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 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | → | Archive 20 |
I understand that Division I FBS national championships are not official, but can we at least set a precedent for all FBS football program articles to follow? Currently, the Texas Longhorns football article (they are certainly not the only ones, this is just an example) has 2008 as an unclaimed championship. That's ridiculous. I propose that we use the official NCAA FBS record book as the source to put unclaimed championships on these articles. They have a list of major selectors, and teams for every year. What do you guys think? Kobra98 ( talk) 03:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
With football season just around the corner, I wonder if there's any interest in getting the College Football Playoff article formally reviewed up to standards, perhaps to be an FA candidate sometime this fall (or at least GA status before then), given its importance as a topic in the football world. I've been smoothing and tweaking it for awhile now (hopefully not too CRYSTAL), and I think it's gotten to be in pretty decent shape, though it's still rated Start class. I was hoping somebody could give me some feedback.
One area that's important but unaddressed is the history and the old systems — a concise but adequate summary of the BCS-era drama and general teeth-gnashing over the years. User:Dcheagle has begun writing some of that history [User:Dcheagle/FixitboxXI on this draft page]. There are sections from Plus-One system and College football playoff debate that should probably be included, though those articles likely need a makeover.
I've never made a run at GA/FA before, so I'm sort of unsure of the next steps for this. Thanks for any help! Woodshed ( talk) 01:14, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
What are everyone's thoughts on the existence of Category:NCAA Division I FCS champions navigational boxes and all of the team navboxes found in it? I know we have these for FBS, and for Division I men's basketball, but is it worth having these for the FCS level? Jrcla2 ( talk) 17:43, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Here's an AfD discussion in which I suspect most WP:CFB participants will want to participate: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Florida–South Carolina football rivalry.
This goes to the core of what a college football rivalry is, and whether we should have a stand-alone Wikipedia article on point. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 05:43, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, y'all. Here's another AfD of general interest to CFB editors: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kraut Bowl (a high school football rivalry article). It may be time to have a policy discussion here on the WP:CFB talk page because I have discovered several relatively new editors beavering away at creating individual CFB game articles, which we generally frown upon. Please feel free to express your reactions below, and to participate in the linked AfD. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 20:00, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
There are now six pending high school football rivalry articles with pending AfD deletion discussions:
There are four or five more high school rivalry articles that I have not nominated because, in my estimation, they probably satisfy the general notability guidelines per WP:GNG. All WP:CFB and WP:NFL editors are invited to express their opinions in these six AfD discussions. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 02:51, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
I need to use Casey Feeding the Hogs, from Scout.com, for a half-line on a reception Chris Gragg made in his freshman year of college (his only catch for the season). If anyone has an account or knows a workaround that would be great. Seattle ( talk) 20:13, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
A discussion I've restarted at the main athletic program page, if anyone's interested. Kithira ( talk) 22:07, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Two new articles were created in the last few days by the same editor: 2013 Alabama vs. Texas A&M football game and 2001 Tennessee vs. Florida football game. He is also the creator Primetime Drama, which is set to be merged per a recent AfD. Those two new articles looks like the fall in the same boat. Thoughts? Jweiss11 ( talk) 01:25, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello all- I have periodically taken a run through some of the small college football coach navboxes such as those found at Category:NCAA Division III football coach navigational boxes. I have found a couple of issues. First, many seem to be out of date (some for as long as three years). Second, a large number have only one or two coaches who have articles. Is anyone maintaining these? A couple (like Template:Dickinson Red Devils football coach navbox) are very well maintained and someone has taken the initiative to create articles for each coach. Others are barren. I guess my other question is if templates for every small college is necessary/a good idea? I don't think every head football coach meets GNG (certainly at the D1 and some lower division schools they do, but not across the board), and if no one is going to maintain them, what is the purpose? I'm not going to AfD anything, just tossing it out to the WikiProject to raise the concern. Rikster2 ( talk) 12:07, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Chris Gragg is a current featured article candidate. If you have the time, please do take a look. Thanks. Seattle ( talk) 21:29, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Not directly related to this project, per se, but of tangential interest to some members here as an NCAA Division I athletic director. Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon B. Gray. Thanks, Ejgreen77 ( talk) 21:34, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
This is the first year of the college football championship game, and this year the semi-final games will be the Rose Bowl and the Sugar Bowl. Fine, but the article about the 2015 Rose Bowl says more specifically that this year it will have the #1 vs. #4 ranked teams, and the article about the 2015 Sugar Bowl says that it will have the #2 vs. #3 ranked teams. Do we have a reliable reference for that? — Mudwater ( Talk) 11:36, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Aside from Cal–UCLA rivalry's title not adhering to naming conventions, is this a notable cfb rivalry? Jrcla2 ( talk) 02:23, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
I nominated another two "rivalry" games for deletion:
In my opinion, neither of these games has significant in-depth coverage as a rivalry in independent, reliable sources to establish its notability, and neither of these series satisfies anyone's definition of a traditional college rivalry. Please feel free to share your opinions on the AfD pages. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 21:09, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
A non-WP:CFB editor nominated another CFB rivalry article at AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arkansas-Baylor football rivalry. The opinions of WP:CFB editors are solicited. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 15:10, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Can I get another set of eyes on the current state of Central Michigan Chippewas football? I've tried to keep an NPOV on the article, but an anonymous user disagrees. Thanks. — X96lee15 ( talk) 20:07, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
There has been much discussion recently about which articles and templates should be deleted, and there's definitely room for that discussion. However, what's been lacking is a concerted effort to expand Wikipedia's coverage of key college football topics. It's striking that we still don't have articles about every consensus first-team All-American. As of this morning, we had roughly 90 holes from 1894 1889 to 1969. If anyone wants to adopt one of these missing All-Americans, I'd be happy to chip in with whatever information I can find. (I've taken the first four and created them today.) So, consider claiming one (or more), and let's see if our project can turn all the red links to blue links by the time the 2014 college football season comes to an end. If you take one on, please strike it from the list below so we know it's done.
Cbl62 (
talk) 06:30, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
James P. Lee - 1889 halfback (Harvard);
Phillip Stillman - 1894 center (Yale);
John Hall - 1897 end (Yale);
Lew Palmer - 1898 end (Princeton);
Charles Romeyn - 1898 fullback (Army);
William Lee - 1901 guard (Harvard);
Arthur Tipton - 1904 center (Army);
Joseph Gilman - 1904 guard (Dartmouth);
William Erwin - 1907 guard (Army);
Patrick Grant - 1907 center (Harvard);
Edwin Harlan - 1907 halfback (Princeton);
John Wendell - 1907 halfback (Harvard);
Peter Hauser - 1907 fullback (Carlisle Indian School);
Ed Lange - 1908 quarterback (Navy);
William Goebel - 1908 guard (Yale);
Bernard O'Rourke - 1908 guard (Cornell);
Charles Nourse - 1908 center (Harvard);
Hamilton Corbett - 1908 halfback (Harvard);
Frederick Tibbott - 1908 halfback (Princeton);
Edward Hart - 1911 tackle (Princeton);
John Logan - 1912 guard (Princeton);
Ray Keeler - 1913 guard (Wisconsin);
Neno DaPrato - 1915 halfback (Michigan State);
Clinton Black - 1916 guard (Yale);
Frank T. Hogg - 1916 guard (Princeton);
Charles Bolen - 1917 end (Ohio State);
Henry Miller - 1917 and 1919 end (Penn);
Alfred Cobb - 1917 tackle (Syracuse);
Eugene Neeley - 1917 guard (Dartmouth);
Leonard Hilty - 1918 tackle (Pitt);
Lyman Perry - 1918 guard (Navy);
Ashel Day - 1918 center (Georgia Tech);
Jack Depler - 1918 center (Illinois);
Wolcott Roberts - 1918 halfback (Navy);
James Weaver - 1919 center (Centre College);
Charles Carpenter - 1919 center (Wisconsin);
Charles Carney - 1920 end (Illinois);
Tim Callahan - 1920 guard (Yale);
Charles Way - 1920 halfback (Penn State);
Tom Woods - 1920 guard (Harvard);
Malcolm Aldrich - 1921 halfback (Yale);
John Fiske Brown - 1921 guard (Harvard);
Wendell Taylor - 1922 end (Navy);
Pete MacRae - 1923 end (Syracuse);
Jim Lawson - 1924 end (Stanford);
Dick Luman - 1924 end (Yale);
Henry Wakefield - 1924 end (Vanderbilt);
Joe Pondelik - 1924 guard (Chicago);
Ed McMillan - 1925 guard (Princeton);
Ed Hess - 1925 guard (Ohio State);
Ralph Chase - 1925 tackle (Pitt);
George Tully - 1925 end (Dartmouth);
Harry Connaughton - 1926 guard (Georgetown);
Bud Boeringer - 1926 center (Notre Dame);
John Charlesworth - 1927 center (Yale);
Bill Webster - 1927 guard (Yale);
Ed Hake - 1927 tackle (Penn);
Irvine Phillips - 1928 end (California);
Seraphim Post - 1928 guard (Stanford);
Don Robesky - 1928 guard (Stanford);
Edward Burke - 1928 guard (Navy);
Ray Montgomery - 1929 guard (Pitt);
Ted Beckett - 1930 guard (California);
Dallas Marvil - 1931 tackle (Northwestern);
Milton Summerfelt - 1932 guard (Army);
Clarence Gracey - 1932 center (Vanderbilt);
Paul Geisler - 1933 end (Centenary);
Frank Larson - 1934 end (Minnesota);
Chuck Hartwig - 1934 guard (Pitt);
Bill Bevan - 1934 guard (Minnesota);
Jack Robinson - 1934 center (Notre Dame);
George Shotwell - 1934 center (Pitt);
Chuck Sweeney - 1937 end (Notre Dame);
Andy Bershak - 1937 end (North Carolina);
Esco Sarkkinen - 1939 end (Ohio State);
David Rankin - 1940 end (Purdue);
Phil Tinsley - 1944 end (Georgia Tech);
Paul Walker - 1944 end (Yale);
Jack Dugger - 1944 end (Ohio State);
Ben Chase - 1944 guard (Navy);
Bill Hackett - 1944 guard (Ohio State);
Bob Jenkins - 1944 halfback (Navy);
Dick Hightower - 1951 center (SMU);
Johnny Karras - 1951 halfback (Illinois);
Elmer Willhoite - 1952 guard (USC);
Frank McPhee - 1952 end (Princeton);
Don Dohoney - 1953 end (Mich. St.);
Crawford Mims - 1953 guard (Mississippi);
Paul Cameron - 1953 halfback (UCLA);
Bo Bolinger - 1955 guard (Oklahoma);
John Witte - 1956 tackle (Oregon State);
George Deiderich - 1958 guard (Vanderbilt);
John Guzik - 1958 guard (Pitt);
Danny LaRose - 1960 end (Missouri);
Dick Arrington - 1965 guard (Notre Dame);
Freeman White - 1965 end (Nebraska);
Jim Breland - 1966 center (Ga. Tech);
Laverne Allers - 1966 guard (Nebraska);
Rich Stotter - 1967 guard (Houston);
Tom Schoen - 1967 def. back (Notre Dame);
Don Manning - 1967 linebacker (UCLA);
Adrian Young - 1967 linebacker (USC);
Jim Barnes - 1968 guard (Arkansas); .
Cbl62 (
talk) 06:30, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Does anyone have an archive of TSN FCS rankings from 2010? I'm currently doing this, and I'm trying to find if Dayton had a ranking before the final poll. Thanks!— CycloneIsaac ( Talk) 21:05, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Hey, ya'll, here's a newly created CFB navbox:
Template:Vanderbilt Commodores football captains navbox. I would like to get the reaction of other WP:CFB editors . . . .
