Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject National Football League (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject iconThis page 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Wikipedia:WikiProject National Football League:

HS labeling conventions when city name in HS name[edit]

Edday1051 (talk · contribs) and I cannot agree on the following issue, so I'm asking for additional opinions. The labeling scheme of high schools in our NFL player infobox so far has been city (state) school name, for instance

Very often, however, the city name is part of the school's "common name". So far, we handled these cases like this:

If the high school name is basically the city name only, we just wrote

The issue between Edday1051 (talk · contribs) and me is now about Paramus Catholic High School in Paramus, New Jersey. Should the label in Jabrill Peppers' and Rashan Gary's infobox be


This is a matter of preferred style as much as it is about consistency, so please leave you comments. --bender235 (talk) 20:32, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Under the standard naming scheme it was "Paramus (NJ) Catholic." This is wrong as it makes it appear that the school name is "Catholic High School." The official name of the school is "Paramus Catholic high school" and should be noted as such. Under the standard naming scheme, the correct version should be "Paramus (NJ) Paramus Catholic." I'm fine with this version as well, but I changed it to "Paramus Catholic (NJ)" as I felt having Paramus twice was superfluous. I had this same discussion with another user and we came to the agreement that my version was correct. Bender keeps bringing up other examples like "Northwestern" and "Poly" as an argument against, but there are obvious differences here. "Northwestern" and "Poly" are the colloquial versions used for Miami Northwestern and Long Beach Poly, so I think it is okay to use those names for the school name. Oppositely, nobody would refer to Paramus Catholic as "Catholic." If you are in Los Angeles and you say you go to Poly, people will know exactly what you are talking about. If you are in Bergen County and you say you go to "Catholic," people will look at you with a puzzled look. Bergen Catholic? Paramus Catholic? There are two versions that are correct here and that is either "Paramus (NJ) Paramus Catholic" or my shortened version "Paramus Catholic (NJ)" Edday1051 (talk) 20:49, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
As a reality check, outside of Miami or Long Beach, people will not associate just "Northwestern" or just "Poly" with either school. On the flip side, a person in Paramus, NJ, will cause no ambiguity by saying "I attend the Catholic High School." In other words: I doubt the validity of this line of reasoning. --bender235 (talk) 23:24, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
as a reality check, you again are avoiding the actual argument. You keep deflecting and talking about "Poly" and "Northwestern" when that is not the argument. The argument isn't whether we should only put "Northwestern" or "Poly" alone in the infobox. Nobody here is arguing that. On the other hand, the argument is whether the school name should only be "Catholic" for "Paramus Catholic." That should be an unequivocal no. Considering Poly and Northwestern are two well known high school football powerhouses, I guarantee you a lot more people know about Poly and Northwestern than a "Catholic high school" in Paramus, New Jersey lol. Yeah you really are a German who knows nothing about America. You really think people will just automatically associate "Paramus" and "Catholic?" with "(NJ)" sandwiched in between? That is idiotic. Why make it ambiguous when you can just clearly state "Paramus Catholic" and leave no doubt. Again, this whole argument comes down to you thinking that "Northwestern" or "Poly" is equivalent to "Catholic." I understand English is not your first language and your knowledge of America and geography is awful, but this is pretty simple to understand. Edday1051 (talk) 02:57, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
and for the record, even though this is just part of the deflection of the actual argument by Bender, I would be for the change of the Northwestern and Poly names to "Miami Northwestern (FL)" and "Long Beach Poly (CA)." I think we should treat any high school name with a city or town as part of the name as the same as the high school names that are the same for the school and city like one of the examples bender wrote above. Again, I don't mind the three name template for something like "Northwestern" because as I've said a million times already, "Northwestern" and "Poly" are the common colloquial names for the school, unlike "Catholic," which is not at all a name that anyone would say to refer to Paramus Catholic. This is the point that underlies this whole argument, which our German friend just does not seem to understand at all. Edday1051 (talk) 03:06, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm living in the US. But thanks for the nationalist ad hominem. I'm not going to debate with you anymore, you have disqualified yourself from this discussion per WP:NPA. --bender235 (talk) 00:27, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
is this what you do when you lose the argument? You take your ball and go home? I only guessed you were a non-native English speaker because this whole argument boils down to you believing that "Poly" and "Northwestern" is considered to the be the same as "Catholic." This is a mistake only a non-native English speaker would make. Then I go to your page and it turns out you are a native German speaker. No surprise there. What in the world does me bringing that up have anything to do with nationalism? I'm sure as a non-German speaker, I would make a similar mistake if we were talking about something similar with the way German schools are named. Only difference is I would realize I made a mistake once someone corrected me. And even though I gave you a clear explanation over and over again, you remained stubborn and unwilling to even consider the possibility that you were wrong here. Edday1051 (talk) 13:45, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog. --bender235 (talk) 02:14, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
I accept your apology and appreciate you finally admitting you were wrong. It happens to the best of us. Edday1051 (talk) 04:10, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Actually this was a response to your null argument of "I see you're German, so you must have no clue. I'm American, so respect my authority on the matter." But nevermind. --bender235 (talk) 14:50, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
dude, when someone offers you a way out of a bad situation, just take it. You admitted to something that makes you look even worse in this whole thing and I offered you a nice little olive branch and there you go again not understanding small nuances of American English. You sure you are American? You just play one on TV, right? Edday1051 (talk) 20:59, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a competition, 'dude.' We had a debate on which way to implement the current naming scheme, and the (unexpected) reaction from the community was to abolish the current scheme all together. There is no winners and losers. We are in this for a common goal. --bender235 (talk) 16:09, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I've always hated this naming scheme and have no idea why we can't just go with the article name for simplicity. Does the convoluted format come from college scouting reports or something? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 07:39, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
