User talk:Jweiss11/Archives/2011 (Jul–Dec)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ellery Huntington.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ellery Huntington.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:33, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Edward Moulton

Thanks for the help on the Edward Moulton article. I've listed you as a co-creator on the DYK nomination. He certainly had a varied career. Cbl62 (talk) 05:57, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

My pleasure to help out as always. Thanks for the nod on the DYK nom. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:24, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Bear Wolf

JW, what were your sources for the additional categories and infobox data that you added to the Raymond Wolf article? Based on what you've added, I'd like to expand the text and add the source footnotes. When I sketched out the present article 18 months ago, i thought I had exhausted the available sources . . . . Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:52, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Everything I added can be sourced at Baseball Reference (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/w/wolfra01.shtml) or the TCU baseball media guide (http://issuu.com/tcu_athletics/docs/2010_media_guide). Jweiss11 (talk) 03:56, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Harry Ely

I'm wondering if you know whether Harry Ely (baseball) is actually the Fordham baseball coach, rather than Harry Ely? Jrcla2 (talk) 00:13, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Hmm. I don't know, but I'd bet it's all the same guy. Let's see what we can dig up. Saw you jumped in the other day and created the William & Mary baseball coach navbox. Thanks. I've been churning out the baseball coach navboxes the past few weeks, in some sense to flesh out the details of a lot of early college football coaches. The baseball coaching successions, especially for the northeastern schools, tend to include an interesting mix of old-time MLBers and coaching generalists who also ran football and basketball teams. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:59, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Hey, guys, while you're churning and burning on those college baseball coach navboxes, could I put in a special order for the Pepperdine Waves and the Central Florida Knights? Those two would help complete the Florida Gators baseball coaching succession. Of course, then there's also the truly obscure St. Viator College baseball program . . . baseball program and college now both defunct. (That's probably asking a bit much!) Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 05:15, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Pepperdine and UCF done. Would you like fries with your navboxes? Jweiss11 (talk) 06:51, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Jrcla2 likes this. My resources are pretty scant when it comes to deciphering whether it's the same person in these types of situations, so I always ask wp:cfb or Rikster2 (for basketball-related ones). I bet it's the same guy also. Last night I created the ODU baseball navbox. I've been on kind of a kick to make baseball navboxes (for the reasons you mentioned – they often overlap with football and basketball coaches) as well as women's D1 basketball navboxes, since there are virtually none to speak of. Jrcla2 (talk) 13:16, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Connormah and Clb62 are good guys as well when it comes to fleshing out these sorts of questions. I'll loop them in on Harry Ely. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:07, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Replied on my talk. BTW, do you have access to the paid NYT articles or any of the paid newspaper archives? Connormah (talk) 21:25, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for reply. Yeah, I have access to the NYT, but not any other subscription stuff. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I just notified User:Spanneraol of this conversation because he's the creator of the baseball-Ely article. Jrcla2 (talk) 23:02, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Not sure if they are the same guy or not.. The baseball player Harry Ely was playing professionally from 1892-1896, primarily in the Pennsylvania State League. Could he have also been a football coach during that same time? I'd say unlikely but I really don't know and the references on the web are scant. Spanneraol (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

It turns out that Harry Ely was a very common name back then. Without a date, place of birth, middle name or initial, etc., it's hard to say for sure that the two articles concern the same person. A search of Ancestry.com records reveals multiple candidates. These include:

• Harry Thomas Ely, born c. 1870 in New York, living in Syracuse, NY in 1910 (employed as a motorman)
• Harry M. Ely, born October 29, 1872, living in Davenport, Iowa in 1918
• Harry F. Ely, born c. 1870 in Pennsylvania, living in Washington, PA in 1880
• Harry George Ely, born October 19, 1872, living in Montgomery County, PA, as of 1918
• Harry D. Ely, born October 1871 in New Jersey, living in Holmdel, NJ, as of 1900
• Harry B. Ely, born c. 1867 in Pennsylvania, living in 1920 at Honesdale, PA
• Charles Harry Ely, born Feb. 20, 1873, living in 1918 in Orange, NJ

I don't see anything that suggests which is which. Cbl62 (talk) 00:09, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Jweiss, this may be of interest: CAPTAIN H.A. ELY BURIED (1928) - can you access it? Connormah (talk) 00:38, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Here's another - Captain H.A. Ely's Funeral Today. (May 1, 1928) Connormah (talk) 00:42, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Cbl62, could you maybe take a look at these Ancestry records? Connormah (talk) 00:46, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm now pretty sure that the Fordham coach is Harry Allan Ely. According to the Fordham Football Media Guide, page 98, Ely was an alum of Yale. However, a New York Times article from 1903 here states: "Harry Allen Ely, a Columbia College graduate, will coach the Fordham football eleven next fall." (It may be that he attended both Yale and Columbia?) I also found two other New York times articles here and here that indicate that Harry Allan Ely of Columbia was a captain in the 46th United States Volunteer Infantry in the Philippine–American War. He was also the secretary of the Volunteer Watchers League, a non-partisan group investigating conditions in parts of New York where repeating was looked for on election day. (The tenant rights guy referenced by Connormah may or may not be the same guy.) Cbl62 (talk) 01:02, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Can anyone with NYT Access take a look at the 2 articles I brought up above? Connormah (talk) 01:18, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I did look. They relate to a tenant rights activist in New York. Possibly the same guy, but the obit is pretty limited. Cbl62 (talk) 01:21, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Frank Martin

Got another for everybody (btw, any resolution on Ely?) – Frank Martin (baseball), is this guy also the very first head coach for Temple, who coached in only the 1927 season? I've made the Temple navbox someone else for the time being, but if it's the same guy that will need to be changed. Jrcla2 (talk) 22:28, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Got a couple spare moments, so I'll look into it. Connormah (talk) 01:30, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't anyone uncovered anything to tie two Harry Ely's together. I'll see what I can dig up on Frank Martin. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:09, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Edward Moulton

EncycloPetey (talk) 08:03, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

GWU Colonials baseball coach tenures

Do you happen to know who, if any, the coaches were between 1903 and 1949 for {{George Washington Colonials baseball coach navbox}}? Their online media guide only starts the year-by-year listings at Reinhart's 1953 season, and I was able to surmise that E. K. Morris coached (at least) the 1933 season due to a sentence in their history section. Anything prior to Reinhart is not readily available (at least to me). Jrcla2 (talk) 22:54, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I found some more history in the NCAA database (http://web1.ncaa.org/stats/StatsSrv/careersearch). Jweiss11 (talk) 00:51, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Great - thanks for the link! Jrcla2 (talk) 01:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

RE:Garbage edits

You could atleast give me a template.--Servesnod (talk) 01:47, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:San Diego State Aztecs baseball coach navbox

Template:San Diego State Aztecs baseball coach navbox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:13, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

UNC coach navbox

Shouldn't Template:North Carolina Tar Heels football coach navbox have 2010 as his final year? It's pretty late into 2011 to be getting fired, but as I understand it, his navbox should read 2010, and then whatever coach takes the lead for this season will be the interim, no? Jrcla2 (talk) 01:12, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes. He will coach no games in the 2011 season. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:13, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Damn you're quick. Jrcla2 (talk) 01:13, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Ha. Just happened to log on right now. Good timing...like sitting on a fastball. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:15, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

On a related note, I love the infobox pic of Butch Davis. Looks like he's going to put the dude sitting next to him, or maybe himself, in a choke hold. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:17, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah that is a funny photo. Kind of looks like an old Italian mobster in the middle of making an offer someone can't refuse. Jrcla2 (talk) 03:22, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Templates

Awesome :) I'm glad you fixed everything. I'm just going to repost this for you:

Question: I messed it up a little and I'm glad that someone fixed it, but from 1946-1950 there were only 9 teams and at this time the Big Ten began being referred to as the Big 9. In 1950 when Michigan State joined, it went to Big 10 and never looked back. I have a similar question about pre-1916 when it was officially known as the "Western Conference." Some sources even say that the name "Western Conference" stuck until 1952. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kallman1 (talk • contribs) 00:25, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

VMI baseball coaches

According to the NCAA link, W. C. Raftery coached the 1929 season. Prior to then, and between 1930 & 1949, I cannot find any records of who should fill out {{VMI Keydets baseball coach navbox}}. The 2011 VMI media guide only starts with 1950 for their year-by-year records. Do you happen to have any of the missing tenures? Jrcla2 (talk) 14:44, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Nope. Don't have anything else on hand. Jweiss11 (talk) 15:51, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:San Diego State Aztecs baseball coach navbox

I have deleted Template:San Diego State Aztecs baseball coach navbox, which you recreated after a TfD which resulted in deletion, under speedy deletion criteria G4. Continual recreation of this template may result in it being salted. Again, I advise you to focus on the creation of the articles that you feel so desperately need this navbox rather than the navbox itself. JPG-GR (talk) 20:24, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

I have been watching this discussion and of course mine about the wrestling templates. It really seems like JPG-GR is overstepping here and acting without really considering the thoughts of others. --Gerry D (talk) 00:38, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

I have tried to start a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Navigation_templates#Red_links_in_nav_boxes but nobody has chimed in yet. I would love to read your opinion. I see no reason to delete a navbox with red links. Red links have provided me with the motivation to create almost every article I have created. Gerry D (talk) 00:44, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Gerry, thanks for your note. I agree that JPG-GR may be overstepping his bounds here. I'll have to take a closer look at your wrestling templates and see what I think about those, but in the case of the San Diego State Aztecs baseball coach navbox, it is part of class of templates that support a topic with established notability, and mirror similar classes of templates, particularly for college football and baseball, between all of which there is significant overlap. The vast majority of, if not all, NCAA D-I baseball coaches are going to be notable and worthy of their own article. As such, I see no reason why we can't live with some of the navboxes containing some red links for the time being. Having at least a blue link or two ought to be sufficient for their existence. In cases where navboxes have mostly red links and are one-off kind of constructions or bring together articles of questionable relatedness or notability, I can understand and would likely support objections to them. But the case of the SDSU baseball template is another story. In response to JPG-GR's admonition about process above, it might be worth considering the the role I've carved out for myself on Wikipedia is one that focuses heavily on projection management, standardization, and quality control, particularly for college sports. There's a hell of lot of work still left to be done and hundreds of teams to cover. My hope is that my work will lay some foundations so that when, say, a savvy SDSU fan comes along eager to expand Wikipedia coverage of his teams, he'll have some good guidance to create high-quality articles that mesh well with similar articles for other teams and sports. These navboxes go a long well toward that goal. Furthermore, the process of creating them often uncovers content forks, orphaned articles, and articles of low quality and/or idiosyncratic form. Navbox instantiation helps a great deal to remedy such problems. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:14, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

The wrestling templates were for all of the wrestling conferences in Division I. Some wrestling templates still exists, only the ones that got nominated for deletion were deleted. As of now there are just 10 - 12 college wrestling articles. I believe that all of the D1 wrestling schools are noteworthy enough to have articles and they certainly should united with a nav box. My feelings about the wrestling article are similar to yours. I would like to see others pick up on them and run with it. Gerry D (talk) 01:27, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Gerry, your deleted/proposed wrestling templates seem reasonable to me. The one thing I would suggest it to get the appropriate WikiProject behind your efforts and get all the relevant pages tagged under that WikiProject. WikiProject Martial arts? Jweiss11 (talk) 04:29, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. I hadn't really considered getting a WikiProject involved. I will work on it later today. It looks like the SDSU coaches box is safe for now. Good. Gerry D (talk) 14:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Dealing with dead urls

Hi. I see that you did some useful maintenance at Jean Harris. (Smile.) However, I'd like to alert you to the importance of not removing reference citations simply because a link to a source is not working. Dead links should not be deleted. Instead, please repair or replace the link, if possible, and ensure properly sourced information is retained. See WP:DEADREF for advice on doing this. In the case of Jean Harris, the article is a biography of a living person (where sourcing is extra important) and the link that you removed is the source that most of the article apparently is based on. Often, a live substitute link can be found for a dead one -- in the case of that particular reference, archive.org had several good copies of the page. (Also, be aware that bad links not used as references/notes/citations are not as important, but should also be fixed if possible.) --Orlady (talk) 20:34, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

It wasn't inline, so it just looked like clutter to me. Thanks for digging up the source on archive.org and restoring it. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:01, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

I guess that's one more reason why that article displays the Template:Inline, complaining that it lists sources but doesn't cite them inline. Not properly citing citations inline can lead to the references getting deleted inadvertently! Thanks for 'splaining. --Orlady (talk) 21:58, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

The article does have some inline citations, so I just removed that template. It still has the BLP sources template, which is most appropriate. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:02, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Repost of Template:San Diego State Aztecs baseball coach navbox

A tag has been placed on Template:San Diego State Aztecs baseball coach navbox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit [[Talk:Template:San Diego State Aztecs baseball coach navbox|the article's talk page directly]] to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of continuing to recreate the page. Thank you. Norespectasip (talk) 03:35, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Guardian Angel

Just want to thank you for being my guardian angel for my escapades through Wisconsin football history :) You've been a fantastic help

My pleasure to help out. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:02, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

awesome :) I plan to get back to work on the seasons soon. Been on vacation and I'm trying to limit my computer use. But I'll definitely look into all that you suggested. I've found that working on Wikipedia is far more intellectually rewarding than just reading Wikipedia. Kallman1 (talk) 19:56, 20 August 2011 (UTC)Kallman1

Category: Horizon League women's basketball coaches

I'm hoping to get your input on Category:Horizon League women's basketball coaches, which has been marked for deletion. You're clearly knowledgeable when it comes to the college basketball articles, templates, etc., and your thoughts are some that I would value. City boy77 (talk) 03:22, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

City boy77, thanks for your note. Deleting this category makes senses to me. The standard in college sports coach categories for a given sport is to have categories for each team and then have those categories roll up into one national category for all NCAA and NAIA teams without any intermediate categories for conferences or divisions. See Category:College football coaches in the United States or Category:College women's basketball coaches in the United States for examples. In fact, on this subject, I recently opened up this category merger discussion: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 August 6#Lists of college football head coaches. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:46, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Extremely helpful. Thank you! I wish the initial poster had explained it this way. I'm obviously still learning while trying to further the college basketball project. I don't really follow women's basketball but there isn't a whole lot to do in the off-season. City boy77 (talk) 04:08, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for barnstar below and it's my pleasure help out and try to explain things. Much of the focus of my work on Wikipedia over the past year or so has been to standardize formatting for college coaches, particularly football coaches. Take a look at Template:Infobox college coach. I've done some work there to clean up and organize the fields, eliminate unneeded ones, and add others. I see you recently created an article for Bob Boldon. You included "player" and "coach" fields in the infobox, which used to trigger section headings in the template, but are no longer needed; you probably just cut and pasted from a similar article that already existed. The template is more efficient now, so those fields can be done away with. The listings in the playing and coaching team fields should wikilink to that relevant team's article. If that team article doesn't exist, you might want to set up a redirect which drives to main athletics article for that school, and if that article doesn't exist either, the redirect should point to the school's main article. Also take a look as finer details like capitalization (e.g. the G in "Point Guard" and the P in "Present" should be lower case). All the years should be listed with their full four digits. Avoid abbreviations like "ass't" if you can fit the full word in. In the Yearly Record Subheads of the head coaching record table, teams should be listed with their fight name and link through to the team page. Again consider redirects if no such team article exists. Also the NCAA has a database (http://web1.ncaa.org/stats/StatsSrv/careersearch) that is a good place to look up birth dates. Boldon's is listed there. Phog Allen is a good example of the formatting I've been working to establish, if you want something to play off of. There's still tons of work to do for these coaching biographies and many other areas within the world of college sports. If you're looking for ideas, I think I can suggest some. Tony Hinkle is a significant figure you might be interested in working on. That article was in pretty bad shape before I cleaned it up a few months ago, but it still needs plenty of expansion and is missing head coaching record tables. He had quite a lengthy career in three sports, so that's a bit of a project right there. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:43, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm in the midst of changing the infoboxes that I used on Bob Boldon, Beth Couture, Keith Freeman, and Eric Simpson (basketball), and I have a couple questions. On the infobox category "sport" should I differentiate between men's and women's basketball? I'm also operating under the assumption that I should note whether it was a men's or women's team in the yearly records. How should I do that? Thanks for your help. I'm sure I'll have more questions soon. City boy77 (talk) 01:25, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Good questions. I haven't done much editing on women's basketball, so I really haven't spent much thinking about it. In the infobox field for sport, I've made a practice of putting simply "basketball" for men's coaches. Maybe it makes sense to specify gender, especially for women's. Might be worth bring this up at the WP:CBB talk page to get some more thoughts about it. In cases where someone has coached both men's and women's basketball (I can't think of any offhand, but I'd bet there are a few), it would make sense to separate their men's coaching history from their women's coaching history in their infobox much like has been done for multi-sport coaches, e.g. Phog Allen. As for the yearly record tables, no explicit mention of men's/women's need to be made within a given table, although for some schools the women's fight name is different, e.g. Arkansas Lady Razorbacks. The lead and body of the article should make it obvious which gender we are talking about, and the wikilinks within the table should point to the relevant articles. For someone who has coached both men's and women's, their records should be broken out into separate tables for with subsection headings to divide and specify the genders, again, a la how Phog Allen's football record is broken off from his basketball record. Does that help? Jweiss11 (talk) 02:58, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	For helping explain things to another CBB team member, you showed that you really know how to be a team player. Thank you so much! City boy77 (talk) 04:06, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Tagging files