Dirtlawyer1 (
talk) 03:01, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Just saw this new class of articles being created by what appears to be a single editor: Ole Miss Rebels football statistical leaders. What are the reactions of other WP:CFB editors? I foresee potential problems with the notability guidelines per WP:GNG, as well as the general prohibition against statistics lists per WP:NOTSTATS. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 18:10, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
I have noticed that a call to change the name of certain teams such as Talk:Austin Peay State Governors and Lady Govs and Talk:Emporia State Hornets between team and Lady team names. But there is an editor who is calling to rename the articles Austin Peay Sports, and eventually University of Michigan Sports etc. Is there a specific reason that team pages are referred to as Oklahoma Sooners, Emporia State Hornets, Michigan Wolverines and not Oklahoma Sports or University of Wisconsin-Madison Sports? I personally like the conformity because I know what to expect on a specific page. So what should the names be, and why were they already posted as such? (Sorry if I opened a can of worms. BOOMER)! UCO2009bluejay ( talk) 01:26, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Okay, EJ and Bluejay, I left a comment on all four talk page discussions, which will hopefully put SMcC's off-the-wall renaming proposal to bed. If y'all have any more questions or problems with this, ping me. I've watch-listed all four talk pages, and will try to monitor the discussions until they close. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 02:33, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Hey gang, we need to make an effort in the next few days to update the College Football Portal. It should really just take a few articles and some fresh images. Who's game? Let's collaborate over at Portal talk:College football.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 00:39, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
I have noticed some movement in the Conference Membership Tables on conference pages, and I was wondering if there is/should be a set format title, and composition for conference membership tables. I have noticed differences in the Atlantic Coast Conference#Member schools, Southeastern Conference#Member universities, Big 12 Conference#Member schools, Missouri Valley Conference#Member schools, and several Division II such as Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association#Member schools Heartland Conference#Member schools, Division III, and NAIA. Should they all include Titles, Sports, City Population, Mascot etc. If there is a precedent that has already been set I would like to know. Should all conferences include the same types of information. Thanks, UCO2009bluejay ( talk) 05:16, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
ACC: | Institution | Location (Population) |
Founded | Type (affiliation) |
Undergraduate Enrollment |
Postgraduate Enrollment |
Nickname | Colors | Mascot or symbol |
Joined ACC |
ACC Division | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BigEast: | Institution | Location | Founded | Joined | Type | Enrollment | Nickname | Colors | US News Ranking | Endowment | |||
BigTen: | Institution | Location (Population) |
Founded | Joined Big Ten |
Type | Enrollment | Endowment | Nickname | Colors | Division I Varsity Teams |
NCAA Championships (As of January 1, 2014) |
Big Ten Championships (As of December 21, 2013) |
Football Division |
Big12: | Institution | Location (Pop.) |
Founded | Type | Enrollment | Endowment | Joined | Nickname | Colors | Mascot | Varsity Sports |
National Titles | |
Pac-12: | Institution | Location (Population) |
Founded | Type | Enrollment | Endowment | Nickname | Colors | NCAA Team Championships | ||||
SEC: | Institution | Location (Population) |
Founded | Type | Enrollment | Endowment | Joined | Nickname | Colors | Mascot |
After seeing the above I definitely would be for some sort of consensus on standardization. — dain omite 18:23, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Jrcla2 posted on the basketball project that he thinks the ACC and SEC tables are good models. UCO2009bluejay ( talk) 23:10, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
I looked up a few football pregame game notes at all levels and in the quick fact box about the opponent all listed the school, location, founded, enrollment, nickname, colors, and joined conference. Other facts were listed which varied but nowhere did I see population, endowment, type, or U.S. news ranking. When I am looking at an athletic conference page, I am looking for information about sports. When someone is looking for information about a school's academics, they will look on the school's page not the conference they belong to; with the same situation about a town's population. If you want to compare rankings and endowment, create a "list of" page. I believe the members table should be compact and be just the school, location, founded, enrollment, nickname, colors, and joined, if the table starts getting crowded with too much information it becomes cumbersome. Personally, I don't even look at the tables that are so big that they can't fit on my screen and also are dominated by wasted white space. The IP user currently adding the U.S. news rankings is technically using the wrong terminology. The schools listed as "not ranked" do have a ranking, it's just not published. I have much much more to say about this topic and will gladly share if permitted. Thank you. Msjraz64 ( talk) 18:52, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
I do not think population should be included. Is it city population, metropolitan/micropolitan area population, designated media market population, county/parish population, or what? It seems like so many different population standards are being used in the tables. I don't think a specific population is a defining characteristic for institutions because the universities are not defined by borders. Location yes, population no. - AllisonFoley ( talk) 05:38, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I also do not think endowment should be included. The biggest reason is that it's not comparing apples to apples. Many schools have systemwide endowments that are being claimed for one institution within the system, which is inaccurate and misleading for this purpose. Many other schools, especially outside of the Power 5 conferences, do not have an endowment listed in the NACUBO survey. Lastly, what does endowment have to do with an athletic conference? If any financial figures should be included in these tables, it should be the athletic budgets, but the problem with that is that the private schools are not listed in the USA Today database. - AllisonFoley ( talk) 05:53, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I also do not think national titles should be included in the table. First, there is significant controversy regarding major college football national titles since the NCAA does not sponsor it. As mentioned above, most NCAA Division I teams have moved up from the NAIA, Division II/small college, and/or I-AA/FCS, which would suggest that those national titles are not equal to NCAA DI national titles. In addition, the NCAA did not sponsor women's championships until the 1980s. Before that, women's titles were awarded by the AIAW, and there was some overlap as well. If any titles are included in the table, I think it should be conference titles from that conference. However, with so much realignment, that may be a misleading figure since the various schools joined in different time periods, and it doesn't account for their history in other conferences. - AllisonFoley ( talk) 06:39, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Here's my proposal, left-to-right:
Institution | Location (Pop.) |
Founded | Joined | Type | Enrollment | Endowment | Nickname | Colors | Varsity Teams | Division |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
University of Florida |
Gainesville, Florida (126,047) |
1853 | 1932 | Public | 51,474 | $1,295,313,000 | Gators | 20 | Eastern |
Explicitly removed or consolidated:
Naming standardization:
Callouts/Questions:
What does the inclusion of school colors to the tables really bring to an article about a sports conference, are these colors related to the conference in a way that is more then just being the colors of the schools that are members? Cause if their not related to the conference in any form other then being the colors of member schools then I see no reason for them being there. Thoughts?-- Dcheagle • talk • contribs 23:34, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Why don't you just get rid of all the info? Why is it more important to list when a school joined a conference...rather than how the school is ranked academically? I just don't get why y'all want to hide information. The population numbers don't mess anything up. These are basic facts to give people an idea of how these schools measure up against each other...and their conference mates. NOW, I have to go to three or four different pages to get the same info that was contained here....on one page. Thanks for making it harder to look at these schools and conferences at a glance. Oh, and all the hours I spent adding some of this info. Just for some person behind a desk to disagree because of how it looks physically. Give me a break. I won't be coming here any longer to do my research. I have had enough of y'all changing things and taking information away from the reader. Thanks for screwing things up! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.41.6.154 ( talk) 13:44, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Based upon discussion, is this a more updated and suitable table? (Colors discussion pending).
Institution | Location | Founded | Joined | Type | Enrollment | Nickname | Colors | Varisty Teams |
Division |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Clemson University |
Clemson, South Carolina |
1889 | 1953 | Public | 21,303 | Tigers | 19 | Atlantic | |
Duke University |
Durham, North Carolina |
1838 | 1953 | Private | 15,591 | Blue Devils | 26 | Coastal | |
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill |
Chapel Hill, North Carolina |
1789 | 1953 | Public | 29,390 | Tar Heels | 27 | Coastal |
I will refer to my previous comment and add other thoughts regarding some categories. Population has no relevance. The local population does not equate to the fan base of any school. Why add population for college conferences when it is not done for pro leagues? A column for varsity teams and championships is only duplicating information. All conferences have a section that covers all the various titles and the "sponsored sports by school" tables detail the number of varsity sports a school has. For NCAA D-I, I would encourage a "conference academics" section that would include a table showing AAU status, type (affiliation), endowment, U.S. news rankings, and other related academic categories. This area would be of high importance for the conferences that have academic requirements to become a member. Anything dealing with academics for NCAA D-II, NCAA D-III, and NAIA would have no relevance since these conferences are formed based on geography and budgets with very little to no consideration given to academic standards. There is also no need for a "division" column. The style used for the Southeastern Conference should be used if a conference uses divisions for multiple sports including football, otherwise the regular members table is sufficient. The conferences that have divisions in football only already have a table in the football section showing the division split. Colors may not seem important enough to include but how many times have you gone to the stadium or arena, even in high school, and see the banners of all the schools in the conference. Maybe thought of as an extension of the conference's visual identity.
Comment - Breaking this proposal into it's own section, as it was lost in the comments of the above section. UW Dawgs ( talk) 16:14, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Comment I really think we need to be certain of which format will be utilized. I know there are differences of opinion and only one person has commented since the most recent proposal. Some of these templates will need to be updated July 1, and an editor is already adding teams to conferences that aren't members of it yet. E.g. adding Louisville to the ACC even though they are still a representing the American in the CWS, adding Appalachian State, Georgia Southern to the Sun Belt etc. UCO2009bluejay ( talk) 02:55, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Support - I also really like what Msjrz64 has done. When you look at any prospectus, media guide, or game notes, the information you will find about each school includes location, founded, nickname, colors, and enrollment. Simply add in the year the school joined because that is very important, and we are good to go. The only minor change I would suggest is making the school names bold and slightly shading the first column to make it look like the top row. I don't find the total number of sports sponsored pertinent for the membership table. All of that info is detailed sport by sport further in each article. Often times schools sponsor sports that the conference does not sponsor. - AllisonFoley ( talk) 06:01, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Oppose - This removes relevant content and associated citations which are seen in many (but not all) conference articles. UW Dawgs ( talk) 16:15, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Oppose- Each conference is different, so I find myself in agreement the with reasons given by User:UW Dawgs... ALSO am opposed to User:Msjraz64 making the changes as outlined in his proposal without a consensus being reached... GWFrog ( talk) 23:42, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Comment - UWDawgs used this rationale "re-add Endowment, per existing consensus implementation" to add endowment to the C-USA page. Do you have a link to the discussion that lead to this existing consensus? I haven't seen this discussion about C-USA. I'm not opposed to having all of this extra information on the conference page, but I don't think it belongs in the basic membership table. The way it is now, there is too much information in the table that it is squeezed with text wrapping. Like someone mentioned above, I think adding an academic measures table further down in the article would be an agreeable compromise/solution. I don't find endowment especially relevant to an athletic conference membership table. I still don't understand why some insist on endowment being in the membership table when athletic budget is a much more pertinent financial figure for an athletic conference article. As I stated above, the endowment numbers being used now are not accurate. Sources being used include US News and NACUBO which report different figures for supposedly the same endowments. NACUBO uses systemwide endowment for many schools, and many other schools aren't listed at all. The current endowment figures are not apples to apples comparisons. Also regarding the C-USA article, the population figures being used are misleading. It has the same population for Miami as Boca Raton. Cities are listed in the table, but it appears that metro/micropolitan area populations were added to the table. I'm not sure how it's done on other articles, but I don't trust any of them because of the way it's been added to the C-USA article. It's true that every conference is different like GWFrog said, but I think there is basic information like Msjraz64 proposed that is inherent to every school and conference that should be included in a standardized membership table. I think the extra information that we can't reach consensus on can be included in another section of the conference article. - AllisonFoley ( talk) 03:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Support If the varsity sports are included on their own table as all DI, and most if not all D-II (and provided the lower division tables are made) then I have no objection to this proposal. I would like to see type, but I don't have enough of an objection to it being left out to oppose this proposal. After the "institution wide" argument, it seems that all but one editor is opposed to endowment at this point. I think that this proposal best fits what we need the table for. My only reservation is that the division outlines seem a bit odd if you click the sort arrows. There are arguments in this discussion (so I won't need to link these) that the lower divisions should follow the major conference tables, and the point is that ALL conferences need standardization, and not a special case for CUSA or any other conference. When do we know when consensus is reached so we can move forward with standardization and move on? UCO2009bluejay ( talk) 04:56, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Oppose In that each conference is different, each conference's membership is different, and each should have its own membership format. I can see the reasons for the elimination of both academic ratings and endowments, but I also see the need for the inclusion of items such as conference titles (as long as it is only for the conference in question)... Fredref123 ( talk) 11:45, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Oppose While I believe that there should be a standardization of the membership table, the tables created by Msjraz64 removed necessary information in my opinion. I would like to thank Msjraz64 for their work though. I agree with previous responses in this discussion that the membership tables serve almost as a de facto media guide for the conference's respective member institutions. As such, the tables should include enough encyclopedic information about the members to suit curious minds. NEMESIS63 | talk | 20:15, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
No divisions:
Institution | Location (Population) |
Founded | Joined | Type | Enrollment | Nickname | Colors |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
University of Central Florida |
Orlando, Florida (249,562) |
1963 | 2013 | Public ( SUSF) | 59,770 | Knights |
Divisions:
Institution | Location (Population) |
Founded | Joined | Type | Enrollment | Nickname | Colors | Division |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
University of Central Florida |
Orlando, Florida (249,562) |
1963 | 2013 | Public ( SUSF) | 59,770 | Knights | East |
Above is my proposal for a standardization of the template, which is currently in use in the American Athletic Conference article. It provides enough at-a-glance information about the member university's but also doesn't overload the page or reader, or provide nonencyclopedic information. Academic information such as endowment and rankings should be provided in an "Academics" section, which numerous conferences already have. In addition, another column could be added on the right for sortable divisions (east, west, atlantic, coastal, etc.). NEMESIS63 | talk | 20:15, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Comment - The above format was NOT in use on the AAC prior to the recent edits of the last 2 days.
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=American_Athletic_Conference&oldid=614972281
UW Dawgs (
talk) 20:49, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Oppose - I think population figures are irrelevant based on the discussion in the previous proposals. While I'm not opposed to Type (most of which are obvious), I think that adding the systems to the Type column is totally irrelevant and unnecessary. Systems aren't in conferences. Individual institutions are. The membership section should be only about individual institutions, not the population of their city or anything about their system. This goes back to individual institutions claiming the endowment for their entire system. I still believe proposal 3 is the best. If particular info isn't important enough to be included in the quick facts in team or conference media guides and game notes, then it's really not notable enough to include in a membership table. Any of the extraneous information can be added to another section in the article if some are determined to keep that info in the articles. - AllisonFoley ( talk) 19:20, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
I tried going to the College Football Data Warehouse site just now, and my anti-virus software blocked access with this message: "The requested URL cannot be provided. The requested object at the URL: http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/ Detected: object is infected by HEUR:Trojan.Script.Generic." If anyone has had a similar experience or knows what this means, please share. This is a site frequently used by members of this project, and folks should be aware of this potential issue. Cbl62 ( talk) 16:10, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
The current version of the Template:CFB Yearly Record End/footnotes contains a mark (†) denoting an appearance in a BCS, Bowl Alliance, or Bowl Coalition game. I've never understood exactly why this was necessary, but also never previously seen a need to do away with it. But now that the BCS is done and the College Football Playoff ("CFP") is here – and apparently will be through at least 2025 – this footnote should be updated.
