![]() | 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 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
At Junior Seau, the forced fumbles and pass deflections listed in the infobox and at Junior_Seau#NFL_stats differ from those listed at http://www.nfl.com/player/juniorseau/2502886/profile. Even http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/213/junior-seau and http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/SeauJu00.htm are different. AFAIK, neither FF or PD is an official NFL stat; for that matter, neither is tackles. Is there any preference on:
1. Which, if any, unofficial stats to list in the article in the:
2. Which stats site to use as a reference
I wonder if anything besides tackles is important enough to list as an unofficial stat.— Bagumba ( talk) 00:44, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
74.211.64.54 ( talk) 00:53, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
With the of participation so far, there is no consensus for the edits to add FF or PD. Per WP:NOCONSENSUS, "a lack of consensus commonly results in retaining the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit."— Bagumba ( talk) 19:37, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
What is the motivation for including the bottom navbox in Template:2014 NFL Draft, which allows navigation to other draft navboxes, not articles? If it is for maintenance purposes only for editors, I propose to use <includeonly>, so that it is only visible on the template page, not in articles.— Bagumba ( talk) 07:09, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
There's a dispute over schedule layouts; compare this to this, and, through this discussion, I hope to draw a consensus. I believe the latter represents the better format, as its sortable and easier on the eyes, with a more concise use of color. Please comment; thanks. Seattle ( talk) 20:42, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
I would also change "Game Site" to the more succinct "Stadium". I don't see the television station that aired the game listed in either the "Recap" link or the reference provided. Otherwise, that seems good. Possibly RaysRates can help here? Seattle ( talk) 03:14, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
There are a lot of links to proposed tables, and waves to an existing "standard" format. For my clarification, can someone point to a specific article or style guide which is considered the existing standard. Thanks.— Bagumba ( talk) 19:00, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Limit color to a few cells I have to side with @Seattle's rationale: limit color to a few strategic cells (say, opponent and score). I haven't heard what makes a schedule table so unique that color needs to be applied to the entire row. FLs generally limit their coloring to select cells, and do not gratuitously highlighting an entire row. While an analogy was made to other GA articles, there is nothing in Wikipedia:Good article criteria that reviews style; that is in Wikipedia:Featured list criteria under 4a: "Visual appeal. It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and colour; and a minimal proportion of items are redlinked." It's not enough for me to stick with status quo unless there is a compelling rationale that supports why it has been done that way.— Bagumba ( talk) 06:27, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
I am at my wits end...everything I try to fix the Los Angeles Rams colors fails. I got the colors to be correct for 1964-1972 and 1973-1994, but then it kills 1946-1963. When I try to fix 1946-1963, it has ranged from killing the entire color template to killing 1964-1994 for the Rams. So PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, if someone could fix the colors for me it could be greatly appreciated.
1946-1963
Primary/Background
#F5D015
#F5D015
Secondary/Font Color
#183990
#183990
Tertiary/Outline
#183990
#183990
1964-1972
Primary/Background
#183990
#183990
Secondary/Font Color
white
white
Tertiary/Outline
white
white
1973-1994
Primary/Background
#183990
#183990
Secondary/Font Color
#F5D015
#F5D015
Tertiary/Outline
#F5D015
#F5D015
Thank you! -- CASportsFan ( talk) 22:21, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Here's an idea that I would like to propose: removing the networks and kickoff times from the schedule boxes for ALL past NFL team season articles — once a team's season ends. I think it's redundant to display the network and time if the game/season has passed. Once the NFL schedule is released (in April), then I think it would be better to still keep the network and times for upcoming games, then remove them once a team's season ends.
I haven't started anything yet, but as an example, this is the preseason schedule table from the 2014 Denver Broncos season (with the networks and kickoff times removed):
Week | Date | Opponent | Result | Record | Game site | NFL.com recap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | August 7 | Seattle Seahawks | W 21–16 | 1–0 | Sports Authority Field at Mile High | Recap |
2 | August 17 | at San Francisco 49ers | W 34–0 | 2–0 | Levi's Stadium | Recap |
3 | August 23 | Houston Texans | L 17–18 | 2–1 | Sports Authority Field at Mile High | Recap |
4 | August 28 | at Dallas Cowboys | W 27–3 | 3–1 | AT&T Stadium | Recap |
One more thing: I really don't think adding the attendance is relevant to a schedule box — that's what the week-by-week game capsules are for. DPH1110 ( talk) 01:55, 24 February 2015 (UTC)DPH1110
Believe it or not those things (especially those related to prime time games) are very important. Including the network and times allows the viewer to very quickly understand the basic circumstances of the game. Toa Nidhiki05 13:03, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Sep. 7 at Miami .....................1:00 Sep. 14 at Minnesota .................1:00 Sep. 21 Oakland ......................1:00 Sep. 29 at Kansas City (Mon)..........8:30 Oct. 5 Cincinnati ..................*8:30 Oct. 12 at Buffalo ...................1:00 Oct. 16 New York Jets (Thu) ..........8:25 Oct. 26 Chicago ......................1:00 Nov. 2 Denver .......................4:25 Nov. 9 BYE Nov. 16 at Indianapolis .............*8:30 Nov. 23 Detroit ......................1:00 Nov. 30 at Green Bay .................4:25 Dec. 7 at San Diego ................*8:30 Dec. 14 Miami ........................1:00 Dec. 21 at New York Jets .............1:00 Dec. 28 Buffalo ......................1:00 * All times ET; Sunday night games in Weeks 5-16 subject to change
Monday and Thursday night games are in parentheses, and Sunday night games are marked with an asterisk. We could do something similar. Games that are flexed or postponed could also be marked with a footnote. A "network" column could be easily replaced by a boilerplate message basically stating "Unless otherwise noted, all Sunday Night games are on NBC; Monday night games are on ESPN; Thursday Night games are on CBS/NFL Network; and Sunday afternoon AFC away games and NFC away games are on CBS and Fox, respectively." Zzyzx11 ( talk) 08:01, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
@ Richmond96: When the NFL schedule is released next month, I think it will just be easier to input the schedule in the same fashion as last season, and use tooltip commands for games that occur on dates other than Sunday. I'm guessing that flexible scheduling will once again begin with Week 5. On a side note, last year's NFL schedule was released on April 23 (2014); my guess is that the 2015 schedule will be released on or around the same date (circa April 21–23), one week before the draft DPH1110 ( talk) 03:45, 17 March 2015 (UTC)DPH1110
A string of edits to Monday Night Football-related topics around 03:09, 19 March 2015 by Bogger1 changed the whole branding of Monday Night Football from ESPN to Fox Sports 1. Is this true? I was going to revert, then saw the extent of the modifications. J♯m ( talk | contribs) 03:47, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Template:Central Texas Sports and several similar navbox templates have been
nominated for deletion. Given that the subjects of these navboxes are within the scope of WikiProject NFL, you are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Dirtlawyer1 (
talk)
14:54, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Due to accessibility concerns, there were some recent tweaks to Infobox NFL player. One of them was to the display of the first and last career appearance for a player. Basically, all infobox entries need to have a label and a data field, to allow for automated retrieval of data. Use Dan Marino as an example. Before it had "Debuted in 1983 for the Miami Dolphins". However, it was changed to have a label of "Debuted in", and its data value is "1983 for the Miami Dolphins". Thus, the infobox now displays: "Debuted in: 1983 for the Miami Dolphins". Marino now also has a corresponding "Last played in" field.
First of all, I think the labels ending with "in" sound a bit clumsy. Is there a more elegant name? More importantly, are the first/last appearance even necessary, and can it just be removed? There is already "Career history" which list all the teams played and their respective years, which has this same information. I think this infobox was mimicking baseball's where the callup from the minors is a bigger deal.— Bagumba ( talk) 23:31, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Infoboxes are not "space-limited". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:31, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Accessibility#Accessibility_with_infoboxes that is related to Template:Infobox NFL player having data inside a header, such as the current placement of the player's number and team.— Bagumba ( talk) 00:31, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#Infobox college football player and Infobox NFL player to help form a consensus on whether Template:Infobox college football player and Template:Infobox NFL player should remain separate or be merged.— Bagumba ( talk) 01:36, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
We as a Wikiproject need to set new standards for these roster navbox templates. If you look at the Atlanta Falcons one, it's run by a single anonymous user who reverts anything that goes against his way, even though he doesn't follow how the other infoboxes are. (the user separates injured reserve and PUP lists into separate groups, when every other team template as them as simply a single "Reserved lists")
Because of this, I say we all agree on a common way every team template should be handled. Here are my suggestions based on how they've been in the past:
There is also no need for a "Free agent" and "Unsigned draft picks" group, since it's cleaner and easier to maintain if we just removed all the free agents from the template. ~ Dissident93 ( talk) 02:57, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Template:Greater Los Angeles Sports in 1946 and similiar templates have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2015_May_18#Greater_Los_Angeles_Sports_by_year_navboxes. Thanks.— Bagumba ( talk) 19:58, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Russ Peterson (American football player) to be moved to Russ Peterson (offensive lineman). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 22:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Jake Ryan (American football) to be moved to Jake Ryan. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:17, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Justin Brown (wide receiver) to be moved to Justin Brown. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:19, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
A recent IP edit broke the height in the infobox for the above (if the value is correct, the wikitext should be height_in=6+1/2
). There are no references, and the NFL.com link is broken. I seem to recall that
WP:BLP articles must have a reference to be kept these days. Is it worth trying to save this, or should it be deleted?
Johnuniq (
talk)
05:16, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Persondata has been deprecated and the template and input data are subject to removal from all bio articles in the near future. For those editors who entered accurate data into the persondata templates of NFL players and other bio subjects, you are advised to manually transfer that data to Wikidata before the impending mass deletion occurs. Here are two examples of Wikidata for football players: Dan Marino] and Tim Tebow. If you have any more questions about the persondata removal, Wikidata, etc., please ping me. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 12:45, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
An editor has repeatedly changed Steve Weatherford's weight from the weight stated by NFL.com and the Giants' official roster, claiming personal knowledge based on a Snapchat photo. [13] [14] [15] As far as I can see, this violates WP:BLP as well as our consensus of following the official information for player infoboxes. Scrutiny and opinions by other NFL-experienced editors would be helpful. -- Arxiloxos ( talk) 19:39, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest.-- Lucas559 ( talk) 22:46, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello - there is currently a discussion underway at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Date range redux to come to a final resolution the way dates for club tenure in infoboxs are displayed (e.g. - with a club from 2001–2007 or 2001–07). If you have an opinion one way or the other, please take part. The value in coming to a final resolution (either having language added to allow 8 digit date spans for this purpose or expressly forbidding it) is that it would provide certainty to these cases and stop needless reverting of this format one way or the other. If you do take part, please be sure to ground your arguments/opinions in fact, Wikipedia precedent and real world examples as opposed to preference only as this will help the project make the right call. There are thousands of articles (touched by thousands of editors) that use summary club tenure information in infoboxes, so there is clearly an advantage to settling it in a clear manner so all can comply. Thanks! Rikster2 ( talk) 04:25, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
There is something weird going on with the 2015 NFC East and 2015 NFC West standings templates — when you click on the Talk Page on the 2015 NFC East template (via the 2015 NFC West and NFC East season articles), it re-directs you to the NFC West Talk page, and vice versa. For example, when you click on the View link on the NFC East Standings template on the 2015 Dallas Cowboys season article, it re-directs you to the NFC West standings template. Is there a way this could be fixed? Thank you. DPH1110 ( talk) 17:23, 3 September 2015 (UTC)DPH1110
I have nominated Template:Legend of the Year for deletion. Please comment here. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 06:02, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Hey. I just changed the navboxes in Category:National Football League roster templates from {{ Navbox}} to {{ Team roster navbox}}, which keeps the number and the name together through nowrap. The unintended consequence was that it apparently doesn't react well with the {{ small}} template. [17] I removed the small template and got this. What do we all think? – Muboshgu ( talk) 23:30, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
There has recently been a discussion at the talk page of the WikiProject on Accessibility regarding Template:Infobox gridiron football person. In the past, the template only had a single set of parameters for playing_years and playing_teams. This caused editors to create lists using <br>. This violates Wikipedia's policies regarding accessibility (see WP:VLIST). To correct this issue, the template has been edited to include numbered parameters playing_years1/playing_team1 through playing_years20/playing_year20 (and similar for coaching, administrating, etc). Eventually, the parameters playing_years and playing_teams will likely be removed from the template and all articles will need to use the new parameters, in order to prevent future issues with accessibility. This template should generally not be in use in articles primarily related to this project, but in practice, many articles that this project will be interested in use it.