I have a favor to ask: When you tag photographs to have them included as File-Class for WP:CFB, can you also tag applicable WP:CBBALL photos if there's an overlap (i.e. Dale Hall)? It would help populate File-Class college basketball articles, and the only reason there aren't many yet is because we haven't gotten around to it. If a college football coach also played or coached college basketball, we'd be appreciative of the double-project tag. Thanks! Jrcla2 (talk) 16:23, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Sure thing. I'll keep that in mind. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:25, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Great. Btw you're the fastest responder I've met on Wikipedia. Jrcla2 (talk) 16:28, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Ha, I spend way too much time here. I see you've been working former nicknames into the coach nav boxes. Good stuff. It may be worth cross-referencing that effort with List of college nickname changes in the United States. I try to update that list as I come across nickname changes. I also see you've been rolling out the "enhanced" navbox form to lacrosse templates. Thanks for that. I think the next step in the navbox department is work on adoption for MLB and NBA. I upgraded the NFL coaching navboxes a few weeks back and aim to get the NFL GM/president nav boxes up to form at some point as well. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:36, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I think the MLB and NBA coaching navboxes would be a good discussion to get rolling. I'm an NBA fan, and I'm personally unsure as to why they've decided to use team templates to put on the coaches' articles in lieu of coach-specific navboxes. I don't know how the MLB guys will take it, but speaking from personal experience interacting with the heavy NBA contributors, I bet they'd be down for the upgrades. You probably already know this, but I wouldn't even attempt this discussion with WP:Ice Hockey. They are all about succession boxes and hate navboxes, for whatever reason. A heated debate about a year ago resulted in their unofficial nickname "Hockey Mafia" because they have a group mob mentality about sticking to their guns, regardless of what the rest of the sports' projects on Wikipedia do. Jrcla2 (talk) 20:30, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I've heard a few things about the "Hockey Mafia". I've seen TonyTheTiger's table about them: User:TonyTheTiger/sandbox/Hockey mafia issue. I think it make senses to go for the lowest hanging fruit and build the most widespread support of the enhanced nav boxes plus the moratorium on succession boxes before we tackle tough cookies like the ice hockey guys. I you want to feel out the NBA guys, I'll work on the MLB. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:43, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:W&Jcats

Although it was suggested that this template be deleted here, the closing admin did not include it since it was not tagged. You should feel free to start a deletion discussion for it if feel it should be deleted. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:16, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Thansks for the heads up. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:17, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

So, because of your activity related to {{W&Jcats}}, I presume that you are also 198.102.153.2 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), which removed that template from all of the categories? --GrapedApe (talk) 02:56, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

No, sir. I never edit anonymously. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:12, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Also, I've never been to Albuquerque, New Mexico, but I do watch Breaking Bad. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:15, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Navbox state

I just wanted to check if there's a particular reason that a navbox state should be set to "collapsed"? (This edit spurred the question.) The default is "autocollapse", which "will start out collapsed if there are two or more tables [this plus one other] on the same page that use other collapsible tables", and that has always seemed quite reasonable to me. Thanks, cmadler (talk) 20:03, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

I thought some of the templates were pretty big and could use the collapse since they will likely be the only template on season pages where they are transcluded. But yes, we should have a discussion about this for standardization. There's more to talk to about that just collapsed states. I'm doing a little clean up to get things started and then I plan to bring this up at WP:CFB. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:08, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Wisconsin baseball coaches

JW, in the Wisconsin baseball coach navbox you have Thomas A. Barry's tenure through 1911. I think he had left for Denver by that point. New York Times and Boston Globe articles from January 1911 said Denver had hired him, and the NYT called him "former" Wisconsin coach at that time. Do you remember where you found the coaching tenures? Strikehold (talk) 21:35, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

See http://books.google.com/books?id=wvAV-TuxKtMC&lpg=PA45&dq=wisconsin%20baseball&pg=PA180#v=onepage&q&f=false. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:38, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll keep looking into this. The Denver baseball coach tenures have not been easy to find. Strikehold (talk) 21:52, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, piecing together the history for defunct programs can be tough. I recently did some work to flesh out the Saint Louis Billikens football coaches. What really helped is that Saint Louis U has many of its old yearbooks available online. That was a great place to pull pictures from as well. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:56, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Joe Iacone

Just out of curiosity, how did you come across this AfD discussion? It doesn't appear that you've edited the article before and you haven't !voted in any of the other 20 AfDs at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/American football. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:48, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

I sit on Cbl62's edits like a hanging breaking ball. He's usually up to something interesting. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:50, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

This link was also posted at WP:CFB and Iacone is the first item there. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:52, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Gotcha, thanks. My concern was that Cbl62 had asked you off-wiki to participate in the discussion, knowing that you'd !vote a certain way and thus violating WP:CANVASS. I trust that what you say is accurate since I have nothing else to rely on. Carry on. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:58, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

My impression is that Cbl62 would be the last editor to resort to that kind of stealthy antic. We've collaborated a lot on Michigan football and I can't tell you how many times I've pissed him off with edit conflicts, me thwarting one his extensively researched opuses with a crappy little copyedit or category addition. I have a link to his edit contributions in my Firefox bookmark toolbar. No joke. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:04, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

That was my hope as well, considering he is an admin. Thanks for your help. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:06, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Junior College records

I am starting to flesh out more of an article for Louisiana–Monroe Warhawks football and have come across a situation you may have some insight on. ULM has kept records of its football team from its inception as a junior college between 1931–1950. Since 1951 they have competed as a regular four-year school. The question I have is do we include the junior college wins in the overall victories total for the program or not? College Football Data Warehouse does not, but they are all accounted for in the Louisiana–Monroe media guide. Furthermore, if we do not include these games in the running total, does the first season date to 1931 for the J.C. or to 1951 for the four-year program? Or has WP:CFB already dealt with this? Thanks for the help! Patriarca12 (talk) 23:19, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Good question. My sense would be to include only the record as a four-year school in places like an infobox, perhaps with a note detailing record as a junior college. The NCAA record book (http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/DI/2010/2010FBS.pdf, p. 62) "includes records as senior college only." Boise State is in the same boat at ULM here as they starting playing as a junior college in 1932 before joining the NCAA in 1968. This is probably worth bringing up at WP:CFB to set some more input on this issue and see if anyone has other examples that would be affected. Thanks for kicking off the ULM article. I believe that was the last FBS program without a main article. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:24, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Good points, and this probably does deserve more of a discussion at WP:CFB since Boise is a very notable program now. I will address it in the history section of the article as I tweak it a bit more. And yes, ULM was the final FBS article needing creation :) It looked lonely there by itself so I remedied it. Have a great evening. Patriarca12 (talk) 01:05, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: Auburn

Thanks Jweiss11 for reducing the Auburn list by over 8,000 bytes! I will be updating the other SEC ones tonight in the same manner. Only two more to go plus Tulane and Georgia Tech to have a full set of all SEC head coaches.Patriarca12 (talk) 12:44, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Heinie Miller

I can not imagine anything will ever be written on him. I will look at his obit in the NYT. His name is not listed in The College Football Bibliography by Myron J. Smith, Jr. There has got to be between 2,000 and 4,000 names in there. I would delete that article. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:38, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Miller played in the NFL and was the head coach of a major college football program. He's notable on two counts right there. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:55, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Hello Jweiss11! I hope you accept this brownie as an amicable greeting from a fellow Wikipedian, SwisterTwister talk 20:06, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

SLC templates

I left a message for you on the deletion nomination page for my two templates: SLC West and Southland Confernce East. ThomasHorn7 (talk) 00:22, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

How does this deletion correspond with the rules for deletion? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:DEL#REASON

ThomasHorn7 (talk) 00:45, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

"Redundant or otherwise useless templates." Jweiss11 (talk) 00:47, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

please look up the words redundant and useless and then come again please. It's not redundant because it was the only template until you butchered it and made another one. It's not useless because people were using it for a year just fine, and look at my post on the discussion page, my template is more useful than yours! ThomasHorn7 (talk) 00:52, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Wrestling

Thanks for the work on the wrestling nav boxes. Can I interest you in starting some team articles? Maybe you could start with Michigan Wolverines wrestling? I am pretty busy IRL. If not, it's not a problem, I will get there eventually. Gerry D (talk) 02:36, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

My pleasure. I'm working a project to standardize all the navboxes across college sports. Don't know if and when I can get to that wrestling article. I really know nothing about wrestling. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:41, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

3RR

Please do not revert my edits to Template:West Coast Conference again or you will be in violation of WP:3RR. —Eustress ^talk 12:19, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

My edits are supported by consensus on the subject. Jweiss11 (talk) 12:25, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Consensus has not been established and it wouldn't give you the right to violate 3RR anyway. This discussion needs to be before a much larger audience in order to yield the sweeping reform you're proposing -- discussion amongst a few editors on the page for the Southland Conf template won't cut it. —Eustress ^talk 12:33, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

My first set of edits were effectively standardization, not reversion, despite the terming of my edit note. It is you who is poised to violate 3RR before I do. I'm am proposing no reforms. I am simply applying the consensus that has already been established. WikiProject College football and WikiProject College basketball are in on this matter. Jweiss11 (talk) 12:37, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Eustress, I am a big fan of your work, but this is not a good fight to pick. Literally dozens of active editors on the two largest WP college sports projects, WP:CFB and WP:CBB, have worked for over a year to standardize the content and formatting of college sports navboxes, including conference navboxes and coaching succession navboxes, and it's been a tremendous effort. These formats have been extended across the board to all college sports, and the coach navboxes have even been extended to WP:NFL. Getting all of these folks on board has been no small effort. Before denying the consensus exists, I urge you to look at the standardized formats for the major college conferences navboxes and all college coach navboxes. There are weeks and months of discussion on the project talk pages to support these formats, and many of us have invested substantial hours of our time to bring order to the previous chaos. I would be personally grateful if you could find a way to readily concede the point. Still a fan, in any event. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:22, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

"These formats have been extended across the board to all college sports"... I don't think that is wise, per my fruit analogy below. As this "policy" keeps moving bubbling up into different wikiprojects, it will collide with more and more people who have been absent from the discussion. A separate MOS for College Sports articles or sports articles in general (you guys will have to decide how high up you want to go) is probably needed here. —Eustress ^talk 15:45, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Eustress, you bring up a good points. WikiProject College football and WikiProject College Basketball have taken the lead for all college sports because the extant focus and coordination on other sports is minimal. The history of athletic conferences really started within the history of college football as well. We've been careful about bubbling policy outside of that domain. For example, with respect to the coaching succession navboxes, we took care to approach the NFL project and entertain discussion there for many months before changes were implemented. That in fact went rather smoothly because the NFL project had already established a great deal of consistency within and it was very simple to sync with them. We're planning on making similar liaisons to the NBA and MLB. No one is planning on foisting these policies onto to, say, English soccer without some serious conversation before, but that indeed may be a direction we want to go one day. A college sports or general sports MOS may indeed be in order here. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:04, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Change etiquette and consensus

I know you and a few other editors think you're right about the template coloring issue (and maybe you are), but look at it from my perspective (excuse the corniness)... Say you made some improvements to Grape, and those edits stood for several months. Then say a few editors on Watermelon decided that all fruit-related articles should be similar to Watermelon. Do you think it's fair to apply a purported consensus on Watermelon to the article about Grapes and all other fruit-related articles? There could be various things to consider with other fruits, and you have excluded editors who may have been interested in participating in the discussion. —Eustress ^talk 14:48, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

You bring up a good point and I like the analogy, but if watermelon, apple, orange, banana, peach, raspberry, strawberry, mango, kiwi, and pear are all carrying a certain format, which has been discussed and agreed upon by many editors, shouldn't grape also? Shouldn't grape be subject to fruit consensus? The onus would be on someone to show why grape is a unique exception. Getting back to the matter at hand, is there something about the West Coast Coast conference that distinguishes it from other conferences? Jweiss11 (talk) 16:54, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Any further discussion on this topic should be in the appropriate venue; otherwise, we're slipping into the same predicament. In the meantime, I respectfully request that you restore the WCC template to its prior state. —Eustress ^talk 19:26, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Request respectfully denied. What is appropriate venue for further discussion? Jweiss11 (talk) 19:30, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Basketball national championship team navboxes

I reverted your move of {{1989 Michigan basketball}}. I think this needs to be brought up at WT:CBBALL, because even though it might conform to Category:Michigan Wolverines men's basketball navigational boxes, it definitely doesn't conform to the more important Category:NCAA Men's Basketball Championship templates, where there are 73 championship team navboxes (it also goes out of sync with Category:NCAA Women's Basketball Championship templates). I understand you're trying to standardize a lot of college-related stuff, but as a WikiProject College Basketball proponent I've got to say this one needs to be discussed. Thanks! Jrcla2 (talk) 18:48, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Okay, can you do me a favor and kick off that discussion? For what it's worth, that region of the category tree is already out of sync. We have Category:NCAA Men's Basketball Championship templates is a subcat of Category:American college basketball roster templates (should be called nav boxes). And we have Template:NCAA Men's Basketball Champions in Category:NCAA Men's Basketball Championship templates. But is that a roster template (navbox)? The existing categorization is very flawed. As for the naming of the 1989 Michigan basketball template, maybe it's unique enough as is, but it would be nice to have everything follow the same form, even if that means moving all 73 of those champ team navboxes...and the football ones as well. If we don't standardize this sort of thing, it leaves the door open for chaos. What if someone comes along and starts making baseball champ navboxes? I believe there may already be a few. Or soccer? We need a consistent way to name them. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:57, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

We've got a field hockey one! Template:2007 North Carolina Field Hockey. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:02, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: College baseball navboxes

Jweiss, thanks very much for the heads-up. I generally make a navbox when I have more than half a conference's venues completed, so I'll keep that in mind. Only one comment- I'd like to make sure that any schools with multiple venues are listed uniformly. Generally, I've put a comma in between, but I have no preference other than that it be uniform. Thanks again for communicating. Kithira (talk) 19:09, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I see the comma used in Template:MVC baseball venues. That looks fine by me. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:13, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Substituting templates

When you substitute the roster/depth chart templates, it would be great if you could remove the edit links (sometimes a {{navbar}}) from the article (e.g., my recent edits to 2005 Texas Longhorns football team and 2004 USC Trojans football team). This way there isn't a misleading edit link pointing back to the template, when the content is in the article. Thanks for doing most of the work :) Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:49, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that on most of them. Guess I missed a couple. Thanks for catching. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:50, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Infobox NCAA team season/doc

Thanks. Is it right now. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:37, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

NCAA Division I athletic conference basketball templates

Are we getting rid of Category:NCAA Division I athletic conference basketball templates? I noticed you removed it from Template:HorizonLeagueBB, which is now only listed in Category:NCAA Division I athletic conference templates. I would think it should be the other way around. City boy77 (talk) 03:57, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Nice catch. Yes, I removed the wrong category before. Just fixed it. Although, I'm not sure about that category surviving this clean-up effort when it's all said and done. We might we fine with Category:American college basketball navigational boxes by conference. Not sure yet. Things will become clearer as the mess gets more and more under control. One thing to think about is that HorizonLeagueBB template. You've blown it out to take on a role that a number of templates are filling for other conferences; see Category:Big East Conference basketball navigational boxes.