The current naming scheme for HS is an extension of the naming scheme for colleges (like "Miami (OH)" or "California (PA)"). --bender235 (talk) 22:01, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Which are rare-ish exceptions that are used for disambiguating from the primary usage of the name. Not sure why we took the standard form from that. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 04:55, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Personally, I have no problem with "Paramus Catholic (NJ)" see as it's the schools full name. That, or "Paramus (NJ) Paramus Catholic". (talk page stalker) CrashUnderride 16:51, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
You'd still pick the second example over just going with the easy to read (and article name) of Paramus Catholic High School or Paramus Catholic? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 04:57, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I agree with Dissident93 that the current <city> (<state>) <school name> format used in football inboxes is unnecessarily cryptic. Aside from niche followers of the national high school football scene, this format is non-intuitive. Non-football fans who attended the high school wouldn't be familiar with the format. Take Josh Rosen, soon to be in the NFL. He went to St. John Bosco High School in Bellflower, California, but his infobox lists "Bellflower (CA) St. John Bosco". Now if anyone asks me which HS I went to, I mention the HS name, not the city and state first. UCLA's website lists Rosen's HS as "St. John Bosco"[1]. MaxPreps' last football poll lists the school as "St. John Bosco (Bellflower, CA)".[2] <school name> (<city>, <state>) would be so much more intuitive to the average reader, and avoids issues like above whether to repeat the city name or not. It is also the WP format used in basketball bios. Keep it simple, for readers and editors alike.—Bagumba (talk) 05:19, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I like the idea. But how would this scheme look like for Paramus Catholic High School? Paramus Catholic (Paramus, NJ)? Or in general, for high schools that only have their city's name, like Auburn High School? Do we make it Auburn (Auburn, AL) or just Auburn (AL). The advantage of the existing scheme was, I guess, that there was little need for exceptions to the rule. --bender235 (talk) 02:10, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Just look at the way it's presented on the pages of NBA players. They have the school name(City, State) whether the name of the school and city are the same or not. With the city and state together inside the parentheses, it actually doesn't look superfluous, it actually just makes everything look clearer. The first name is the high school and then city and state in the parentheses. Very clear to the reader even in cases where the school and city have the same name. For your example, you would just present it: Auburn (Auburn, Alabama). I think in these situations where the school and city have the same name, you could put city and state on the second line, so it doesn't appear superfluous, but here with Iowa Falls on Nick Collison's page it actually doesn't look bad on the same line. With Carmelo Anthony and Jordan Bell, the city and state are on the second line. Both look fine to me. Edday1051 (talk) 04:22, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
I'd personally just settle on Paramus Catholic with no mention of city/state, but this would still be an major improvement over the current method. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 06:16, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
I agree there's no need to repeat a city name. In the case of Paramus Catholic or any school where the city is included in the school name, it should be either Paramus Catholic or "Paramus Catholic (NJ)", but not "Paramus Catholic (Paramus, NJ)". Cbl62 (talk) 07:09, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Just to be clear: I'm not clinging to the current naming scheme, all I'd like to see is consistency. For this, I'd like to see a rule established that guides even the corner cases. How about this for a first draft:
Suggestions for improvement? --bender235 (talk) 14:50, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
  • That looks quite reasonable and efficient. Cbl62 (talk) 19:54, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm not opposed to Bender's new naming format. It's infinitely better than what we have now, but I just look at the NBA player pages and think why are we not just going with that. Just have school name(City and State) no matter what. This way any sticklers for consistency have nothing to complain about and it shows all of the relevant information in a fairly clear way. By only putting "Paramus Catholic," you are just assuming a reader is aware that "Paramus" is a city or town in the state of NJ. The vast majority of readers will not be aware of the formatting exception for names that are the same for the school and city. I think the way the high schools are presented here with Carmelo Anthony and Jordan Bell is just perfect It's all of the relevant information right in your face. There is no guessing what city the school is located in and what is the school name. It's all there without even taking up all that much space. Edday1051 (talk) 21:12, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Infoboxes should not be all encompassing. The school itself matters way more than its physical location on earth. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 03:26, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm not sure adding the city name is "all encompassing." No one here is suggesting we add the name of the school's mascot and the year of the school's founding. On a more serious note, the city here is important because you will have a number of cases where there is a common high school name like Central High School, even within the same state. Those cases would need to be differentiated with the city name. I don't see a reason to create formatting exceptions for these special cases and again, this appeases the sticklers for formatting consistency. Additionally, I can't speak for everyone, but isn't location a big part of the reason why someone would even look up what high school a player went to. I know that is the case for me personally. Outside of the handful of well known high school powerhouse teams like Bishop Gorman or Mater Dei, I don't so much care that player X went to some random high school named "Mount Bum." I want to know where the hell "Mount Bum" is located. Again, referencing Carmelo Anthony, I can just look at the infobox and right away know that the two high schools he attended are located in Towson, MD and Mouth of Wilson, VA. I don't have to click on the high schools and go to their pages to find this information or scroll through the body of Carmelo Anthony's page. It's all conveniently right there in the infobox and it's not like it takes up a ton of space. It's one extra line and in the case of Nick Collison, it's all on the same line. Edday1051 (talk) 07:38, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
