Name (stadium) | Rose Bowl (stadium) |
More complex name with multiple locations | Stadium Name (owner/operator) | Memorial Stadium (Kansas State) |
Demolished/renamed stadium | Stadium Name (owner/operator-current/old/1920-1955/etc) |
Don't forget all the Stagg Field locations across the country, too!-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 01:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I just posted a first draft of Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Images -- it's an essay on image use in the project. We need more photos!-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 19:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
I tested the idea of attending a fall practice this past Friday and it was a smashing success --I was able to get photos of almost every major USC player and coach. While its unusual for all practices to be open to the public, most programs at least have one or two open practices or scrimmages and (even if not) you can wait until the end of practice (which is usually posted publicly) and ask for photos as players and coaches leave (there are often kids who wait for autographs outside anyway). The flip side is I also witnessed a major team storyline as the starting QB dislocated his kneecap at the same practice, leaving me with photos of first instances of the previous back-ups practicing with the first-team offense. So, in summary: consider hanging around an open practice or hanging around after a practice gets out and you'll find college players and coaches are usually pretty friendly (though a bit tired) and willing to smile for a photo. -- Bobak ( talk) 16:09, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
As part of GA Sweeps, I am reassessing the Ralphie article. The talk page indicates that the article is within the scope of this project, so I am letting the editors know that the article will be on hold for seven days to allow for the improvements I have listed on the talk page. Thanks. Nikki 311 23:19, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Would a coaching tree be appropriate for Wikipedia? If so, would one generation backward and forward be enough? i.e. Here is Skip Holtz tree:
Hello everyone, I've been working on the 2007 USC Trojans football team season article for the past year or so (not continuously), and last February a well-meaning editor pushed it for peer review well before it was quite ready for review --in a positive result it garnered good tips from Phydend (which have been followed). Now, after some delays on my part, I think the article is ready for a good examination by peers before applying for GA status. The original peer review is still open here, please feel free to chime in there or in general. I hope to one day achieve the same level as 2005 Texas FA, which, in conjunction with 2005 USC GA (mostly by Phydend), I used as models for 2007 USC. -- Bobak ( talk) 16:54, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
The article was elevated to GA status today; however the WikiProject tag on the talk page still assesses it as a "Start" with an open Peer Review... Could someone more knowledgeable with the tag close the peer review and archive it? (and maybe give the article an higher assessment ;-) ). -- Bobak ( talk) 23:09, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
After a general peer review, I've nominated 2007 USC Trojans football team for FA. If you have time, please come by and take a look and offer any feedback --I think its to the point set by 2005 Texas Longhorn football team. -- Bobak ( talk) 18:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
92 years and 7 days ago... The title says it all: A FOOTBALL FEAST TO BE SET FORTH. Come, fellow college football Wikipedians, and share in the ancient scribblings of our beloved game. I'm currently working on a Peer Review, and in searching for an old article I ended up stumbling upon this pretty awesome article in The New York Times, previewing the 1916 season. Remember, this was a time well before the success of the NFL, when college football dominated the news and was still considered a bit high brow. This article is available here, click on "view full article" to get the PDF scan of the original piece from August 14, 1916... See your favorite teams like Virginia Poly (before it was more commonly known as Virginia Tech) challenge the powers at Yale; Notre Dame versus the Michigan Aggies (now known as the Michigan State Spartans); Georgetown versus Louisville; the Carlisle Indian Schools is looking weaker this season; Chicago versus Minnesota; California (a powerhouse) versus the upstarts from Southern California; "South California" (sic) versus Oregon; and gate receipts that could surpass the incredible sum of $200,000! This is a fun read for college football buffs, and if anyone is working with articles from that era, there might be some fun information to mine out of this piece. -- Bobak ( talk) 15:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm also working on a 1997 season article for a team that, well, sucked. This bowl summary doesn't help me, but if you want to read up on the final season before the BCS system "solved" everything, here's CNN/SI's old-school webpage which is still on their server: [10] -- Bobak ( talk) 23:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I have reviewed this article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have left a small list of tasks to complete to maintain the GA status of this article. The article will remain on hold for seven days (starting today) for improvements. Nikki 311 17:47, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
In order to better organize our college football season articles, I have created this category. It is pretty much the college football version of the similar NFL cat. Whenever you guys have the time, please add the team season pages to this cat (be sure to create a sub-cat for the team first). BlueAg09 ( Talk) 18:45, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Gang, feel free to use this userbox... -- Paul McDonald ( talk) 16:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