Yeah, I'm in the process of breaking it apart. I learned a little about making navboxes, but not enough to know when too much is too much. Now I'm going back and making some changes. City boy77 (talk) 04:48, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

I wish everyone had learned as much as you have. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:49, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:HorizonLeagueBB (or now Template:Horizon League basketball navbox) can be deleted because it has all been split apart. Instead of Horizon League basketball navbox, I created one each for men's and women's basketball. City boy77 (talk) 05:53, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Great. I was going to suggest breaking those into separate templates. I redirected the original combined template to the men's template. Keep an eye out for standardizing the naming of these templates. I've got the Big Ten, Big East, and ACC cleaned up now. Keep those on hand as a reference. Check out Template:Big Ten Conference men's basketball navbox. I think the groups for teams and champs/awards work better than bottom bar. What do you think? Jweiss11 (talk) 06:07, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Really didn't have a preference so I changed it to use the groups. On the women's template, the red links will give me a reminder of what else I need to work on. Thanks for your help with the categories, btw. I hate working on those because I really don't feel like I know what I'm doing. City boy77 (talk) 06:28, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Block M logo border

I saw that you reverted the Block M logo that I uploaded a while back. If you look on mgoblue.com under each schedule, the Block M they use actually does have a border to distinguish the white from the maize. In my opinion, this is just cause for the border, but let me know if you disagree. Thanks. SCS100 (talk) 06:09, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, the mgoblue football homepage seems to feature the solid yellow M with no border in prominent places. But the main banner at http://www.bigten.org shows the M with a blue border. Not sure. I don't think either is incorrect. We should probably go with one the looks better here. Against a white background that may be the one with the blue border. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:15, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I'd bet the lack of border on mgoblue has to do with the blue background. I've switched it back to the blue border. Thanks again. SCS100 (talk) 06:20, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

SLC Template

I'm done with the Southland Conference template discussion. We fundamentally disagree about the utility of the navboxes and the reason for conformity to a norm. If that is how you believe it should look and you feel that strongly about it then I have nothing more to say on the topic.

Thank you for the compliments on Lamar Cardinals football, it's a work in progress and I hope to have more citations, photos and content for the article soon. Thank for your edits on my watch-list articles too. ThomasHorn7 (talk) 22:46, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: CFB template & college soccer

Hey Jweiss11! First of all, thanks for the links and style manuel/goals! I it is definitely a wise move to have all collegiate sports standings follow the same templates. Personally, the second example of the CFB Standings template would perfectly display the soccer standings, since soccer's notorious for games ending tied.Other than that, I think it would be a good idea to convert the soccer templates over to the CFB style, which I can begin doing later this week. Cheers, Quidster4040 (talk) 04:36, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Milwaukee Panthers

Will you take a look at the recent revisions to Milwaukee Panthers? Someone completely changed the infobox and I don't know enough about the standardization of the main athletic pages to know if this is following a previous discussion or not. I'm pretty sure it needs reverted (although it looks nice). City boy77 (talk) 19:14, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I reverted this. The standard infobox should be used. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:25, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Re: Mercer Bears

I actually stumbled upon it here. I know that it is not properly sourced, but I am confident it is accurate as I have been able to confirm tenures for Fred Robbins (1914), Josh Cody (1920–1922), Stanley Robinson (1923–1925), Bernie Moore (1926–1928), Lake Russell (1929–1940), Bobby Hooks (1941) through separate queries through Google News. If this is not enough to keep it or more needs to be done, please let me know, and I will see what I can find. Patriarca12 (talk) 12:29, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

NCAA stats leaders navbox

Please stop removing them from season articles. It's an appropriate navbox to have on NCAA basketball season articles, and it's not like it's junking up the articles by being there. Thank you. Jrcla2 (talk) 03:30, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Jrcla2, it is junking them up. Template:NCAA Division I men's basketball statistical leaders doesn't link to any of the season articles, and shouldn't. So why should it be transcluded onto them? Jweiss11 (talk) 03:38, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

No, it's not. There are three 3 or 4 total navboxes on season articles, depending on how recent the season is (NCAA seasons, that year's team championship navbox, possibly that season's D1 conferences' seasons, and the stats leaders). The stats leaders provides a useful reference for historical records that would relate to the seasons in question. While the navbox does not link any seasons specifically, it serves an important function in being on those pages by allowing readers to find a directly-related set of NCAA Division I college basketball articles that may otherwise be less intuitive to find. Jrcla2 (talk) 03:44, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

It is not proper usage of navboxes to have Template:NCAA Division I men's basketball statistical leaders on every season page. Links to the stat leader lists should be integrated into season and player articles where appropriate. And this navbox certainly belongs on the stat lists themselves. But it's link crisis-style overkill to include them on all the national season pages. Can you explain why we have this navbox at 1919–20 NCAA men's basketball season, but not at Pete Maravich or LSU Tigers basketball or 2010–11 BYU Cougars men's basketball team?

Are you seriously going there? You know darn well the answer to your own question. And please refrain from using overly dramatic words like "crisis" to describe this. The reason it'd be on the 1919–20 article is because it would be on every season article for standardization (one of your buzzwords). Besides, I feel like this is a waste of both of our time arguing over this. Just let WP:CBBALL do something that's not the same as the Walmart-esque WP:CFB and please let it be. Jrcla2 (talk) 04:17, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

I honestly don't see why this navbox belongs on 1919–20 and not on those other ones. I really don't see it. It seems more apt on those others. And if we start putting it on all those, the crisis snowballs. I support standardization, but not misapplied standardization. My intention was to remove this navbox from all of the season pages, not just some of them. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:32, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Furthermore, there is nothing about this question that makes it specifically about college basketball. We could create an analogous set of lists and a navbox for college football stat leaders, and have the same issue on our hands. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:38, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

JW and Jrcla, you guys should know I have both of your talk pages on my watch list; it's one of the ways I silently keep up with what's going on around the CFB and CBB projects. So, I immediately noticed this debate over appropriate links and navboxes, which is a topic close to my heart. Generally, I am not in favor a proliferation of tangentially-related succession boxes and navboxes on pages. What makes me hesitate here is that WP:CBB has a family of apparently well-developed stats articles, and the related navbox may be appropriately used on some pages and not others. For instance, if we were arguing about the navbox's use on player, coach, team, and team season pages, my gut reaction would be "no," they do not belong and they contribute to the clutter. On the CBB national season pages, I'm not so sure, and I'd like to take the time over the weekend to study how the navbox fits on each of the pages and how much bottom-of-the-page clutter already exists, and then run all of the links and see where they lead. Why don't you guys let this one sit for a couple of days, and let's revisit the topic on Monday or Tuesday. I'll weigh in with a more well-informed opinion, and maybe we should solicit some input from some of the other CBB and CFB guys who have worked on the big navbox cleanup project over the last year. Both of you have been big contributors to that cleanup project, and I respect your opinions on point, so I don't want to prejduge this without doing my homework. What do you say, guys? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:19, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

DL, thanks for your input here. Taking a couple days to do some homework sounds reasonable to me. In the meantime, I'd like to propose two guidelines for navboxes. These may not have been codified anywhere yet, but perhaps should be, and are in keeping with general best practices to date:

1. A navbox should never be placed on a article that is not linked to from that navbox.
2. Navboxes should provide a closed loop of navigation, i.e. if a navbox links somewhere, you should be able to return to your origination via navbox link.

Placing the stat leaders template on the national season articles violates both of these principles. Jweiss11 (talk) 13:36, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Lists of Michigan Wolverines football statistical leaders

Should we put active players (Robinson, Roundtree, Hemingway, and Odoms) in bold on Lists of Michigan Wolverines football statistical leaders like they do in articles like List of Major League Baseball players with 2,000 hits and List of National Basketball Association career scoring leaders?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:18, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable to me. I keep active guys in bold here too: List of college football coaches with a .750 winning percentage. Jweiss11 (talk) 14:23, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Date format

I copied the ref from Roy Roundtree.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:56, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, there's a lot of bad formatting out there; see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Dates: "Do not use year-final numerical date formats (DD-MM-YYYY or MM-DD-YYYY), as they are ambiguous." Jweiss11 (talk) 21:10, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Re:Help with template projects

Yeah, I'll start looking into both of those templates. In particular, coming up with some standardized standings templates that can be used WP-wide sounds like a great plan. I'm pretty busy in real life for the next couple weeks, so I'm not sure how much time I will be able to devote to this until the last week of the month, but I'll make a start of it in any case. DeFaultRyan 20:55, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Awesome. Thanks so much for your interest. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:56, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Have a look at what I've got so far at User:DeFaultRyan/Sandbox2. I haven't yet separated the core layout stuff from the football-specific flags, but this is my first real attempt at tightening the spacing and layout of the infobox. If we like this layout, I'm going to separate the football/rankings/whatever flags out into the CFB standings templates, and create new standings templates that will do the layout, and have the CFB Standings templates use the new layout cores. After that, we can start reworking the college basketball standings templates, and after that, the world! DeFaultRyan 17:48, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

This looks good. Thanks for jumping on this project. The one comment I have right now is about nomenclature. I see you used "Infobox" in the naming scheme for the new templates in development. I've always interpreted the standings templates not as infoboxes strictly speaking, but as informational tables that can be placed in a number of places in the body of an article. Perhaps, "Table" is a better word here than "Infobox"? Jweiss11 (talk) 04:59, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

"Table" sounds great. I'm not wedded to any idea of nomenclature. On another topic, I've noticed that the college basketball templates have winning percentages. I'm not entirely sure if we want those on the football templates, but I can give it a try, and will likely leave it as an option that can be enabled. I'll come back here after giving it a try. DeFaultRyan 20:30, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Ok, so now I've got some demo code to show winning percentages as well moving code to decide whether to show winning percentages, championship flags, rankings, etc, out of the framework templates, and into the sport-specific "middle man" templates. Some more tweaking can be done to beef up the basketball version to support their various postseason/championship flags, but that's about it. Please check it out. If it looks good to you, we can start floating this major rev past the cfb project, followed by the cbb project. DeFaultRyan 23:29, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

DeFaultRyan, the spacing around the endashes still looks a little funny. I'm starting to think maybe we'd be better off without them and just spaces a la the existing CBB templates. Also, the standings figures seem to be bunched pretty hard to the right in a lot of these scenarios. Are you trying to leave room for the crazy W-L-T with divisions and winning pct scenario? That all being said, it might be worth getting some more CFB/CBB eyes on this now. Thanks again for all your effort here. This is great stuff. Jweiss11 (talk) 23:56, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Not sure what the dash spacing is all about. I might spend some time looking at it, but yeah, maybe we should just go to spaces. I moved the spacings hard to the right in an attempt to get the W/L columns tighter together. This was done by making the "team" column take up as much space as possible. In the absence of doing that, the W/L columns tended to spread out and take up the availabe space, and I haven't yet found an easy way to get some columns to stay narrow while letting others grow freely. Take a look at the sample now, with the team column less agressively taking up space. The W/L columns drift back to the left, but also spread out from each other. DeFaultRyan 22:30, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Yep, started revisiting it today and ran into a bizarre snag/interaction between piped links, tables, template parameters, and gremlins. You can see for yourself how the test case isn't formatting the table's title properly at Template:CFB Standings Start/testcases. I've resorted to asking the WP:Village Pump for help. Once I get that cleared up, I should be able to roll out the standardization changes to the CFB standings templates. After that, it shouldn't be too difficult to start using the new meta-templates in other sports. DeFaultRyan 04:55, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done The new standardized templates have been incorporated into both CFB and CBB. Note that I added a "dashes=" parameter to the entry template to enable/disable the display of endashes between win/loss columns. DeFaultRyan 16:55, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Jweiss11. You have new messages at TomCat4680's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

RE: Date Formats

Hey, Jweiss. I actually read over that later and it said that the YYYY-MM-DD was fine. Am I missing something? I checked through a couple of featured articles to be sure, and they used this format, as does the 2010 Michigan page. It isn't a big deal, I just want to be sure I get this right and don't have to change two pages worth of references. Thanks. SCS100 (talk) 02:02, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Whoops, never mind. I read the wrong part of the style guide. Thanks again. SCS100 (talk) 02:05, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay, no worries. There seems to be a lot of YYYY-MM-DD formatting in references out there, but best practices seem not to use it. Thanks for the response. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:53, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Big Ten Conference Athlete of the Year navbox

I know you have been cleaning these up. So you might want to comment at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_September_15#Template:Big_Ten_Conference_Athlete_of_the_Year_navbox.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:19, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up here. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:33, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Now that he has officially TFDed the others, I can call on these WP:CFB and WP:WPCBB to come by and comment without WP:CANVASSing.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:08, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, this is potential big pain the ass. I just dropped LtPowers a note about this. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:11, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Good to know you stick to the letter of the law, if not the spirit, Tony. Powers ^T 20:12, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Re: Sports award navboxes

Having a sitewide discussion would be nice, but I've found they rarely attract much attention -- or when they do attract attention, they rarely come to a consensus. Powers ^T 20:12, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps, the place to have this discussion is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports. I know that tends to be more of forum for lower-profile sports that don't have strong projects of their own, but maybe that should be the place to develop standards and discuss issues that are relevant across all sports? Jweiss11 (talk) 20:33, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Given the extreme attachment certain editors seem to have to these templates, I would prefer a wider community discussion than that. I was quite surprised to see the attitude these editors directed toward WP:HOCKEY, though I suppose I shouldn't have been; I recall the consternation when WP:HOCKEY refused to go along with gussying up hockey infoboxes with colored headers. Besides, this affects more than just sports, as you pointed out in one of the discussions. Powers ^T 20:41, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Some of the most productive conversations I've ever seen have been on User talk:Jimbo Wales. Jrcla2 (talk) 20:45, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm open to a discussion wherever, as commentary on the current TfD has suggested that this issue extends beyond just sports to the arts, sciences, and politics as well. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:43, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Cbl62

I am worried about Cbl62 (talk · contribs). Do you know anything? I just started watching Denard Robinson again.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:17, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

No, I don't know anything. Maybe he met a new girl and has better things to do theses days? Jweiss11 (talk) 23:26, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

Thanks for everything you do! We appreciate all your great contributions. Now, enjoy this cheeseburger, just for you! (But mind the fat...:P) ★Pinkstrawberry02★ (talk) 00:56, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Rider Broncs

Hello, Jweiss11. I just noticed that you removed Category:Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference from the Rider Broncs page. I'm curious as to why you did so. Other conferences have the member schools' teams listed in their conference categories. Eagle4000 (talk) 01:57, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Check out the way things are categorized under Category:Big Ten Conference. That's the way all of the conferences should be done. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:17, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Ducky Pond

