Jump to content

User talk:Dirtlawyer1/Archives/2014/August

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited James Farrior, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Welsh. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

LFL articles

Given your sports expertise, are you familiar with the Los Angeles Temptation? It is one of many articles to which I may give closer attention. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 01:42, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Tebow

You're fine. I saw it and I was thinking ok this doesn't make much sense whatsoever I figured it was a mistake.--Rockchalk717 18:46, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Oh I did just not publicly lol--Rockchalk717 22:45, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Veda Scott

I've edited wrestling articles for quite some time now. I'd prefer to answer questions here but wouldn't mind opening a throw away email briefly if need be, as I don't have an email for regular use. I attempted to answer the questions from Starship (who is also a very skilled editor on wrestling-related articles) in the AfD that were directed at both of us.LM2000 (talk) 03:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Okay. Thanks, LM2000. As I said, I am not a regular wrestling editor, and I have not previously participated in wrestling AfDs. I have participated in over 250 sports AfDs, however, and I usually pick up on the sport-specific notability guidelines and other nuances relatively quickly. One of the things which surprised me in the Veda Scott AfD was the fact that the wrestling project apparently has its own project-approved list of "reliable sources." Is this true? The list of four or five "project-approved" sources that have been used in the Veda Scott article all appear to pay-per-view fansites . . . are these the typical "reliable sources" used to support wrestlers' notability? From my perspective, this seems quite odd because these sources seem to violate the "indepdendence" element of reliable source per WP:RS. What's your reaction? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:50, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
All but Pro Wrestling Insider have been analyzed during Featured Article nominations, though it was before I joined the wikiproject. They aren't fansites, they are run by serious wrestling journalists (Pro Wresting Torch is ran by veteran journalist Wade Keller, Wrestling Observer Newsletter by Dave Meltzer). PWinsider was dissected by the wikiproject, which saw a majority support it and was taken to the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard where we got little resolution. We're actually discussing unreliable sources right now on the project talk page.LM2000 (talk) 04:08, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
We created that list because there are a lot of unreliable sources out there in wrestling -- probably hundreds of them -- professional wrestling fans call them "dirtsheets". Generally they just copy and paste what the Observer, Torch, and Insider are saying and publish it on their fansites. We see newer editors use these dirtsheets in favor of the actual journalists who produce the content very frequently and it's important to guide them in a better direction. In terms of notability, these reliable sources are used like any other reliable sources, so that means that they count towards WP:GNG.LM2000 (talk) 04:15, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Louisiana State University System presidents

Nope, feel free to edit the templates to where you feel more comfortable....Pvmoutside (talk) 12:02, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Welcome back!

Will we be seeing you at VA/E? pbp 17:25, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

  • @Purplebackpack89: Thanks for the greeting, PBP. Right now, I'm focusing mostly on article content for college sports and Olympic swimmers. I've looked over VA/E from time to time; it appears y'all are doing fine without me. You've got a good number of people involved, with some diverse opinions, who understand compromise and give and take. When I got involved, there were too few knowledgeable people, a handful with an agenda, and some fractured personalities. Looks like it's back on track now.
That having been said, I may need your help from time to time. Are you still working on college sports? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:36, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Now and then. I'm the guy who created the Spaghetti Bowl article. pbp 18:53, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Ah, so. I did a little surgery on that one earlier, to remove the reference to the high school game. FYI, I've AfD'ed seven high school rivalry articles in the last month. In this case, it was just easier to delete the one sentence about the Washington state high school rivalry, and leave the rest of the article. Hope you understand, chief. The next phase is to AfD about 25 non-notable college football rivalry articles, which, when I said I may need your help, is exactly what I had in mind. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 23:25, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Which ones do you have in mind? pbp
The email you sent never got to me. Would you mind resending? pbp 01:12, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Just tried again, PBP, but I'm not getting the usual acknowledgment email from the WP email server. Can you check your WP email configuration? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:35, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Just resent for 3rd time using your old PBP address at AIM? Is that still a valid email address? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:45, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Input requested

Hi Dirtlawyer - Would love your thoughts on this note I posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#Small college coach navboxes. Do you think there is an issue here? As I noted, I am not interested in TfDing anything, but wanted to put it out to the project to see if y'all wanted to self-police the issue or leave it alone. Rikster2 (talk) 16:07, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