Agree with Dissident93, disagree with Edday. Jordan Bell is a perfect example of what NOT to do; in that case, the infobox discussion of the high school is just as long as the discussion in the body of the article. The extra detail should be saved for the body. Cbl62 (talk) 08:13, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
that is exactly my argument for the inclusion of city and state in the infobox. The fact that I don't have to scroll to the body for the information is argument for, not against. Isn't that the whole point of the infobox? Were adding literally one additional word. I'll repeat this part from above comment: "On a more serious note, the city here is important because you will have a number of cases where there is a common high school name like Central High School, even within the same state. Those cases would need to be differentiated with the city name. I don't see a reason to create formatting exceptions for these special cases and again, this appeases the sticklers for formatting consistency." For this reason, you have to include the city the high school is located in the infobox. We could make special rules for these cases, but why? Just keep everything consistent. We need the NBA editors to come join the NFL wiki. The goal here should be to make things as clear as possible. I mean no disrespect to all the NFL editors, there's very few of us and overall you guys do a great job, but it's like our aim is to make things as ambiguous as possible. The idea that the clear, but concise way the high school is presented for Jordan Bell and NBA players is "what NOT to do," while we've had this odd three name template for high schools on NFL player pages for a long as I can remember is this discussion in an nutshell. Edday1051 (talk) 10:43, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
The same argument can be made for including every bit of trivial information in them, then. I'd argue to remove the city/state from schools in NBA player articles too. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:55, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
so for common high school names like Central High School. In the state of Alabama, there are two "Central" high in Tuscaloosa and the other in Phenix City. We shouldn't differentiate these two high schools by simply adding the city name because the addition of 3 additional words to the infobox is just simply too cumbersome. The internet and our low tech internet devices just would not be able to to handle that. Again, the goal here seems to be to provide pertinent information in the most ambiguous way possible. Edday1051 (talk) 23:29, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm with Bagumba; this is unnecessarily convoluted. I would also add that the manual of style recommends against the use of postal abbreviations such as NJ in text and in infoboxes. That's not writ, but we shouldn't depart from it unless there's a great reason to do so. If this convention is based on Miami then I'd call that a doubtful precedent. That's a strange situation, where the real world disambiguates with OH, usually "Miami of Ohio" when spoken, to avoid the ambiguity. Mackensen (talk) 05:45, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Agree with Dissident93 and Bagumba. Cbl62 (talk) 06:29, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
nice to see a consensus here. I'm just puzzled why it has taken this long for a discussion on changing the high school format. There is no reason at all for the city to come first before the high school name. Look at the way high schools are presented for NBA players:Carmelo Anthony. It takes up a bit more space is the only negative, but I think we can sacrifice an extra line for clarity. Look at the way Poly is presented here: Jordan Bell. It's just perfect. You have the entire official name of the school and since the city and state is presented on the second line, Long Beach appearing twice doesn't feel superfluous, as it would if it were on the same line. I'm all for changing the high school format to the NBA style. Edday1051 (talk) 13:32, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Agree with Dissident et al., this standard has always been odd to me. Lizard (talk) 20:57, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I think I'm in agreement with Dissident et al as well. Another wrinkle to consider: much of my relevant editing on this point concerns the infoboxes of the college sports coaches, principally college football coaches. I've generally followed the form of the school name with "High School" abbreviated to "HS" and then the state code in parenthesis attached to the end. See: Hayden Fry, Gerry Faust, and Len Casanova for some examples. In this context, I think it makes sense to explicitly convey high schools with the "HS" to differentiate them from college and pro teams. Rikster2 has objected to the my use of parenthetical state codes in this manner for college basketball coaches on at least one occasion, offering that it's a "football thing". Whatever the case, we should come up with a unified scheme to represent high school in the contexts of all sports. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:27, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Important to note that in many cases basketball has different concerns than football. Basketball is a global sport and we have people from all over the world who read and edit basketball articles (today's All-American is tomorrow's Serbian League All-Star) and they often aren't as familiar with state abbreviations or high school conventions. So we pretty much never use state abbreviations (I think they are just in the recruit templates) and try to just put the name of the school (minus "high school" because it is clearly in the high school field) plus full city, state. It is just clearer to the reader, even if it takes a little more space. As for the issue jweiss mentions, if a coach has a high school in their coaching tenure we just put the HS name and "HS" (e.g. "Auburn HS") at the end with a hotlink. I don't think we need to come to a consensus way of listing (I don't change them if the coach is primarily a different sport than basketball), but if we do I would like to see abbreviations and parenthesis largely eliminated for space/readability concerns. The high school stint with fuller info should be documented in the prose anyway. Rikster2 (talk) 20:58, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
I agree with Bender's proposal of: schools with "unique" names are listed schoolname (city, state) and schools with city names are listed schoolname (state). However we should spell out the state name, since as Mackensen says, the MOS advises against postal abbreviations even in the infobox. Lizard (talk) 16:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
