Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive 25

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 20

←

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

While the the 2020 NCAA Division I FBS football season finished as regularly scheduled with only a few postseason games played after the new year, all lower divisions had significant portions of their season rescheduled to the spring of 2021 because of Covid. We have named these seasons 2020–21 NCAA Division I FCS football season, 2020–21 NCAA Division III football season, and 2020 NAIA football season. No article has yet been created for NCAA Division II, but some of those teams and conferences did play in the spring of 2021. However, all of the related categories, templates, and individual team articles have been named "2020...", e.g. Category:2020 NCAA Division I FCS football season, Template:2020 Big Sky Conference football standings, 2020 Sam Houston State Bearkats football team, 2020 West Alabama Tigers football team, 2020 Wesley Wolverines football team, 2020 Lindsey Wilson Blue Raiders football team. Should these articles and other elements all be renamed to "2020–21..."? Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 23:53, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

For teams that played all of their games in the first half of 2021, it does seem wrong to title them 2020 Lindsey Wilson Blue Raiders football team. Since all of their games were played in 2021, it strikes me that the most accurate solution for such teams would be something like 2021 (spring) Lindsey Wilson Blue Raiders football team or Spring 2021 Lindsey Wilson Blue Raiders football team or even 2021 (winter/spring) Lindsey Wilson Blue Raiders football team. Cbl62 (talk) 02:21, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Cbl, I think we'd be much better off naming everything related to a particular season the same way. Consider Template:2020 Great Plains Athletic Conference football standings or if were were to make an article for the NAIA runners-up, the Northwestern Red Raiders, who played their regular season in the fall of 2020 and participated in the NAIA playoffs in spring 2021. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:01, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Two different parts IMO. The overall seasons (e.g. 2020–21 NCAA Division III football season) span the two years and are correctly named accordingly as "2020–21". However, individual team seasons should be named according to which years they actually played. This is the precedent we have followed previously. When particular teams have played non-standard schedules, we have recognized that in naming the individual team's season article. E.g., 1876–77 Harvard Crimson football team (part of the 1876 college football season). Extending the same logic here, Spring 2021 Lindsey Wilson Blue Raiders football team (part of the 2020–21 NAIA football season). That seems logical to me, but I don't feel very strongly. Cbl62 (talk) 08:24, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

The precedent for those 1870s articles doesn't seem to be very strong, given that Harvard's spring 1877 opponent is named 1876 Princeton Tigers football team—the date of the game also doesn't match on the two articles. And if the overall season contains 1876–77 Harvard Crimson football team, shouldn't it be named 1876–77 college football season? We should also note that in the 1870s, there were no overarching bodies organizing college football to delimit the beginning and end of a season in any sort of official way. It was just individual teams scheduling games with other teams ad hoc. That's quite different from the structured competition we have now. The 2020 Lindsey Wilson Blue Raiders football team originally had games scheduled for the fall of 2020 and ultimately played against teams that did play in the fall of 2020. I strongly suggest we apply a consistent naming structure within a particular season. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:51, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

The Big_Ten_Conference#Intra-conference_football_rivalries needs to be updated for the George Jewett Trophy. I don't spend a lot of time on WP anymore and don't want to mess up the table.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:36, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

• @Jweiss11 and Cbl62:-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:31, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

TonyTheTiger I added the George Jewett Trophy to the table. Looks like some of the other data in the table could use some updating. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:51, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@TonyTheTiger: Hope we have you back here soon. Cbl62 (talk) 21:26, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Working on an app. So, if I have a lot of time to be back here, that would be bad news.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:43, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Good luck with the app! Cbl62 (talk) 03:52, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Many news outlets are reporting that Dan Lanning has been hired as the new head coach at Oregon. An IP editor has suggested that we need to wait for official confirmation from the university to reflect this in the article. Do we? Has this not yet been confirmed by Oregon? Jweiss11 (talk) 00:32, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

I know it is a moot point now, but in this case I think the IP is being consistent with what happens in NBA free agency, and with what occured with a certain former Oklahoma coach heading to USC.[1] So in order to be consistent, it should be named by the institution.-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 01:52, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

User:DrKay is going through the team templates and changing the existing standard from bold to signify national championship seasons to underlining. E.g., here, here, here, here, here, here. Has this been discussed? What do folks think? Cbl62 (talk) 17:23, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

I saw the same thing on baseball and other navboxes. I don't have a huge issue with the change, but in my view when it impacts literally thousands of templates it should have been discussed first. Billcasey905 (talk) 17:30, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

My thoughts exactly. There should be a discussion first to see if consensus supports the change. If so, the change should be implemented across all the templates, as doing it ad hoc on a handful of templates creates a system of inconsistency. Cbl62 (talk) 17:35, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

It would be better to apply underline (or some other format) consistently across the navboxes because using bold doesn't work. At any season article that article will be bolded on the navbox, regardless of whether it was a championship season. Therefore, on the vast majority of season articles the phrase 'National championship seasons in bold' is incorrect. DrKay (talk) 17:36, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

I agree that bolding isn't a good solution for that reason, but underlining isn't an improvement for those people whose browsers use underlines with links (which is a common design pattern). I think a signifying character after the season, such as we do with interim coaches, would be better. Edit: I've revised {{Alabama Crimson Tide football navbox}} as a demonstration. Mackensen (talk) 19:33, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Looks OK to me. DrKay (talk) 09:15, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

I like the idea of adding the additional character that was suggested by Mackensen, I'd throw my support behind that. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 06:16, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Personally, I think the insertion of multiple "§" symbols looks overly busy and distracts from the clean appearance of the list of years. Cbl62 (talk) 11:53, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

I don't disagree, although Alabama is something of an outlier given the number of claimed national championships. I'm proceeding from the assumption that it's necessary to call out championships in this way. It might be clearer, and more useful, to have a separate navbox grouping for national championships:

The national championship links could potentially go to the playoff articles where appropriate, or just go to the individual season articles. I don't think it's a problem to have double linking for the national championship season. Mackensen (talk) 12:28, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

• Personally, I don't see a problem in need of a solution. I'm accustomed to the bolding and think it works well. The only "problem" is that the page you're on also displays in bold, but if you're already on that page, and have scrolled all the way to the bottom to where the template it, you know whether or not that's a NC season. Cbl62 (talk) 17:30, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

• To someone not accustomed to college football an article like 1892 Centre football team shows the team won the national season. They are top in the table, won all their games and are highlighted in the navbox. This is not an outlier. Other articles have the same problem. DrKay (talk) 18:30, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

What about bold italics or just italics if the regular bold doesn't work? BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:38, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Bold italics sounds OK. Cbl62 (talk) 18:39, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm with Cbl62. The status quo strikes me as a non-problem. Bold italics seems like the best option out of the proposed alternatives. Underlining clearly doesn't work. Symbols look pretty cluttery. A separate section creates redundant links. Those three are all definitely worse than the status quo. Jweiss11 (talk) 23:27, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

I agree that if we're making a change, bold italics is the best option. College Basketball, Baseball, Softball, and Soccer all use italics to indicate Final Four, CWS, and College Cup appearances, and so bold italics seems like a standard way to call out National Championships. Billcasey905 (talk) 00:39, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm in camp-don't-bold-it on this one. One thought I had was (if possible) a box could go around the conference championship. But the underline and double-underline look good. Just to be clear, I'm not going to fix it myself because 1) I don't know how; 2) I don't want to know how; and 3) I don't have the time. The best solution may be whatever is easiest.--Paul McDonald (talk) 15:28, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

What about CBBALL where Final Fours are italicized? I think creating a separate section might be what is best. It follows the pro model.-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 04:32, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Professional sports' projects are often wildly inconsistent though. Maybe not the ice hockey project, but take a look at any other pro sport's infoboxes, templates, and navboxes. I think the college football and college basketball projects are the outliers for being organized and consistent (which is obviously a good thing). I am opposed to trying to align with the pro projects. SportsGuy789 (talk) 21:17, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

SportsGuy789, yes, I was thinking the same thing when the pro navboxes were mentioned above. If anything, the pro navboxes should be molded toward the college model. The college navboxes are much better designed. Take Template:San Francisco 49ers and San Francisco 49ers seasons for example: two navboxes to accomplish what the college navboxes do in one, even with longer histories. The pro navboxes also have crufty Easter egg links like "Joe Cool" to Joe Montana and lots of links to articles that don't have that navbox transcluded on that article, thus leaving the navigation around the navbox unclosed. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:28, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Hey all! I would like to invite any editors here to show their support for and potentially join the new WikiProject: Purdue University. It hasn't technically been made yet, and I only proposed it just a few minutes ago, but I'm trying to start out strong. The Project would aim to improve existing Purdue University-related articles and create new ones. As it is still in the proposal process, you can show your support here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Purdue University. Thanks!! Invinciblewalnut (talk) 20:25, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@Invinciblewalnut: Not sure why you're posting here. Does Purdue play college football? ;) Cbl62 (talk) 22:10, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

They do have a football team, yes Invinciblewalnut (talk) 02:19, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I see that we have Harry Thayer (American football), an 1890s fullback and halfback who played for Penn, Harry Thayer (American football executive), who was general manager of the Philadelphia Eagles from '41 to '46 (and the Los Angeles Dons from '47 to '49), and another player who meets NGRIDIRON but does not yet have a page named Harry Thayer, who played tackle and guard in 1933 (see here). (the last one may also have been a coach, see [2]) My question is, what are these pages to be named? The first and last ones I mentioned both played multiple positions, and so I am not sure what the disambig titles will be. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:05, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Even though NCAA canceled the championship and some teams and conferences decided not to play football in the fall of 2020 or the spring of 2021, some teams played. The same process took place at DIII and there is an article about the 2020-21 season of DIII (2020–21 NCAA Division III football season), so, for consistency reasons, in my opinion, I think the article on D-II also should be created. Luks25 (talk) 01:35, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Be bold, friend, and create it! SportsGuy789 (talk) 02:47, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Luks25, yes, this should be created. If you want to kick it off, go for it. Happy to help. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:14, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

I made an attempt at creating this when I made the D3 article linked above, but I found it was a touch more difficult as there is not a centralized hub of information on D2 football like there is for D3 football. Sure, there's d2football.com, but I didn't find it nearly as helpful as its Division III counterpart. I'm happy to help with the page as well if information can be found. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 03:19, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I had problem searching centralized information too, I thought someone could had it, but now I created the article after searching almost every school schedule in their website, if I made some mistake or forgot something, people can help with the article. Thanks everyone Luks25 (talk) 21:49, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

I know that some schools consider 2020-21 as official and others as strictly exhibition if they played.-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 01:59, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League#Article formats -> Create a format for coaches? that might interest a few editors here because of the overlap between certain college and NFL coaches?-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 16:58, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

I've long wondered but never asked. If a football payer is born in Florida, moves to Georgia as a very young boy, grows up and goes to high school in Georgia, does he belong in the Category for "Players of American football from Florida" or "Players of American football from Georgia", or both? I've generally gone with the place of birth but sometimes it doesn't seem right if the amount of time spent there was minimal. Variants on this come up all the time. Cbl62 (talk) 16:05, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

It's really a general question for categories like Category:People from Florida, and not sport specific. "From" is ambiguous whether it relates to one's birthplace, where they grew up, their principal residence, etc. There's no guidance in the categories' descriptions either.—Bagumba (talk) 16:46, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Cbl, I default to the state where the person went to high school over the state where the person was born, if the two are different. I suppose both categories could be included. We also need to think about the people/sportspeople from city categories as well. Many of these are being broken down by sport such that we now have Category:Players of American football from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. User:Grutness has been active with this effort. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:09, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I do both birth and high school assuming the player went to an in-area high school where they lived. Rikster2 (talk) 17:47, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I've been going primarily by whatever categories are already in place, though I'll admit some of them seem pretty tenuous. Place of birth makes sense, as does high school, but quite a few players seem to have just about everywhere they played listed, which seems like overkill. Grutness...wha? 00:18, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

• Bagumba raises another level of ambiguity. I've always thought of "from" in these situations to refer to "originating from" (and thus have generally gone with place of birth), but if the same Fla/Ga athlete hypothesized above moves after high school to Illinois and lives his entire adult life there, Illinois is another candidate as to where he is "from". Do folks think a more general discussion is appropriate to try to reach some sort of consensus? If so, where? Cbl62 (talk) 18:14, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

In the case of American sports, the "originating from" really refers most to where the person attended high school, likely where he or she started gaining notoriety for playing the sport that ultimately made them notable and from where he or she was recruited or drafted to play college or pro sports. Michael Jordan was born in Brooklyn but he is most "from" North Carolina, having grown up and attended high school in Wilmington, North Carolina. Jim Harbaugh is in interesting example. He was born in Toledo, Ohio and spent his early childhood in Kentucky, Ohio, and Iowa as his father, Jack, moved to various coaching jobs, before attending high school in Michigan and California. Perhaps, this issue isn't fundamentally sports-specific and concerns other occupations as well. In that case, maybe the place to discuss it is either Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography or Wikipedia:Categorization? Jweiss11 (talk) 22:44, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I agree to an extent, though the caveat is if the high school is essentially where they live. Players for IMG Academy aren't from Bradenton, Florida, for example. High school athletes are notable for their communities - as evidenced by countless "best plays from City X" lists. But the place of birth is also a valid "from" answer - in fact, there are editors who think that is the only "from." But I think about myself - I qualify as "from" my city of birth but if someone asks me today then I will answer that I am "from" my current home. There is no issue with two categories if this is the case. Rikster2 (talk) 13:45, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Discussion opened at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography#Meaning of "from", cross-referenced at Wikipedia talk:Categorization#Meaning of "from". Cbl62 (talk) 13:50, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Onel5969 has been tagging a few CFB players I believe meet GNG with {Notability}, and when I removed it they said I am not allowed to "remove them without improvement". Is this how the notability tag works? I've listed a few of them below so someone else can check whether they pass GNG:

• Will Taylor (American football)
• Olakunle Fatukasi
• Nick Starkel
• Zay Flowers

BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:20, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

I removed the tag from Starkel. That one's clearly notable. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:42, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

I have been doing a bit of digging on newspapers.com recently and found while Marshall was referred to as the Thundering Herd as early as 1926, they were not officially known as the Thundering Herd until January 1965. They were officially known as the Big Green but were often referred to as the Thundering Herd concurrently from ~1926 until 1965, which begs the question, how should the articles be named? Should the season articles prior to 1965 be Marshall Big Green or remain Thundering Herd? Eknight2012 (talk) 00:01, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Under WP:COMMONNAME, we should follow whichever was the more common name. Date-focused searches at Newspapers.com can help guide which name was more common at different periods of time. Cbl62 (talk) 02:09, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

I propose merging content from article Montgomery Bowl into article 2020 Montgomery Bowl. Editors may recall that the Montgomery Bowl was last season's one-off bowl game, and did not return this year. Thus, I don't see a need for the "root" article, as just an article on the game that was played should suffice. That is what has been done with this season's one-off bowl game, the 2021 Frisco Football Classic. Frisco Football Classic simply redirects to the 2021 game page; Montgomery Bowl should/would simply redirect to the 2020 game page. Input welcome. Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 03:35, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Pete Vainowski, who played nine seasons professionally, including one in the National Football League (also in college for Loyola), was deleted in an AFD in which there were 8 keeps and 3 deletes, making this the only time ever, we have deleted an article on a topic meeting NGRIDIRON. What do users here think about this? BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:15, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

• Disappointed, but Vainowski is a poor "test case" for defending NGRIDIRON, given that (i) his NFL career was limited to one game, and (ii) we could not find anything remotely resembling SIGCOV.
  • Do you agree with the closure? BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:26, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

No but I don't think it would be overturned. There is a substantial wave of support for challenging the sports SNGs that has developed in response to the mass creation of cricket sub-stubs, and unfortunately that wave has now reached the shores of the NFL. Cbl62 (talk) 20:41, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

...sigh... that kind of defeats my purpose of editing WP (to have all NFL players with an article), but I will still probably continue to edit/create. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:44, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Nobody likes to see their work deleted. My advice is to track down at least one decent example of SIGCOV before undertaking the effort to create a bio article. One other piece of advice regarding your nomination of 20 sports bios for deletion in the wake of Vainowski's deletion -- I've seen other instances where an editor has their article deleted and then tries to prove a point by nominating for deletion a bunch of other articles from other areas. This may be an understandable reaction, but it creates a risk of pitting editors of one sport against those in another. Cbl62 (talk) 21:09, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the title or scope of the list would be, but I wonder if someone could create a list similar to List of National Football League players with unidentified given names for players like Vainowski that there isn't much to say about. That way we could still have complete coverage of every NFL player without having to give them all their own articles. TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 01:12, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Vainowski's given name is known. Cbl62 (talk) 02:37, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm aware of that, I was just using that list as an example of how we treat other NFL players without enough coverage to justify standalone articles. TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 02:41, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't read your post as carefully as I should have. Perhaps a List of National Football League players who appeared in only one game (1920–1929) and another for List of National Football League players who appeared in only one game (1930–1939)? I suggest the decades approach because the probability of passing WP:GNG is higher in more recent decades, even for players who appeared in only one game. Cbl62 (talk) 14:39, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

I personally believe all players should have an article, even with just one game, as this is an encyclopedia. Similar to what we've done at NBA, MLB, NHL, etc. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:58, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Understood, but given what has happened with Vainowski and with one-game players in other sports, such a list seems better and more encyclopedic than nothing. Compare List of players who played only one game in the NHL. Cbl62 (talk) 08:22, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

My point is, every player on the list you pointed out, and every one-game MLB and NBA player all have an article. The NFL is the only of the "Big Four" leagues not to have all their players with an article and I don't think it should be that way. I actually would support a list of one game NFL players, unless the list's purpose is to redirect articles to it. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:49, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

I also noticed that about the NHL list but I think that many of the early one game NHL players are vulnerable to deletion for the same reason. There’s also a big difference between a one game player today and in the 1920s. There just wasn’t as much coverage of the NFL in the 1920s and it’s tough to find SIGCOV on a one game player from that era. Cbl62 (talk) 18:02, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

I started "List of players who appeared in only one game in the NFL (1920–1929)" yesterday. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League#NFL one-gamers if you have ideas on improving this list. Cbl62 (talk) 16:01, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

As follow up to the Vainowski discussion above, the list article created in response has been nominated for deletion. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of players who appeared in only one game in the NFL (1920–1929) if interested one way or the other. Cbl62 (talk) 19:41, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

I have made a merge proposal for article Plus-One system that may be of interest to editors who work on college football. Dmoore5556 (talk) 07:04, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

The current plus-one article seems to be describing the current 4-team playoff... which I suppose technically is "+1" game compared to the BCS. But I believe the "plus-one system" was actually a proposal to select the #1 and #2 teams from the winners of all bowls, played with traditional conference tie-ins and without seeded semi-finals. That's what is described in the citations:

> The likely next step is the so-called Plus One model. It is similar to the current system except that it would determine the participants in the national championship game after the five major bowls were played. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PKAMB (talk • contribs) 16:15, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

> In a plus-one, the whole thing gets reset after the bowls, and a selection committee or poll picks the top two teams, which would require an even more carefully selected group of selectors.