User:Traegansieber

Hey, DL - haven't seen you much since Giovanni retired his last sock! Anyhow, I see that this user is giving you the same kind of fits that he's giving me - I've warned him 4 times now for restoring vacated / forfeited wins to, e.g., Ohio State and Penn State pages (he doesn't even bother to take out the explanatory footnote, so his new number is just wrong) and figure he's due for a report to WP:AIV the next time he inserts incorrect data. He's not exactly - communicative, and that's not a good sign going forward. JohnInDC (talk) 01:43, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

He's stopped editing for now, so a block is not merited - most likely due to time difference over there? If he re-appears report to WP:AIV as well as dropping me a note, if I'm around I'll step in. GiantSnowman 08:35, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes, he went quiet yesterday, and I was waiting to see if he resumed, or perhaps had (finally) got the point. Thanks for the note, Snowman, and I'll do precisely that. (Apologies to DL for hijacking his Talk page.) JohnInDC (talk) 11:49, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
No worries. Mi casa es su casa, JIDC. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 11:51, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Now blocked. May be worth keeping an eye on some of those pages though. This kind of determination sometimes presages sockpuppetry - JohnInDC (talk) 23:34, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
John, I'm absolutely convinced that some of these vandals are repeat customers. Too many of them have a working understanding of our procedures and seem to be testing our systems and reactions . . . And, yes, sockpuppetry appears to be part of it. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 23:59, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

CFB game articles

Hey DL, an editor's new article creations you may want to keep an eye on is User:Michiganwolverines2014. He writes a lot of individual game college football articles. I know you've been trying to weed out non-notable games as of late, so just a heads up that some of his may not meet GNG. Jrcla2 (talk) 13:51, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Jrcla. MW2014 and his several articles are already on my list, and there was a brief discussion on the WP:CFB talk page about several of his recent creations. One already got AfD'ed in July, and I plan to circle back with the assistance of editors affiliated with the relevant CFB programs in the near future. Stand-alone articles for regular season CFB games should be fairly rare animals, but we seem to have a subset of editors who specialize in cruft. I am presently targeting less-than-notable CFB "rivalry" articles, and the single game articles are part of that equation. I like to get the CFB guys to "buy in" in advance on potentially controversial AfDs, which builds a strong !majority consensus at the AfD. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:17, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Makes sense. Welp, as long you already knew about him then it's all good. Thanks! Jrcla2 (talk) 15:33, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Jim Breland

The 1968 GT yearbook, at p. 396, has this caption under Breland's photo: "James E. Breland C.E." Presumably, chemical engineering. Nothing on hometown or birthdate in the yearbook. DOB is tricky. There's a James E. Breland born 2/6/44 who per public records lived in LaGrange, GA. There's also a Jim E. Breland, Jr., born 6/2/44, who lived in Lilburn, GA, in 1986. Cbl62 (talk) 18:37, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Those are both him. His middle initial is "E." per the GT football media guide, the 1944 birth year is consistent with being a 22-year-old senior in 1966, he was a "Jr." per a CoSIDA HOF nomination form from 2006, and he was an officer in an Atlanta metro corporate engineering firm with multiple offices in Georgia, all of which I can substantiate from non-reliable or non-independent sources. The two birthdates: one is clearly transposition of the correct month and date, but which one? I think we can safely say he was born in 1944, but not June or February. There should have been something in the Blacksburg, VA newspaper when the hometown boy was a first-team All-American by multiple selectors in December 1966. FYI, "C.E." is usually taken as "civil engineer" in engineering circles; my dad was one. "P.E." usually means professional engineer, which indicates the subject is licensed. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:53, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

your question

You asked me about an editor review. I unfortunately don't really have the time to do one in the usual depth, but I think I can make a few informal comments. In the field you work on here, it's clear that others think highly of your contributions, but it's a field where I have so litttle knowledge of my own that I cannot judge personally. I think it would be of great assistance to WP if you would work on some of the topics connected to your profession, where we have very little coverage of even basic topics.

If you are thinking of the current NSPORTS discussions, it's difficult to comment on what is an undecided situation. I've briefly expressed my views at Del Rev., but I would not blame anyone with different views. With respect to a few particular points, I think it was appropriate to ask a particular individual to comment, I think it perfectly reasonable to use afds to influence deletion policy (I've often done this as a probe, especially to see if consensus had changed, though I've never continued if there was significant resistance)

If you are think of RfA2, my suggestion would be to participate in some WP and WT space discussions outside sports and the mos. I'd suggest BLP as one possible area. Your deletion work is excellent, as I said at RfA1; currently, we also look for some experience in copyright. DGG ( talk ) 21:52, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Phil Tinsley

Clarence Gracey was pretty straightforward, so I added it. Here's what I found on Tinsley:

  • U.S., Department of Veterans Affairs BIRLS Death File for Phil Tinsley, dob 16 Jan 1924, dod 17 Jul 1989, SSN XXX-XX-1166, enlistment date 1 Jul 1943, release date 18 Jun 1946.
  • Social security death index for Phil R. Tinsley, SSN: xxx-xx-1166 (issued in Alabama before 1951), last residence 77478 Sugar Land, Fort Bend, Texas, USA, born 16 Jan 1924, died 17 Jul 1989.

