Template:Did you know nominations/1899 Sewanee Tigers football team


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:04, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

1899 Sewanee Tigers football team

 * ... that the 1899 Sewanee Tigers won five road games in six days, all by shutout over southern college football powers?


 * Reviewed: United States military bands

Improved to Good Article status by MisterCake (talk). Self-nominated at 04:30, 11 April 2016 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Nominated within 5 days since the GA was passed, sources check out fine, hook cited, looks to be good to go.  NFL  is  Awesome   (ZappaOMati) 17:58, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Where did the information in the charts come from? Can you add any cites? Yoninah (talk) 06:02, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm sure I could. Which charts? The schedule? The box score? Both? Cake (talk) 11:01, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, all of them. My understanding of the DYK rules is that charts, like paragraphs, should have at least one cite in them. And often you get all the information from just one source. Yoninah (talk) 14:54, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Alright. There we go. Cake (talk) 15:07, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you! What about the first chart of standings? Yoninah (talk) 15:28, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, those are more difficult. Official conference standings are hard to come by for southern teams before the SEC in 1933, and especially hard before the SoCon in 1922. Newspapers would sometimes have John Heisman or Grantland Rice or somebody else rank the teams, but it would be done by their perceived strength, and not their record or winning percentage or anything like that. However, there are a few sources to find members of the conference in various years (such as those rankings, yearbooks, etc. to check the writings of historians). One can then rank some team according to its record against other teams as is traditionally done, underneath those which claim titles. Unfortunately, one is still in the dark about various SIAA teams, such as e. g. the University of Nashville (whose conference record can only be inferred by other teams). Cake (talk) 15:38, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Then how did you put together this chart? Yoninah (talk) 16:19, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * That's what I tried to get across. One doesn't have a nice chart like say this to link to for 1899. However, one does have the conference members listed e. g. here or here (page 112) and the schedules for most of programs, such that one can construct the chart. One also has the title claimants each year. One takes the schedule for each member team, disregards games against nonconference members, and ranks them by wins accordingly, with the champions on top. Cake (talk) 16:55, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I understand. Well, for the purposes of DYK, I would sprinkle a few of those cites through the chart. Even if only one or two lines has a cite, it would be ok. Yoninah (talk) 17:36, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not certain the chart works that way. I will add a source to its page though. Cake (talk) 18:06, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg The author has added the requested citations. I think compiling a table based on widely published and available information can fall under routine calculations. Hook & GA verified. Intelligent  sium  15:35, 17 May 2016 (UTC)