I'm posing a question here before I do anything, since it could affect many coaches' pages. Should we ADD the CFP to the list of bowls that are marked by the "†"? Should we have a new and different mark for CFP, and KEEP the "†" for historic appearances in the BCS, etc.? Or should we DELETE all designations for BCS bowls and just mark appearances in the CFP with a "†" going forward? I think the last is the best option, but welcome all thoughts. Thanks. -- Kgwo1972 ( talk) 17:21, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
i've just created a Template:Appalachian State Mountaineers quarterback navbox but can't find a website that lists every QB who has started for App State, hence why there are many gaps in time in this template. Could anyone help me find such a source? Arbor to SJ ( talk) 21:16, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Personally, Cbl, I think it was a huge mistake to sanction CFB starting QB navboxes in the first place. Here are three typical QB navboxes for Division I FBS teams:
And it's not like most of these QB navboxes are missing a handful, or some relatively reasonable percentage of 10-15%. Nope, they're missing anywhere from 30 to 70% -- and mind you, I intentionally selected teams that were not perennial cellar dwellers. Moreover, many of the Division I FBS QB navboxes are selectively omitting/including examples from their history to avoid listing the entire succession of starting QBs, which would increase the percentage of red links. We have created 100+ messes in order to justify keeping a handful of the QB navboxes for which the succession is actually complete. Why should we be surprised when some fan of Appalachian State does the same thing? The simple solution is to start converting these navboxes to "list of" articles. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 22:32, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Since the first part of the campaign worked so well (almostnow complete), I figured we may as well lay out the remaining consensus All-Americans. This Part II campaign has 63 red-linked consensus All-Americans from 1970 through 2007 who weren't originally part of the first campaign, including the ones that WikiOriginal-9 started in the past couple days. Again, feel free to help out, grab as many as you like, and strike them when you're done. If we fill out this list, we will have an article for every consensus All-American college football player!
Cbl62 (
talk) 00:05, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Ernie Jennings - 1970 receiver (Air Force);
Larry DiNardo - 1970 OG (Notre Dame);
Don Popplewell - 1970 center (Colorado);
Dick Bumpas - 1970 DT (Arkansas);
Rock Perdoni - 1970 DT (Georgia Tech);
Mike Anderson - 1970 LB (LSU);
Bobby Majors - 1971 DB (Tennessee);
Greg Marx - 1972 DE (Notre Dame);
Ron Rusnak - 1972 OG (No. Carolina);
Robert Popelka - 1972 DB (SMU);
Bill Yoest - 1973 OG (NC State);
Bill Wyman - 1973 center (Texas);
Mike Townsend - 1973 DB (Notre Dame);
Tony Cristiani - 1973 DL (Miami);
Kermit Johnson - 1973 RB (UCLA);
Booker Brown - 1973 tackle/guard (USC);
Peter Demmerle - 1974 WR (Notre Dame);
Marvin Crenshaw - 1974 OT (Nebraska);
John Roush - 1974 OG (Oklahoma);
John Provost - 1974 DB (Holy Cross);
Larry Seivers - 1975 & 1976 receiver (Tennessee);
Randy Johnson - 1975 OG (Georgia);
Ted Smith - 1975 OG (Ohio State);
Mike Vaughan - 1976 OT (Oklahoma);
Joel Parrish - 1976 OG (Georgia);
Al Romano - 1976 DL (Pitt);
Bill Armstrong - 1976 DB (Wake Forest);
Dave Butterfield - 1976 DB (Nebraska);
Dan Irons - 1977 OT (Texas Tech);
Tom Brzoza 1977 center (Pitt);
Bob Jury - 1977 DB (Pitt);
Greg Kolenda - 1979 OT (Arkansas);
Ken Fritz - 1979 OG (Ohio State);
Jeff Leiding - 1983 LB (Texas);
Bill Mayo - 1984 OG (Tennessee);
Mark Traynowicz - 1984 center (Nebraska);
Tony Thurman - 1984 DB (Boston College);
Rod Brown - 1984 DB (Okla. St.);
Ricky Anderson - 1984 punter (Vanderbilt);
Willie Smith - 1985 tight end (Miami);
Peter Anderson - 1985 center (Georgia);
Anthony Phillips - 1988 OG (Oklahoma);
Jake Young - 1988 & 1989 center (Nebraska);
Keith English - 1988 punter (Colorado);
Bob Kula - 1989 OT (Michigan St.);
Eric Still - 1989 OT (Tennessee);
Chris Smith - 1990 tight end (BYU);
Stacy Long - 1990 OT (Clemson);
Maurice Crum, Sr. - 1990 LB (Miami);
Carlton McDonald - 1992 DB (Air Force);
Bjorn Merten - 1993 PK (UCLA);
Terry Daniel - 1993 punter (Auburn);
Ed Stewart - 1994 LB (Nebraska);
Brian Robinson - 1994 DB (Auburn);
Brian Lee - 1997 DB (Wyoming);
Chad Kessler - 1997 punter (LSU);
Rufus French - 1998 tight end (Mississippi);
Joe Kristosik - 1998 punter (UNLV);
Jason Whitaker - 1999 OG (Fla. St.);
Rob Riti - 1999 center (Missouri);
Andrew Bayes - 1999 punter (E. Carolina);
J. T. Thatcher - 2000 DB (Oklahoma);
John Sullivan - 2007 kicker (New Mexico).
Cbl62 (
talk) 00:05, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
This discussion floundered last year at the end of the season: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive 13#Dates on standings templates. Let's try to revive it at the beginning of the season to see if there's a consensus one way or the other. I will copy and paste last year's comments into a gray box here (please place new comments below the gray box):
OCNative ( talk) 23:57, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello. I have a question. Does the page Longest NCAA Division I football winning streaks include current streaks? If so North Dakota State Bison are currently on a 25 game win streak. Other FCS schools are on there can someone who knows how to edit please add them? Thx. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.135.176.108 ( talk) 08:23, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
I rewrote {{ Infobox NCAA Division I FBS season}} today, and it has a few major improvements:
Now, here's where I require assistance. I personally think that referring to the BCS/CFP winner as the sole national championship is placing undue weight on the organizers of the BCS and College Football Playoff. As such, the infobox no longer refers to the BCS winner as a "champion", but as the winner of the designated championship game. Due to its importance and prominence, said game is still significant for the infobox, but to comply with neutral point of view, I added, as mentioned, the ability to list other post-season poll results as well. Now, in pre-BCS pages, the "champion" field is used to specify the AP winner. However, to make sure my changes were backwards compatible, I did not change that. On articles that list AP poll #1's under |champion=, could you help me and change those to |ap_poll= instead?
2008 NCAA Division I FBS football season serves as the showpiece for the full extent of the changes; you can use it as a guideline for how to tweak other season pages for this updated version.
Sincerely, ViperSnake151 Talk 22:38, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Part II of the Consensus All-American campaign is nearing completion. As a result, we will have articles on every consensus All-American in college football history. There are loads of additional areas where our coverage is in pretty sore shape. With college football season upon us and drawing eyes to this board, we could work on another group campaign to improve the project's core coverage. A topic that occurs to me is College Football Hall of Famers. Years ago, Patken created two or three-line stubs for all or almost all of the inductees. Many of them remain in really poor condition, consisting of just a couple lines of text and no citations. A sampling of those (from A-BG) are set forth below. If people would be willing to work on improving these, I could compile a fuller list. Other thoughts on group projects welcome as well.
Cbl62 (
talk) 05:33, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Joe Alexander (Syracuse),
Bob Anderson (Army),
Volney Ashford (Missouri Valley),
Reds Bagnell (Penn),
Bill Banker (Tulane),
Vince Banonis (Detroit),
Ron Beagle (Navy),
Hub Bechtol (Texas Tech),
Forrest Behm (Nebraska),
Marty Below (Wisconsin),
Jeff Bentrim (North Dakota St.),
Tony Blazine (Ill. Wesleyan),
Ed Bock (Iowa St.),
Murry Bowden (Dartmouth),
Charley Brewer (Harvard),
George Brown (Navy/SD St.),
Gordon Brown (Yale),
Teel Bruner (Centre College),
Bob Butler (Wisconsin),
Dennis Byrd (NC St.),
Brad Calip (East Central),
Dave Campbell (Harvard),
Jack Cannon (Notre Dame),
Rod Cason (Angelo State),
Joe Cichy (North Dakota State),
Gary Cochran (Princeton),
Dick Colman (Williams/Princeton),
Bill Cooper (Muskingum),
Brad Crawford (Franklin),
Fred Crawford (Duke),
Zygmont Czarobski (Notre Dame),
John Dalton (Navy),
Ave Daniell (Pitt),
Tom Deery (Widener),
Steve DeLong (Tennessee),
Kevin Dent (Jackson St.),
Herb Deromedi (Central Michigan),
John DeWitt (Princeton),
Joe Donchess (Pitt),
Jess Dow (S. Conn. St.),
Nick Drahos (Cornell),
Dick Duden (Navy),
Ed Dyas (Auburn),
Ray Eichenlaub (Notre Dame),
Steve Eisenhauer (Navy),
Mike Favor (N. Dakota St.),
Bill Fincher (Ga. Tech.),
Bill Fischer (Notre Dame),
Buck Flowers (Ga. Tech),
Rod Franz (Cal),
Kenny Gamble (Colgate),
Edgar Garbisch (Washington & Jefferson),
Forest Geyer (Oklahoma),
Walter Gilbert (Auburn),
Gene Goodreault (Boston College),
W. C. Gorden (Jackson St.),
Charlie Green (Wittenberg),
William Grinnell (Tufts),
Ralph Guglielmi (Notre Dame),
Lester Lautenschlaeger, and
Alex Moffat (Princeton).
Does anyone have a good reason why the Glenn Scobey Warner article should not be moved to Pop Warner per WP:COMMONNAME? Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 02:48, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
On Template:Nebraska–Omaha Mavericks football coach navbox, the link for Bill Danenhauer redirects to Dave Sullivan (wrestler). Given that the UNO head coach's tenure was 1975–1977, there's no way Sullivan (b. 1963) would be that guy. Does anyone know if Bill Danenhauer is an erroneous redirect, or if it's the brother/son/whatever of the coach? The link needs to be disambiguated but I'm just not sure how they're related. Jrcla2 ( talk) 14:26, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the sleuthing all. This was a trickier than usual disambig case. Jrcla2 ( talk) 12:45, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
With football season in full swing, I wonder if there's any interest in getting the College Football Playoff article formally reviewed up to standards, perhaps to be an FA candidate sometime before the first playoff this winter (or at least GA status), given its importance as a topic in the football world. I've been smoothing and tweaking it for awhile now (hopefully not too CRYSTAL), and I think it's gotten to be in pretty decent shape, though it's still rated Start class. I was hoping somebody could give me some feedback.
One area that's important but unaddressed is the history and the old systems — a concise but adequate summary of the BCS-era drama and general teeth-gnashing over the years. User:Dcheagle has begun writing some of that history [User:Dcheagle/FixitboxXI on this draft page]. There are sections from Plus-One system and College football playoff debate that should probably be included, though those articles likely need a makeover. Images, too, are needed.
I've never made a run at GA/FA before, so I'm sort of unsure of the next steps for this. Thanks for any help! Woodshed ( talk) 08:21, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
I would like to proposed the following "rivalry" series for deletion at AfD:
1. Georgia–Vanderbilt football rivalry - Not a traditional college rivalry, standard annual series between division foes;
2. Kentucky–Vanderbilt football rivalry - Not a traditional college rivalry, standard annual series between division foes;
3. LSU–Mississippi State football rivalry - Not a traditional college rivalry, standard annual series between division foes;
4. Arkansas–Missouri football rivalry - New inter-divisional SEC rivalry beginning in 2014, could be notable in 5 to 10 years;
5. Illinois–Missouri football rivalry - Not a traditional rivalry for either team, or a historically significant series;
6. Indiana–Kentucky rivalry - This is a basketball rivalry, not a traditional football rivalry, and the football text should be purged.
All of these articles involve one or more SEC teams. WP:NRIVALRY states that no rivalry is inherently notable, and must satisfy the general notability guidelines per WP:GNG, with significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources. The gloss on that, which most long-time CFB editors have accepted, is that the series most be notable as a rivalry, not merely as a long-time series.
Please express your reaction to whether we should keep or delete each of the identified series above, with a brief statement of your reason, in next seven days (by September 1, 2014). Only those articles on which WP:CFB members agree by majority !vote will be submitted to AfD. More suggestions of other CFB "rivalry" articles will follow next week. We will also review several CFB single-game articles in the near future, too. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 00:26, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
There isn't an article for it right now, but should it have one? This was a pretty intense rivalry in the 1970s and 1980s, but went dormant for about 20 years and was just restarted last night. Jhn31 ( talk) 15:40, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Maybe this isn't the optimal forum for this question, but I am wondering why conference pages include lists of which sports schools compete in other conferences. The fact that School 1 competes in Conference B in women's blernsball is completely irrelevant to an article about Conference A. The fact that many of those sports are non-NCAA sports makes it even more out of place. The proper place would be the article about the school or its athletic teams. Grsz 11 00:42, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej ( talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
|
|
|
Ugh, this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Under the Lights III. Jweiss11 ( talk) 03:20, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
MisterCake has done a lot of good work of late building out content about Vanderbilt and other southern football teams during the early 20th century. As part of that, he's created a number of new national champion navboxes. Some of them may be problematic. Template:1920 Georgia Bulldogs football navbox, Template:1921 Vanderbilt Commodores football navbox, Template:1922 Vanderbilt Commodores football navbox represent national champions selceted by Clyde Berryman. While College football national championships in NCAA Division I FBS includes Clyde Berryman as a selector for national champions in later years, none of these championships from the early 1920s are noted there. The College Football Data Warehouse doesn't make note of them either. I don't think these championships have sufficient recognition to warrant a navbox. Thoughts? Jweiss11 ( talk) 18:48, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
The Ole Miss-Alabama and Mississippi State-Texas A&M games on October 4, 2014, got all kinds of hype leading up to them, and when both Mississippi schools pulled the upset, it got front page coverage in most Mississippi newspapers, on ESPN.com's front page, apparently will be the SI cover this week, and sports websites all over the Internet are calling it the greatest day in Mississippi sports history.