That's probably your guy, but I thought you'd be in a better position to assess, so I didn't include it in the article. Cbl62 (talk) 01:30, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Good detective work from you, as always. Ol' Pete Gracey had a good run -- 90+ years old. Query: do we really want to include all of that personal data in the DOB/DOD footnote? I'm a little uncomfortable with that, even if he is deceased. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:37, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
The one piece I did not include was the first part of the SSN. Once a person is deceased, the SSN death index releases the information, but I think it's prudent not to report the full SSN. Is there another part that you were concerned with? Cbl62 (talk) 02:12, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I think I would cite the SSDI as the source via Ancestry.com, and leave it at that. I feel a little odd about posting home addresses or any part of a SSN. BTW, I was just starting to get attached to Pete and Phil. I kind of feel like I just lost a couple of uncles. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:24, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
The reason I think that it's important to include some of the specific information is to provide a breadcrumb trail to show that you haven't inadvertently cited the records for someone with a similar name. That said, the SSN doesn't really add anything; what does help for verification purposes is information on DOB, DOD, last address, and state of issuance (sometimes included). As for your uncles, they are gone but, as of today, not forgotten! Cbl62 (talk) 02:40, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

User:Midnite1469

Probably not done with this user, though they have been blocked right now. I'll add those three college football team pages to my watchlist. BusterD (talk) 01:52, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, BusterD. I've already used my three reverts on the three articles, so I'm 3RR and done for the next 24 hours. Never been blocked and I would like to keep it that way. Certainly not getting blocked on account of any angry vandal.  : ) Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:55, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
I was range-blocked once (in error), and it made me mad, not cooled off. So usually when I see someone flagrantly putting falsehoods into articles, I expect them to be dedicated disruptors. Thanks for calling an admin's attention to it. I just got there faster than User:Go Phightins!. If you use WP:Twinkle, you can place linked escalating warnings on a vandal's talk page very quickly. Appreciate your good eyes. Keep up the great work. BusterD (talk) 02:05, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Actually, I tried to notify two admins who I work with, but it was someone else who blocked him. Someone with whom I've never worked -- Elockid. He must have seen my request for admin help on one of the other talk pages. I'll take it any way I can get it, because AIV is miserably slow to respond. I've never been a big fan of automated edits for what I do, but if Twinkle allows me to issue vandalism warnings quickly, I probably need to learn how to use it. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:14, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
I'd reported vandalism after final warning at WP:AIV. That's why the user was blocked; they continued to do vandal edits after escalating warnings. And they're back. BusterD (talk) 03:01, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Well, nice to see the AIV folks are on top of it. Your friend the vandal is one angry little dude. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:03, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Acceptable use of school athletic logos?

DL - Do you know what constitutes acceptable use for school athletic logos on WP articles? The University of Dayton has unveiled a new logo scheme (see here) and I'd like to get it up on the UD athletic articles, but not at the expense of copyright law. If you aren't sure do you know anyone who is expert in this area? Thanks. Rikster2 (talk) 12:58, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Never mind, looks like someone did upload the new logo, it just hadn't been applied to all the UD programs yet. Rikster2 (talk) 13:03, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Any interest in creating an article for a Gator hoops player?