{{
User:Paulmcdonald\amfootsocbox}}
User:Paulmcdonald\amfootsocbox
Remember, if you're going to a game --consider taking photos. Here are some great tips and suggestions. Cheers for a good season. -- Bobak ( talk) 21:34, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:NOTED PLAYER for a proposal about making Notable Player sections into official guidelines. RGTraynor 17:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I would like to get outside opinions on the discussion at Talk:2008_Florida_Atlantic_Owls_football_team#Game_notes. Thank you! Johntex\ talk 02:14, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Why is this necessary? Can we get rid of it? I noticed it because it was added after I used the template for a CFB schedule at 2008 Louisville Cardinals football team (if I was clever I'd use Template:cfb link in this sentence, but I digress). Isn't this exactly the intended use of this template? Most of the pages in this category seem to use it for schedules in this way. Oren0 ( talk) 07:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, A.C. Ransom, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A.C. Ransom. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Stifle ( talk) 16:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey all -- I'm currently preparing 2005 Sugar Bowl to undergo the FAC process, and if you have a moment to look it over and leave a few comments before I add it, I'd be extremely grateful. Sweat now saves blood later. I should also mention that Bobak's FAC, 2007 USC Trojans football team is still ongoing and could use your help as well. I'd like to get as many comments as possible before Saturday, since I'm sure we'll all be kinda busy after then. Thanks! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 09:10, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:05, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Project team: Please review Articles & Pages being considered for deletion immediately. There are currently 48 articles going through the AfD process. Of course, each and every one may make their own comments and contributions as they see fit. However, awareness of this issue is important as most editors are currently busy with current events of the 2008 season that is now under way.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 18:25, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
The problem I have is that they are trying to use this to delete every college coach stub. The funny thing is that the article that started this whole thing, Walter J. West was notable per WP:ATHLETE since he was the leading rusher for the Cleveland Rams in 1944. [12] [13] [14] Sorry, I did not find this out until he was deleted. 09er ( talk) 02:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
User:Stifle is attempting to set the precedent that college football conference season articles should be deleted as unencyclopedic. Your comments would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2002 Mountain West Football Season.
Thank you. SashaNein ( talk) 15:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
I've grown weary of being harassed, ridiculed, and personally attacked by a few editors outside of this project and have become over-stressed with all the AfDs I'm expected to respond to (including 18 more that I just discovered this morning). I'll be taking a break for a while, not sure how long. I do plan to return--maybe a few days, maybe a few weeks, maybe longer. Please will everyone continue to "watch the store" around here for a while?-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 16:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello there, the article Colt McCoy, which falls under the auspices of this Wikiproject, has come under review as part of GA Sweeps and a number of problems have been identified and listed on the talk page. If these problems have not begun to be addressed by seven days from this notice, the article will be delisted from GA and will have to go through the GAN process all over again to regain its status once improvements have been made. If you have any questions, please drop me a line.-- Jackyd101 ( talk) 23:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you guys have quite a few shortcut redirects beginning with CFB:. These cross-namespace redirects have been deprecated and I would suggest moving them to WP: shortcuts (e.g. moving CFB:N to WP:CFB/N and so on). If I hear no objections I will begin moving them in the next week or so, although any redirects that are excessive or inappropriate are liable to be sent to WP:RFD instead. Stifle ( talk) 10:30, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Myself and an anonymous user have become involved in a dispute. I claim that, due to SECsports.com and ESPN.com standings, Alabama finished 5th in the SEC West standings. The anonymous user says that, according to the Alabama media guide, Alabama finished 3rd in the West. However, I feel that the SECsports.com record and even our own 2007 article should be regarded as the official standings, as opposed to that of just the University of Alabama athletic department. Please help to get this situation resolved. (Please reference my talk page and the IP user's talk page to look at the external links.) – Latics ( talk) 00:05, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Here is a link to Secsports.com Media Guide. If you will notice, on page 23 it lists Alabama as finishing 4-4 tied for 3rd in the west. http://www.secsports.com/doc_lib/fbc_2008_mediaguide_sec1.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.113.65.140 ( talk) 00:36, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
2006-2008 Southern Oregon Raiders football teams has been nominated for deletion. Reviewing the article and its 2008 season section, your comments would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2006-2008 Southern Oregon Raiders football teams. SashaNein ( talk) 20:15, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Please help me with this page. The bottom half is centered, when it shouldn't be. I have an idea it might have something to do with this page. Thanks for your help. Topgun530 ( talk) 17:15, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
