Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive-Jul2008

Players notability expansion?
I've added a few more acceptable categories to WikiProject College football/Notability, specifically adding the guideline "Goes on to play in the American Football League, Canadian Football League, or other comparable professional league" such as the United States Football League. Please review and give opinions. Is it too broad? Not broad enough? Worded differently?--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:21, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm kinda hinky on the USFL or WFL ... mainly because I look at WP:Athlete's notability, which says "Competitors who have competed in a fully professional league." To me, that opens the door to everybody who's ever played in the Intense Football League or arenafootball2. Many of the players in those leagues may not have even started a game for a college team, yet would be notable for playing in a professional league. I'd strongly suggest limiting it to NFL or CFL players at the present time. We can always reconsider later. JKBrooks85 (talk) 10:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That's probably good advice. I think we might could take the stance that since the USFL was only 3 years long, any noteworthy player was picked up by an NFL team after the league closed.  But then that leaves the question of historic leagues--what about the AFL players before the merger. for instance?--Paul McDonald (talk) 11:35, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Would the NFL WikiProject take a stand on the USFL, AFL, Arenafootball2, etc, player notability? Or any other WikiProject?  I believe we should take direction from other WikiProjects, since it would be the end-job of a college player that would potentially make them notable.   P G  Pirate  12:43, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Y'know, in some sense that does make sense. Here's another thought:  if they are notable because they were an NFL player, they are notable--the college playing has no additional impact on notability.  Hmmm...--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:45, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Correct, we need to establish if non-NFL football sports are considered notable. If so, then those players will be considered notable in college. But, I do not feel that College Football WikiProject has the authority to grant "notability" for those entities.  P G  Pirate  14:46, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll go put an invitation on the NFL, CFL, and other similar projects to join in on this discussion.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:50, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't see why not. I'm for including everyone who has ever played college football having an article, providing an article can contain more than "Player X was a Position Y for College Z".  Call it the Inclusionist in me.  --    Me   Holla! 16:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That would unleash hundreds of thousands of new articles. People over at WP:BIO would have a problem with it.  I can understand their concern.  We do not need an article for every college football player ever.  I believe our current notability guideline, minus this new question, is sufficient.   P G  Pirate  17:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not so much worried about thousands of new articles that I am the fact that they could be a bit crufty if everyone who ever played a snap in college decides to create an article about themselves. JKBrooks85 (talk) 22:42, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Since everything would have to be sourced, I don't see the problem in that. Not that it's best case scenario, but it shouldn't be a deal breaker.  --    Me   Holla! 23:01, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't see a problem with this as long as the league they play in is entirely professional. After all, there are thousands of soccer players on Wikipedia. Bettia   (rawr CRUSH!)  08:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Well according to our wikipedia, there are currently eight professional leagues: National Football League, Arena Football League, Arenafootball2 (af2), American Professional Football League, American Indoor Football Association, United Indoor Football, Continental Indoor Football League and Intense Football League. Are all these players, minus NFL, considered notable now?  How about these current semi-pro leagues: Mid Continental Football League, North American Football League, Southern States Football League, Minor League Football Association, Empire Football League, Florida Football Alliance and Central Football League. How about historical major leagues? Such as All-America Football Conference, American Football League x4, World Football League, United States Football League and XFL. Or these historical minor leagues? American Football League, Dixie League, American Association, American Football League, American Football League, Pacific Coast Professional Football League, American Football League, United Football League, Atlantic Coast Football League, Continental Football League, North American Football League, Professional Spring Football League, Professional Indoor Football League, Regional Football League, Indoor Football League, Spring Football League,  Indoor Professional Football League, National Indoor Football League, Eastern Indoor Football League and World Indoor Football League.  Where is the line drawn?  P G  Pirate  12:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

All the Pro Leagues I think it's safe to say we can divide all the pro leagues into categories:

In short, if there is a project that says that a college player goes on to play professionally, and that project calles the player notable, I don't want to argue. If that project does not call the player notable, then that player would have to stand on its own notability achievements outside of that league. The problem is that we're left with the same problem--how do we determine if a specific college player is notable? I don't want to say that no players are notable, but I also don't think that "only players who go to the NFL" are notable either...--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * So basically, the guideline should be that we follow the notability guidelines of other projects in regard to professional careers? JKBrooks85 (talk) 05:10, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Edit: If a player is not notable under any of the CFB guidelines, but has notability due to the guidelines of another wikiproject, he is notable. JKBrooks85 (talk) 05:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Notability Message Template
I've been working on Template:CFNotability, a notability message template. It's designed to go in the TALK page of a user that questions notability. However, I don't know a lot about templates, and I'd like to get some feedback anyway from others on the project. Please review.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:50, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Moved it to Template:CFBNotability to match standards. Also starting work on Template:CFBPriority for article pages--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:55, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * There's gotta be a template help page somewhere on Wikipedia. JKBrooks85 (talk) 22:43, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Throw up helpme and someone will come.  P G Pirate  11:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
 * The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
 * The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
 * A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot  ( Disable )  22:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Possible duplication
Are George McLaren (football coach) and George McLaren the same person? Neither have a date of birth but both coached college football teams in the same era. Crickettragic (talk) 02:09, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Going to CFBDW, George McLaren was the coach of Arkansas, Cincinnati and Wyoming with no mention of ESU. But, ESU does not have a active page on that website. I feel they are the same person, but as of right now, cannot say either way.  P G  Pirate  12:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes *From p. 36 of the “The Razorbacks: A Story of Arkansas Football” By Orville Henry, Jim Bailey: “Two years proved maximum, even for such a personally popular coach as young George McLaren, Schmidt's immediate predecessor. McLaren had been a Pittsburgh All-American in 1917 under Pop Warner.“ *From the New York Times May 2, 1919,  Section: Sports, Page 16:  "George McLaren, The University of Pittsburgh’s All-American fullback and Captain of the Panther eleven last year has accepted a position as coach of football, basketball and track athletics at Kansas State Normal College, Emporia Kansas and next fall will assume his duties there. McLaren was recommended for the position by Coach Glenn S. Warner …”  Note:  Emporia State University used to be called Kansas State Normal College. *Also here is a link to his College Hall of Fame bio but no mentioned on where he coached. *Also here is a link from the Pitt Panthers site about his time there. 09er (talk) 19:47, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Nice work, 09er! JKBrooks85 (talk) 03:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I have merged the two articles into George McLaren. I also added a lot of additional info about his early life and his time at Pitt.  I also removed the stub tag from the front of the article.  Could someone please review and re-assess the article?  Thanks  09er (talk) 20:48, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks great! Just read it!--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:48, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Very nice. Thanks for doing that, 09er. JKBrooks85 (talk) 19:31, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

1949 Rose Bowl
In connection with the History of Northwestern University, I created the article for the 1949 Rose Bowl based primarily off of the template for the '48 game. However, someone more experienced should probably give it the once over to make sure everything meets this Project's standards and criteria. Madcoverboy (talk) 05:26, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

FLC help requested
There are two college football Featured List candidates that are about to expire for lack of support: Virginia Tech Hokies football seasons and List of Arkansas Razorbacks in the NFL Draft. Your help is needed to get these articles to featured list status. Without your comments and support, they'll be forced to go through the process again. It only takes a minute or two to suggest some changes or give your support, and your assistance is highly valued. Thanks for your time. JKBrooks85 (talk) 19:37, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Put in a support vote for both. Nice work gentlemen! Geologik (talk) 20:11, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your support and the compliment, Geologik! JKBrooks85 (talk) 22:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

A big thank you goes to everyone who offered comments and/or support. Both articles have passed review and are now featured! JKBrooks85 (talk) 06:44, 26 July 2008 (UTC)