Spelling out the state makes the label too long, in my opinion: Junípero Serra (San Mateo, California), or Century (Bismarck, North Dakota). --bender235 (talk) 18:18, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I agree, and would much rather abbreviations but I'm a stickler for following the MOS. Then again, we've been using abbreviations for this long and no one has brought it up as an issue. I can go with it if everyone else does. Lizard (talk) 18:46, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
Again, we could just go with the school's name without any mention of its location if this turns out to be an issue. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:52, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
spelling out the entire state name is too cumbersome? It's like the addition of 8 characters at most if we spell out the state. We are adding like 3 words at most to the infobox with the inclusion of city and state. For the sake of clarity and consistency, just include city and state like the nba player pages for every scenario, whether the school name is same for school and city. It simplifies everything and it is crystal clear to the reader. You can't not include city and state because there are cases where there are common high school names like "Central." Some of them are even within the same state like the Alabama example in my comment above. I'm all for the new bender format where we do include city and state, but my only issue is the exception that we make for the high schools with names that are the same for school and city. As I've said above, why make special rules and complicate things? Just include city and state for every situation and keep things consistent. It also assumes the reader will figure out why some high schools have city and state together, and others only include the state. Using Towson Catholic as an example, we should just assume the reader knows Towson is a city in Maryland? I didn't even know that. I knew about Towson University...had no idea Towson was an actual city. Look at the way it's presented with Carmelo Anthony. I'm not sure how anyone looks at that and thinks that isn't the way we should be doing it. Were adding one additional line at most. You guys are discussing this like were contemplating adding the school mascot, the all time high school football record of the school, and all of the head coaches in the history of the school. Edday1051 (talk) 23:58, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
Maybe it's just me, but I'd prefer the new scheme to have as little exceptions as possible. --bender235 (talk) 23:41, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
by adding city and state to all scenarios, you create exactly zero exceptions. Like I already said above, not including city and state like dissident suggests, that creates a huge problem with common school names like Central High School. Edday1051 (talk) 00:00, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
To be fair, the infobox isn't the place to be specific. It's important to remember the infobox is merely an extension of the article; it's not meant to stand alone. It's meant to give the reader general information, and if they want to know any specifics (such as the location of Central High School) they can look in the main text of the article. So I'd be fine with excluding city and state. Lizard (talk) 03:24, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
lizard, I understand the infobox is not a place to write a short story about the history of the city the high school is located in. I hope my sarcasm is not coming off as abrasive, I really mean no disrespect, but I find the push back on this very odd. It's like I'm suggesting we include the entire mayoral history of the city and every principal in the school's history. I mean, is it really that big of a deal to include the city and state of the school in question? It just seems pretty standard thing to do, particularly in the situations I outlined in a previous comment. If player x attended Central High School, we should make it crystal clear that we are referring to the one in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, as opposed to the one in Phenix City, Alabama, or the one Grand Junction, Colorado. Why make a reader click on an additional link to find this information? It's like our goal here as wikipedia editors is to make things as ambiguous as possible. It works great on NBA player pages. The precedent has already been set and it's not like it takes up some absurd amount of space in the infobox where that is some big issue. It's literally 3 extra words in the infobox. I'm of the opinion the infobox can handle 3 more words in the interest of clarity and consistency. Edday1051 (talk) 04:50, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
The three extra words should be in the body of the article. We don't include a parenthetical (City, State) for colleges, so why do it for high schools. An NFL's player's high school is not so critical as to warrant two lines in every infobox. And the high school, as displayed in the infobox, in almost all cases has a wikilink, so a reader who is so interested in the precise location of the high school can find it by looking in the body or simply clicking on the wikilink. Cbl62 (talk) 06:45, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
there are only 130 D-1 football programs, while there are more than 30,000 high schools/secondary schools in the United States. Colleges are far more well known to the general public than high schools are. And how many colleges share the same name? The only one I can think of off the top of my head is Miami University and University of Miami, which we differentiate with "(OH)" and "(FL)." High schools on the other hand, there has to be hundreds of examples of schools that share the same exact name, but located in different cities and states. I've already brought up the case of Central High School, where nearly every state has one or more schools named "Central High School." Many of them have multiple schools of that name in the same state. Another great example is Independence High School. If I counted correctly, there are 14 "Independence High School" in California alone. Again, why are we making it harder for readers to find out which "Independence High School" the infobox is referring to? I mean, the whole point of Wikipedia is to give people quick and easy access to information. Why are we making them click on an additional link to find out which "Independence High School" player X attended. This is a no brainer here. There are simply way too many high schools with identical names where we have to have some form of differentiation and the simplest way is to just simply include city and state along with the high school name. Edday1051 (talk) 08:20, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Agree with Edday1051. Few high schools are nationally known, and even then it would be by niche, diehard, national high school football fanatics. Without the added context of city and state, we may as well remove high schools from infoboxes altogether. However, my preference remains to list the HS with format <high_school_name> (<city>, <nonabbrev_state>) It's the same format already used in basketball articles. It's also not much longer than the existing football format, which is generally <city> (<abbrev_state>) <high_school_name>Bagumba (talk) 15:28, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

