Talk:2014 Ohio State Buckeyes football team

	College football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject College football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of college football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.College footballWikipedia:WikiProject College footballTemplate:WikiProject College footballcollege football
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ohio High‑importance

	Ohio portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ohio, which collaborates on Ohio-related subjects 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 current discussions.OhioWikipedia:WikiProject OhioTemplate:WikiProject OhioOhio
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Days of the week are not included in college football schedules.

Just look at 2013 Ohio State Buckeyes football team, 2014 Alabama Crimson Tide football team, 2014 Florida Gators football team and 2013 Florida State Seminoles football team. To call my removal of the days of the week when they are not included, WP:Vandalism is absolutely absurd. They should be removed immediately.UCO2009bluejay (talk) 05:05, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To answer the question you posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#Days of the week do or don't belong in schedules?, the example at Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Yearly team pages format does not show the day of the week, but it also doesn't specifically forbid it. The dates in the example chart are also Wikified, however, which is something we typically don't do in articles. Also, there are differences in date format (September 14 vs 09/14/2006 for example) in the talk page (which doesn't discuss the matter). To be totally honest, I don't really think it matters and at first glance, there doesn't seem to be a guideline about whether or not having the days of the week listed with the date is preferred/discouraged. Having them there doesn't clutter the charts, nor does their absence really make a difference. It may simply be a case of whatever gets there first unless some other consensus is arrived at for the Wikiproject in general. The fact that some articles lack them does not mean they aren't allowed. Unless you can cite a specific guideline, referencing a few other articles is more an example of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. --JonRidinger (talk) 05:28, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@JonRidinger: I will, in principle, agree with your assessment. To your point, "It may simply be a case of whatever gets there first unless some other consensus is arrived at for the Wikiproject in general." What I had a problem with is an IP who claimed my revert was vandalism when they were the first one to add it two days ago, [1]. If the wikiproject agrees or disagrees I will stand by their decision. It isn't that WP:Idontlikeit in the schedule. It is a consistency issue.-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 06:33, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is the day of the week relevant enough to force us to pull out a calendar and verify the day is written correctly? I say no to the day; date is sufficient.—Bagumba (talk) 08:00, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Illibuck

The highlighted area of the infobox is for championships, not for listing rivalry trophy winners. Having a physical trophy doesn't make it something that should be listed any more than we would list winning the games with Michigan and Penn State in the championship section. When schools list championships, they typically don't mention rivalry wins with that; they mention bowl games, division, league, and national championships. --JonRidinger (talk) 15:06, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2014 Ohio State Buckeyes 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141211011715/http://cfp-cms-s3-prod.slcfp.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/CFP-Final-Top-25.pdf to http://cfp-cms-s3-prod.slcfp.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/CFP-Final-Top-25.pdf

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) 23:12, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]