Template talk:Washington Huskies football navbox

[Quarterback U]: No reference of any sources claim that Washington Huskies were ever considered as a "Quarterback U", their name is not even on the "Quarterback U" wikipedia page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.208.116.70 (talk) 23:43, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ping re link removal

@Jweiss11: Could you clarify/expand your view on this edit? The edit summary can be read a few different ways, and later morphed into rationalization for edit warring to remove long-standing content. Thanks, UW Dawgs (talk) 01:45, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

UW Dawgs, simply put, navboxes are for linking to articles, not sections of articles, especially ones that are otherwise linked in the same navbox. If that 1992 game against Nebraska is so notable just for the noise level, then it deserves it own article. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:50, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So is it your (informed) opinion that an article is always required for each link in a navbox, rather than arising from policy or project consensus? Is this scoped to just CFB navboxes, or narrowly to our consensus "Culture & lore" section therein, where V/RS elements of a team's tradition will not (and probably should not) always have stand-alone articles by the nature of that content. UW Dawgs (talk) 02:11, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would consider this a Wikipedia-wide best practice for navboxes. Navboxes are intended to provide navigation between articles related to a subject. They are not trophy cases or scrapbooks. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:56, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. At WP:WikiProject Universities, it has always been a standard for navboxes to only link those that have a separate article. We don't link something that is a redirect to the primary article. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 04:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]