An infobox is supposed to summarize the truly essential elements of a bio. I frankly think including two lines of detail in the infobox about a professional football player's "high school" is pure fancruft. The optimal solution IMO would be to eliminate such trivia from the infobox altogether, but if the majority view is for inclusion, keep it simple with no more than one line devoted to such nonsense. Cbl62 (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Other than football/basketball, no other bio infoboxes that I'm aware of even include a parameter for high school. Compare Template:Infobox ice hockey player, Template:Infobox baseball biography, Template:Infobox football biography, Template:Infobox sportsperson, Template:Infobox person, Template:Infobox tennis biography, Template:Infobox golfer, Template:Infobox gymnast, etc. The inclusion of such information in the box is part of a trend toward inclusion of all sorts of recruiting web site fancruft into football bios. Cbl62 (talk) 17:17, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
There is a pretty big difference between the coverage high school basketball and football get vs. (say) baseball and hockey. For better or for worse, it is essential info for basketball at least. Rikster2 (talk) 17:31, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
I'll reiterate what rickster said, comparing high school football and basketball players to other sports is just silly. Look at how big high school recruiting is in football and basketball. There are multiple websites that are entirely dedicated to high school recruiting. ESPN spends an entire day televising national signing day. With basketball and football players, what high school they attended is an essential piece of information that unequivocally, should be part of their respective infoboxes. You list tennis, golfers, and gynmasts? A lot of those athletes don't even attend high school or their club teams are far more important. Hockey players in particular, especially top level Canadian players play junior hockey, instead of for a high school. For baseball players, high school baseball recruiting is not a point of interest for the general public, especially compared to basketball and football recruiting, but I would not be opposed to listing high schools for baseball players. Edday1051 (talk) 01:17, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
There's basketball players that go pro directly out of HS, so that's another distinction for hoops. I'd be ok with removing HS for NFL players; however, the format discussion is still relevant for college players.—Bagumba (talk) 12:37, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
I agree that inclusion of high school in the infobox is more justifiable for college players, but once a player is elevated to the NFL, it is no longer "essential" information. Cbl62 (talk) 14:47, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
@Cbl62: Since one of your concerns is keeping HS on one line, would you be amendable to <high_school_name> (<city>, <abbrev_state>)? The state would be abbreviated, and the other components are the same as the existing format, just reordered. With all due respect to MOS:POSTABBR, I think using {{abbr}} would be a reasonable exception (WP:IAR) in this case.—Bagumba (talk) 12:59, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
An abbreviated state is better than whole state names like Connecticut or Rhode Island, but there's also no justification for repeating a city name when it's already in the school name. Consider the case of Gavin Escobar. If we use the full high school name and then repeat the city name and the state with no postal code, the high school consumes a ridiculous three lines in the infobox: "Rancho Santa Margarita Catholic HS (Rancho Santa Margarita, California)". There is no justification for such infobox clutter since (a) the high school is not "essential" information, and (b) anyone seeking more information on the high school can either scan left to the body of the article or click the wikilink for the high school. Less is better in the infobox. Cbl62 (talk) 14:47, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
you would just place city and state on the second line. This idea that a few extra words clutters the infobox is just ridiculous. Look at Jordan Bell, it looks totally fine. All of the information you need to know in two lines. There is no confusion and it maintains consistency across all examples. How is less information better in the infobox? As a matter of fact, we should put more information in the infobox. What is the point of the infobox then? The fact that I can go to career history and quickly see what teams the player has played on without scrolling to the body of the article is the entire point of the infobox. Give quick access to basic information at the very top of the page. The college and high school the player attended is the exact type of basic information that belongs in the infobox, in which a reader should not have to click on an additional link or scroll to the body of the article to discover. Is clarity, consistency, and quick access not enough justification? I can't speak for everyone, but I often look up what high school a player attended. Considering how big high school football and recruiting has become, it is a point of interest for many football fans. I do the same for college and NFL players. Did they go to some powerhouse high school like Bishop Gorman or were they able to make it to the pros from a high school in some small town in Texas. It's particularly nice to have in the infobox as it is right below the place of birth. You can see whether the player attends a high school in his hometown/place of birth or has since moved and attends a different high school. We should not have to force a reader to have to scroll through the body of an article or click on an additional link to find such basic biographical information. Edday1051 (talk) 21:59, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
forgot to mention this. Bagumba, the one year college rule was implemented years ago, unless you're referring to older players still in the league. And just to add to this idea that the high school is non-essential information. I could not disagree more with this. What high school you attended is essential information for any person. Think about what high school you attended and think about how that shaped you as a person. Now think about that in the context of a football player. Statistically, you are far more likely to make it to the NFL if you attended a high school in Florida, California, or Texas. In 2016, 34% of NFL players attended a high school from one of these three states.[3] If you attend a football powerhouse like Bishop Gorman, you are far more likely to get recruited by a major college program, which in turn paves a clearer path to the NFL. The high school also tells you where a player spent their teen years and also the level of talent they played around. Not only on their own team, but also from the high school league they played in. This is all part of their biographical history, especially in the context of being a football player. This doesn't become less important when they become NFL players. It is all part of their path to becoming a professional NFL player. Edday1051 (talk) 22:57, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
A person's high school is not "essential information for any person", at least not in the Wikipedia infobox sense. Were that so, then Template:Infobox person would include a parameter for it. It does not. The only Wikipedia infoboxes that include such recruiting-web-site fancruft/trivia are those for American football and basketball players. Cbl62 (talk) 18:54, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
yes because the standard for wikipedia infoboxes or any other editable part of wikipedia are not subject to change and the whole point of wikipedia is all about being static. Why are even having this discussion at all if things cannot be changed for better or for worse. Again, excuse my sarcasm, but the counter arguments you are presenting are just ridiculous. I've countered each and every one and then you just move the goal posts with another inane counter point. You are the "contrarian" guy right? This discussion went from changing the wording format, then to whether we should include city and state, then to whether we should just remove the high school altogether. You've disagreed and moved the goal posts every step of the way. By the end of this discussion, you are going to make the case that we should should get rid of wikipedia altogether. Just shutdown the entire website lol. Whatever discussion there is for the relevance of high school for other biographical pages is a whole another discussion. Like you said, the high school parameter does exist for football and basketball players and they exist for a reason. This discussion, pertaining to NFL players, the case has been made clear why high school is a relevant piece of information that absolutely should be included in the infobox. Edday1051 (talk) 20:38, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
Not sure why you are personalizing this. I suspect we both share the same objective, which is to improve Wikipeida, not to "shutdown [sic] the entire website" as you suggest. We simply disagree as to how much space should be consumed in a football player's infobox by the high school he attended. Not the end of the world either way. Cbl62 (talk) 22:08, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
sorry man, it wasn't my intention to make it personal. I just wanted to point out that it just feels to me you are just being the "contrarian" guy. You and others may disagree, but I feel I've presented valid counterpoints to whatever disagreements you may have had and you just keep on moving the goalposts. I give you a reason why including the city and state is important, then suddenly you are in favor of just removing the high school parameter altogether. I give you a reason why high school is particularly relevant for football players, then it's...well other biographical infoboxes in other parts of wikipedia don't include high school...etc. This has been the same pattern over and over. Edday1051 (talk) 22:24, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Well we're in a pickle. Looks like everyone agrees the current format needs to go. But from what I gather:

  • Bagumba and Edday favor the basketball format of schoolname (city, state)
  • Bender is for the "unique names are listed schoolname (city, state) and schools with city names are listed schoolname (state)" format
  • Dissident and Cbl are for listing just the school name

I just wanna see it changed but ideally I also think we should list just the school name. Crash Underride, Jweiss11, Mackensen, and Rikster2 have also commented but haven't taken a side. Lizard (talk) 21:12, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Comment I don’t contribute enough to the project to feel like I should have a say if I won’t be doing the work to implement. Jweiss just pinged me and I thought I’d give context as to why basketball does it the way we do. Rikster2 (talk) 01:25, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I favor the third option but wouldn't mind the first. I fully object to the 2nd option as it's not really any better than the current version. (that being unnecessary complicated) ~ Dissident93 (talk) 01:40, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
What exactly is complicated about it? Whenever the school name is the city name, we simply make sure there is no duplicate. So no "Pahokee (Pahokee, FL)", "Auburn (Auburn, AL)", "Midland (Midland, TX)". How is that complicated? --bender235 (talk) 15:30, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Because it could be even simpler by getting rid of the city/state. We don't include this info for colleges, so why do this for high schools? Because that's what scouting reports do? Using that logic is how we got to this bad format in the first place. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:03, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

At some point we should start implementing the new scheme. We do agree, as I see it, on the basic scheme of School name (city, state), as in

but we still have to come to an agreement on the city-named schools. Is it

As mentioned before, I prefer the latter. But my #1 goal here is to simply establish a consistent scheme. --bender235 (talk) 16:09, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