Dan Cross is the last remaining redlink on two Basketball All-American articles - 1994 and 1995 (he was an AP honorable mention pick both years). Are you interested in creating it? I may eventually get to it, but have a lot of other stuff ahead of it on my list. Not sure how up for article creation you are, but thought I'd check. All-American articles are one of the many stes of articles/templates I am trying to complete and could use any/all help. Thanks for considering it. Rikster2 (talk) 22:03, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Yes, sir, I'll do it. Cross was a huge part of the Gators' 1994 Final Four run. If the refs had not handed the national semifinal game to Duke on a platter, that would have been the Gators' first NCAA Final. I remember that game like yesterday. Probably could not have beaten '94 Arkansas, though. In any event, that '94 season was really the basis of all the success that has followed. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:17, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Duke getting help from the refs in the NCAAs? Say it ain't so! I'm sure the 2000-01 Maryland Terrapins would agree. Thanks for agreeing to create the Cross article. Rikster2 (talk) 11:43, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
      • Guys, remember that one NCAA Tournament where William & Mary got hosed by the refs? Time to crawl back into the basketball hole I just popped out of :( Jrcla2 (talk) 14:03, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Hey, from 1912 to 1987, the Gators couldn't find the NCAA Tournament with a map. I know what it means to be a suffering fan. Cheers to the Tribe, an cheers to the alumni who are old enough to still refer to themselves as the Indians. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:19, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Florida did have a long drought as well. But the past 30 years have been great, especially the last 20. If W&M gets to 3 Final Fours and wins 2 national championships in the next 20 years, I'll put aside everything that's happened to our program through 2013–14. Jrcla2 (talk) 14:26, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Most dogs (and some Gators) eventually have their day, my friend. I just hope you live long enough to see it happen for W&M.
Kidding aside, what made Dan Cross and the '94 Gators special was they really were a team, with no big-time stars dominating the opposition. In contrast to the Norm Sloan/Vernon Maxwell/Dwayne Schintzius teams of the 1980s, the '94 Gators were long on teamwork, short on controversy, and a great start for the things that would follow. I wish Lon Kruger well wherever he goes; I wish he could have made Florida work for him over the long haul, but sometimes the evolution of a sports program requires different coaches at different stages. Kruger got Gainesville back on the basketball map. Gators should always be grateful, and we should not forget players like Dan Cross. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:38, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
P.S. It's five Final Fours for the Gators in the last 20 years . . . . Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:39, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Is that all? ;-) Rikster2 (talk) 14:41, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
I meant Final Fours excluding the national championships, sorry I wasn't clear about that. I'm hoping Tony Shaver can be to W&M what Kruger was to Florida. This coming season we have a very real chance at a berth. It just is a matter of getting over that proverbial hump. Jrcla2 (talk) 14:51, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

@Rikster2: Okay, Rik, I've ground out a "start" article for Dan Cross. I've got the basics from his college career, and I've got the references to flesh that out and properly source everything. I've also found several features about what he's been doing since he quit playing. What I don't have is anything about his pro playing career. Looks like he only had a single season in the CBA in 2000-01, but apparently also played two or three years in Europe and Turkey. Can you help me with that? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:27, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I can help some. I definitely have some info about his CBA career (he played before 2000-01 in the CBA, I have registers up to 1999-2000 and he's in the last one) and maybe his other American minor leagues. The European stuff might be a little harder to find, but I will see what I can do. Rikster2 (talk) 17:30, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, sir. The foreign hoops leagues confuse the hell out of me. I just recently discovered that the Gators have a big-time alumnus who was a genuine star for Real Madrid in the 1960s and 1970s (Cliff Luyk) -- I need to spend some time cleaning that up in the near future, but I don't know where to start for references. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:35, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
I have a bunch of foreign league player databases linked on my user page. I just found Cross' Italian and Finnish profiles and will add that info pretty soon. Rikster2 (talk) 17:48, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
I saw your adds. Cross's CV on his basketball camp website indicates that he played some form of pro ball in Greece, Italy, Turkey, Finland, Cyprus, Venezuela, Dominican Republic and Israel. He got around for several years after graduation. Better opportunities available now than 20 years ago. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:00, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

FYI, Rik, I'm not the least concerned about Cross' notability. This guy got a raft of significant coverage in the major Florida newspapers and other S.E. regional media. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:23, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

