Talk:2008 Florida State Seminoles football team

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject College football (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Image copyright problem with Image:FloridaStateSeminoles.png[edit]

The image Image:FloridaStateSeminoles.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. --07:43, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Gator Bowl[edit]

I don't doubt that the Gator Bowl will be FSU and Nebraska, however here are the problems with including the statement at this point:

  1. Wikipedia is concerned with verifiability, not necessarily truth (Wikipedia: Verifiability). If a source cannot be provided (and I was unable to find one in a cursory search online) then it shouldn't be included. A pay forum is not a good source. If it's referenced by a reliable source there, by all means please copy and paste or post a link.
  2. I understand that you have worked hard on the article, but you need to realize that that does not imply ownership (Wikipedia: Ownership). Understand that I am not "messing up" anything as you assert, I'm making it more professional and encyclopedic.
  3. "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material" (Wikipedia: Sources).
  4. Everything I have seen regarding the '09 Gator Bowl is speculative in nature, i.e. hearsay or conjecture or prediction. "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball" (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not).

I have seen several sources online pointing to a possible meeting between FSU and Nebraska, and noting that both are being courted by the bowl officials, but have not found anything that officially states this will happen. I also saw Clemson and Notre Dame (I think) mentioned. BCS officials have said that nothing can be offered until tomorrow evening, and nothing will be official until December 7 (Sunday). I think the best thing to do in this circumstance is to wait until an official announcement. Strikehold (talk) 03:38, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, FSUNolez06, please note that I am reverting this once again. You should not revert it back to avoid violating the three-revert rule (Wikipedia:Three-revert rule). Thanks.Strikehold (talk) 03:45, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Gator Bowl[edit]

Strikehold, there is no probably about it. It is 100% true. It's not an inside source or anything of like that. It is 100% true. Not 99% true. Not 99.9% true. 100% true. Also, it is not speculative in nature. Once again, it is true. There are many things on Wikipedia that you can't verify anywhere online. It doesn't mean it is not true. Also, you are guilty of the 3RR rule, not me. You are getting rid of true material. You are the guilty one in this matter. FSUNolez06 (talk) 04:48, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

FSUNolez, I can only explain this so many ways: (1) Truth does not matter, only VERIFIABILITY. If your information is only on a pay membership website and you cannot share this information with anyone else, then that is not verifiable for other users! Anything that cannot be verified online, should not be include on Wikipedia. Once more, see: WP:V. (2) I am not in violation of the 3RR, because I only reverted three times. You reverted the article FOUR times, and therefore are in violation. Once more, see: WP:3RR.
Strikehold (talk) 04:58, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
It doesn't seem at this point like it's verifiable that FSU is committed to the Gator Bowl. If it's shown through a reliable source accessible to everyone, it's fine to add it. Otherwise, I'd suggest to leave it off until that happens. Dayewalker (talk) 05:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
I have suggested to FSUNolez06 that this information be redacted until official confirmation is made on what teams will be attending which bowl games. This should happen no later than 7 December (five days). I don't understand the insistence on including what is right now unconfirmed information. Strikehold (talk) 05:10, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Because it is NOT unconfirmed information! It is confirmed. Do you get the FSView (FSU's campus newspaper)? That's accessible to anyone and it verifies what I have posted. How is that not good enough? I'm sorry that you can't find a link online. Aren't newspaper articles OK to cite? FSUNolez06 (talk) 05:16, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