Thanks for the expanding expertly the entry. By the way, Pond's Bates team lost the Glass Bowl.SLY111 (talk) 14:52, 19 September 2011 (UTC)SLY111

My pleasure. Thanks for the catch on the Glass Bowl. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:22, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Robinson's career stats

Shouldn't 2011 have an asterisk for the WMU game?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:23, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Not sure how to handle that. Michigan and ESPN count the stats from the WMU game. The NCAA doesn't. I brought this up at the CFB talk page. A note of some sort makes sense. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:25, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

All in the family

I sure hope you know these two older women: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUOtxCQJuvk&feature=player_embedded Jrcla2 (talk) 01:46, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Classy. ;) Jweiss11 (talk) 21:17, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks so much for your help in improving the Bill Lange (coach) article; it really looks much much better. I greatly appreciate all your hard work on this article. Remember (talk) 13:17, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

My pleasure to help out. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:31, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Ryan Miller

Really, Jweiss? Says who? You? The succession box was there first; it's up to editors who want to include the navbox to make the case to replace it. Powers ^T 13:35, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

The TfD on this navbox failed. As long as it exists, it should be transcluded onto all of the articles that it links to. First come, first serve is not a tenet we ought to honor here. It's antithetical to the notion of collaborative progress. Jweiss11 (talk) 14:55, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

That's no excuse for not discussing undoing the removal, but let's pick this up at Talk:Ryan Miller. Powers ^T 15:09, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't think any excuse was needed. As long as the navbox exists, it should be used where it is intended to be used. I think it would make sense to continue the discussion at the village pump. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:30, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Coaching records

So it isn't standard practice to put the career total in at the completion of the season?--SportsMaster (talk) 17:47, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

No, career totals should always be up to date. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:49, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

UM radio network

Leaving it off is fine with me - more than anything I was hoping to head off the efforts of an IP editor who's been adding lengthy "radio network" listings to various articles, and reinserting them when editors (reasonably in my view) remove them. See the history of Michigan Wolverines. Anyhow let's see what happens - JohnInDC (talk) 03:35, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, looks like this IP editor is bombing all the NFL teams pages with that stuff. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:36, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Bill Lange (coach)

Can you add his Kenyon AD tenure in his infobox? Thanks! Jrcla2 (talk) 14:32, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Done. Jweiss11 (talk) 14:34, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

FYI

Template_talk:DYK#Bill Lange (coach). Jrcla2 (talk) 20:19, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for noting me in the nomination. This was a nice, little collaboration. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:21, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

2008–09 Michigan Wolverines men's ice hockey team

Hi Jweiss11, hope all is well. I was making some changes to the Michigan Wolverines men's ice hockey season navbox where the individual seasons were named as n1–n2 Michigan Wolverines men's ice hockey team and changing the team to season per naming convention. until I came across 2008–09 Michigan Wolverines men's ice hockey team and noticed your edit from 19:31, 3 July 2010 which moved 2008–09 Michigan Wolverines men's ice hockey season to 2008–09 Michigan Wolverines men's ice hockey team. The edit summary contained "naming conventions" which appears to be opposite of the one I was going. So before going any further I thought I'd see where your naming convention was coming from and make sure we're on the same page. Bhockey10 (talk) 21:10, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

The naming convention for most college sports (e.g. football, basketball, baseball) is to use "team". See: Category:College sports team seasons in the United States by sport. After some digging around I see that ice hockey tends to use "season." Most North American pro sports (e.g. MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL) appear to use "season" as well. Would be nice to have some uniformity here. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:44, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Darn, we're both experienced editors and I've seen a lot of your work, so I figured it wasn't a newbie mistake. It looks like there's some contradicting naming conventions. One possible explanation with the college sport teams vs. seasons names, is that many other sports such as football (other than later bowl games), soccer, baseball, lacrosse etc.. are one semester in length, where college ice hockey is both fall and winter semesters- in more of a pro sport season-style format. It terms of uniformity, the vast majority of college ice hockey men's and women's season articles are named as seasons.

The length of season is irrelevant here. I think the college basketball season is about as long as the ice hockey season and they both wrap into a new calendar year. The situation we have is simply a case of two local standards not syncing globally. I actually think that the "season" format that college hockey and the pro sports use may be most appropriate for everything. You can see the college football/basketball/baseball season categories use "seasons" as well. But, man, that will be a painful exercise to move everything to the "season" standard. We're talking a couple thousand articles at least here. Yikes. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:29, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I noticed that too, I think Michigan football has a seasons navbox but indidual seasons are named as teams. College hockey doesn't seem to have the problem with thousands of articles needing to be moved so if it's okay with you I'll change 2008–09 Michigan Wolverines men's ice hockey team back to 2008–09 Michigan Wolverines men's ice hockey season since the vast majority of college hockey season articles are named as seasons. I just wanted to make sure it was what it looked like, two different naming conventions/local standards, and that you didn't know something I didn't with that situation. Bhockey10 (talk) 19:07, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

That sounds okay to me until we come up with a global solution. I think most of the Michigan hockey articles were created by User:TonyTheTiger, who's pretty well tied in with the college football and college basketball projects, so that's probably why he went with "team". Jweiss11 (talk) 19:11, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I added the proper template for an admin to complete the move for the said Michigan hockey article, corrected the navbox links, and checked other hockey seasons, other than a few UAH season articles needing the same, all other were already fine. So at least now everything will be uniform across one of the college sports. Thanks for your help. Happy Editing! Bhockey10 (talk) 21:49, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

College coach infobox: empty fields

JW, just saw your recent edit to the "Bob Woodruff (American football)" article----why are you adding empty, non-applicable fields to the infobox? Empty, never-to-be-used fields just encourage future vandalism . . . . Woodruff's dead. We're never going to add his "current team" or "current record," nor is he ever going to be inducted into the College Basketball Hall of Fame (!). LOL Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:32, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Those fields are far more likely to induce well-intentioned editors to copy and paste the infobox in a standard form into new articles than they are to promote vandalism. But if they bother you, then I suppose they can be deleted. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:37, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Also, I've noticed that you and Strikehold are fond of italicizing infobox images captions. If those should be capitalized, why don't we just auto-format them in the template? Jweiss11 (talk) 22:40, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Basketball or College Basketball?

I haven't done a lot of searching of other pages, but I noticed that 2011–12 Butler Bulldogs men's basketball team's talk page has the Wikiproject basketball template and not the Wikiproject College Basketball. Is this correct? If not, should they both be listed or only Wikiproject College Basketball? City boy77 (talk) 23:33, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

That one should have just the Wikiproject College Basketball tag. Wikiproject Basketball is for basic basketball concepts and stuff outside of the NBA and college basketball. Jweiss11 (talk) 23:58, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

NFLPA

Hey, just wanted to say thanks for the help on the page. I really appreciate it. The onyl edit I reverted was capitalizing the "G" in "NFLPA game." Typically all words after the first word in a section heading aren't capitalized. I don't think this changes even with an abbreviation, but I could be wrong. Thanks again. --TravisBernard (talk) 17:03, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

I saw your post at the WikiProject NFL talk page. My pleasure to help out. That "G" should indeed be capitalized. While you are correct about sentence case for section headers, "NFLPA Game" appears to be a proper noun, so it should be capitalized. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:14, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Good to know. It's always great to learn about technicalities with formatting. Thanks for the heads up. --TravisBernard (talk) 20:02, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

AA templates

I am unsure what the proper names are for the various periods and welcome renaming by someone in the know. I adapted them from something that was red and did not want to use the default colors.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:55, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Bill Lange (coach)

The DYK project (nominate) 00:09, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Jordan Kovacs vs. NW

I am trying to find a WP:RS stating that Jordan Kovacs had two fourth down solo tackles for a loss, but all the sources I have checked only document one.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 10:02, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

I can source that he had 2 tackles for a loss, but sources only mention one as being on fourth down (the sack on Persa), but the Adonis Smith rush for a loss of 1 yard to the Mich 33 on 4th and 1 at MICH 32 with Michigan trailing 14–7 is not noted in any stories I see.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 10:32, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

This one that is omitted, IMO, was the turning point in the game. If NW made that first down, they might have won the game.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:13, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Tony, the play-by-play here ([1]) confirms Kovacs' tackle on 4th and 1 in the first quarter. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:40, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. (2nd quarter BTW).--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:28, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Template:University of Arkansas

What is your reason for removing the images from Template:University of Arkansas? Brandonrush (talk) 17:26, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

My main goal was to standardize the code for this template using Template:Navbox and set it to autocollapse. I think the images in navbox templates probably aren't the best practice because navboxes should really be about providing navigation through links with a minimum of other content and adornment. That being said, I'm not sure what the consensus is about including images in navboxes, so I have no particular problem with reintroducing the images, if it can be doing in a standardized way. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:02, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

AP Poll vs Coach's Poll Help

Hello, Ive edited most of the top 25 college football teams. If you have a little time, could you check my work and see what you think? Thank you for your help. Rocketmaniac ^RT 23:31, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Rocketmaniac, I took a look at a couple of these edits of yours. What you've done with the "Rank" column looks good. You also want to add the Coaches' Poll ranking in the "Opponent" column where appropriate. For example, on 2011 Virginia Tech Hokies football team, both rankings should be listed for Clemson on October 1. Thanks for you work on this. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:05, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh yea... Good point. This then brings up the discussion of the rankings listed in the Game Notes section? Dual rankings here? or if only one rank/poll... Which one? I think there were 2 "undo's". Rocketmaniac ^RT 17:18, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Whenever you've got something in table or list form, both major polls should be included side by side. In prose, the rules don't have to be as hard and fast. In the case that the AP and Coaches rank is the same, you should be able to get away with just "ranked #X" without specifying the poll. In cases where the two rankings differ, you may want to be wordier and more specific. I see there's been a lot of undos on this. We need to have discussion at the College football talk page. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:21, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, has you might have seen..... ALL of my work was totally undo in 2 minutes flat!!!!. I wish an admin would jump into this conversation. Anyway, Im on a short vacation, spending time with my daughter for her 12th birthday. Besides, Im not in the mood to work anymore on these pages just to have someone undo it. This is why I posted a couple of "comments/questions" before I acted. I was afraid this would happen. Anyway, I will talk (well message)to you later, Randy AKA Rocketmaniac ^RT 18:59, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry that your efforts got thwarted a bit. I working on sorting this out at WikiProject College football. I didn't think this would be such a hot issue and thought it has been largely settled already. Thanks again for your help. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:05, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Red templates

If they are default, they are too easily confused with other templates like basketball AAs. E.g. in 1925, see Bennie Oosterbaan. Can't we make them some other color?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:47, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't think there's any justification to color them anything other than the default, per WP:NAV. There are no applicable brand colors here. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:53, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Art Clokey

Hey I appreciate your edits on the Art_Clokey page. However, I would just like to let you know that Husnain22 has again reverted your changes and is vandalizing the page to promote his own website.

Please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Art_Clokey&action=historysubmit&diff=455199146&oldid=455198097

I would appreciate it if you could help undo his vandalism and possibly report him, as the page is edit-protected.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Southhamptom (talk • contribs) 13:03, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

RE: 1934 rankings

Hello, Jweiss11. You have new messages at OCNative's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

For what it's worth

Thanks re: User:NCDane. I generally don't have issues with him as an editor, mainly because I haven't come across him before, but the agenda for the large bold font is so out there that I literally didn't know what else to say on the matter. I'm sure the college football core has seen their share of "wtf?" kinds of edits by new editors as well. Jrcla2 (talk) 03:10, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, the large bold font is wacky. Seems this editor has a track record of not getting the point. Yeah, we've had plenty of wtf edits on college football. Here's a discussion re: one of my favorites from last year: User talk:ChaseFWilson. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:16, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

I've never heard of a college football "state title" before. ChaseFWilson was probably some drunk Georgia Tech student trying to pad his school's coach's article. Jrcla2 (talk) 03:23, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Michigan football template

I'm starting to look at the big changes you've made to the template. I like many of the changes. Not so sure about others. Here are some preliminary thoughts:

• The one thing I strongly disagree with is the "Games" section. Putting these individual games in the template gives them FAR more prominence than they warrant. The one truly "legendary" game is the Snow Bowl, and if we wanted to include that in the template, it could go in a section called "Lore" which would be a rename of your "Pageantry" section.
• I re-inserted "Hall of Honor" in the "People" group. I agree with eliminating other groups (including Heisman winners, etc.) that are not separate articles.
• I do not agree with having a redlink for Bowl Games.
• I wonder if there's some way to code national championship years to look different in the "Season" section. It would be nice to have those seasons featured somehow.Cbl62 (talk) 21:21, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm working on a post to the CFB talk page about this. Let's open up the discussion there to get more people involved. I understand your point about the red link to the bowl list. However, this article ought to be created, a la List of Alabama Crimson Tide bowl games. There's also a "red" link to List of Michigan Wolverines football seasons (though it isn't red in the navbox). Jweiss11 (talk) 21:29, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

If the national championship seasons can't be highlighted, then they should be re-inserted as a separate group. Cbl62 (talk) 21:33, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Guys, I know that you are test-driving this as a possible prototype for the new all-in-one CFB program navbox. Before this gets set in stone, I would urge you to reconsider the inclusion of the coaching succession in the program navbox. In college sports, the history of any given program is intimately tied to the coaches who have led the program, far more so than individual players. Impact players may start for two or three years; impact coaches can have tenures that run into the decades. Apart from a separate "history of" article, which does not exist for every college sports team (and even fewer outside of CFB), there is no better source for the program's evolution than the coaches' biographies. I earnestly believe the coaches' bios should be linked to the program navbox. I had been waiting to weigh in on this at the on-going CBB discussion until it had reached critical mass, and I guess it's now time to do so . . . . BTW, JW, there is no reason why exceptions cannot be made to the general rule that every article listed in a given navbox must transclude that navbox. I have long since rationalized this as team navboxes go on team pages, and coaching succession navboxes go on coach pages, and so on. I would ask you two to consider this. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:36, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

DL, this is a good point. I think this gap can be bridged with List of Michigan Wolverines head football coaches, which is indeed in the main team navbox. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:49, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

JW -- You made huge changes to the navbox. I then made two changes, which you immediately reverted. This is supposed to be a collaboration, not JW's way or the highway. Your insistence on having things your is pissing me off big time. Cbl62 (talk) 21:38, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Okay, let's leave the hall of honor link in for now. I wanted to keep the games links in so as to include them in the discussion. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

You reverted me yet again on individual "Game" section with the edit summary, We've decided they are important enough to have their own articles, right?" That's nonsensical. We've got articles about hundreds of things related to Michigan football that have no place in an overall template. How in the world is the result of the 2001 Michigan State game more important than (i) national championships, or (ii) coaching progression? ICbl62 (talk) 21:50, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

It's not nonsensical. The point of navbox is not to summarize the most important point of a subject. Its purpose it provide links to the articles that exist about the subject. The navbox indeed has a link to the list of coaches. It also links to each of the Michigan's 11 nat'l champ seasons. We have an article for the 2001 Michigan State game. But we don't have an article summarizing Michigan's nat'l titles. Perhaps the Michigan State game should be CFD'd and merged into the 2001 season article? Jweiss11 (talk) 21:54, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Just because I don't think the 2001 MSU game belongs in the overall template doesn't mean it should be deleted. Entirely different standards. There are lots of Michigan football articles that aren't linked (directly or indirectly) in the template (e.g., assistant coaches, athletic directors, or important figures like Don Canham, Albert Pattengill, Ralph W. Aigler, Charles A. Baird, and Keene Fitzpatrick). The overall template need not include every topic in the Michigan football universe. Cbl62 (talk) 22:11, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Some of these guys fall into a more nebulous "founding fathers" group or, in the case of Canham, are simply the Michigan AD, not to diminish the specific impact he had on the football program. In terms of bio articles, Michigan is far more developed that any other football program, thanks, of course, largely to you. I think if we delved into the history of any program, we'd find analogous guys like these Michigan ones. That all being said, my idea was to leave specific people off of the team navboxes. Jweiss11 (talk) 23:22, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