  • If these are the only four valid options left (I haven't paid much attention to the conversation above, it's gotta too long-winded), then option #4 is my personal favorite, as its the most simple. School name + state abbreviation, we don't need to list city names here. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:05, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
@Dissident93: The other option proposed was listing just the school name only with no parenthetical for city or state. I had favored this one, and from the comments above it appeared you did too. Lizard also stated that "ideally I also think we should list just the school name." Accordingly, and from those casting votes thus far, it appeared that was the majority view. Cbl62 (talk) 14:25, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I prefer this one over all others. We don't mention location for colleges (in the infobox), so why do it for high schools? I would just go with Mater Dei and nothing more, although I'd still support Mater Dei (CA) if we don't go with that as it's still a vast improvement over the current format. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:44, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
I don't think that's a good idea. As was mentioned earlier in this discussion, there are only a couple of hundred of college, so there is little room for ambiguity. In contrast, there are tenths of thousands of high schools, lots of them with similar names. We should distinguish them a bit in these infoboxes. --bender235 (talk) 22:16, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
I am in agreement with Dissident93. Colleges are far more significant for a college player and we don't burden the infobox with city/state details for colleges. For both colleges and high schools, such secondary details can be gleaned from either clicking on the wikilink or referring to the body of the article -- it's just not essential information. The numeric count of colleges is a bit of a red herring, but in any event there are actually far more than "only a couple hundred colleges" with football programs. Try 760: FBS (130), FCS (124), Division II (169), Division III (249), NAIA (88). Cbl62 (talk) 02:14, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
So I skimmed through this and don't think a straight forward answer was given for this, what should be done for when the the name has the city in it, for example my hometown uses the city name and what side of town the school is on.--Rockchalk717 03:06, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
it has come full and Bender are somehow on the same side of the argument now lol. The only thing I don't agree with Bender on is the exception we make for the schools in which the school name is the same for city and school. Just keep things consistent and list city and state no matter what. It works totally fine on the NBA pages and it doesn't clutter the infobox like dissdent and cbl claim. It's literally 2-3 additional words. It's not a big deal, especially for pertinent information like high schools. A lot of this argument is going in circles. I've already explained why high schools are pertinent information and it unequivocally belongs in the infobox of NFL players. Secondly, the other option seems to be to just get rid of city and state and that is another one that I've already explained why that has major problems. As I've already stated, there are over 25,000 high schools/secondary schools in the United States. Many of which share the same name like Independence High School or Central High School. There absolutely needs to be some differentiation and the simplest way to do that is input city and state. Edday1051 (talk) 09:21, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
CBL, how is that a red herring? First of all, even if you include every college football program, that is still only 760. That is still nowhere near the 25,000+ high schools in the United States and how many of these colleges and universities share the same name where we would need a method of differentiation with city and state? Secondly, that still doesn't take away the fact that colleges are far more well known to the public than high schools are. I mean even high school powerhouses like Bishop Gorman are helluva lot less well known that any major power 5 university. If you took a poll of 100 people and asked them what city and state Bishop Gorman is many do you think would answer correctly? Now ask them the same question for the University of Washington or Stanford. I'm guessing Seattle and Palo Alto will be answers more commonly heard than Las Vegas, Nevada for Bishop Gorman. Edday1051 (talk) 09:31, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
"How is it a red herring?" Because you're missing the real point which is that infoboxes should be limited to essential information, and the city/state location of an NFL player's high school is miles away from being essential information. Even assuming arguendo that the point were not a red herring, it is certainly true that most people don't know where Bishop Gorman HS is located. But it is equally true that they don't know where Bethel College (KS)/Bethel University (TN), Anna Maria College (MA)/Ave Maria University (FL), Benedictine College (KS)/Benedictine University (IL), Wayne State University (MI)/Wayne State College (NE), or Franklin College (IN)/Franklin & Marshall College (PA), all of which have college football programs, are located. The city/state location for these high schools, colleges, and universities are minor details, and readers seeking such minor details can find them by clicking on the wikilink or reading the body of the article. The infobox should be limited to essential information. Cbl62 (talk) 10:13, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
aren't those differentiated in the infobox with the state abbreviation? If not, they absolutely should be, the same way we do it for "Miami (FL)" and "Miami (OH)". If we list "Independence High School" for player x, noting that we are referring to the one in North Carolina, as opposed to the one in that not essential information? Making sure it is crystal clear to the reader which "Independence High School" we are referring to? How is that information not essential? So we are going to force a reader to click on an additional link or scroll through the body of the article to obtain this information when we can just clearly add that information to the infobox? Edday1051 (talk) 12:31, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
We just disagree. You view the city/state where Dick Butkus went to high school to be essential information to his biography. I do not. Let's let the vote initiated by Bagumba run its course. We can then all abide by the result. Cbl62 (talk) 13:53, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
the precedent has already been set with nba player pages. Just look at the way high schools are presented here: Lebron James...Jordan Bell...Nick Collison.....what in the hell are we even arguing about? Why are we not just using the NBA is just so straightforward. Cbl and dissident, you guys are in favor of less information and making people click additional links or scrolling to the body of an article to find information. Lets make it harder for people to find the information they are looking for, which is the complete opposite of the purpose of wikipeida and infoboxes. Edday1051 (talk) 09:51, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Just because the NBA infobox includes trivia doesn't mean we have to follow that. If you're looking at other precedents, the overwhelming majority of infoboxes do not include high schools at all. Cbl62 (talk) 10:13, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
you can read my previous comments addressing the importance of where a player attended high school, specifically for a football player. It's a pretty important part of a football player's biographic history. I don't even think that is even an argument. As for other infoboxes, we can have another discussion about that, but specifically for football and basketball players, I honestly feel that is not even worth a discussion. That is how strongly I believe high school should be pretty standard for football and basketball infoboxes. Edday1051 (talk) 12:31, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

HS convention poll[edit]

After lots of discussion above, it seems useful to have a poll to see where we stand on listing high schools. Please !vote on one of the options below in its respective section, or feel free to add a new option.—Bagumba (talk) 10:46, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Keep status quo: <city> (<state>) <school>[edit]