that's fine, I generally try to be clear when someone meets NBASKETBALL since there are so many editors (especially outside the US) who don't get that college sports are of high interest. It staves off unnecessary AfD conversations, which IMO are big time-wasters (but maybe as a lawyer you enjoy arguing) ;-) Rikster2 (talk) 11:15, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. There are arguments that are worth having, and there are arguments that are a waste of time. When a subject is clearly notable, that's definitely a waste of time. What becomes a black hole for time, however, is a subject that isn't notable but someone is emotionally vested in saving the article. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 11:20, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Dirt -- There are many who would disagree about Cross's notability. We've seen the argument that if a college athlete doesn't pass WP:NCOLLATH, then he should be deleted regardless of WP:GNG. We've also seen the argument that Florida newspapers shouldn't count in assessing the notability of a Florida athlete. If there are articles from mainstream media outlets with in-depth coverage of Cross, you might want to consider adding them to the article. Cbl62 (talk) 16:21, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Not many, but there are certainly a minority who are willing to argue NCOLLATH is more restrictive than GNG and supersedes it, but as you may recall Masem eventually backed off that argument in the Mark Dodge AfD, and that's when I dropped out of the discussion. Masem's argument, such as it was, was that NCOLLATH be satisfied to establish notability in the same way that the high school athlete SNG does. (I disagree, for the simple reason that NCOLLATH is not explicit in the same way the high school SNG is. I am a lawyer and I usually can interpret the "plain meaning" pretty well. LOL) In Dan Cross's case, there are numerous mainstream newspaper accounts of his four years as a Gator -- unless someone is going to try to argue that every major newspaper in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee is somehow "local." (We may be a bunch of uneducated hillbillies, but we got some big regional newspapers, too.) I was planning on adding several of the better newspaper accounts and features, but I've been a little distracted with CFB All-Americans as of late.
Arguably, Cross also satisfies WP:NBASKETBALL for having played in one or more top-level foreign leagues, but I am personally not knowledgeable enough to make those arguments -- unless a given player was a national team member for FIBA, the Olympics, Pan Am Games, etc. -- and I rely on guys like Rikster and Jrcla for foreign basketball team factoids and notability issues.
BTW, how did the AfD for the Stanford NCAA swimming champion work out? I was trying to follow that AfD to see if he would satisfy GNG or not . . . . Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:44, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

@Rikster2: Got any good factoids about Cross' international performance I can add to the article. The description of his pro career is a little sparse. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:49, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

A. M. "Bum" Day

I responded to your discussion about Bum Day at User talk:Cbl62. Hopefully that will clear things up. 09er (talk) 14:06, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

On his reason for leaving GT. This link states the reason he did not originally attend Georgia was they did not have a football team during WW I. I do not know if a reliable source but it is a start. 14:41, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
On more link 09er (talk) 14:52, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
@09er: Thanks again, 09er. This was exactly what I needed: diff. I will also add several newspapers cites for his 1920 and 1921 All-Southern honors. Day turns out to be an interesting footnote to CFB history for several reason, including the fact that he was the first Southerner who Walter Camp selected for his All-American first team. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:22, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Andrew Sledd

Hi -- I saw Andrew Sledd pop up on my watchlist, and it reminded me that you were considering taking it to FAC at one point. Are you still interested in doing that? I think the article is good enough to be featured. I'd have to read it again, but I would expect to be able to support if it were nominated. If you prefer, I'd also be happy to conominate and help deal with any issues, though I don't think you need my help. Is there any more research that you think is necessary before the article could be nominated? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:05, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

  • @Mike Christie: Mike, how much work do you think it would take to drag the Sledd article across the FA finish line? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 00:17, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
    I just looked through the article; there are only a couple of minor things that might be looked at. One is the sentence about inferring his prominence from the obituaries -- I don't think it's necessary to make the inference. It would be fine to say that he had obituaries nationally; the inference can be left to the reader. The other is footnote 41, which doesn't appear to be cited. I also looked back through my comments on the talk page, and there is one nit left from those comments: you have "earned doctorate degrees" -- I would think this should be either "earned doctorates" or "earned doctoral degrees".
    FAC reviewers will also look at source formatting; I'm terrible at getting those consistent so I won't try to do that review now.
    The only other thing I can think of is that you said there were more sources you would like to get hold of -- I can see you've acquired more sources since we talked about the article; are you comfortable with the coverage? I do now have access to newspapers.com, and can do some research through that if you would like to try to find additional material.
    With the minor caveats above, this is a very fine article. I think it would have no trouble at FAC. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
    FYI, I just had a quick look on newspapers.com and found the Atlanta Constitution article about his resignation from Emory. I'll clip it and post a link to the article talk page, either tonight or tomorrow. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:29, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
    OK, here are the clippings for the two pages of the article: first page and second page. If you decide to use these (and I think they'd be worth adding as citations to the sentence about his resignation) then there's a standard format that newspapers.com citation use; an example is footnote 2 of Franklin Foster Fry. I noticed that you fixed a couple of the issues above. What's your feeling about nominating the article at FAC? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:27, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
    Mike, I just added The Atlanta Constitution footnote to the article text, and linked the clipped front page as the hyperlink. Any suggestions how to include and format a second hyperlink to the clipped second page of the article? I'm new to Newspapers.com, having just recently received an account password, so I haven't really contemplated how to create two hyperlinks in the same footnote in manner that looks consistent. Also, as I understand your comment above, we are supposed to credit Newspapers.com with the "-via Newspapers.com" attribution at the end of the normal footnote, right? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:13, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
    The newspapers.com page gives a suggested {{cite news}} format, so I used that -- it includes the via parameter. There's been discussion on how to do multi page links, but no agreed method, so I just made something up. I think it's probably good enough. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 03:01, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Single season articles for association football players