There is further discussion ongoing about whether these changes should be done manually or with a bot. You can read and contribute to the discussion at the talk page. ~ Rob Talk 21:45, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
The new editor Filipo Sooa ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been busy creating templates and redirects regarding the 1997 Green Bay Packers. I am not familiar enough with them to tell if they are useful or not. I can say that I am finding what is being done to be confusing so if any of the members of this project can take a look at things it would be appreciated. MarnetteD| Talk 03:53, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Is the coloured banner at the top of the table in List of Minnesota Vikings seasons actually necessary? User:Charlesaaronthompson has attempted to explain it as a matter of consistency between the Vikings list and other teams' lists, but since the Vikings have never been known by another name, is it necessary at all? I can understand it for teams that have moved around a lot (or even just once), but not teams like the Vikings and the Packers... – Pee Jay 09:46, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
There exists a prevalent accessibility issue in Template:Infobox NFL player caused by the use of small text to denote whether a player was on a team during the regular season or just during the offseason or on the practice roster. WP:FONTSIZE disallows the use of text smaller than 11px, and specifically states to avoid use of small text in infoboxes. Please see the relevant discussion at the template's talk page regarding the possible removal of the small tags from this text. ~ Rob Talk 06:15, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
This might be overly cautious, but since it's been so long since this was last discussed, it's probably best to gauge opinions.
There was a TfD discussion way back in 2012 to merge Template:Infobox NFL coach with Template:Infobox NFL player to create Infobox NFL biography. There was later a request to delay that merge pending a discussion here. The merge was never actually carried out, and it was rediscussed in the second half of 2013, where there appeared to be consensus to carry it out as per the TfD. The template still exists today, and we're approaching three years after the TfD. Among our current AFC head coaches (which I used for spot-checking purposes), half of them are already using the Infobox NFL player template, so I assume that the functionality of Infobox NFL player works for coaches at this point in time. Is there any reason not to finish carrying out this merge? ~ Rob Talk 12:02, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Can there be a parent template for the NFL roster navboxes, in the same way that Template:NFL roster exists? Some users have added in non-standard groups\info, and it would be nice to prevent that all together. If you want to see what I mean, look at the discussions I had on the talk page on the Falcons one. A parent template would prevent edit warring, like it does on the normal roster one. I can work on a sandbox prototype if the community agrees it should be done. ~ Dissident93 ( talk) 22:17, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
A while back, in a discussion which can be seen here, we discussed whether or not the rankings of the NFL Top 100 of each year should be listed in a player's infobox. In players that are listed regularly, it can really cloud up the infoboxes. There is no official guide to do this in the template which leads to some players having it and others not having it. It seems in this past discussion which was left alone, we were close to a consensus to remove it. Would you guys support or oppose this change? Chambr ( talk) 03:15, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
There is a discussion in which you may be interested on including "all colleges attended" in the pro football player Infobox, at Template talk:Infobox NFL player#Including "all" colleges attended in Infobox?. UW Dawgs ( talk) 00:54, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
There's been some ongoing vandalism over Rob Gronkowski and his middle. An editor (correctly) added a {{ cn}} tag to the middle name, because it became unclear what his middle name is (the two candidates appear to be James and Paxton). I removed the middle name altogether, because I'd rather not have the CN in the lead like that. If anyone can help determine what his middle name is, it would be really helpful. Calidum 03:49, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
For some time, I have been thinking about a suitable replacement for the helmet images on Infobox NFL team, ever since all of them were deleted on grounds of replaceable fair use back in 2012 ( see archived discussion). I think that having the team wordmarks on there would be a good idea. Over the past few years, all of them have been eventually uploaded onto Commons under {{ PD-logo}}. I have just made test edits to this effect on {{ Infobox NFL team/sandbox}} and Template:Infobox NFL team/testcases (putting the wordmark image next to the team logo in the same space where the helmet image use to be), and if there are no objections, I would like implement this before the Kickoff Game next week. Zzyzx11 ( talk) 08:33, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm starting to think that there is really no useful purpose to bold division opponents in the regular season schedule tables. I'm contemplating de-bolding division opponents for each team's season articles. DPH1110 ( talk) 00:29, 2 September 2015 (UTC)DPH1110
Hey, sports fans. In the next few weeks, Template:Infobox NFL player will replace the remaining 300 or so uses of Template:Infobox NFL coach. Infobox NFL player will support the current functionality of Infobox NFL coach, but will maintain the formatting of Infobox NFL player. We need a new name that everyone can live with for the infobox template. Here are the leading candidates for the resulting "merged" template:
Question: Is this infobox only to be used for NFL players & coaches, or is it for other NFL personnel, as well (GM's, owners, presidents, etc.)? Ejgreen77 ( talk) 02:19, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello all. I have been working on List of Washington Redskins players for quite awhile (currently going through each player and updating their pages). I was wondering if their has been any consensus regarding how these pages should be set up. Back when I was maintaining this page, I tried to limit the size of the article (currently still huge at 153kb) by making the list exclusive to players who have played at least five games with the franchise (per the recommendation of a peer review). However, it didn't seem to help too much. So I was thinking about doing what the List of Green Bay Packers players article does, and split the page into several articles by a grouping of letters. I ask because all of the other franchise players list articles seem to have EVERY player who played at least one game. Thoughts? Also, I think it would be a great idea to get some continuity going with these pages so that they all look at least somewhat similar, but I realize that's a monumental undertaking. Jwalte04 ( talk) 21:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Players who are waived/injured (if unclaimed) by a team revert to IR and are released only through an injury settlement. This is my interpetation. Correct? This is involving me and DoctorGiants. 2605:6000:54C2:1F00:CD5E:748B:CEE2:DB14 ( talk) 20:19, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
And do players that are waived/injured go directly to the inactive list, or can they just be removed from the teams' roster. User:DoctorGiants 20:25, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
They are placed on waivers and if they clear they are placed on the inactive list. Released only through injury settlement. 2605:6000:54C2:1F00:CD5E:748B:CEE2:DB14 ( talk) 20:29, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
I noticed the Toledo Maroons' colors work for infoboxes (e. g. Tom Brown), and was curious to see the equivalent of Module:College_color/data for NFL articles to see if it was possible to do the same for, say, the Frankford Yellow Jackets, or even odder cases like the Chicago Rockets. No luck in finding such; any help? Cake ( talk) 14:41, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Hey fellow NFL-heads. I'd like to solicit your opinions on a recent discussion regarding whether it's appropriate to include a paragraph related to Seahawks safety Kam Chancellor's recent holdout in the article on the 2015 season. The pro and con arguments have both been advanced in the discussion, so I won't attempt to rehash them here. It would be great if we could get some additional opinions. Thanks! — DeeJayK ( talk) 18:47, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Can someone respond to my comment I wrote about the Washington Redskins. Thank you! -- 74.130.133.1 ( talk) 14:39, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
This newish list article List of professional football players who spent their entire career with one franchise could use review by subject matter experts. Appear to use WP:OR, lacks citations, lacks expected (any) categories, question of title and scope (NFL vs all professional football), better as bullet list or sortable table, etc. Cheers. UW Dawgs ( talk) 16:01, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
I have nominated Template:Baltimore Colts (1953-1983) for deletion. Please comment here. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 05:10, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
In addition to Template:Baltimore Colts (1953-1983), noted above, Template:Los Angeles Rams has also been nominated for deletion. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 October 7 and comment on the discussions. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 00:45, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
I've nominated a series of obsolete, unused templates created in 2007 and related to NFL team colors. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 October 14#NFL/meta/color templates. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 20:20, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
I understand this could be kind of contentious seeing as it's a violent sport and certain parties involved in it would want to keep such things quiet. But should the infobox have a field for cause of death? Most articles infoboxes have that field. It would only make sense to add it to the infobox here. Cra sh Underride 05:42, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
We have an article at football pool about soccer, but the fantasy sports page is located at Fantasy football (association). There doesn't seem to be a football pool page, unlike Fantasy football (American). Shouldn't there be an American football - football pool article? -- 70.51.44.60 ( talk) 06:40, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
I've nominated the 1967 American Football League draft article for deletion. This and the subsequent two years the NFL and AFL participated in a Common draft. As such, this topic is covered in more detail in the 1967 NFL draft article. If you'd like to share your opinion on the topic, please do so on the AfD discussion page or on the article talk page. — DeeJayK ( talk) 16:52, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
It has recently come to my attention that some WP:NFL editors are using British/international style dates (e.g., 21 October 2014) in articles about American football players, written in American English. When Wikipedia article subjects are American in character, and the article text is written in American English, the articles should uniformly use the American-style MDY date format (e.g., October 21, 2014). This applies to birth dates and death dates in the lead, main body text and infobox; contract signing and game dates; and reference publication dates, as well as online reference retrieval dates in the article footnotes. Please do not use British-style DMY dates in articles about NFL teams and players -- it looks goofy. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 21:49, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Not sure we have a consensus here. DJSasso seems to favor style based on country of birth, while Dirtlawyer1 and I favor country of notable accomplishments. Here's another interesting example: Neil O'Donoghue, who played association football (soccer) in Ireland before moving to the US and becoming an American football placekicker for Auburn and then in the NFL. This article was a bit of a mess. I just spent some time editing it. There were British variant spellings describing his exploits in America ("honours", "programme"). I changed these to American spellings. Jweiss11 ( talk) 05:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Okay, so how do we wrap this discussion up and move forward? It seems we have a motion and a second that the project should follow the approach that you laid out in your initial post which was amended a bit to allow some limited exceptions. To wit: NFL articles should use the American date norms (e.g., October 21, 2014) except in the limited case of biographical articles for those who have gained notability outside of an American football context in another country where a different date format is the norm. In either case, the chosen date format should be applied consistently within a given article (i.e. in birth and death dates wherever they occur, in game or other dates mentioned in the article body and in all references). Is that statement something that we can build consensus around? — DeeJayK ( talk) 15:19, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
In light of this discussion, would it be appropriate/useful to add the {{ Use mdy dates}} template to the articles covered by this project (except for the limited exceptions called out previously)? If so, does anyone know of a bot that might be put to that task? — DeeJayK ( talk) 14:58, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
@ Charlesaaronthompson: has been updating NFL team templates in an (apparent) attempt to horizontally align the ten season-year links of xx00, xx02, ... xx09 which are typically grouped by decade.
