Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/List of historically significant college football games

Suggesitons for revised criteria
To address the concerns of original research and subjectivity while maintaining the essence of the article on historically significant college football games, the criteria or the focus of the article could be revised to be more objective and measurable. Here are a few suggestions for refining the criteria and possibly renaming the article to better reflect its revised scope:

Revised Criteria Suggestions

 * 1) Historical Milestones in College Football: Focus on games that introduced significant rule changes, technological advancements (e.g., the first game broadcast on television), or other clear, measurable milestones in the history of college football.
 * 2) College Football Games with Lasting Legacy: Include games that initiated long-standing traditions, rivalries, or contributed to the evolution of college football's strategic and play styles.
 * 3) Record-Breaking and Pioneering Games: Highlight games that set or broke significant records (e.g., scoring, attendance) or were pioneering in aspects such as racial integration or international play.
 * 4) Influence on College Football Policies and Structure: Feature games that had a direct impact on the governance, structure, and policy-making in college football, such as changes in scholarship regulations, player safety protocols, or the playoff system.
 * 5) Documented Impact on Society and Culture: Consider games that had a documented impact beyond the sport, influencing societal issues, cultural developments, or contributing to significant charitable causes.

Article Name Change Suggestions

 * 1) Milestones in College Football History
 * 2) Pioneering Games of College Football
 * 3) Record-Breaking College Football Contests
 * 4) Influential College Football Games in History
 * 5) College Football: Games That Shaped the Sport

By refining the criteria to be more objective and measurable, and possibly renaming the article, it may stand a better chance of addressing the concerns raised and remaining as a valuable resource on Wikipedia. Paul McDonald (talk) 15:20, 16 February 2024 (UTC)


 * did... did you use chatgpt to write this?? ltb d l (talk) 15:46, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Of course. It's certainly better at generating ideas than I am most of the time!--Paul McDonald (talk) 22:19, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * using it is frowned upon, see WP:LLM. ltb d l (talk) 09:22, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I was unaware of that essay, it looks thoughtful! Note that I did not use it to write an article, it's simply a comment on a talk page.  Further, I did review the output and made additional edits and content removoal of the generated result-this meets the suggestion from the essay that "outputs should be rigorously scrutinized for compliance with all applicable policies."  Because I was unaware of the essay, I did fail the "disclosure" suggestion but that's handled now and I have no objection to it.  There's no copyvio, no BLP issues... it was just used to start generating ideas.  It does have the added advantage of having correct spelling and grammer (something I often fail at).  Feel free to ignore these suggestions and come up with your own, won't bug me.--Paul McDonald (talk) 15:29, 18 February 2024 (UTC)