No I am not aware of any single season articles for association football players; as it is a team sport I would not expect to see any. Are the articles you talking about about athletes from 'individual' sports (tennis etc.) or players from a team? Regardless, as with all articles, GNG needs to be met. GiantSnowman 07:42, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Tennis. In some cases, they have huge articles for every season/year of a given player's entire career. I had never seen anything like it until one of the individual season articles came up at AfD. I am polling the various sports projects to see if any of them have anything similar. So far, no other sport has anything like it. Some of the single-season articles can apparently satisfy the general notability guidelines, but that's not the standard they have been using. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 09:50, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Questionable Rivalries

You asked me a couple weeks ago to consider which Big Ten rivalry articles might warrant further scrutiny.

At least one non-Penn State entry probably requires some scrutiny as well: Colorado–Nebraska football rivalry: I don't know about the history, but the article suggests it wasn't a big deal until the 1980s and now they're not even in the same conference, so it was short-lived at best.
Maryland is new to the Big 10 and has 5 rivalry articles, which is on the high side, but I don't yet know enough about the Terrapins to offer an informed judgment on these. User:Strikehold would have been a good person to check with, but he hasn't been active for a couple years.
Michigan has five rivalry articles, but one (Chicago–Michigan football rivalry) is purely historic in nature. The other four (OSU, MSU, Notre Dame and Minnesota are solid.)
  • Leaving the Big 10, but staying in the Midwest, Notre Dame might appear to be a bloated list with 10 rivalry entries. However, there's so much lore built up around Notre Dame that I doubt that any of these 10 series could/should be AfD'd. The Northwestern series was AfD'd a year ago (here), and Jweiss, PaulMcDoanald, Ejgreen, TonyTheTiger and I all voted "keep" after reviewing the sources.Cbl62 (talk) 21:26, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the feedback, Cbl. Several of the non-Big Ten rivalries you listed above are already on my hit list, and I think your Big Ten weak sisters are dead on the money (and, yes, I've been around long enough to be familiar with Big Blue vs. the Maroons). I voted to keep Bama-Penn State in 2011; my level of scrutiny and my !vote would both probably be different now. You're right: the Notre Dame cluster is tough because it's a collection of active rivalries plus notable historic rivalries. I did the SEC first because I know it best, and also to set an example for everyone else; I will probably do another round of SEC (mostly SEC vs. non-SEC), and then look at the Big Ten and MAC. The ACC has a handful of weak sister "rivalries," too. The Big 12 has a bunch, but they have series names and trophies, which means somebody is attached to them, even if they aren't particularly notable per GNG. I expect to raise 20-25 more at WP:CFB, and then take the ones to AfD which a majority of WP:CFB editors give the thumb's down. I think it's a smart process for two reasons: (1) it's educational for all the CFB editors to clearly understand the NRIVARLY/GNG standard, (2) it creates a built-in consensus of 5-10 !votes at AfD, and (3) it allows us to avoid any obvious mistakes with a pre-discussion. I also think it's important that all of the regulars feel like they've had their say and their articles got a fair hearing. Apart from holding all of them to a strict GNG standard, I also think we can apply a certain measure of common sense to some of the relatively recent, short-lived series. Inevitably, there will be some squealing. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:04, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
  • You mentioned the sheer number of LSU rivalry at 7 as being indicative of overreach. Yet, there are almost as many supposed rivalry articles for Florida -- six. Do you think they all qualify as traditional, notable rivalries? When I think of Florida's rivals, I pretty much think of Florida State and Georgia. Sure, the Fulmer-Spurrier games were classics, but does that make it a traditional rivalry? Likewise, everyone gets excited to play Alabama, but can the Crimson Tide really have 8 current rivalries? It would show some real balance to include one or two of Florida's questionable rivalries in the next batch. Cbl62 (talk) 23:03, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
  • I hear you, but do remember we've already deleted Alabama-Florida and Florida-South Carolina. What makes Florida's situation problematic is two historical rivalries, both legit: Auburn (SEC cross-division, formerly annual 1927-1940, 1945-2002), Miami (in-state, formerly annual 1938-1942, 1944-1987). The four active rivalries are annual: Florida State (in-state, annual since 1958), Georgia (SEC in-division, annual 1926-1942, 1944-present), Tennessee (SEC in-division, annual since 1990), and LSU (SEC cross-division, annual 1953-1967, 1971-present). From my perspective, the only candidate is LSU -- it has the least character of a traditional rivalry. Tennessee, which you suggested, has been the second most important rivalry, after FSU, over the last 24 years. It is, of course, also the newest/youngest in terms of total games played. The most obvious Bama candidate for AfD is Penn State, as you suggested.
You know Florida football best, though I'm surprised you would rate the Tennesee series ahead of the "World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party," which I've always thought of as one of the biggest rivalry games in college football. I thought the "bigness" of the Tennessee series was limited to the decade from mid-90s to mid-00s when things were actually competitive. Cbl62 (talk) 01:22, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Oh, I think the alumni probably have a greater emotional investment in the Florida-Georgia game, but the Florida-Tennessee game has had conference and national title implications more frequently since 1990. I chose my words carefully: the "most important," not the most popular, not the most bitter. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:41, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Florida coaches: see also sections, years in navboxes