Examples (expand the collapsed "Seasons (N)" section): Rams before and after, Seahawks, Saints.
The end result is bullets are now rendering unpaired to associated year articles in the team's first decade row. There has to be a better way to achieve the desired result. UW Dawgs ( talk) 00:24, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
I think this effort should probably be tabled, at least for now. I'm planning on addressing a cleanup and restructuring of the the NFL team navboxes. One problem that we have is that for every team navbox, e.g. Template:Arizona Cardinals, there is a team season navbox Template:Arizona Cardinals seasons. But the team navbox also contains links to all the seasons in a collapsed group. Both navboxes are transcluded on every team season article, e.g 2015 Arizona Cardinals season, leading to redundancy and unnecessary clutter. I prose that we eliminate the team season navboxes and streamline the team navboxes along the lines of what has been done for college football and college basketball, e.g. Template:Michigan Wolverines football navbox. Jweiss11 ( talk) 20:26, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Okay, so I'm not sure what should be done or if there's already been a discussion about this. Josh Gordon's NFL.com profile page lists his college as Utah, so should his infobox say the same? I know he never played a game for them, but I just thought I'd ask. Cra sh Underride 00:26, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Can someone update Template:2015 NFC standings? I added a few things but the team rankings are out of order. I've never worked on standings templates before so I don't want to make any incorrect edits. I'm not sure if all of the schedules are up to date, but either way, the team standings are currently out of order after this week. - Newyorkadam ( talk) 15:37, 10 November 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam
For anyone who is interested in the discussion, there is a proposal being discussed to rename the captioned page, possibly to either List of Super Bowls or List of Super Bowl games (both of which currently redirect to that page).
You can participate in the discussion at: Talk:List_of_Super_Bowl_champions#Rename.
Thanks.
-- Legis ( talk - contribs) 13:42, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
We are discussing "Los Angeles Football Club" at Talk:Los Angeles FC -- 70.51.44.60 ( talk) 06:14, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
I uberred an individual who seemed to be Hayden Epstein last week. As a Michigan alum, I have decided to beef up his article as a result. In researching his career, I see that NFL.com credits him with 72 career kickoffs 10 of which were touchbacks and 59 of which were returned. This means that on 3 of the kickoff somethings other than a touchback or return happened. What could those other things be?-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:48, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
For those interested in navboxes, there is an RfC about the use of WP:BIDIRECTIONAL that you may want to participate in at Wikipedia_talk:Categories,_lists,_and_navigation_templates#WP:BIDIRECTIONAL_navbox_requirements.— Bagumba ( talk) 07:09, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm playing in the sandbox with some tweaks to Template:Infobox NFL season which is used for the individual season articles for individual teams (e.g. 2015 Chicago Bears season). Specifically, I've implemented a change to the navigation at the bottom of the infobox that allows the user to jump to the previous and next season articles. This change is primarily aesthetic and brings this infobox in line with Template:Infobox NFL which is used for the league season articles (e.g. 2015 NFL season). There are several samples in the testcases page to allow you to see the change. As I know this template is widely used I've tried to find a number of diverse examples. I'd love to get some input on this change before I implement it. Feel free to comment here or on the template talk page. Thanks! — DeeJayK ( talk) 16:32, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
UW Dawgs ( talk) 13:30, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the response @ UW Dawgs:. However, I'm not sure I yet fully understand your reluctance to support this change. It seems as though your primary objection rests on the use of the arrows (← and →) rather than the "less than" and "greater than" symbols (< and >) to signal the links to the next and previous seasons.
Digging into the symbols, your primary (sole?) stated argument against them is that of "convention". I understand this to a point — it's nice to maintain some consistency among articles in the encyclopedia when it makes sense. However, I don't quite understand why you insist on maintaining this particular "convention". Maybe you can help me understand why this is so important to you. First off, looking at the other templates you've cited, I don't see a clear "convention" — three of them do use the < and > symbols but the NCAA example uses the "left angle quotation mark" and "right angle quotation mark" (« and »). In addition to this, I don't see a lot of other agreement within these templates with the implementation of the entirety of the next/previous navigation portion at the bottom of the infobox. To wit, the MLB template produces the links spelled out as < Previous season Next season >, the NBA template produces < 2005–06 2007–08 >, the NHL template produces <2004–05 2006–07> (with alignment that differs from that of the NBA) and as noted the NCAA template produces « 1898 1900 » (within a grey background with the word "Seasons" centered above). That's not strong evidence that a single standard exists; only two of these actually agree in a substantive way, and even among those two differences with regard to positioning remain. If anything, the NCAA example shows that other projects have taken it upon themselves to take a different tack. In fact, I would argue that (with the exception of the introduction of the arrow symbols), my proposal brings this NFL template more in line with the examples that have been cited.
As to your contention that the adoption of the arrows on the other NFL templates should be reverted, while you're certainly free to hold that opinion and that discussion can surely be had if you wish to raise it, I've seen absolutely no discussion (pro or con) regarding the arrows since those changes were introduced. I tend to think that this means that most editors either were completely ambivalent about the change or had a positive opinion of it. Certainly I've seen no one who was sufficiently incensed/annoyed by the change to raise any concerns.
Were we to set all concerns about "convention" and matching other templates/projects aside, I'd like to get your opinion on the aesthetics of the change. In other words, if we were designing this on a clean sheet of paper, which look would you prefer? I happen to feel strongly that the < and > are a poor choice given that those symbols are used in HTML markup and as such seeing them on a page makes me wonder if they are just stray markup artifacts or cruft. The arrows (← and →) read to me as more intentional while conveying similar information.
Sorry for the diatribe. I feel the need to let you know that my intention is not to be didactic or to dismiss your opinions. On the contrary, I think this discussion has already led to positive tweaks and I'd like to get/build consensus for these changes which (I think) improve the template, which is the entire point of this exercise. Thanks! — DeeJayK ( talk) 16:36, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template_talk:Infobox_NFL_biography#Question about the preferred display format after a merge of {{ Infobox NFL player}} and {{ Infobox NFL coach}}.— Bagumba ( talk) 04:43, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
User:AoorwHead has unilaterally moved Mercedes-Benz Stadium to another name for the second time, as he/she doesn't think two stadiums should have "the same name", meaning the Mercedes-Benz Superdome. Both moves were done without discussion. Unfortunately, the user vandalized the original title, thus the page can't be moved back except by an admin. Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 17:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Please help us come to a consensus regarding the requested move at Talk:Chicago Cardinals (NFL, 1920–1959)#Requested move 27 November 2015-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:41, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Is there a way we can merge the fields that are exclusive to the Infobox gridiron football person that WikiProject Canadian football used for CFL players in the one we use for NFL and AFL players/coaches so that it's one uniform box for all gridiron football players? It would make it less of a chore when a player goes from the NFL to the CFL or vice versa. Cra sh Underride 01:44, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
So, I created a new article. Could someone give it a rating, I'm biased so I shouldn't. Also, before anyone asks, he's played in two games this season for Dallas. Cra sh Underride 05:51, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
I may have uberred Randy Moss this weekend. Subsequently, I looked up his wikipedia page to determine that a skilled editor needs to attend to this article. I am hoping someone else wants to do this. There are may uncited paragraphs of facts. There are citation needed tags. The article is in bad shape in terms of WP:V. Someone needs to attend to this page.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:18, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Please see WT:WikiProject Articles for creation#Two independent drafts about the same subject where the arrival of two draft submissions about the same match caused a bit of confusion. One of the drafts Draft:Miracle in Motown has meanwhile been accepted into mainspace at Miracle in Motown while the other Draft:Miracle in Motown (2) is left in limbo in draft space. I think merging the efforts of both writers is the best way to avoid wasting the good work done by the author of the second draft. I know absolutely nothing about American football so I'm passing the ball here. Roger (Dodger67) ( talk) 14:43, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
As wiki has international readers may I suggest that the "type" of football being discussed and the country/nation applicable is described.
"Football" appears NOT to mean Association Football (UK) soccer rugby Rugby League Rugby Union
The country appears to Canada — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tekaham ( talk • contribs) 11:04, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
The problem with using "gridiron football" in articles written in American English, primarily for an American audience, is that most Americans have no clue what "gridiron football" is. "Gridiron" is an archaic nickname for the American sport, and is not widely used here anymore. When it is used, it is typically employed by American sports writers as a colorful metaphor for the playing field -- which is, of course, the actual origin of the term. Most British and Commonwealth sports fans know American football is not soccer or a rugby variant, although we have the occasional weird soccer partisans on Wikipedia who don't think American football should be called "football" because football players don't move the ball with their feet (well, other than punters and placekickers. If you want a sample of silliness, you only have to look at the talk page of the American football and History of American football articles, as well as the periodic outbreaks of edit-warring at those articles over the name of the sport. The irony is that virtually no one in the United States refers to the sport as "American football"; here, it's just "football" and most of the literate English-speaking world knows that. Linking to the articles for the sport, the player's position, the player's team, and the National Football League in the opening sentence of a player's bio is more than sufficient (to anyone who does not have some axe to grind) to identify the sport of American football.
