Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive-Aug2008

Mythical National Championship
Correct me if I have come to the wrong place, but I would like the opinion of some of the members of this project to take a look into the Mythical National Championship. This article cites no sources and does not seem notable. It seems to me more like taking a jab at the term National Championship. The term is also in the first line of the article for NCAA Division I FBS National Football Championship. I vote that the page should be deleted but in the very least, the term be removed from any other pages such as the NCAA pages. What are some other opinions? Thanks. Brinkley32 (talk) 20:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * We'll definitely take a look at it. The article does cite one source (which of course is not enough) but remember that it is speaking generally to the concept of a "mytical national championship" -- a concept that exists not only in NCAA but high schools as well, and maybe even other governing bodies of sports and competitive events (mythical national championship of pee wee darts, or mythical national championship of apple pie baking, maybe...).  The article NCAA Division I FBS National Football Championship is a specific application of the more general mythical national championship.--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:38, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposed renaming of coach navbox templates
I'm proposing to renaming each of the coach navbox templates to remove ambiguity from what the templates contain. Currently, the name is of the form: " Coach" If there is are two schools with the same mascot, then it is the form: " Coach"  The ambiguity lies in the fact that the navboxes do not say what sport the coaches are for (the college basketball coach templates are the first thing that jump to mind) and the " Coach" can be very confusing in some cases, such as OrangeCoach, VolunteersCoach and UKyFbCoach. The new naming scheme would be " football coach navbox". For example, AFFalconsCoach would be Air Force Falcons football coach navbox. It's a bit long, but I think it's more intuitive than the current system. It also more closely follows the naming convention for the football articles (e.g. Air Force Falcons football). — X96lee15 (talk) 22:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree, except that the name is largely not relevant. Unlike articles, people aren't really searching for the names of them. They have the VDE links on them, so the name is not important, as someone wants to edit it, they just click it there. If you want to "fix" it, go ahead, but I think there are more pressing issues (content) to work on. MECU ≈ talk 00:03, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I sometimes wonder about that myself. It would be handy to have it be in a standard format for creating articles (and thus navboxes) and it would also help give our project more of a "sense of standard" and that ain't nothing.  I'd classify it as certainly a good idea but one of relatively low impact.--Paul McDonald (talk) 11:24, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Memorial Stadium Nightmare
Over my creation of college football season articles, I have encountered Memorial Stadiums young and old alike. However, there seems to be no standard format for saying which University the Stadium belongs to in the title of the article. I have encountered: same with War Memorial Stadiums (to a lesser extent)
 * [Memorial Stadium, city] i.e. Memorial Stadium, Bloomington (which doesn't match Memorial Stadium (Indiana University old) the old stadium's format much less other schools).
 * [Memorial Stadium (univ)] i.e. Memorial Stadium (Kansas State)
 * [Memorial Stadium (city)] i.e. Memorial Stadium (Champaign)
 * [War Memorial Stadium (state)] i.e. War Memorial Stadium (Arkansas)
 * [War Memorial Stadium (city)] i.e. War Memorial Stadium (Buffalo)

which leads me to guessing and hoping I don't get redlinked. Are there naming conventions (or could there be some put) in place to prevent this?  Brandonrush   Woo pig sooie  00:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Good question. I suggest the following:

Don't forget all the Stagg Field locations across the country, too!--Paul McDonald (talk) 01:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