I don't know that each game deserves it own article (though I don't object), but what about a single article about both games, since almost all of the coverage has been about how both Mississippi programs have stepped up and won signature wins? Jhn31 ( talk) 22:11, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
OSU and the NCAA vacated several 2010 OSU wins. The consensus on the Talk page for the above article, as well as that reached in discussions here, see here, and encapsulated at Wikipedia:WikiProject_College_football/Vacated_victories, was that the historical results would be reported, but that the vacated games - officially, no longer victories - would neither be reported as such nor included in the school's overall W-L record. The subject page was revised in keeping with these discussions. Recently an editor has been (persistently) restoring the victory, in text, to Ohio State, with earlier edit summaries lacking a certain - civility. (Sample diff here.) I was reverting freely because I regarded it as vandalism, intentionally disruptive, when the editor persisted after being directed to these discussions and nevertheless electing not to discuss; but an admin at WP:AIV disagreed and sent me to 3RR. With that, I am done reverting, and raise it here so that editors experienced in this area can either 1) keep an eye on it as well or 2) tell me to up my meds and find something better to worry about. Or maybe both. Thanks. JohnInDC ( talk) 19:53, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
I've been working on getting William Wurtenburg to FA for a while, and my peer review recently closed with no comments. I was wondering if there was anyone who would be willing to take a look at the article for me before I put it at FAC. Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks, Awardgive. Help out with Project Fillmore County 01:06, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
This may have been discussed before, but what should I use on the season-by-season depth charts? Opening day? Final game? Some kind of weighted average where the player who started the most games during the year is at the top of the depth chart? Jhn31 ( talk) 02:54, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on the CfD for Category:Night Games at Michigan Stadium. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 13:24, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
This is a notice about Category:College football articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. Iceblock ( talk) 16:24, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I've updated the Most weeks ranked number 1 (NCAA football) article with the 2014 NCAA Record Book. The article is fringe, so wondering about suggestions for a merge. AP Poll and AP National Championship Trophy are both general, while 2014 NCAA Division I FBS football rankings is too specific. Thoughts appreciate. UW Dawgs ( talk) 23:45, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
I likw Jweiss11's title but I have a question. As an Oklahoma fan I am wondering how the Sooners is listed as first being number 1 in 1954, when the 1950 Sooners won the national championship that season? UCO2009bluejay ( talk) 04:51, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
There's a new article for Greg Bower, a college football coach and former player of pretty minor note. He's never been a head coach and the most high-profile program he's been associated with is Northern Illinois. Thoughts about notability / AfD? Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 03:36, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to take part in a discussion about this category at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 October 24#Sport players from Louisville, Kentucky. Rikster2 ( talk) 13:40, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi there. A recent requested page move of O.co Coliseum to Oakland Coliseum has been re-listed for another week, and thus may need input by participants here at WikiProject College football.
At issue are WP:COMMONNAME and WP:NAMINGCRITERIA concerns that, if this move request passes, may eventually affect the naming of college football stadium articles: specifically whether to keep the current practice of renaming stadium articles whenever there is a new sponsor (like renaming Bronco Stadium to Albertsons Stadium), or permanently keep them at long-term, stable names (like always keeping articles at, for example, the Rutgers Stadium or Groves Stadium titles instead of their current corporate titles) regardless of current or future changes to the naming rights. Please discuss at Talk:O.co Coliseum#Requested move 2. Thank you. Zzyzx11 ( talk) 03:16, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
This article is hopelessly out-of-date due to different contractual tie-ins for 2014, the switch from BCS to playoff, and the renaming of several games. I edited the part about BCS to playoff, but could somebody give it some love in the other areas? Thanks. p b p 22:49, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated the following articles for deletion:
User:Grayfell has also nominated the following two articles for deletion:
And another article nominated by Jweiss11:
I have also nominated the following two articles for deletion: --
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE) 22:32, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
And another nominated by X96lee15:
New round of single-game AfD nominations:
User:Bikeroo has also nominated the following article:
As a general proposition, we do not permit discourage stand-alone articles for regular season single games unless there is some greater significance to the particular game. Without some historical significance to an individual game, we encourage the incorporation of game highlights into rivalry series and individual season articles; that's why these season and rivalry articles exist. This is amply supported by existing consensus and prior AfD outcomes.
Dirtlawyer1 (
talk) 06:12, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
On this topic, Primetime Drama has been slated for a merge since its AfD closed in July. Does someone want to take the lead on executing that merge? 03:02, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I just recently declined a speedy deletion move request for Illibuck Trophy. Apparently the page was originally located at Illinois–Ohio State football rivalry and User:Vjmlhds moved it to the article's current location as well as to Illibuck Trophy Game, both of which were contested by User:AL2896. I want to stress that I am neutral over the article's name and by declining the speedy, I am not endorsing the current name. It's just that the name does appear to be under some form of debate and I think that a formal discussion over what to call the article should probably take place. I've posted a move request on the article's talk page and I think that it'd be a good idea if some of you guys took part in it so there can be multiple opinions. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:12, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Does anyone have time to take a look at this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SoCal Coyotes? Rarely, if ever, have I seen an AfD that was a bigger mess than this one. The author (and sole substantive discussion participant) has created a nearly impenetrable wall of repetitive commentary, and has done his article, this AfD, and other editors a disservice by doing so. It's a mess, and it's apparent from the lack of commentary that everyone, including all of the regular participants in American football-related AfD discussions, is shying away from this AfD because of the required effort to wade through the volume of accumulated material. Rather than relist this article again in a week, I am going to request that editors who are regular members of WP:CFB and WP:NFL focus on this AfD and come to a decision based on WP:ORG and WP:GNG. Perhaps we can find some way to divvy up the necessary AfD homework among several WP:CFB editors, so we can make a sensible recommendation to keep or delete this article, but this has gone on long enough. Anyone? Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 00:31, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm going to nominate Category:All-Southern college football players for deletion unless someone cares to convince me otherwise. Thoughts? Jrcla2 ( talk) 15:57, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Quick reminder to everyone that there are four pending single-game AfD nominations:
Please voice your opinion in these discussions. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 16:38, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Is there a Wikipedia convention on the proper use of mouseover in tables? Is it generally accepted? Which of these two tables would be preferable?
Rank | Player | Yards | Years |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Don Smith | 7,097 | 1983 1984 1985 1986 |
2 | John Bond | 6,901 | 1980 1981 1982 1983 |
3 | Wayne Madkin | 6,482 | 1998 1999 2000 2001 |
4 | Dak Prescott | 5,831 | 2012 2013 2014 |
Rank | Player | Pass | Rush | Total | Years |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Don Smith | 5,229 | 1,868 | 7,097 | 1983 1984 1985 1986 |
2 | John Bond | 4,621 | 2,280 | 6,901 | 1980 1981 1982 1983 |
3 | Wayne Madkin | 6,336 | 146 | 6,482 | 1998 1999 2000 2001 |
4 | Dak Prescott | 4,159 | 1,672 | 5,831 | 2012 2013 2014 |
I definitely prefer the compactness of the first table, but I don't think the mouseover is always easily available on mobile devices? Is there an established Wikipedia preference on this? Jhn31 ( talk) 20:58, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm in the process of completing List of NC State Wolfpack football seasons, however it appears that the page uses its own wikitable, as opposed to Template:CFB Yearly Record. Should I import the template into the page? It looks like there's quite a bit of inconsistency across all of the various CFB seasons pages.-- Prisencolinensinainciusol ( talk) 01:07, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
The 2008 ACC Championship Game was a college football game between the Virginia Tech Hokies and the Boston College Eagles.
I've nominated 2008 ACC Championship Game for consideration as Today's Featured Article, see discussion at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/2008 ACC Championship Game. — Cirt ( talk) 21:16, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
2007 Pittsburgh vs. West Virginia football game has been nominated for deletion. Please see the discussion here. Jweiss11 ( talk) 06:55, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Should this exist? Jrcla2 ( talk) 17:51, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
(Originally posted on the CFP talk page, but I meant to post it here.)
Now that we don't have the BCS anymore: on the conference standings templates, I've set up the standings end template to render the standard †–Conference champion, at the bottom. I feel that this is the best way to represent this, as doing it as we did in the past with the BCS (†–BCS representative as champion) with the playoff would be awkward, because if the templates did say †–CFP representative as conference champion, then that could cause confusion if that conference champion is in a bowl that participates in the CFP system, but is not a semifinal bowl that year. For the teams that make it to the Top 4 after Championship Saturday, I set up the standings templates to show ^–College Football Playoff participant, and #–College Football Playoff champion if they were to win.
Much of this confusion could be averted if the playoff contained 8 teams with all 5 conference champions getting an automatic bid, but that's a topic for the
Paul Finebaum show. Otherwise, are there any thoughts on this?
Ben
Yes? 03:40, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Mike Christie raised a question over at William Wurtenburg FAC about my wording of "national champions", and I am at a loss for how I should respond. When thinking about it, I probably use three different wordings interchangeably to say national champion, and I have no clue which way would probably by most proper. The three possible phrases would be:
I don't know if this is just my problem and there is an obvious answer to my question, but at the moment I'm stumped. The current phrase I'm using in the article is "the Yale team shut out every single one of its opponents and was named national champions". It seemed to work at first, but now it doesn't really sound right. Anyone know what I should do? Thanks, - A Texas Historian ( Talk to me) 06:02, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
List of American football players who died during their career was created in the last day and then nominated for deletion. Please take a look and comment. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 06:20, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Marshall–UCF football rivalry has been nominated for deletion. Please comment here. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 20:22, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
I'd like to discuss a recent change to Template:CFB Yearly Record End/footnotes, which renders the footnotes at the bottom of yearly record tables, most often seen on coach bio articles. @ Kgwo1972: brought up the topic here in August, but we didn't have much of discussion. Only @ Paulmcdonald: and I commented, and that was to discuss a side note, not the central topic, which is denotation of BCS, Bowl Alliance, or Bowl Coalition games in light of the move to the College Football Playoff (CFP). After a the lack of discussion/objection, Kgwo1972 moved ahead with his proposed edit to the template footnotes, adding notation for CFP and deleting all for the earlier systems, but I think some more input is needed here. It seems that if the BCS and its predecessors were worthy enough of special notation before, they are still historically worthy of such, even though a new system is now in place. Should we have one marker for all four systems? A different marker for each of the four. Just mark the current CFP system, as Kgwo1972 has proposed and executed? Thoughts? Jweiss11 ( talk) 21:14, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
Minnesota–Nebraska football rivalry has been nominated for deletion. Please comment here. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 07:30, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated 1996 UCLA at Tennessee football game for deletion. Please comment here. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 07:39, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
I recently took a crack at writing an individual season article ( Marshall 1998)and I'd like to do some more, but I wanted to make sure I was following notability guidelines before I put the work in. Are seasons of FCS teams considered notable? The specific ones I'm thinking of are the Marshall seasons 1993-1995 (back when they were FCS), although I may go back further than 1993 if I have time and it's considered notable. Thanks! Chuy1530 ( talk) 20:00, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
The requested move discussion here may be of interest to project members. Thanks. Go Phightins ! 22:41, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello everyone. I don't edit college football articles much, so I am not that familiar with your notability criteria. I do edit hockey articles, and I am pretty sure this guy would fail ours. I am thinking of AFDing it, but, I don't want to waste anyone's time. Thanks! Dbrodbeck ( talk) 22:26, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Seem like candidates for creation. 1945 Army Cadets football team, College football national championships in NCAA Division I FBS, just a few links. Here's some 1945 guys Earl Blaik, Doc Blanchard, Glenn Davis (American football), Shorty McWilliams. WikiOriginal-9 ( talk) 03:06, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
So, Mackensen and myself have been discussing the "Head coaching record" section at Talk:Gary Andersen, and whether or not the 2015 Outback Bowl belongs in Andersen's head coaching record section. I'm hoping that some folks can help us come to a consensus. Thanks, — dain omite 00:04, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated the recently created Template:Ernie Davis Award for deletion. Please comment here. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 05:50, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
There is a proposal to merge Template:Infobox gridiron football person and Template:Infobox college football player. Please comment here. Jweiss11 ( talk) 21:41, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Folks, you need to understand what has been proposed by this TfD: two non-sports editors have proposed that we merge the existing imperfect infobox for college football players into the less-than-ideal infobox for Canadian football players. Time to speak up, unless you want non-sports editors dictating how CFB and NFL article graphics must appear. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 12:20, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Can we add the Athlon Sports and FoxSports.com All-America lists to the 2014 College Football All-America Team? Thanks, wscsuperfan — Preceding undated comment added 01:29, 18 December 2014 (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 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | → | Archive 20 |
I understand that Division I FBS national championships are not official, but can we at least set a precedent for all FBS football program articles to follow? Currently, the Texas Longhorns football article (they are certainly not the only ones, this is just an example) has 2008 as an unclaimed championship. That's ridiculous. I propose that we use the official NCAA FBS record book as the source to put unclaimed championships on these articles. They have a list of major selectors, and teams for every year. What do you guys think? Kobra98 ( talk) 03:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
With football season just around the corner, I wonder if there's any interest in getting the College Football Playoff article formally reviewed up to standards, perhaps to be an FA candidate sometime this fall (or at least GA status before then), given its importance as a topic in the football world. I've been smoothing and tweaking it for awhile now (hopefully not too CRYSTAL), and I think it's gotten to be in pretty decent shape, though it's still rated Start class. I was hoping somebody could give me some feedback.