And for the record, the "gridiron" sport name is mostly used in places like Australia, where they play soccer, two variants of rugby, Gaelic football, and their own homegrown Australian rules football, and where American football is a very minor sport. On Wikipedia, "American football" is more than sufficient to disambiguate the sport from soccer, the two rugby variants, and Gaelic and Australian rule football. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 19:53, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
I suppose there's a lot of other things to clean up in WP:NFL, so I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. In the meantime, non-American's like Nate Burleson have their lead as "... is a Canadian-born former American football wide receiver", which doesn't exactly say what his nationality is, but avoids the clumsy "is a Canadian American football wide receiver".— Bagumba ( talk) 21:49, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
The Announcerless Game, in DYK doesn't have an importance rating. JerrySa1 ( talk) 15:07, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
An IP is currently adding All-Pro's selections to the infobox from a website called "Spreadapedia". Clearly these are not notable and should not be in the infobox. I was told "You don't have any right to determine what All-Pro teams are valid and which are not" and "I will keep adding them, thank you very much". I don't want to violate 3RR so can I get some help reverting these?-- Yankees10 23:55, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Can I appeal to the sensibility of this WikiProject and ask that we remove all of the generic team logos from individual season articles? By my understanding, the "logo" parameter in {{ Infobox NFL season}} is supposed to be only for logos specific to that season (see 2010 Minnesota Vikings season), and therefore adding the generic franchise wordmarks to articles is inappropriate. Even though the wordmarks are copyright-free, it seems like unnecessary decoration to add them to the season articles. – Pee Jay 16:52, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Template:Los Angeles-St. Louis Rams Annual Sack Leaders has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Yankees10
00:23, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Just a heads up, I've created this article by splitting the NFL related content from Uniform number (American football) as it appeared to be dominating that article. I've also tried to improve it by moving the text around, changing the sections etc, but I haven't changed what any of it actually says, or at least I don't think I have. I'd like someone who knows more about the subject than me to give it a once over (and the NFL summary in the uniform article), to ensure I haven't introduced any glaring errors. Brown 72 DF ( talk) 19:52, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
According to Yankees10 ( talk · contribs), we should be using the "2016–" style instead of the same way we do in the infobox, which is "2016–present". Don't see why we are being inconsistent here, and I don't think what the NBA or NHL navboxes have should matter for the NFL. Comments? ~ Dissident93 ( talk) 02:19, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
The cynical side of me says move on to something else that adds missing content to Wikipedia, as opposed to a time sucker like this which probably will only get reverted even with a discussion. For a similar example, WP:NBA had a consensus at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Basketball_Association/Archive_17#Format_for_interim_coaches on how to list interim coaches in the coaches navbox, namely with a superscripted #, e.g. #. At some point they were all reverted without discussion, presumably in the name of "consistency". Moreover efforts to remove the word "pound" when referring to # in the key were overridden, again for consistency, even though £ is "pound" to a lot of the English-speaking world, and keys generally refer to *, †, ‡, §, etc visually without needing to explicitly write the words asterisk, dagger, double-dagger, or section sign.— Bagumba ( talk) 01:55, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
An IP was mass changing the piping of articles in the navboxes. See their edits. My main objection was to a rivalry like Chargers–Chiefs rivalry being shown instead of the previous format Kansas City Chiefs on Template:San Diego Chargers. It's implied the Chargers are involved, and it's repetitive to see "rivalry" over and over. Moreover, some might know not who the Chiefs are. I've blocked the user because they wouldn't acknowledge their talk page, but will unblock once I know they are at least seeing the message. Other changes they made, which I have no opinion either way, are changing the division from West to AFC West, when the conference is already listed above.— Bagumba ( talk) 00:38, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
I want to gently remind everyone: per MOS:CAPS, we use "sentence case" capitalization, which means we only capitalize the first word of a sentence, article title, section header, or a phrase or fragment that appears in an infobox data field -- unless individual words are proper nouns like the name of a person, place or organization. As applied to American football articles, that means we capitalize player and team names such as "Doug Pederson" and "Philadelphia Eagles," but we do not capitalize player positions such as "quarterback," coaching titles like "defensive coordinator," or statistics descriptions such as "rushing yards" and "return yards". If phrases that are non-proper nouns appear in infobox data fields or field labels, then only the first word of the phrase is capitalized.
If you are uncertain whether certain words or phrases should be capitalized, please refer to MOS:CAPS or ask for advice from your fellow editors here. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 20:00, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
How about {{ nowrap}}? The longer we make the infobox, the more text we need before we can put an image on the page and avoid WP:SANDWICHING.— Bagumba ( talk) 03:26, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
In infobox data fields, we capitalize the first word of the input data using sentence case per MOS:CAPS. If we're specifically discussing what gets capitalized in the player "position" field, here are some common examples:
In the main body text of an article, none of the foregoing should be capitalized at all -- unless they are the first word of a sentence. Hypothetical examples:
Bottom line: there are two basic rules of capitalization at work here:
Again, if you have any questions about capitalization, please refer to MOS:CAPS, or ask here. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 03:34, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
We sidetracked from Dissident93's issue. If multiple positions on a single line, ""Quarterback / Wide receiver" or "Quarterback / wide receiver"? NBA and Baseball choose the former (caps).— Bagumba ( talk) 06:03, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
To add a few more wrinkles to this issue, let me add my perspective. Much of my editing centers on college football coaches, most of who played at least college football, and many of who played multiple sports, particularly those that played in the early 1900s. In the player_positions field of Template:Infobox college coach, my practice has been to only capitalize the first word of the first listed position and to separate positions with commas, e.g. " End, tackle" as found at Harry J. Robertson. But then things get complicated for a guy like Bennie Oosterbaan! Jweiss11 ( talk) 07:56, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
What is this project's stance on succession boxes? I could have sworn the NFL was following suit with the college sports' projects to eliminate all of them ( this edit caught my attention). Jrcla2 ( talk) 21:48, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Five years ago, we eliminated all the kludgey succession boxes for NFL head coaches in favor of a single uniform navbox template for the full succession of head coaches of every NFL team. It was a good move. Since then, we have had a small number of editors add succession boxes for coordinators and other assistant coaches with no consensus to do so. It was a bad move, and partially defeated the original idea of doing away with succession boxes in our coaches bio articles. Our NFL articles do not need more bottom-of-the-page clutter.
A lot of editors hate succession boxes because they take up an ordinate amount of space relative to the marginal navigational aide they provide to our readers, because every one of them looks differently because their dimensions change based on the length of the included names and titles, and because they're butt ugly. Moreover, there is no screaming demand among our readers for a convenient graphic tool to navigate the succession of position coaches for every NFL team from the beginning of time through 2016. We have annual season articles for every season of every NFL team; for the occasional reader who really wants to know, for example, who every Indianapolis Colts assistant coach was, we should finish building out the coaches rosters for all of the individual team season articles -- most of them already exist. And as Schetm suggested above, creating lists of NFL coordinators would be a good idea, too. Both of those ideas would be meaningful content that would actually help our readers; succession boxes are just cruft. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 10:46, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
Why is mcneil an interceptions leader? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.86.14 ( talk) 23:50, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
On the Washington Redskins article, there has been a bit of controversy with how to rank them in regards to Super Bowl wins. (Are they ranked fourth all time with three wins, or seventh?) The discussion for it is here. ~ Dissident93 ( talk) 23:58, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Does anyone know anything about the "NFL Unsung Hero Award"? We do not appear to have an article on this award, and I am struggling to believe that it is anything approaching notable per WP:GNG, or even worth noting in player or coach infoboxes. If anyone can shed some light on this, I would be grateful. I've encountered it in a couple of infobox "highlights" sections, and my first impulse was just to delete it, but I thought I should inquire here first. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 13:57, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
I have started a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#NFL Logo Slick that was being used on Kansas City Chiefs. I had a dispute with another editor about it and I'm intrestred in getting some people with exiperce on editing NFL related pages to comment to help resolve the dispute. Thanks in advance to everybody that does I appreciate it.--Rockchalk 717 03:23, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
I looked at the Chiefs article's history, and it seems the larger problem lies with this edit: should the team colors mentioned in the article be their primary colors, or also their minor colors? Reliability of the source aside, it's pretty easy to eyeball and see that there is black (or some shade of it) used as an outline in the Chiefs uniforms and logos. Does that warrant it being a team color worth putting in the infobox? I would lean towards listing what RS's generally call the team's colors, and not blindly listing all colors found on a stylesheet, which is a form of original research.— Bagumba ( talk) 01:39, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
We really need a well-researched, well-sourced, and well-written article about the concept of the " quality control coach" in the NFL. This might be an excellent joint research project for some of our newer WP:NFL members as they get to know each other and how to build a properly written encyclopedia article. This is real topic that needs a proper article. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 16:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Ok cool, a single sentence is all I was thinking. I figured it was worth noting.--Rockchalk 717 05:47, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Is the social media section of his page really necessary? Crash Under ride 18:41, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Our navboxes for current NFL coaches below the head coach level are a mess (see Category:National Football League coach navigational boxes), and need some loving care from an interested WP:NFL editor who is willing to follow all of the 2016 coaching changes and update the navboxes with the newly hired position coaches until the music stops in this 2016 round of NFL musical chairs. Any volunteers? Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 16:50, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Template:NFL strength and conditioning coach navbox. For real? Now I know there is a long snapper navbox in our future.— Bagumba ( talk) 02:33, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
These should be gone. Head coaches, Off. and Def. coordinators are fine but the rest are silly and unnecessary in my opinion. God knows how many are still on pages where the person hasn't been a coach in a few years.-- Yankees10 02:47, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
The 2015 regular season ended in Jan 2016 this year. I saw someone changed the year on
Philip Rivers' infobox because of this, so it now says "Career NFL statistics as of Week 17, 2016". If we don't fill in |statsweek=
and change it to 2015, it would say "Career NFL statistics as of 2015". Neither of which is technically correct. What do we prefer it to say?—
Bagumba (
talk)
01:58, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
There are three descriptive parameters that are used to create the "as of" header for Infobox NFL player:
| statleague = NFL
| statseason = 2015
| statweek = 17
Which displays "Career NFL statistics as of Week 17, 2015". We are supposed to delete the "statseason" and "statweek" parameters for retired players, which then displays "Career NFL statistics". The problem you raise, of the non-intuitive problem of players who are active after December 31, 2015, and how to accurately reflect their statistics, could easily be resolved with the following:
| statleague = NFL
| statseason = 2015–16
| statweek = 17
My two cents. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 09:46, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
@Dissident93: how is "Career NFL statistics as of 2015" not correct
: Depends how 2015 is interpreted. If interpreted as
2015 NFL season, it's fine. If a reader sees it as 2015 the calendar year, then it's seen as inaccurate. Rant: Yet another hassle with weekly stats updates—
Bagumba (
talk)
19:55, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
|statsseason=
is unknown to the reader. 2015–16 is awkward. I'm fine with just 2015.—
Bagumba (
talk)
03:06, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
QB - Completions (Comp), Attempts (Att), Completion percentage (Pct), Passing yardage (Yards), Passing touchdowns (TDs), Interceptions (Ints)
RB/FB - Attempts (Att), Rushing Yards (Yards), Touchdowns (TDs)
WR/TE - Receptions (Rec), Yardage (Yards), Touchdowns (TDs)
OL/LS - Games played (GP), Games started (GS)
DE/DT - Tackles (Only counting combined/total tackles), Sacks
LB/DB - Tackles, Sacks, Interceptions (Ints), Forced fumbles (FF), Defensive touchdowns (TDs)
K - Field goals attempted (FG Att), Field goals made (FGM), Longest (Long), Extra points attempted (XP Att), Extra points made (XPM) (Extra points being missed is now something that matters, with the recent rule change. The NE-DEN game last week would have likely went to OT if NE's kicker didn't miss an XP early in the game, as they had to go for 2 at the end and failed.)