> On the one hand, a "plus-one" -- a euphemism for the current BCS system, the only difference being the BCS National Championship Game participants are determined after, not before, the bowl games...

So the BCS selected the #1 and #2 prior to the bowls, whereas the proposed plus-one system would select them after for +1 additional game. So IMO the current article's playoff info should be moved/merged to the CFP article... but Plus-One system should remain and describe only the never-implemented proposal.

PKAMB (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:03, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

PKAMB, thanks for that insight. Looking at the history of the Plus-One system page, it was first created in March 2012 by user Bschoenle, who has not been active since June 2012. A portion of the lead in the initial article read as: "The Plus-One system has many variations, but essentially places the nation’s top four teams into a playoff to determine the National Champion." I do see, via newspapers.com, that back in the 2004 timeframe the initial direction was to add another game after existing bowls had been played. Example here from January 2004 in the Orlando Sentinel. I'm going to look further via newspapers.com to get a better sense of how the meaning / intent of "plus-one system" may have changed over time. The "Plus-One" section of the Plus-One system page only speaks to the four-team playoff. Overall, I view all of this as part of the history of how the College Football Playoff came to be implemented, and not a topic that warrants a stand-alone article. Dmoore5556 (talk) 17:48, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Dmoore5556 The entire concept of calling the CFP 4-team playoff a "plus-one system" seems to currently be original research unsupported by the citations. The College Football Playoff article currently states:

> The current format is a Plus-One system, an idea which became popular as an alternative to the BCS after the 2003 and 2004 seasons ended in controversy.

But the two citations to that statement are both talking about the plus-one system in the BCS sense, not a 4-team playoff. We shouldn't conflate the Plus-One System and 4-team playoff just because they both happen to add 1 game to the previous BCS bowls. Contemporary reporting shows it to be an extension of the BCS and discussed independently of a potential playoff, which came later. I think I would prefer the plus-one article to remain, rewritten to discuss only the the BCS+1 proposal and with a link to CFP. But if anything it should be merged into Bowl Championship Series, not College Football Playoff.

PKAMB (talk) 18:18, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

P.S. perhaps the article should be retitled "BCS Plus-One system" to disambiguate from anything else that happens to add "+1" game.

PKAMB (talk) 18:45, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

PKAMB, it may simply be wrong, albeit well-intentioned when first written. I agree that Plus-One, certainly as it was described in 2004, should not be lumped in with the four-team playoff that was ultimately implemented nearly a decade later. I also agree with updating the existing article to accurately reflect the initial Plus-One proposal, along with any variations that developed (I haven't reviewed chronology via newspapers.com yet). Once that's been done, where the content belongs should hopefully be clearer. Dmoore5556 (talk) 21:23, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

PKAMB, looking at the page history for College Football Playoff, when Plus-One was first added in the main text (it was initially an entry in See also), the statement was "The new championship format is similar to the Plus-One system idea that became popular in 2011" (bolding added by me). It was then changed to "is known as a Plus-One system". Both edits in August 2013 by Woodshed, who is still an active editor (and whose recollections or input are welcome). Dmoore5556 (talk) 21:45, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

I've been piecing together member schools and their respective timelines in Southern States Conference. I'm having a hell of a time finding the exact years in which Montevallo, Selma, and Talladega respectively joined. Maybe my eyes are crossed from all of the newspapers.com searching. I was wondering if someone else with a newspapers.com account can give those three schools a shot? SportsGuy789 (talk) 18:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

An article on the NCAA transfer portal was long overdue. I took a shot at starting the article today, but it's an important topic and welcome any help in developing the topic further. Among other things, it would be good to include data on the number of athletes entering the portal each year. Cbl62 (talk) 01:26, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks enormously. Huge hole filled. I looked for sources in early fall and saw nothing. Good eyes. SI should have a feature on this... BusterD (talk) 03:01, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Editors of this project may be interested in the deletion review of Pete Vainowski, which can be found here. BeanieFan11 (talk) 03:06, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Today's DYK is as good a time as any to update this project that the Vacated victory page has finally gone live, a mere ten years after discussions here led to a draft starting. Feel free to add/watch/link to it. Alyo (chat·edits) 15:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

There is currently pending at RfC: Abolish the current version of NSPORTS a proposal to eliminate NSPORTS, including its subparts dealing with WP:NGRIDIRON and WP:NCOLLATH. Feel free to weigh in there if you have thoughts on the issue. Cbl62 (talk) 01:58, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

College football editors may be interested in the deletion discussion of the 1977 South Dakota Coyotes football team. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:55, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

If anyone is familiar with coding of the CFB team rosters, could you take a look at the above and see why it's messed up? Cbl62 (talk) 05:16, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Looks like there were an extra pair of brackets thrown in there. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 06:34, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

A new proposal is now pending to add language to NSPORT providing, among other things, that "meeting [NSPORTS, NGRIDIRON, or NCOLLATH] would not serve as a valid keep argument in a deletion discussion." If you have views on this proposal, one way or the other, please feel free to add your comments at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Subproposal 1 (NSPORT).Cbl62 (talk) 14:52, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

I suspect that Eber Simpson and Eber Sampson, both born in 1895, both NFL backs in the early 1920s, may be the same person. Anyone care to help with the research to see if we can either prove or disprove my hypothesis? Cbl62 (talk) 05:14, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

I expanded Eber Simpson a bit. I think they were not the same person. Simpson seems to have been strongly tied to St. Louis at the time both played in the NFL. And Sampson certainly looks like a different guy, if the picture used in that article is correct. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:10, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Wisconsin–La Crosse Eagles has been nominated for deletion. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wisconsin–La Crosse Eagles. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 20:34, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Onel5969 keeps tagging Kearis Jackson with {{Notability}} and calls it "disruptive editing" to remove it. I'm bringing it here for someone else to review. Here are the sources that are SIGCOV in my opinion (and bring him over the GNG bar): [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] and [11], among others. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:08, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

There is an anonymous user that is adding the support staff to the 2022 Arizona State Sun Devils football team page and I was wondering what others are doing? Is anyone else adding the support staff to their respective pages or are you only adding the coaches/analysts? I feel like adding the support staff is a little overboard considering it would take up so much extra space. Any insight would be great. Thanks. GoWarriors151718 (talk) 02:14, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't see a problem including support staff in the body of the article. A fully-developed team season article is going to have lots of detail with a full roster listing, etc. The amount of "extra space" here is negligible. Would be good to have a standardized way of of listing coaches and personnel though. The current state of things there is an inconsistent mess. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:34, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@Jweiss11: Okay. Fair points. I agree with you that it is extremely inconsistent. I will add it at a later time since most likely there will be changes between now and when the season starts. Thanks for your opinion. GoWarriors151718 (talk) 05:49, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Jamie Fitzgerald (American football), a former NFL player, has been nominated for deletion. You may be interested in the discussion. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:51, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Editors of this project may be interested in a village pump proposal which will "replace all instances of 'presumed to be notable' with 'significant coverage is likely to exist'" in WP:NSPORT and "rewrite the introduction to clearly state that GNG is the applicable guideline, and articles may not be created or kept unless they meet GNG." BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:27, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

To be more specific, your input, one way or the other, on several pending proposals to alter NSPORTS would be welcomed. These proposals are as follows:

• Subproposal 1: Requires "all athlete biographies must demonstrate GNG when notability is challenged at AfD" and that "SIGCOV in multiple secondary, independent reliable sources would have to be produced during the course of an AfD". Also potential limitations/exceptions.
• Subproposal 3: "Remove all simple or mere 'participation' criteria in NSPORT, outside of ones related to Olympics and equivalent events."
• Subproposal 4: "Modify all provisions of NSPORTS that provide that participation in 'one' game/match such that the minimum participation level is increased to 'three' games/matches. This raises the threshold for the presumption of notability to kick in."
• Subproposal 5: "Implement a requirement that all sports biographies and sports season/team articles must, from inception, include at least one example of actual WP:SIGCOV from a reliable, independent source. Mere database entries would be insufficient for creation of a new biography article."
• Subproposal 6: "Conditional on Subproposal 6 passing, should a prod-variant be created, applicable to the articles covered by Subproposal 5, that would require the addition of one reference containing significant coverage to challenge the notice."
• Subproposal 8: "Rewrite the introduction to clearly state that GNG is the applicable guideline, and articles may not be created or kept unless they meet GNG." Further: "Replace all instances of 'presumed to be notable' with 'significant coverage is likely to exist.'
• Subproposal 9: Strike, as allegedly confusing and/or at odds with other parts of NSPORTS, the following sentence from the lead: "The article should provide reliable sources showing that the subject meets the general notability guideline or the sport specific criteria set forth below."
• Subproposal 10: "Require each project that has inclusion criteria based on participation in a league ... within the next 30 days to justify the inclusion of each league. Such justification must include actual 'random' (truly random) sampling showing that 90%-plus of the players in each league receive sufficient SIGCOV to pass GNG. At the end of 30 days, any league as to which the data has not been provided must be stricken from NSPORTS." Cbl62 (talk) 09:35, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Happy new year, everyone. I want to make another plea for help with team season articles from the 1930s to 1950s. 1934 college football season and 1955 college football season are over the limit on Template:Cfb link calls, leading to errors. 1951 college football season is just under the limit (I've created a whole bunch of 1951 articles in last couple days) and other seasons in the late pre-divisional era are close to the limit. This problem can be solved by building out more team season articles. We've still got lots of now-Division I and other historically significant programs missing season articles in that era. I know many of you including Cbl62, Patriarca12, TheCatalyst31, and Pvmoutside have been active building out these sorts season articles. It would be great if we could prioritize seasons in this 1930s-to-1950s area to get a little more breathing room. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 03:18, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Sure, happy to lend a hand. Is there a list somewhere to work from? Dmoore5556 (talk) 03:27, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Dmoore5556, thanks for volunteering. There's no list exactly for this specific issue, but I'd recommend taking a look at the following programs; see links to navbox templates for red-linked seasons from 1930 to the late 1950s:

Jweiss11 (talk) 04:03, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Jweiss11, thanks. I'll work on some Idaho State season articles, as time allows. Dmoore5556 (talk) 04:18, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

All good suggestions, with one word of caution. Before creating season articles for these teams, be sure to check first to make sure that each season you are creating has WP:SIGCOV in multiple, reliable, and independent sources, so as to pass WP:GNG. Best practice is to include such SIGCOV in the articles you are creating. Newspapers.com is an excellent resource to find such SIGCOV. If you lack access to Newspapers.com, and someone with access will probably volunteer to assist. Cbl62 (talk) 20:07, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Cbl62, got it thanks. I have a Newspapers.com account and will use to locate SIGCOV. Dmoore5556 (talk) 01:17, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

1952 college football season, 1953 college football season, and 1954 college football season are over the limit now that I have added Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference standing templates for those years. I just created 1953 East Texas State Lions football team, but could use some help getting these seasons below the limit plus creating some breathing room to continue fleshing out the missing standing templates, e.g. Midwest Conference, Northern Sun Intercollegiate Conference, Pennsylvania State Athletic Conference. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 20:55, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Update

1934, 1949, 1952, and 1955 are right at the limit (500) for expensive parser calls and several other seasons are very close to the limit.

• 1930: 429
• 1931: 476
• 1932: 471
• 1933: 436
• 1934: 500
• 1935: 465
• 1936: 453
• 1937: 449
• 1938: 457
• 1939: 466
• 1940: 417
• 1941: 393
• 1942: 328
• 1943: 34
• 1944: 55
• 1945: 144
• 1946: 415
• 1947: 446
• 1948: 486
• 1949: 500
• 1950: 494
• 1951: 494
• 1952: 500
• 1953: 493
• 1954: 497
• 1955: 500

Once again, it would be great if could get folks to help with creating team season articles for these years! Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 01:48, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Again, just a reminder that it is prudent from inception to show that any such season articles pass GNG with SIGCOV in multiple, reliable, and independent sources. `Cbl62 (talk)

Hi all - I am interested in expanding some articles for older games (1992 SEC Championship Game, for one) but I am finding that few sources exist (at least, that I can find readily) on such things as starting lineups and play-by-plays, as can be easily found for games nowadays. I have found both in a broadcast of the game posted to YouTube (this one in particular), but WP:RSPYT says that citing this broadcast could potentially be problematic. Any other interpretations or possible solutions? Thanks! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 05:50, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

That particular video looks like a copyright violation, so you couldn't link to it per WP:COPYVIOEL.—Bagumba (talk) 17:58, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

This post raises interesting questions. We shouldn't cite and link a YouTube video that violates copyright. But if one views the video of the game, and it includes such things as a starting lineup, could one not just cite to the "Television broadcast of 1992 SEC Championship Game, December 5, 1992, ABC Sports" without linking to the YouTube republication? After all, ABC Sports is a reliable source for the starting lineup. Are we disqualifying the broadcast as a source simply because it was later republished on YouTube in violation of ABC's original rights? Does it matter that the person made the edit only after viewing it on YouTube? If we don't know if the person made the edit based on watching YouTube, isn't a violation of AGF to presume as much? Not sure about the answers, but it seems like there are some "less than black and white" issues. Cbl62 (talk) 18:39, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

User 70.178.153.147 (talk · contribs) is changing Alabama's 2006 season record to all losses, most recently here at Template:2006 Southeastern Conference football standings, apparently based on player violations resulting in Alabama vacating those wins. I have not yet found a source that actually shows standings that reflect any vacated wins. They show Alabama's wins intact for 2006: [12] and [13] for example. So were these wins ever actually vacated? The player violations involving misappropriated text books is old news that broke some 13 years ago. It pre-dates the creation of the template and I see nothing in the edit history to suggest any contention regarding Alabama's W-L record.

(Note 70.178.153.147 has also stated this should be consistent with MSU's 2018 situation and how that is presented at Template:2018 Southeastern Conference football standings)

I have left 70.178.153.147's latest revision stand as is. Has any of this been brought up before? Can someone confirm 70.178.153.147's changes are correct? Any help clarifying would be greatly appreciated. --DB1729 (talk) 00:40, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

We've had a lot of success building out season articles for historical teams. I've been shifting some of my focus to improving the quality of some of the lower quality season articles, including many that I created in a hurried manner. Is there a way to do a search to create a list of college season articles that have fewer than 2,000 bytes of content? If we could generate and sort such a list (ideally sorted by team), it could be an effective "to do list" for anyone who wanted to work on such an upgrade project. Cbl62 (talk) 21:19, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Petscan is useful for searches like that, if you look for articles in the subcategories of Category:College football seasons by team that have various issues. I've also used it to find unreferenced season articles and articles that are missing Template:CFB schedule. TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 23:10, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Tim Atchison, a former National Football League player (who played college football for Baylor), has been nominated for deletion. You may be interested in the discussion. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:48, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Jock Mungavin, who played college football in the 1910s and later in the National Football League, has been nominated for deletion. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jock Mungavin. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:20, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I have noticed on the quality scale for the project that there is a tag for "needed" class. I don't think it would be acceptable to create a redirect simply to add this tag, but what about existing redirects for programs that redirect to the institution or athletics program, or lists of head coaches/lists of seasons? Would we be better just to 86 the quality scale tag altogether?-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 01:03, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Examples of some lists [14].-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 01:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Cal Poly (SLO) Mustangs football#Requested move 1 March 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. It has been proposed to move Cal Poly (SLO) Mustangs football back to Cal Poly Mustangs football. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 08:02, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Template:NCAA Division I-A football ranking movements has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 16:04, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

User:Johnpacklambert has correctly pointed out that the above article lacks appropriate sourcing (currently sourced only to Find-a-Grave). He is likely notable as he played five games in the NFL (see here) and was head coach at Georgetown for two years. Anyone want to take a stab at improving it to show that he passes muster? For search purposes, it appears he was sometimes known as "Mush" Dubofsky. Here's a couple of sources that should be a good start: [15], [16], [17], [18], [19]]. Cbl62 (talk) 20:08, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

See discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League#RIP NGRIDIRON regarding its repeal. Cbl62 (talk) 09:33, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

In the National championship claims by school table, I've been adding citations for the public signs and banners that schools use to claim their national championship seasons like so: ^[1][2][3]

These public sign/banner claims are stronger than mentions in media guides, which may not properly communicate the level of "claim" that the school is giving to a season. Some of the claims-by-school currently listed on the page may still be "incorrect", and citing (or failing to locate) the public claims may help fix the discrepancies.

I believe I have already cited most of the prominent claims visible from the field. Remaining claims will likely be in the stadium concourse or perhaps somewhere else like a Hall of Fame, museum, or recruiting office.

I could use help locating, identifying, citing, and photographing any public sign/banner/flag/plaque/exhibit claims of the remaining schools below. Fans of the schools may know their locations (if they exist).

• Alabama
• Michigan
• Notre Dame
• USC
• Pittsburgh
• Cal
• Iowa
• SMU
• Stanford
• Arkansas
• Boston College
• Kentucky
• Navy
• Rutgers
• UCLA
• Wisconsin
• Arizona State
• Duke
• Missouri
• Purdue
• Vanderbilt

Ivy League stadiums all seem to display Ivy League Championship banners, but I can't see national championship banners.

• Princeton
• Yale
• Harvard – found
• Penn
• Cornell
• Columbia
• Dartmouth

And then there are the historic curiosities in the list, which either no longer have football programs or now compete at a lower division:

• Lafayette
• Chicago
• Centre
• Detroit
• Colgate
• Washington & Jefferson

Any help on this citation project would be very appreciated! The more public, large, and expensive the sign the better.