The article Walter J. West has been restored by the deleting admin, stating that the article now meets WP:ATHLETE.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 22:56, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
The article Alured Ransom has been restored by the deleting admin, stating "significantly improved since AfD"-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 04:55, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I've put up an essay at Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/West precedent that I'd like some input on. Let me know what you think...-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 05:13, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I created a page for Ian Cambell, but I spelled the name of the page wrong. His last name is spelled "Campbell". Can someone fix it for me please? Topgun530 ( talk) 18:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
AfD discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don Lee (college football) for articles Don Lee (college football), Norman Joseph, and Scott Highsmith was closed as "no consensus" which normally calls for keeping the article. Subsequently, the articles have been erased and replaced by a redirect. You can participate in the deletion review at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 October 22.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 17:52, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
The college football article 2000 Sugar Bowl is currently a featured article candidate. Any comments, concerns, or support would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 03:56, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Check this out! Ross Fiscus has been restored, the guy was one of the first professonal players ever! Played with William Heffelfinger at Allegheny!-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 01:35, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
The last remaining coach article for Dickinson College, J. William Williams has been restored after a deletion review.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 11:18, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Is it appropriate/necessary to have game-by-game statistical narratives for a college player? -- ZimZalaBim talk 02:45, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to report some major success in the West-related deletions. As of the restoration of Wally Bullington after deletion review, just over 25% of those articles deleted have subsequently been restored or merged into existing articles! Many of the coaches have been found to have professional careers and even at least one member of the hall of fame.
Other coach articles have been slightly improved and anyone who would like to assist can navigate to userfied articles here. It's been loads of fun and I've really learned an awful lot about football coaching around the early 1900s!-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 12:53, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
can people help me with the Javon Ringer article? I need help on expanding the lead, more suggestions on what to do to help can be found here and the [Wikipedia:Peer review/Automated/November 2008#Javon Ringer|automated peer review page]]. With some help, i think i could get this up to GA standards. - - ' The Spook ( TALK) ( Share the Love with Barnstars) 19:11, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Robert Park, a college football player for Syracuse, later moved to Pennsylvania, where he coached football and was a professor at Geneva College. This edit adds American football players from Pennsylvania: is this considered appropriate? After all, he didn't play football and live in Pennsylvania at the same time. Nyttend ( talk) 13:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello! I recently created template:FloridaGatorsFootball, and I was wondering what everyone thought of having a template like this for all the teams. It combines the seasons and head coaches templates and adds a bit more links to related pages. In some cases, such as Florida-Florida State rivalry, it could be used in place of template:University of Florida, because it is more specific to the topic. I would like to create one for every team, but would like to ask the Wikiproject first! Richmond96 ( talk) 00:08, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
(UTC)
What about Quarterbacks? Should this be used or the QB navbox? ~ Richmond96 t • c 13:44, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
A fact from Francis Dunn appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on November 21, 2008.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 00:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Alright, Rich Rodriguez did an interview with Michigan Today which is an online magazine for alumni of the University of Michigan. It was part of a big feature article by John Bacon, a lecturer at Michigan who has written for Time, ESPN, Sports Illustrated and a best selling book about Bo Schebemchler. The article can be found here: [16]. In it, Bacon makes the out of left field assertion that Rodriguez was born in Chicago. Rodriguez then discusses moving to West Virginia in the second grade. Now, I updated his article with this as this is a reputable source and the words are coming from his own mouth, but it's contantly (poorly) changed whenever I do, always by new accounts who provide no rationale. Can anyone here offer help/advice. -- MichiganCharms ( talk) 12:12, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi everyone, I have been having a problem with an anon on the Egg Bowl article. He is insisting that the article only cover games from 1927 to present (from the year the game was officially called the "Egg Bowl"), however, that is unusual to say the least, considering the Apple Cup, Battle for the Iron Skillet, Iron Bowl, Crab Bowl, etc, all cover the entire series.