(OD)FSUNolez06, I understand you want to post information as soon as you find it, but we have to have a reliable source for this. If you have a newspaper source (or non-subscription, non-forum) for this information, please provide it. Also, you are edit warring on this page. As there's already been a report about you, I strongly suggest you revert your last set of edits. When you have the reliable source for the information, bring it here to the talk page and someone else can add it so it doesn't look like you're edit warring. Dayewalker (talk) 05:21, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Like I said, I have no reason to doubt the truth of the information, I just want reliable verification. FSUNolez06, if you have a link to a newspaper article confirming this, by all means please include it so we can get this over with! Strikehold (talk) 05:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
How can I provide a link to a newspaper? I can only suggest that you have someone you know in Tallahassee, Florida go and pick one up. shrug Trust me... now more than anything, I wish there was an online place for this. How is a newspaper article not good enough?
The only official news is that at 6:00pm EST Nebraska was extended an invitation to the Gator Bowl, while 90% likely it is not official yet for FSU thus should not be included in the article until such a time, is a reliable source, yet has not confirmed anythingUkrNole 485 (talk) 05:34, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
UkrNole, do you get the FSView (and happen to have a scanner)? If so, this would help out a lot! And, on a side note, what is edit warring, Dayewalker? Thanks! FSUNolez06 (talk) 05:36, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Pick one up tomorrow -UkrNole 485 (talk) 05:38, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Nice! Thanks! FSUNolez06 (talk) 05:39, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
The FSView student newspaper has a website [1]. I searched it and there's nothing on there at this time about the Gator Bowl or an FSU bowl game. Strikehold (talk) 05:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
I searched it too. There was something that came out today about it (an insert in the paper). I wasn't expecting it to be online, yet. FSUNolez06 (talk) 05:43, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
UkrNole: Do you have a source for the Cornhuskers getting the nod for the Gator Bowl? said: "Nebraska fans will have to wait at least one more day to find out their Gator Bowl fate. Gator Bowl president Rick Catlett told the Florida Times-Union that the plan was to originally invite one team, presumably Nebraska by 4 p.m. CST on Monday. However, the BCS commissioners won't officially release teams not in consideration for the BCS bowl games until after a teleconference on Tuesday." Strikehold (talk) 05:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
I must say, I am vigorously searching the internet trying to find a verifiable source and am having trouble, myself. I have found links stating, Gator Bowl officials want Florida State - Nebraska, but so far, nothing more concrete than that. I will keep my search up, as I want nothing more than to put this thing to rest. FSUNolez06 (talk) 05:51, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, I must throw this out there. Why couldn't we of brought this conversation in here when I first added it to Wikipedia instead of you undoing my edit (which caused me to undo your edit, causing you to undo my edit, causing me to... you see where I'm going with this)? We are having a civil discussion here. This is the way it should of been the whole time. There was no need to keep editing each others post, threats to be thrown back and forth, etc. We should of immediately brought it here to discuss. Why wasn't this done? I'm just as guilty as you (with not bring it here). I'm just saying. FSUNolez06 (talk) 06:01, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, the Warchant Pay Site was not where I originally got this information. I got it from my inside sources. You just asked where it can be verified, so I started finding places where I could verify it for you (and Warchant and the FSUView insert were the only two places I found, so far). FSUNolez06 (talk) 06:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
FSUNolez, I did attempt to engage in dialogue without further reverts, after you included the pay website citation. When I reverted, I posted the first topic on this talk page (see the timestamps), with a note to see the talk page in the edit summary. I included a point-by-point list of reasons for my revert. Strikehold (talk) 06:17, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Well, then. It looks like I'm an idiot and didn't check this page. My fault. FSUNolez06 (talk) 06:35, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, guess what?! I was wrong (along with two other sources). Clemson - Nebraska in the Gator Bowl. I'll go hide in a hole now. FSUNolez06 (talk) 19:36, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Page protected for one week[edit]

I protected the page from editing for one week because of the severe edit warring during the past week. If the dispute above is resolved before protection expires, the page may be unprotected.

If edit warring resumes after page protection has expired, it may be protected again or the disputants may be temporarily blocked from editing as per blocking policy. — Athaenara 06:30, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. FSUNolez06 (talk) 06:32, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
I have no issue with unprotecting the page. At present the information isn't included (and no reliable source can currently be found to confirm it). But that information is going to be forthcoming in less than a week, hopefully tomorrow evening. As long any info regarding bowls is reliably sourced when it gets added, I have no issue with an unprotect. Strikehold (talk) 06:35, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
I think it can be unprotected right now without issue. To be honest, prior to tonight, I had no idea there was such a thing as edit warring. I posted correct information, and Strikehold took it off saying it wasn't cited. I know that my information is correct, so I kept adding it. I have no problem waiting to add it when it is plastered all over the web, so you won't have any more issues from me. I do think it is pretty pointless to have Wikipedia if you can't add information you know is true without a cite, but that's another story.
Strikehold, is there an easy way to put my wording back when it becomes public information? I would hate for it to get halfheartedly added when I spent so long to make it sound and look right. Thanks! FSUNolez06 (talk) 06:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Either you or someone else could just edit the version of the article you originally made to begin with, and save that to then make it the current version, negating all the edits and undos and stuff that came after, so you won't have to retype everything from scratch. Tampabay721 (talk) 07:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Champs Sports Bowl[edit]

It's going to be Florida State vs. Minnesota (most likely Minnesota) in the Champs Sports Bowl. FSUNolez06 (talk) 19:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd give it a rest you were wrong once, just sit on it until it becomes OFFICIAL
Way to anonymously write that. At least I came back and took my crow like a man. I was wrong. I admit it. I promise you, life will go on. FSUNolez06 (talk) 22:55, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
It's looking like it could be Wisconsin. FSUNolez06 (talk) 16:13, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
[2] says Wisconsin is who they want, but they have other teams under consideration. The thing is, they can't pick the Big 11 team until they know how many BCS bids the Big 11 will get. Boise St is in full media blitz mode trying to convince the Fiesta to take them over tOSU. Their case is obvious - BSU-Texas might actually be an interesting game, while tOSU-Texas would be a blowout. Either way, Texas brings enough fans to sell it out so tOSU's traveling fanbase doesn't really matter all that much. The other potential issue is that it is a mathematical possibility that in the final BCS, you could have OU lose a very close game to Missouri and Alabama lose a very sloppy game to UF, then in the final BCS, have #1 Texas and #2 Oklahoma. The Big 12 would take 3 BCS bids (#1, #2, and Missouri as conference champion) and tOSU's bid goes away. None of the lower Big 11 bowls can pick until Sunday since it is a mathematical possibility that they might only get one BCS bid, so Florida State's opponent cannot be known until Sunday. Most bowls like to announce both teams together, so there will be no announcement until then. --B (talk) 12:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC)