Jump to content

Talk:J. T. O'Sullivan

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

NFL Europe

[edit]

I took out the bit as follows: "This is the same league top NFL quarterbacks Kurt Warner, Brad Johnson, and Jake Delhomme (among others) made their mark when nobody knew who they were. Because of this, some believe O'Sullivan has gained the skills and experience necessary to compete in the NFL."

To put the 2nd highest passer rating in NFL Europe in perspective, the year before the #2 guy was P. Stambaugh. The year after, it was K. Eakin. So I think it's stretching it to call it a breakthrough year or that O'Sullivan can now compete in the NFL. Also, Warner did win quite a bit in the Arena League, and Brad Johnson was at least somewhat famous from his tenure at Florida State, although perhaps that's splitting hairs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diogenes00 (talkcontribs) 21:02, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"He has yet to take responsibility for this despicable act." - I don't get was this act was. losing the game? perhaps this should come out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.62.139.101 (talk) 04:27, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on J. T. O'Sullivan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:47, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stats

[edit]

Some sources say different things for his NFL Europe stats, particularity 2007, but I just decided to use the official NFL Europe press release (2,201 yards). For example, this (1,997) and this (2,238) have stats that differ from the NFL Europe press release. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 18:28, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added some more sources for his stats. It seems like all of the sources have his 2004 stats the same (1,527 passing yards). For 2007, I linked articles that say he threw for 2,201 yards. The stats sites for 2007 just seem to have a different number. They all have the stat line where he threw for 2,238 yards [1] [2] [3]. They do have the same stat line (1,527) for 2004 though. So one stat site or something just made an accident and put the wrong stat line in for 2007 and the other ones copied it. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 20:44, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Lions bio said he threw for 1,997 yards in 2007. I'll just take NFLEurope.com's word for it with the 2,201 yards. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 21:09, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I found some other sources for the 2,201 yards. [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 22:18, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:J. T. O'Sullivan/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Haxwell (talk · contribs) 20:02, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]


I determine that this article is well written verifiable, with no original research addresses the main topics, yet stays focused without unnecessary detail neutral stable illustrated.


It is a Good Article.