One area that's important but unaddressed is the history and the old systems — a concise but adequate summary of the BCS-era drama and general teeth-gnashing over the years. User:Dcheagle has begun writing some of that history [User:Dcheagle/FixitboxXI on this draft page]. There are sections from Plus-One system and College football playoff debate that should probably be included, though those articles likely need a makeover.
I've never made a run at GA/FA before, so I'm sort of unsure of the next steps for this. Thanks for any help! Woodshed ( talk) 01:14, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
What are everyone's thoughts on the existence of Category:NCAA Division I FCS champions navigational boxes and all of the team navboxes found in it? I know we have these for FBS, and for Division I men's basketball, but is it worth having these for the FCS level? Jrcla2 ( talk) 17:43, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Here's an AfD discussion in which I suspect most WP:CFB participants will want to participate: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Florida–South Carolina football rivalry.
This goes to the core of what a college football rivalry is, and whether we should have a stand-alone Wikipedia article on point. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 05:43, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, y'all. Here's another AfD of general interest to CFB editors: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kraut Bowl (a high school football rivalry article). It may be time to have a policy discussion here on the WP:CFB talk page because I have discovered several relatively new editors beavering away at creating individual CFB game articles, which we generally frown upon. Please feel free to express your reactions below, and to participate in the linked AfD. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 20:00, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
There are now six pending high school football rivalry articles with pending AfD deletion discussions:
There are four or five more high school rivalry articles that I have not nominated because, in my estimation, they probably satisfy the general notability guidelines per WP:GNG. All WP:CFB and WP:NFL editors are invited to express their opinions in these six AfD discussions. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 02:51, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
I need to use Casey Feeding the Hogs, from Scout.com, for a half-line on a reception Chris Gragg made in his freshman year of college (his only catch for the season). If anyone has an account or knows a workaround that would be great. Seattle ( talk) 20:13, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
A discussion I've restarted at the main athletic program page, if anyone's interested. Kithira ( talk) 22:07, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Two new articles were created in the last few days by the same editor: 2013 Alabama vs. Texas A&M football game and 2001 Tennessee vs. Florida football game. He is also the creator Primetime Drama, which is set to be merged per a recent AfD. Those two new articles looks like the fall in the same boat. Thoughts? Jweiss11 ( talk) 01:25, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello all- I have periodically taken a run through some of the small college football coach navboxes such as those found at Category:NCAA Division III football coach navigational boxes. I have found a couple of issues. First, many seem to be out of date (some for as long as three years). Second, a large number have only one or two coaches who have articles. Is anyone maintaining these? A couple (like Template:Dickinson Red Devils football coach navbox) are very well maintained and someone has taken the initiative to create articles for each coach. Others are barren. I guess my other question is if templates for every small college is necessary/a good idea? I don't think every head football coach meets GNG (certainly at the D1 and some lower division schools they do, but not across the board), and if no one is going to maintain them, what is the purpose? I'm not going to AfD anything, just tossing it out to the WikiProject to raise the concern. Rikster2 ( talk) 12:07, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Chris Gragg is a current featured article candidate. If you have the time, please do take a look. Thanks. Seattle ( talk) 21:29, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Not directly related to this project, per se, but of tangential interest to some members here as an NCAA Division I athletic director. Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon B. Gray. Thanks, Ejgreen77 ( talk) 21:34, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
This is the first year of the college football championship game, and this year the semi-final games will be the Rose Bowl and the Sugar Bowl. Fine, but the article about the 2015 Rose Bowl says more specifically that this year it will have the #1 vs. #4 ranked teams, and the article about the 2015 Sugar Bowl says that it will have the #2 vs. #3 ranked teams. Do we have a reliable reference for that? — Mudwater ( Talk) 11:36, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Aside from Cal–UCLA rivalry's title not adhering to naming conventions, is this a notable cfb rivalry? Jrcla2 ( talk) 02:23, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
I nominated another two "rivalry" games for deletion:
In my opinion, neither of these games has significant in-depth coverage as a rivalry in independent, reliable sources to establish its notability, and neither of these series satisfies anyone's definition of a traditional college rivalry. Please feel free to share your opinions on the AfD pages. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 21:09, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
A non-WP:CFB editor nominated another CFB rivalry article at AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arkansas-Baylor football rivalry. The opinions of WP:CFB editors are solicited. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 15:10, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Can I get another set of eyes on the current state of Central Michigan Chippewas football? I've tried to keep an NPOV on the article, but an anonymous user disagrees. Thanks. — X96lee15 ( talk) 20:07, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
There has been much discussion recently about which articles and templates should be deleted, and there's definitely room for that discussion. However, what's been lacking is a concerted effort to expand Wikipedia's coverage of key college football topics. It's striking that we still don't have articles about every consensus first-team All-American. As of this morning, we had roughly 90 holes from 1894 1889 to 1969. If anyone wants to adopt one of these missing All-Americans, I'd be happy to chip in with whatever information I can find. (I've taken the first four and created them today.) So, consider claiming one (or more), and let's see if our project can turn all the red links to blue links by the time the 2014 college football season comes to an end. If you take one on, please strike it from the list below so we know it's done.
Cbl62 (
talk) 06:30, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
James P. Lee - 1889 halfback (Harvard);
Phillip Stillman - 1894 center (Yale);
John Hall - 1897 end (Yale);
Lew Palmer - 1898 end (Princeton);
Charles Romeyn - 1898 fullback (Army);
William Lee - 1901 guard (Harvard);
Arthur Tipton - 1904 center (Army);
Joseph Gilman - 1904 guard (Dartmouth);
William Erwin - 1907 guard (Army);
Patrick Grant - 1907 center (Harvard);
Edwin Harlan - 1907 halfback (Princeton);
John Wendell - 1907 halfback (Harvard);
Peter Hauser - 1907 fullback (Carlisle Indian School);
Ed Lange - 1908 quarterback (Navy);
William Goebel - 1908 guard (Yale);
Bernard O'Rourke - 1908 guard (Cornell);
Charles Nourse - 1908 center (Harvard);
Hamilton Corbett - 1908 halfback (Harvard);
Frederick Tibbott - 1908 halfback (Princeton);
Edward Hart - 1911 tackle (Princeton);
John Logan - 1912 guard (Princeton);
Ray Keeler - 1913 guard (Wisconsin);
Neno DaPrato - 1915 halfback (Michigan State);
Clinton Black - 1916 guard (Yale);
Frank T. Hogg - 1916 guard (Princeton);
Charles Bolen - 1917 end (Ohio State);
Henry Miller - 1917 and 1919 end (Penn);
Alfred Cobb - 1917 tackle (Syracuse);
Eugene Neeley - 1917 guard (Dartmouth);
Leonard Hilty - 1918 tackle (Pitt);
Lyman Perry - 1918 guard (Navy);
Ashel Day - 1918 center (Georgia Tech);
Jack Depler - 1918 center (Illinois);
Wolcott Roberts - 1918 halfback (Navy);
James Weaver - 1919 center (Centre College);
Charles Carpenter - 1919 center (Wisconsin);
Charles Carney - 1920 end (Illinois);
Tim Callahan - 1920 guard (Yale);
Charles Way - 1920 halfback (Penn State);
Tom Woods - 1920 guard (Harvard);
Malcolm Aldrich - 1921 halfback (Yale);
John Fiske Brown - 1921 guard (Harvard);
Wendell Taylor - 1922 end (Navy);
Pete MacRae - 1923 end (Syracuse);
Jim Lawson - 1924 end (Stanford);
Dick Luman - 1924 end (Yale);
Henry Wakefield - 1924 end (Vanderbilt);
Joe Pondelik - 1924 guard (Chicago);
Ed McMillan - 1925 guard (Princeton);
Ed Hess - 1925 guard (Ohio State);
Ralph Chase - 1925 tackle (Pitt);
George Tully - 1925 end (Dartmouth);
Harry Connaughton - 1926 guard (Georgetown);
Bud Boeringer - 1926 center (Notre Dame);
John Charlesworth - 1927 center (Yale);
Bill Webster - 1927 guard (Yale);
Ed Hake - 1927 tackle (Penn);
Irvine Phillips - 1928 end (California);
Seraphim Post - 1928 guard (Stanford);
Don Robesky - 1928 guard (Stanford);
Edward Burke - 1928 guard (Navy);
Ray Montgomery - 1929 guard (Pitt);
Ted Beckett - 1930 guard (California);
Dallas Marvil - 1931 tackle (Northwestern);
Milton Summerfelt - 1932 guard (Army);
Clarence Gracey - 1932 center (Vanderbilt);
Paul Geisler - 1933 end (Centenary);
Frank Larson - 1934 end (Minnesota);
Chuck Hartwig - 1934 guard (Pitt);
Bill Bevan - 1934 guard (Minnesota);
Jack Robinson - 1934 center (Notre Dame);
George Shotwell - 1934 center (Pitt);
Chuck Sweeney - 1937 end (Notre Dame);
Andy Bershak - 1937 end (North Carolina);
Esco Sarkkinen - 1939 end (Ohio State);
David Rankin - 1940 end (Purdue);
Phil Tinsley - 1944 end (Georgia Tech);
Paul Walker - 1944 end (Yale);
Jack Dugger - 1944 end (Ohio State);
Ben Chase - 1944 guard (Navy);
Bill Hackett - 1944 guard (Ohio State);
Bob Jenkins - 1944 halfback (Navy);
Dick Hightower - 1951 center (SMU);
Johnny Karras - 1951 halfback (Illinois);
Elmer Willhoite - 1952 guard (USC);
Frank McPhee - 1952 end (Princeton);
Don Dohoney - 1953 end (Mich. St.);
Crawford Mims - 1953 guard (Mississippi);
Paul Cameron - 1953 halfback (UCLA);
Bo Bolinger - 1955 guard (Oklahoma);
John Witte - 1956 tackle (Oregon State);
George Deiderich - 1958 guard (Vanderbilt);
John Guzik - 1958 guard (Pitt);
Danny LaRose - 1960 end (Missouri);
Dick Arrington - 1965 guard (Notre Dame);
Freeman White - 1965 end (Nebraska);
Jim Breland - 1966 center (Ga. Tech);
Laverne Allers - 1966 guard (Nebraska);
Rich Stotter - 1967 guard (Houston);
Tom Schoen - 1967 def. back (Notre Dame);
Don Manning - 1967 linebacker (UCLA);
Adrian Young - 1967 linebacker (USC);
Jim Barnes - 1968 guard (Arkansas); .
Cbl62 (
talk) 06:30, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Does anyone have an archive of TSN FCS rankings from 2010? I'm currently doing this, and I'm trying to find if Dayton had a ranking before the final poll. Thanks!— CycloneIsaac ( Talk) 21:05, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Hey, ya'll, here's a newly created CFB navbox:
Template:Vanderbilt Commodores football captains navbox. I would like to get the reaction of other WP:CFB editors . . . .
