Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject National Football League and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Shortcuts

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25: 21 days

WikiProject National Football League was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 20 November 2013.

Editing war

OK I am not really sure how this works and if I am in the wrong place, however I am wondering about the page Brayden Narveson. I personally do think that my edits are correct, however User:135.131.153.248 and User:2404:4404:442F:2100:11B9:83:1305:D2B3 have reverted my edits such as Narveson losing the kicking job to Nick Folk, his weight being 6 foot instead of 5 foot 11, or Greg Joseph being released hours after signing Narveson (if you check the logs). I did not want to get into an editing war so I wanted to check with you higher-ups. Anyway thanks for dealing with me and please let me know if I am in the wrong place. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 03:57, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~It was a different user who edited your additions.~~ Generally, follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. In this case though, since their edit summary "Info Update" didn't seem to match their actual edit to remove content, you might try to reinsert it with an explanation like "unexplained removal of sourced content". Hopefully that resolves it, or they discuss it, but yeah, good to be aware of potential edit wars. Good luck.—Bagumba (talk) 04:15, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Ah, looks like you added the other IP while I was editing.—Bagumba (talk) 04:17, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks for helping. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 04:22, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe IP 135. is going with the team link: https://www.packers.com/team/players-roster/, which many editors do when there's no pfr link. The team has him listed at 6'0" - 215 lbs. The article has pre-draft numbers. I would have went with the team link, I'm going out on a limb, but the Packers might have the final current say in the matter. Bringingthewood (talk) 04:30, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK I can put it back at 6 foot. Thanks. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 04:43, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't. Looks like Green Bay rounded it off. Keeping it at 5'11" seems accurate. That might be the way a team site lists players. A stupid 1/8th of an inch could lead to this. It's just tough to point fingers at a team site at times. I just went through this with pfr and teams. Bringingthewood (talk) 04:47, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ohhhhhhhh, OK so I will revert my revert of my other revert LOL WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 04:53, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you got that, lol. I think you're correct, not sure how to fight one of those team site editors though. :/ Bringingthewood (talk) 04:57, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note: Take T. J. Watt for example. The Steelers team site and pfr are correct. His pre-draft is 6'4 1/2". But they both list him at 6'4".... and 1/2 is more than 1/8. Go figure. Bringingthewood (talk) 05:03, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alrighty Airtighty thanks. Good night (for me), one last question, do you guys ever sleep? It seems like the majority of people that work on this WikiProject never sleep, I am sure you guys do, but I would like some secret insight from you. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 05:04, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does Merlot or Cabernet count? Ooops .. I didn't say that. Good night. Bringingthewood (talk) 05:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Differing timezones and most editors here seem like night owls, giving that impression. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 13:47, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the Packers list him at six feet, so should we. Kante4 (talk) 15:43, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Normally I would agree 100%. But I think Packers.com might not be rounding him off correctly. Sometimes people do make mistakes, I think I heard that somewhere. Just going along with it right or wrong ... nah. Bringingthewood (talk) 21:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But assuming that they "might" have made a mistake is not the way to go I say. We have sources and should stick to them. Kante4 (talk) 21:23, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not assuming here. On Brayden Narveson's page it shows pre-draft at an 1/8th of an inch. I even wrote about it in the revision history, that maybe someone could find that out. We definitely shouldn't lose sleep over it. Honestly, I wish this player had a pfr page. I'm not going stop using a team page over this in the future. Bringingthewood (talk) 22:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Devil's advocate: Why assume the pre-draft is necessarily right? —Bagumba (talk) 07:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bagumba @Bringingthewood @Kante4 Well, I mean if you look it up, it is conflicting… some say 6'1"[1][2][3] others say 6'0"[4][5][6] and others say 5'11"[7][8][9][10] (the Titans did as well). When I searched everything up, I think User:Bringingthewood's original prediction was correct, because when he was on the Titans he was 5'11". However, when he went to Green Bay, he magically went up to 6'0" (and all the others updated to that as well). I personally think he should stay at 5'11" but I don't know what you guys think. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 15:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, pfr has him also at 6'0. This, NFL.com and the current team website is what i would consider checking for players and if they conflict, then it should be discussed. Kante4 (talk) 15:53, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely agree 100% with Kante4. Brayden Narveson’s height should be listed as 6’0”. That’s how he’s listed on Packers.com and NFL.com. Those are the most recent and factual sources. It shouldn’t matter what other sites say or what the Titans had him listed as. Narveson no longer plays for Tennessee. Just because his pre-draft height was 5’ll 1/8” doesn’t mean Green Bay or us on Wikipedia must have him at 5’ll”. The draft was months ago and that may not even be accurate. The Packers have him at 6’0” at this very moment in time for a reason, that’s the fact. This isn’t about personal opinions, some bias or an assuming feeling that the editors at Packers.com or other sites made a mistake listing him at 6’0”. That’s not for us to decide. If anyone concurs, then I’m going to update his height to 6’0” on his page. 135.131.153.248 (talk) 04:23, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Before a change is made, I recommend that a couple of people agree to it. Not just the one you agree with. If you change it and it gets reverted, it starts all over again. Let's not forget the title of this section. Bringingthewood (talk) 04:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it. Maybe this will save someone from being blocked. I believe that @WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 will be okay with it, being that he was originally doing the right thing .. before I made a suggestion. We should all be able to sleep again. Bringingthewood (talk) 05:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that is absolutely OK with me, I just wanted a consensus to be made with at least most of us agreeing with it. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 13:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So did I. But it wasn't heading in that direction, not with the one and done reverting attitude. This is only a speck on the paper. No big deal. Bringingthewood (talk) 23:44, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quick roster navbox question