We need more images!
I just posted a first draft of WikiProject College football/Images -- it's an essay on image use in the project. We need more photos!--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Some of the best places to ask are on fansites. If you make a posting saying that they're for Wikipedia, you should get plenty of responses, and all you'll have to do is follow the labyrinthine permitting process. JKBrooks85 (talk) 19:58, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Last year, before the season, I implored the WikiProject members who attend football games to go out and take as many useful photos as possible (and even try and cover nearby stuff like college campuses that may not have good pictures yet). I had a lot of luck.  I'll probably make a new section before the upcoming season, but here's a few techniques I found useful: if a team has a traditional march to the stadium before the game, its great for players and coaches.  If they have a place they rally after the game (esp. visiting teams) to meet with family, that's another good place.  Some stadiums, like Nebraska's Memorial Stadium, are set up so that people can walk only a few feet behind each bench on the same level --I was able to take photos of half the USC football team following those techniques. --Bobak (talk) 20:19, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I was wondering how you got those for the season article ... looked as though you were on the field with the players! JKBrooks85 (talk) 22:51, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I know, it was pretty awesome --they looked just as amazed that we were so close. One technique --if you're ever in that situation, the trick is to use as high a resolution as your camera will allow and just click fairly wide shots and see what you come up with later.  A few of them were actually cropped from the same photo.  Some players are willing to pose if you get them after the game (calling their name with a nice tone usually gets a smile and a wave); USC's slightly more tricky because they don't have names on their jerseys so you need to know the number.  --Bobak (talk) 01:44, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Bobak, would you mind taking a crack at WikiProject College football/Images? I think you could put together a nice "tips" section!--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, no problem. --Bobak (talk) 18:20, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I tested the idea of attending a fall practice this past Friday and it was a smashing success --I was able to get photos of almost every major USC player and coach. While its unusual for all practices to be open to the public, most programs at least have one or two open practices or scrimmages and (even if not) you can wait until the end of practice (which is usually posted publicly) and ask for photos as players and coaches leave (there are often kids who wait for autographs outside anyway). The flip side is I also witnessed a major team storyline as the starting QB dislocated his kneecap at the same practice, leaving me with photos of first instances of the previous back-ups practicing with the first-team offense. So, in summary: consider hanging around an open practice or hanging around after a practice gets out and you'll find college players and coaches are usually pretty friendly (though a bit tired) and willing to smile for a photo. --Bobak (talk) 16:09, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Ralphie
As part of GA Sweeps, I am reassessing the Ralphie article. The talk page indicates that the article is within the scope of this project, so I am letting the editors know that the article will be on hold for seven days to allow for the improvements I have listed on the talk page. Thanks. Nikki 311  23:19, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I've also started the process with Sparty, which will also remain on hold for seven days. Nikki  311  00:43, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Somebody want to split these with me? I'll take one, if someone else can grab the other. JKBrooks85 (talk) 08:47, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll take Ralphie. Though some of the comments on the re-review seem nit-picky and preferential, and perhaps not really enough to downgrade from GA and would have taken less time to correct that initiate the review and advertise it... MECU ≈ talk 22:32, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I guess I'll tackle Sparty, then. JKBrooks85 (talk) 03:24, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Coaching tree
Would a coaching tree be appropriate for Wikipedia? If so, would one generation backward and forward be enough? i.e. Here is Skip Holtz tree:
 * Bobby Bowden Earle Bruce Lou Holtz
 * Skip Holtz
 * (Any former assistants that became a Head Coach}


 * Hmmmm great idea, but I'm not sure if the rest of the Wikipedia comomunity is ready for that--they'll all scream "original research" and we'll have to deal with that.--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Additional Peer Review request
Hello everyone, I've been working on the 2007 USC Trojans football team season article for the past year or so (not continuously), and last February a well-meaning editor pushed it for peer review well before it was quite ready for review --in a positive result it garnered good tips from Phydend (which have been followed). Now, after some delays on my part, I think the article is ready for a good examination by peers before applying for GA status. The original peer review is still open here, please feel free to chime in there or in general. I hope to one day achieve the same level as 2005 Texas FA, which, in conjunction with 2005 USC GA (mostly by Phydend), I used as models for 2007 USC. --Bobak (talk) 16:54, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * You got it. Good work. JKBrooks85 (talk) 21:08, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the input. After making those changes (save for breaking out the smaller daughter articles), I've  gone ahead with the GA nom (I'll save the daughter article question for the FA nom).  Anyone else want to give suggestions?  They're all welcome. --Bobak (talk) 18:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * You think it'd be okay if I did the GAR for it? Or would that be a conflict of interest? I'm inclined toward the latter, myself. JKBrooks85 (talk) 08:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know, but I would be safe and go with the latter unless I see policy written otherwise. How long do you think it'll be in the GA nom queue? --Bobak (talk) 15:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Given past experience, at least a month. If you're in a hurry, try contacting someone who's done a GA review in the past. JKBrooks85 (talk) 21:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * If you're interested, Nikki311 and ThinkBlue have been going through the GAs ... you might try contacting them if you want to get it reviewed more quickly. JKBrooks85 (talk) 23:42, 19 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Update