P - Punts, Punt yardage (Yards), Punting average (Avg), Inside 20 (In 20)
Return specialist (Would be combined for both punt and kickoffs) - Returns (Ret), Return yardage (Ret yards), Return touchdowns (Ret TDs)
The stats tables for all positions should include games played and games started. Also, in order to have a nice, elegantly compact stats table, we need to keep the column header abbreviations to 2 or 3 characters, maybe 4 characters at the max. Remember, we will code the mouse-over reveal function for each abbreviation, as well as providing a nice, compact, and uniform abbreviation key at the bottom of each stats table. No more of these freelance wikitable monstrosities that include four or five times as much white space as substance because the column headers are too wide. They should also be coded so that the main body text wraps around them like our image files, rather than stopping at the beginning of the table, and then picking up afterward, often leaving a huge, gaping white space to the right of many stats tables. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 18:24, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Just a question. Do players such as Osi Umenyiora really need their place of birth in their infbox to read "London, England, UK"? I mean, there's only one England, duh, we know it's in the UK. Just a thought. Crash Under ride 08:05, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | 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 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
At Junior Seau, the forced fumbles and pass deflections listed in the infobox and at Junior_Seau#NFL_stats differ from those listed at http://www.nfl.com/player/juniorseau/2502886/profile. Even http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/213/junior-seau and http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/SeauJu00.htm are different. AFAIK, neither FF or PD is an official NFL stat; for that matter, neither is tackles. Is there any preference on:
1. Which, if any, unofficial stats to list in the article in the:
2. Which stats site to use as a reference
I wonder if anything besides tackles is important enough to list as an unofficial stat.— Bagumba ( talk) 00:44, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
74.211.64.54 ( talk) 00:53, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
With the of participation so far, there is no consensus for the edits to add FF or PD. Per WP:NOCONSENSUS, "a lack of consensus commonly results in retaining the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit."— Bagumba ( talk) 19:37, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
What is the motivation for including the bottom navbox in Template:2014 NFL Draft, which allows navigation to other draft navboxes, not articles? If it is for maintenance purposes only for editors, I propose to use <includeonly>, so that it is only visible on the template page, not in articles.— Bagumba ( talk) 07:09, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
There's a dispute over schedule layouts; compare this to this, and, through this discussion, I hope to draw a consensus. I believe the latter represents the better format, as its sortable and easier on the eyes, with a more concise use of color. Please comment; thanks. Seattle ( talk) 20:42, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
I would also change "Game Site" to the more succinct "Stadium". I don't see the television station that aired the game listed in either the "Recap" link or the reference provided. Otherwise, that seems good. Possibly RaysRates can help here? Seattle ( talk) 03:14, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
There are a lot of links to proposed tables, and waves to an existing "standard" format. For my clarification, can someone point to a specific article or style guide which is considered the existing standard. Thanks.— Bagumba ( talk) 19:00, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Limit color to a few cells I have to side with @Seattle's rationale: limit color to a few strategic cells (say, opponent and score). I haven't heard what makes a schedule table so unique that color needs to be applied to the entire row. FLs generally limit their coloring to select cells, and do not gratuitously highlighting an entire row. While an analogy was made to other GA articles, there is nothing in Wikipedia:Good article criteria that reviews style; that is in Wikipedia:Featured list criteria under 4a: "Visual appeal. It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and colour; and a minimal proportion of items are redlinked." It's not enough for me to stick with status quo unless there is a compelling rationale that supports why it has been done that way.— Bagumba ( talk) 06:27, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
I am at my wits end...everything I try to fix the Los Angeles Rams colors fails. I got the colors to be correct for 1964-1972 and 1973-1994, but then it kills 1946-1963. When I try to fix 1946-1963, it has ranged from killing the entire color template to killing 1964-1994 for the Rams. So PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, if someone could fix the colors for me it could be greatly appreciated.
1946-1963
Primary/Background
#F5D015
#F5D015
Secondary/Font Color
#183990
#183990
Tertiary/Outline
#183990
#183990
1964-1972
Primary/Background
#183990
#183990
Secondary/Font Color
white
white
Tertiary/Outline
white
white
1973-1994
Primary/Background
#183990
#183990
Secondary/Font Color
#F5D015
#F5D015
Tertiary/Outline
#F5D015
#F5D015
Thank you! -- CASportsFan ( talk) 22:21, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Here's an idea that I would like to propose: removing the networks and kickoff times from the schedule boxes for ALL past NFL team season articles — once a team's season ends. I think it's redundant to display the network and time if the game/season has passed. Once the NFL schedule is released (in April), then I think it would be better to still keep the network and times for upcoming games, then remove them once a team's season ends.
I haven't started anything yet, but as an example, this is the preseason schedule table from the 2014 Denver Broncos season (with the networks and kickoff times removed):
Week | Date | Opponent | Result | Record | Game site | NFL.com recap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | August 7 | Seattle Seahawks | W 21–16 | 1–0 | Sports Authority Field at Mile High | Recap |
2 | August 17 | at San Francisco 49ers | W 34–0 | 2–0 | Levi's Stadium | Recap |
3 | August 23 | Houston Texans | L 17–18 | 2–1 | Sports Authority Field at Mile High | Recap |
4 | August 28 | at Dallas Cowboys | W 27–3 | 3–1 | AT&T Stadium | Recap |
One more thing: I really don't think adding the attendance is relevant to a schedule box — that's what the week-by-week game capsules are for. DPH1110 ( talk) 01:55, 24 February 2015 (UTC)DPH1110
Believe it or not those things (especially those related to prime time games) are very important. Including the network and times allows the viewer to very quickly understand the basic circumstances of the game. Toa Nidhiki05 13:03, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Sep. 7 at Miami .....................1:00 Sep. 14 at Minnesota .................1:00 Sep. 21 Oakland ......................1:00 Sep. 29 at Kansas City (Mon)..........8:30 Oct. 5 Cincinnati ..................*8:30 Oct. 12 at Buffalo ...................1:00 Oct. 16 New York Jets (Thu) ..........8:25 Oct. 26 Chicago ......................1:00 Nov. 2 Denver .......................4:25 Nov. 9 BYE Nov. 16 at Indianapolis .............*8:30 Nov. 23 Detroit ......................1:00 Nov. 30 at Green Bay .................4:25 Dec. 7 at San Diego ................*8:30 Dec. 14 Miami ........................1:00 Dec. 21 at New York Jets .............1:00 Dec. 28 Buffalo ......................1:00 * All times ET; Sunday night games in Weeks 5-16 subject to change
Monday and Thursday night games are in parentheses, and Sunday night games are marked with an asterisk. We could do something similar. Games that are flexed or postponed could also be marked with a footnote. A "network" column could be easily replaced by a boilerplate message basically stating "Unless otherwise noted, all Sunday Night games are on NBC; Monday night games are on ESPN; Thursday Night games are on CBS/NFL Network; and Sunday afternoon AFC away games and NFC away games are on CBS and Fox, respectively." Zzyzx11 ( talk) 08:01, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
@ Richmond96: When the NFL schedule is released next month, I think it will just be easier to input the schedule in the same fashion as last season, and use tooltip commands for games that occur on dates other than Sunday. I'm guessing that flexible scheduling will once again begin with Week 5. On a side note, last year's NFL schedule was released on April 23 (2014); my guess is that the 2015 schedule will be released on or around the same date (circa April 21–23), one week before the draft DPH1110 ( talk) 03:45, 17 March 2015 (UTC)DPH1110
A string of edits to Monday Night Football-related topics around 03:09, 19 March 2015 by Bogger1 changed the whole branding of Monday Night Football from ESPN to Fox Sports 1. Is this true? I was going to revert, then saw the extent of the modifications. J♯m ( talk | contribs) 03:47, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Template:Central Texas Sports and several similar navbox templates have been
nominated for deletion. Given that the subjects of these navboxes are within the scope of WikiProject NFL, you are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Dirtlawyer1 (
talk)
14:54, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Due to accessibility concerns, there were some recent tweaks to Infobox NFL player. One of them was to the display of the first and last career appearance for a player. Basically, all infobox entries need to have a label and a data field, to allow for automated retrieval of data. Use Dan Marino as an example. Before it had "Debuted in 1983 for the Miami Dolphins". However, it was changed to have a label of "Debuted in", and its data value is "1983 for the Miami Dolphins". Thus, the infobox now displays: "Debuted in: 1983 for the Miami Dolphins". Marino now also has a corresponding "Last played in" field.
First of all, I think the labels ending with "in" sound a bit clumsy. Is there a more elegant name? More importantly, are the first/last appearance even necessary, and can it just be removed? There is already "Career history" which list all the teams played and their respective years, which has this same information. I think this infobox was mimicking baseball's where the callup from the minors is a bigger deal.— Bagumba ( talk) 23:31, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Infoboxes are not "space-limited". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:31, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Accessibility#Accessibility_with_infoboxes that is related to Template:Infobox NFL player having data inside a header, such as the current placement of the player's number and team.— Bagumba ( talk) 00:31, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#Infobox college football player and Infobox NFL player to help form a consensus on whether Template:Infobox college football player and Template:Infobox NFL player should remain separate or be merged.— Bagumba ( talk) 01:36, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
We as a Wikiproject need to set new standards for these roster navbox templates. If you look at the Atlanta Falcons one, it's run by a single anonymous user who reverts anything that goes against his way, even though he doesn't follow how the other infoboxes are. (the user separates injured reserve and PUP lists into separate groups, when every other team template as them as simply a single "Reserved lists")
Because of this, I say we all agree on a common way every team template should be handled. Here are my suggestions based on how they've been in the past:
There is also no need for a "Free agent" and "Unsigned draft picks" group, since it's cleaner and easier to maintain if we just removed all the free agents from the template. ~ Dissident93 ( talk) 02:57, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Template:Greater Los Angeles Sports in 1946 and similiar templates have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2015_May_18#Greater_Los_Angeles_Sports_by_year_navboxes. Thanks.— Bagumba ( talk) 19:58, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Russ Peterson (American football player) to be moved to Russ Peterson (offensive lineman). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 22:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Jake Ryan (American football) to be moved to Jake Ryan. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:17, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Justin Brown (wide receiver) to be moved to Justin Brown. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:19, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
A recent IP edit broke the height in the infobox for the above (if the value is correct, the wikitext should be height_in=6+1/2
). There are no references, and the NFL.com link is broken. I seem to recall that
WP:BLP articles must have a reference to be kept these days. Is it worth trying to save this, or should it be deleted?
Johnuniq (
talk)
05:16, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Persondata has been deprecated and the template and input data are subject to removal from all bio articles in the near future. For those editors who entered accurate data into the persondata templates of NFL players and other bio subjects, you are advised to manually transfer that data to Wikidata before the impending mass deletion occurs. Here are two examples of Wikidata for football players: Dan Marino] and Tim Tebow. If you have any more questions about the persondata removal, Wikidata, etc., please ping me. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 12:45, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
An editor has repeatedly changed Steve Weatherford's weight from the weight stated by NFL.com and the Giants' official roster, claiming personal knowledge based on a Snapchat photo. [13] [14] [15] As far as I can see, this violates WP:BLP as well as our consensus of following the official information for player infoboxes. Scrutiny and opinions by other NFL-experienced editors would be helpful. -- Arxiloxos ( talk) 19:39, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest.-- Lucas559 ( talk) 22:46, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello - there is currently a discussion underway at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Date range redux to come to a final resolution the way dates for club tenure in infoboxs are displayed (e.g. - with a club from 2001–2007 or 2001–07). If you have an opinion one way or the other, please take part. The value in coming to a final resolution (either having language added to allow 8 digit date spans for this purpose or expressly forbidding it) is that it would provide certainty to these cases and stop needless reverting of this format one way or the other. If you do take part, please be sure to ground your arguments/opinions in fact, Wikipedia precedent and real world examples as opposed to preference only as this will help the project make the right call. There are thousands of articles (touched by thousands of editors) that use summary club tenure information in infoboxes, so there is clearly an advantage to settling it in a clear manner so all can comply. Thanks! Rikster2 ( talk) 04:25, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
There is something weird going on with the 2015 NFC East and 2015 NFC West standings templates — when you click on the Talk Page on the 2015 NFC East template (via the 2015 NFC West and NFC East season articles), it re-directs you to the NFC West Talk page, and vice versa. For example, when you click on the View link on the NFC East Standings template on the 2015 Dallas Cowboys season article, it re-directs you to the NFC West standings template. Is there a way this could be fixed? Thank you. DPH1110 ( talk) 17:23, 3 September 2015 (UTC)DPH1110
I have nominated Template:Legend of the Year for deletion. Please comment here. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 06:02, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Hey. I just changed the navboxes in Category:National Football League roster templates from {{ Navbox}} to {{ Team roster navbox}}, which keeps the number and the name together through nowrap. The unintended consequence was that it apparently doesn't react well with the {{ small}} template. [17] I removed the small template and got this. What do we all think? – Muboshgu ( talk) 23:30, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
There has recently been a discussion at the talk page of the WikiProject on Accessibility regarding Template:Infobox gridiron football person. In the past, the template only had a single set of parameters for playing_years and playing_teams. This caused editors to create lists using <br>. This violates Wikipedia's policies regarding accessibility (see WP:VLIST). To correct this issue, the template has been edited to include numbered parameters playing_years1/playing_team1 through playing_years20/playing_year20 (and similar for coaching, administrating, etc). Eventually, the parameters playing_years and playing_teams will likely be removed from the template and all articles will need to use the new parameters, in order to prevent future issues with accessibility. This template should generally not be in use in articles primarily related to this project, but in practice, many articles that this project will be interested in use it.
