Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/New England Patriots/archive1

New England Patriots
Nomination (not self-nom). I am disappointed that that there is no NFL franchise as a featured article, and after studying all the franchise pages, i chose what i believe to be the best one, after deliberating between the Philadelphia Eagles and this article, i decided this was the best one. Expertly written with attention to detail. I will be happy to attempt to adress any criticisms of the article, however, please, do not object with the argument of "Pats SUCK!" or the like. Thethinredline 17:16, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Object. Lacks a References sections to cite the sources used for this article as required by criteria 2 of the featured article criteria. --Allen3 talk 17:27, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * A clear mistake on my part, and will attempt to rectify. Is there any specific area where a refernece is especially lacking?Thethinredline
 * The Franchise history section needs some references. Outside of the newly added references for individual players such as Jim Nance and Jim Plunket, there are no citations for anything but the 1970 season and 1971 draft. --Allen3 talk 01:05, 12 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Object for now. I am concerned that some portions of the article might not be "stable" as per featured article criteria #2. An example of this concern is what is expressed on Talk:New England Patriots; a number of users have been entering summaries for each game for the 2005 season, which is still currently ongoing. Until the season ends in February, I feel that this section of the article will change significantly from day to day. My other current concern is that the lead section still needs work. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 21:35, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Object:
 * Pats SUCK! ;-)
 * The image Image:McGinestLawSeymour.jpg is tagged as a "promotional photo". However, this tag is only for press kit and other official promotional images, while this image appears to be from a news report.  It needs a different fair use tag and a rationale, or it needs to be removed.
 * The navbox at the bottom contains the restricted-license image Image:NationalFootballLeague.png. Navboxes and other templates should never use non-free images.
 * --Carnildo 04:30, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

I also will agree that details about individual games in 2005 probably don't belong; however details about the seasons, and conflicts, and certain milestone games over the years make the article more useful.--Seadog1611 04:30, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Object lead should summarise the article. The article at 54 kb is long and winding. It should be written in summary form and details moved to subarticles. Inline links should be collected using the footnote style. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  15:14, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I fear that this article will be long and winding for some time. As with Philadelphia Eagles, New York Giants, St. Louis Rams, and some of the other National Football League team articles, it is completely out of control. It seems that users are trying to stuff every single detail they can in them with out even looking into the sub-cats of Category:National Football League. I feel like I have to wait until the season ends in February to clean it all up. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 17:23, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not a sportsfan and I'm not particularl interested in sports article, but I'm very sympathetic to your plight, Zzyzx, and I understand the problems you're having. I don't know what the best course of action is, but I encourage you to be absolutely merciless (yet polite) in removing trivia and other unencyclopedic material. / Peter Isotalo 12:15, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I have done quite a bit of work in this article. (I also did some work on the Rams and Patriots articles)  Just so you see from where I'm working, I am trying to focus on summaries and high points in seasons.  I am not trying to put stuff in, for the sake of putting it in; but at the same time, I think it is good to be as detailed as possible.  Indeed, it seems to be working, as this has been nominated for an award.
 * Object. I've been working on the New Orleans Saints article and I think it's necessary to spin the history section off into a subpage: History of the New Orleans Saints. Also, it was mentioned, I think, at the NFL Wikiproject talk page, but someone discussed cutting out the stuff in the lead section that is already in the infobox--which obviously needs to be done--and maybe expanding the infobox to make sure all the pertinent information is there. My first suggestion would be to move all that history onto a History of the New England Patriots article; then summarize it briefly for the main article (see IFK Goteborg for an example).Kevin M Marshall 22:51, 12 October 2005 (UTC)