That's precisely my point! I'm not saying we should put individual people on the template (with possible exceptions for current coaching staff and past head coaches). Just the opposite. I agree with the approach to not listing specific people. For the exactly that same reason (focusing on the bigger picture), we should likewise not be listing specific games. Cbl62 (talk) 00:07, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

You appear to believe that you now "own" the Michigan footbal template. You have reverted five of my edits in the past 24 hours. This is not consistent with collaboration. Cbl62 (talk) 18:43, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Is there a problem with the last "revert" to reinstate the bowl games link? I created that redirect and tagged it as "Needed" class for the CFB project. Again, the larger point for right now was to provide fodder for the discussion, and to that end, find a place in the navbox for all articles for any given program. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:53, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there is a problem with the last revert (though the bigger concern is with the "ownership" conduct). We ought not to be linking to a non-existent article. And given that the main Michigan Wolverines football article already includes a complete list of the bowl games, I'm not convinced a separate bowl game list is needed. Cbl62 (talk) 06:39, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

It's you who is guilty of the ownership. My posture has been one of using the Michigan template as living example in practice (for the time being) to foster discussion and allow us all to contemplate the range of possible articles that exist out there for any given program, and how we may best organize that set in a standardized fashion that services the whole landscape of college football and beyond. You, on the other hand, wield all sorts of subjective assessments that often function in defense of subjects you happen to have already invested a lot of time working on (not to diminish those efforts themselves, because they are great). You are the owner, especially when it comes to Michigan football, my fellow Wolverine-rooting friend. Jweiss11 (talk) 08:45, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Link to main mascot article

Hey there, I appreciate your hard work on college football articles, and agree with the vast majority of the changes you make. So of course, I'm writing about the exception: I don't think it's a good idea to remove the link to the main "mascot" article from the football articles. I've seen you make this change a couple of times, most recently, on the delinking of Stanford Cardinal from Stanford Cardinal football, and you might be intending to do it in more articles, so I wanted to discuss it first. It seems like either the infobox or the first line of the lede should continue to have that link. Both aren't necessary; it seems to me that people might come to the article to read about the football team, but would be interested in learning more about the general sports history of the school and/or the history of the athletic mascot. Currently there's no easy way to do that, and it's not obvious to the casual reader that such an article might even exist. We should figure out a place to provide that link to show the richness of the encyclopedia. Let me know what you think. --Esprqii (talk) 20:19, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Esprqii, thanks for the message. Yeah, I've been cleaning up and standardizing a few elements including the infobox title field in the main program articles. I agree that a prominent link to the main athletic program article is useful, but it shouldn't be in the infobox title or the statement of the subject in the lead. Those should not be wikilinked. Perhaps a new field in the infobox or a hat note for those links? Jweiss11 (talk) 20:32, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, Template:Infobox NCAA football school says that the TeamName parameter can contain links. My preference would be to put them there, e.g., Stanford Cardinal football. I don't think any other parameter in the template would be appropriate. You're right that it shouldn't go in the bolded part of the intro sentence (as per WP:MOSINTRO) but it could go soon afterward. At a minimum, I'd suggest that before removing the link, we should make sure that the lede paragraph contains a reference to the mascot article somewhere. The Oregon Ducks football article actually does this pretty well. I think I'll add something similar to the Stanford article.

On a side note, most of these team articles get pretty messy past the first paragraph or so, being haphazardly puffed up by fans and devolving into long lists, tables, unsourced fan prose, etc. Any opinion on the best ones out there, or good models? That Oregon one, for example, goes on waaaay too long. --Esprqii (talk) 22:57, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Weaving links to Stanford Cardinal into the lead as you've done is a good move. The guidelines and examples at Template:Infobox NCAA football school need some work. There is mention of external link usage in many of the fields. What kind of external links you would want there? The TeamName field in the example is dreadful: [[University of Mississippi]] (Ole Miss)<br>Rebels. Yikes. You're right about the team articles getting messy. There are many like I like parts of, but few that I think are really excellent top to bottom. Pittsburgh Panthers football has a nice history section, but I think the tables down need some work. I believe Washington & Jefferson Presidents football is only GA-quality team article out there. I've done a lot of work on Michigan Wolverines football. It doesn't really have a body, but the lead is good and I think the tables are pretty clean, though perhaps some should be broken out into their own articles. Jweiss11 (talk) 00:53, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

That W&J football article is a really good model, especially with all the stuff that gets broken out (list of coaches, seasons, etc.) to keep the article focused. Might be interesting to try and get it to be a Featured Article, which might really solidify it as the gold standard for these kinds of articles. --Esprqii (talk) 20:57, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Sounds looks a good idea. May be worth circling back with GrapedApe, who's been the main guy on the W&J article, about getting it to FA-status. Let me know if I can help. Thanks. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:15, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Eddie Robinson (American football coach)

Hi, I think you did something to Eddie Robinson that messed up the external links for find a grave that I put in. Can you please take a look at it and fix whatever you did or whatever I did. Thanks 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:13, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

cool, thanks I just figured out how to do it 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:20, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

The Find a Grave link looks to be working fine. I just cleaned it up a little so it just displays "Eddie Robinson" without the parenthetical qualifier. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:21, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Templates are complicated for me 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:24, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

No worries. Give me a shout if you need help or have questions with anything. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Bill Daley photo

I noticed you uploaded a photo of Bill Daley. It's a great photo, but I'm not sure it meets fair use standards. Your rationale states, "There is no free alternative available, and the subject is deceased." I though Daley was still alive. If so, fair use may not be appropriate. Did Daley die? If so, we should add a date of death to the article with sourcing. Cbl62 (talk) 07:16, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, this was a bit of slip-up on my part. I thought I read a DOD there, but obviously I was mistaken. Daley appears to be alive and well. I'm pretty sure I've seen a fair use image rationale for living people somewhere. But if I can't track that down, or if that's not kosher anyway, then this image should be deleted. Sorry for the messiness here. Jweiss11 (talk) 13:47, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't generally allow fair use images for living people, so this should probably be deleted. Cbl62 (talk) 20:22, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Give me a couple days to rack my brain and see I can dig up an example of fair use for living people. If I can't find anything, then let's delete it. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:24, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Cbl, I found an example and it's one of your uploads: File:Stan Noskin.png. Is fair use okay here? Jweiss11 (talk) 07:28, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Sure enough. I try to avoid uploading images of living people, as it's my understanding that our Wikipedia policies don't allow it. I don't recall my thinking on Noskin, may have been unsure if he was still alive. Also, there's some question as to whether the Michiganensian yearbooks from 1923 at least through the 1950s have fallen into public domain. Copyright renewal is required to keep it in place. I've been meaning to check into that at some point. Cbl62 (talk) 19:06, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Nice work on the legalese to open up the later Michiganensian stuff. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:42, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Tagging

Yeah, I can do that. Let me know what you need, although the next week is gonna be kind of busy for me. SCS100 (talk) 02:49, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

One clarification item needed. Do you mean the overall category in the first link, or do you mean every page within every category as well as the categories. I want to make sure I get this right. Thanks. SCS100 (talk) 03:07, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. The first one of the three that you gave me is complete, and I'll get to the other two when I have time. SCS100 (talk)

Awesome. Thank you! Jweiss11 (talk) 15:24, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in finishing this, I was busy the last couple of the weeks. Anyways, all three of the categories that you gave me are complete. SCS100 (talk) 05:21, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

No worries on the timing. Great job. If you want more wiki-scut work like this, I've got more. :) And if you need my help with anything, just holler. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:27, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

The Citadel football

As a heads up, new user Billcasey905 is a Citadel grad and has concentrated on Citadel football articles. He could be an unofficially signed up WP:CFB contributor for that school. Jrcla2 (talk) 03:37, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks for the heads up. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:39, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Jweiss11/Archives/2011 (Jul–Dec)! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Overlinking

The consensus is pretty solid against linking routine terms like United States in biographical articles, particularly biographies of Americans. It serves no useful purpose. Overlinking like this is rampant. A good discussion of the topic can be found at User:Tony1/Silliest wikilink of the month award. Of the examples you gave, the Tim Duncan article merely links United States in a medal table, not in the article body. Also, I don't see a wikilink to United States in the Rudolph Cartier article. Cbl62 (talk) 05:58, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

See also WP:OVERLINK: "Avoid linking the names of major geographic features and locations, languages, religions, and common professions." The United States is certainly a major geographic location. Cbl62 (talk) 06:06, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

The piping to "American" is different. But even in the Duncan article, that piping was added last month, years after the article received feature article status. Cbl62 (talk) 06:11, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Two separate issues. The overlinking of a major geographic location is clearly contrary to WP:OVERLINK. On the second issue you raised, if you're looking for a less wordy way to build in the person's nationality, I don't have any objection to saying someone is "an American football player and coach." But saying "Joe Smith was an American football player in the United States" just doesn't read like professionally written encyclopedic content. It reads very poorly IMO opinion. Cbl62 (talk) 06:28, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I actually don't like the wording or the overlinking, as I mentioned. Two separate issues. The overlinking of United States is a clear violation of WP:OVERLINK, so I am fixing those. The wording issue is stylistic, and I'd ask you to reconsider, as it really does read poorly. Cbl62 (talk) 06:38, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

This is not a clear violation of WP:OVERLINK. You admit that you're okay with the link in the Duncan article. Today's feature article has a link to the subject's nation in its lead. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:44, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I agree with you we need to clean up the "crapfests." But this issue is clear. Major geographic locations are not to be wikilinked. That has been interpreted by some to prohibit links to places like "California" and "Texas." Do you think the "United States" is not a major geographic location??? Cbl62 (talk) 06:45, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

And yet we have a link to "Austria" in today's featured article. And links to the "United States" in other FAs. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:49, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I thought the issue is pretty cut and dried, but since you object, I've asked for input on the issue from the wikilinking experts at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Linking. Cbl62 (talk) 06:57, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Jweiss, please do not link United States in such articles. It is rare for this item to be useful as a wikilink, and on rare occasions where a link might be useful, it should generally be to a section or daughter article of the United States. It's the English WP, and the native-speaking countries are expected to be commonplace, even among visitors from other languages. "Austria" is a borderline case: I'd usually avoid it unless such an unfocused article really is useful in a context. Tony (talk) 07:20, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

What is being lost here is that WP:MOS states explicitly that "[t]he opening paragraph should have . . . [c]ontext (location, nationality, or ethnicity)[.] In most modern-day cases this will mean the country of which the person is a citizen or national, or was a citizen when the person became notable." To be crystal clear, the well-written lede of a biography of a notable sports personality should include the nationality of the subject. Regardless of whether the nationality of the subject is linked or not, the biography of every well-written American athlete or coach should include a statement of the subject's "American" nationality. There should be no debate about this. Period.

What makes this discussion a wee bit interesting are the syntactical problems of stating the subject's American nationality in the same sentence where a link to "American football" is also present, so as to distinguish the American sport from soccer. To state the obvious, most of the rest of the English-speaking world calls soccer "football" or "association football." Personally, I don't have a problem piping the link for "American football" into "football," but some non-American editors get apoplectic about the need to display "American football" because they are convinced "football" is confusing to non-American readers. (These are the same folks that get all pissy about forcing American editors to use British style "logical quotation" in articles about purely American subjects.) Whatever. The piped link "American football|football" makes that distinction perfectly clear, as does the American context and such other descriptors as "NFL," "NCAA," "college football," etc. Ironically, in articles on which I've worked, the leads of all biographies about American athletes who play association football contain a piped link from "association football" to "soccer," in keeping with standard American sports usage and MOS's ENGVAR guidelines.

BTW, if we feel compelled to include a geographic link in the lede of an American sports biography, I have often used "Smith was a native of West Virginia," or a similar construction, reserving a more specific linked statement of the subject's birthplace or hometown (e.g. "Fairmont, West Virginia") for the "early years" section of the article. Bottom line: every biographical article should expressly state the subject's nationality per MOSBIO, whether it's linked or not. If the nationality is not linked for the reasons stated above, there are other geographical links that may be employed in the lede or body text, such as the subject's native state or region, hometown or birthplace. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 10:38, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

If American football/er (as a single link) appears at the opening or anywhere else, whether linked, piped, or normal, the default is clearly that the player is American. If of another nationality, you'd say so, wouldn't you? (A Canadian-born player of American football?) You certainly don't need a link to the country article, either, unless to "[[Sport in Mongolia|Mongolian]]" or "[[Mongolia#Culture and sport|Mongolian]]". Give readers lots of overgeneralised link and piped choices and they'll probably pass on all of the invitations. Give them one in a statement and they might, just might, if you're lucky, click—I'd count on one in a hundred readers, or fewer. Probably less likely at the top anyway, since the reader has come to the article to read about that specific topic. This is why the more logical place for country-related links in bios is at the bottom "See also" section, where the reader is more likely to be ready to travel via links.

Elna Baker

Very weird. I just noticed this diff in my edit history. It was made while I was at work today and not on Wikipedia. It looks like someone may have hacked my account. I have no idea how someone could have done this, but I will be changing my password to try to prevent it from happening again. Cbl62 (talk) 04:44, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that's weird. No worries on that one. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:49, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Template:Michigan Wolverines football navbox

I'm fine with having the NC years highlighted in the seasons grouping. The particular color block scheming doesn't look real good, but the concept is fine. Cbl62 (talk) 19:57, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

H O Stickney

Any chance you can access this article also? [2] May help to tie Highland Stickney and Hiram O. Stickney together... – Connormah (talk) 21:49, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I was just looking at that. Unfortunately, I can't access that article. One of the cited sources for Highland Stickney say he was an All-American at Yale, but there's no Stickney listed in the Yale media guide (http://issuu.com/ivyleaguemanual/docs/yale-football-2009-opt). Jweiss11 (talk) 21:56, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I just dug up the one for the Highland Stickney that coached for OSU - perhaps it's a misunderstanding? Haven't been able to find any association with the Hiland from Harvard to the Oregon coach, though. Something is telling me that this is probably a match, but I can't verify it yet. Maybe Cbl62 can access it, I'll try. – Connormah (talk) 22:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

More confusion! An autobio by Dorothy Stickney, "Stickney"+AND+"Yale"+AND+"football"+-Harvard&dq="Stickney"+AND+"Yale"+AND+"football"+-Harvard&hl=en&ei=-nesTvupIYSeiQKZ57CMCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDYQ6AEwAg says: "The two were Highland Orlando, who coached football at Yale, became a professional polo player, and died young of an athlete's heart. The other was Victor Hugo who went to Dakota Territory to be a doctor. " – Connormah (talk) 22:05, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, would be great to get at that Boston Globe article. It may solve the little mystery here. Let me know if you access it or find anything else. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:22, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Probably a match. Since he died in Portland, Oregon, the Oregon coaching gig must have been his last, and he must have settled there...if only we could get confirmation... – Connormah (talk) 22:31, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Follow up on "American football coach in the United States"

Having now gone through dozens of college football coaching articles that use an opening sentence identifying the person as "an American football coach in the United States," here are my views.

(1) The formulation is not a model of either precision or concision. When you look at our best, feature level sports biography articles, none of them open with a phrase specifying that the person's coaching or playing career took place "in the United States."

(2) The formulation does not state the person's nationality. It merely provides locational information indicating that the person coached the game "in the United States." Where the lead otherwise provides more precise locational information on where the person coached, adding "in the United States" is unnecessary. See, e.g., M. Griffin (lead coneys that his coaching career took place in Alabama).

