Talk:Capital Cup

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

Virginia Low‑importance

	Virginia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Virginia 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.VirginiaWikipedia:WikiProject VirginiaTemplate:WikiProject VirginiaVirginia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I don't believe that this is commonly called the "South's Oldest Rivalry", which is the name used to refer to the Virginia-North Carolina game. This game is called the I-64 Trophy, which is why the article is named that. The only citation given is to a poorly researched personal website. Thus, saying this game is "coined the South's Oldest Rivalry" is dubious at best. Uris (talk) 19:02, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, actually, you're pretty much dead wrong. If you read the categories on the page, it's under "College football rivalry trophies". This isn't what the game is called. I added more sources, one of which is the completely legitimate and verifiable The Sporting News, as having referred to this game as such. -Jrcla2 ^(talk)^(contribs) 19:10, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me ask you this. Did you read the Sporting News article? It's talking about the UVA-UNC game as the South's Oldest Rivalry, and is more proof for my point. UR and W&M are not even in the article to which you refer. Uris (talk) 19:15, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sports Illustrated. -Jrcla2 ^(talk)^(contribs) 19:23, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So you did not read the completely legitimate and verifiable The Sporting News article then? Please research the material before you revert edits... it's a lot less messy that way. Furthermore, the proper title South's Oldest Rivalry is not mentioned in the SI article. This isn't about which rivalry is older, it's which has that exact title. Uris (talk) 19:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:RichmondSpiders.png

The image File:RichmondSpiders.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.

The following images also have this problem:

File:WM Tribe logo.svg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --18:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Capital Cup. 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) 16:22, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Capital Cup. 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/20110616235914/http://www.richmondspiders.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/111109aaa.html to http://www.richmondspiders.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/111109aaa.html

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) 12:33, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]