I have been trying to open a line of dialogue on the discussion page with him, but he has not done so. I've also tried opening on a dialogue on his talk page, but he blanks it every time I write something there. No other editors have interjected, and now it's turning into an edit war, and I'd appreciate others' opinions. Thanks! CH52584 ( talk) 04:07, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
I've noticed that we often find AFDs started by well-meaning editors from outside the US who assume that a college sports league (and its key players) must not be all that notable because its not a professional league. The confusion is magnified by the existence of the NFL. What they don't realize is, unlike CFL or Arena, college football is often the other major league other than the NFL. In order to create some factual ammunition for disputes over D-I FBS (top-level) college football, I found the following data from credible sources that I'd like to share so that others can use it to educate user when needed:
I hope these figures will help, and if anyone can find more numbers to throw in --please do! -- Bobak ( talk) 16:25, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
ATTENTION WP:ATHLETE is being re-written. There is a very big discussion here. The re-writing is focusing mainly on amateur athletes. You may well wish to participate.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 16:46, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
The Dave Meggyesy article that I started needs some help. I can find lots about his book and the related controversy, but almost nothing about his college and NFL careers. The pro football databases do not have defensive statistics for the 1960s, except for the number of games played. There are a couple of Google News hits that say he was an All-American at Syracuse, but I'd have to pay for an article in order to see the details--such as whose list he was on. If anybody has access to sources of Meggyesy's performance at St. Louis or at Syracuse, please add it to the infobox or start a new section. The article still seems stubbish for the NFL and college football projects, although I classified it as at Start for WP:BIO.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hjal ( talk • contribs) 12:30, November 12, 2008
Alright, as most of you know it has pretty much been a unwritten standard that you don't link a specific rank from one week (just talking about the number itself) to the main NCAA rankings article for that entire particular year. I have came across a non-registered user who is insisting that the numbers under rankings in info boxes and coaches career templates be linked, he is only doing it on Ole Miss related pages though ( 2008 Ole Miss Rebels football team and Houston Nutt) which leads me to believe he or she is just a fan of a particular team and doesn't really have an interest in what works for this project. He isn't linking the poll (coaches or AP) he is linking the actual numbers. (ex 20, 14 etc) This seems very silly to me and would create more confusion to a regular viewer than it would help them. It is like linking a specific game to a general season article. Just not very logical in my opinion. Just wanted to get some other opinions on this. Thanks. Rtr10 ( talk) 18:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Does a policy currently exist for which rankings to use when citing what a team was ranked at a given point in the season? If not, I believe one should be created so it is documented and standardized across the board for all football articles. I propose that for weeks where the BCS rankings are available that the BCS rankings be used and that when these are not available that the AP poll be used, followed by the Coaches poll. Comments? ---- Rodzilla ( talk) 22:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
"Im An Asian" made an edit on the Alabama Crimson Tide football page to the number of national titles, changing the number from 12 (the number the school recognizes, as well as most media outlets), to 7 (the number of "wire" titles...AP + UPI titles), and threatens anybody who changes it back with a vandalism warning.
It seems to me that there is nothing that dictates the source of the number of national titles, simply that it be the number that is "generally accepted," not from a specific organization, and it seems to be beyond the scope of this project to dictate which number should be used.
And, I might add that the BCS champion is only guaranteed the USA Today/Coaches national title, not the AP title (see LSU in 2003, who won the Coaches/USA Today Poll, but USC won the AP), so, in that case, LSU did not win what "Im An Asian" would consider a wire title.
So, that being as it is, I am going to change it back, and I would appreciate others opinion on this. CH52584 ( talk) 01:08, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Actually, we've been going off of wire titles for a long time now. THere have been discussions on changing back to non-wire, or rather "claimed titles" (especially since the wires only started naming champions in the 1930s) but no consensus was ever reached. Alabama is notorious for its 12 claim. --
Bobak (
talk) 20:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Okay, as we can see from the above conversation, we're getting people who want the school's claimed national titles versus the wire national titles --this time with citations. We really need to figure out a uniform position because some articles are following the CFB policy of using wire and others are not --this is problematic because people are, in good faith, giving and receiving vandalism warnings to people who may not know of one policy or the other. How should we move forward? I have not been happy with the current policy, but regardless we need to have consensus and uniform implementation (and, if necessary, enforcement). -- Bobak ( talk) 16:07, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
I propose the use of the AP poll across the board for all locations throughout wikipedia where football team rankings are listed. This proposal stems from the discussion above and I believe that Johntex did an excellent job of summarizing the pros of the AP poll (the very last post above). Please post agree, disagree, or comment (neutral). ---- Rodzilla ( talk) 02:11, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