PKAMB (talk) 07:33, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't really understand why public sign/banner claims are stronger than mentions in media guides. Moreover, I wonder how many signs would note if there was a co-champion. At any rate, an independent source would be ideal, as schools could put up fake banners, like Syracuse still claiming a vacated lacrosse title.[20]—Bagumba (talk) 07:52, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Nevermind. I see that it truly is claims by the schools themselves, which may be disputed. It seems it'd be more useful to highlight the specific titles disputed by independent sources, as I assume most of those "claimed" are legit.—Bagumba (talk) 08:02, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Brown is a program that could really use some TLC on its season articles. In particular, the following years: 1891-1897, 1899, 1919-1924, and 1927-1940. Cbl62 (talk) 00:35, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I started chipping away at the early Brown years. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:19, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Cbl62, I've expanded all the Brown seasons listed here up through 1919. Additionally, 1902 thru 1916 and 1918 still have games missing references. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:35, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks. Cbl62 (talk) 17:40, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

See Talk:Dick Pierce#Mystery and possible AfD— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbl62 (talk • contribs) 14:00, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Cnd474747 has pulled together newspaper clippings for weekly Coaches Poll rankings for 1950 to 1976, e.g. https://www.newspapers.com/clip/95748365/1950-09-19-coaches-poll-pre-season/. While the weekly results for the AP Poll are fleshed out at 1950 NCAA football rankings and the like, the same has not yet been done for the Coaches Poll. Generally, only the final Coaches Poll is detailed in those articles. Does anyone want to help Cnd474747 build out the weekly Coaches Poll rankings? Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 00:55, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for making this Jon -- I had no idea this page existed. While I have assembled the data, formatting the table in the Wiki style is above my skillset, hence the call for help. The data is all there, just needs beautification. Cnd474747 (talk) 01:28, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Please see the changes in edits at that page. Thank you. There are changes that overhauled the page. Some discussion is needed regarding formatting.-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 17:50, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

I noticed some discrepancies between {{Gatorade Football Player of the Year}} and Gatorade Player of the Year awards#Football:

1. The years in the navbox are based on the football season, while the years in the article are based on the end of the academic year (when the award was probably handed out)
2. Greg Paulus is listed on the navbox for 2005 (i.e. the 2004 season) but the list-article doesn't have him at all

Admittedly, I'm too lazy / not passionate enough about this exact topic to dig into it. Just thought I'd throw it over to a contingent who might care. SportsGuy789 (talk) 18:49, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

With Queens University of Charlotte joining the ASUN in July, Module:College color needs to have the school added. Anyone know an editor who is good with that stuff? SportsGuy789 (talk) 23:51, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

I've done a few. The important thing is to find the institution's branding guidelines/style guide; they should be published somewhere. Mackensen (talk) 01:12, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Can you add it? I think this might help. SportsGuy789 (talk) 03:24, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

@Mackensen/@SportsGuy789, I just did this. Brand guidelines were very recently updated. https://queensathletics.com/documents/2022/4/29/Athletic_Guidelines_Updated_4_29_22.pdf Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 03:26, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @Sammi Brie. SportsGuy789 (talk) 20:44, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Have you ever considered changing these templates from uppercased, space-using parameter names (e.g. "Visitor Record" to "visitor_record")? See the WP:INFOBOXNAME section:

* Parameters in infoboxes should:

• • be named, not numbered, to provide for future use.
  • use lower-case unless they are proper nouns.
  • be consistent between infoboxes. For example, Infobox person uses birth_date=, as do many other biographical infoboxes, so it would be confusing for a new biographical infobox to use, say date of birth=, rather than reusing the existing parameter name.
  • Use snake case (eg birth_date=). Not camel case (eg birthDate=) or title case (eg BirthDate=)
  • represent spaces using an underscore, eg birth_place= not birth-place= or birth place=.

I can assist with this process and requesting a PrimeBOT run to change over the parameters. It would make these templates easier to use for people from other topic areas; the parameter names jumped out at me when I was reviewing 2021 Myrtle Beach Bowl. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:27, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Sammi, sounds likes a good idea to do this cleanup. Template:Infobox college football team, also needs the same. Jweiss11 (talk) 00:00, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Would there be any objection to changing "Visitor1" through "Visitor4" to "visitor_1q" through 4q and then changing the overtimes to be labeled _ot, _2ot, _3ot, etc. instead of using numbers 5 through 13? I have {{Infobox college football game/sandbox}} with just the new param names... I'd then add these alongside the existing ones, call in PrimeBOT, have it run, and drop the old parameters. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:44, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

No objection from me. Those parameter names are more institutive than the currents ones. Jweiss11 (talk)

I have done this. Pinging Primefac to get a PrimeBOT Task 30 run for this. There are two wrapper templates that will need this treatment too, {{Infobox NCAA football yearly game}} and {{Infobox NCAA football single game}}; they pass on the same parameters in the same names. The sandbox contains the final (new names only) code. When done, I'll add tracking etc. to it.

Here's a find and replace list. Note that all the purple parameters (Visitor) have "Home" versions that I have also changed to "home".

Was	Now
Year Game Played	year_game_played
Title Sponsor	title_sponsor
Game Name	game_name
Subheader	subheader
Image	image
Image_Size	image_size
Image Size	image_size
Image_Upright	image_upright
Alt	alt
Caption	caption
Football Season	football_season
Football Division	football_division
Visitor Name Short	visitor_name_short
Visitor Nickname	visitor_nickname
Visitor School	visitor_school
Visitor Record	visitor_record
Visitor Conference	visitor_conference
Visitor1	visitor_1q
Visitor2	visitor_2q
Visitor3	visitor_3q
Visitor4	visitor_4q
Visitor5	visitor_ot
Visitor6	visitor_2ot
Visitor7	visitor_3ot
Visitor8	visitor_4ot
Visitor9	visitor_5ot
Visitor10	visitor_6ot
Visitor11	visitor_7ot
Visitor12	visitor_8ot
Visitor13	visitor_9ot
Visitor Coach	visitor_coach
Visitor AP	visitor_rank_AP
Visitor Coaches	visitor_rank_coaches
Visitor CFP	visitor_rank_CFP
Visitor BCS	visitor_rank_BCS
Visitor Bowl Alliance	visitor_rank_bowlalliance
Visitor Bowl Coalition	visitor_rank_bowlcoalition
Stadium	stadium
City	city
Odds	odds
Anthem	anthem
Referee	referee
Halftime	halftime
Attendance	attendance
Payout	payout
US Network	us_network
US Network Link	us_network_link
US Announcers	us_announcers
Ratings	ratings
US Announcers Link	us_announcers_link
Intl Network	intl_network
Intl Network Link	intl_network_link
Intl Announcers	intl_announcers
Intl Announcers Link	intl_announcers_link
FirstGameEverPlayed	first_game_ever_played
LastGameEverPlayed	last_game_ever_played
Different Previous	different_previous
Different Next	different_next
Navigation 2	navigation_2
FirstGameEverPlayed 2	first_game_ever_played_2
LastGameEverPlayed 2	last_game_ever_played_2
Different Previous 2	different_previous_2
Different Next 2	different_next_2
Date	date
game link	game_link

I also see Template:Infobox NCAA FCS football yearly game needs this work done, with mostly similarly named parameters, but I am out of spoons to do it. Found myself wishing I could automate much more of this. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:29, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. Primefac (talk) 06:59, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac (talk) 13:49, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

FYI and BTW, the "us_announcers" parameter and/or link are/is broken in the NCAA football yearly game infobox template. I mucked about in the infobox template without success (and did not save my edits) and now leave it to others to rectify. Zeng8r (talk) 14:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

We use "NC State" to describe the athletic teams from North Carolina State University, regardless of time period. While "NC State" may be the common nomenclature in the modern era, it was not for much (most?) of the school's history. Does anyone have a good read on when "NC State" became the more common usage? Also, when the "Wolfpack" name came into usage? If we can answer these questions, we will better be able to decide which articles (e.g., 1946 NC State Wolfpack football team, 1919–20 NC State Wolfpack men's basketball team) should be renamed and how they should be renamed. Cbl62 (talk) 15:39, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

From their 2021–22 Men's Basketball Media Guide, page 51:

1923-24 SEASON NC State, previously known as the Techs, becomes the Red Terrors, ...

DEC. 2, 1947 NC State plays its first basketball game as the Wolfpack, changing its name from Red Terrors.

No word on use of the term NC State specifically mind you, although it does cover the university's name changes in general. Hope this helps! Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 16:00, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

As a followup, it may not be that clear cut -- or maybe even it was split by sport. I can find an article from October 1946 referring to the football team as the Wolfpack, but then another from December '48 still using the name Red Terror for the basketball team. Perhaps unsurprising they wanted to move away from the name at the onset of the Cold War! Tbh, I would imagine branding was less rigorous in those days, so many secondary sources weren't that concerned with following what the school actively chose. I'd be inclined to simply follow the primary source here. (Mind you, that primary source doesn't mention when the football team switched, and the football Media Guide for last year doesn't mention the old name at all.) Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 16:19, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

@Buttons to Push Buttons: Thanks for all of the above. That's a great start. And the bit about moving away from "Red Terror" during the Red Scare is very interesting. Cbl62 (talk) 20:27, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

As a point of reference, we refer to the 1919–20 Duke Blue Devils men's basketball team as the team representing Duke University, not Trinity College. So by extension, it makes sense to name articles using "NC State" whether it's NC A&M, NC State College (of Agriculture and Engineering), UNC–Raleigh(!), North Carolina State of the University of North Carolina, or North Carolina State University (at Raleigh). (Except for the early A&M years, "NC State" has been the common short form, other than within NC, where "State College" was used before the transition to a university.)

That said, we do change nicknames through history: older Syracuse articles use title constructions with Syracuse Orangemen, not the Syracuse Orange. So for the years when Red Terrors would have been preferred to avoid the connections to U-boat wolf packs—and sources show that Red Terrors was the common name—I'd agree with the change of nickname. (Obviously, a redirect with "Wolfpack" in the name will help from a navigation standpoint.) —C.Fred (talk) 19:42, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

We have typically named each season article according to what the school was called at the time in question. For example, Michigan State University has gone through name changes and our season articles follow those name changes. E.g., 1920 Michigan Agricultural Aggies football team. Or in the case of UCLA, see 1925 Southern Branch Grizzlies football team. Or in the case of Duke, 1894 Trinity Blue and White football team. Our NC State articles should IMO likewise reflect the common name of the school at the time of the season (of course, with appropriate redirects to assist in navigation). Cbl62 (talk) 20:30, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I would not put much stock in an article like 1919–20 Duke Blue Devils men's basketball team, which is just a bare-bones import of data from a media guide or encyclopedia site. The article is clearly misnamed. Generally speaking, our coverage and accuracy in naming articles for college football of this era is much better than that for college basketball. The answer to how an article should be named can be found largely by looking at the contemporary newspaper coverage. 1922 NC State Wolfpack football team is the first NC State season article using the "Wolfpack" fight name, and that's clearly supported by the cited references, as is "NC State"—I just added a few to the article. Note that in this era and earlier it was more common to see initialisms punctuated with periods and spaces, e.g. "N. C. State" instead of "NC State". I noticed this while doing some work on TCU and SMU football; "T. C. U." and "S. M. U." were more common in the early 20th century. I think this was probably just the general style of initialisms in those days rather an anything specific to these teams and schools. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:51, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

I agree with most of what you said, Jweiss. However, my sense is that, at least in the first half of the 20th century, references to "NC State" or "N.C. State", while they can be found, represented a minority usage with the more common usage being "North Carolina State". Time permitting, someone could do a deep dive to figure out when the "initialism" (new word to me, and I like it) became the more common usage. Cbl62 (talk) 03:04, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Yep, until recently I used "acronym" for things like "TCU" or "UCLA", but they are technically initialisms. An acronym has to form a pronounced word like "NASA" or "scuba" or "POTUS". If it's just read or stated as a string of letters like "TCU", its an initialism. Jweiss11 (talk) 12:24, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

@Jweiss11 You might want to see this page from 192**1** [21] which mentions the "newly acquired" Wolfpack name for football. As to basketball, [22] mentions that the athletic council of the college changed the name owing to confusion from out-of-state opponents and sportswriters because the Terrors moniker was only used by basketball, bringing it in line with other teams. Regionally, UNC's basketball teams were informally called the "White Phantoms" from 1925 through about 1950 after Atlanta Journal sportswriter Oscar Bane Keeler called them that at the SIC tournament (luckily, that got quoted in the Nashville Banner, as newspapers.com only has the Constitution). (Usage took a year or two longer to taper out outside of the Raleigh area.) Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 19:01, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm quite late to this discussion, sorry, , but Sammi Brie above is correct; Red Terrors applied only to basketball. Wolfpack was adopted after the 1921 season, when a sports write noted the team was "as unruly as a pack of wolves." Before that, we were called variously the Aggies, the Farmers, the Mechanics, and the Techs. Aggies seems to have been the most popular nickname from what I've seen, so I think we should keep Aggies as the primary nickname.Cnd474747 (talk) 18:17, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

I have nominated Category:1982 Far Western Conference football season for renaming. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 May 10#Category:1982 Far Western Conference football season. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 21:55, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

This nominations has been relisted here: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 May 17#Category:1982 Far Western Conference football season. It could use some comments. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 20:22, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

This could still use some comments. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 19:22, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

We need some better standardization around how we "short name" the four Loyola schools in lists, tables, and standings templates. The four schools are as follows.

• Loyola Marymount University, known as Loyola College of Los Angeles from 1917 to 1930 and Loyola University of Los Angeles from 1930 to 1973
• Loyola University Chicago
• Loyola University Maryland in Baltimore, known as Loyola College in Maryland from 1852 to 2009
• Loyola University New Orleans, known as Loyola College from 1886 to 1912 and Loyola University from 1912 to 1996

The main athletics pages for the four schools are as follows.

• Loyola Marymount Lions (Los Angeles)
• Loyola Ramblers (Chicago)
• Loyola Greyhounds (Baltimore)
• Loyola Wolf Pack (New Orleans)

The football programs four all four schools are defunct. See:

• Template:Loyola Lions football navbox (1951)
• Template:Loyola Ramblers football navbox (1930)
• Template:Loyola Greyhounds football coach navbox (1933)
• Loyola Wolf Pack football (1939)

Within college football articles, the standard shortnaming for the four schools has used standard two-letter state code disambiguators, as follows:

• Loyola (CA), c.f. Jordan Olivar, 1951 Santa Clara Broncos football team, Template:1951 Western college football independents records
• Loyola (IL), c.f. Roger Kiley, 1930 Boston College Eagles football team, Template:1926 Midwestern college football independents records
• Loyola (MD), c.f. Tony Comerford, 1928 Navy Midshipmen football team
• Loyola (LA), c.f. Eddie Reed, 1935 TCU Horned Frogs football team, Template:1935 Dixie Conference football standings

In discussion with Cbl62 at Talk:1946 Redlands Bulldogs football team, we recognized that using "Loyola (LA)" for the New Orleans school could be confusing given the other Loyola school in Los Angeles (LA). There was also a related discussion at WikiProject College Basketball in March concerning the shortnaming of the Chicago school; see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College Basketball/Archive 8#Loyola Chicago vs Loyola Illinois?. What came out of that discussion was a sort of novel inconsistency where articles concerning the Chicago school are named simply "YYYY Loyola Ramblers...", e.g. 2021–22 Loyola Ramblers men's basketball team, while the school is short-named "Loyola Chicago" (Template:2021–22 Missouri Valley Conference men's basketball standings) or "Loyola–Chicago" (e.g. Drew Valentine, 2021–22 Vanderbilt Commodores men's basketball team). A shortnaming of "Loyola Chicago" suggests we should be naming articles 2021–22 Loyola Chicago Ramblers men's basketball team and Loyola Chicago Ramblers and the like. This needs some more thought and clean-up.

Generally, we need a consistent paradigm here for all college sports covering the full histories of these schools, as we don't yet have one. Should we use parenetical city disambiguators, e.g. Loyola (Los Angeles) for the pre-Marymount years, Loyola (Chicago), and Loyola (New Orleans)? For the Maryland school, Loyola (MD) may make more sense than Loyola (Baltimore). Thoughts?

Pinging the participants of the WP:CBB discussion from March: Zagalejo, SportsGuy789, Rikster2, Editorofthewiki, UCO2009bluejay, Dale Arnett, Bagumba.

Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 02:17, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Just so we are clear should we start naming the articles Miami (FL) Hurricanes, Miami (OH) RedHawks(redskins), Georgetown (D.C.) Hoyas?-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 02:50, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

No, parenetical disambiguators don't belong in those article titles because the fight name is present. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:04, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

I presume this should only apply to tables like staandings and schedules.—Bagumba (talk) 04:41, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, this largely applies to tables and lists like infoboxes, standings templates, schedules table, etc. Generally, parenetical disambiguators should be avoided in prose where there's room to explain which school/team is being discussed with a fight name or a location. Jweiss11 (talk) 15:30, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

What's the downside if just use the contemporary convention throughout, and gloss over any inconsistencies, as necessary? It's a similar dilemma of what are the deciding principles on whether we refer to AFL-NFL World Championship Game or Super Bowl.—Bagumba (talk) 02:56, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Bagumba, not sure what you mean here. We don't have a consistent contemporary convention. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:06, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

I mean like at that CBB discussion, where it seemed "Loyola Chicago" was the contemporary name to use. What's the downside of using that in historical tables as well?—Bagumba (talk) 04:05, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Scratch that. I skimmed and missed that these are defunct football programs, so the Super Bowl analogy for an ongoing annual event, which has a current name, is not as applicable.—Bagumba (talk) 04:09, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Bagumba, that the football programs are defunct is largely beside the point. The basketball and others sports programs are still active. The point of this discussion is to bring about a consistent standard for the four Loyola schools for all sports, covering the full histories of each sport. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:55, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

In a modern context, the Los Angeles school is "Loyola Marymount", and modern references to it, at a minimum, should not be otherwise. No opinion on their football teams. —Bagumba (talk) 03:04, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

• Article titles need not be changed. This is solely an issue of how we refer to the programs for disambiguation in schedule tables. As I noted in the earlier discussion, three of the Loyolas were most commonly referred to by city name (Los Angeles, New Orleans, and Chicago) while the fourth was commonly referred to by state (Maryland). Accordingly and IMO, we should dismbiguate the first three by using the city name, i.e. Loyola Chicgo, Loyola New Orleans, Loyola Los Angeles (or, if parentheticals are preferred, I'd be fine with Loyola (Chicago), Loyola (New Orleans), Loyola (Los Angeles). No need to change anything with Loyola (MD). Cbl62 (talk) 14:55, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Parentheticals are appropriate if the city/states are not being incorporated into the relevant articles titles. So, we'd go with: Loyola (Los Angeles), Loyola (Chicago), Loyola (New Orleans), and Loyola (MD). Jweiss11 (talk) 15:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm fine either way but the parenthetical does result in an inconsistency with how the basketball project decided the issue (i.e., Loyola Chicago, rather than Loyola (Chicago)). Cbl62 (talk) 16:36, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

The March WP:CBB discussion resulted in a mal-formed inconsistency, as I explained above. If the short name is "Loyola Chicago", then related articles need to be explicitly titled with "Loyola Chicago". The point of this discussion is to arrive at one standard for all sports. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:51, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

I think the WP:CBB discussion didn't really spend much time talking about the parenthetical - it was briefly considered towards the end, and then in an effort to close the discussion, it was not used when "Loyola Chicago" was far more popular than any other suggestions. It's also worth noting that the only argument against the parenthetical was that it wasn't common in other sports media, and frankly, I don't think that matters too much. I'd rather us go slightly against the grain for shorthand references to teams than use a more common shorthand styling that forces us to improperly name pages as "Loyola Chicago Ramblers" and such.

(tl;dr: I think the parenthetical is the way to go) -fuzzy510 (talk) 02:57, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME is the guiding policy for page titles. Using a more prominent example, we dont have Miami (FL) Hurricanes. —Bagumba (talk) 03:10, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

I don't think anyone is suggesting that we put parentheticals in the Loyola article titles, are they? My point is that if the city/state isn't in the article title at all, then the city/state need to be inside parenthesis in the shortname display in tables because it's not an explicit part of the team's full name. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:00, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

I might have misinterpreted Fuzzy510's ... that forces us to improperly name pages as "Loyola Chicago Ramblers" and such—Bagumba (talk) 04:07, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

...if the city/state isn't in the article title at all, then the city/state need to be inside parenthesis in the shortname display in tables because it's not an explicit part of the team's full name: That's generally the case. I don't have much insight on the Chicago case, so I take the arguments at face value, but the proponents of "Loyola Chicago" seem to say it was common usage, so consider it a one-off/IAR to the general (<state_abbrev>) convention. —Bagumba (talk) 04:13, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Okay, well if "Loyola Chicago" is indeed the common name, then the relevant articles need to be renamed, e.g Loyola Ramblers→Loyola Chicago Ramblers and 2021–22 Loyola Ramblers men's basketball team→2021–22 Loyola Chicago Ramblers men's basketball team, and the shortname display is "Loyola Chicago". If the common name is just plain old "Loyola", then the shortname display is "Loyola (Chicago)". I'm just noticing now that the men's soccer team is named Loyola Chicago Ramblers men's soccer, which doesn't match its category or the other Loyola Ramblers articles. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:37, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Not arguing for or against "Loyola Chicago", but another factor in page titles is WP:CONCISE, and perhaps "Chicago" is considered redundant when "Ramblers" is in the title. That's not an option for shorthand though. —Bagumba (talk) 05:08, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, "Loyola Chicago Ramblers" is not the common name. Loyola Ramblers is, Loyola Chicago is, Loyola Chicago Ramblers is not. -fuzzy510 (talk) 05:35, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Regarding the short name, Loyola Chicago is in line with the actual university name, Loyola University Chicago. In the spirit of WP:NATURALDIS, a natural name is preferred over a parenthetical, and the shortname of "Loyola Chicago" isn't a space issue in the relevant tables. —Bagumba (talk) 05:54, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

I've moved the soccer page back, that was moved without discussion, and it should have been reverted a while ago. -fuzzy510 (talk) 05:38, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Proposal

To summarize, what I think we want is as follows:

School	Year range	Sports article titles	Sports shortname display
Loyola Marymount University	1917–1973	Loyola Lions	Loyola (Los Angeles)
Loyola Marymount University	1973–present	Loyola Marymount Lions	Loyola Marymount
Loyola University Chicago	1909–present	Loyola Ramblers	Loyola (Chicago)
Loyola University Maryland	all years	Loyola Greyhounds	Loyola (MD)
Loyola University New Orleans	all years	Loyola Wolf Pack	Loyola (New Orleans)

Jweiss11 (talk) 04:15, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

This makes the most sense to me. -fuzzy510 (talk) 05:40, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

For convenient reference, the March 2022 discussion re: Chicago is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College Basketball/Archive 8 § Loyola Chicago vs Loyola Illinois?—Bagumba (talk) 04:26, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

As a data point, the NCAA at 2021 MEN’S BASKETBALL CONFERENCE STANDINGS, p. 48, lists the schools (with varying styles) as Loyola (LA) 1952-53, 1955-72; Loyola Chicago 1948-present; Loyola Maryland 1948-50, 1982-present; LMU (CA) 1950-present. However, it does show Loyola Marymount at the actual 2020–21 standings on p. 5—Bagumba (talk) 04:58, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

The NCAA has some unique ways of referring to some schools. This is one of them; another is their insistence on referring to the United States Military Academy as Army West Point. To not confuse it with the other Army institutions? -fuzzy510 (talk) 05:41, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Since last fall when I posted this thread, tremendous progress has been made filling in missing team season pages. The only remaining red linked seasons for current FBS teams now appear to be the following:

• Troy Trojans (many seasons between 1909 and 1991)
• Arkansas State Red Wolves (many seasons between 1911 and 1989)
• Hawaii Rainbow Warriors (many seasons between 1909 and 1940)
• Liberty Flames (1974-2008

I think it would be cool to try and knock these remaining seasons out before the 2022 season kicks off. I will try and work a bit on it myself. --Hockeyben ^{(talk - contribs)} 01:56, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

• I'm a bit dubious as to whether season articles for the Liberty Flames (pre-Division I status) would be notable. Cbl62 (talk) 03:40, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

There is a discussion pending at Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports)#Request from NPP'er that apparent conflict in "seasons" section be clarified about the import of NSEASONS and whether season articles should be redirected if the majority of the article does not consist of prose. Feel free to add your 2 cents if it's an area of interest. Cbl62 (talk) 22:13, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Sheesh it looks like DL was ahead of his time on that one. What implications does this have on the single season article campaign?-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 22:05, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

My take-away is that (1) college football season articles need to pass WP:GNG with WP:SIGCOV in multiple, reliable and independent sources; (2) the sourcing should amount to more than just school media guides and statistical databases such as College Football Data Warehouse or Sports Reference LLC; (3) we should verify that such SIGCOV exists before creating season articles; (4) at least some SIGCOV sourcing should appear in the article to avoid being redirected or nominated for deletion; and (5) the articles should ideally include substantial narrative text, i.e., more than just a brief introductory sentence or two. Cbl62 (talk) 23:14, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

I have found it useful to work on season articles by year and have recently been working on the 1946 college football season, improving existing articles and starting articles on missing notable teams for that year. User:Patriarca12 has recently been doing similar work on the 1930 college football season. In doing this work, I've found it useful to have an inventory of the year, showing what's done and what remains to be done. If anyone is interested in doing something similar, an inventory that can be useful as a model is found at Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/1946 season inventory. Cbl62 (talk) 17:18, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

I've now created a 1945 inventory at Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/1945 season inventory. If anyone wants to help with 1945, the help would be appreciated. Cbl62 (talk) 04:08, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

I want to include information about The Pittburgh Courier black college All-America teams. The Courier each year picked an All-America team from the country's HBCUs. As the sport was largely segregated until the 1950s/1960s, these picks were the highest recognition given to black college football players in the mid-century years. An example is found here. Do folks think the Courier picks should be (a) integrated with other All-America selectors in the stand-alone annual All-America lists, (b) grouped under a separate heading in the stand-alone annual All-America lists, or (c) placed in separate lists for the African-American All-American teams? Cbl62 (talk) 19:42, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

C if it can sufficiently pass WP:GNG with multiple reliable sources, B if not. A could confuse casual readers especially without context.-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 22:06, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

I was a bit concerned that including a separate heading for the black All-Americans could be viewed as perpetuating the segregation of bygone days, but I think you raise valid concerns about confusion and context. I'll go ahead with option (b). Cbl62 (talk) 20:10, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

See 1945 College Football All-America Team#Black college All-Americans and 1946 College Football All-America Team#Black college All-Americans. Cbl62 (talk) 20:46, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

In a perfect world, we do (c) with a standalone list. However, unless sources have gotten progressive enough to discuss this grouping, (b) puts the information out there so that hopefully (c) becomes a reality at some point.—Bagumba (talk) 01:32, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure how prominent it was and for how long it lasted, but the Atlanta Daily World also had a black All-American team here—Bagumba (talk) 01:39, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

An RfC is pending at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#RfC: Change to Sports Personalities section. Cbl62 (talk) 03:37, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed there are some discrepancies on the articles and standings templates of the Missouri Valley Intercollegiate Athletic Association AKA the Big Eight Conference and Missouri Valley Conference. Some links direct to Big Eight and others to MVC. For instance the 1921 Nebraska Cornhuskers football team article links to the MVC in the infobox and the lead of the article. However, the standings template says "Missouri Valley" yet links to the Big Eight. Considering the divorce of the conference involved (which both conferences claimed lineage from the original), the way WP has handled the more recent Big East/AAC split, and the fact that there is an article on the MVIAA. I propose adjusting links in this period to the MVIAA, while keeping the categorization to both conferences the same. Thoughts?-- UCO2009bluejay (talk) 04:41, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, just FYI there are a couple of IPs that are adding unrecognized national titles to individual season articles. A few eyeballs could be useful. @Dcheagle: - UCO2009bluejay (talk) 01:42, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Ok thanks for the heads up I'll keep en eye out. Dcheagle • talk • contribs 02:14, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for helping.-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 18:21, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Apparently this is a bigger problem than just OU. I have been removing them from infoboxes whenever I have seen them. I have left in-text citations alone because there it is useful for giving information about different selectors. However, the inclusion in infoboxes leads to misinformation about who actually won/recognized NCs those seasons. I will leave 2017 UCF alone.-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 18:21, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2022 July 5#Template:Infobox college football game- UCO2009bluejay (talk) 03:39, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi all, multiple Duquesne season articles have been nominated for deletion. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2022 Duquesne Dukes football team and weigh in with your opinion. I have not kept up with the evolving NSEASONS guidelines regarding these sorts of articles so everyone's input would be appreciated. Thanks. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:37, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Would need to meet WP:GNG, which is not a given for a program outside of the FBS.---- —Bagumba (talk) 02:47, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

NCAA Division I Football Championship Subdivision (FCS) team seasons will also, virtually always, pass GNG. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:12, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

If so, perhaps that guidance could be added to WP:CFBSEASON, given that there's more leeway with an essay. —Bagumba (talk) 04:33, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

In my work on the 1946 college football season, I created a couple conference season articles: 1946 College Conference of Illinois football season and 1946 Wisconsin State Teachers College Conference football season. I had doubts that any of the individual seasons were notable and decided that the conference season articles were a way to cover these teams without individual stand-alone articles. I'd be interested in thoughts or suggestions as to whether these are a good idea and for how to improve the content/organization. Cbl62 (talk) 01:00, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

@Cbl62 I think this is an excellent approach for smaller conferences where notability for individual seasons would be questionable at best. These can further be fleshed out with additional content such as all-conference selections and team captains as sources are identified. Patriarca12 (talk) 13:01, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. I did include the all-conference picks for 1946 Texas Conference football season. Sometimes, they are hard to find. Cbl62 (talk) 22:42, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

• 1946 Indiana Intercollegiate Conference football season is now a better example of how these should be developed. Cbl62 (talk) 21:31, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

An IP user at Spencer Webb keeps removing information stating he was 22 at the time of his death because his birth date is uncertain, despite me pointing out that nearly every article on his death states that he was 22. Is the IP address correct in doing this? BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:21, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

They should be discussing this at your talk page discussion there, but perhaps they are unaware (and their IP is not consistent to leave them a msg on their talk page). Perhaps they are conflating the exact birthdate being unknown with his death age being reliable. It'd be better if the editor was clearer. —Bagumba (talk) 01:22, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

A requested move is under discussion at Talk:Acrisure Stadium § Requested move 22 July 2022. ––FormalDude talk 21:15, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I have nominated Category:Salem International Tigers football and its subcategories for renaming. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 July 24#Salem Tigers football. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 16:02, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Created the above list today. Any thoughts on formatting? Or on other statistical categories that should be added? Cbl62 (talk) 01:37, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Cbl, I think this may be the first standalone article of its kind, although Ohio State Buckeyes football statistical leaders contains a yearly leaders section which parallels what you've created for Alabama. There's the pretty robust Category:Lists of college football statistical leaders by team, which contains 133 articles that detail a given programs all-time career, season, and game leaders. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:10, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

This is very different from the existing statistical leaders lists, e.g. Alabama Crimson Tide football statistical leaders. Those articles show the overall leaders and are dominated by recent players. The yearly approach IMO provides a much-needed supplement. Any thoughts on formatting or additional categories? Maybe scoring? Cbl62 (talk) 05:44, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

We'd need a new category like Category:Lists of college football yearly statistical leaders by team if we're going to create articles like this for lots of teams. Formatting looks pretty good. I'd just link the rest of the seasons. Jweiss11 (talk) 12:56, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Also, should this article be titled List of Alabama Crimson Tide football yearly statistical leaders? Jweiss11 (talk) 12:58, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Members of this project may be interested in the deletion discussion for the 1889 Wake Forest football team. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:04, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

I just wrote my first wikipedia article ever, Draft:Appalachian State–Marshall football rivalry. If anyone has any feedback or tips, it would all be greatly appreciated! It is my hope that the draft can be approved in time for the start of the college football season. Thank you! Tarcanes (talk) 22:41, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

@Tarcanes looks good! Cnd474747 (talk) 18:03, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Is there a consensus for the inclusion of "professional players coached" sections (ex: Mark_Stoops#Notable_players_coached)? If not a consensus should probably be established. I'd personally be against including them as it's really just puffery and any specific coaching/player relationship can be mentioned in the prose of the article. Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:12, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

GPL93, Not sure if we've established a consensus on this before, but I agree with you here. These sections look like cruft/puffery. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:28, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Also not a fan of such sections. Cbl62 (talk) 00:34, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, definitely crufty. Remove it. Ejgreen77 (talk) 05:34, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm looking for information on the "UPI Trophy" that was presumably awarded to the UP/UPI Coaches Poll national champion prior to the introduction of the Coaches' Trophy for 1986. Not much information is available.

• Awarded to Syracuse in 1959 as the "UPI Trophy" or "UPI Cup".
• 1968 Ohio State in their trophy case.
• Pittsburg has the 1976 UPI Trophy
• Notre Dame's 1977 UPI Trophy is shown with its other hardware on 1978 ticket stubs. It's located at the right side of the Notre Dame trophy case today.
• BYU 1984: https://archive.sltrib.com/images/2010/0522/lavelledwards_052310~2.jpg

These are the ones I'm specifically aware of, but I haven't tried to examine the trophy case of every Coaches Poll national champion.

Photos for Wikimedia Commons would be appreciated if anyone can get one during this upcoming College Football season. Same goes for the Bowl Alliance National Championship trophy for fans at Nebraska or Florida.

Mainly looking for the years it was awarded, and information about if/when it was replaced by the crystal football. I'm wondering if information on this trophy should reside at Coaches Poll, Coaches' Trophy, or its own page?

PK-WIKI (talk) 18:56, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

The page Wake Forest Demon Deacons football is expanded with List of Wake Forest Demon Deacons football seasons that has a "Seasons" section with yearly statistics. Each year has then been afforded a separate article found at Category:Wake Forest Demon Deacons football seasons that appears to be redundant.

An AFD of 1889 Wake Forest Baptists football team (brought by @SWinxy:) was closed as keep but the information about the already included "list of seasons" was not brought up and the closer mentioned bringing this to the project. @Cbl62: mentioned that a merging solution has been used before. -- Otr500 (talk) 21:57, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

When media coverage of seasons is very scant and/or seasons are very brief, we've sometimes optioned to have a single article coverage multiple seasons, e.g. Temple Owls football, 1894–1899. But list of List of Wake Forest Demon Deacons football seasons is not redundant to the individual season articles. We have analogous season list articles for about 200 other programs, found at Category:Lists of college football seasons Jweiss11 (talk) 22:12, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

The merge idea I proposed was to create an early years article covering the first few seasons, not to merge to the List of Wake Forest Demon Deacons football seasons and thus lose all information on individual games. The latter would result in a greatly-reduced level of information. In any event, my merge proposal did not attract support, and I am content to let stand the consensus developed at the AfD. Cbl62 (talk) 00:56, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

My bad, I didn't know the rules were changed concerning losing "all information on individual games". At one time "merging" meant to move or add information to a new article as apposed to "redirect". I do see the point about merging to one article on the early years.

The problems I ran into was that articles like the unsourced 1893 Wake Forest Baptists football team, or one sourced articles like 1895 Wake Forest Baptists football team, 1911 Wake Forest Baptists football team, sourced with a "2007 Wake Forest Football Media Guide" (POF), 1915 Wake Forest Baptists football team, sourced only with a POF "All time results", and 1895 Wake Forest Baptists football team. This means an early year article would work to solve the apparent notability issues.

