Talk:2008 Ole Miss Rebels football team

Ranks are not wikilinked

We do not wikilink ranks. This is a standard all through out the Wikipedia College Football Project, its not just Ole Miss. The reason you don't wikilink a specific rank is because you are not sending it to a specific page about THAT ranking, you are sending them to a page about the rankings of the season. The ranking is already identified. Now if you want to start a ranking chart like sever other team pages have (examples: 2008 Alabama and 2008 LSU) that would be appropriate to wikilink to 2008 NCAA Division I FBS football rankings because it refers to the entire season and progression of the college football rankings from that year. Not just one ranking. Hope that makes sense to you. Rtr10 (talk) 06:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

That's bogus. The wikilinked page shows THE ranking for each week so there's nothing wrong whatsoever with linking them. There's no WP:MOS that says don't do it nor is there any rule or law. Just because it isn't done elsewhere doesn't mean it CAN'T be done. I will be re-linking those ranks. 75.64.248.238 (talk) 15:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree with 75.64.248.238, I think that it is helpful to have the ranks wikilinked so as to see what other schools are ranked easily.Jmerchant29 (talk) 15:54, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Apparently you still don't understand that you are linking a specific ranking from a specific week to an article on the PROGRESSION of the polls through out the ENTIRE season, NOT just a specific week. If you were linking the poll itself (ie Coaches, AP or BCS) then that would be correct, but how you have it in its current state is not. Rtr10 (talk) 18:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Again, no rules or guidelines say you can't wikilink to another article as a source. I have reverted again and remind you that as it stands now, a consensus has been reached with 2 vs 1. That could change of course but as it stands now the consensus is to link the ranks. 75.64.248.238 (talk) 04:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

My friend "2 vs. 1" is in no way a consensus, maybe you should learn the definition of the word before you try to use it. This topic is currently being discussed in the Wikipedia College Football Project. If a consensus there becomes apparent, both articles to will be reverted to their original state and standard. Either way, I suggest you learn how wikipedia works as a community rather than being a pain to editors who contribute on a regular basis to a variety of articles through out a project and not just one or two specific articles. Rtr10 (talk) 05:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

clr

Caused way too much dead space with the

- when the season ends, it'll fill itself out with content to where there won't be an issue with the schedule box but in all honesty, if someone would clean up that ugly SEC standings template and make it more streamlined, that would fix this issue and other SEC team pages as well. - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 03:13, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, meant to come back and fix that, just totally forgot. What we've done on quiet a few other team season pages is moved the rankings chart up above the schedule which helps tremendously. That's what I've done now. Looks much better. As for the Conference Standings template, that is a standard through out the entire College Football project. If you have a suggestion let it be heard. I honestly don't see anything wrong with it. It is definitely a lot easier to read than the old SEC standings template. Rtr10 (talk) 03:49, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

BowlTourneyResult field in info box

The BowlTourneyResult is for the result of the bowl game. As stated before 'TBD' is not a result of a game and does not belong in that field. There is a hanging comma because the game has not been played yet. The correct formatting for this template is to leave the 'BowlTourneyResult' field blank until there is an actual result to the game. This is the same format used on pages all through out the college football project. And as for your statement in your edit reversion summary "TBD is being used everywhere else I've seen on other teams w/ upcoming bowl games" I just looked at eight random team pages and didn't see a single other page other than Texas Tech that had TBD in the result field of the info box. It is simply not the correct format. Rtr10 (talk) 07:06, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Rankings Chart

The Rankings chart is specifically formatted to fit each ranking into ONE column. The column that says Final is for rankings that are released AFTER the College Bowl season. Out of the four rankings listed in the chart, only the AP and Coaches polls publish a Final ranking after the bowl games are complete. The Week 15 rankings are the last rankings published by Harris Interactive Poll nor are the Bowl Championship Series statement, that is why they are not listed in the Final chart. This is a standard used all through out the College Football Project, not just on this specific page. For examples see 2008 Florida Gators, 2008 Oklahoma Sooners, 2008 Utah Utes, 2008 Texas Longhorns, 2008 Alabama Crimson Tide. It is not just this one little thing on this specific article, it is a standard used in the project. A standard is used to lessen confusion among readers reading multiple pages through out the College Football Project. The Final column is for the final rankings published after bowl season, only two polls publish those rankings and that is why there are only two polls listed in the column with the other two empty, which pretty clearly indicates the other two polls do not publish a poll after the bowl games. If you have questions about the format, feel free to leave a message here or on my talk page and I'll be happy to answer. Rtr10 (talk) 18:13, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Total b.s. here. If you go to http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/bcspoll.asp, the first link to a poll on there specifically says "Harris Interactive College Football Poll FINAL Team Rankings December 7". What is so hard to understand about the word FINAL. FINAL is FINAL. Additionally, the BCS web site links to http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/polls to view their poll. There, it says "BCS Standings - Updated: January 13, 2009, 1:35 AM ET." meaning just TODAY, changes were made - AFTER THE BOWLS. - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 19:29, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Did you even read the explanation above? If you did, you apparently did not comprehend it. The Harris Poll published its last poll of the year on December 7 which is Week 15 of the College Football schedule. The BCS does not even publish a final standings, they publish their last set of standings on Week 15 for Bowl Selection purposes and that is it. It is not final, if it were final as you say it is, that would mean the Oklahoma Sooners are the #1 team in the nation and we both now that is not true. While they are the last ranking of the season and in that way are technically the "final" release of that particular poll, that is irrelevant to this. The Final column is for rankings released after the bowl games. If we were to insert the last BCS or Harris Poll numbers in this slot it would be indicating they are being released as a final poll after the bowl season, which is not the case at all. This wasn't asking for your permission, it was just to let you know that it is a standard used in the entire project which includes this article and an explanation of why it is formatted that way. As I said before if you have questions about the format of the chart or why we use a standard across the project (although I have really addressed this twice now), I'd be more than happy to answer them, but I would appreciate it if you would use some courtesy and not ignorantly ignore a clear standard and not start a revert war. Thanks. Rtr10 (talk) 21:08, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Apparently you didn't comprehend the word "final", because that's what Harris called their poll: "F" "I" "N" "A" "L". Final, the end, the last, done. The BCS poll was their final poll of 2008 as well. Yes, it was the last, and the final. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/final may be of help to you. - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 04:34, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Buddy, no one is questioning that those were the final times those polls were released. HOWEVER, for the one hundred and fiftieth time the Final COLUMN in this chart is for polls released AFTER bowl games. The polls released before the bowl game are in the Wk 15 column. This is not rocket science. We don't duplicate a ranking in a progression chart. Rtr10 (talk) 06:52, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20081129/SPORTS030106/811290338
  • In Egg Bowl on 2011-03-18 00:50:21, 404 Not Found
  • In 2008 Ole Miss Rebels football team on 2011-06-16 13:54:03, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 13:54, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2008 Ole Miss Rebels football team. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090105160114/http://olemisssports.com/ to http://www.olemisssports.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:07, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2008 Ole Miss Rebels football team. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110723114141/http://www.wapt.com/news/18224046/detail.html to http://www.wapt.com/news/18224046/detail.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.olemisssports.com/SportSelect.dbml?db_oem_id=2600&spid=737&spsid=12785

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:52, 18 June 2017 (UTC)