There's a problem developing in the Category:College football seasons area. User Maple Leaf is creating new FBS categories for seasons already covered by I-A. I've noticed that Ohio State season articles are being put into these new categories. A few days ago I nominated two of the categories for deletion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 December 10#Category:1997 NCAA Division I FBS football season. Can someone help out here and leave the guy a note and get the incorrect categories deleted? -- Geologik ( talk)
Hey all. There's a new college football featured article candidate up for review right now. I posted 2006 Gator Bowl for comments, criticism, and support, and anything you'd care to add would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 07:41, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Without any warning, a handful of editors had a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content today and decided for everyone in the Project that there is a so-called "severe overuse problem" with college football logos. This is hardly the first time its come up, and its been heavily discussed and we've come to the current system with one logo per season page. While they're acting in good faith, they've gone and made changes across the CFB spectrum, even changing the Template:NCAATeamFootballSeason. I'm trying to keep the sudden changes to a minimum and encouraging them to come discuss the matter here. -- Bobak ( talk) 22:33, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
What a fackin' toolbag. I hope he's not older than 16. Jesus Christ. How do you expect anyone to take your arguments seriously when all you've done is express your views in a condescending and immature manner? How about working to improve pages instead of crusading against the use of logos? *facepalm here* -- Geologik ( talk) 21:38, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
Can someone take a look at The Game (Harvard-Yale)? I added logos like every other rivalry mentioned in that article, added good fair use rationales, and Hammersoft came by and deleted it, claiming that there was "no consensus" for adding logos. I understand she is trying to change the consensus, that is her right, but to say that there is no consensus for that type of edit belies her whole argument against the existing consensus. Can someone here take a look at her recent edits?-- 2008Olympian chitchat 01:52, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
This project would probably be interested in the debate on Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(people)#WP:ATHLETE reform: the other side, concerning the wording of WP:ATHLETE. You may also be interested in the debate on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Devon Kennard, an AfD seeking to delete numerous articles on college football players. - auburnpilot's sock 08:00, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
There is a discussion occurring about whether certain college-football related pages should include a logo. You are invited to participate in the discussion if you wish. permalink to discussion as of this point in time. Johntex\ talk 20:40, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Any thought to articles on non Division I-A programs? The Ivy League, to take the most prominent example, has a long and storied football history, and currently there aren't even specific articles for Ivy League school athletic programs as a whole, much less football teams individually. Compare coverage of I-AA football with, for instance, single A minor league baseball or lower ranks of the English football system (e.g. Conference National teams), and it seems like these programs get very short shrift. Princeton played in the first game of American football ever played, and has a program going back 140 years, but all we have about it is a single paragraph. The same is more or less true for all the other Ivies' football teams. And beyond the Ivies, I-AA teams regularly provide players to the NFL, are occasionally televised, and draw thousands of fans - oughtn't coverage be better? john k ( talk) 15:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
I'd love to see more people get involved with creating and editing articles for teams below I-A. I know Paul has done a lot of the Division II, III and NAIA page creations. I mostly spend my time on Division I-AA, especially the
Appalachian State Mountaineers football and
Southern Conference related articles. I updated the infoboxes for all the I-AA conferences awhile back but the pages themselves could use some work. Take a look at the
Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/MasterTeamTable as it'll give a good idea on what's been created and what hasn't. I've spent a lot of time organizing it and trying to find as many team and season articles to link as I could. I keep tabs on and organize
List of NCAA Division I FCS football programs and over the last few days I've been working a bunch on
List of NCAA Division I FCS football stadiums. I also started
List of NCAA Division I-AA football seasons. We've got articles for the
2006,
2007, and
2008 seasons so far. I also created the I-AA playoff templates found here:
Category:NCAA Division I FCS playoffs navbox templates and the {{
Division I FCS National Champions}} template. More help is always appreciated. --
Geologik (
talk) 19:24, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
We've got an interesting situation: there's an article about a USC reserve of absolutely no notability, Steve Gatena, but somehow it got by an AfD without consensus ( 3-3, with one of the keeps being a new account and the other its PR-titled creator; the WP:CFB voters were 2 for delete and 1 for no opinion). Let me be clear, I am a firm supported of notable college athletes being worthy of inclusion --but if this precedent holds, any player on any D-IA team will be fair game for an article. I don't think the greater Wikipedia community at-large is going to go for this, I'm trying to prevent things from getting out of control. The article is a puff-piece and the photos are call CP-violations desperately trying to show some notability when, as someone who has a huge knowledge of USC football (just see the FA I made of the 2007 season), this is not a notable person. If this had slipped by with another team, I may not have caught it, but this is an article of nothing. Am I being out of line here? This ended up slipping through because of lack of attention --Would the fellows of WP:CFB be willing to chime in if this gets renominated? -- Bobak ( talk) 17:37, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
I realize people are a bit distracted by the Non-free content discussion, but I have gone ahead and re-nominated the Steve Gatena article for AfD. Please participate (one way or the other), the last AfD had a total of 6 votes which --given the significance of this notability decision for a walk-on-- is far too low. -- Bobak ( talk) 18:24, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Can someone please help me with the 1998 Big 12 Championship Game page? The game went into double OT, and I can't get the infobox to show the two overtime periods. K-State scored 3 points in each period, and A&M scored 3 in the first, and 6 in the second period. Thanks in advance Topgun530 ( talk) 19:57, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Users opposing the use of College Football team logos being used in articles through out the College Football project have filed a Request for Comment trying to ban use of team logos. As I am sure you know our current standard/system of using logos legitimately with fair use rationales do not violate any wikipedia policy. It would be appreciated if you could take a moment and voice you opinion on the subject here: RFC: Use of logos on sports team pages. Thank you in advance and thank you for your contributions to the College Football Project. Rtr10 ( talk) 04:31, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Everyone remember to keep a cool head. Given how adamant both sides are, this could end up moving up in the dispute resolution process. Acting badly isn't going to help us, and will harm individuals (and arguable the whole). In the meantime, if you want to get more attention on this important discussion, you can place a notice, similar to the one JohnTex used above, on the discussion pages of affected articles, to let people know there is a conversation going on that will influence those articles. Remember, as per WP:CANVASS, you have to keep it neutral. This is a variant of how JohnTex did it that you can use: "There is a Request for Comment occurring about whether certain college-football related pages should include a logo. This is an article that would be affected by the decision. You are invited to participate in the discussion if you wish. permalink to discussion as of this point in time." (feel free to use it) I recommend avoiding individual user talk pages and reviewing the WP:CANVASS guideline before going forward. I think we will prevail on the merits of our arguments, we just need people involved in areas such as college football and college basketball to know what's going on. Let's just keep it cool, and to it the right way. -- Bobak ( talk) 21:16, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
As the NFCC talk page was becoming difficult to navigate (it was 400K), I have moved the RFC to a subpage at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/RFC on use of sports team logos. If you had the talkpage watchlisted, you may wish to add the subpage also. Best, Black Kite 11:31, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
I have counted 11 national titles, but the person who is controlling the USC Trojans football page counts 7. What gives?
I have heard the USC Trojans football dept claims 11 national titles. (1928, 1931, 1932, 1939, 1962, 1967, 1972, 1974, 1978, 2003, 2004)
For the 1939 team:
"The 1939 Trojans were presented with the Knute Rockne Intercollegiate Memorial Trophy, at the time emblematic of the nation's No. 1 team. The trophy (originally called the Rissman National Trophy) was given to the team that finished atop the Dickinson System, a mathematical point formula devised by Illinois economics professor and nationally-respected football analyst Frank G. Dickinson. His system crowned a national champion from 1926 to 1940 (with predated rankings in 1924 and 1925). It was the first to gain widespread national public and media acceptance as a "major selector," according to the NCAA Football Records Book."
http://usctrojans.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/072604aaa.html [/quote]
Teams such as Michigan, Stanford and SMU have claims championships solely using the Dickinson System as well, and they are not disputed. USC should have the same right. ( Phenix621 ( talk) 22:24, 1 December 2008 (UTC))
Is there any reason we couldn't just split up the "national titles" section on the infobox into multiple sections? So USC's infobox would say Dickinson National Titles X, AP National Titles X, BCS National Titles X and so on. It would add a little more length to the infobox but it seems to me like the easiest way to defuse a reoccurring problem we have regarding this issue and provide a lot more clarity on where the total number championships listed came from Ryan2845 ( talk) 16:59, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
See below for the newly-minted RfC. — Scien tizzle 20:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
I don't think splitting "wire" (which isn't used very often in the media) and "claimed" is a good idea, and I also don't think an RfC was necessary. But here we are :-) -- Bobak ( talk) 21:26, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
If you look on the sporting news alamanc regarding NCAA titles for college football, they grant USC 10 titles (1939 goes to Texas A&M). Not only that, but they USC the Dickinson System as a legitimate and a major determinate for the national title.
http://www.sportingnews.com/archives/almanac/nfl/cfbnatch.html
And moreover, if you want to remove USC's 4 titles pre-AP, then you should remove them for Stanford, Michigan, Notre Dame and SMU as well. I have listed my arguements under the USC trojans talk page(under USC titles again.....). TO be fair, either we grant USC claims to the 4 titles they say, or remove all title given. Phenix621 ( talk) 00:10, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Edit warring consistently occurs regarding the appropriate number of national titles to be listed in a team's infobox when the number of AP/Coaches/BCS titles, claimed titles and/or other externally awarded titles varies for any particular team. I've detailed much of this in a thread above, but will lay out everything as clear as possible here.
Template:NCAAFootballSchool is the widely-used infobox for college football school articles. On February 29, 2008, Allstarecho ( talk · contribs) removed the "wire" from "Wire national titles", which had been added back on December 30, 2006, by PassionoftheDamon ( talk · contribs) (during this Dec 2006-Jan 2007 discussion). The topic was broached once on Template talk:NCAAFootballSchool, referring to the aforementioned Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football thread, which seems to be the largest centralized discussion on the issue.
What makes this a problem is that Div-1A football is the only college sport in which the NCAA doesn't run a championship, and therefore they don't "recognize" any particular claim to a championship; the best we get is a list (starts on p.81) of every selector's yearly pick. While this is a reasonable way to go in terms of quality sourcing with minimal external bias, many years list multiple teams that most practical fans would not consider that year's (co-)champion--i.e., only 8 of the last 50 years list a true consensus champ. The situation is clearly muddier prior to the introduction of the AP poll in 1936, compounded by the fact that the two major polls took their final votes before the bowl games until '67 (AP) & '73 (Coaches). Thus, in any given year, there are commonly multiple teams that have some arguable claim to a national title; some schools accept and promote all of these claims, some only recognize the "major" selectors.
This is a case where each potential listed number has problems and benefits, particularly regarding WP:NOR in whether and how Wikipedia should filter these different categories:
Assuming that "national titles" is a field that has wide support for inclusion (in some way) in the infobox, I propose a few options that may address this issue and help (re-)establish consensus on Template:NCAAFootballSchool:
Option 1: Leave the template as it currently is and list wire titles. Although, re-adding "wire" (or maybe "poll"?) to the infobox with a link to NCAA Division I FBS National Football Championship would likely help ease terminological confusion.
Option 2: Leave the template as it currently is and list the number in the NCAA record book.
Option 3: Change the template to "Claimed national titles" and allow schools' individual claims to be listed.
Option 4: List both wire & claimed titles
National titles X wire (Y claimed)
Wire national titles X
Claimed national titles Y
Further suggestions are welcome. — Scien tizzle 20:21, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
I was bored for a few minutes, so I made this. The image is one that I took myself at a Georgia Tech football game. Its included in a GT Football article, and I thought it made a good fit.
This user is a member of WikiProject College Football. |
{{User Project CFB}}
Fell free to add it to your user page.
Ndenison
talk 23:50, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
I restored another " West incident" article at John D. Schwender. Turns out there's some good sources (washington post, chicago trib, etc) on the faculty of the school voting to discontinue the program for a year due to excessively rough practice sessions. Anyway, we're now at 35% of the West deletions getting restored.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 06:01, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Can someone check Special:Contributions/72.208.8.229? The IP has been adding incorrect information to hockey articles. I tried double-checking the football edits, but I have no idea how to verify what they've added.- Wafulz ( talk) 16:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Chas Henry is a Sophomore not a Senior on the Florida Gators roster. How can this be changed? I cannot edit the page. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Rwbannon (
talk •
contribs) 23:26, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Seriously though, I noticed there were issues with incomplete fair use rationales for the WVU logo, but then I noticed they had some older teams (that certainly predated their current logo), so I went through and found the old logos online. Now the two relevant teams, 1975 and 1969, have the actual team logo from those years. Anyone else thing this is a good idea for older team pages? The actual trademark on these logos is almost certainly abandoned, though the copyright ownership (unless they were made pre-1923), would be active. Thus an abandoned logo from pre-1923 would be straight-up public domain, not sure how many of those there are. -- Bobak ( talk) 21:26, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
While the FedEx/Big Ten logos are more creative, the threshold for originality is exceptionally low. The US case that is now cited is the Supreme Court decision in Feist v. Rural (1991, text here). It was a case over one phone book literally copying another (not original), but in reaching the decision in laid out a good summary of how low the threshold actually is:
The sine qua non of copyright is originality. To qualify for copyright protection, a work must be original to the author. . . . Original, as the term is used in copyright, means only that the work was independently created by the author (as opposed to copied from other works), and that it possesses at least some minimal degree of creativity. . . . To be sure, the requisite level of creativity is extremely low; even a slight amount will suffice. The vast majority of works make the grade quite easily, as they possess some creative spark, "no matter how crude, humble or obvious" it might be.(from Feist)