However, I found that some of the articles are being updated so maybe some of the above will be included. -- Otr500 (talk) 16:56, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

My thought was that something like Wake Forest Baptists football prior to 1898 would make sense given that Wake Forest played only 17 football games during the 20-year period from 1888 to 1907. Later articles like 1915 could more easily be expanded into solid articles, if someone wants to do so. Cbl62 (talk) 18:07, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

• I support this but not one to properly merge sports articles. -- Otr500 (talk) 11:13, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I recently created a football page to summarize UNC's 1918 football season -- see 1918 North Carolina (SATC) football team. I imagine this will impact the SAIAA standing, but I wasn't certain if the teams they played (listed as SATC in the source I used) were the same as the pages already encapsulated by the SAIAA seasons or not, so I left the SAIAA record as 0-0 even though 3 of the teams they played against (Davidson, VPI, and Wake Forest) were fellow SAIAA members. Any thoughts? Cnd474747 (talk) 23:15, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Cnd474747, nice work on the 1918 North Carolina article. The sourcing around the membership of the South Atlantic Intercollegiate Athletic Association (SAIAA) is pretty scant, mostly coming from the now-defunct College Football Data Warehouse. Neither Template:1918 South Atlantic Intercollegiate Athletic Association football standings, nor any of the other SAIAA standings templates have any sourcing. Inclusion in those templates appears to be interpolated from the membership section of the main SAIAA article, which has a "factual accuracy is disputed" tag on it. Most of the work there was done by MisterCake and UW Dawgs. I would say more research is needed here. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:46, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

It seems a safe assumption due to the war and the SATC status - meaning the school does not even recognize it - to say they were independent rather than in a conference. Like, for example, the 1918 Tennessee (SATC) football team, or the 1915 Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets football team. But of course, assuming is probably not enough. UNC is particularly difficult. It seems they were in the SIAA in 1901 but got banned for paying baseball players. Anyway, the best source on this stuff with UNC is Kemp Plummer Battle, who died in 1919. If he has a final edition of the History of UNC, then I bet it covers it. Keep in mind just like the South is still a region whether or not there's a Southern conference or SIAA, the South Atlantic is still a region. All-South Atlantic might mean All-SAIAA, all conference. It might just mean all regional. Cake (talk) 07:02, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Well put, Cake. You're also right about UNC getting expelled from the SIAA. It's my opinion and observation that the SAIAA in particular was primarily a track and field organization, as I haven't seen nearly any period articles or books discussing its impact on football, but I haven't found anything that concretely says that. FWIW, the Barrier Smith book I referenced in the UNC article (published 1937) makes no mention of the SAIAA, but does discuss the founding of the Southern conference. As for Plummer's History of UNC, you can read that here, though you'll want to start at Vol. 2. Plummer does mention the SIAA (briefly, and avoiding the whole reason they were expelled, noting only that "After two years of experiment the University withdrew from the Southern Intercollegiate Athletic Association..."), but unfortunately his work was published in 1912 and doesn't mention the SAIAA in any way. Cnd474747 (talk) 13:29, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

To follow up, some quick digging found this article from 1919(!) where member schools "propos[ed] to have intersectional baseball, basketball, football and track contests" -- that's the closest language I've found to even suggesting that football was played under the auspices of the SAIAA. Again, it was not an exhaustive search by any means, but it's my opinion that including football teams in the SAIAA is perhaps a bit spurious. The water's just too murky. Cnd474747 (talk) 13:43, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

To note, you are right that the SAIAA was mostly track and field - but so was the SIAA. Track and cycling seem to be some of the oldest conference functions. So it can be hard to know what are legitimate football titles, and retroactive football titles for a track conference. Or if there's even a distinction. On page 759 Battle (ps I'd be related to his Plummer side) mentions the South Atlantic Intercollegiate track meets, which I used as a source of members. Here is an article about the SAIAA being founded. Cake (talk) 19:40, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Also on your source - every year the conference has to meet and see who is still a member, for which sports, and so on. It seems to confirm all those sports as parts of the conference, and to be stating those sports are all conference functions. Note how it includes track. "intersectional" means inter-regional, what we would now call "out of conference" matchups. Like when Alabama schedules Ohio State or whatever. In those days, if VPI played Yale. The point being if you're discussing intersectional contests, surely you are already playing regular contests among conference members. It seems the issue - just like in 1912, is Virginia not showing up. They usually win the title so maybe they thought they were too good for it. Cake (talk) 19:51, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

PPS the 1895 UNC team is also difficult. Some will say they were the first champions of the SIAA, but it looks like the SIAA hadn't quite started yet, nor were they members. Despite a legendary game with Georgia. Cake (talk) 19:53, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Understood, thanks. Cnd474747 (talk) 18:18, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

See Talk:Virginia Conference#Talk:Merge of page with draft Cnd474747 (talk) 18:23, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I want to revisit how we handle coaches who leave before the start of a season. The current example is Dave Patenaude, who was OC at Old Dominion beginning in January and resigned yesterday. I think the current convention is to mention in the article and omit from the infobox and any navigational templates (usually that's just head coaches). I find that a little unsatisfactory. Mike Price was the head coach at Alabama, even if he never coached in a game. Price's tenure was rather notable in fact. Patenaude was the OC for roughly eight months, including spring football. With the infobox, I think it would make sense to list the school with an explanatory footnote. See example here: [23]. For navigational templates, you could indicate these unusual situations with a special character and explanatory note, similar to how we flag interim coaches.

Previous discussions:

• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive 10#Head coaches who never coached a game
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive 12#Navbox style guide
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive 13#Alabama head coaches
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive 24#COVID interim coaches

-- Mackensen (talk) 21:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Mackensen, yes this is a good topic for discssion, and we should establish/confirm the conventions here. In the head coaching navboxes, the rule has been to include only those coaches that have at least one decision to their record. Some examples of head coaches dismissed or deceased before coaching a game of record in a given season:

• Bo Rein, 1980 LSU Tigers football team
• George O'Leary, 2002 Notre Dame Fighting Irish football team
• Mike Price, 2003 Alabama Crimson Tide football team
• Michael Haywood, 2011 Pittsburgh Panthers football team
• D. J. Durkin, 2018 Maryland Terrapins football team

Jweiss11 (talk) 22:21, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

I've re-added Price to {{Alabama Crimson Tide football coach navbox}} with a note to demonstrate what this would look like. Mackensen (talk) 12:21, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Mackensen, I reverted changes you made the Alabama and LSU navboxes regarding Rein and Price. This breaks conventions that extend to the NFL and other sports. If we start adding anyone who was ever named "head coach", that may add a lot of bloat to some of these navboxes. We should keep the navboxes just to coaches of record. What we ought to discuss is how to handle the infoboxes for bio articles like Mike Price and team season articles like 2003 Alabama Crimson Tide football team. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:45, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Well, I thought I might encourage some participation and discuss that convention. The precedent is a somewhat shaky and informal one; Price, for example, has been in that navbox before, and the last removal (I think) was by an IP who also removed the interim coaches. The purpose of a navbox is to navigate between articles. If you're reading about Alabama head coaches, Price (to take one example) is relevant. If bloat's a concern then the developing trend of interim bowl game coaches seems like a more serious issue than the comparatively rare situation of a head coach who never coached a game. Mackensen (talk) 17:23, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

The convention isn't shaky. The one-off edits by IPs and newbies who don't engage in these sorts of discussions do count for much in these conventions. Price was added to the Alabama navbox in 2011 by Perfectmile8, an editor with about 30 totals edits, none in the last decade, and no talk page edits ever. I can't find the discussion, but I recall one about the inclusion of Bill Belichick on Template:New York Jets coach navbox since he was the Jets head coach for a day but was never a coach of record for the Jets. Yankees10 may remember more details there. Interim coaches for bowl or other games are coaches of record. That's a discrete qualification. Perhaps "discrete integrity" is more what I was after rather than "bloat". Jweiss11 (talk) 23:32, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

An AfD of note, also bundling five other ESPN/CFB pages. Alyo (chat·edits) 20:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Bumping this and the discussion that's beginning there, as it could impact all of the ESPN CFB pages and more input (generally, doesn't have to be on the AfD) would be appreciated. Alyo (chat·edits) 18:40, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

These is move discission taking place at Talk:ACC Men's Basketball Tournament#Requested move 23 August 2022 that impacts a number of college sports and may be of interest to participants here. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 17:46, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:1922 Trinity Blue and White football team#Requested move 17 August 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky (talk) 07:19, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Over the last couple years, it has become common to include detailed listings of future recruiting classes in team season articles. This wasn't the case previously, and I think it's a bad development. As an example, it makes perfect sense for an article on 2022 Michigan Wolverines football team to include a list of incoming recruits in the 2022 recruiting class. However, and IMO, a listing of future commitments to the class of 2023 has no place in an article on the 2022 team. Information on the 2023 recruiting class belongs in the article on the 2023 team -- and not in the article on the 2022 team. Cbl62 (talk) 15:44, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Strong agree. Lots of potential for CRYSTAL issues/twitter sourcing that far out. Alyo (chat·edits) 15:57, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

That's two of us. What do others think? Is there a consensus to limit the practice to the current recruiting class, i.e., 2022 team article has information on 2022 recruits but not charts of commits to future classes? Cbl62 (talk) 16:09, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I've opened an RfC regarding the categorization of templates and template categories. While the issue concerns Wikipedia-wide policy, it has substantial impact on college football topics. Please take a look at the discussion here. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 20:35, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Following up from the AfD mentioned above, I'd like to start a discussion about merging/trimming the various ESPN CFB articles. At present there are 12 such articles:

ESPN College Football on ABC
List of ESPN College Football broadcast teams
ESPN College Football
List of ESPN College Football personalities
ESPNU College Football
ESPN College Football Thursday Primetime
ESPN College Football Saturday Primetime
ESPNU Inside the Polls
ESPNU Recruiting Insider
ESPNU Coaches Spotlight
Saturday Night Football
List of ESPN College Football on ABC personalities

I'd like to talk about merging/trimming several of these articles, with the exception of Saturday Night Football, which should be kept as-is. 100.7.36.213 (talk) 19:01, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I do not think we need all three of List of ... broadcast teams/List of ... personalities/List of ... ABC personalities. Not sure which should be the core article though. I'd also redirect the three ESPNU programming articles to ESPNU#List of programs broadcast by ESPNU, then leave the rest as notable in their own right. Alyo (chat·edits) 20:13, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

It's a good thing redirects are easy to do. 100.7.36.213 (talk) 23:57, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Do you or anyone else have any ideas as to which list should be the core? I'm drawing a blank at the moment. 100.7.36.213 (talk) 12:53, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Hold that thought for a moment. I just found two more ESPN CFB articles I didn't catch the first time around: ESPN College Football Friday Primetime and ESPN2 College Football Saturday Primetime. Are they both notable enough to be kept like the others? 100.7.36.213 (talk) 12:56, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Radio silence. Unless I get a message on my talk page informing me about a new development regarding this matter, I will henceforth consider this discussion closed. 100.7.36.213 (talk) 02:57, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

@100.7.36.213 I'm waiting until Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of ESPN College Football on ABC personalities closes, but once it does I'll work on merging some of the personality articles. I agree that we have too many in that area specifically. Alyo (chat·edits) 14:33, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hobson Snead, head football coach at Bluefield College in 1923 and 1924, had been nominated for deletion. Please see the discussion here. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 17:00, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Wasn't there a consensus to split up articles like Maine Black Bears football, 1892–1899 and Maine Black Bears football, 1900–1909 into standalone articles, or am I misremembering? SportsGuy789 (talk) 16:03, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

• I think it depends. A season article needs to pass WP:GNG. If an individual season does not satisfy GNG with WP:SIGCOV in multiple, independent, reliable sources, groupings of this type make the most sense and help to ensure that we have comprehensive program coverage without running afoul of GNG. Cbl62 (talk) 16:42, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Winsipedia is cited as a source in some cfb articles. Is there a discussion where we determined that that source qualifies as WP:RS? I searched the archives and I can't find anything. (u t c m l ) 🔒 ALL IN 🧿 03:25, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

All in I feel like Winsipedia has been mentioned here somewhere before, but I don't see anything in the archives either. At a glance, none of the info on Winspedia looks wrong, but I don't think we know anything about who is running this website. I also doubt there's anything there that couldn't be sourced from ESPN, Sports Reference, or official records and media guides. I would avoid citing Winsipedia. Jweiss11 (talk) 00:19, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I will probably start working on List of most-played college football series in NCAA Division I to remove the Winsipedia references that have collected there and cite RS instead. (u t c m l ) 🔒 ALL IN 🧿 01:35, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

I have nominated Template:CFB Last Meeting for deletion. Please see the discussion here. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 20:43, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

List of Southeastern Conference football standings (1992–present) has been nominated for deletion. Please see the discussion here. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 04:50, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Despite the massive coverage they receive, we have not heretofore had articles about annual college football recruiting classes. I went ahead this week and created the following:

• 2020 college football recruiting class
• 2021 college football recruiting class
• 2022 college football recruiting class

I limited the charts to the top 20 classes and top 20 recruits out of concern that going further would risk copyright concerns with respect to the selections of various selectors. I left 2023 college football recruiting class as a redirect, as it strikes me as WP:CRYSTAL and/or WP:TOOSOON to have running coverage on future commitments that will ebb and flow until February. Thoughts? Ideas for better sourcing? Formatting? Additional selectors? Cbl62 (talk) 17:15, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

We should probably make it clear that these articles/lists apply specifically to FBS. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:39, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

But they don't apply specifically to FBS. Top recruits are free to go to school at any level. And they sometimes do. For example, 2022 No 1 recruit Travis Hunter committed to Jackson State, an FCS school. Likewise, On3 rated Jackson State's 2021 class as 15th best in the country even though its an FCS program. Cbl62 (talk) 18:46, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Okay, well, then that needs to be clear. While the names of the articles suggest all college football, the infoboxes link to the relevant FBS season and articles are categorized under the relevant FBS season. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Not sure I understand what needs to be made more clear. What do you suggest? Do you think more categories need to be added? Cbl62 (talk) 19:55, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

I did add FCS cat and link to the 2021 and 2022 articles. Is that what you had in mind? Cbl62 (talk) 20:03, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

I feel that the national championships article should not be named "... in NCAA Division I FBS" for the same reason (FCS schools are among the leaders in all categories and are still eligible to win) and recently opened a move request stating the same. I'm interested in seeing how these new articles end up being named. PK-WIKI (talk) 20:09, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

LEspinosaJr1991 and Aidan721 have created expanded 2022 standings templates for the Power Five conferences, broken down by division where applicable:

• Template:2022 Atlantic Coast Conference Atlantic football standings
• Template:2022 Atlantic Coast Conference Coastal football standings
• Template:2022 Big 12 football overall standings
• Template:2022 Big Ten East football standings
• Template:2022 Big Ten West football standings
• Template:2022 Pac-12 football overall standings
• Template:2022 SEC East football standings
• Template:2022 SEC West football standings

These are somewhat redundant to the standard standings templates like Template:2022 American Athletic Conference football standings. Do we need these expanded standings templates? Jweiss11 (talk) 20:54, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

I prefer keeping full conferences as a single template. The continuing expansion of the BIG 10 and SEC may at some point justify a splitting, but I'm not ready to support it yet. On a separate point, the inclusion of columns for "PF" and "PA" is interesting. Cbl62 (talk) 05:05, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes, splitting the conferences up by division is not a good idea, and neither is the redundancy with the existing templates. On the points columns, you created something similar at 1980 Big Ten Conference football season#Results and team statistics and the like. I think a conference season article is probably the only place where that level of details is needed. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:12, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree and would support removing them at this time as redundant to the existing conference standings templates. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 06:38, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

@Jweiss11: Curious as to why you think splitting the conferences up by division is not a good idea? Every other notable sports league does this. Why shouldn't CFB? –Aidan721 (talk) 13:02, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

The use of Module:Sports table as the basis for standings promotes consistency across all sports and leagues. –Aidan721 (talk) 13:08, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Aidan721, when you say every other notable sports league does this, I presume you are talking about things like the NFL, e.g. Template:2022 AFC East standings or MLB, e.g. Template:2022 AL East standings? Those templates tend be used in different ways and in different places on the articles onto which they are transcluded. And those leagues and their subdivisions have different histories from college conferences. In college sports, we have a standard that the standings templates are placed directly after the infobox on team season articles, like 2021 Michigan Wolverines football team. The use of divisions in conference standings is often transient over the years, and the full conference standings provide needed context including conference championship games and provide consistent treatment going back to the 1800s. We have thousands of college football standings templates (see Category:American college football standings templates) and many others for other college sports, principally basketball, that take on the same form. Per the use of Module:Sports table, I'm supportive of as much standardization as possible. If we want convert all the college sports standing templates over that form, then we need to gameplan this, as it's a huge project. It's not just a matter of picking off the 2022 FBS templates. We need to deal with thousands of templates, including things like Template:1916 Kansas Collegiate Athletic Conference football standings, and address the underlying templates like Template:CFB Standings Start that drive these standings templates. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:20, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

You're absolutely right. Can we start a larger discussion for migrating standings templates to use Module:Sports table in partnership with WP:CFB, WP:College baseball, WP:CHOOPS and any other relevant groups? –Aidan721 (talk) 18:17, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

@Jweiss11: I've created Module:Sports table/College as a more specific version of the module to college sports conferences. See how it looks on Template:2022 American Athletic Conference football standings/sandbox. Let me know what you think. –Aidan721 (talk) 00:21, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Aidan721, thanks for mocking that up. Many issue heres. The biggest issue is that we're missing a lot of stuff that we have in the existing standings templates, like divisions, poll rankings, championship games, and notation for division champs, conference champs, and playoffs and other things, as seen in Template:2021 Big Ten Conference football standings. Second, notations for "POS" for position in the table header and "matches" in the footer are inapt for American college sports. "Matches" are played in soccer or tennis, not in American college football, basketball, or baseball. And "position" isn't right either. It's "standing" or "place". And if we're going to include explicit ordinal standings, we need to deal with ties. For example, in 2021, Michigan and Ohio tied for first place in the Big Ten East and Nebraska and Northwestern tied for sixth place in the Big Ten West; see page 4 here. Jweiss11 (talk) 00:51, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

status_XXX=A will display an "A" next to team XXX and at the bottom display (A) Advance to conference championship game. This can be done for any letter value as well. |status_XXX=C denotes the conference champion. Poll rankings can be added just before the team name as well with No. 12 for example. I will mock a more interesting conference from a previous year to see how it works, possibly 2021 Big Ten to see how the ties can be handled and advancement to postseason playoffs. |matches_text=games and postitle={{abbr|#|Place}} solve the two problems of American verbiage. Still a work in progress. Appreciate you finding the inconsisties. –Aidan721 (talk) 01:25, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