Dirtlawyer1 (
talk) 03:01, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Just saw this new class of articles being created by what appears to be a single editor: Ole Miss Rebels football statistical leaders. What are the reactions of other WP:CFB editors? I foresee potential problems with the notability guidelines per WP:GNG, as well as the general prohibition against statistics lists per WP:NOTSTATS. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 18:10, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
I have noticed that a call to change the name of certain teams such as Talk:Austin Peay State Governors and Lady Govs and Talk:Emporia State Hornets between team and Lady team names. But there is an editor who is calling to rename the articles Austin Peay Sports, and eventually University of Michigan Sports etc. Is there a specific reason that team pages are referred to as Oklahoma Sooners, Emporia State Hornets, Michigan Wolverines and not Oklahoma Sports or University of Wisconsin-Madison Sports? I personally like the conformity because I know what to expect on a specific page. So what should the names be, and why were they already posted as such? (Sorry if I opened a can of worms. BOOMER)! UCO2009bluejay ( talk) 01:26, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Okay, EJ and Bluejay, I left a comment on all four talk page discussions, which will hopefully put SMcC's off-the-wall renaming proposal to bed. If y'all have any more questions or problems with this, ping me. I've watch-listed all four talk pages, and will try to monitor the discussions until they close. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 02:33, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Hey gang, we need to make an effort in the next few days to update the College Football Portal. It should really just take a few articles and some fresh images. Who's game? Let's collaborate over at Portal talk:College football.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 00:39, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
I have noticed some movement in the Conference Membership Tables on conference pages, and I was wondering if there is/should be a set format title, and composition for conference membership tables. I have noticed differences in the Atlantic Coast Conference#Member schools, Southeastern Conference#Member universities, Big 12 Conference#Member schools, Missouri Valley Conference#Member schools, and several Division II such as Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association#Member schools Heartland Conference#Member schools, Division III, and NAIA. Should they all include Titles, Sports, City Population, Mascot etc. If there is a precedent that has already been set I would like to know. Should all conferences include the same types of information. Thanks, UCO2009bluejay ( talk) 05:16, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
ACC: | Institution | Location (Population) |
Founded | Type (affiliation) |
Undergraduate Enrollment |
Postgraduate Enrollment |
Nickname | Colors | Mascot or symbol |
Joined ACC |
ACC Division | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BigEast: | Institution | Location | Founded | Joined | Type | Enrollment | Nickname | Colors | US News Ranking | Endowment | |||
BigTen: | Institution | Location (Population) |
Founded | Joined Big Ten |
Type | Enrollment | Endowment | Nickname | Colors | Division I Varsity Teams |
NCAA Championships (As of January 1, 2014) |
Big Ten Championships (As of December 21, 2013) |
Football Division |
Big12: | Institution | Location (Pop.) |
Founded | Type | Enrollment | Endowment | Joined | Nickname | Colors | Mascot | Varsity Sports |
National Titles | |
Pac-12: | Institution | Location (Population) |
Founded | Type | Enrollment | Endowment | Nickname | Colors | NCAA Team Championships | ||||
SEC: | Institution | Location (Population) |
Founded | Type | Enrollment | Endowment | Joined | Nickname | Colors | Mascot |
After seeing the above I definitely would be for some sort of consensus on standardization. — dain omite 18:23, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Jrcla2 posted on the basketball project that he thinks the ACC and SEC tables are good models. UCO2009bluejay ( talk) 23:10, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
I looked up a few football pregame game notes at all levels and in the quick fact box about the opponent all listed the school, location, founded, enrollment, nickname, colors, and joined conference. Other facts were listed which varied but nowhere did I see population, endowment, type, or U.S. news ranking. When I am looking at an athletic conference page, I am looking for information about sports. When someone is looking for information about a school's academics, they will look on the school's page not the conference they belong to; with the same situation about a town's population. If you want to compare rankings and endowment, create a "list of" page. I believe the members table should be compact and be just the school, location, founded, enrollment, nickname, colors, and joined, if the table starts getting crowded with too much information it becomes cumbersome. Personally, I don't even look at the tables that are so big that they can't fit on my screen and also are dominated by wasted white space. The IP user currently adding the U.S. news rankings is technically using the wrong terminology. The schools listed as "not ranked" do have a ranking, it's just not published. I have much much more to say about this topic and will gladly share if permitted. Thank you. Msjraz64 ( talk) 18:52, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
I do not think population should be included. Is it city population, metropolitan/micropolitan area population, designated media market population, county/parish population, or what? It seems like so many different population standards are being used in the tables. I don't think a specific population is a defining characteristic for institutions because the universities are not defined by borders. Location yes, population no. - AllisonFoley ( talk) 05:38, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I also do not think endowment should be included. The biggest reason is that it's not comparing apples to apples. Many schools have systemwide endowments that are being claimed for one institution within the system, which is inaccurate and misleading for this purpose. Many other schools, especially outside of the Power 5 conferences, do not have an endowment listed in the NACUBO survey. Lastly, what does endowment have to do with an athletic conference? If any financial figures should be included in these tables, it should be the athletic budgets, but the problem with that is that the private schools are not listed in the USA Today database. - AllisonFoley ( talk) 05:53, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I also do not think national titles should be included in the table. First, there is significant controversy regarding major college football national titles since the NCAA does not sponsor it. As mentioned above, most NCAA Division I teams have moved up from the NAIA, Division II/small college, and/or I-AA/FCS, which would suggest that those national titles are not equal to NCAA DI national titles. In addition, the NCAA did not sponsor women's championships until the 1980s. Before that, women's titles were awarded by the AIAW, and there was some overlap as well. If any titles are included in the table, I think it should be conference titles from that conference. However, with so much realignment, that may be a misleading figure since the various schools joined in different time periods, and it doesn't account for their history in other conferences. - AllisonFoley ( talk) 06:39, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Here's my proposal, left-to-right:
Institution | Location (Pop.) |
Founded | Joined | Type | Enrollment | Endowment | Nickname | Colors | Varsity Teams | Division |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
University of Florida |
Gainesville, Florida (126,047) |
1853 | 1932 | Public | 51,474 | $1,295,313,000 | Gators | 20 | Eastern |
Explicitly removed or consolidated:
Naming standardization:
Callouts/Questions:
What does the inclusion of school colors to the tables really bring to an article about a sports conference, are these colors related to the conference in a way that is more then just being the colors of the schools that are members? Cause if their not related to the conference in any form other then being the colors of member schools then I see no reason for them being there. Thoughts?-- Dcheagle • talk • contribs 23:34, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Why don't you just get rid of all the info? Why is it more important to list when a school joined a conference...rather than how the school is ranked academically? I just don't get why y'all want to hide information. The population numbers don't mess anything up. These are basic facts to give people an idea of how these schools measure up against each other...and their conference mates. NOW, I have to go to three or four different pages to get the same info that was contained here....on one page. Thanks for making it harder to look at these schools and conferences at a glance. Oh, and all the hours I spent adding some of this info. Just for some person behind a desk to disagree because of how it looks physically. Give me a break. I won't be coming here any longer to do my research. I have had enough of y'all changing things and taking information away from the reader. Thanks for screwing things up! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.41.6.154 ( talk) 13:44, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Based upon discussion, is this a more updated and suitable table? (Colors discussion pending).
Institution | Location | Founded | Joined | Type | Enrollment | Nickname | Colors | Varisty Teams |
Division |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Clemson University |
Clemson, South Carolina |
1889 | 1953 | Public | 21,303 | Tigers | 19 | Atlantic | |
Duke University |
Durham, North Carolina |
1838 | 1953 | Private | 15,591 | Blue Devils | 26 | Coastal | |
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill |
Chapel Hill, North Carolina |
1789 | 1953 | Public | 29,390 | Tar Heels | 27 | Coastal |
I will refer to my previous comment and add other thoughts regarding some categories. Population has no relevance. The local population does not equate to the fan base of any school. Why add population for college conferences when it is not done for pro leagues? A column for varsity teams and championships is only duplicating information. All conferences have a section that covers all the various titles and the "sponsored sports by school" tables detail the number of varsity sports a school has. For NCAA D-I, I would encourage a "conference academics" section that would include a table showing AAU status, type (affiliation), endowment, U.S. news rankings, and other related academic categories. This area would be of high importance for the conferences that have academic requirements to become a member. Anything dealing with academics for NCAA D-II, NCAA D-III, and NAIA would have no relevance since these conferences are formed based on geography and budgets with very little to no consideration given to academic standards. There is also no need for a "division" column. The style used for the Southeastern Conference should be used if a conference uses divisions for multiple sports including football, otherwise the regular members table is sufficient. The conferences that have divisions in football only already have a table in the football section showing the division split. Colors may not seem important enough to include but how many times have you gone to the stadium or arena, even in high school, and see the banners of all the schools in the conference. Maybe thought of as an extension of the conference's visual identity.
Comment - Breaking this proposal into it's own section, as it was lost in the comments of the above section. UW Dawgs ( talk) 16:14, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Comment I really think we need to be certain of which format will be utilized. I know there are differences of opinion and only one person has commented since the most recent proposal. Some of these templates will need to be updated July 1, and an editor is already adding teams to conferences that aren't members of it yet. E.g. adding Louisville to the ACC even though they are still a representing the American in the CWS, adding Appalachian State, Georgia Southern to the Sun Belt etc. UCO2009bluejay ( talk) 02:55, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Support - I also really like what Msjrz64 has done. When you look at any prospectus, media guide, or game notes, the information you will find about each school includes location, founded, nickname, colors, and enrollment. Simply add in the year the school joined because that is very important, and we are good to go. The only minor change I would suggest is making the school names bold and slightly shading the first column to make it look like the top row. I don't find the total number of sports sponsored pertinent for the membership table. All of that info is detailed sport by sport further in each article. Often times schools sponsor sports that the conference does not sponsor. - AllisonFoley ( talk) 06:01, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Oppose - This removes relevant content and associated citations which are seen in many (but not all) conference articles. UW Dawgs ( talk) 16:15, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Oppose- Each conference is different, so I find myself in agreement the with reasons given by User:UW Dawgs... ALSO am opposed to User:Msjraz64 making the changes as outlined in his proposal without a consensus being reached... GWFrog ( talk) 23:42, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Comment - UWDawgs used this rationale "re-add Endowment, per existing consensus implementation" to add endowment to the C-USA page. Do you have a link to the discussion that lead to this existing consensus? I haven't seen this discussion about C-USA. I'm not opposed to having all of this extra information on the conference page, but I don't think it belongs in the basic membership table. The way it is now, there is too much information in the table that it is squeezed with text wrapping. Like someone mentioned above, I think adding an academic measures table further down in the article would be an agreeable compromise/solution. I don't find endowment especially relevant to an athletic conference membership table. I still don't understand why some insist on endowment being in the membership table when athletic budget is a much more pertinent financial figure for an athletic conference article. As I stated above, the endowment numbers being used now are not accurate. Sources being used include US News and NACUBO which report different figures for supposedly the same endowments. NACUBO uses systemwide endowment for many schools, and many other schools aren't listed at all. The current endowment figures are not apples to apples comparisons. Also regarding the C-USA article, the population figures being used are misleading. It has the same population for Miami as Boca Raton. Cities are listed in the table, but it appears that metro/micropolitan area populations were added to the table. I'm not sure how it's done on other articles, but I don't trust any of them because of the way it's been added to the C-USA article. It's true that every conference is different like GWFrog said, but I think there is basic information like Msjraz64 proposed that is inherent to every school and conference that should be included in a standardized membership table. I think the extra information that we can't reach consensus on can be included in another section of the conference article. - AllisonFoley ( talk) 03:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Support If the varsity sports are included on their own table as all DI, and most if not all D-II (and provided the lower division tables are made) then I have no objection to this proposal. I would like to see type, but I don't have enough of an objection to it being left out to oppose this proposal. After the "institution wide" argument, it seems that all but one editor is opposed to endowment at this point. I think that this proposal best fits what we need the table for. My only reservation is that the division outlines seem a bit odd if you click the sort arrows. There are arguments in this discussion (so I won't need to link these) that the lower divisions should follow the major conference tables, and the point is that ALL conferences need standardization, and not a special case for CUSA or any other conference. When do we know when consensus is reached so we can move forward with standardization and move on? UCO2009bluejay ( talk) 04:56, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Oppose In that each conference is different, each conference's membership is different, and each should have its own membership format. I can see the reasons for the elimination of both academic ratings and endowments, but I also see the need for the inclusion of items such as conference titles (as long as it is only for the conference in question)... Fredref123 ( talk) 11:45, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Oppose While I believe that there should be a standardization of the membership table, the tables created by Msjraz64 removed necessary information in my opinion. I would like to thank Msjraz64 for their work though. I agree with previous responses in this discussion that the membership tables serve almost as a de facto media guide for the conference's respective member institutions. As such, the tables should include enough encyclopedic information about the members to suit curious minds. NEMESIS63 | talk | 20:15, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
No divisions:
Institution | Location (Population) |
Founded | Joined | Type | Enrollment | Nickname | Colors |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
University of Central Florida |
Orlando, Florida (249,562) |
1963 | 2013 | Public ( SUSF) | 59,770 | Knights |
Divisions:
Institution | Location (Population) |
Founded | Joined | Type | Enrollment | Nickname | Colors | Division |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
University of Central Florida |
Orlando, Florida (249,562) |
1963 | 2013 | Public ( SUSF) | 59,770 | Knights | East |
Above is my proposal for a standardization of the template, which is currently in use in the American Athletic Conference article. It provides enough at-a-glance information about the member university's but also doesn't overload the page or reader, or provide nonencyclopedic information. Academic information such as endowment and rankings should be provided in an "Academics" section, which numerous conferences already have. In addition, another column could be added on the right for sortable divisions (east, west, atlantic, coastal, etc.). NEMESIS63 | talk | 20:15, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Comment - The above format was NOT in use on the AAC prior to the recent edits of the last 2 days.
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=American_Athletic_Conference&oldid=614972281
UW Dawgs (
talk) 20:49, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Oppose - I think population figures are irrelevant based on the discussion in the previous proposals. While I'm not opposed to Type (most of which are obvious), I think that adding the systems to the Type column is totally irrelevant and unnecessary. Systems aren't in conferences. Individual institutions are. The membership section should be only about individual institutions, not the population of their city or anything about their system. This goes back to individual institutions claiming the endowment for their entire system. I still believe proposal 3 is the best. If particular info isn't important enough to be included in the quick facts in team or conference media guides and game notes, then it's really not notable enough to include in a membership table. Any of the extraneous information can be added to another section in the article if some are determined to keep that info in the articles. - AllisonFoley ( talk) 19:20, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
I tried going to the College Football Data Warehouse site just now, and my anti-virus software blocked access with this message: "The requested URL cannot be provided. The requested object at the URL: http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/ Detected: object is infected by HEUR:Trojan.Script.Generic." If anyone has had a similar experience or knows what this means, please share. This is a site frequently used by members of this project, and folks should be aware of this potential issue. Cbl62 ( talk) 16:10, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
The current version of the Template:CFB Yearly Record End/footnotes contains a mark (†) denoting an appearance in a BCS, Bowl Alliance, or Bowl Coalition game. I've never understood exactly why this was necessary, but also never previously seen a need to do away with it. But now that the BCS is done and the College Football Playoff ("CFP") is here – and apparently will be through at least 2025 – this footnote should be updated.
