User talk:Dirtlawyer1/Archives/2012/May

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for THIS. It's nice to see great clean up on articles as opposed to having the article "tagged" for cleanup. Thanks for getting dirty and doing work. Morning277 (talk) 12:26, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the barnstar, Morning277. Just working my way through the consensus All-American football players . . . it's a process of upgrading these articles to respectability. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:36, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

The fact that you are "Dirt Lawyer" (Just Kidding) helps. I just graduated and I am waiting to be barred (or disbarred, or licensed, or whatever you want to call it). Good luck with your edits. I had the luck of watching him play in person on several occasions (I live just a few miles from ND Stadium). Saw Jimmy Clausen and Michael Floyd as well but Jimmy has not yet panned out like we all would have hoped. --Morning277 (talk) 14:33, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Notability of college football players

I've put together some preliminary thoughts on possible notability standards for college football players: User:Cbl62/College football notability. Your feedback would be appreciated. After refining it a bit, we could present some suggestions to the college football project. Cbl62 (talk) 03:14, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Arena Football League

Some people have argued that arena football is a separate sport from traditional American football, and that the Arena Football League is the highest level of play within arena football. Under that reasoning, Arena Football League players participate in a professional sport at its highest level. (The guidelines do say that players at the lower level of arena football (the AF2) do not get presumed notability.) Also, in its heyday (probably 2000-2006), the Arena Football League got a lot of coverage, had broadcast TV contracts with NBC and ESPN, and attracted quality players. I took my kids to a few Los Angeles Avengers games back in the early 2000s and still have a Tony Graziani bobblehead in the garage somewhere. I don't know as much about the new, relaunched version of the Arena Football League (there is no LA team), but it seems to receive less attention and attendance. I don't think an effort to retroactively strip the presumed notability of players in the original Arena Football League would be warranted, but it may be worth considering whether the new, relaunched version of the league (which began in 2010) merits the same treatment. In 2011, the new Arena Football League ranked fourth in average attendance for indoor sports (slightly below the National Lacrosse League but ahead of the WNBA). See List of attendance figures at domestic professional sports leagues. Cbl62 (talk) 15:59, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Florida Gators - rugby

Dirtlawyer: I saw that you deleted the section on Florida Gators rugby that I had posted -- stating that Florida Gators rugby (1) is non varsity and (2) does not meet Wikipedia notability standards -- and I wanted to respond. First, I am not aware of any policy for excluding non-varsity programs. A number of college sports pages on Wiki include a brief discussion of rugby or other club sports: Ole Miss, Georgia Bulldogs, Miami Hurricanes, to name a few. And the Florida Gators page currently includes a section on former varsity sports (i.e., non varsity sports). So a section on rugby would not be out of line with this page or other similar pages. Second, I have reviewed the Wiki notability standards you helpfully cited, which suggest that notability hinges on whether the text cites to reliable independent sources. I see that I cited to the UF rugby website a couple of times. I can instead cite to independent sources, which should cure the notability issue you raised.

I would like to re-post an improved version of what I originally included, with more independent cites and making clear that rugby is a non varsity sport. Have I addressed your concerns, or is there something else I should be aware of? I'll also point out that, given the Gators recent and ongoing success in rugby in the Southeast Conference and nationally, Gators rugby is the kind of subject that folks viewing the Gators Wiki page might be interested in learning about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barryjjoyce (talk • contribs) 01:35, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Barryjoyce, the Florida Gators article was purged of all mentions of non-varsity sports long ago, and I will continue to advocate that only the university's official NCAA Division I intercollegiate varsity sports be included in it. You will note from the article's introduction that its scope only includes the university's officially sponsored NCAA Division I intercollegiate team. While every one of the varsity teams at Florida easily satisfies the general notability standards for inclusion as a stand-alone article on Wikipedia per WP:GNG, and every one of the Florida Gators teams does have a separate stand-alone article on Wikipedia. The same cannot be said for the university's various club teams, including many of long standing long standing like men's lacrosse, sailing, crew, competition cheerleading, water-skiing, men's volleyball, etc. As I am sure you are well aware, most of the Wikipedia articles about Division I sports programs did not include references to club sports before your recent additions on rugby club teams. That was not an accident. University club teams are not presumed to be notable, and very few, if any, satisfy the Wikipedia notability standards with prolonged, meaningful coverage over time in independent sources. In time, I suspect you will find other editors who find these additions as objectionable as I do. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:00, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Dirtlawyer, Thanks for the helpful explanation. I was not aware of the prior discussion & decision re the criteria for including/excluding certain Gators sports, and since it appears consensus was already reached on this issue, I will defer.