@Jweiss11: Here's how the Big Ten East and West plays out with status for division (co-)champions, conference champion, advancement to conference championship, and CFB selection/champion. And lastly, here is how the two divisions look side-by-side. –Aidan721 (talk) 02:32, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

I have nominated Template:Delaware Sports Museum and Hall of Fame members for deletion. Please see the discussion here. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 16:22, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

I have nominated 16 templates, discussed above at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#Expanded standings templates broken down by division, for deletion. Please the discussion here. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 17:01, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Is this collegiate head coach notable? Does WP:SIGCOV exist? Cbl62 (talk) 15:48, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

We need to make sure we're staying compliant with MOS:CONTRAST, as I just went through and had to update all Big 12 2022 articles to make sure the colors are compliant. We need to make sure |color=white is added to those that are unreadable like in this edit (crimson on blue is not readable). Another thing to keep in mind is if two schools have similar colors like Kansas and Duke (see this example), we need to use an alternate color as they are way too close together. Just because one is a darker shade, doesn't mean someone with a disability will be able to tell them apart. We'll need to go through all 2022 team articles to make sure they're compliant, which I plan to do, though it will probably over the course of the season, unless someone is willing to help. Thanks, Corky 09:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

There also needs to be some kind of consistency... 2022 Big 12 Conference football season has West Virginia using blue and gold font, blue and white font, etc. It's a mess and would look better with a consistent color. Also, is it overcolored? Corky 09:29, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Do we really need school colors in all these places? The full rainbows at 2022 Big 12 Conference football season are pretty gaudy. Cbl62 and MisterCake have done a lot of work on historical conference seasons and avoided the use of a rainbow of school color; see 1980 Big Ten Conference football season, 1910 Southern Intercollegiate Athletic Association football season, etc. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Lots of gaudy rainbows, many of which likely violate contrast standards, appear on the article for various kickoff games: Chick-fil-A Kickoff Game, Pigskin Classic, Wheat Bowl, etc. Bowl articles, like Rose Bowl Game, tend to not have them. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:30, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

I would certainly be in favor of working to remove those. Makes the tables hard to read, doesn't add anything of note when there are 10+ different colors (compared to, say, a rivaly page where two colors do allow you to quickly scan for periods of dominance by one team), and arguably furthers the "no prose, only tables" problem with a lot of modern sports pages. Alyo (chat·edits) 17:03, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

I cant see the value to readers, but do see a big detriment to those with problems with certain colors.—Bagumba (talk) 17:06, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks all. I completely agree that it’s over colored and the individual awards section especially needs to be de-colorized. Corky 04:11, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

I've started moving the colors from the awards sections, though it will take me some time to do. Are there any other sections you all want the colors removed from? Corky 22:16, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

There is open conversation about the naming convention for UAPB's women's team name at Talk:Arkansas–Pine Bluff Golden Lions and Golden Lady Lions#Requested move 14 October 2022. If you have any input please chime in there. Thank you. SportsGuy789 (talk) 18:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Why are these not listed in college football? They are for NFL coaches. Somarain (talk) 15:12, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Somarain, do you mean in Template:Infobox college coach, as seen in Mark Richt? Jweiss11 (talk) 16:09, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Accomplishments and honors yes. Somarain (talk) 16:44, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

I was curious to see how accurate Wikipedia page views might be at predicting the winner of the Heisman Trophy. So far, from Aug 27 to Oct 27, the leading recipients of clicks are:

1. Bryce Young, Alabama QB - 266,845
2. Hendon Hooker, Tennessee QB - 170,152
3. Bo Nix, Oregon QB - 136,974
4. Stetson Bennett, Georgia QB - 125,486
5. JT Daniels, West Virginia QB - 114,805
6. Quinn Ewers, Texas QB - 112,330
7. Spencer Rattler, South Carolina QB - 111,133
8. C. J. Stroud, Ohio State QB - 101,906
9. Marvin Harrison Jr., Ohio State WR - 100,009
10. Adrian Martinez, Kansas State QB - 99,377
11. DJ Uiagalelei, Clemson QB - 94,578

Vegas's heavy favorite C. J. Stroud is No. 8 on the "Wikipedia clicks" method. We will see how the voting turns out in a few more weeks. Cbl62 (talk) 06:16, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

No respect for Blake Corum. Sad! Jweiss11 (talk) 15:34, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

No respect for running backs, period. Cbl62 (talk) 19:33, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

J.T. Tuimoloau will see a huge jump. --DB1729^talk 22:09, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

DB1729, that dude was a beast today! Jweiss11 (talk) 00:41, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Tuimoloau had over 14,000 views in his first day on Wikipedia -- two interceptions, two sacks, a forced fumble, and a fumble recovery will draw some attention. Cbl62 (talk) 10:48, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

I've become increasingly convinced that stand-alone season articles for lower-level programs are questionable in terms of whether they receive sufficient WP:SIGCOV to satisfy WP:GNG. One solution is to build higher-level conference season articles where the extent of coverage is likely to be greater. Such articles have additional benefits in being able to survey an entire conference's performance in one place, while still having the ability to navigate between teams using wikilinks. Several examples of such articles are set forth in the chart below. Feel free to use or adapt this format for other years/conferences, but always include coverage showing that GNG is satisfied. Cbl62 (talk) 14:21, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Title	Descriptions
1946 Rocky Mountain Conference football season	Montana State conference champion
1946 Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association football season	Hilllsdale and Kalamazoo co-champions
1946 Midwest Conference football season	Lawrence conference champion
1946 Southern California Conference football season	Redlands champion
1946 Central Intercollegiate Conference football season	Southwestern conference champion
1946 Missouri Intercollegiate Athletic Association football season	Southeast Missouri State conference champion
1946 Minnesota Teachers College Conference football season	Mankato State conference champion
1946 Texas Conference football season	Abilene Christian and Southwestern co-champions
1946 Oklahoma Collegiate Conference football season	Southeastern conference champion

Cbl62 (talk) 14:21, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Cbl62, thanks for all your work building out the coverage for the 1946 seasons. A few concerns about this approach:

• You've redirected 1946 Montana State Bobcats football team, which won the RMC title, to 1946 Rocky Mountain Conference football season#Montana State, but we have individual season articles for almost every other Montana State season. Montana State is now an NCAA Division I (FCS) program. We've previously decided that even sub-Division I seasons in which the team won a conference title or reached postseason play may qualify for a stand-alone article. Which Montana State seasons do you think deserve stand-alone articles?
• Do we want to put navigation boxes in the body are these articles, at the bottom of each team's section? Navboxes typically only go in the footer at the very bottom of an article.
• The form of these 1946 conference articles is incongruous with that for the preexisting ones for major conferences, e.g. 1915 Southern Intercollegiate Athletic Association football season, 1980 Big Ten Conference football season, 2022 Atlantic Coast Conference football season.

Jweiss11 (talk) 16:07, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

• The content from 1946 Montana State remains intact. It's now simply included in the conference-season article. Since Montana State is not an FBS team, I thought it best to have the full season in one place. I don't feel strongly, and if consensus is to revert so that Montana State is stand-alone, I'm fine with that.

  I concluded that the navboxes are most useful after the discussion of each team's content. Again, if consensus is otherwise, I'm fine with that.

  Yes, the format is different because the purpose is different. The conference-season articles here are a substitute for team-season articles, and so the format seeks to replicate the content of what we would normally include in each team's season article.`Cbl62 (talk) 23:15, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

I wanted to call attention here to Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/5#Add_Warren_Moon_and_if_necessary_remove_Doug_Flutie.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:40, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Legitimate questions: What is a vital article? What is the importance of a vital article? Is it noted in the article itself?-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 22:15, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

The discussion has broadened beyond Flutie and Moon. See Tony's link above to join the discussion. Cbl62 (talk) 21:34, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

• The current proposals are:
  • Add Warren Moon
  • Add Night Train Lane
  • Add Jim Parker
  • Add Gino Marchetti
  • Add Walter Camp
  • Remove Doug Flutie
  • Remove Ray Guy
  • Remove Kurt Warner
  • Remove Joe Namath.

Click on these links to weigh in. Cbl62 (talk) 17:14, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

According to the well-sourced 1938 Troy State Red Wave football team, they went 3-4-1 (1-0-1 SIAA). But on {{1938 Southern Intercollegiate Athletic Association football standings}}, they went 0-3-1 (4-4-1). What's correct? SportsGuy789 (talk) 16:11, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

SportsGuy789, it appears that 3–4–1 overall and 0–3–1 in SIAA play is correct. The Troy football media guide (https://troytrojans.com/documents/2022/7/21/2022_Troy_Football_Media_Guide_R.pdf) lists the 1938 team at 4–4–1 overall and 2–0–1 in Alabama Intercollegiate Conference (AIC) play. But it seems the AIC wasn't formed until after the season, in December 1938; see https://www.newspapers.com/clip/113052743/the-troy-messenger/. The Troy media guide lists a ninth game, a 14–6 win over West Alabama, then known as Livingston, on Dec 3. This appears to be an error, as it was the Troy State freshman team that beat Livingston on November 18; see https://www.newspapers.com/clip/113051523/the-troy-messenger/. Troy State was a member of both the AIC and SIAA from 1939 to 1941. Pinging Patriarca12, who created the article. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:59, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Patriarca12 Any additional insight? SportsGuy789 (talk) 15:24, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Nope. I agree with @Jweiss11 that the record is 3–4–1 overall and 0–3–1 SIAA based on what has been dug up. Patriarca12 (talk) 22:18, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

I have nominated Category:Southern States Conference football and it subcats for renaming. Please see the discussion here. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 23:19, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Here's a good one if someone wants to investigate. We have articles or leads on four different Hal Hansen/Hansons who all had Minnesota connections and all played or coached in the NFL in the 1920s: Hal Hansen (born 1892 in Iowa, played college football for Minnesota), Hal Hansen (coach) (born 1894 in Minneapolis), Hal Hanson (born 1895 in Wisconsin, played for Minneapolis in 1923), Hal Hanson (American football guard) (born 1905 in Minnesota). Is there some duplication or did the NFL really have four Minnesota Hal Hansens in the 1920s? Cbl62 (talk) 16:52, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

I saw this edit by Cmm3, changing a Canadian's bio to replace "college football" with a link to U Sports football. Assuming "college football" is not a common Canadian term, should:

1. College football have a hatnote to U Sports football?
2. College football's lead be changed to "College football refers to American or Canadian football...", as well as other similar mentions on the page?
3. College football not be considered for MOS:COMMONALITY, and all Canadian bios should refer to U Sports football?

I'm neither Canadian nor too knowledgeable about football in Canada, so input is welcome. —Bagumba (talk) 07:16, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

"College" in Canada usually refers to a 2-year diploma awarding institution, whereas "University" is the 4 year degree awarding institution, so in Canadian English it's best to refer to it as "University football". Of course, due to American influence there is some muddling of the terms in vernacular speech, but I would still say university is the preferred term.-- Earl Andrew - talk 14:17, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

• Bear in mind that U Sports football wasn't founded until 1961. Historically, there were Canadian universities and colleges that played football in competition with U.S. universities and under U.S. rules. E.g., 1925 Assumption Purple football team, 1941 Western Ontario Mustangs football team, 1946 Western Ontario Mustangs football team, 1946 British Columbia Thunderbirds football team. These are accurately placed under the umbrella of college football. Cbl62 (talk) 14:37, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

It appears that Hal Erickson (American football) and Swede Erickson are the same person. Any objections to redirecting Swede to Hal? @Packerfansam: Cbl62 (talk) 01:45, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

In light of Wikipedia:Don't build the Frankenstein, how are we sure they are the same? Their pro-football-reference profiles don't look similar with either measurements or listed position.—Bagumba (talk) 07:03, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

We have very little info on the one-game player identified in our article as Swede Erickson. I was originally planning to redirect to List of players who appeared in only one game in the NFL (1920–1929). Then, I noticed that Hal Erickson (American football) was also known as "Swede". The first Swede played the Kenosha NFL team in 1924 while Hal/Swede played for the Milwaukee NFL team in 1924. It wasn't unusual in these early days of the NFL for someone to play for more than one team in the same season, and Kenosha and Milwaukee are pretty close. But you are right about the difference in weight and position played. Still, given the lack of specifics and SIGCOV on Swede Erickson, the article doesn't comply with WP:SPORTBASIC and some sort of redirect (or other fix) is needed. Cbl62 (talk) 15:01, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

I have nominated Category:Capital Crusaders and it subcats for renaming. Please see the discussion here. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 04:34, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

For those interested, I was bored this afternoon and compiled this list of the all-time most-viewed college football team/season articles. The winner by far -- 2001 Miami Hurricanes football team. Cbl62 (talk) 00:01, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Rank	Title	Page views	Description
1	2001 Miami Hurricanes football team	1,531,942	Consensus national champion; QB Ken Dorsey won Maxwell Award and Rose Bowl MVP
2	2014 Ohio State Buckeyes football team	970,789	CFP national champion; Joey Bosa unanimous All-American; Ezekiel Elliott at RB and J. T. Barrett at QB
3	2015 Alabama Crimson Tide football team	803,001	CFP national champion; Nick Saban (head coach), Lane Kiffin (OC), Kirby Smart (DC); Derrick Henry won Heisman Trophy
4	2019 LSU Tigers football team	795,391	CFP national champion; Joe Burrow won Heisman
5	2008 Florida Gators football team	770,005	BCS national champion; Tim Tebow won Heisman
6	2017 Alabama Crimson Tide football team	699,216	CFP national champion; Minkah Fitzpatrick unanimous All-American
7	1997 Michigan Wolverines football team	575,424	AP national champion; Charles Woodson won Heisman Troph
8	2013 Florida State Seminoles football team	561,480	BCS national champion; Jameis Winston won Heisman
9	2016 Alabama Crimson Tide football team	544,174	CFP finalist lost to Clemson in championship game (national champion Clemson not far behind with 510,188 views)
10	1998 Tennessee Volunteers football team	526,379	BCS national champion; one year after Peyton Manning
11	2005 Texas Longhorns football team	524,295	BCS national champion; Vince Young won Maxwell Award

Cbl62 (talk) 00:01, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Chuck Stobart, who had 36 consecutive seasons as a coach at Division I collegiate programs, died on Tuesday. Spoke to two of his grandchildren today and they appreciate the work of Wikipedia volunteers in keeping his memory alive. Good stuff. Cbl62 (talk) 23:03, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Cbl, nice work expanding the article. Jweiss11 (talk) 00:08, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. The family was pleased with it. I've only had direct contact with a subject or family five or six times, and it's nice when they appreciate the effort. BTW the family offered some great leads for further development if anyone wants to work on finding published sources: Talk:Chuck Stobart#Input from Chuck's family. Cbl62 (talk) 00:15, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

They didn’t play in the 2003 championship game so they’re not the champions. LSU has the crystal ball, not USC. 2601:3C3:C000:1600:E528:1C04:2C48:9381 (talk) 14:49, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

The 2003 USC Trojans football team finished No. 1 in the AP poll, so they claim an AP national championship. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:17, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

• 2022 Kansas Jayhawks football team (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

It's the 2022 Jayhawks article where this came to a head, where there has been opposition to listing ESPN's College GameDay in the field for the name of the game, which is done in other teams' seasons articles when GameDay hosts their show from the school/stadium on the day of the game. What's the best approach for noting this?

1. Include it in the name of game field
2. Include it in the TV column
3. Include it as a symbol in the TV column, with a key below, like we do for homecoming games
4. Omit it entirely

Using the game in question as an illustration of how it would look (and it may be ugly with all options in one place):

Date	Time	Opponent	Rank	Site	TV	Result	Attendance
October 8	11:00 am	No. 17 TCU	No. 19	David Booth Kansas Memorial Stadium Lawrence, KS (College GameDay)	FS1	L 31–38	47,233
October 8	11:00 am	No. 17 TCU	No. 19	David Booth Kansas Memorial Stadium Lawrence, KS	FS1, College GameDay	L 31–38	47,233
October 8	11:00 am	No. 17 TCU	No. 19	David Booth Kansas Memorial Stadium Lawrence, KS	FS1‡	L 31–38	47,233
October 8	11:00 am	No. 17 TCU	No. 19	David Booth Kansas Memorial Stadium Lawrence, KS	FS1	L 31–38	47,233
Rankings from AP Poll (and CFP Rankings, after November 1) - Released prior to game All times are in Central time

IMO, options 1 and 3 are the cleanest looking. Option 2 is clunky unless we abbreviate it to CGD, in which case why not use a symbol and a key? That may also require a template code revision. Option 4 omits relevant information and is the least preferable option to me. —C.Fred (talk) 03:31, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Pinging Rockchalk717 here, as he has objected to inclusion of College GameDay at 2022 Kansas Jayhawks football team. We also need to consider Big Noon Kickoff, Fox's version of College GameDay. We should have a consistent treatment for both across all relevant articles. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:35, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for making this a discussion. I would be ok with inclusion in the TV parameter. My big objection is including it in a parameter intended for named games, not it being included whatsoever, or even creating a whole new parameter for it, similar to the homecoming parameter. Though I supposed I should give an actual vote: 2 or 3.--Rockchalk717 04:48, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Note that in practice in the gamename field as been used for games with formal names (bowls, playoffs, conference championship games, rivalry games, kickoff games, etc), unnamed rivalry games, special events like "Family Weekend" (e.g. 2013 Arizona Wildcats football team), and these two on-site pre-grame shows. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:05, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Family weekend seems more out of place and inappropriate use of the parameter than College Gameday, because let's face it, is something like a family day really all that notable? If we allow that, then that opens the door to so many other things like Alumni Day, Military Appreciation Day, etc., all things not super relevant to the season. College Gameday is relevant to the season because it's identifying ESPN's Game of the Week (usually). Again, it's not the inclusion itself I have an issue with, it's the location.--Rockchalk717 05:12, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

I agree that Family Weekend doesn't belong in the named game field. Do we need to add a column for notes, which can capture everything from College GameDay and Big Noon Kickoff to Family Weekend to games rescheduled or cancelled due to weather? —C.Fred (talk) 13:02, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

That's a good idea too, Virginia cancelled a couple games after 3 of their players were tragically killed and lord knows there where a multitude of games cancelled because of COVID-19 outbreaks back in 2020, it would be useful to have something like that and keep the game name parameter for rivalries and bowl games.--Rockchalk717 14:47, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

I don't think we need a separate notes field/column in these schedule tables. In-line notes can be used for any field that requires an explanatory note. Cancellations should be populated in the w/l field. The structure at 2022 Virginia Cavaliers football team works quite well. As for things like "Family Day", "Military Appreciation Day", etc, sure maybe we don't need to note these minor special events in the schedule tables at all. Such details could be saved for the game summaries section in the body down below. But such events are noted in the official schedule listings, e.g. [24]. Probably best to refocus this discussion on College GameDay and Big Noon Kickoff. I'm not sure that they belong in the TV field as those on-site studio shows are separate programming from the broadcast of the game itself. ESPN/ABC's College GameDay was at the Ohio State vs. Michigan game both this year and last even though Fox aired the games both times. Big Noon Kickoff was there as well for both games. My first choice would be keep things as is (option 1). My second choice would be to eliminate mention of these shows entirely (option 4). Jweiss11 (talk) 17:10, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

College GameDay, Big Noon Kickoff, etc., has been placed where option 1 is for decades. As an example, even 1998 Florida State's schedule has it there on their games against Georgia Tech and Tennessee. It would be a significant undertaking to change all of them from present to the beginning if it changes now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.197.212.37 (talk) 23:58, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

@74.197.212.37: Wikipedia hasn't existed for "decades" nor has the schedule template. The mere existence of things on Wikipedia doesn't mean a whole lot either and how difficult enforcement of a new policy is, is not a very good reason not to change something on Wikipedia.--Rockchalk717 01:37, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps the IP meant decades of seasons? We are actually coming up on nearly two decades of these schedule tables existing. But that's beside the point. We're probably only talking a couple hundred quick edits if we need to change things up here. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:36, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

We also should consider SEC Nation here. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:45, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Would like input on the infobox of Gary "Big Hands" Johnson. At the article, it's sourced to this Newspapers.com reference that he was a three-time Little All-American. Sergio Skol removed it from the inbox,[25] stating in the edit summary: I don't see ANYTHING there, and the red links are horrible, please avoid it)

For me at least, the reference shows a Little All-American article with the first line reading: Defensive tackle Gary Johnson of Grambling has been named to The Associated Press College Division All-America football team for the third year in a row. As for the red link to 1974 Little All-America college football team, the WP:REDYES guideline says:

Create red links whenever a non-existent article with more information would help a reader understand the content of the article in which the red link will appear.