(3) There are some articles with "bare bones" leads where the "in the United States" formulation arguably has some utility. See, e.g., Fred Clapp. I have been leaving those intact. However, even in those cases, the lead should ultimately be improved to a point where "in the United States" eventually becomes unneeded. Per our prior discussion, and pursuant to WP:OVERLINK, the term "United States" should not be wikilinked in articles where it remains.

(4) Is it essential to denote the person's nationality? Probably not. Many feature level sports biographies don't mention the person's nationality in the lead –- Scott Zolak, Tyrone Wheatley, Sandy Koufax, Jackie Robinson, Stan Musial, J. R. Richard. And in the case of American football, there's a reasonable presumption that the players/coaches are American. That said, I don't take the position that a nationality designator is inappropriate. If someone feels it's useful to identify a football player or coach's nationality, I think the best (certainly not the only) way to do that is by saying, "Joe Smith was an American football player and coach ..." Another (but less flowing) approach would be, "Joe Smith was an American player and coach of American football." In either of those cases, it appears that per WP:OVERLINK, the American nationality should not be piped to the "United States" article. Examples of recent feature level sports biography articles that avoid such a wikilink include Ozzie Smith, Rogers Hornsby, Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan, and Bill Russell.

I respect and appreciate the effort you put into improving college football articles, and I'd welcome your help in trying to fix the articles that still include the phrase. Of course, I realize you may have other priorities. Cbl62 (talk) 18:01, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Further to point (4) above, one other reasonable way of designating a coach's nationality can be found at George E. Pyle and Jimbo Fisher ("is an American college football coach and former player.") Cbl62 (talk) 18:50, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Cbl, thanks for your comments here. The arguments that you and others have made have forced me to think about this item with a bit more rigor than I had before and reweigh the costs of the benefits of the "in the United States" phrase. As this point, I agree with you, more or less, that's it's safe to assume by default that an American football person is an American flourishing primarily in the United States, and so those attributes doesn't need to be explicitly stated. I think the "American college football" verbiage, a la the Pyle and Fisher articles, is okay as long as the subject didn't coach or play notably at another level. Even for a guy who coached only high school in addition to college, I'd prefer to summarize him as an American football coach. I also think that "American football" should not be piped to "football" in its first appearance in an article to dispel any ambiguity and since the word "American" is not merely a parenthetical qualifier, but has been deem to be titular element of the concept "American football". Finally, I think that the delinking of countries should be far more ecumenicial, i.e. not just applicable to the United States and other natively Anglophone places like the UK. For example, on the FA-rated Mariano Rivera article, "Panamanian" is still linked to Panama. Is Rivera's relationship to Panama any more germane in the lead than Ozzie Smith's to the United States? That's an issue I plan to take up at MOS Linking talk page. My top long-term priority is still to continue to sweep through coaching biographies and see that they have a clean infobox, record table, and other standardized elements, a decent, if brief, lead, hopefully a reference or two to back up some key facts, and that they are generally bereft of egregious garbage. So, I'll amend my SOP accordingly regarding this item. Finally, I appreciate your efforts to go out and implement your arguments on a vast numbers of articles this weekend. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:40, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Kelly

Hello, Jweiss11. You have new messages at Connormah's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

– Connormah (talk) 04:20, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

See [3] - says he attended Butler in 1899 to 1904 and graduated Dartmouth in 1897. – Connormah (talk) 04:29, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

The MD degree was from Indiana Medical College in 1906 also [4] – Connormah (talk) 04:30, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Happy to help. – Connormah (talk) 04:38, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Robinson's was probably from a Draft Card - let me see if I can pull it up. – Connormah (talk) 22:06, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

G. H. Harvey and M. H. Harvey

This source says that G. H. Harvey coached Alabama and Auburn, and my head hurts too much at the moment trying to search for a DOD fo D. M. Balliet - could you look into this one? M. H. Harvey is listed as an Auburn coach as well...*head explodes* – Connormah (talk) 03:14, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

My guess is that item on rolltide.com is a typo and they meant M. H. Harvey. Will see if I can track down a DOD on Balliet. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:29, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Going to try to to get some info on G.H., thanks for searching for Balliet. He was a fairly prominent Princeton player, there's 16 pages of articles mentioning him in Google News... – Connormah (talk) 04:01, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Finally got Balliet's DOD - was harder that I thought - he died in 1960! – Connormah (talk) 04:35, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Cool. Nice job. Is that Lebanon Daily News article available somewhere online? Jweiss11 (talk) 04:39, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Ancestry - I asked Cbl if he can get it. – Connormah (talk) 04:42, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Cbl's got the connect with the Mormons, huh? Jweiss11 (talk) 04:44, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I thought that was the FamilySearch library that was LDS run? I scoured it and couldn't find anything...didn't expect the DOD to be as late as 1960, and records are thin at the time period. On a side note, I will be completely flabbergasted if I am able to find anything on GH Harvey or FM Hall of Auburn. – Connormah (talk) 04:48, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Ancestry was started by LDS guys too. I'm going to work on fleshing out Balliet a little with what we've got. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:50, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

If you're up to a challenge, could you do searching for G. H. Harvey , L. N. Morris and F. M. Hall? I've only been able to find Harvey's full name and both of their alma mater. Morris I have found nothing. Good luck if you do decide to look... – Connormah (talk) 22:39, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Re'd Caraway on my talk. – Connormah (talk) 01:55, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

1988–89 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team assistant coaches

We need to add the Assistant coaches to the 1988–89 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team article. Do you know how to find out this information?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:08, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Let me see if I can dig something up here. In the meantime, championship navboxes should go below head coaching navboxes, e.g. see my edit on Dave Leitao. Thanks. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:12, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

I am just seeing this and I am done with adding all the assistant coaches I could find. I do not understand what the proper ordering is for infoboxes. Some coaches separate out awards and championships and others have all their templates as one. I may go back and redo these all. I assume you are reading the CBB talk page and saw my complete report on the state of assistant coaches. It is not just Michigan 1989 that needs help.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:55, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Though I don't think it's been formally codified anywhere, the general order I try to stick to with navboxes is as follows:

1. Positional tenure history navboxes (e.g. coach, athletic director, general manager, playing position) sorted in chronological order with respect to the subject's tenure
2. Current conference or league-wide positional navboxes
3. Championships and inaugural team navboxes, sorted chronologically
4. Yearly award navboxes, sorted alphabetically by award name
5. Career honor navboxes (e.g. halls of fame), sorted by importance

Positional tenure history navboxes and current positional navboxes should appear ungrouped. If there are more than two or three team, award, and honor navboxes, those should be collapsed into a grouping. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:51, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Where do you put Basketball program boxes in this scheme (e.g., Mike Hopkins (basketball))? Do you count them like hall of fame and retired number, since they are often included for that reason?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:09, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

There's push a push to purge these team-wide navboxes from bio articles. For now, in case like Hopkins, I'd leave it at the top, since its functioning to frame his current position. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:11, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

What about pro franchise boxes which include head coach succession boxes.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:23, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Also I think Steve Lavin would look better with his UCLA boxes together. Thoughts?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:29, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

If you see a franchise navbox paired with a head coach succession navbox for that same franchise, I'd delete the franchise navbox. I'd cleaned up all of the NFL coaches accordingly this summer when I upgraded the NFL coaching succession boxes to the form first developed for college football and basketball (full names, parenthetical years of tenure). Jrcla2 was working on getting this done for the NBA and had the green light from the NBA project, but I'm not sure where he stands with that. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:32, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Tony, you have a point about aesthetic value of grouping like colors together. But I think it's more important that we develop meaningful and systematic organization for the navboxes. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:41, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

I have reordered all the assistant navboxes. The remaining concerns are Jim O'Brien (basketball, born 1952), Alvin Gentry, Tim Grgurich. Grgurich is a case where we could have team color groupings by swapping one pair of infoboxes out of the prescribed order. I think these three are in the preferred order, but let me know if they should be changed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:03, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Clinton L. Hare

Very nice work on Clinton L. Hare. It's not easy fleshing out a full biography on a football figure from this era, and your work on this one is impressive. In my opinion, it rates at least one step, and maybe two steps, higher than the "C" status you assigned it earlier today. Although I'm not sure where (if anywhere) it's written, it has always been my understanding that we ought not rate our own work (unless it's a stub). Do you know if there is something in policy or guidance one way or the other? Cbl62 (talk) 18:01, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your compliments. The countless bio articles you've written for old-time sportspeople have no doubt set a great example for me and others. I'm not sure if there's an official policy on assessing your own work, but it accepted, at least among the CFB crowd, that rating your own work as Stub or Start class as appropriate is clearly non-controversial. The Hare article seems C class, at least, to me, and I tend to lean toward the lower class when in doubt. I personally don't have a problem with editors rating their own work C or B class, as long it's done in good faith and that they defer to other editors who deem to change the assessment. Obviously, any thing higher than B class has to go through an official peer review. I'm hesitant, at least for right now, about pushing the Hare article past C class and going for a GA review because it seems somewhat in doubt whether or not Hare was the first head football coach at Butler. The Butler media guide lists a "Clint Howe" as their coach in 1887, 1888, and 1890. I emailed the sports info director at Butler about "Howe" really being Hare, and he basically said, "yeah, you're probably right, our old records are crappy". I routed this exchange to David DeLassus at the College Football Data Warehouse, and he if gives that Howe-Hare merger his blessing and edits his site accordingly, I'll rework the Hare article to reflect that. Anyway, this is the interesting stuff. I look forward to the day when he have all the fundamentals like infoboxes, tables, categories, and basic style elements, etc locked down and can all focus on the richer historical details. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:19, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty of upgrading it. As you know, the richer historical deatils is the part I find interesting, moreso than the battles over style elements, and I really enjoyed the Hare article. Cbl62 (talk) 18:55, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Phog Allen

That might be the problem, it was at a sports museum in my hometown and I actually believed it has closed. I know how that sounds but I 100% sure I saw his name on it.--Rockchalk717 (talk) 21:19, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Chuckling. :) Yeah, we probably need some better evidence to keep it in the article. Allen does not appear in the list of all-time letterman for the Kansas football program: http://issuu.com/theyoungmc7/docs/football_guide. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:41, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bennie Oosterbaan.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bennie Oosterbaan.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 18:51, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Proper use of ellipsis

I noticed you edited Wally Weber to change certain cases where the ellipsis separated completed sentences to reflect only three dots. That is in error. Where an ellipsis separates complete sentences, the period at the end of the sentence remains. ... It is then followed by the ellipsis, with the result of there being four dots. See, for example this site: "If one or more sentences are omitted, end the sentence before the ellipsis with a period and then insert your ellipsis marks with a space on both sides. ... As in this example." Cbl62 (talk) 05:00, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip on the ellipses. That nuance sounds familiar, but I clearly forgot about it. What we had before wasn't correct either, four periods each separated by a space (. . . .). Jweiss11 (talk) 05:10, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Actually, what was there before was correct. Not all style guides agree on whether or not there should be a space between the dots within an ellipsis. See here ("Not all style guides agree as to whether or not the dots in the ellipsis should have spaces between them."). I was taught to have spaces between them, which is how it was done in the Weber article. If you're not sure about a grammar point, feel free to ask. Better to ask rather than just tinkering without knowing. Cbl62 (talk) 05:51, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Duly noted. I'll be sure to confer rigorously with you before making any future edits on Wikipedia...or anywhere. Jweiss11 (talk) 14:27, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Hey, guys, I do believe the ellipsis rules can be boiled down to these three basics: (1) generally, when omitting text from a quote, use three spaced periods (" . . . "); (2) when omitting text from the end of a quoted sentence, use four spaced periods (" . . . . "); and (3) when the omitted text follows a complete sentence, use four spaced periods, but omit the first space—this signals that the sentence preceding the ellipsis was quoted in full, but subsequent text is omitted before the quoted text starts again ("Weiss is not a details man. . . . He has many other redeeming qualities." See, that's not sooo hard, is it? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:45, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

That's my understanding too (as well as being how things were originally laid out in the Weber article), though some style manuals do allow for the ... without spaces between the three periods. My offer to help with grammar was sincere. If there's one thing my Catholic school nun/teachers were good at, it was drilling basic grammar rules into us. Amazing how effective the fear of the paddle is as a teaching device. Cbl62 (talk) 00:43, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Cbl, just point out the mistake if you see it. What I don't need is to be admonished about "tinkering without knowing". On Wikipedia, I'm one of the people who sets standards and answers questions more often than needs guidance. Your precious Cliff Kleen article was loaded with bad and out-moded formatting, which is understandable considering that you wrote it four years ago. Rather than your condescension and selective hauty-tautiness about grammar, I would have preferred something like, "hey thanking for unfucking all the garbage in that article, but you missed this one thing". Evidently, those nuns didn't teach you how to not be an ingrate. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:14, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

You're a real gem. Cbl62 (talk) 02:43, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ron Kramer.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ron Kramer.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 07:31, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

A. A. Mason and Appleton A. Masin

Same person? – Connormah (talk) 02:06, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Yep, I think so. I've got him dying in New York in 1938: http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive/pdf?res=FA0F12FF3F5F1B7A93C0AB1789D95F4C8385F9. Nice find. Jweiss11 (talk)

Censuses say he was born in Nova Scotia (Canada) too. Will see if I can get a DOB, I'm very familiar with Canadian sources... – Connormah (talk) 02:21, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Wondering the same with R. R. Brown and Robert R. Brown... – Connormah (talk) 02:05, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I've puzzled over that one before. Va Tech, UNC, and Wash and Lee seems like the same guy. Maybe the New Mex St is a different guy. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:08, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Hey, guys. Do you have access to Census and or on-line genealogy records? I have a four deceased Gators football coaches who I've been trying to track down for two years: Jack A. Forsythe (birth date c. 1881), George E. Pyle (birth date c. 1886), Charles J. McCoy (no birth or death dates), and William G. Kline (no death date). Any help would be greatly appreciated. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:29, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

DL, I don't have any special access to any of that stuff. Connormah, the 1903 Va Tech yearbook list their coach for 1902 as "R. R. Brown, Darthmouth". Jweiss11 (talk) 02:31, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:James A. Baldwin.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:James A. Baldwin.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:56, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Norman G. Wann.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Norman G. Wann.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:59, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:John Magnabosco.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:John Magnabosco.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:02, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Paul "Billy" Williams.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Paul "Billy" Williams.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:02, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:William Juneau.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:William Juneau.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:03, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Paul B. Parker.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Paul B. Parker.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:05, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Lawrence McPhee.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Lawrence McPhee.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:05, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Yearbook description

Can you write a quick description at the top of the archived yearbooks page saying what it is and what it's intended for? People who venture there from WP:CBBALL (via Template:WPCBB) might not know why they're being redirected to a WP:CFB page, and I figured I'd probably word it incorrectly if I tried to write the description.