DL, just an FYI, I removed the List of Florida Gators head football coaches in the see also section of each of the Florida Gator head coach bio articles. That article is linked in Template:Florida Gators football coach navbox, so it seems like overkill to have it in both places on each article. You seem to be quite fond of the see also section, but I really question its utility and aptness on Wikipedia. See also references certainly make sense in a printed encyclopedia. But in an online one with a search bar and hyperlinks?

Also, I noticed that you recently edited the year spans on the Florida Gators coach navboxes to the six-digit format. Was there some MOS consensus about that? Because the prevailing standard for sports infobox and navboxes is the eight-digit format. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:34, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

JW, I think you underestimate the usefulness of the "see also" section, properly employed, to our readers. The "see also" can be used to call attention to related articles that the reader would never find on their own, not knowing they exist, and help drive page views for those related articles. I understand that you are deleting the list of coaches article as redundant to the coaches navbox at page bottom, and I suppose there are trade-offs. As for the rest of the "see also" links, you might be surprised how they have improved page views for some of the linked articles. My goal is introduce Gator fan readers to the wider family of Florida Gator articles as quickly and easily as possible.
With regard to the year spans and MOS, six-digit year spans are supposed to be standard everywhere except sports infoboxes. The logic being that the many of the years/seasons are linked to team or league season articles and it looked goofy to have one linked season with four digits and another linked with two digits, side by side. So, the eight-digit coach and player year spans in the infoboxes had their own logic. Frankly, I seriously question the utility of league season links in the player and coach infoboxes, but I went along with the association football and basketball guys who were adamant about maintaining the eight-digit format for infoboxes. There is no similar exception for navboxes, headers and prose/text. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:57, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Duly noted on the rationale for the see also sections. But I think it's good practice to stay away there from items linked in navboxes or the infobox. I agree that season links in infoboxes are overkill. The years should be unlinked; aside from the plain overlink factor, why are the first and last years of range more important than any year in the middle so as to warrant links anyway? But I like the eight-digit format everywhere, including navboxes. Whatever the case, we should have consistency among the navboxes. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:18, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
  • "Aside from the plain overlink factor, why are the first and last year of range more important than any year in the middle so as to warrant links anyway." Exactly. And that assumes the league season links are really useful at all to most readers; lot of work for not a lot of payoff. In the spirit of I can only fight so many battles, and I really couldn't afford to piss off the guys from WP Association football, WP Baseball, WP Basketball and WP NFL with whom I had a mutually beneficial working relationship, I decided to kick that can down the road. In the time since, the WP Baseball guys have come to that conclusion on their own and have delinked season in Infobox MLB player.
"We should have consistency among the navboxes." Yup, we should. It's called MOS.  : )

Renso "Rock" Perdoni

Here are a couple sources for you: Houston Chronicle, The Palm Beach Post. Cbl62 (talk) 14:51, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Florida coaches: see also sections, years in navboxes

DL, just an FYI, I removed the List of Florida Gators head football coaches in the see also section of each of the Florida Gator head coach bio articles. That article is linked in Template:Florida Gators football coach navbox, so it seems like overkill to have it in both places on each article. You seem to be quite fond of the see also section, but I really question its utility and aptness on Wikipedia. See also references certainly make sense in a printed encyclopedia. But in an online one with a search bar and hyperlinks?