So my point is that the old WVU logo could arguably fall into this minimum degree of creativity, "no matter how crude, humble or obvious" it might be. As such, we should be careful and assume that it is remains under copyright and used under fair use. -- Bobak ( talk) 19:07, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm getting flustered by some Wikians who are using the short names in some of the yearly bowl game pages. I, for one in the last couple years have used the full name of the school and team nickname (i.e. "Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Hokies") while some use the shorter version (i.e. "Virginia Tech Hokies") in the game summeries on the annual pages, NCAA football bowl games, 2007-08 as a most recent example. However, this year, I feel that we should not do one or two sentance recaps on that page, rather than that, have a summary on each bowl game page with the full school name. Examples include 2008 Armed Forces Bowl, 2009 Cotton Bowl and 2009 BCS National Championship Game, of which I have put the proper name but instead use the short version. In such cases, I would like to see the following schools (such as Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, LSU, etc.) be listed as folows with a back link to the team that year (such as ((2009 Ole Miss Rebels football team|University of Mississippi (Ole Miss) Rebels)) (using the Wikilink brackets):
These are the only schools that I know of with this problem, and complicating matters, both Southern California and South Carolina share the "USC" initals, hence "Southern California" is usually used in the recaps and stories in lieu of the USC initals. Please take this under consideration, and thanks. NoseNuggets ( talk) 2:54 PM US EST Jan 12 2009.
Just wanted to give you all a heads-up that I've submitted 2008 ACC Championship Game to be a featured article. Any comments, questions, concerns, criticism or support you'd care to add on the review page would be appreciated. Thanks! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 05:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Would anyone else be interested in having a "Part of a series on.." template for college football? (describing the major aspects of it) For examples of what I mean, and ways in which this sort of template can be used, see Template:Judaism, Template:History of Australia, Template:Censorship, Template:Islam, Template:Love table, Template:BibleRelated, Template:Creationism2, etc... I could create one for college football fairly quickly to see what people thought of it before implementing it, if anyone would be interested. Cardsplayer4life ( talk) 06:09, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
<---I was messing around with a template for one, but I started thinking, should this be a template about all of college football or just Division I? I say that because if it were on all of college football, then it would need to be much more general and include links to Division II, Division III, and NAIA stuff as well, and likely could not contain information on, say, the BCS and whatnot. (Well, not as detailed information on it anyway, since it would be more of an overview) I don't know what the best format would be. Anyone have any ideas? Cardsplayer4life ( talk) 07:42, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry I didn't mention this earlier, but another new college football bowl game FAC has been submitted — and this time, it's not by me. Strikehold has submitted 2008 Humanitarian Bowl to FAC, and more reviewers and commenters are needed. Thanks! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 11:48, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
|
I thought this WikiProject might be interested. Ping me with any specific queries or leave them on the page linked to above. Thanks! - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 21:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
There is a thread on the administrators' noticeboard which may affect editors involved in this WikiProject. Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Lyrics. CrazyPaco ( talk) 01:06, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
There is another vote going on to determine the way college and university logos can be used in sports articles for those interested. Cardsplayer4life ( talk) 23:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Would a few eyes, uninvolved of course :), mind taking a look at just the lead section and how it is curently crafted. I would rather remove the phase "well-known" per WP:PEACOCK, but have been met with pretty feirce resistance. I am sure there is a better way to write this material so that term is avoided but still covers this factually. Thanks in advance. -- Tom 13:54, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to let everyone know that I've signed up the project for article alerts, an automated notification of events like AfDs and things like that. It's been linked in the project navigation toolbar. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 11:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot ( Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:09, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
The project almost has full inclusion for Division I FBS team articles, with 109 (91%) by my count. We're also very close on 2008 season articles for Division I FBS teams, with 101 (84%). Anyone interested in helping close the loop on these? Strikehold ( talk) 01:35, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Please refer to my comments made here about the 2009 Sugar Bowl article's neutrality. I'm debating on removing the entire game summary section, as I believe it might just be clever vandalism. The entire section is unreferenced, and has some wild slanting in Utah's favor, in my opinion. Help and comments would be appreciated. :) – LATICS talk 18:29, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Someone from here might want to look over the article on Chris Beatty and comment at the afd, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Beatty, it'd be useful for those of us with less of a clue to help voice an opinion. Ta. Hiding T 11:49, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows ( full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to
report bugs and
request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a
"news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none
parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at
Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Thanks. — Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 08:58, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)