Jump to content

Talk:1917 Georgia Tech Golden Tornado football team

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Heisman's "Jump Shift"

[edit]

A few sources seem to call it a predecessor to the T formation and single wing, but I don't find any great source. Help is appreciated. Cake (talk) 16:39, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:1917 Georgia Tech Golden Tornado football team/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mackensen (talk · contribs) 16:40, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Hello MisterCake (talk · contribs), thanks for your work on this article. I hope to have comments for you shortly. Best, Mackensen (talk) 16:40, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. The lead discusses the team's place in history, but this information isn't discussed in the article itself (perhaps in a "Legacy" section?) Also, there's a discussion of the "jump shift" which appears nowhere else in the article.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. This is mostly fine, but splitting out book sources into a separate section and referencing them with shortened footnotes would be helpful. Done.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). I stopped marking up referencing problems after the Preseason section. While overall sourcing is good, there are too many cases of incomplete citations, missing page numbers, and facts not found in the citations given. I don't doubt that what's been written is accurate, but I had trouble verifying it.
2c. it contains no original research. None that I found; all assertions are supported from other works.
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. None that I found
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. Subject to my organizational concerns above, this article has the expected coverage for a single football season.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Are the starting lineups for each game relevant? Yes, they are.
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. The source for many of these images is unclear. Images created prior to 1923 but not published until after 1923 (particularly archival material) could still be subject to copyright. See Wikipedia:Public_domain#Unpublished_works. I'll conduct a more thorough review of each image soon. See list below.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Please add alt text for the images
7. Overall assessment.

Review in progress. I've also flagged an issue with the Wake Forest section on the talk page which will need to be resolved. Mackensen (talk) 17:39, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you very much mackensen. In my own way I've tried to help wikipedia cover football in the south in these olden days, and '17 Tech is the cornerstone for that subject. Fear of cluttering up your table has me unsure where to post my feedback. I tried to brush up the lead as I found it difficult to resolve those issues. Their claim of greatest southern team of the era and the jump shift sort of pervade the whole article. The jump shift would've been every offensive play. Their legacy was hindered by a loss to Pitt the next year, such that it reinforced the notion of southern teams as pretenders if anything. The legacy in the sense captured by the lead was more immediate. To draw an analogy, Centre's defeat of Harvard in 1921 hasn't much of a "legacy," but it sure made an impact. Cake (talk) 22:59, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let's just discuss down here (the table isn't helpful for discussion but the lists are even worse). My only issue with the lead is that it summarize the article so there shouldn't be ideas discussed there which aren't discussed in the body. I'll take a stab at a section. Mackensen (talk) 23:11, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I renamed and expanded the "Before" and "After the season" sections and trimmed down the lead, so that there's no unique information there. Does that work for you? Mackensen (talk) 23:59, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes especially the lead is much better. Pasting my version of the same information parroted with sources in the before section seems a little clumsy, but if that were brushed up a little it would all flow nicely. I wonder if I should mention how Strupper was deaf and used this to his advantage with hand signals and lip reading; or how Guyon was a full-blooded indian but nobody seemed to care since his face was more attractive than Jim Thorpe's. Cake (talk) 00:14, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hope I am not too late in my broader comments. First some trivia - though it never caught on, sportswriters tried to nickname Guyon "Indian Joe," like in Tom Sawyer except enunciated properly. Been able to cross-reference a few things with that extra search term.
  • On lead: I am still unsure whether I should explain the jump shift at all. I struggle to do it as brief as would be pretty. The "Heisman Shift" is one of the vivid images of early football. 'Pup' puts his hands on his hips, looks behind him as he stretches the torso a bit, then gets down in his stance to hike the ball (2 hands in those days of the fat rugby hall), the shift, a second elapses, and the Tornado charges on.
  • I concur here and have to thank you - I did not know how to do things like the Notes and having the source linked as e. g. McCarty 1988a, though I had surely seen both before.
  • The wealth of sources on this team probably had me get lazy at points. Will try and go through each source you haven't glossed over already shortly — go through the article with a fine toothed comb so to speak.
  • On starting lineups One relishes when the article includes them, and it is pretty standard practice (e. g. 1922 Michigan Wolverines football team). Some wikipedia articles even include all the substitutions as well. While that's interesting, I think that's a bit much. You might argue the starting lineups are a fine thing to do until one gets a complete picture of the roster and/or lettermen; and then becomes redundant. However, it is uncanny how interchangeable players were in those days, and knowing e. g. how many games they started can be useful. For one example, consider how little you might know about the starters of the 1928 Florida Gators football team if you only knew the "Phantom Four." On the subject, supposedly there were jersey numbers post-1913, and so maybe "Big Six" was number 6, but as yet unable to find a source with numbers. It can be difficult since well after 1917 the same player can have a different number depending on the color (home/away) or year. Cake (talk) 23:06, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Think the copyeditors guild and such usually handles my alt text, so I will need to re-read the article on that wiki-art. Cake (talk) 23:01, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your quick attention on everything; this has been an interesting review for me. You've won me over completely on lineups--I hadn't considered how important they were in this era. Once you've finished your review I'll go through the sources again and then hopefully we can resolve 2b. After that it's just images, which won't take long. This is looking really, really good. Mackensen (talk) 23:39, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know if I missed any sources in the game accounts. Do I source calculator.exe for the average of 55 to 2? Also, surely the referee of the Tulane game is George Watkins, but I cannot prove this. Cake (talk) 04:02, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Passing now. Thank you for all your hard work on this. All the best, Mackensen (talk) 05:06, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Images

[edit]
@Mackensen: I've found an even better team picture, the one from which Carpenter is cropped. It has the mark "F. E. Lee Co. 1919" (here is the crop). Here is yet another of the team picture. Here is another image of the Penn contest. Fincher's placekick is from the 1918 Blue Print. Cake (talk) 13:04, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if this is noteworthy, but the college hall of fame also uses that image of Guyon. Also, hmm.. for what this is from Cake (talk) 00:06, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Mackensen: I have removed all the images which might draw controversy aside from Guyon's, which is in commons. I will reluctantly remove that too if I must. Cake (talk) 06:32, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Good enough for me. In the alternative, I noticed a number of newspapers running an image of Guyon with a high kick to the right. Mackensen (talk) 05:03, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that too. However, a punting image is almost necessarily vertical and so its shape is a bother. Also, the only good version I could find online had a big watermark over it. Tried for a long time to find the book talking about 1914 football with an image of the Tech-Penn game in it - never did find it. Thanks again for your help in this. Cake (talk) 05:15, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Week 2

[edit]

All the sources I've read so far place the Wake Forest game on the same day as the Furman game, not the day after. Mackensen (talk) 17:37, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks already for some of the work. There does seem a discrepancy on this one. The Tech paper definitely says it was a doubleheader, but sports-reference say it was the day after. database football mimics the paper for that date, so I will include it as a source. Cake (talk) 19:00, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lettermen

[edit]

The 1918 Blue Print yearbrook lists 18 lettermen. The only discrepancy between that list and the list in this article is that the Blue Print does not include Pup Phillips. The cited source is hard on the eyes, but it doesn't seem to mention lettermen. It was also published on November 4, 1917, but the football banquet (again, per the year book) took place on December 8. Mackensen (talk) 21:49, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see Pup there - "Phillips, G. M". However, I don't see Shaver, so I moved him. Dick Jemison at least should be fairly authoritative on the subject, for he was the big cheese on the Atlanta Constitution's sports page then. Cake (talk) 22:43, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
We must be looking in different places--on page 112 (football banquet) I see this: "The following men were awarded letters: Bell, Carpenter, Strupper, Ulrich, Dowling, Welchel, Higgins, Fincher, Guill, Hill, Harlan, Guyon, Shaver, Colcord, Mathes, Thweatt, Rogers and Johnson." There's also this: "Phillips, Strupper, Bell and Hill were given trophies to signify that they had won letters for three years." I'm not sure what to make of this. Mackensen (talk) 22:54, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Go to page 4 of 34 in pdf of the athletics section; I don't see a page number. "Wearers of the T." That has all the usual suspects. Perhaps his omission on 112 has something to do with Phillips leaving for the military. Cake (talk) 23:05, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I see it, and that makes perfect sense. Thanks! Mackensen (talk) 23:08, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stats table

[edit]

Is there a way to make it so when the table's header is colored (e. g. List of Florida Gators starting quarterbacks), the sorting arrows can still be seen? They seem to work if they were just visible. At this time GT was just gold and white, and it is difficult to read as is. Cake (talk) 23:19, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Strupper and signals

[edit]

I tracked down the obituary and copied the language. However, I am still unsure whether it means to say "Strupper was deaf, and due to his deafness, he was acquainted with sign language, and so called the team's hand signals instead of the quarterback;" or "Strupper was deaf, and due to his deafness, he could not hear the quarterback's spoken signals, and so he spoke them instead." Both were used, and though Heisman's story in the article gives credence to the latter view (shifts also usually require speaking (the rhythm for the shift of the Notre Dame Box goes "1-2 let's go" for Charlie Bachman), and Heisman is even credited with the invention of saying "hike" or "hep" or "hut" to signal snapping the ball), I can also show you Heisman saying Strupper couldn't enunciate well enough to be a quarterback. Cake (talk) 12:07, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 1917 Georgia Tech Golden Tornado football team. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:50, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 1917 Georgia Tech Golden Tornado football team. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:32, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:1917_Georgia_Tech_Golden_Tornado_football_team&oldid=1195912528"