I'm posing a question here before I do anything, since it could affect many coaches' pages. Should we ADD the CFP to the list of bowls that are marked by the "†"? Should we have a new and different mark for CFP, and KEEP the "†" for historic appearances in the BCS, etc.? Or should we DELETE all designations for BCS bowls and just mark appearances in the CFP with a "†" going forward? I think the last is the best option, but welcome all thoughts. Thanks. -- Kgwo1972 ( talk) 17:21, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
i've just created a Template:Appalachian State Mountaineers quarterback navbox but can't find a website that lists every QB who has started for App State, hence why there are many gaps in time in this template. Could anyone help me find such a source? Arbor to SJ ( talk) 21:16, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Personally, Cbl, I think it was a huge mistake to sanction CFB starting QB navboxes in the first place. Here are three typical QB navboxes for Division I FBS teams:
And it's not like most of these QB navboxes are missing a handful, or some relatively reasonable percentage of 10-15%. Nope, they're missing anywhere from 30 to 70% -- and mind you, I intentionally selected teams that were not perennial cellar dwellers. Moreover, many of the Division I FBS QB navboxes are selectively omitting/including examples from their history to avoid listing the entire succession of starting QBs, which would increase the percentage of red links. We have created 100+ messes in order to justify keeping a handful of the QB navboxes for which the succession is actually complete. Why should we be surprised when some fan of Appalachian State does the same thing? The simple solution is to start converting these navboxes to "list of" articles. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 22:32, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Since the first part of the campaign worked so well (almostnow complete), I figured we may as well lay out the remaining consensus All-Americans. This Part II campaign has 63 red-linked consensus All-Americans from 1970 through 2007 who weren't originally part of the first campaign, including the ones that WikiOriginal-9 started in the past couple days. Again, feel free to help out, grab as many as you like, and strike them when you're done. If we fill out this list, we will have an article for every consensus All-American college football player!
Cbl62 (
talk) 00:05, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Ernie Jennings - 1970 receiver (Air Force);
Larry DiNardo - 1970 OG (Notre Dame);
Don Popplewell - 1970 center (Colorado);
Dick Bumpas - 1970 DT (Arkansas);
Rock Perdoni - 1970 DT (Georgia Tech);
Mike Anderson - 1970 LB (LSU);
Bobby Majors - 1971 DB (Tennessee);
Greg Marx - 1972 DE (Notre Dame);
Ron Rusnak - 1972 OG (No. Carolina);
Robert Popelka - 1972 DB (SMU);
Bill Yoest - 1973 OG (NC State);
Bill Wyman - 1973 center (Texas);
Mike Townsend - 1973 DB (Notre Dame);
Tony Cristiani - 1973 DL (Miami);
Kermit Johnson - 1973 RB (UCLA);
Booker Brown - 1973 tackle/guard (USC);
Peter Demmerle - 1974 WR (Notre Dame);
Marvin Crenshaw - 1974 OT (Nebraska);
John Roush - 1974 OG (Oklahoma);
John Provost - 1974 DB (Holy Cross);
Larry Seivers - 1975 & 1976 receiver (Tennessee);
Randy Johnson - 1975 OG (Georgia);
Ted Smith - 1975 OG (Ohio State);
Mike Vaughan - 1976 OT (Oklahoma);
Joel Parrish - 1976 OG (Georgia);
Al Romano - 1976 DL (Pitt);
Bill Armstrong - 1976 DB (Wake Forest);
Dave Butterfield - 1976 DB (Nebraska);
Dan Irons - 1977 OT (Texas Tech);
Tom Brzoza 1977 center (Pitt);
Bob Jury - 1977 DB (Pitt);
Greg Kolenda - 1979 OT (Arkansas);
Ken Fritz - 1979 OG (Ohio State);
Jeff Leiding - 1983 LB (Texas);
Bill Mayo - 1984 OG (Tennessee);
Mark Traynowicz - 1984 center (Nebraska);
Tony Thurman - 1984 DB (Boston College);
Rod Brown - 1984 DB (Okla. St.);
Ricky Anderson - 1984 punter (Vanderbilt);
Willie Smith - 1985 tight end (Miami);
Peter Anderson - 1985 center (Georgia);
Anthony Phillips - 1988 OG (Oklahoma);
Jake Young - 1988 & 1989 center (Nebraska);
Keith English - 1988 punter (Colorado);
Bob Kula - 1989 OT (Michigan St.);
Eric Still - 1989 OT (Tennessee);
Chris Smith - 1990 tight end (BYU);
Stacy Long - 1990 OT (Clemson);
Maurice Crum, Sr. - 1990 LB (Miami);
Carlton McDonald - 1992 DB (Air Force);
Bjorn Merten - 1993 PK (UCLA);
Terry Daniel - 1993 punter (Auburn);
Ed Stewart - 1994 LB (Nebraska);
Brian Robinson - 1994 DB (Auburn);
Brian Lee - 1997 DB (Wyoming);
Chad Kessler - 1997 punter (LSU);
Rufus French - 1998 tight end (Mississippi);
Joe Kristosik - 1998 punter (UNLV);
Jason Whitaker - 1999 OG (Fla. St.);
Rob Riti - 1999 center (Missouri);
Andrew Bayes - 1999 punter (E. Carolina);
J. T. Thatcher - 2000 DB (Oklahoma);
John Sullivan - 2007 kicker (New Mexico).
Cbl62 (
talk) 00:05, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
This discussion floundered last year at the end of the season: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive 13#Dates on standings templates. Let's try to revive it at the beginning of the season to see if there's a consensus one way or the other. I will copy and paste last year's comments into a gray box here (please place new comments below the gray box):
OCNative ( talk) 23:57, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello. I have a question. Does the page Longest NCAA Division I football winning streaks include current streaks? If so North Dakota State Bison are currently on a 25 game win streak. Other FCS schools are on there can someone who knows how to edit please add them? Thx. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.135.176.108 ( talk) 08:23, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
I rewrote {{ Infobox NCAA Division I FBS season}} today, and it has a few major improvements:
Now, here's where I require assistance. I personally think that referring to the BCS/CFP winner as the sole national championship is placing undue weight on the organizers of the BCS and College Football Playoff. As such, the infobox no longer refers to the BCS winner as a "champion", but as the winner of the designated championship game. Due to its importance and prominence, said game is still significant for the infobox, but to comply with neutral point of view, I added, as mentioned, the ability to list other post-season poll results as well. Now, in pre-BCS pages, the "champion" field is used to specify the AP winner. However, to make sure my changes were backwards compatible, I did not change that. On articles that list AP poll #1's under |champion=, could you help me and change those to |ap_poll= instead?
2008 NCAA Division I FBS football season serves as the showpiece for the full extent of the changes; you can use it as a guideline for how to tweak other season pages for this updated version.
Sincerely, ViperSnake151 Talk 22:38, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Part II of the Consensus All-American campaign is nearing completion. As a result, we will have articles on every consensus All-American in college football history. There are loads of additional areas where our coverage is in pretty sore shape. With college football season upon us and drawing eyes to this board, we could work on another group campaign to improve the project's core coverage. A topic that occurs to me is College Football Hall of Famers. Years ago, Patken created two or three-line stubs for all or almost all of the inductees. Many of them remain in really poor condition, consisting of just a couple lines of text and no citations. A sampling of those (from A-BG) are set forth below. If people would be willing to work on improving these, I could compile a fuller list. Other thoughts on group projects welcome as well.
Cbl62 (
talk) 05:33, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Joe Alexander (Syracuse),
Bob Anderson (Army),
Volney Ashford (Missouri Valley),
Reds Bagnell (Penn),
Bill Banker (Tulane),
Vince Banonis (Detroit),
Ron Beagle (Navy),
Hub Bechtol (Texas Tech),
Forrest Behm (Nebraska),
Marty Below (Wisconsin),
Jeff Bentrim (North Dakota St.),
Tony Blazine (Ill. Wesleyan),
Ed Bock (Iowa St.),
Murry Bowden (Dartmouth),
Charley Brewer (Harvard),
George Brown (Navy/SD St.),
Gordon Brown (Yale),
Teel Bruner (Centre College),
Bob Butler (Wisconsin),
Dennis Byrd (NC St.),
Brad Calip (East Central),
Dave Campbell (Harvard),
Jack Cannon (Notre Dame),
Rod Cason (Angelo State),
Joe Cichy (North Dakota State),
Gary Cochran (Princeton),
Dick Colman (Williams/Princeton),
Bill Cooper (Muskingum),
Brad Crawford (Franklin),
Fred Crawford (Duke),
Zygmont Czarobski (Notre Dame),
John Dalton (Navy),
Ave Daniell (Pitt),
Tom Deery (Widener),
Steve DeLong (Tennessee),
Kevin Dent (Jackson St.),
Herb Deromedi (Central Michigan),
John DeWitt (Princeton),
Joe Donchess (Pitt),
Jess Dow (S. Conn. St.),
Nick Drahos (Cornell),
Dick Duden (Navy),
Ed Dyas (Auburn),
Ray Eichenlaub (Notre Dame),
Steve Eisenhauer (Navy),
Mike Favor (N. Dakota St.),
Bill Fincher (Ga. Tech.),
Bill Fischer (Notre Dame),
Buck Flowers (Ga. Tech),
Rod Franz (Cal),
Kenny Gamble (Colgate),
Edgar Garbisch (Washington & Jefferson),
Forest Geyer (Oklahoma),
Walter Gilbert (Auburn),
Gene Goodreault (Boston College),
W. C. Gorden (Jackson St.),
Charlie Green (Wittenberg),
William Grinnell (Tufts),
Ralph Guglielmi (Notre Dame),
Lester Lautenschlaeger, and
Alex Moffat (Princeton).
Does anyone have a good reason why the Glenn Scobey Warner article should not be moved to Pop Warner per WP:COMMONNAME? Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 02:48, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
On Template:Nebraska–Omaha Mavericks football coach navbox, the link for Bill Danenhauer redirects to Dave Sullivan (wrestler). Given that the UNO head coach's tenure was 1975–1977, there's no way Sullivan (b. 1963) would be that guy. Does anyone know if Bill Danenhauer is an erroneous redirect, or if it's the brother/son/whatever of the coach? The link needs to be disambiguated but I'm just not sure how they're related. Jrcla2 ( talk) 14:26, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the sleuthing all. This was a trickier than usual disambig case. Jrcla2 ( talk) 12:45, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
With football season in full swing, I wonder if there's any interest in getting the College Football Playoff article formally reviewed up to standards, perhaps to be an FA candidate sometime before the first playoff this winter (or at least GA status), given its importance as a topic in the football world. I've been smoothing and tweaking it for awhile now (hopefully not too CRYSTAL), and I think it's gotten to be in pretty decent shape, though it's still rated Start class. I was hoping somebody could give me some feedback.
One area that's important but unaddressed is the history and the old systems — a concise but adequate summary of the BCS-era drama and general teeth-gnashing over the years. User:Dcheagle has begun writing some of that history [User:Dcheagle/FixitboxXI on this draft page]. There are sections from Plus-One system and College football playoff debate that should probably be included, though those articles likely need a makeover. Images, too, are needed.
I've never made a run at GA/FA before, so I'm sort of unsure of the next steps for this. Thanks for any help! Woodshed ( talk) 08:21, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
I would like to proposed the following "rivalry" series for deletion at AfD:
1. Georgia–Vanderbilt football rivalry - Not a traditional college rivalry, standard annual series between division foes;
2. Kentucky–Vanderbilt football rivalry - Not a traditional college rivalry, standard annual series between division foes;
3. LSU–Mississippi State football rivalry - Not a traditional college rivalry, standard annual series between division foes;
4. Arkansas–Missouri football rivalry - New inter-divisional SEC rivalry beginning in 2014, could be notable in 5 to 10 years;
5. Illinois–Missouri football rivalry - Not a traditional rivalry for either team, or a historically significant series;
6. Indiana–Kentucky rivalry - This is a basketball rivalry, not a traditional football rivalry, and the football text should be purged.
All of these articles involve one or more SEC teams. WP:NRIVALRY states that no rivalry is inherently notable, and must satisfy the general notability guidelines per WP:GNG, with significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources. The gloss on that, which most long-time CFB editors have accepted, is that the series most be notable as a rivalry, not merely as a long-time series.
Please express your reaction to whether we should keep or delete each of the identified series above, with a brief statement of your reason, in next seven days (by September 1, 2014). Only those articles on which WP:CFB members agree by majority !vote will be submitted to AfD. More suggestions of other CFB "rivalry" articles will follow next week. We will also review several CFB single-game articles in the near future, too. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 00:26, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
There isn't an article for it right now, but should it have one? This was a pretty intense rivalry in the 1970s and 1980s, but went dormant for about 20 years and was just restarted last night. Jhn31 ( talk) 15:40, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Maybe this isn't the optimal forum for this question, but I am wondering why conference pages include lists of which sports schools compete in other conferences. The fact that School 1 competes in Conference B in women's blernsball is completely irrelevant to an article about Conference A. The fact that many of those sports are non-NCAA sports makes it even more out of place. The proper place would be the article about the school or its athletic teams. Grsz 11 00:42, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej ( talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
|
|
|
Ugh, this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Under the Lights III. Jweiss11 ( talk) 03:20, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
MisterCake has done a lot of good work of late building out content about Vanderbilt and other southern football teams during the early 20th century. As part of that, he's created a number of new national champion navboxes. Some of them may be problematic. Template:1920 Georgia Bulldogs football navbox, Template:1921 Vanderbilt Commodores football navbox, Template:1922 Vanderbilt Commodores football navbox represent national champions selceted by Clyde Berryman. While College football national championships in NCAA Division I FBS includes Clyde Berryman as a selector for national champions in later years, none of these championships from the early 1920s are noted there. The College Football Data Warehouse doesn't make note of them either. I don't think these championships have sufficient recognition to warrant a navbox. Thoughts? Jweiss11 ( talk) 18:48, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
The Ole Miss-Alabama and Mississippi State-Texas A&M games on October 4, 2014, got all kinds of hype leading up to them, and when both Mississippi schools pulled the upset, it got front page coverage in most Mississippi newspapers, on ESPN.com's front page, apparently will be the SI cover this week, and sports websites all over the Internet are calling it the greatest day in Mississippi sports history.