Also, I noticed that you recently edited the year spans on the Florida Gators coach navboxes to the six-digit format. Was there some MOS consensus about that? Because the prevailing standard for sports infobox and navboxes is the eight-digit format. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:34, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

JW, I think you underestimate the usefulness of the "see also" section, properly employed, to our readers. The "see also" can be used to call attention to related articles that the reader would never find on their own, not knowing they exist, and help drive page views for those related articles. I understand that you are deleting the list of coaches article as redundant to the coaches navbox at page bottom, and I suppose there are trade-offs. As for the rest of the "see also" links, you might be surprised how they have improved page views for some of the linked articles. My goal is introduce Gator fan readers to the wider family of Florida Gator articles as quickly and easily as possible.
With regard to the year spans and MOS, six-digit year spans are supposed to be standard everywhere except sports infoboxes. The logic being that the many of the years/seasons are linked to team or league season articles and it looked goofy to have one linked season with four digits and another linked with two digits, side by side. So, the eight-digit coach and player year spans in the infoboxes had their own logic. Frankly, I seriously question the utility of league season links in the player and coach infoboxes, but I went along with the association football and basketball guys who were adamant about maintaining the eight-digit format for infoboxes. There is no similar exception for navboxes, headers and prose/text. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:57, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Duly noted on the rationale for the see also sections. But I think it's good practice to stay away there from items linked in navboxes or the infobox. I agree that season links in infoboxes are overkill. The years should be unlinked; aside from the plain overlink factor, why are the first and last years of range more important than any year in the middle so as to warrant links anyway? But I like the eight-digit format everywhere, including navboxes. Whatever the case, we should have consistency among the navboxes. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:18, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
  • "Aside from the plain overlink factor, why are the first and last year of range more important than any year in the middle so as to warrant links anyway." Exactly. And that assumes the league season links are really useful at all to most readers; lot of work for not a lot of payoff. In the spirit of I can only fight so many battles, and I really couldn't afford to piss off the guys from WP Association football, WP Baseball, WP Basketball and WP NFL with whom I had a mutually beneficial working relationship, I decided to kick that can down the road. In the time since, the WP Baseball guys have come to that conclusion on their own and have delinked season in Infobox MLB player.
"We should have consistency among the navboxes." Yup, we should. It's called MOS.  : )


Renso "Rock" Perdoni

Here are a couple sources for you: Houston Chronicle, The Palm Beach Post. Cbl62 (talk) 14:51, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

William McRae

I came across William McRae while filling out some 1920s All-American lists. Aside from playing for the Gators, he was also a Rhodes scholar and federal judge. The article could use some TLC if you or another Gator fan has an interest. Cbl62 (talk) 15:39, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Thank you, very much, for finding this article. I had no idea the article existed. I had considered creating one under "Bill McRae," but had no real information on him other than the name-only listing as a second-team All-American from a couple of 1928 All-America team articles, and the years he lettered from the Gators media guide. Given the paucity of significant coverage, I was concerned that the subject would not survive a GNG review at AfD. McRae having served as a federal judge, I believe that definitively resolves the notability issue.
McRae and several of the other 1928 second and third-team All-Americans are "lost" (other than Dale Van Sickel), and are not currently listed in the media guide as having received AA honors in 1928. I suspect that the other three '28 AA's were overlooked because Van Sickel was the first-ever first-teamer the Gators ever had. Having found the newspaper back-up through Google News Archive for Clyde Crabtree, Bill McRae and Jimmy Steele's '28 honors, I really need to forward the clippings to UAA sports information department so they will be properly listed in future editions of the Gators media guide. The 1928 Gators were probably the best Gators team ever until 1960 or 1969, an maybe until 1984 or 1990. They were a Very Big Deal for their generation and deserve to be better remembered by Gators fans.
Again, thank you very much for bringing this article to my attention. I owe you one large favor; feel free to collect at your discretion. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:54, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
"Someday - and that day may never come - I'll call upon you to do a service for me. But until that day, accept this justice as gift ..." Don Corleone Seriously, no problem. That one got me digging into old Fla. yearbooks, and I've uploaded a bunch of PD photos that you might also want to check out. Cbl62 (talk) 21:24, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, counselor. Doing service is honorable, especially in honor of a service freely given in the past. I'll have a look-see later tonight at your recent uploads. I already saw the Seminole photo of Van Sickel you added. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:29, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dirtlawyer1/Archives/2014/August&oldid=627758395"