Talk:New England Patriots

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former featured article New England Patriots is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 3, 2006.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject National Football League / Patriots  (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Football League, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the NFL 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Patriots task force.
WikiProject American Football League (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject American Football League, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the American Football League 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject United States / Massachusetts / Boston (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts (marked as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts - Boston (marked as Top-importance).
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5 (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
Checklist icon
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Note icon
This article is within of subsequent release version of Everyday life.
Taskforce icon
This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.

Pat Patriot a symbol of ineptitude?[edit]

I'm not sure if "many saw Pat as a symbol of ineptitude" is an accurate statement. On the day the Flying Elvis was unveiled at the stadium, the fans cheered for Pat and booed Elvis. --MrBawn 13:07, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

I was the one that put that in there. I stand by that, by 1992 when it was retired in game use, "Pat Patriot" to many had become a symbol of ineptitude - just like Tampa Bay's pre-97 "pirate" logo had long been a symbol of embarassment. Of course, that is not to say that people loved the Flying Elvis when it was rolled out - indeed, a lot of people didn't like it and I even read one wag refer to them as "USFL uniforms."--Seadog1611 01:33, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

There are at least a dozen other NFL franchises whose history over the last half century make the Patriots' not only not inept, but in fact rich in success, heroic performances on the field and loyal support off it. The "many" who allegedly perceive(d) Pat Patriot as a negative symbol clearly do not include: Patriots fans, New Englanders, Football fans (even opponents' fans to this day are strikingly vocal in support of the previous logo & uniforms), casual sports fans, and those possessing any fashion sense or common sense (including every woman who has ever addressed the subject over the last 23 years), to name a few. ChumleyDuh (talk) 23:57, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Any of these claims (whether a symbol of ineptitude, or because then-owner Orthwein was neither previously a Pats fan or from New England) need to be verified by attributing them to a reliable, published source using an inline citation. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 03:50, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

History section[edit]

As per featured article suggestions, I plan on trimming the history section down to about one paragraph per header, and perhaps 2 for the dynasty era. All of the info has been moved to History of the New England Patriots. Deckiller 22:40, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I trimmed it down somewhat; I'm thinking that this level of information looks pretty good. Once we replace it with beautiful prose (I wrote it in somewhat of a hurry) and cite, we might be ready for feature article or at least good article status. Deckiller 00:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
  • A suggestion for FA: You should also begin a section on the logo and uniforms too, and how it evolved from the "Pat Patriot" logo to the "Elvis" logo. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:37, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Okay, sounds like an awesome idea. Deckiller 00:42, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I added the brief section from the history page to get the ball rollong. Deckiller 00:45, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I admire your dedication, Deckiller. keep up the good work!--Alhutch 03:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

In the "Franchise History" section the following sentence: "A change was also made that same year to the Patriots uniforms, changing their primary colors from their traditional red and white to blue and silver, and introducing a new logo." Should accurately read as follows: "Despite never being a New Englander or Patriots fan, Orthwein and his marketing team commissioned the NFL to develop a new logo, and changed their primary colors from the traditional red, white and blue to blue and silver for the team uniforms." (ChumleyDuh (talk) 00:23, 6 March 2016 (UTC))

Perhaps to include in the "Rivalries" section but somewhere in any case; are three seminal and critical events, all occurring in games versus the Oakland Raiders. The first and second both occurred at Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum in the 1970's: On December 18th, 1976, the Patriots played their second-ever playoff game and first in the NFL as a wild card entry against the host Raiders, whose only loss was a blowout at Foxborough in October. Referee Ben Dreith, later the primary figure in the officials union's legal suits versus the league, led a crew that was exposed on the live telecast as missing several blatant holding infractions committed by the Raiders, particularly when tight end Russ Francis, who earlier in the game had his nose broken by defensive end George Atkinson (no foul called then either), watched a late Steve Grogan third down pass bounce between the "8" and the "1" on Francis' jersey and fall incomplete, as both his arms were held behind his back by linebacker Phil Villapiano. Leading late in the fourth quarter 21-17, the Patriots' defense saw Ken Stabler's third down pass fall incomplete, and the Raiders were to face a near impossible fourth-and-eighteen with time running out. However, Dreith threw his penalty flag, calling defensive tackle Ray "Sugar Bear" Hamilton for roughing the passer, a seldom-called infraction at that time reserved for the most extreme quarterback hits. This, despite Hamilton actually deflecting the ball; and though Stabler went down in a heap, he admitted in 2002 to Boston Globe reporter Will McDonough (who was also there covering the game in 1976), "That should have never been a penalty. I got hit a lot worse than that in my career and it was never called. Hamilton just went for the ball and landed on me. That's all that happened." After a further unsportsmanlike conduct penalty against New England, a perfectly healthy Stabler had no trouble rolling into the end zone for the winning touchdown, and the Raiders rolled easily thereafter to win their first Super Bowl. Then, on August 12, 1978, an evening preseason game at the same venue became the worst nightmare for television viewers after midnight back in New England, when young Darryl Stingley, a talented, popular husband and father who was due to sign a contract extension within days, went over the middle in pursuit of a high and hard Steve Grogan pass. Oakland safety Jack Tatum, later rumored to be making bets with fellow defensive backs before the game on "who could knock someone out" that night, hit Stingley in a collision that left Stingley motionless on the ground, until after what seemed like an eternity taken off on a stretcher to the hospital. Stingley very nearly died during the next thirty-six hours, barely surviving but left paralyzed from the chest down. No penalty was called on the play, and no personal apology ever was given from Tatum. The deep, unabating bitterness felt by Patriots fans was exemplified after they defeated the Raiders seven years later at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, again as a wild card team in the divisional round, when Pats GM Pat Sullivan fought on the field with Raiders players, referring later to "crap we've taken from that organization." Finally, on January 19th, 2002 in the last game played at old Foxboro Stadium, the division-winning Patriots hosted the #3 seed Raiders in a game-long blizzard. Late in the fourth quarter, after second-year quarterback Tom Brady was hit by college teammate Charles Woodson, he lost the ball and the Raiders recovered, appearing poised to run the clock out and preserve their 13-10 lead. However, after a video-replay review, referee Walt Coleman overturned the call on the field, citing the clearly applicable but obscure "tuck rule" wherein Brady never fully tucked the ball away before the hit. The Patriots retained possession of the ball, Adam Vinatieri made what former Raider coach John Madden called "the most clutch field goal I've ever seen in my life," a 45-yard line drive through the blowing snow, and later the winning field goal in overtime, after which the Patriots won the next subsequent two games to secure their first Super Bowl victory. (ChumleyDuh (talk) 02:23, 6 March 2016 (UTC))