Per this edit, I think listing the practice squad above the inactive list makes more sense since PS players still practice with the active roster and can be called up to play in games. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 13:45, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unless we want to be hierarchical. Reserve list players are earning full salary? —Bagumba (talk) 13:49, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't necessarily object to Dissident's proposal, but this is also what I was mulling over. IR players are, in a sense, more officially and statically part of the team typically.

I've been looking at rosters a lot this last week. For what it's worth, practice squad players are listed below those on the reserve list. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's always been that way but recent PS rule changes have put more importance on it. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 14:01, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not up on rule changes, so I don't have an informed opinion either way. —Bagumba (talk) 07:34, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since 2020, it has been expanded from 10 to 16, up to six veterans can now be signed to it, and teams are able to call up two PS players on game day up to three times a season. When these navboxes were created, the PS was for players with two or fewer accrued seasons and they could only be added to the active roster if a corresponding move was made (like any signing). ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 14:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would be in favor of this. I had reverted a couple edits doing this but after seeing it discussed here and previewing it I think it looks good. I do agree there is a bit more emphasis on the practice squad and its importance now more than ever so I'd be in favor of the change. My only con to changing it is the main roster page lists reserves first then practice squad, which is why I reverted in the first place to follow that same format. So if we make the change to one I think it may be beneficial to do the other for continuity's sake. Jrooster49 (talk) 04:05, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relevant to the topic, but I also don't think we need to add the elevated PS players to the active roster since they revert back following the game. It just adds additional maintenance (up to 64 possible transactions a week) that people usually forget to change back. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 23:54, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why I moved to inactive (Goodbye)

(If you have questions you can ask me on my talk page, I may respond, I may not.)

