Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/MasterTeamTable

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

College football
WikiProject
Information
Project page talk
College football Portal talk
Participants talk
2007 NCAA FBS Season talk
2007-08 Bowl Games talk
2007 Rankings talk
Project category talk
Master Team Table talk
Team images talk
Year Page Format talk
Notability guidelines talk
To do list talk
Departments
Assessment talk
  •Worklist  •Log
Newsletter talk
Collaboration of the Month talk
Peer review talk
Tools
Project banner talk
Persondata talk
WP:CFB Templates talk
{{subst:CFBwelcome-project}} talk
Photos on Commons
Userboxes
Project Userbox talk
NCAA Teams talk
edit · changes


Contents

[edit] Please Note

If you are going to make a lengthy edit to this long table, please consider first adding the {{inuse}} tag above the table so that other authors know that you are making a lengthy edit. Johntex\talk 22:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cell corrections

Why were my cell corrections overwritten? It was a pain doing that but it made the table look much better since it was complete. I like the addition of current coach, but my edit should not have been overwritten.--NMajdan•talk 14:10, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry. It wasn't overwritten because it was bad or wrong or anything like that. I had spent a lot of time doing the coach column and going to save it showed me your edits, and in my opinion, adding the extra || until there is content to use them, is mostly useless unless it's for a finished product, which this is not. Again, I'm sorry, I know it takes lots of time to do that (which I why I didn't want to do it). --Mecu 15:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
That's understandable. Format is important to me and I think it still is important to have a complete table even if it does not yet contain data. However, given how you were adding a lot of content when it told you I had also made changes, your addition was more important than mine. I hate it when that happens. That's why I've started doing large edits (like the ones I just made) in Notepad. I would just see what edits you made, and then copy/paste them into my notepad document while I was working on it.--NMajdan•talk 16:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
I going to post a note (above) suggesting we use {{inuse}} during long edits to help prevent this sort of problem. Johntex\talk 22:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Names

I think it would be better to list items as they exist as a page name. For example, Dan Hawkins (coach) instead of Dan Hawkins. This way, someone could use the table and simply cut and paste the name and not have to worry if there's a disambig or other type page they should be linking to. --Mecu 15:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with that.--NMajdan•talk 16:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree - Johntex\talk 00:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] School Team/Athletic/Sports Pages

Does anyone know if there is a standard on how the athletic pages should be named? There seems be be some that are School Athletics and some School Nickname. I personally think it should be School Nickname instead of the other way unless there's a name conflict like Texas Longhorn and Troy Trojans, then they could have the Athletics appended onto School Nickname Athletics.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mecu (talk • contribs)

School Nickname sounds better to me, and it is already the case with a majority of articles.--NMajdan•talk 16:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
  • When we considered this for Texas Longhorn Athletics, we searched and could find no policy or guideline. In the end, we decided that it was best to include the word "Athletics" becuase there is a need to discuss the intramural programs of the school. Intramural teams naturally do not have the school nickname (Texas Longhorns vs Texas Longhorns would not make much sense). We also were unable to determine if "Texas Longhorn football" or "Texas Longhorns football was more preferred in actual usage (UT uses both interchangeably on their own web site) so we picked one. Johntex\talk 22:45, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Project Tagging

Do we want to tag (add {tl|WikiProject College football}}) to the athletic pages of schools? Certainly the football pages, but I'm only half convinved we should tag the athletic pages. --Mecu 16:03, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I think we should do that only if the Athletics page is mainly about football, or if we are actively editting the page. Johntex\talk 22:46, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Maryland redirect

"Maryland Terrapins" used to redirect to the University of Maryland page. I changed it so it redirected to University of Maryland athletics. When people search for "Maryland Terrapins," they probably usually are meaning the sports teams and not the university. I changed the redirect to reflect that.--NMajdan•talk 20:01, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm completely fine with that. I added it back after PhattyFatt omitted the redirect. --Mecu 20:58, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Did the same thing with Texas A&M Aggies.--NMajdan•talk 19:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Coach template question

If we have the coach template on a page, do we still need to have a succession box on that page as well? See Bob Devaney as an example. He has the Nebraska and Wyoming coaching templates, but he also has succession boxes for both schools. Are they still needed?--NMajdan•talk 21:47, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes. The coach templates list the coaches in general order of history, but not always, especially in the early history of football, coaches would do one season, "skip" a season and then do another season. But, in the coach box, you only list the coaches once in order of first appearance. So, while it may seem redundant, espcially for a majority of coaches, the list in the coachbox isn't always fully true, nor does it also provide the years they were there easilly accessable. Though that could be seen in a {{College coach infobox}}. It's nice to just have it there to present the information in another way. --Mecu 22:31, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Web colors