What is your opinion on

1. The change from 2x to 3x for Little AA selections?
2. The red link to the 1974 selections?

—Bagumba (talk) 14:35, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

• This all seems to check out. He was first-team pick on both 1972 and 1973 Little All-America college football teams per sources in those articles. While we don't yet have 1974 Little All-America college football team, the sources (e.g., here) are clear that "Big Hands" got his third straight selection. Since the article is likely to be created, I think a redlink is fine. Cbl62 (talk) 18:01, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
• Agree with Cbl; 3×selection seems correct and the redlink is certainly not "horrible" but instead seems quite appropriate in this case. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 18:03, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
• I started the 1974 Little All-America college football team, so redlink issue solved. Cbl62 (talk) 18:14, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

The Little AA source appears to be accessible and supports him being a 3x selection. No consensus to ignore the redlink guideline, and the point is moot now that the page exists.—Bagumba (talk) 16:29, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

John A. Bell, head football coach at Mississippi Valley State in 1959 and 1960, has been nominated for deletion. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John A. Bell. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 01:24, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi all - just wanted to check with everyone about something I'm seeing on bowl game articles this year. Several users, particularly MKP2020, have been adding radio broadcast information to the infobox under the "United States TV coverage" section. I don't think we should be putting it there (since TV and radio are not the same), but rather in prose somewhere else in the article. I left that user a message to that effect on their talk page yesterday but they didn't respond and added another round of radio information this morning. If I'm wrong I'll happily concede but I just feel like a section labeled "TV" shouldn't have radio information in it, and that we should either change the label in the template or remove radio info from the infobox. What do you all think? PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 18:03, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Would anyone be willing to help me in sourcing Mike Leach (American football coach) so that it can be posted to ITN? I've added some, but there's a lot left and I'm not sure I'll be able to do it all in time. Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:46, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

You may be interested in the deletion review of Buck Saunders, an article on a college football and NFL player which was recently redirected after an AFD discussion. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:18, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Big Tackle Football, recently created Michigan–Penn State football rivalry. It's a well-formed article with lots of citations, but I have my doubts that this is notable rivalry worthy of an article. Michigan and Penn State are two blue-clip programs that have played a few memorable, high profile games since they became conference mates in 1993, but I don't think this qualifies as a rivalry. Neither the body of the article, nor any of the titles of the cited sources, mention "rivalry". Shall we delete this? Thoughts? Jweiss11 (talk) 02:58, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

• I've thought about creating such an article but figured on waiting a bit longer as the sense of "rivalry" strengthens. This piece from Bleacher Report ranks Michigan at #2 among teams Penn State loves to beat. For that reason, Michigan is frequently scheduled as Penn State's "white out" opponent. The series doesn't have the long history like Michigan's rivalries with Ohio or Michigan State, but it is an annual match (26 games played in the last 30 years) between two of the top 10 teams in college football history -- Michigan ranks #1 in total program wins and Penn State at #8. This ESPN video surveys some of the best games in the series history. Finally, one of the criteria I weigh is the number of ranked match-ups: they have 12 games in which both teams were ranked and three in which they were both in the top 10. While I may have waited a bit longer to create a stand-alone article, it's probably sufficiently notable. My only hesitancy in voting "Keep" would be that this may be yet another sockpuppet-created rivalry article. Cbl62 (talk) 03:44, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

If "Big Tackle Football" is yet another sock of Caleb, then I'd favor delete. Cbl62 (talk) 04:01, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Delete unless WP:RELIABLE sources specifically calling it a "rivalry" can be produced. Also should be checked for the sockpuppet... Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/CalebHughes/Archive 03:57, 5 December 2022 (UTC) PK-WIKI (talk) 03:57, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Doesn't quite look like CalebHughes's m.o. And CalebHughes's mischief should not have bearing on the notability of a subject. That being said, I'd lean delete here, unless we can find sustained, substantive coverage of this matchup as a rivalry. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:22, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Caleb's mischief wouldn't transmogrify notable into not notable, but we have had a strict practice of deleting everything they create (regardless of notability) so as to deter socking. Cbl62 (talk) 15:49, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

One man's opinion, but I've followed Michigan football since around 1990 and I wouldn't regard this as a rivalry, certainly not in the same breath as Michigan State or Ohio State. It's important, yes, in that both teams tend to be good, but it doesn't have the same emotional resonance. Mackensen (talk) 17:08, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I appreciate you taking the time to read over the article I created. In terms of me being another “sock puppet”, I’m genuinely unsure who Caleb is, however I can ensure you that as an account, I’m completely unrelated to Caleb. In terms of the notability of the game, they of course play each other most seasons in conference play and are two blue chip football programs who are regularly ranked towards the top end of the AP Poll, so the games between the pair have a good amount of input towards the play offs etc. However as mentioned earlier, I’m aware that this would be a minor rivalry (at least taking into account Michigan's rivalry with Ohio State and Michigan State) so I would completely understand if you opted to delete this article. Big Tackle Football (talk) 12:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Big Tackle Football FYI - Caleb is a blocked user whose pattern has been to create new accounts, make a few random edits, and then create a new rivalry article as their first substantive work. Your activity (in conjunction with a second new account, User:Long Pass Football) fit that pattern and naturally raised some suspicion. Can you confirm whether you have any connection to "Long Pass Football". Cbl62 (talk) 16:12, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

I can indeed confirm that “Long Pass Football” was a previous account I was using for articles relating to college football, however I unfortunately lost my log in details so had to create a new account. The article itself was released before it was ready and finished, hence why I’ve made a number of edits on my new account. In regards to the edits been small and stagnated, I want to ensure that the article is up to a high quality, however I also have a busy life away from editing so I don’t always have enough time to proceed with large edits which are of an acceptable quality. Big Tackle Football (talk) 17:33, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Big Tackle Football: Are there any other accounts you have used? Or just those two? Cbl62 (talk) 19:18, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

I have one other account called “Big Punch Boxing” however, this account is entirely centred around the editing of articles related to the sport of boxing. In terms of accounts related to college football, I only have the aforementioned two. Big Tackle Football (talk) 19:58, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

I have opened an AfD for this article here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michigan–Penn State football rivalry. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:11, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

I have nominated SMU Mustangs football under J. Burton Rix and two similar articles for deletion. We now have individual season articles for all years in question. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SMU Mustangs football under J. Burton Rix. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 23:20, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Cbl, a few things would help with the new 2023 articles you are creating:

• The offensive and defensive schemes in the infobox ought to be cleared rather than copying over from 2022 until we get some source confirming. Team media guides often note this in the introductory basic facts table about the team, but those media guides won't be out for a few months. If the head coach and coordinators aren't changing, the schemes may stay the same, but maybe not. Best to leave blank for now.
• Tag the talk page with the WikiProject College football banner. We should default the rating to Stub and importance to mid for FBS teams and low for FCS teams.
• Add the link to the 2023 team article on the team's navbox.
• Include time and tv fields in the schedule tables. These will surely get populated later.
• For opponents links in the schedule table or elsewhere, rather than using the cfb link template, it's probably best just to direct link to the article if it's a FBS or FCS team, even if red for now. All those articles will get created in coming months and the red links (or lack thereof) help track progress.

Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 00:43, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Oops. I meant to the put this on Cbl's talk page, but these are good points for anyone creating 2023 articles. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 23:23, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

I would go a step further on the offensive and defensive schemes. These paramaters should remain empty until there is citation added to support the claim. I'd say that it's uncited in > 90% of the season articles. Cbl62 (talk)

There is an open AfD that the members of this project may be interested in, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Jennings (American football). Thanks, Ejgreen77 (talk) 17:11, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

WebberCold recently changed the infobox for Nick Saban to the NFL biography infobox with the edit summary being “Making infobox the NFL Biography template. Provides a cleaner look for his many head coaching jobs”. I reverted disagreeing with the summary of “Maybe if he spent more than 4 years in the NFL I’d agree with this change. College coach box is more fitting” (it’s 8 years, not 4… oops). They then reverted again. My thought is if he only spent 8 years in the NFL and wasn’t a former player, the then the infobox should be the college coach infobox as that’s where he has spent a majority of his 41-career as a coach. Thoughts? Corky 00:42, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Even though the NFL biography looks much cleaner and easier to read, I would not be opposed to reverting it back. Thanks - WebberCold (talk)

Empircally, there should just be one common football ibx. However, that requires consensus on common parameters, and discussion on why XYZ is necessary or not for one level but not the other.—Bagumba (talk) 00:55, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Empirically, there should be? Hmm. Empirically there only is or isn't. :) I just reverted Saban back to Template:Infobox college coach. That's certainly the more appropriate infobox for him. WebberCold, why do you think the Template:Infobox NFL biography is cleaner? His coaching history looks clearer to me in Infobox college coach as each position takes up only a single line. The rest looks pretty similar. Infobox NFL biography lacks fields for bowl and tournament record, which doesn't serve Saban well. Infobox NFL biography also has a major flaw in that is only has one position field, which serves either current coaching position or position while a player. Doug Pederson is a great example. Nowhere in his infobox does it explicitly state he played quarterback. The data has been overwritten with his coaching position. As for merging into a common football infobox, that won't work so easily because Infobox college coach has been set up to serve multiple sports; see Wallace Wade. Thus Wade can harmonize with both Nick Saban and Brad Bohannon, Alabama's current baseball coach. Bagumba, I think we've discussed this in a basketball context before. Should we have one (American?) team sports bio infobox that can serve everything? Maybe. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:29, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Should we have one (American?) team sports bio infobox that can serve everything?: In theory, yes, though practically the baby step would be to normalize within a sport first. I think if one sport set a good example, others would follow. The position limitation doesn't exist for the basketball ibx as it does for NFL. Is there a reason not to fix the NFL limitation for past player positions?—Bagumba (talk) 04:33, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

No, the problem with the position field in the NFL infobox should be fixed. That should be done before any bigger changes. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:36, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Looking at this test case, it seems like the template already puts the position under "Career information" if there is no number listed for the player. I assume we would just extend that to also place the number there, if the person has no current team. For an active coach, we could introduce new parameters like |career_position= and |career_number=, which the basketball ibx already has. —Bagumba (talk) 05:36, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Two new Alabama rivalries article have been recreated recently: Alabama–Southern Miss football rivalry by Slickrick53 and Alabama–Vanderbilt football rivalry by Breckbreaker. Both of these look to be questionably qualified as notable rivalries. Should these be AFD'd? Thoughts? Jweiss11 (talk) 02:53, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

User:Breckbreaker recently added a LOT of other questionable rivalries as well, including Florida–South Florida football rivalry, which is obviously not a thing. I already nominated it for deletion here, and most/all of the others should be AFD'd as well, imo. Zeng8r (talk) 03:45, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Zeng8r, thanks for opening that AfD. I also see SMU–Texas football rivalry created by Breckbreaker. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:52, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Looking a little closer at Breckbreaker's edits, I see he tagged User:Ejgreen77 on Talk:SMU–Texas football rivalry, Talk:Alabama–Vanderbilt football rivalry, Talk:Florida–South Florida football rivalry. Looks likes CalebHughes's MO, I believe; see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CalebHughes/Archive. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:58, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Good catch. Breckbreaker was confirmed as a Caleb sock. Cbl62 (talk) 13:30, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

I've nominated Alabama–Southern Miss football rivalry for deletion. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alabama–Southern Miss football rivalry. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 16:47, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Is this the work of another suspected sockpuppet? Cbl62 (talk) 18:27, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

The creator of that has made of 6,000 edits and has been editing since 2016, so I doubt he's a sock. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:56, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Has anyone else noticed the "new" IP editor 69.85.216.103 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) who hit the ground running two days ago and already has over 300 advanced-format edits in college football and basketball pages? Grorp (talk) 06:56, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello. I was wondering if anyone would like to help make articles for the recipients at Buck Buchanan Award. There's currently 12 of them. Thanks! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 03:42, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

@Londonfifo: In your edit at Terry Donahue, you reverted back to your preferred of piping the page San Jose State University, which has no diacritics, to "San José State University". According to your edit summary: ...this has been widely discussed, adjudicated and settled years ago... Do you have a link to that prior consensus? Generally, I'd expect most references to a page to use the page's title—unpiped—as it's presumably the WP:COMMONNAME already. Thanks in advance. —Bagumba (talk) 03:24, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:San_Jose_State_University Londonfifo (talk) 03:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

You linked only to the general talk page, not a specific discussion. However, at the most recent RM at Talk:San Jose State University#Requested move 14 October 2022, the page title remained without diacritics. —Bagumba (talk) 03:37, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

This issue was discussed on the SJSU talk page many years ago and a consensus was reached that the accent should be included in all references to the full, official name of the university. The diacritic does not appear in the official SJSU article title since the university only added the mark officially within the last 10 years. I believe changing/moving the Wiki page at the time the university officially changed its name was unsupported since the old (and technically incorrect) name was more commonly used. Londonfifo (talk) 03:55, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Upon reading through the SJSU talk page, it seems a move was put to a vote in October 2022, but it did not pass. Londonfifo (talk) 04:09, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

It seems then that we should reference it using the same COMMONNAME as its page title. —Bagumba (talk) 20:48, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

John Hartwell, former athletic director at Troy and Utah State, has been nominated for deletion for a second time. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Hartwell (2nd nomination). Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 00:58, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Unreviewed featured articles/2020 (URFA/2020) is a systematic approach to reviewing older Featured articles (FAs) to ensure they still meet the FA standards. A January 2022 Signpost article called "Forgotten Featured" explored the effort.

Progress is recorded at the monthly stats page. Through 2022, with 4,526 very old (from the 2004–2009 period) and old (2010–2015) FAs initially needing review:

• 357 FAs were delisted at Featured article review (FAR).
• 222 FAs were kept at FAR or deemed "satisfactory" by three URFA reviewers, with hundreds more being marked as "satisfactory", but awaiting three reviews.
• FAs needing review were reduced from 77% of total FAs at the end of 2020 to 64% at the end of 2022.

Of the FAs kept, deemed satisfactory by three reviewers, or delisted, about 60% had prior review between 2004 and 2007; another 20% dated to the period from 2008–2009; and another 20% to 2010–2015. Roughly two-thirds of the old FAs reviewed have retained FA status or been marked "satisfactory", while two-thirds of the very old FAs have been defeatured.

Entering its third year, URFA is working to help maintain FA standards; FAs are being restored not only via FAR, but also via improvements initiated after articles are reviewed and talk pages are noticed. Since the Featured Article Save Award (FASA) was added to the FAR process a year ago, 38 FAs were restored to FA status by editors other than the original FAC nominator. Ten FAs restored to status have been listed at WP:MILLION, recognizing articles with annual readership over a million pageviews, and many have been rerun as Today's featured article, helping increase mainpage diversity.

Examples of 2022 "FAR saves" of very old featured articles

Solar System 2007 FA J. K. Rowling 2007 FA June 26, 2022 TFA Antarctica 2006 FA Joan of Arc 2006 FA Speed of light 2010 FA

All received a Million Award

But there remain almost 4,000 old and very old FAs to be reviewed. Some topic areas and WikiProjects have been more proactive than others in restoring or maintaining their old FAs. As seen in the chart below, the following have very high ratios of FAs kept to those delisted (ordered from highest ratio):

• Biology
• Physics and astronomy
• Warfare
• Video gaming

and others have a good ratio of kept to delisted FAs:

• Literature and theatre
• Engineering and technology
• Religion, mysticism and mythology
• Media
• Geology and geophysics

... so kudos to those editors who pitched in to help maintain older FAs !