I do have a general question, though, about the Wiki notability policy WP:GNG. How do you (and other experienced editors) interpret the apparently differing standards for whether a subject is sufficiently notable to merit a standalone article, vs whether to include certain content within an existing article? Quoting WP:GNG: "The criteria applied to article content are not the same as those applied to article creation." As you suggest, this issue may come up on other Wiki pages, and I want to make sure I understand the notability policy and how it is interpreted. Barryjjoyce (talk) 17:33, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

New CFP standards

Dirtlawyer -- Thanks for the note. I will review your proposal more carefully when time permits. Unfortunately, I've got a two-day trial starting on Thursday and so may not be able to do so over the next few days. From a quick look, there's some I agree with and parts I'm concerned about. The parts that strike me as most problematic include (1) the need for a proviso that makes it clear that passing WP:GNG is still enough (the subject specific criteria can never trump GNG; (2) concern with what "prolonged" means (coverage beyond one game? coverage beyond one season? Not sure such a requirement is necessary or appropriate.); (3) I agree fan blogs get no weight but your statement on what blogs do count seems inconsistent with WP:BLOGS providing that a blog written by a recognized expert in the field is considered reliable (no requirement that it be "major media" or subject to editorial review); (4) there needs to be a mid-level between regional and local media (e.g., the top 100 major metropolitan dailies -- the virtue of these being they are objectively identifiable); and (5) don't agree with some of what you've defined as "routine" but don't have time tonight to go through it with greater care. Would you mind tabling the discussion for a week so I can have more time to focus on the proposed new standard? Cbl62 (talk) 04:34, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Sure, no rush. We've got time. More important to work out the bugs and get it right. I will look at your comments, and tweak the draft – it was not intended to be anything resembling a final version, but merely as a starting point. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:40, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Trial over and I had a little bit of time to try to distill things into a proposed standard: Proposed college football notability. Comments welcome here. I'm going to be on vacation for the next few days but I'll check in when I return. Cbl62 (talk) 01:40, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Ga T&F hall of fame looking for contact info on Anita Howard

I ran across the page you started on Anita Howard. Tomy Sitton of the GA HS T&F Coaches Association is attempting to get contact information on Anita Howard and additional information on her accomplishments (she has been nominated for the GA T&F hall of fame).

Here is what he recently sent out via email:

---

Original Message-----

From: TOMAS A SITTON [1] Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 8:54 AM To: xxxxxxx Subject: Help on finding out about Anita Howard of Butler High School Augusta

I. I am having trouble tracking Anita down. I talked to Coach Brown her high school coach and he has no contact information.

2. Can you get me any of her accomplishments at Butler and Florida. I know she was All-American at Florida, but that is all I know.

Thanks Tomy Sitton

---

Could you please contact Tomy at tomasasitton@bellsouth.net if you have any additional information Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.126.181.248 (talk) 13:57, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:McDonald's AA Dunk Contest winners

Template:McDonald's AA Dunk Contest winners has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. I'm sending this notification to you since you raised the issue of its notability at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_College_Basketball#Is this really notable enough to have a navbox?. Jrcla2 (talk) 16:57, 20 May 2012 (UTC)