On an unrelated note, your talk page is getting pretty long. Time to archive some of it? :) Jrcla2 (talk) 15:23, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Been meaning to do both! Jweiss11 (talk) 16:36, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Photos

Any chance you can do a search for any photos of Wallace Moyle, David Farragut Edwards, and Harry Orman Robinson? I have been able to find nothing... – Connormah (talk) 04:58, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I'll take a look. I've been building a list of college yearbook archives here. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:02, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Nice, that'll be helpful in the future. George Schildmiller is another I've had troubles with. – Connormah (talk) 05:03, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Also, if you'd like to have a look at W. B. Hopkins, it'd be greatly appreciated - seems he was captain of the Brown football team for multiple years, before graduating in 1896(?) - haven't been able to find a photo or first/middle names yet. Thanks. – Connormah (talk) 05:20, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Oosterbaan template sorting

I see you reverted my Bennie Oosterbaan template sort. I have been told for basketball to put head coaching national championships above assistant coaching ones for the likes of Roy Williams (coach) and Denny Crum. Shouldn't this be the same?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:19, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, we need a inter-project powwow on this. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:48, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Samuel B. Newton.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Samuel B. Newton.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:57, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ion Cortright.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ion Cortright.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:58, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tom Keady.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Tom Keady.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 18:02, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:George Hoskins.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:George Hoskins.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 18:10, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bill Warner.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bill Warner.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:38, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:John J. Ryan.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:John J. Ryan.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:46, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Mike Taylor (linebacker c. born 1990)

Thank you for moving the page I created to a better location. I have been trying to find when he was born (DOB) but have been unsuccessful. I see you found that he was born in 1990. Were you able to find is DOB so you or I can update his page? Thank you again! Carthage44 (talk) 00:54, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Hey, my pleasure. I've been meaning to drop you a note to thank you for cranking out all those Wisconsin season stubs. I moved the Mike Taylor article to ..."c. born 1990", as in circa 1990. I don't have a DOB or even an exact year of birth, but since he entered college in 2008 he had to be born around 1990 give or take a year or so. When we do find a DOB and have an exact year of birth, the article should be renamed again to reflect that. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:58, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

No problem, I am a huge Badger fan and enjoy updating/creating pages. Since I work odd hours, I have some time on my hands to update these articles. Once I do find his DOB, how do I rename the article? Creating pages is still somewhat new to me so any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you again for your time and help. Carthage44 (talk) 01:27, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Check out Wikipedia:Moving a page for all the detail regarding page moves. If you run into any problems when it comes time to move the Taylor article or any others, let me know. I'll be happy to help. You seem to have a good handle on creating new pages. All those season articles you kicked off are well-formatted. The next step is obviously to start building them out. If you want to start working on that, I'd recommend looking at the more developed Michigan and Alabama articles for examples on how to flesh out a good season article. I've done a lot work on the Wisconsin head coaches and they're in pretty decent shape, but many are rather brief. One thing we don't have yet is a List of Wisconsin Badgers football coaches, a la List of Michigan Wolverines head football coaches or List of Alabama Crimson Tide head football coaches. That might be something you'd like to take on. If you have questions about anything, let me know. Jweiss11 (talk) 07:56, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Guy Lowman.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Guy Lowman.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:47, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Whitey Wistert.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Whitey Wistert.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:52, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Gordon Bell (American football) main image

Are you aware that there are bots that delete Fair Use images in living people infoboxes?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:32, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I was not aware, but clearly those bots should be stopped if fair use images are indeed appropriate for living people. Moving an image from out of the infobox, a la Gordon Bell, is not a good solution. Which bots are you talking about? The image at Stan Noskin has been fine for months. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:38, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

It is no longer an issue. Cbl62 (talk · contribs) found an image.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:38, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I see the new image that Cbl uploaded. Cool. I'm still curious about these bots. If you can identify them, please share. Thanks. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:39, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

George Barclay (baseball)

Yes, I agree that simply (baseball) is not particularly appropriate in this instance, but the alternative of using (American football/baseball) that's been the compromise usage on other pages (see Tom Brown (American football/baseball)) isn't particularly appealing. Sadly, (athlete) has been co-opted by track-and-field. Perhaps George Barclay (sportsperson), as suggested by WP:NCSP? In any case, I thought it best to leave the navbox alone until the WP:BRD process had resolved itself. -Dewelar (talk) 19:12, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, the "American football/baseball" qualifier is pretty infelicitous and "sportsperson" seems a little too broad. I understand the concern about the middle initial perhaps being too obscure to use in the article name, but we do have one source, the obit, using it. If we can find a few more sources referring to "George O. Barclay" would that make my initial page move okay? Jweiss11 (talk) 02:41, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I believe it would depend on whether the sources were related to his sports career, which is the source of his notability. Otherwise I think (sportsperson) is probably the best way to go. -Dewelar (talk) 04:36, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Feh...on further review, we already have George T. Barclay, another American football-related figure, which means we might be stuck with that ugly hybrid qualifier after all. -Dewelar (talk) 04:40, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I moved George T. Barclay from George Barclay (American football) the other day when I moved George Barclay (baseball). Jweiss11 (talk) 06:41, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

True, and I see that using the initial there seems justifiable based on the sources, so we should be able to use (sportsperson) after all. -Dewelar (talk) 16:09, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Mike Krzyzewski

What's your problem with the link to that 5-minute ESPN interview? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:17, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

For biography articles, external links sections should only contain official sites and links to definitive listings. If you allow one-off articles and interviews, there nothing to prevent those sections from becoming unmanageable laundry lists. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:21, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I understand your concerns. I thought it was an insightful interview - coach and mentor, and their relationship as such is very evident on-camera. Maybe it would be better placed in the body of the article where it talks about Knight? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:34, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I'm sure it's good content in it's own right. Admittedly, I have't watched it yet. Perhaps, it can go in as a reference to support some new content to the body of the article. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:38, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

• Hey, just to make things clear, when I said "vandal" in my edit summary and "a jerk" on Bugs's page, I wasn't talking about you, Jweiss--I was pointing to this joker. Later, Drmies (talk) 05:00, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Drmies, no worries. Something funky happened with all the edits crossing wires at same time. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:02, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Hey, no picking on the drive-bys. That's my schtick. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:08, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I would like for you to watch it. It's only 5 minutes, and says a lot about them in that short time. What struck me was how deferential Coach K was to Coach Knight; willingly deferential, I would say. Very much "old school". I don't think my observation needs to be made explicit in the article, though, as that's up to the viewer's judgment. Maybe something more "encyclopedic", like how Coach K regards his coaching efforts as an "extension" of what he learned from Coach Knight. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:50, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Just watched it. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Go ahead and see if you can work something into the article about Krzyzewski's relationship with Knight and I'll let you know what I think. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:57, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I added it to the part where it talks about breaking Knight's career record. I might be rah-rah on my talk page, but I try to keep things low-key within article text. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:38, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Looks good. Nice work. I did a little clean-up of the wording in the section and put the link to the video and its accompanying article in proper citation form. The article as a whole could use a little work. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:47, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

• Excellent. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:11, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
• Duke, the last couple of minutes of the game, needed a little work too. Drmies (talk) 05:01, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Claude J. Hunt.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Claude J. Hunt.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:11, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:M. B. Banks.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:M. B. Banks.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 18:08, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi, this message is to let you know about disambiguation links you've recently created. A link to a disambiguation page is almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

Evan O. Williams (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

was linked to Evan Williams

Any suggestions for improving this automated tool are welcome. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 23:50, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Williams Newton.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Williams Newton.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:42, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Infobox help

At 2011–12 Chattanooga Mocs basketball team, in the infobox it has a link to Chattanooga Mocs men's basketball, but since they use "lady mocs" for their women's teams, the article it should link to is Chattanoog Mocs basketball. I can't figure out how to change it. I feel I may simply be making a silly omission but I can't seem to find it. Help is appreciated. City boy77 (talk) 02:30, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

This is a good question. I'm looking at Template:Infobox NCAA team season and it appears that the template has no way to turn off that men's/women's qualifier once you're in basketball mode. This issue has been brought up in the past on the talk page but it remains unresolved. This is worth bringing up at the college basketball project talk page. You might want to kick off a new discussion about it there. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:36, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Joe Bedenk.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Joe Bedenk.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 07:03, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Vacated victories

Thanks for your comments. If you have any thoughts to add at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_College_football/Vacated_victories about how vacated victories should be annotated in affected articles, please throw them into the mix. I think it'd be good to lay this all out and gain a consensus so that we don't have to suffer any more ad hoc solutions. Thanks again. JohnInDC (talk) 13:08, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I won't be in a position to edit much over the coming days and leave the handling of the "series record" footnote to your good judgment. As you can see I added a link to the essay at the UM-OSU rivalry article. I don't think it's necessary at this point, really, but it's better than a long footnote that only scrapes the first layer of the issue, I think. JohnInDC (talk) 12:13, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I'll do my best to keep things in order. Hopefully, Michigan can finally win one on Saturday and make at least the question of OSU's streak a moot point for the infobox. Happy Thanksgiving and enjoy the holiday weekend. Jweiss11 (talk) 14:48, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Bolding in navboxes

Fair enough. I hadn't realized that most of the college templates had the bold.--Yankees10 01:48, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Trying to remember

Jweiss, do you recall who the editor was that would keep creating new "People from (city), (state)" categories, and then when populating them, would move that category right next to the categories for years of birth and death? I'm asking because of this edit that popped up on my watchlist. User:Corlier has only been around for a month, yet is unquestionably the same user I am trying to recall. I don't want to bring this to a formal SPI if the username change was approved, but I do want to get to the bottom of it. The user who I can't remember had been left myriad notices and requests to stop placing the People From categories at the start, ignoring all alphabetization, and I'm wondering if Corlier is avoiding scrutiny with this sockpuppet. Jrcla2 (talk) 15:41, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure it's only one editor doing this. I recently left a note for User:Monegasque about the same thing. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

AP Poll matchups

WTF. That table tells a lot about the history of Michigan football rivalries (official and unofficial) in a succinct format. I would like to see these types of tables for all major football and basketball programs. It quantifies the OSU and ND rivalries especially well.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:32, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh man. Maybe something like this belongs somewhere, but definitely not where you put it. Let's get some other people to weigh in on the idea. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:34, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

(ec)For rivalries that are geographic/historic these tables may not be as relevant. For some schools that is all that they have. However, for many major rivalries this adds some detail. I would like to see these numbers for Duke Basketball and see the Duke-UNC line.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:37, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Do you mean having a discussion at WP:CFB and/or WP:WPCBB. Sure--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:37, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

3RR, apology

I just re-reviewed the Three revert rule thoroughly. I didn't realize that I was prohibited from making any unrelated edits. For whatever that's worth. I'm done on that page indefinitely.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 00:37, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Okay, no worries. I worked back in those additional references you had bulleted together, now separated out and all in the notes section. Jweiss11 (talk) 00:45, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Rivalry templates

Maybe you didn't notice, but I was curious about why we want to set policy for conferences that they have different types of templates. Please respond at the discussion on this matter because I am unaware of any other policy where we encourage different template structures for the power conferences.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:12, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox college rivalry

Template:Infobox college rivalry has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox college sports rivalry. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:13, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Infobox college sports rivalry

Hi,

Please explain why you reverted my edits to {{Infobox college sports rivalry}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

It killed the alignment of the team fields and introduced a strange bullet between the team names. The idea here is to have two logos side-by-side with the team names below them. Jweiss11 (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean by "killed the alignment". The bullet-like character (actually small CSS background image) is the standard separator for horizontal lists, used in thousands of Wikipedia templates. My edits removed the situation where "team 1" is in one table column and "team2" in the next; unlike the subsequent table rows, they're not a header:data pair, nor are they headers for their respective rows. If the team names are meant to be captions for the images, perhaps they should be rendered as the caption property of the image? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 01:39, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

The teams shouldn't be considered a horizontal list and they shouldn't be separated by bullets. In setting up the template, I was aiming to mirror the alignment of Template:Infobox college football single game. See 2006 Michigan vs. Ohio State football game for an example of it in use. You see how in that template we essentially have the top of the infobox split into two parts with one side of each team? That's what I was going for here as well. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:45, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. To take your points in order:

The teams shouldn't be considered a horizontal list

Why not? The list of teams is just that; a list. See WP:HLIST.

they shouldn't be separated by bullets

Why not?

the alignment of {{Infobox college football single game}}

Achieving such a visual appearance does not require the misuse of table markup, as in your preferred version of the template currently under discussion.

Also, I still don't understand how my changes "killed the alignment". Please explain. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:37, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Your edits made the team names bunch together in the middle of the infobox. The desired alignment is to have each team name centered on it's own half of the infobox. That's what I mean by "killed the alignment". As in the case of {{Infobox college football single game}}, the team names should not be considered to be two elements of a list. They are, rather, each an element of a multi-dimensional array that runs vertically. The two vertical arrays are placed side-by-side, one for each team, with each team getting its own half of the box. If you could explain how these infoboxes are misusing table markup so that they can be fixed while retaining their current form, that would be awesome. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:14, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Tim Kish and Rich Rodriguez

Why did you remove the navbox? --Kevin W./Talk•CFB uniforms/Talk 10:05, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Kevin, I assume you are talking about Template:Arizona Wildcats football navbox? It's been established per WikiProject College football that program-wide navboxes are not appropriate for transclusion on biography articles. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:45, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks for clarifying. --Kevin W./Talk•CFB uniforms/Talk 18:58, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Alvin Wistert.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Alvin Wistert.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:18, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Template:Michigan State Spartans football navbox

In your edit did you intentionally remove the overall record or did that accidentally happen during the reorganization? If you did remove it intentionally, why? Spidey 104 14:41, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Spidey104, that was intentional. The purpose of a navbox is to provide navigation. Overall record is a non-navigation element. The inclusion of overall record in navboxes has been a really bad habit and their removal is long overdue. I'm working on standardizing all of the college football program navboxes accordingly. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:16, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

That makes sense to me. Have a good day! Spidey 104 21:07, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Changes to navbox

Hello, Jweiss11. You have new messages at Pigsonthewing's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:39, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Ducks -> Webfoots

Good call on those page moves. It's been on my list to change for a while but I hadn't gotten around to it. One of my stumbling blocks was trying to figure out when they were more commonly called Ducks than Webfoots. The Oregon website is no help; they seem to be covering up the history or when the "official" mascot changed. But it seems that well into the 50s and 60s, Webfoots was still used quite a bit. Did you find a good source for the mascot change dates?

I think the 1938–39 Oregon Ducks men's basketball team has to change as well, but contemporary reports always seem to never refer to the mascot. --Esprqii (talk) 02:39, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

--Esprqii (talk) 02:39, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I haven't been able to nail down the date of the name change exactly, but this page at the Oregon website suggests it happened around 1932: "Headline writers searching for ways to parse Webfoots into their sports pages began churning out Ducks, which the students eventually voted as their new nickname over Timberwolves and Lumberjacks. A second student-body election in 1932 beat back the challenges of Trappers, Pioneers, Yellowjackets and Spearsmen..." Not sure exactly when that first election took place. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:54, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I seriously think the Oregon AD has done a cut and paste of Webfoots to Ducks over the years. I can't tell if it's outright whitewashing or unintentional. Most newspapers articles I've read say that students picked Webfoots in that vote: see from 1976,from 1978, and from 1995. From those, it sounds like Webfoots became semi-official in 1926, and Ducks didn't come into use until the 1940s, and became sorta kinda official in 1978. Prior to 1926, there was no official mascot (Stanford, and I'm sure other teams, has a similar history of mascotlessness). As late as 1995, judging from the tone of that article, the term "Ducks" was still controversial. --Esprqii (talk) 18:14, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

...although I should add that my own WP:OR would say that Ducks was the common term in the 1980s. --Esprqii (talk) 18:19, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Vandy 2011

Hey can you look at the first part of the Vanderbilt football 2011 and edit it? It seems that it does not read well. Mickey Sanker 10:53, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I gave the 2011 Vandy article a little work. I think it's in decent shape now. The verb tense is a little tricky because I'm not sure if the season is over yet. I guess it's still up in the air whether they are going to a bowl. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:12, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Re:Team navboxes

With the list whittling down, I will handle Wyoming, NC State, Memphis, New Mexico, New Mexico State and UTEP. If I have time for more I'll let you know! Patriarca12 (talk) 02:09, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Awesome. Thanks. I'll aim for the other ones. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:10, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

I will definitely help out as much as I can as time permits. I will work from the bottom of the list as you suggested. Patriarca12 (talk) 20:30, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Great. Thanks. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:31, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Navbox sorting

Re: your edit to June Jones - is there a specified order that coaching navboxes should be in? --Kevin W./Talk•CFB uniforms/Talk 19:43, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes. First go the team coaching tenure navboxes, chronologically. Then the current coach by conference navbox. Then any championship and award navboxes. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:45, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks. --Kevin W./Talk•CFB uniforms/Talk 20:03, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Ok...