Semi-protected edit request on 29 October 2015[edit]

Update latest meeting between New England Patriots and Indianapolis Colts to 10/10/2015. It reads erroneously that the last meeting was the AFC Championship game. (talk) 18:45, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. clpo13(talk) 17:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2016[edit]

I want to add {Super Bowl hopefuls of 2015} Moron93 (talk) 21:50, 20 January 2016 (UTC) Thats all

Isn't every NFL team a 'Super Bowl hopeful'? Leaving that aside, are you suggesting a template of some kind? One does not exist under that title. 331dot (talk) 22:24, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

minor vandalism[edit]

In the current staff section:

 Head coach-general manager/Lead Cheater – Bill Belichick

-- (talkcontribs) 19:47, 25 January 2016‎ (UTC)

That was vandalism off in Template:New England Patriots staff, which was fixed by Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 11:25, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Super Bowl Banners[edit]

Gillette Stadium04.jpg

Hello, These banners that are displayed today have four not three as this picture was taken 9 years ago and this is outdated. Can somebody replace it? Palmount45 (talk) 20:24, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:New England Patriots/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MrWooHoo (talk · contribs) 18:24, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

I'll start this review ASAP. Just before we begin, to sort out confusion, I will have a general review then an in depth prose and source review. In the general review, I'll use the "GA tools" box. I feel pretty bad for the number of times this page has been started and deleted, so I'll try and start/finish this review quickly. MrWooHoo (talk) 18:20, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Main Review[edit]

GA Toolbox[edit]

  • Please resolve the issues noted here (besides the first note as this is a GA review). There are a couple of "weasel words" and some footnote punctuation problems. MrWooHoo (talk) 01:49, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

General Review[edit]

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well written:
1a. the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct. See prose review below.
1b. it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Some weasel words that need to be changed
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. all in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines. See source review below.
2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by images:
6a. images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content. Wrong license for just this picture. I don't believe the cheerleaders are air force members.
6b. images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
7. Overall assessment. Fix GA toolbox problem, image license, prose review, and dead links.

Prose Review[edit]

Note: If you have changed the sentence that needed to be corrected, press Enter and start off the line with ::, then use YesY or Yes check.svg Done If the change was only partially done use YesY, and N or X mark.svg Not done if the change could not occur. (If you would explain why, I would be greatly appreciated :P) To see code, go to edit source and copy the code.

  • "The Patriots played their home games at Foxboro Stadium from 1971 to 2001, then moved to Gillette Stadium at the start of the 2002 season."
Right now, only 2002 is linked. Link both words of "2002 season" to the 2002 NFL season article.
  • "This includes the current teams, the New York Jets, the Miami Dolphins, and the Buffalo Bills, as well as former divisional opponents the Colts."
Why not say "the Indianapolis Colts" for conformity?
  • See the Oakland Raiders subsection.
Is it necessary for this subsection to be so long? It seems like a play by play summary in the first half of the subsection.
  • "On the field, the Patriots have typically utilized an "Erhardt–Perkins" offense and a "Fairbanks–Bullough" 3–4 defense, referred to commonly as a 2-gap 3–4 defensive system."
See WP:NUMERAL. "Integers from zero to nine are spelled out in words."

Source Review[edit]


  • Hi @MrWooHoo: Just wanted to let you know that I have seen this and will try to get to your suggested edits over the next week or so. Thanks and sorry for the delayed response. Sportsguy17 (TC) 13:23, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
@Sportsguy17: I have finished my review, I will now put this review on hold. Take your time. Cheers! MrWooHoo (talk) 03:17, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Just passing through, and saw the missing image mentioned above is from an domain. Ironically, that's the same as a missing image on a recent FAC image review that I did. Sure enough, I was able to locate the new image in the same way. It is now at this URL -- Saskoiler (talk) 03:11, 22 June 2016 (UTC)