Talk:Arkansas Razorbacks football

	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 articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Arkansas / University of Arkansas Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Arkansas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Arkansas (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Arkansas - University of Arkansas (assessed as Low-importance).

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Image copyright problem with File:Arkansas-Razorback-Logo-2001.png

The image File:Arkansas-Razorback-Logo-2001.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --12:45, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reassess

Is there any way to get this article reassessed? I don't think it is start-class anymore. Brandonrush Woo pig sooie 15:35, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uniform combos image

Why was JohnnySeoul's uniform image removed? It's got the licensing and non-free use established on the image page. I don't get how it's non-free. --Kevin W. 20:04, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure why it or the main logo keeps being removed. They have direct relevance to the article, and are being used appropriately here. (I can semi-understand removing them from individual season articles, but not from the MAIN article on the football team.) It is clearly within the bounds of wikipedia fair use policy to use these images in this MAIN article. Hogvillian (talk) 00:41, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of File:Arkansas Razorbacks helmet, 1964-1966.png makes no sense. It is an old helmet of the team, so it is obvisouly relevant. It has Non-free media use rationale for this page, so why is it being removed? Brandonrush Woo pig sooie! 00:45, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you guys. The logo might could be changed to that text one, but the helmet and the uniforms are clearly applicable to this article. Cardsplayer4life (talk) 17:29, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'm willing to discuss the use of the old uniforms and whatnot- I can see that they may be useful. My primary objection to their use is the way that they are currently formatted- having a section simply to display four non-free images, without any prose at all, is not acceptable. I would have no objection to the use of a text only logo. Also, can I ask why the removal of the image of the coach is being constantly reverted? It's clearly adding nothing to this article. How does knowing what an old coach looked like enhance a reader's understanding of the team? J Milburn (talk) 17:41, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can see your point on most of this and am glad you are discussing it now. I would be in favor of changing the current logo (the old ones could be historically significant) to the text one. (although it seems that since this is the main article for the football team as opposed to the yearly articles, I can see the argument for keeping it as well) Adding verbiage to the old uniforms and things to describe them more fully shouldn't be a problem, and I would be happy to try and help accommodate that. I could go either way on the image of the old coach; I can see the merits of having the "Powder River Pass" image in there, as it is clearly historically significant, but the Barnhill picture seems less so because it is not a significant moment in time. Cardsplayer4life (talk) 17:51, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Compared to the yearly articles, I can see the merit of the main logo here also, but I feel that, unless it is worth discussing in the text, it probably shouldn't be used- the text logo, obviously, is fine. Once some extensive discussion is added to the old uniforms/logos section, discussing each of the images (with sources...) I will have no objection to their use. I also see the worth of the Powder River Pass image, and I think it should stay. Could the coach image be removed now, please? J Milburn (talk) 18:00, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion about the logo could certainly be added. (although, it is barely discussed in the Arkansas Razorbacks article, which you don't have a problem with it in, and the one place it is discussed, it references the football team) I am fairly busy over the next few days (starting a new job Monday, my father is in the hospital, etc.), but I will try to get the text added about the uniforms/logos added in a timely manner if someone doesn't beat me to it. Yes, the Barnhill image should probably be removed. (unless someone else has a significant objection) Cardsplayer4life (talk) 18:14, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I have not been checking this discussion, but reading it now it looks like everyone was in favor of keeping the Powder River Pass picture, but it has been deleted. Did something change? Is there another discussion about it somewhere that I missed? Brandonrush Woo pig sooie! 16:00, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image deletion discussion

Relevant deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 January 1#File:Arkansas Football.png.--GrapedApe (talk) 17:55, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Arkansas Razorbacks football. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150402122634/http://www.hickoksports.com/history/footall2 to http://www.hickoksports.com/history/footall2

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:02, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Arkansas Razorbacks football/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

* A few sections are not sourced

Some technical terms not explained
A casual reader or fan may have some questions unanswered; e.g. why do the Razorbacks play home games in two stadiums?
Generally well written and well-sourced

Last edited at 18:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 08:14, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Arkansas Razorbacks football. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 00:56, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Arkansas Razorbacks football. 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) 21:53, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Arkansas Razorbacks football. 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) 04:12, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Arkansas Razorbacks football. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://www.arkansasrazorbacks.com/pdf9/2429792.pdf?DB_OEM_ID=6100
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080122013713/http://www.razorbackfacilities.com/sport01.htm to http://www.razorbackfacilities.com/sport01.htm

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) 09:47, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting history

I am in favor of UW Dawgs proposal to split the history section of this page into its own separate page. How does everyone else feel? CalebHughes (talk) 00:21, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Split proposed

The "History" section of this article is suffering from severe growing pains. There are also significant defects including WP:OVERLINK and WP:RECENTISM. The CFB project generally addresses some of these issues via creation of a History of Arkansas Razorbacks football article per Category:History of college football by team norms.

Much of the existing History section content can be ported with attribution, leaving a significantly cleaner and reader-friendly version intact. The is more preferable that the alternative of simply pruning the existing content back to a reasonable size without it being preserved anywhere. Thoughts? UW Dawgs (talk) 00:24, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am in favor of a History of Arkansas Razorbacks football page as well as a history page for numerous other college football pages that quite frankly are well-written and detailed but need their own page. CalebHughes (talk) 00:27, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gus Malzahn non-hire

IPs are adamant that Gus Malzahn's non-hiring is relevant (WP:RECENTISM) and an appropriate introduction to the "Chad Morris era (2018–present)" section. What say you IPs? UW Dawgs (talk) 20:11, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Morris

Notwithstanding his positive record at SMU this section reads like a press release. - PhilipR (talk) 06:22, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Crowder proposed for deletion

I just created the article for Tom Crowder, but it has been nominated for deletion. If you are interested in saving it, please provide your comments on the article's talk page. Regards.Tecmo (talk) 01:01, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]