I'm reading now that ASU's talks with Jones have fallen through. I really shouldn't have bothered making the changes until everything was confirmed. Whoops. In any case, I've reverted my changes to the navboxes, but you've made some significant changes to Jones' article since my changes, so I'd rather not just blanket revert everything and screw up your work, so I'm just letting you know so you can make the adjustments. --Kevin W./Talk•CFB uniforms/Talk 21:04, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Yikes. Well, the infobox needed a lot of cleaning up and the lead was too sparse. It didn't note any of his previous head coaching tenures in college and the NFL, which is certainly should. If the ASU hiring falls though, that should just be backed out. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:10, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

FYI

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:159.53.46.141_reported_by_User:JohnInDC_.28Result:_.29 JohnInDC (talk) 21:08, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Kevin "Yogi" Ferrell

Is it common practice to create articles for high school seniors who commit to Big Ten teams? There is an article that's been written for Kevin "Yogi" Ferrell and I really don't think he's reached the point that he's notable but want to get a second opinion. Perhaps he is notable and I'm just plain wrong. Afterall, "Yogi was ranked the number one player in his class as a fourth grader." City boy77 (talk) 23:17, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

If I may offer my outside opinion, I don't think he's notable enough. Any high-level college recruit has the same number of ESPN/Scout/Rivals/recruiting service pages. You could put together the same kind of page for any of them. I just don't see anything that makes this guy special. --Kevin W./Talk•CFB uniforms/Talk 00:28, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

This is really a question of level of coverage. I agree that we should not be make making articles for every recruit listed on rivals.com. But if a given high school player has garnered significant, feature-type coverage in non-local media, he may well be notable. This sort of thing has to be assessed on a case by case basis. If you feel Ferrell is not notable enough to warrant an article, you may want to bring this up at the college basketball talk page or even open up an AfD. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:00, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In Byron W. Dickson, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Germantown, Pennsylvania (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:30, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

List of historically significant Michigan Wolverines football games

I saw that. I was initially skeptical, but then found it to be a good template to use in listing some of the major milestones in the development of the program. If it doesn't survive as a list, you, I or someone else can preserve the information for use in a Michigan football history article. BTW, thanks for your help tidying up the Andrew G. Reid article. Cbl62 (talk) 02:38, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

rivalry

So you'll accept discussing OSU NCAA sanctions but not Michigan NCAA sanctions. Why don't you just admit your bias. I'd be willing to accept discussing both teams sanctions or none, no bias there. What are you afraid of? Is there more to the Rodriguez story? Something more along the scale of the massive cheating the basketball team committed in the 90s? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.199.16.120 (talk) 00:36, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

It's pretty clear where the bias lies on this issue. I have no idea if there is "more" to the Rodriguez story. I haven't done any special investigation into the matter. What I do know, and what is clear from reliable, cited sources, is that the Tressel scandal was the reason for his resignation and the end of the most dominant coaching run in history of the rivalry. Also, given Ohio State's attendant vacation of all of its wins from the 2010 season, the OSU scandal figures into the series record of the rivalry. The OSU scandal is therefore orders of magnitude more germane to the subject of the Michigan-Ohio State rivalry than are Michigan's violations from practicing too much in 2009. Your presence thus far on Wikipedia has essentially been a one-issue political plug to drag Michigan's less grievous and less germane violations down to the level of Ohio State's on the high-profile venue of the rivalry article. If you wish to pursue such controversial aims on Wikipedia, I suggest that you establish yourself with a stable user name and complete at least of modicum of non-controversial contributions beforehand. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:30, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Michigan Wolverines football helmet.gif listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Michigan Wolverines football helmet.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Mtking ^(edits) 03:24, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Montana Grizzlies football

Your assertion that it is in-line with the wiki project guidlines might be the case however WP:CONLIMITED applies here and I fail to see how with vast tracts of the article un sourced, with sections of no real Encyclopedic value to a reader from outside University of Montana such as Montana Grizzlies football#37 Jersey or Montana Grizzlies football#Head coaching history (none of the coaches notable for there own stand alone page) means that this page meets wiki wide standards. Mtking ^(edits) 05:20, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Mtking, I was just about to drop you a message on your talk page about this and your fancruft tags at Michigan Wolverines football, LSU Tigers football, and Texas Longhorns football. The Montana Grizzlies football article admittedly needs some work and more sourcing. But the head coaching history table is certainly notable enough for inclusion. This is rather standard information for college football and other sports teams. In fact, many of Montana's head football coaches have articles, they are just not wikilinked there; see: Template:Montana Grizzlies football coach navbox. It is likely that notability will be established for every one of the red-linked individuals in that template as well. I'll take a closer look at the #37 Jersey section to see if reliable sources can support that. In the meantime, a source tag there would not be inappropriate. The fancruft tags at Michigan Wolverines football, LSU Tigers football, and Texas Longhorns football are rather egregious as the sourcing on those articles is much better than on the Montana article, and since those teams are as well-covered by third-parties as just about any team in North American sports. It appears that you placed those tags not because they were warranted, but rather to try to prove a point (and not a very good one) in your discussions with User:Dsetay. This is rather unbecoming behavior. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:35, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Jim L. Mora

Is it a convention in college football articles to link to the university e.g. University of California, Los Angeles instead of piping the link to the schools football program, e.g. UCLA Bruins football. I would think most readers would be interested in the football program first; from that link, they should be able to get to the university's article. Apologies in advance if this has already been discussed ad nauseum.—Bagumba (talk) 08:16, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Bagumba, there's no strict rule here. My general strategy in coaching bio articles is to link to the university articles first, then weave in links to team articles after. Whatever the linking strategy, the emphasis should be on the getting the language right first and then have the wikilinks flow off of that language as appropriate. I didn't see this at the Mora article, but one thing I can't stand is when the university name is spelled out in full and then piped to the team article. If one is talking about the university (and this may make sense especially when talking about hiring and firing because that happens at the university level), then that's where the wikilink should go. As for the infobox, standards dictate without question that links go to team articles, not the university articles. Jweiss11 (talk) 08:38, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, I spoke too soon. My pet peeve just happened at the Mora article. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:17, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Sounds like a good convention would be to mention the institution first (e.g. University of California, Los Angeles) and then mention the team name later (e.g. UCLA Bruins).—Bagumba (talk) 18:35, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good to me too. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:49, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Old discussion

I don't know if you are still watching Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_College_football#New_infobox_template_for_rivalries. I dropped a note in that discussion.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:04, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Kansas State

Why was the Kansas State Wildcats football navbox changed so dramatically? There was nothing wrong with the old format and it is very similar to many of the other teams' navboxes. Topgun530 (talk) 22:12, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Topgun530, please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#Team navboxes for the full discussion regarding the ongoing standardization of team navboxes. Thanks. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:21, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Bert Bell

After months, I have finally found the Bert Bell and the Union Club of Phoenixville smoking gun that proves he was not a player, its here: Canton and Union Play Here Today and Bell was the head linesman. I have utterly blasted (out of frustration) the Union article so it may need to be toned down. But Bell, formed an independent professional team, use the further reading links in Bell I have found, in the fall of 1920 but due to the Black Sox Scandal he decided to disband it. All of that stuff in the Union article is close to being true, but is not true.

I need your help because I do not want anyone saying Bell played for Union without a citation.

I am removing the Union template from Bell, and I am removing Bell as a player from the Union team also.

It's very difficult to disprove something that someone just threw out there and I've spent dozens of hours trying to cite an uncitable event. Thanks in advance.

P.S. keywords on searching are Maxwell (wow, what an interesting character), and Thorpe for 192066.234.33.8 (talk) 02:01, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

after having to deal w claims that Bell played for Union and not being able to substantiate it, I now feel better by destroying the Union article. It's actually not that far off base. But I do not want it landing on the bell article. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 02:16, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

College football season category header

Are you able to edit Template:College football season category header so that it correctly links to the Category:1910 NCAA football season through the Category:1955 NCAA football season‎? I don't know how to do this. As it is now, those categories are red-linked in the header because the template is set up wrong. The links for the 1869 to 1905, and 1906 to 1909, are different as well. Thanks for your help. Cmcnicoll (talk) 05:10, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I figured out how to fix this. I had to edit {{CFB Seasons Cat Header/Name conv}}, which is called by {{College football season category header}}. I cleaned up the season category naming conventions over a year ago, but never realized this piece of code was out there. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:18, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

East Carolina Pirates football navbox

Does {{East Carolina Pirates football navbox}} need to be tweaked to conform to the other team navboxes? I'm asking because I see where you edited it numerous times on December 8th but didn't change anything around. Jrcla2 (talk) 14:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, badly. I'm getting to it. I was just cleaning up the categories to get everything in one place before. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:15, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Duke–Michigan basketball rivalry

Thanks for all your editorial assistance. I have nominated this at WP:FLC.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:19, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Forest Evashevski.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Forest Evashevski.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 18:05, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

AA navboxes

A lot of these will need to be moved if historical accuracy per naming convention is a goal of WP:CFB. Jrcla2 (talk) 15:48, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. I'm still mulling over the right naming, but "Division I FBS" is clearly being misapplied here. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:16, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Hey, guys, I've just finished adding 11 new All-American navboxes (1969, 1980, 1983, 1984, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995). I am aware that the navbox names should follow the actual NCAA "major college football" designation applicable in the given year. Rather than wait on getting the proper era names reconciled, I followed the established naming pattern of the other 38 existing AA navboxes when I started. TonyTT, Bender235 and SigEp252 ground out most of this first group of 38, spanning the 1920s through 2011, but with huge gaps in the sequence; obviously anything from the 1920s through 1970 or so that references "Division I" is clearly anachronistic, let alone "Division I-A" and "FBS." I wanted to make a dent and complete the sequence for the more recent AA's, and the 11 that I added completed the AA sequence from 1978 through 2011, an unbroken span of 34 seasons. All of the applicable player articles (1978 through 2011) have also been tagged with "Category:All-American college football players," so there are now 900+ player articles in the category. Please consider this my initial contribution to the consensus AA project; I am happy to help more once we get the proper navbox name sequence resolved. Based on the discussion I've been following over at the CBB talk page, it appears the interior format of the AA navboxes may evolve, too. FYI, Aquamelli just added a cluster from the 1890s today, too. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

I've completed the consensus AA navboxes from 1890 to 1924... I'm ready to fill in the rest (late 20s to early 70s) but I really dont think putting "NCAA Division I FBS College Football Consensus All-Americans" works at all... I'm going to stick with the same naming convention that I used for the 34 that I created. If this is going to be a problem, please let me know Aquamelli (talk) 17:11, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

That sounds good to me. Division I didn't exist until 1973. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:36, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

I had some extra time early this morning while waiting on St. Nick, and did a little reading on the NCAA website and elsewhere regarding the evolution of the NCAA's division structure over the years. Here's the timeline for the "major college" sports divisions:

• 1956–1972 NCAA University Division (University Division was for major college sports; there was also the College Division for smaller college sports programs)
• 1973–1978 NCAA Division I (essentially the renamed University Division for major college sports programs, but with the further breakout of the smaller colleges into Division II and Division III)
• 1979–2005 NCAA Division I-A (a further subdivision of Division I into two subdivisions I-A and I-AA for football only);
• 2006–present NCAA Division I Football Bowl Subdivision (renamed Division I-A for football only)

There apparently was no formal distinction between major and minor college sports programs before 1956. That's the NCAA division history in a nutshell. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:30, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

2006 was the first year of the "FBS" moniker. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:05, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

I stand corrected. Oddly, the NCAA's website gives 2007 as the first year of the "FBS" subdivision designation (see [5]), but a Google News Archive search shows that "FBS" was already being phased into use by the media during the 2006 football season. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:15, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

The NCAA's records suck. The College Football Data Warehouse and its unidentified sources are far more reliable. ;). Merry xmas. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:23, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: College baseball navboxes

Recently got up to more than half finished on Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference baseball venues, and thus made the navbox. Tried to follow your example here, but I thought I'd pass it by you to see if/where I messed up. On the categories especially, I haven't the faintest idea what's going on. If you could take a quick look, I'd much appreciate it. Thanks. Kithira (talk) 16:48, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Looks like you did a pretty good job. I just tweaked the colors to match the other Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference navboxes. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:49, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I'll make a mental note to keep conference navboxes uniform from now on. Kithira (talk) 23:25, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fred Sefton.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fred Sefton.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:57, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Hola

Jweiss, from interacting enough with you in the past I know that you're less hot-headed and better at explaining things than I am. If you could please drop some knowledge at Talk:San Diego State Aztecs men's basketball#Notable players and more lucidly explain the situation I'd greatly appreciate it. I'm being accused of misinterpreting a policy (I'm not) and am being told I'm 100% wrong (it's the opposite actually). I would keep going with the discussion there myself, but frankly he won't listen to me at this point and I'm sure I'd just end up straying from the main argument anyway. Jrcla2 (talk) 18:52, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Team navbox consensus?

You do not have consensus on the issue of CFB Navbox templates being forced into a strict standardized format. Please wait for proper Wikipedia discussion policies, RfC, and dispute resolution processes to run their course. CrazyPaco (talk) 00:06, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree that we should sit tight for now and let others weigh in. As a measure of temporary compromise, I think we ought to leave things as they are for now, i.e. the Pitt navbox "standardized" with the succession boxes on the venue articles restored. Sound good? As for gathering input for others, we should try to keep it all in once place. The RFC you put out directs people to comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football, correct? Jweiss11 (talk) 01:07, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good. I hope you know this isn't personal. I'm generally a great admirer of your work. I'm just on the side of having some customizability retained, not only for templates of the CFB wikiproject, but those of completely non-related templates. I hope you are having a great holiday. CrazyPaco (talk) 01:26, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I would also suggest that we press for resolution of these matters after the holidays, gentlemen, assuming you can both wait a few days. Right now, most of the usual CFB/CBB project editors are either barely active or mostly inactive; comments at the CFB talk page have dropped off significantly in the last week or so. I think the more editors that participate in an organized discussion and polling/voting, in which everyone has their say, the more likely we are to evolve a stable consensus that everyone is willing to abide by. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:42, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm fine with holding things off a few days until after the new year. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:48, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Keith Allen (American football), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Student assistant (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:55, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Open queries

I have open queries at CFB: 1. Consensus AA template renaming, 2. Rivalry template progress.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:20, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Some Washington templates

Not sure what you want to do with things like Template:1984 Washington football and Template:1990 Washington football. I found these while standardizing the templates, and they are kind of inaccurate since the national champions for those years were BYU and Georgia Tech, respectively. — Moe ε 15:15, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Nice finds on those two. Washington's "nat'l titles" in '84 and '90 are not widely recognized. Those two navbox should be TfD'd. I'll put that on my to-do list. Jweiss11 (talk) 15:46, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Rivalry infobox

Thank you.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:32, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

James H. Horne

Thanks for the compliment! I was going to start an article for "J.H. Horne", then I noticed you had already created James H. Horne. Although I haven't been able to track down when he died, I enjoyed working working on the article and found a few tidbits of information that I thought were really interesting. I nominated the article at Template:Did you know nominations/James H. Horne, so hopefully you should get some bot-recognition soon! Cheers! Location (talk) 20:35, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Michigan–Michigan State ice hockey rivalry

Have a look at Michigan–Michigan State ice hockey rivalry.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:06, 31 December 2011 (UTC)