The article was elevated to GA status today; however the WikiProject tag on the talk page still assesses it as a "Start" with an open Peer Review... Could someone more knowledgeable with the tag close the peer review and archive it? (and maybe give the article an higher assessment ;-) ). --Bobak (talk) 23:09, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * We need to close the peer review, otherwise I can't take it to FA (or start a pre-FA peer review). --Bobak (talk) 14:06, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

2007 USC FA nom
After a general peer review, I've nominated 2007 USC Trojans football team for FA. If you have time, please come by and take a look and offer any feedback --I think its to the point set by 2005 Texas Longhorn football team. --Bobak (talk) 18:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd like to second this. It's a lengthy article, and the more eyes that look it over, the better. JKBrooks85 (talk) 07:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

"A Football Feast to be Set Forth", looking back to a season preview: 1916
92 years and 7 days ago... The title says it all: A FOOTBALL FEAST TO BE SET FORTH. Come, fellow college football Wikipedians, and share in the ancient scribblings of our beloved game. I'm currently working on a Peer Review, and in searching for an old article I ended up stumbling upon this pretty awesome article in The New York Times, previewing the 1916 season. Remember, this was a time well before the success of the NFL, when college football dominated the news and was still considered a bit high brow. This article is available here, click on "view full article" to get the PDF scan of the original piece from August 14, 1916... See your favorite teams like Virginia Poly (before it was more commonly known as Virginia Tech) challenge the powers at Yale; Notre Dame versus the Michigan Aggies (now known as the Michigan State Spartans); Georgetown versus Louisville; the Carlisle Indian Schools is looking weaker this season; Chicago versus Minnesota; California (a powerhouse) versus the upstarts from Southern California; "South California" (sic) versus Oregon; and gate receipts that could surpass the incredible sum of $200,000! This is a fun read for college football buffs, and if anyone is working with articles from that era, there might be some fun information to mine out of this piece. --Bobak (talk) 15:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Nice find! I've been going to the library a lot lately in order to get more sources for the bowl game articles I've been working on -- NewsBank is a wonderful tool -- but this is a lot further back than I'd thought to look and is really neat! JKBrooks85 (talk) 20:25, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Looking less back: 1997 bowl summary
I'm also working on a 1997 season article for a team that, well, sucked. This bowl summary doesn't help me, but if you want to read up on the final season before the BCS system "solved" everything, here's CNN/SI's old-school webpage which is still on their server: --Bobak (talk) 23:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Gaylord Family Oklahoma Memorial Stadium
I have reviewed this article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have left a small list of tasks to complete to maintain the GA status of this article. The article will remain on hold for seven days (starting today) for improvements. Nikki 311  17:47, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

New cat: College football teams seasons
In order to better organize our college football season articles, I have created this category. It is pretty much the college football version of the similar NFL cat. Whenever you guys have the time, please add the team season pages to this cat (be sure to create a sub-cat for the team first). BlueAg09 (Talk) 18:45, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I think this is a good move. Someone's going to scream "But this should be on a list" -- they're usually different than the people who scream "This should be in a category" when you make a list, though... so I for one will support it!--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Should the season pages be filed in this as well? JKBrooks85 (talk) 21:23, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Oops -- I just noticed I linked to the wrong cat. I fixed the original link. But yes, the season pages belong in this cat, though there are subcategories for each team's pages. Here is an example of one of those subcategories: The only pages that should be filed in the main category (College football teams seasons) are the year-by-year season result lists (e.g. Virginia Tech Hokies football seasons) BlueAg09 (Talk) 22:22, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Fun userbox
Gang, feel free to use this userbox... --Paul McDonald (talk) 16:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Happy 2008 -- The Season begins anew!
Remember, if you're going to a game --consider taking photos. Here are some great tips and suggestions. Cheers for a good season. --Bobak (talk) 21:34, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

NOTED PLAYER
See NOTED PLAYER for a proposal about making Notable Player sections into official guidelines.  RGTraynor  17:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I know that kind of section is common in general team pages. ... What other pages use Notable Players subsections? JKBrooks85 (talk) 04:15, 30 August 2008 (UTC)