But looking only at the oldest FAs (from the 2004–2007 period), there are 12 content areas with more than 20 FAs still needing review: Biology, Music, Royalty and nobility, Media, Sport and recreation, History, Warfare, Meteorology, Physics and astronomy, Literature and theatre, Video gaming, and Geography and places. In the coming weeks, URFA/2020 editors will be posting lists to individual WikiProjects with the goal of getting these oldest-of-the-old FAs reviewed during 2023.

Ideas for how you can help are listed below and at the Signpost article.

• Review a 2004 to 2007 FA. With three "Satisfactory" marks, article can be moved to the FAR not needed section.
• Review "your" articles: Did you nominate a featured article between 2004 and 2015 that you have continuously maintained? Check these articles, update as needed, and mark them as 'Satisfactory' at URFA/2020. A continuously maintained FA is a good predictor that standards are still met, and with two more "Satisfactory" marks, "your" articles can be listed as "FAR not needed". If they no longer meet the FA standards, please begin the FAR process by posting your concerns on the article's talk page.
• Review articles that already have one "Satisfactory" mark: more FAs can be indicated as "FAR not needed" if other reviewers will have a look at those already indicated as maintained by the original nominator. If you find issues, you can enter them at the talk page.
• Fix an existing featured article: Choose an article at URFA/2020 or FAR and bring it back to FA standards. Enlist the help of the original nominator, frequent FA reviewers, WikiProjects listed on the talk page, or editors that have written similar topics. When the article returns to FA standards, please mark it as 'Satisfactory' at URFA/2020 or note your progress in the article's FAR.
• Review and nominate an article to FAR that has been 'noticed' of a FAR needed but issues raised on talk have not been addressed. Sometimes nominating at FAR draws additional editors to help improve the article that would otherwise not look at it.

More regular URFA and FAR reviewers will help assure that FAs continue to represent examples of Wikipedia's best work. If you have any questions or feedback, please visit Wikipedia talk:Unreviewed featured articles/2020/4Q2022.

FAs last reviewed from 2004 to 2007 of interest to this WikiProject

If you review an article on this list, please add commentary at the article talk page, with a section heading == [[URFA/2020]] review== and also add either Notes or Noticed to WP:URFA/2020A, per the instructions at WP:URFA/2020. Comments added here may be swept up in archives and lost, and more editors will see comments on article talk. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:55, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

1. 2005 Texas Longhorns football team
2. 2006 Chick-fil-A Bowl

Is there a reason that we have {{CFB schedule entry}} (and its cousin, {{CBB schedule entry}}) set up to denote that a game is a non-conference game? I feel like the much more common depiction is to mark that a game is a conference game, and the way we have it set up leads to some awkward usages, especially for independent teams where literally their entire schedule is getting marked up. fuzzy510 (talk) 07:40, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

If a team is a member of a conference, the majority of its games (typically) are conference games, so it makes sense to be marking the outliers (i.e., non-conference games). If a team is an independent, there is no need for non-conference markers. Cbl62 (talk) 10:37, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

In September 2021, a user bolded 2001 on {{Sacred Heart Pioneers football navbox}} as a national championship season. The only thing I can find to support this claim is that SHU finished 1st in the 2001 Sports Network Cup poll, declaring them the NCAA Division I FCS Mid-Major Football National Champions by the Sports Network. What is WP:CFB's stance on this? To me that's not a recognized national championship, and 2001 shouldn't be bolded nor should that season have national championship shading on Jim Fleming's page. SportsGuy789 (talk) 19:21, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hmm. There's also NCAA Division I FCS Consensus Mid-Major Football National Championship covering 2001 to 2007. 2001 Sports Network Cup should probably be merged into that article. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

A merge is probably in order, I'd agree. But, what is the consensus about it being declared a national championship? SportsGuy789 (talk) 04:41, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

You may be interested in some of the NFL player deletion discussions listed here. BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

• You may also be interested in an ANI discussion about this: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:BeanieFan11 and WP:BATTLEGROUND at NFL AFDs. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:25, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Wanted to bring this here for a few more eyeballs. A few months back, the page Sam Houston State Bearkats men's basketball was moved to Sam Houston Bearkats men's basketball, citing that the athletic department had changed its preferred branding to drop "State." Doing a cursory glance, it seems like this is likely the case. More importantly, it seems like ESPN has started using the same branding, as has the AP in recaps: [26]

The men's basketball page is the ONLY team page that got moved, so no matter what, something has to change. But do we think that there's enough evidence that the WP:COMMONNAME is without the "State," justifying moving everything over to the name, or is the right name "Sam Houston State," requiring the one page to be moved back? fuzzy510 (talk) 09:42, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

• Something similar seems to have happened for McNeese State. It looks like the athletic pages were all moved without discussion in January 2023 from McNeese State Cowboys football to McNeese Cowboys football, etc. Note that the main university article is still located at McNeese State University. Ejgreen77 (talk) 11:48, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

The Vital Articles are a list of articles that are deemed to be the highest importance to Wikipedia. Currently two "modern" college football coaches are listed, Bear Bryant and Joe Paterno. Given that Saban has the most national championships of any coach and is often cited as the greatest coach ever, should he gain Vital Article status? If so he would most likely have to replace Bryant or Paterno as the list has strict quotas.--Newtothisedit (talk) 17:03, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Paterno is not vital. Cbl62 (talk) 17:40, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Well, I think that determination should take consensus somewhere. He still has the most NCAA DI wins all time, doesn't he?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:46, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Of course, a discussion/consensus needs to be developed. While Paterno may have the most D1 wins, that's because (a) he had his stripped wins restored after lobbying by Penn State, and (b) he stuck around for 46 years until he was barely functioning and finally fired for covering up the Penn State child sex abuse scandal. With only two national championships, Paterno falls well behind Saban (seven), Bryant (six), Bernie Bierman/Woody Hayes (five each), Frank Leahy/John Robinson (four each), and Urban Meyer/Tom Osborne/Knute Rockne (three each). And if you look at winning percentage, Paterno is not among the all-time top five. Tom Osborne (.836), Nick Saban (.801), and Bear Bryant (.780) are tops. Saban and Bryant are clearly the top two IMO Cbl62 (talk) 02:41, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

If the standard for most vital is sheer success, then yeah, Bryant and Saban are probably the top two, certainly since WWII. But if you enter influence on the establishment and development of the game into the mix, the likes of Walter Camp, Amos Alonzo Stagg, Fielding Yost, and John Heisman should be considered. 03:18, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I agree that Camp is certainly a top candidate as well. Any of those is more influential, more vital than Paterno. Cbl62 (talk) 04:54, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I am just saying delisting a VA requires consensus.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:31, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Camp, Stagg and Heisman are already Vital Articles. Here is the list of the football coaches and figures that are VAs. Newtothisedit (talk) 17:06, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

• @Newtothisedit: Thanks for the link; it's good to see that Camp and Stagg are included. I am no fan of Alabama, but there's no question that the most successful college coach of all time (Nick Saban) belongs on the list of the top 15 vital American football coaches/business people. If you make a motion, I will support it. If someone from that list needs to be delisted, Paterno makes the most sense. Cbl62 (talk) 18:50, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I'd probably say keep Paterno, add Saban, and maybe remove Goodell. All-time D-I FBS wins record is in my opinion a hugely significant accomplishment, so is most national championships – I kind of don't see what's so important about Goodell (so much that he'd be among the 15 most important football figures ever...) besides that he's been the NFL commissioner for a while, and his importance seems similar to other commissioners not listed such as Joe Carr, Bert Bell, Tagliabue... BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:16, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Agree about Goodell -- his inclusion is simply the result of recency bias. Joseph Carr, on the other hand, is hugely important. He was the NFL's first president and led the league for 20 years from a regional Midwest enterprise into a truly national and major-league sport. Remarkably, he was also one of the founders of the first major professional basketball league (the American Basketball League) and a major figure in the expansion of Minor League Baseball. Cbl62 (talk) 20:52, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I'd probably support adding Carr. BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:07, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

• Somebody put some nominations out there and we will come to consensus where it matters. This venue is just talk for VA status. Let us know when noms are up?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:58, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
• I started a discussion to add Saban and remove Goodell. If you have views, one way or the other, the discussion is found at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5#American football coaching/business adds and deletes. Cbl62 (talk) 21:33, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Did Bob Scrabis ever start a game at QB for Penn State (in the late 50s)? I am wondering if he belongs on {{Penn State Nittany Lions quarterback navbox}}.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:38, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

• Yes/no somebody? I was driving by while creating Bob Scrabis (basketball). Just asking.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:33, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
  • I am no longer watching this thread. However, if anyone determines that Scrabis ever started at QB for PSU, please add his name to the template and add the template to his bio.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

@TonyTheTiger: It seems he mainly was a backup and I didn't see anything mentioning him as a starter. PSU had according to one article "four good quarterbacks" at that time and this, written right before his final home game, mentions "And smooth-passing Bob Scrabis, who'll never know if he could have been a top college quarterback because of defensive and blocking weaknesses that gave Lucas and Jacks the starting nod for the past three years, may not play at all." BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:30, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

I have nominated three unusual template documentation pages associated with MEAC standings templates. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2023 March 1#MEAC football standings docs. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 02:11, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

You may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Vehmeier. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

at Template:Did you know nominations/Lewis Manly. Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:11, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

• I'd really appreciate if someone could comment on the issue there. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:33, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Looking at Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Coach Navboxes, I see a lot of college football head coach redlinks. Even some who were prominent at their school are missing. For example, the following coaches were the head at their school for over 10 seasons and do not have articles (bold=20+; bold italics=30+ – there was also one (Barry H. Streeter) who coached for 40)

• FBS level (complete)
• FCS level

(moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Coach articles campaign)

• Division II level

(moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Coach articles campaign)

• Division III level

(moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Coach articles campaign)

• NAIA level

(moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Coach articles campaign)

• Defunct

(moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Coach articles campaign)

• WWII Service Teams
  • Frank Tritico (1943–1944) - Randolph Field

If you decide to create any of these coaches, please note that they still need to pass WP:GNG. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:03, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

*or* Wikipedia:Notability (sports). You can pass a SNG but fail the GNG and vice versa. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:09, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

What do you mean? Are you suggesting that passing the SNG is sufficient as well? Or that failing the SNG but passing GNG is not enough? BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:25, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

@Horse Eye's Back, that's technically true, but the NSPORT SNG requires GNG be met so that's an irrelevant distinction. JoelleJay (talk) 20:09, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

• Among my favorite names from the redlink coaches: Gordon Ramsey (the other one), C. A. Clingenpeel, Carl Quackenbush, Larry Terry, George Schlaugenhauf, and Richard Richardson. BeanieFan11 (talk) 13:54, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
• Also, it seems there are a few active head coaches from Division I schools missing articles. They are listed below (each were hired for this year):
  • Alonzo Hampton - Arkansas-Pine Bluff
  • Raymond Woodie - Bethune-Cookman
  • Trevor Andrews - Dayton
  • Kevin Cahill - Lehigh
• BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:08, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
• A few other categories of missing coach articles:
• Division I FBS team coaches missing articles (the longest serving was John O. Miller, eight years, NM State – I also found West. Kent. coach Jesse Thomas interesting – he coached one year in 1933 and then returned in 1946 and coached two further seasons, a gap of 14 seasons):

(moved)

• Coaches at Division I schools since 2000 missing articles (excluding the newly hired 2023 ones listed above):

(moved)

• Coaches at Division I FCS schools with more than five seasons (excluding those listed above):

(moved)

• Remember that any coach you create needs to pass WP:GNG. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:08, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
• Suggestion. @BeanieFan11: This project is useful, but it's become a bit unwieldy to maintain and grow here on the project talk page. It might be better suited as a stand-alone page along the lines of Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Season articles campaign. Cbl62 (talk) 19:30, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

I see your point – it might be getting just a bit too long :) – although FWIW I don't plan on adding any other categories of coaches missing articles here. What would say the title should be? Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Coach articles campaign? Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Coach articles project? BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:50, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Either sounds fine, though I think campaign is a bit better. Cbl62 (talk) 20:21, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cbl62: I've started Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Coach articles campaign and moved many of the coaches there. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:48, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

I saw a mention recently of the 2001 season's BCS controversy, and how the cancelled WSU vs. Colorado game in mid September would have played into the rankings.

That brought me to Wikipedia, but all of the year's team articles have an unmentioned gap on Saturday September 15th, and sometimes the 22nd:

• 2001 Miami Hurricanes football team#Schedule
• 2001 Colorado Buffaloes football team#Schedule
• 2001 Nebraska Cornhuskers football team#Schedule

The season article also has no mention of the impact of the September 11 attacks on the schedules and/or season as a whole. Some of the games seem to have been cancelled, others postponed until later in the season.

The 1963 season schedules might be similarly improved by adding game cancellations or postponements from the Friday assassination of John F. Kennedy. The more recent 2020 COVID season schedule tables do seem to show the cancelled games: 2020 Colorado.

Help appreciated in adding rows for the cancelled/postponed games. PK-WIKI (talk) 18:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure that WikiProject College Softball is active so I'm pinging related projects, in case anyone has an opinion on the mass-TfD. Please see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2023 March 24#College softball class-/position-specific award navboxes if you care either way. SportsGuy789 (talk) 16:36, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Please note that Offensive backfield, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 27 March 2023 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

I have nominated Category:Jacksonville Naval Air Station Flyers football and its subcats for renaming. Please see the discussion here. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 02:13, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

While not exactly college football, members of this project may be interested in the following discussions on the deletion of several Division I (Auburn) college basketball seasons:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1980–81 Auburn Tigers men's basketball team
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1979–80 Auburn Tigers men's basketball team
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1981–82 Auburn Tigers men's basketball team

BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:42, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

I've come across a number of teams where the season article lists the modern stadium name for older years when the stadium was different or at least had a different name. This would be a worthwhile cleanup project if somebody wants to volunteer. Or if you know of such situations, list them here so we can make a list of what needs to be fixed. Cbl62 (talk) 22:11, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Oklahoma

• Oklahoma Sooners are an example. Historic season articles use the name Memorial Stadium. In older years, contemporary press reports indicate they played on "Owen Field". Unclear to me if this is a different facility altogether or just a former name. Cbl62 (talk) 22:11, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

  Gaylord Family Oklahoma Memorial Stadium#Early history addreses this to some extent, asserting that the playing field in the early years was known as "Owen Field" though the stadium as a whole was known as "Memorial Stadium". This may be correct, though it appears "Owen Field" was the WP:COMMONNAME. Cbl62 (talk) 22:20, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

  The names are often used interchangably from what I understand. @Dcheagle: what do you have to say?-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 02:30, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

  Well for Oklahoma, in their 129 seasons they have played home games in four locations in Norman. The first two fields were unnamed. Starting in 1905 they played home games at Boyd Field till 1923 when they moved to their current location which was at first called Owen Field. Once the Stadium was finished in 1925 it was named "Oklahoma Memorial Stadium" with the field itself still being called Owen Field as its considered two different structures hints the interchangeability of the names to this day. As for names in season articles my goto is using the names of the stadiums/field as it was called during the season of play, so an example would be in 1923 OU played their games at Owen Field, and in 1925 it should be listed as Oklahoma Memorial Stadium.--Dcheagle • talk • contribs 09:46, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

So are you saying it should be "Owen Field in 23, 24 and the Memorial Stadium in 25?-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 05:13, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

That's what I'm saying it should be listed as, but if a consensus is found to list it under another one of its names then by all means list it as such. Its just my opinion that it should be listed as what it was called back then. The History of names of OU's stadiums is a short one, Owen Field, Oklahoma Memorial Stadium and its current name Gaylord Family Oklahoma Memorial Stadium. Any would be fine with me as long as we give contects to its Current name being used for seasons past.--Dcheagle • talk • contribs 23:38, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

• A search of hits in Oklahoma newspapers via Newspapers.com shows that "Owen Field" remained the WP:COMMONNAME at least through the 1945 season:

Year	"Owen Field"	"Oklahoma Memorial Stadium"	"Memorial Stadium" + Norman[1]	"Owen Stadium"	Example
9/25-11/25	103	14	79	6
9/26/11/26	246	1	54	4	[27]
9/27-11/27	325	8	51	34
9/28-11/28	170	4	65	19	[28]
9/29-11/29	209	20	86	29	[29]
9/30-11/30	201	3	109	15	[30]
9/31-11/31	344	2	134	5	[31]
9/32-11/32	338	0	135	6	[32]
9/33-11/33	310	0	58	9	[33]
9/34-11/34	348	0	37	3	[34]
9/35-11/35	168	0	81	3	[35]
9/36-11/36	206	0	46	0	[36]
9/37-11/37	186	0	40	9	[37]
9/38-11/38	242	0	28	19	[38]
9/39-11/39	215	2	70	29	[39]
9/40-9/41	276	0	57	50	[40]
9/41-11/41	422	0	95	68	[41]
9/42-11/42	192	0	52	32	[42]
9/43-11/43	179	0	70	6	[43]
9/44-11/44	171	0	100	11	[44]
9/45-11/45	229	0	61	53	[45]
9/46-11/46	228	8	139	54	[46]

• These results are consistent with what I've found in reviewing game coverage for Oklahoma games in the 1920s and 1930s. By a great preponderance, the press in Oklahoma referred to Oklahoma's football home as "Owen Field" with "Owen Stadium" and "Memorial Stadium" as distant second and third choices. Cbl62 (talk) 12:06, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

You may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Junior varsity team. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:50, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

The article NCAA transfer portal is attracting a large number of uncited lists and tables of transferring athletes in college football and other NCAA sports.

Seeing as student athlete college transfers appear to be a large part of the sport going forward and generate a ton of offseason interest, this wikiproject should put some thought into a better format for the transfer tables. We might look to the association football wikiproject for inspiration:

• List of Major League Soccer transfers 2022
• Template:American soccer transfers
• List of English football transfers summer 2022
• List of English football transfers winter 2022–23
• Template:English football transfers

I don't know if it would be best to handle CFB transfers separately, or if all-NCAA all-sports pages are the way to go.

PK-WIKI (talk) 23:19, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

• I believe the following: (1) annual lists should be created for each year and broken away from the main NCAA transfer portal lists, (2) individual entries on such annual lists should be cited and limited to notable transferees. Cbl62 (talk) 23:38, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

  I created List of 2023 college football transfers as an example of how we could lay things out. Comments and suggestions? Cbl62 (talk) 00:33, 6 April 2023 (UTC)