There is further discussion ongoing about whether these changes should be done manually or with a bot. You can read and contribute to the discussion at the talk page. ~ Rob Talk 21:45, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
The new editor Filipo Sooa ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been busy creating templates and redirects regarding the 1997 Green Bay Packers. I am not familiar enough with them to tell if they are useful or not. I can say that I am finding what is being done to be confusing so if any of the members of this project can take a look at things it would be appreciated. MarnetteD| Talk 03:53, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Is the coloured banner at the top of the table in List of Minnesota Vikings seasons actually necessary? User:Charlesaaronthompson has attempted to explain it as a matter of consistency between the Vikings list and other teams' lists, but since the Vikings have never been known by another name, is it necessary at all? I can understand it for teams that have moved around a lot (or even just once), but not teams like the Vikings and the Packers... – Pee Jay 09:46, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
There exists a prevalent accessibility issue in Template:Infobox NFL player caused by the use of small text to denote whether a player was on a team during the regular season or just during the offseason or on the practice roster. WP:FONTSIZE disallows the use of text smaller than 11px, and specifically states to avoid use of small text in infoboxes. Please see the relevant discussion at the template's talk page regarding the possible removal of the small tags from this text. ~ Rob Talk 06:15, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
This might be overly cautious, but since it's been so long since this was last discussed, it's probably best to gauge opinions.
There was a TfD discussion way back in 2012 to merge Template:Infobox NFL coach with Template:Infobox NFL player to create Infobox NFL biography. There was later a request to delay that merge pending a discussion here. The merge was never actually carried out, and it was rediscussed in the second half of 2013, where there appeared to be consensus to carry it out as per the TfD. The template still exists today, and we're approaching three years after the TfD. Among our current AFC head coaches (which I used for spot-checking purposes), half of them are already using the Infobox NFL player template, so I assume that the functionality of Infobox NFL player works for coaches at this point in time. Is there any reason not to finish carrying out this merge? ~ Rob Talk 12:02, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Can there be a parent template for the NFL roster navboxes, in the same way that Template:NFL roster exists? Some users have added in non-standard groups\info, and it would be nice to prevent that all together. If you want to see what I mean, look at the discussions I had on the talk page on the Falcons one. A parent template would prevent edit warring, like it does on the normal roster one. I can work on a sandbox prototype if the community agrees it should be done. ~ Dissident93 ( talk) 22:17, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
A while back, in a discussion which can be seen here, we discussed whether or not the rankings of the NFL Top 100 of each year should be listed in a player's infobox. In players that are listed regularly, it can really cloud up the infoboxes. There is no official guide to do this in the template which leads to some players having it and others not having it. It seems in this past discussion which was left alone, we were close to a consensus to remove it. Would you guys support or oppose this change? Chambr ( talk) 03:15, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
There is a discussion in which you may be interested on including "all colleges attended" in the pro football player Infobox, at Template talk:Infobox NFL player#Including "all" colleges attended in Infobox?. UW Dawgs ( talk) 00:54, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
There's been some ongoing vandalism over Rob Gronkowski and his middle. An editor (correctly) added a {{ cn}} tag to the middle name, because it became unclear what his middle name is (the two candidates appear to be James and Paxton). I removed the middle name altogether, because I'd rather not have the CN in the lead like that. If anyone can help determine what his middle name is, it would be really helpful. Calidum 03:49, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
For some time, I have been thinking about a suitable replacement for the helmet images on Infobox NFL team, ever since all of them were deleted on grounds of replaceable fair use back in 2012 ( see archived discussion). I think that having the team wordmarks on there would be a good idea. Over the past few years, all of them have been eventually uploaded onto Commons under {{ PD-logo}}. I have just made test edits to this effect on {{ Infobox NFL team/sandbox}} and Template:Infobox NFL team/testcases (putting the wordmark image next to the team logo in the same space where the helmet image use to be), and if there are no objections, I would like implement this before the Kickoff Game next week. Zzyzx11 ( talk) 08:33, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm starting to think that there is really no useful purpose to bold division opponents in the regular season schedule tables. I'm contemplating de-bolding division opponents for each team's season articles. DPH1110 ( talk) 00:29, 2 September 2015 (UTC)DPH1110
Hey, sports fans. In the next few weeks, Template:Infobox NFL player will replace the remaining 300 or so uses of Template:Infobox NFL coach. Infobox NFL player will support the current functionality of Infobox NFL coach, but will maintain the formatting of Infobox NFL player. We need a new name that everyone can live with for the infobox template. Here are the leading candidates for the resulting "merged" template:
Question: Is this infobox only to be used for NFL players & coaches, or is it for other NFL personnel, as well (GM's, owners, presidents, etc.)? Ejgreen77 ( talk) 02:19, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello all. I have been working on List of Washington Redskins players for quite awhile (currently going through each player and updating their pages). I was wondering if their has been any consensus regarding how these pages should be set up. Back when I was maintaining this page, I tried to limit the size of the article (currently still huge at 153kb) by making the list exclusive to players who have played at least five games with the franchise (per the recommendation of a peer review). However, it didn't seem to help too much. So I was thinking about doing what the List of Green Bay Packers players article does, and split the page into several articles by a grouping of letters. I ask because all of the other franchise players list articles seem to have EVERY player who played at least one game. Thoughts? Also, I think it would be a great idea to get some continuity going with these pages so that they all look at least somewhat similar, but I realize that's a monumental undertaking. Jwalte04 ( talk) 21:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Players who are waived/injured (if unclaimed) by a team revert to IR and are released only through an injury settlement. This is my interpetation. Correct? This is involving me and DoctorGiants. 2605:6000:54C2:1F00:CD5E:748B:CEE2:DB14 ( talk) 20:19, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
And do players that are waived/injured go directly to the inactive list, or can they just be removed from the teams' roster. User:DoctorGiants 20:25, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
They are placed on waivers and if they clear they are placed on the inactive list. Released only through injury settlement. 2605:6000:54C2:1F00:CD5E:748B:CEE2:DB14 ( talk) 20:29, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
I noticed the Toledo Maroons' colors work for infoboxes (e. g. Tom Brown), and was curious to see the equivalent of Module:College_color/data for NFL articles to see if it was possible to do the same for, say, the Frankford Yellow Jackets, or even odder cases like the Chicago Rockets. No luck in finding such; any help? Cake ( talk) 14:41, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Hey fellow NFL-heads. I'd like to solicit your opinions on a recent discussion regarding whether it's appropriate to include a paragraph related to Seahawks safety Kam Chancellor's recent holdout in the article on the 2015 season. The pro and con arguments have both been advanced in the discussion, so I won't attempt to rehash them here. It would be great if we could get some additional opinions. Thanks! — DeeJayK ( talk) 18:47, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Can someone respond to my comment I wrote about the Washington Redskins. Thank you! -- 74.130.133.1 ( talk) 14:39, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
This newish list article List of professional football players who spent their entire career with one franchise could use review by subject matter experts. Appear to use WP:OR, lacks citations, lacks expected (any) categories, question of title and scope (NFL vs all professional football), better as bullet list or sortable table, etc. Cheers. UW Dawgs ( talk) 16:01, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
I have nominated Template:Baltimore Colts (1953-1983) for deletion. Please comment here. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 05:10, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
In addition to Template:Baltimore Colts (1953-1983), noted above, Template:Los Angeles Rams has also been nominated for deletion. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 October 7 and comment on the discussions. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 00:45, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
I've nominated a series of obsolete, unused templates created in 2007 and related to NFL team colors. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 October 14#NFL/meta/color templates. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 20:20, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
I understand this could be kind of contentious seeing as it's a violent sport and certain parties involved in it would want to keep such things quiet. But should the infobox have a field for cause of death? Most articles infoboxes have that field. It would only make sense to add it to the infobox here. Cra sh Underride 05:42, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
We have an article at football pool about soccer, but the fantasy sports page is located at Fantasy football (association). There doesn't seem to be a football pool page, unlike Fantasy football (American). Shouldn't there be an American football - football pool article? -- 70.51.44.60 ( talk) 06:40, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
I've nominated the 1967 American Football League draft article for deletion. This and the subsequent two years the NFL and AFL participated in a Common draft. As such, this topic is covered in more detail in the 1967 NFL draft article. If you'd like to share your opinion on the topic, please do so on the AfD discussion page or on the article talk page. — DeeJayK ( talk) 16:52, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
It has recently come to my attention that some WP:NFL editors are using British/international style dates (e.g., 21 October 2014) in articles about American football players, written in American English. When Wikipedia article subjects are American in character, and the article text is written in American English, the articles should uniformly use the American-style MDY date format (e.g., October 21, 2014). This applies to birth dates and death dates in the lead, main body text and infobox; contract signing and game dates; and reference publication dates, as well as online reference retrieval dates in the article footnotes. Please do not use British-style DMY dates in articles about NFL teams and players -- it looks goofy. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 21:49, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Not sure we have a consensus here. DJSasso seems to favor style based on country of birth, while Dirtlawyer1 and I favor country of notable accomplishments. Here's another interesting example: Neil O'Donoghue, who played association football (soccer) in Ireland before moving to the US and becoming an American football placekicker for Auburn and then in the NFL. This article was a bit of a mess. I just spent some time editing it. There were British variant spellings describing his exploits in America ("honours", "programme"). I changed these to American spellings. Jweiss11 ( talk) 05:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Okay, so how do we wrap this discussion up and move forward? It seems we have a motion and a second that the project should follow the approach that you laid out in your initial post which was amended a bit to allow some limited exceptions. To wit: NFL articles should use the American date norms (e.g., October 21, 2014) except in the limited case of biographical articles for those who have gained notability outside of an American football context in another country where a different date format is the norm. In either case, the chosen date format should be applied consistently within a given article (i.e. in birth and death dates wherever they occur, in game or other dates mentioned in the article body and in all references). Is that statement something that we can build consensus around? — DeeJayK ( talk) 15:19, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
In light of this discussion, would it be appropriate/useful to add the {{ Use mdy dates}} template to the articles covered by this project (except for the limited exceptions called out previously)? If so, does anyone know of a bot that might be put to that task? — DeeJayK ( talk) 14:58, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
@ Charlesaaronthompson: has been updating NFL team templates in an (apparent) attempt to horizontally align the ten season-year links of xx00, xx02, ... xx09 which are typically grouped by decade.