I suggest that we are better off limiting the number of colunms on this table. Specifically, I don't think a column for web colors is needed. While these colors may be useful for templates related to the particular school, I think that information could better be stored on a talk page related to the university or their athletics program. Johntex\talk 00:06, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. This information should be in the infobox for the specific university where there is already a field for colors.--NMajdan•talk 00:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
The point of the table was to collect information that was scattered to have one central location for such information, and to standardize how such information is generated and presented. --Mecu 00:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
If the information is in the university infobox, then it is only one click away from the page (just click the university name in the first column). Besides, how often will such information be needed? --NMajdan•talk 00:49, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
I went ahead a removed the color columns. I added to colors to the Colorado infobox.--NMajdan•talk 14:06, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Which infobox are you referring to? I can't find it. --Mecu 15:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
If you go to University of Colorado at Boulder, the main university infobox.--NMajdan•talk 15:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you, I was looking in the wrong spots. I don't think that's a good spot for it. Humans don't know what hex codes are like that. If you don't want it on the MasterTeamTable, then perhaps there is another alternative somewhere we can use it? Is there a college football box we could create that would contain summary information for articles like Colorado Buffaloes football that would contain coach, nation championship years, conference, location, field, colors, logo and other such information? --MECU≈talk 16:21, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
On the Colorado page, I didn't know the actual names of the colors so I just used the hex number. If you go to other university pages, like University of Oklahoma, you can see the color is named with the hex code in parenthesis. The infobox contains an attribute for color so I feel that is the best place for it. As of right now, pages for specific college football teams are few and far between so I don't know if we're ready for an infobox specific for that yet. But it may be something to work on in the future. I made the {{college coach infobox}} so I'd be willing to help when it came to that.--NMajdan•talk 16:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Ok. I can live with that until we get the team pages up and rolling. On the infobox for the team page, I'd rather have the color displayed instead of just typing the name and hex code (or at least with a background color or something). --MECU≈talk 17:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Like I said, that is typically the case with the University infobox. I just didn't know the exact name of the Colorado colors (such as crimson & cream for OU) so I just inserted the hex. Typically, some people type the name of the color with the hex in parenthesis, or they'll type the name of the color in the specific color, or they'll have a little colored box next to the name.--NMajdan•talk 18:12, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Just year in Year Pages column?

Given the recent additions of LSU pages and the existing Nebraska pages, what does everyone think about having just the years as wikilinks to the articles? This would save a lot of room in the cell and prevent the row from growing too large. So, instead of 2006 Oklahoma Sooners football team the link would just be 2006. It would be on the same row as the team so there shouldn't be any confusion regarding which team it is referring to.--NMajdan•talk 16:29, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Brilliant! Let's do it. --MECU≈talk 22:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Logo Images

Would any mind if I added a column for the logo image? It would be referenced like Logo inline and not displayed of course. With the season pages and the week-by-week format including a small image of the team, I think it would be handy to have this on the table as well. But I could see it taking up too much space as well. --MECU≈talk 18:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

  • What would be the difference between clicking the Logo link and clicking the School link to the logo? How about using a special character next to the school and have it link to the image? Like University of Colorado at Boulder (‡). That wouldn't take up as much space at a whole other column.--NMajdan•talk 18:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
    • One could just click the school to goto the image and get it there, but this would make it quicker/easier for folks and let us see what (if any) schools are missing logo images. I'm fine with that special icon to signify the image. I actually would prefer that over another column. --MECU≈talk 18:33, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
      • I do think that would be better than a column. I don't know how Wikipedia renders images. I thought about just having a small version of the icon (i.e. [[Image:University-of-Colorado-Boulder-sports-logo.png|15px]]), but if the page loads the entire image and then shrinks it, that would increase the load time on the page. Now, if the site automatically shrinks down the image to the point where it is just 2-3k, then it won't. You're call.--NMajdan•talk 18:36, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
        • I think a link to the image would be better than displaying the image, even if small, to avoid possible fair-use violations of any kind. --MECU≈talk 18:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
          • Good point, didnt even think about that. Wikipedia forces me to think from a different from a different perspective sometimes.--NMajdan•talk 18:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Supplamental Information

I've started a template under my userspace for "supplamental" information. Links to the football page of the official website, the media guide(s), and the images (instead of here, though I'm waiting for the Fair Use debate to end before doing that really because otherwise it would be very limited use). If you'd like to help find information or can fill in any gaps (it's fairly bare right now) please do. If anyone thinks this might be better under the project, I'd be fine moving it. User:Mecu/CFBSupplementryTeamTable MECU≈talk 04:34, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Season Pages Listing

For the teams that have a season template, I have removed all the years, except the current year. If you generate a season template, please do the same. --MECU≈talk 13:07, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Can we get multiple support or consensus for this? It seems some teams have sprouted many years in addition to their seasons template. AUTiger » talk 18:00, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] USCs

Why is one of the two major college programs known as USC referred to as South Carolina on the table, with the corresponding link South Carolina Gamecocks football, while the other is referred to only as USC, with the corresponding link USC Trojans football? Shouldn't the latter article be renamed Southern California Trojans football and the table entry disambiguated? Regards, PhilipR 19:42, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

USC Trojans football used to be a valid entry. Further, USC doesn't mind being called USC, it's one of the many acceptable names they like (and Southern California and University of Southern California, not Southern Cal). I don't think South Carolina is as common to call USC, though it defiantly fits, and I don't think they prefer it. However, I don't think it matters if it's called USC Trojans football or Southern California Trojans football. I do think USC is probably more common since it's shorter. However, University of Southern California Trojans football is incorrect (as which the current page is under and USC Trojans football gets redirected to) since it doesn't match the rest of the pages under the project. It should be moved to one of the other names that is acceptable. University of should not be used per the naming standard we developed summer 2006. --MECU≈talk 20:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Following convention, It should be the fuller name without the University of part, and not an abbreviation to avoid just this kind of confusion. Intrepidsfsu 07:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I-A Master Team Table?

Since there are now more and more I-AA and even a couple of Div-II team pages being made, would it make sense for this to become the I-A or 'FBS' Master Team Table and for somebody to put together a I-AA or 'FCS' Master Team Table? Then people could start filling in the teams and years for those schools as well as their interests dictate. I would like to start doing this but want to know if other people approve, since it would mean changing the name. Intrepidsfsu 07:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to see that, and see it extended to Div-III and NAIA.--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:54, 21 May 2008 (UTC)