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

Goodbye, at least for now. I do not know how long, it may range from a few days to a few months, I am not sure. This is partially due to school and somewhat getting into an editing war and my previous past of vandalism (I do sincerely apologize for that), even if it had been over 3 years ago now. I do not know if anyone will really care, however, because of all this I will be taking a break from Wikipedia. I know that Brayden Narveson is something I should keep up on, however I think it is needed for a break for me. Anyways, goodbye for now, I will make another edit or two today cleaning things up, but for now, I am going to be gone, thanks for all the help I have done for the past 4 years. Anyways goodbye for now, I am sure that Wikipedia will be an ever better place for when I am away… goodbye. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 17:12, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Take a break and breather. Best of luck to you. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 18:25, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I care @WhyIsThisSoHard575483838. That was a bull**** edit war anyway. Remember your revert of a revert? I should have stayed away after that, because you seemed to agree with me when I said the team page and pfr are usually the way to go. You created the page, so I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. I didn't like others jumping in and assuming they took all the erasers off pencils. Hope you come back soon, you did fine. A better place .. not sure about that one. ;) Regards, Bringingthewood (talk) 23:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks man. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 00:37, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is the NFL an independent source for an article about a player?

See Wikipedia_talk:Main_Page/Errors#Independent_sources, for a discussion about this. --2603:7000:2101:AA00:F804:C954:1D4C:5D11 (talk) 22:15, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template talk:Infobox American football game#Proposal changes to Infobox

I would appreciate some input in the above referenced section for the template {{Infobox American football game}}, which is heavily utilized by this WikiProject. Thank you. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source Request

Has anyone come across a good source that explains how taking part in preseason games, being on a practice squad, etc does not contribute to being on a team's all-time roster? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:24, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, the 49ers media guide has separate listings of "All-Time Roster" and "All-Time Practice Squad Roster". —Bagumba (talk) 14:48, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bagumba, thank you so much! I checked the Packers' media guide and it includes Players who have played in at least one regular-season or playoff game with the Packers; list includes years and regular-season games played. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:29, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help requested for article creation

So I've done extensive research for good sources to create an "Uprights" article at Draft:Uprights, but I think I'm hitting major writer's block, and thus having trouble actually fleshing out the prose. If there's anyone in this project who's interested, please feel free to expand it using the many references attached (or any other sources you can find), it would be much appreciated. You can move it to mainspace whenever without having to ask or notify me, there's no WP:OWNERSHIP. Left guide (talk) 09:26, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Left guide, this topic seems to already covered at Goal (sports)#Gridiron football. I would recommend improving that section and maybe creating a redirect for Uprights to that section. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:29, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it seems too minor enough to stand as an independent article. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 22:09, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gonzo fan2007 and Dissident93: I appreciate the feedback. Honestly though, I respectfully disagree because from researching the sources, at least a few of them go into in-depth detail on the design, construction, assembly, and installation of the uprights, which seems too tangential and off-topic for other existing articles which are mainly focused on football rules and gameplay. Hopefully, the writer's block will go away soon. :( Left guide (talk) 23:10, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You might also find SIGCOV discussing the evolution of the goal posts -- which have changed significantly (both in configuration and location) over the history of the game. One question, though: Is "uprights" the formal/common name? I'd generally thought of them as goal posts. Cbl62 (talk) 02:16, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cbl62: Well some of the sources I researched discussed that too, but that seems at least somewhat replicated by other already-existing articles. I'm mainly hoping to fill in holes or gaps in the encyclopedia, particularly for aspects that seem beyond the scope of existing articles (such as engineering, construction, assembly). Feel free to examine the sources if you haven't already and I think you'll see what I mean. As to your question, both terms seem used, maybe it varies by region. My main reason for preferring "uprights" is that it seems like more of a unique and distinguishing term for gridiron football, whereas "goal posts" seems more widely-used in other sports (i.e. soccer, hockey, etc.) and therefore more ambiguous. Left guide (talk) 02:59, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:COMMONNAME, the article should be based on the common name. You should do some sampling to see which is, in fact, most common. If that leads to "goal posts", the new page could be disambiguated with a "gridiron football" qualifier. Cbl62 (talk) 03:12, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

High school stats table

So for players that set state/national high school records, would a stats table still be considered too trivial to include? I ask because I've never seen such a thing in over a decade editing player articles. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 22:08, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for 1920 Buffalo All-Americans season

1920 Buffalo All-Americans season has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 17:58, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]