Examples (expand the collapsed "Seasons (N)" section): Rams before and after, Seahawks, Saints.
The end result is bullets are now rendering unpaired to associated year articles in the team's first decade row. There has to be a better way to achieve the desired result. UW Dawgs ( talk) 00:24, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
I think this effort should probably be tabled, at least for now. I'm planning on addressing a cleanup and restructuring of the the NFL team navboxes. One problem that we have is that for every team navbox, e.g. Template:Arizona Cardinals, there is a team season navbox Template:Arizona Cardinals seasons. But the team navbox also contains links to all the seasons in a collapsed group. Both navboxes are transcluded on every team season article, e.g 2015 Arizona Cardinals season, leading to redundancy and unnecessary clutter. I prose that we eliminate the team season navboxes and streamline the team navboxes along the lines of what has been done for college football and college basketball, e.g. Template:Michigan Wolverines football navbox. Jweiss11 ( talk) 20:26, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Okay, so I'm not sure what should be done or if there's already been a discussion about this. Josh Gordon's NFL.com profile page lists his college as Utah, so should his infobox say the same? I know he never played a game for them, but I just thought I'd ask. Cra sh Underride 00:26, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Can someone update Template:2015 NFC standings? I added a few things but the team rankings are out of order. I've never worked on standings templates before so I don't want to make any incorrect edits. I'm not sure if all of the schedules are up to date, but either way, the team standings are currently out of order after this week. - Newyorkadam ( talk) 15:37, 10 November 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam
For anyone who is interested in the discussion, there is a proposal being discussed to rename the captioned page, possibly to either List of Super Bowls or List of Super Bowl games (both of which currently redirect to that page).
You can participate in the discussion at: Talk:List_of_Super_Bowl_champions#Rename.
Thanks.
-- Legis ( talk - contribs) 13:42, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
We are discussing "Los Angeles Football Club" at Talk:Los Angeles FC -- 70.51.44.60 ( talk) 06:14, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
I uberred an individual who seemed to be Hayden Epstein last week. As a Michigan alum, I have decided to beef up his article as a result. In researching his career, I see that NFL.com credits him with 72 career kickoffs 10 of which were touchbacks and 59 of which were returned. This means that on 3 of the kickoff somethings other than a touchback or return happened. What could those other things be?-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:48, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
For those interested in navboxes, there is an RfC about the use of WP:BIDIRECTIONAL that you may want to participate in at Wikipedia_talk:Categories,_lists,_and_navigation_templates#WP:BIDIRECTIONAL_navbox_requirements.— Bagumba ( talk) 07:09, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm playing in the sandbox with some tweaks to Template:Infobox NFL season which is used for the individual season articles for individual teams (e.g. 2015 Chicago Bears season). Specifically, I've implemented a change to the navigation at the bottom of the infobox that allows the user to jump to the previous and next season articles. This change is primarily aesthetic and brings this infobox in line with Template:Infobox NFL which is used for the league season articles (e.g. 2015 NFL season). There are several samples in the testcases page to allow you to see the change. As I know this template is widely used I've tried to find a number of diverse examples. I'd love to get some input on this change before I implement it. Feel free to comment here or on the template talk page. Thanks! — DeeJayK ( talk) 16:32, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
UW Dawgs ( talk) 13:30, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the response @ UW Dawgs:. However, I'm not sure I yet fully understand your reluctance to support this change. It seems as though your primary objection rests on the use of the arrows (← and →) rather than the "less than" and "greater than" symbols (< and >) to signal the links to the next and previous seasons.
Digging into the symbols, your primary (sole?) stated argument against them is that of "convention". I understand this to a point — it's nice to maintain some consistency among articles in the encyclopedia when it makes sense. However, I don't quite understand why you insist on maintaining this particular "convention". Maybe you can help me understand why this is so important to you. First off, looking at the other templates you've cited, I don't see a clear "convention" — three of them do use the < and > symbols but the NCAA example uses the "left angle quotation mark" and "right angle quotation mark" (« and »). In addition to this, I don't see a lot of other agreement within these templates with the implementation of the entirety of the next/previous navigation portion at the bottom of the infobox. To wit, the MLB template produces the links spelled out as < Previous season Next season >, the NBA template produces < 2005–06 2007–08 >, the NHL template produces <2004–05 2006–07> (with alignment that differs from that of the NBA) and as noted the NCAA template produces « 1898 1900 » (within a grey background with the word "Seasons" centered above). That's not strong evidence that a single standard exists; only two of these actually agree in a substantive way, and even among those two differences with regard to positioning remain. If anything, the NCAA example shows that other projects have taken it upon themselves to take a different tack. In fact, I would argue that (with the exception of the introduction of the arrow symbols), my proposal brings this NFL template more in line with the examples that have been cited.
As to your contention that the adoption of the arrows on the other NFL templates should be reverted, while you're certainly free to hold that opinion and that discussion can surely be had if you wish to raise it, I've seen absolutely no discussion (pro or con) regarding the arrows since those changes were introduced. I tend to think that this means that most editors either were completely ambivalent about the change or had a positive opinion of it. Certainly I've seen no one who was sufficiently incensed/annoyed by the change to raise any concerns.
Were we to set all concerns about "convention" and matching other templates/projects aside, I'd like to get your opinion on the aesthetics of the change. In other words, if we were designing this on a clean sheet of paper, which look would you prefer? I happen to feel strongly that the < and > are a poor choice given that those symbols are used in HTML markup and as such seeing them on a page makes me wonder if they are just stray markup artifacts or cruft. The arrows (← and →) read to me as more intentional while conveying similar information.
Sorry for the diatribe. I feel the need to let you know that my intention is not to be didactic or to dismiss your opinions. On the contrary, I think this discussion has already led to positive tweaks and I'd like to get/build consensus for these changes which (I think) improve the template, which is the entire point of this exercise. Thanks! — DeeJayK ( talk) 16:36, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template_talk:Infobox_NFL_biography#Question about the preferred display format after a merge of {{ Infobox NFL player}} and {{ Infobox NFL coach}}.— Bagumba ( talk) 04:43, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
User:AoorwHead has unilaterally moved Mercedes-Benz Stadium to another name for the second time, as he/she doesn't think two stadiums should have "the same name", meaning the Mercedes-Benz Superdome. Both moves were done without discussion. Unfortunately, the user vandalized the original title, thus the page can't be moved back except by an admin. Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 17:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Please help us come to a consensus regarding the requested move at Talk:Chicago Cardinals (NFL, 1920–1959)#Requested move 27 November 2015-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:41, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Is there a way we can merge the fields that are exclusive to the Infobox gridiron football person that WikiProject Canadian football used for CFL players in the one we use for NFL and AFL players/coaches so that it's one uniform box for all gridiron football players? It would make it less of a chore when a player goes from the NFL to the CFL or vice versa. Cra sh Underride 01:44, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
So, I created a new article. Could someone give it a rating, I'm biased so I shouldn't. Also, before anyone asks, he's played in two games this season for Dallas. Cra sh Underride 05:51, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
I may have uberred Randy Moss this weekend. Subsequently, I looked up his wikipedia page to determine that a skilled editor needs to attend to this article. I am hoping someone else wants to do this. There are may uncited paragraphs of facts. There are citation needed tags. The article is in bad shape in terms of WP:V. Someone needs to attend to this page.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:18, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Please see WT:WikiProject Articles for creation#Two independent drafts about the same subject where the arrival of two draft submissions about the same match caused a bit of confusion. One of the drafts Draft:Miracle in Motown has meanwhile been accepted into mainspace at Miracle in Motown while the other Draft:Miracle in Motown (2) is left in limbo in draft space. I think merging the efforts of both writers is the best way to avoid wasting the good work done by the author of the second draft. I know absolutely nothing about American football so I'm passing the ball here. Roger (Dodger67) ( talk) 14:43, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
As wiki has international readers may I suggest that the "type" of football being discussed and the country/nation applicable is described.
"Football" appears NOT to mean Association Football (UK) soccer rugby Rugby League Rugby Union
The country appears to Canada — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tekaham ( talk • contribs) 11:04, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
The problem with using "gridiron football" in articles written in American English, primarily for an American audience, is that most Americans have no clue what "gridiron football" is. "Gridiron" is an archaic nickname for the American sport, and is not widely used here anymore. When it is used, it is typically employed by American sports writers as a colorful metaphor for the playing field -- which is, of course, the actual origin of the term. Most British and Commonwealth sports fans know American football is not soccer or a rugby variant, although we have the occasional weird soccer partisans on Wikipedia who don't think American football should be called "football" because football players don't move the ball with their feet (well, other than punters and placekickers. If you want a sample of silliness, you only have to look at the talk page of the American football and History of American football articles, as well as the periodic outbreaks of edit-warring at those articles over the name of the sport. The irony is that virtually no one in the United States refers to the sport as "American football"; here, it's just "football" and most of the literate English-speaking world knows that. Linking to the articles for the sport, the player's position, the player's team, and the National Football League in the opening sentence of a player's bio is more than sufficient (to anyone who does not have some axe to grind) to identify the sport of American football.
And for the record, the "gridiron" sport name is mostly used in places like Australia, where they play soccer, two variants of rugby, Gaelic football, and their own homegrown Australian rules football, and where American football is a very minor sport. On Wikipedia, "American football" is more than sufficient to disambiguate the sport from soccer, the two rugby variants, and Gaelic and Australian rule football. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 19:53, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
I suppose there's a lot of other things to clean up in WP:NFL, so I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. In the meantime, non-American's like Nate Burleson have their lead as "... is a Canadian-born former American football wide receiver", which doesn't exactly say what his nationality is, but avoids the clumsy "is a Canadian American football wide receiver".— Bagumba ( talk) 21:49, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
The Announcerless Game, in DYK doesn't have an importance rating. JerrySa1 ( talk) 15:07, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
An IP is currently adding All-Pro's selections to the infobox from a website called "Spreadapedia". Clearly these are not notable and should not be in the infobox. I was told "You don't have any right to determine what All-Pro teams are valid and which are not" and "I will keep adding them, thank you very much". I don't want to violate 3RR so can I get some help reverting these?-- Yankees10 23:55, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Can I appeal to the sensibility of this WikiProject and ask that we remove all of the generic team logos from individual season articles? By my understanding, the "logo" parameter in {{ Infobox NFL season}} is supposed to be only for logos specific to that season (see 2010 Minnesota Vikings season), and therefore adding the generic franchise wordmarks to articles is inappropriate. Even though the wordmarks are copyright-free, it seems like unnecessary decoration to add them to the season articles. – Pee Jay 16:52, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Template:Los Angeles-St. Louis Rams Annual Sack Leaders has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Yankees10
00:23, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Just a heads up, I've created this article by splitting the NFL related content from Uniform number (American football) as it appeared to be dominating that article. I've also tried to improve it by moving the text around, changing the sections etc, but I haven't changed what any of it actually says, or at least I don't think I have. I'd like someone who knows more about the subject than me to give it a once over (and the NFL summary in the uniform article), to ensure I haven't introduced any glaring errors. Brown 72 DF ( talk) 19:52, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
According to Yankees10 ( talk · contribs), we should be using the "2016–" style instead of the same way we do in the infobox, which is "2016–present". Don't see why we are being inconsistent here, and I don't think what the NBA or NHL navboxes have should matter for the NFL. Comments? ~ Dissident93 ( talk) 02:19, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
The cynical side of me says move on to something else that adds missing content to Wikipedia, as opposed to a time sucker like this which probably will only get reverted even with a discussion. For a similar example, WP:NBA had a consensus at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Basketball_Association/Archive_17#Format_for_interim_coaches on how to list interim coaches in the coaches navbox, namely with a superscripted #, e.g. #. At some point they were all reverted without discussion, presumably in the name of "consistency". Moreover efforts to remove the word "pound" when referring to # in the key were overridden, again for consistency, even though £ is "pound" to a lot of the English-speaking world, and keys generally refer to *, †, ‡, §, etc visually without needing to explicitly write the words asterisk, dagger, double-dagger, or section sign.— Bagumba ( talk) 01:55, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
An IP was mass changing the piping of articles in the navboxes. See their edits. My main objection was to a rivalry like Chargers–Chiefs rivalry being shown instead of the previous format Kansas City Chiefs on Template:San Diego Chargers. It's implied the Chargers are involved, and it's repetitive to see "rivalry" over and over. Moreover, some might know not who the Chiefs are. I've blocked the user because they wouldn't acknowledge their talk page, but will unblock once I know they are at least seeing the message. Other changes they made, which I have no opinion either way, are changing the division from West to AFC West, when the conference is already listed above.— Bagumba ( talk) 00:38, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
I want to gently remind everyone: per MOS:CAPS, we use "sentence case" capitalization, which means we only capitalize the first word of a sentence, article title, section header, or a phrase or fragment that appears in an infobox data field -- unless individual words are proper nouns like the name of a person, place or organization. As applied to American football articles, that means we capitalize player and team names such as "Doug Pederson" and "Philadelphia Eagles," but we do not capitalize player positions such as "quarterback," coaching titles like "defensive coordinator," or statistics descriptions such as "rushing yards" and "return yards". If phrases that are non-proper nouns appear in infobox data fields or field labels, then only the first word of the phrase is capitalized.
If you are uncertain whether certain words or phrases should be capitalized, please refer to MOS:CAPS or ask for advice from your fellow editors here. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 20:00, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
How about {{ nowrap}}? The longer we make the infobox, the more text we need before we can put an image on the page and avoid WP:SANDWICHING.— Bagumba ( talk) 03:26, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
In infobox data fields, we capitalize the first word of the input data using sentence case per MOS:CAPS. If we're specifically discussing what gets capitalized in the player "position" field, here are some common examples:
In the main body text of an article, none of the foregoing should be capitalized at all -- unless they are the first word of a sentence. Hypothetical examples:
Bottom line: there are two basic rules of capitalization at work here:
Again, if you have any questions about capitalization, please refer to MOS:CAPS, or ask here. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 03:34, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
We sidetracked from Dissident93's issue. If multiple positions on a single line, ""Quarterback / Wide receiver" or "Quarterback / wide receiver"? NBA and Baseball choose the former (caps).— Bagumba ( talk) 06:03, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
To add a few more wrinkles to this issue, let me add my perspective. Much of my editing centers on college football coaches, most of who played at least college football, and many of who played multiple sports, particularly those that played in the early 1900s. In the player_positions field of Template:Infobox college coach, my practice has been to only capitalize the first word of the first listed position and to separate positions with commas, e.g. " End, tackle" as found at Harry J. Robertson. But then things get complicated for a guy like Bennie Oosterbaan! Jweiss11 ( talk) 07:56, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
What is this project's stance on succession boxes? I could have sworn the NFL was following suit with the college sports' projects to eliminate all of them ( this edit caught my attention). Jrcla2 ( talk) 21:48, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Five years ago, we eliminated all the kludgey succession boxes for NFL head coaches in favor of a single uniform navbox template for the full succession of head coaches of every NFL team. It was a good move. Since then, we have had a small number of editors add succession boxes for coordinators and other assistant coaches with no consensus to do so. It was a bad move, and partially defeated the original idea of doing away with succession boxes in our coaches bio articles. Our NFL articles do not need more bottom-of-the-page clutter.
A lot of editors hate succession boxes because they take up an ordinate amount of space relative to the marginal navigational aide they provide to our readers, because every one of them looks differently because their dimensions change based on the length of the included names and titles, and because they're butt ugly. Moreover, there is no screaming demand among our readers for a convenient graphic tool to navigate the succession of position coaches for every NFL team from the beginning of time through 2016. We have annual season articles for every season of every NFL team; for the occasional reader who really wants to know, for example, who every Indianapolis Colts assistant coach was, we should finish building out the coaches rosters for all of the individual team season articles -- most of them already exist. And as Schetm suggested above, creating lists of NFL coordinators would be a good idea, too. Both of those ideas would be meaningful content that would actually help our readers; succession boxes are just cruft. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 10:46, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
Why is mcneil an interceptions leader? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.86.14 ( talk) 23:50, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
On the Washington Redskins article, there has been a bit of controversy with how to rank them in regards to Super Bowl wins. (Are they ranked fourth all time with three wins, or seventh?) The discussion for it is here. ~ Dissident93 ( talk) 23:58, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Does anyone know anything about the "NFL Unsung Hero Award"? We do not appear to have an article on this award, and I am struggling to believe that it is anything approaching notable per WP:GNG, or even worth noting in player or coach infoboxes. If anyone can shed some light on this, I would be grateful. I've encountered it in a couple of infobox "highlights" sections, and my first impulse was just to delete it, but I thought I should inquire here first. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 13:57, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
I have started a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#NFL Logo Slick that was being used on Kansas City Chiefs. I had a dispute with another editor about it and I'm intrestred in getting some people with exiperce on editing NFL related pages to comment to help resolve the dispute. Thanks in advance to everybody that does I appreciate it.--Rockchalk 717 03:23, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
I looked at the Chiefs article's history, and it seems the larger problem lies with this edit: should the team colors mentioned in the article be their primary colors, or also their minor colors? Reliability of the source aside, it's pretty easy to eyeball and see that there is black (or some shade of it) used as an outline in the Chiefs uniforms and logos. Does that warrant it being a team color worth putting in the infobox? I would lean towards listing what RS's generally call the team's colors, and not blindly listing all colors found on a stylesheet, which is a form of original research.— Bagumba ( talk) 01:39, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
We really need a well-researched, well-sourced, and well-written article about the concept of the " quality control coach" in the NFL. This might be an excellent joint research project for some of our newer WP:NFL members as they get to know each other and how to build a properly written encyclopedia article. This is real topic that needs a proper article. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 16:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Ok cool, a single sentence is all I was thinking. I figured it was worth noting.--Rockchalk 717 05:47, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Is the social media section of his page really necessary? Crash Under ride 18:41, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Our navboxes for current NFL coaches below the head coach level are a mess (see Category:National Football League coach navigational boxes), and need some loving care from an interested WP:NFL editor who is willing to follow all of the 2016 coaching changes and update the navboxes with the newly hired position coaches until the music stops in this 2016 round of NFL musical chairs. Any volunteers? Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 16:50, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Template:NFL strength and conditioning coach navbox. For real? Now I know there is a long snapper navbox in our future.— Bagumba ( talk) 02:33, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
These should be gone. Head coaches, Off. and Def. coordinators are fine but the rest are silly and unnecessary in my opinion. God knows how many are still on pages where the person hasn't been a coach in a few years.-- Yankees10 02:47, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
The 2015 regular season ended in Jan 2016 this year. I saw someone changed the year on
Philip Rivers' infobox because of this, so it now says "Career NFL statistics as of Week 17, 2016". If we don't fill in |statsweek=
and change it to 2015, it would say "Career NFL statistics as of 2015". Neither of which is technically correct. What do we prefer it to say?—
Bagumba (
talk)
01:58, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
There are three descriptive parameters that are used to create the "as of" header for Infobox NFL player:
| statleague = NFL
| statseason = 2015
| statweek = 17
Which displays "Career NFL statistics as of Week 17, 2015". We are supposed to delete the "statseason" and "statweek" parameters for retired players, which then displays "Career NFL statistics". The problem you raise, of the non-intuitive problem of players who are active after December 31, 2015, and how to accurately reflect their statistics, could easily be resolved with the following:
| statleague = NFL
| statseason = 2015–16
| statweek = 17
My two cents. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 09:46, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
@Dissident93: how is "Career NFL statistics as of 2015" not correct
: Depends how 2015 is interpreted. If interpreted as
2015 NFL season, it's fine. If a reader sees it as 2015 the calendar year, then it's seen as inaccurate. Rant: Yet another hassle with weekly stats updates—
Bagumba (
talk)
19:55, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
|statsseason=
is unknown to the reader. 2015–16 is awkward. I'm fine with just 2015.—
Bagumba (
talk)
03:06, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
QB - Completions (Comp), Attempts (Att), Completion percentage (Pct), Passing yardage (Yards), Passing touchdowns (TDs), Interceptions (Ints)
RB/FB - Attempts (Att), Rushing Yards (Yards), Touchdowns (TDs)
WR/TE - Receptions (Rec), Yardage (Yards), Touchdowns (TDs)
OL/LS - Games played (GP), Games started (GS)
DE/DT - Tackles (Only counting combined/total tackles), Sacks
LB/DB - Tackles, Sacks, Interceptions (Ints), Forced fumbles (FF), Defensive touchdowns (TDs)
K - Field goals attempted (FG Att), Field goals made (FGM), Longest (Long), Extra points attempted (XP Att), Extra points made (XPM) (Extra points being missed is now something that matters, with the recent rule change. The NE-DEN game last week would have likely went to OT if NE's kicker didn't miss an XP early in the game, as they had to go for 2 at the end and failed.)
P - Punts, Punt yardage (Yards), Punting average (Avg), Inside 20 (In 20)
Return specialist (Would be combined for both punt and kickoffs) - Returns (Ret), Return yardage (Ret yards), Return touchdowns (Ret TDs)
The stats tables for all positions should include games played and games started. Also, in order to have a nice, elegantly compact stats table, we need to keep the column header abbreviations to 2 or 3 characters, maybe 4 characters at the max. Remember, we will code the mouse-over reveal function for each abbreviation, as well as providing a nice, compact, and uniform abbreviation key at the bottom of each stats table. No more of these freelance wikitable monstrosities that include four or five times as much white space as substance because the column headers are too wide. They should also be coded so that the main body text wraps around them like our image files, rather than stopping at the beginning of the table, and then picking up afterward, often leaving a huge, gaping white space to the right of many stats tables. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 18:24, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Just a question. Do players such as Osi Umenyiora really need their place of birth in their infbox to read "London, England, UK"? I mean, there's only one England, duh, we know it's in the UK. Just a thought. Crash Under ride 08:05, 2 February 2016 (UTC)