Talk:Baltimore Ravens

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please follow the National Football League's naming conventions and official record book: the Baltimore Ravens are considered a 1996 expansion team while the Cleveland Browns are considered to have suspended operations from 1996-1998

American football Portal

This article is part of WikiProject National Football League, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the NFL on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary on the comment page to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

	Baltimore Ravens is part of WikiProject Maryland, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Maryland.
B	This article has been rated as b-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Baltimore Task Force.

I don't agree with the shift of Cleveland Browns content to the Cleveland Browns page. The old Browns and current Ravens are linearly the same franchise, with the same owner and carrying over much of the same management structure and player personnel. The new Browns are an expansion team with new owners and personnel. As is correctly pointed out, the current franchise owns the old trademarks and stuff, but that's not relevant; it's like saying that Michael Jackson was a Beatle because he now owns the rights to the old Lennon-McCartney songs.

Willing to be persuaded; otherwise, would recommend switching it back. -- RjLesch

I am inclined to agree. While it is true that the NFL decided to transfer the teams history, the fact remains that the Baltimore Ravens were not an expansion team. They had the same players, coaches, and management as the old Browns, and it is they new Browns that are the true expansion team. Jeff8765 15:42, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

But currently, the NFL and all its official records technically treats the Baltimore Ravens as an 1996 expansion team who just got same players, coaches, and management as the old Browns. The Browns are treated like the team suspended operations from 1996-1998. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 05:40, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Zzyzx11 is correct, and the wish among Baltimore fans is to use that same treatment to make the Colts in Baltimore the Baltimore predessesor team, with a suspended operations until the Ravens came along. --Noitall 23:31, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

I doubt that will happen in the near future, as the Irsay family seems persistent in keeping all of the Baltimore Colts history and records. Until then, the Colts and the Ravens are officially different and separate teams. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 18:05, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Several issues: It is only part Irsay, the rest in Tagliabou. The Colts are the one exception and have been treated that way from the beginning. In fact, the city of Baltimore was initiating eminant domain procedings when the Colts left (it may have hastened their departure). It is a legal argument that would likely work, but is likely not to be needed any more.

This is not the "NFL" page. The city of Baltimore and all those hall of famers, uncluding Johnnie U., have every right to assert their position that Baltimore NFL history includes the Colts. NPOV means they get equal treatment.

Finally, the legacy of 2 previous Baltimore Colts teams was OFFICIALLY incorporated with great fanfare into the Baltimore Ravens, see brief description at Baltimore Colts (1947-50). This is the only football team to have such a legacy and history. --Noitall 03:16, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

All I am going to by the official history of the NFL. That is the standard that was agreed on Wikipedia:WikiProject National Football League. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:34, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
- Noitall, And please stop trying to edit when I am trying to edit, please... I am getting constant edit conflicts, that my edits to this page have not gotten through until now. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:34, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

You continue to ignore all discussion, seem to think this is the NFL page, and seem to think this is your page. You are wrong on all of them. Further, I could care less what some Wikiproject agreed to. We don't have a some private organization controlling anything on Wiki. Should the Bush Administration write its own article on Wiki and should Enron? Give me a break. Are you a newbie here? --Noitall 03:36, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

Please calm down. First, as I wrote above, I have tried to write my comments here but I kept on getting an edit conflict. Second, as I wrote in my previous message about, "The Colts and the Ravens are officially different and separate teams". Third, we did agree on the policy at the Wikiproject. And lastly, I am not really a newbie; I am on here editing on most days because I am an administrator here. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:45, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

So, now that we are not having edit conflicts anymore, do you like my compromised edits? Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:47, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

I have no problem with your compromise edit. For the most part, I don't mind further explanations as long as the position of some (very passionate) fans and hall of famers is in there. I became rather annoyed because I thought I already took some time to make compromise edits and, well, you know the rest. --Noitall 03:52, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

1 Improvement drive
2 Not to be forgotten
- 2.1 Comments
3 Vandalism and BJ Ward
4 Logo Change in 1998
5 Logo Controversy
6 Change in order of colors
7 Not to be Forgotten and Broken Links
8 Sheild logo
9 Fair use rationale for Image:BaltimoreRavens 1000.png
10 Fair use rationale for Image:Bwings.png
11 Fair use rationale for Image:RavensdrawingBouchat.jpg

[edit] Improvement drive

National Football League is currently a candidate on WP:IDRIVE. Vote for it if you are interested!--Fenice 20:39, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Not to be forgotten

Many of these players are already forgotten and should be forgotten. Here is the original list.

I am paring it down to people who contributed substantially in the early losing years or contributed substantially in Super Bowl year. In addition, if they made it big outside of the Ravens, perhaps they should be included. Thus it becomes:

Comments? --Noitall 10:36, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Comments

I decided to add Gary Baxter back to the list of not to be forgotten players, I am also adding Edgerton Hartwell back to the list.--IAMTHEEGGMAN 20:31, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Did Dale Carter, the 199? Defensive rookie of the year, ever play for this team? Somebody ought to add him to the notable player list. 216.165.236.141 02:58, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism and BJ Ward

I have two comments: First, there should be a disambiguation page for B.J. Ward the football player as opposed to B.J. Ward the actress. Second, I see apparent vandalism where the Ravens' logo should appear. --JHVipond 03:01, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Both fixed and taken care of, thanks for pointing it out. --Boothy443 | comhrá 05:37, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

JHVipond, remember that you can always revert a page to an earlier version. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 17:30, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Logo Change in 1998

The caption to the logo says it was changed due to copyright infringement, but searching for 'logo' in the article yielded no hits. I'm intrigued. What are the details of that? Is there another logo which was similar in design?

I started a new section on this topic. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 20:29, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Logo Controversy

Alakazam here!

On the "Logo Controversy" section, that's cool that it's comparing the artist's drawing and the Ravens' very firt logo. Keep up the good work guys!

[edit] Change in order of colors

I changed the order of the colors from "Black, Purple, and Gold" to "Purple, Black, and Gold" because the home jersey is purple. The jersey color is the primary, not the helmet color. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.208.197.248 (talk • contribs) .

If you are curious, what I basically did was copy the order "Black, Purple, and Gold" from the book NFL Record and Fact Book (ISBN 193299436X). Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:28, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Not to be Forgotten and Broken Links

If the player has a broken link, shouldn't he be removed from the Not to be Forgotten List? I was just checking with you guys before I do it... or someone else beats me to it...--68.55.182.255 13:51, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

No, normally red links are not removed from a list like that just in case a registered user decides to start an article about him. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 14:45, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sheild logo

If they got sued for using that logo they why is it still used on the field at the 50 yard line? -- Coasttocoast 06:13, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

It is NOT the same copyvio "B" logo with wings. If you look carefully at the current logo at the 50-yard line of M&T Bank Stadium, the design inside the shield is similar to the Flag of Maryland. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 07:39, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is the Flag of Maryland.Mezlo 18:33, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:BaltimoreRavens 1000.png

Image:BaltimoreRavens 1000.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 13:40, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Bwings.png

Image:Bwings.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

BetacommandBot 08:16, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:RavensdrawingBouchat.jpg

Image:RavensdrawingBouchat.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)