I don't know that each game deserves it own article (though I don't object), but what about a single article about both games, since almost all of the coverage has been about how both Mississippi programs have stepped up and won signature wins? Jhn31 ( talk) 22:11, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
OSU and the NCAA vacated several 2010 OSU wins. The consensus on the Talk page for the above article, as well as that reached in discussions here, see here, and encapsulated at Wikipedia:WikiProject_College_football/Vacated_victories, was that the historical results would be reported, but that the vacated games - officially, no longer victories - would neither be reported as such nor included in the school's overall W-L record. The subject page was revised in keeping with these discussions. Recently an editor has been (persistently) restoring the victory, in text, to Ohio State, with earlier edit summaries lacking a certain - civility. (Sample diff here.) I was reverting freely because I regarded it as vandalism, intentionally disruptive, when the editor persisted after being directed to these discussions and nevertheless electing not to discuss; but an admin at WP:AIV disagreed and sent me to 3RR. With that, I am done reverting, and raise it here so that editors experienced in this area can either 1) keep an eye on it as well or 2) tell me to up my meds and find something better to worry about. Or maybe both. Thanks. JohnInDC ( talk) 19:53, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
I've been working on getting William Wurtenburg to FA for a while, and my peer review recently closed with no comments. I was wondering if there was anyone who would be willing to take a look at the article for me before I put it at FAC. Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks, Awardgive. Help out with Project Fillmore County 01:06, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
This may have been discussed before, but what should I use on the season-by-season depth charts? Opening day? Final game? Some kind of weighted average where the player who started the most games during the year is at the top of the depth chart? Jhn31 ( talk) 02:54, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on the CfD for Category:Night Games at Michigan Stadium. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 13:24, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
This is a notice about Category:College football articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. Iceblock ( talk) 16:24, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I've updated the Most weeks ranked number 1 (NCAA football) article with the 2014 NCAA Record Book. The article is fringe, so wondering about suggestions for a merge. AP Poll and AP National Championship Trophy are both general, while 2014 NCAA Division I FBS football rankings is too specific. Thoughts appreciate. UW Dawgs ( talk) 23:45, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
I likw Jweiss11's title but I have a question. As an Oklahoma fan I am wondering how the Sooners is listed as first being number 1 in 1954, when the 1950 Sooners won the national championship that season? UCO2009bluejay ( talk) 04:51, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
There's a new article for Greg Bower, a college football coach and former player of pretty minor note. He's never been a head coach and the most high-profile program he's been associated with is Northern Illinois. Thoughts about notability / AfD? Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 03:36, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to take part in a discussion about this category at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 October 24#Sport players from Louisville, Kentucky. Rikster2 ( talk) 13:40, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi there. A recent requested page move of O.co Coliseum to Oakland Coliseum has been re-listed for another week, and thus may need input by participants here at WikiProject College football.
At issue are WP:COMMONNAME and WP:NAMINGCRITERIA concerns that, if this move request passes, may eventually affect the naming of college football stadium articles: specifically whether to keep the current practice of renaming stadium articles whenever there is a new sponsor (like renaming Bronco Stadium to Albertsons Stadium), or permanently keep them at long-term, stable names (like always keeping articles at, for example, the Rutgers Stadium or Groves Stadium titles instead of their current corporate titles) regardless of current or future changes to the naming rights. Please discuss at Talk:O.co Coliseum#Requested move 2. Thank you. Zzyzx11 ( talk) 03:16, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
This article is hopelessly out-of-date due to different contractual tie-ins for 2014, the switch from BCS to playoff, and the renaming of several games. I edited the part about BCS to playoff, but could somebody give it some love in the other areas? Thanks. p b p 22:49, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated the following articles for deletion:
User:Grayfell has also nominated the following two articles for deletion:
And another article nominated by Jweiss11:
I have also nominated the following two articles for deletion: --
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE) 22:32, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
And another nominated by X96lee15:
New round of single-game AfD nominations:
User:Bikeroo has also nominated the following article:
As a general proposition, we do not permit discourage stand-alone articles for regular season single games unless there is some greater significance to the particular game. Without some historical significance to an individual game, we encourage the incorporation of game highlights into rivalry series and individual season articles; that's why these season and rivalry articles exist. This is amply supported by existing consensus and prior AfD outcomes.
Dirtlawyer1 (
talk) 06:12, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
On this topic, Primetime Drama has been slated for a merge since its AfD closed in July. Does someone want to take the lead on executing that merge? 03:02, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I just recently declined a speedy deletion move request for Illibuck Trophy. Apparently the page was originally located at Illinois–Ohio State football rivalry and User:Vjmlhds moved it to the article's current location as well as to Illibuck Trophy Game, both of which were contested by User:AL2896. I want to stress that I am neutral over the article's name and by declining the speedy, I am not endorsing the current name. It's just that the name does appear to be under some form of debate and I think that a formal discussion over what to call the article should probably take place. I've posted a move request on the article's talk page and I think that it'd be a good idea if some of you guys took part in it so there can be multiple opinions. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:12, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Does anyone have time to take a look at this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SoCal Coyotes? Rarely, if ever, have I seen an AfD that was a bigger mess than this one. The author (and sole substantive discussion participant) has created a nearly impenetrable wall of repetitive commentary, and has done his article, this AfD, and other editors a disservice by doing so. It's a mess, and it's apparent from the lack of commentary that everyone, including all of the regular participants in American football-related AfD discussions, is shying away from this AfD because of the required effort to wade through the volume of accumulated material. Rather than relist this article again in a week, I am going to request that editors who are regular members of WP:CFB and WP:NFL focus on this AfD and come to a decision based on WP:ORG and WP:GNG. Perhaps we can find some way to divvy up the necessary AfD homework among several WP:CFB editors, so we can make a sensible recommendation to keep or delete this article, but this has gone on long enough. Anyone? Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 00:31, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm going to nominate Category:All-Southern college football players for deletion unless someone cares to convince me otherwise. Thoughts? Jrcla2 ( talk) 15:57, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Quick reminder to everyone that there are four pending single-game AfD nominations:
Please voice your opinion in these discussions. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 16:38, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Is there a Wikipedia convention on the proper use of mouseover in tables? Is it generally accepted? Which of these two tables would be preferable?
Rank | Player | Yards | Years |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Don Smith | 7,097 | 1983 1984 1985 1986 |
2 | John Bond | 6,901 | 1980 1981 1982 1983 |
3 | Wayne Madkin | 6,482 | 1998 1999 2000 2001 |
4 | Dak Prescott | 5,831 | 2012 2013 2014 |
Rank | Player | Pass | Rush | Total | Years |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Don Smith | 5,229 | 1,868 | 7,097 | 1983 1984 1985 1986 |
2 | John Bond | 4,621 | 2,280 | 6,901 | 1980 1981 1982 1983 |
3 | Wayne Madkin | 6,336 | 146 | 6,482 | 1998 1999 2000 2001 |
4 | Dak Prescott | 4,159 | 1,672 | 5,831 | 2012 2013 2014 |
I definitely prefer the compactness of the first table, but I don't think the mouseover is always easily available on mobile devices? Is there an established Wikipedia preference on this? Jhn31 ( talk) 20:58, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm in the process of completing List of NC State Wolfpack football seasons, however it appears that the page uses its own wikitable, as opposed to Template:CFB Yearly Record. Should I import the template into the page? It looks like there's quite a bit of inconsistency across all of the various CFB seasons pages.-- Prisencolinensinainciusol ( talk) 01:07, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
The 2008 ACC Championship Game was a college football game between the Virginia Tech Hokies and the Boston College Eagles.
I've nominated 2008 ACC Championship Game for consideration as Today's Featured Article, see discussion at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/2008 ACC Championship Game. — Cirt ( talk) 21:16, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
2007 Pittsburgh vs. West Virginia football game has been nominated for deletion. Please see the discussion here. Jweiss11 ( talk) 06:55, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Should this exist? Jrcla2 ( talk) 17:51, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
(Originally posted on the CFP talk page, but I meant to post it here.)
Now that we don't have the BCS anymore: on the conference standings templates, I've set up the standings end template to render the standard †–Conference champion, at the bottom. I feel that this is the best way to represent this, as doing it as we did in the past with the BCS (†–BCS representative as champion) with the playoff would be awkward, because if the templates did say †–CFP representative as conference champion, then that could cause confusion if that conference champion is in a bowl that participates in the CFP system, but is not a semifinal bowl that year. For the teams that make it to the Top 4 after Championship Saturday, I set up the standings templates to show ^–College Football Playoff participant, and #–College Football Playoff champion if they were to win.
Much of this confusion could be averted if the playoff contained 8 teams with all 5 conference champions getting an automatic bid, but that's a topic for the
Paul Finebaum show. Otherwise, are there any thoughts on this?
Ben
Yes? 03:40, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Mike Christie raised a question over at William Wurtenburg FAC about my wording of "national champions", and I am at a loss for how I should respond. When thinking about it, I probably use three different wordings interchangeably to say national champion, and I have no clue which way would probably by most proper. The three possible phrases would be:
I don't know if this is just my problem and there is an obvious answer to my question, but at the moment I'm stumped. The current phrase I'm using in the article is "the Yale team shut out every single one of its opponents and was named national champions". It seemed to work at first, but now it doesn't really sound right. Anyone know what I should do? Thanks, - A Texas Historian ( Talk to me) 06:02, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
List of American football players who died during their career was created in the last day and then nominated for deletion. Please take a look and comment. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 06:20, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Marshall–UCF football rivalry has been nominated for deletion. Please comment here. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 20:22, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
I'd like to discuss a recent change to Template:CFB Yearly Record End/footnotes, which renders the footnotes at the bottom of yearly record tables, most often seen on coach bio articles. @ Kgwo1972: brought up the topic here in August, but we didn't have much of discussion. Only @ Paulmcdonald: and I commented, and that was to discuss a side note, not the central topic, which is denotation of BCS, Bowl Alliance, or Bowl Coalition games in light of the move to the College Football Playoff (CFP). After a the lack of discussion/objection, Kgwo1972 moved ahead with his proposed edit to the template footnotes, adding notation for CFP and deleting all for the earlier systems, but I think some more input is needed here. It seems that if the BCS and its predecessors were worthy enough of special notation before, they are still historically worthy of such, even though a new system is now in place. Should we have one marker for all four systems? A different marker for each of the four. Just mark the current CFP system, as Kgwo1972 has proposed and executed? Thoughts? Jweiss11 ( talk) 21:14, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
Minnesota–Nebraska football rivalry has been nominated for deletion. Please comment here. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 07:30, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated 1996 UCLA at Tennessee football game for deletion. Please comment here. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 07:39, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
I recently took a crack at writing an individual season article ( Marshall 1998)and I'd like to do some more, but I wanted to make sure I was following notability guidelines before I put the work in. Are seasons of FCS teams considered notable? The specific ones I'm thinking of are the Marshall seasons 1993-1995 (back when they were FCS), although I may go back further than 1993 if I have time and it's considered notable. Thanks! Chuy1530 ( talk) 20:00, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
The requested move discussion here may be of interest to project members. Thanks. Go Phightins ! 22:41, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello everyone. I don't edit college football articles much, so I am not that familiar with your notability criteria. I do edit hockey articles, and I am pretty sure this guy would fail ours. I am thinking of AFDing it, but, I don't want to waste anyone's time. Thanks! Dbrodbeck ( talk) 22:26, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Seem like candidates for creation. 1945 Army Cadets football team, College football national championships in NCAA Division I FBS, just a few links. Here's some 1945 guys Earl Blaik, Doc Blanchard, Glenn Davis (American football), Shorty McWilliams. WikiOriginal-9 ( talk) 03:06, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
So, Mackensen and myself have been discussing the "Head coaching record" section at Talk:Gary Andersen, and whether or not the 2015 Outback Bowl belongs in Andersen's head coaching record section. I'm hoping that some folks can help us come to a consensus. Thanks, — dain omite 00:04, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated the recently created Template:Ernie Davis Award for deletion. Please comment here. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 05:50, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
There is a proposal to merge Template:Infobox gridiron football person and Template:Infobox college football player. Please comment here. Jweiss11 ( talk) 21:41, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Folks, you need to understand what has been proposed by this TfD: two non-sports editors have proposed that we merge the existing imperfect infobox for college football players into the less-than-ideal infobox for Canadian football players. Time to speak up, unless you want non-sports editors dictating how CFB and NFL article graphics must appear. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 12:20, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Can we add the Athlon Sports and FoxSports.com All-America lists to the 2014 College Football All-America Team? Thanks, wscsuperfan — Preceding undated comment added 01:29, 18 December 2014 (UTC)