  1. I know I'm adding this long after this discussion of a small number of users has run its course, but I prefer this format. It's cleaner, more visually inline with other material in the info box, usually only takes up a single line (like other infobox items are designed to be), and does so without sacrificing ambiguity. I don't think the concern that this format is only understood by hardcore recruiting or sports fans is warranted. Codifying standards for names I'm in favor of, but the two-line line-break format I am not. Especially when the city and state in parenthesis are both given separate wikilinks. Just make it one if we're actually going to do that format. GreenRunner0 06:56, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
    City and state should just link to the city per MOS:SEAOFBLUE.—Bagumba (talk) 07:06, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Use basketball bio format: <school> (<city>, <state>)[edit]

  1. Most people would not recognize the school name alone, and the location of where they went to school is actually more useful than the school name for most readers. The current football format (<city> (<state>) <school>) is a format most readers are not familiar with except for die-hard high school fans who follow national publications.—Bagumba (talk) 10:46, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  2. I'm generally in favor of this option, with a fall-back simplification of <school> (<state>) if the <school> and <city> are identical, i.e. "Pahokee (FL)" instead of "Pahokee (Pahokee, FL)", and "Auburn (AL)" instead of "Auburn (Auburn, AL)". --bender235 (talk) 13:36, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
    Sure. We can easily discuss minor tweaks like that if this general option is chosen.—Bagumba (talk) 16:11, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  3. I'd say I'm good with this one over the others. (talk page stalker) CrashUnderride 14:29, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  4. Edday1051 (talk) 15:31, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  5. My vote is for this one. Even though different sports have different projects, we can still try to find some consistencies between them. But we would need to know what to do in the case of Darren Sproles's high school for example? Would we do Olathe East (KS) or East (Olathe, KS)?? --Rockchalk717 21:51, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
    under bender's format, I think it would be "Olathe East (KS)". "East (Olathe, KS)" is just plain wrong IMO. It makes it look like the high school name is "East High School," instead of the official name "Olathe East High School." And this is why I strongly prefer the NBA style, where there are no exceptions. This way the format is consistent across all scenarios. By inputting city and state no matter what, you would have "Olathe East (Olathe, Kansas)." It's clear and concise and there is no confusion about formatting with the nba/no exceptions style. Edday1051 (talk) 10:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
    I agree with you 100%. That's what I figured I just wanted to be sure if that's what the consensus winds up being.--Rockchalk717 16:12, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
    There are really two options here that ought to be split. Bender’s version is preferable (less verbose) to Edday’s IMO, though I still maintain my main vote below.Cbl62 (talk) 16:21, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
    it's one additional line at most and in many cases, it all fits on the same line as is the case here: Russel Westbrook. This idea that it clutters the infobox and it's too verbose is just puzzling to me. It's like were discussing whether we should add a list of every principal in the history of the school to the infobox. Even if it took up 5 lines, I think we can sacrifice a couple additional lines for the sake of clarity and consistency. Consistency is the biggest reason I oppose Bender's format. Just add city and state for all scenarios. Simple. No confusion. I'm glad Santa Margarita Catholic High School was brought up because this is a real tricky one. What happens if there are additional words like "Catholic" or "East," like in the "Olathe East" example. Does "Santa Margarita Catholic" qualify for bender's exception? Technically no, since the city is RANCHO Santa Margarita, but this certainly will bring up confusion and debate under bender's format. Under the NBA format, there is zero confusion or debate. You simply use the standard format and input city and state for every single exceptions. Edday1051 (talk) 21:00, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
    question so would we be looking at Olathe East (Olathe, KS)? That seems more clear as there are lots of "East" high schools or "Washington" high schools... a little more data to me isn't a problem.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:37, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
    @Paulmcdonald: Yes, the listed name should be the school name sans any "High School" ending, i.e. "Olathe East". It should not be bastardized to be ambiguous whether the actual name is "Olathe East High School" or just plain "East High School". It is not OK to rely on a user to click on the link to confirm the real name. Per MOS:LINK: Do not unnecessarily make a reader chase links.—Bagumba (talk) 01:39, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
    So smaller towns where the high school and town are the same would look like this: Concordia (Concordia, KS). Yeah, I support that. might be a little awkward and wordy at times, but I think for consistency and clarity it's worth it.--Paul McDonald (talk) 12:30, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
    @Paulmcdonald: Care to place a formal vote at this point i.e. start line with "#" and add to tally? Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 10:33, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
  6. I generally favor this option, with reasonable exceptions, like bender said, for cases where the school and city name are identical and don't need to be repeated twice. The less ambiguity, the better, generally speaking. Ejgreen77 (talk) 20:10, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
  7. Support --Paul McDonald (talk) 14:44, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

List school name only: <school>[edit]

  1. City/state are unnecessary detail for the infobox and constitutes infobox bloat/clutter. Those interested in the precise location of the players high school or college can simply click on the wikilink or refer to the body of the article. Infobox should be limited to truly essential information. As noted above, the case of Gavin Escobar illustrates the bloat factor of including city/state, stretching the high school name to a ridiculous three lines in the infobox: "Rancho Santa Margarita Catholic (Rancho Santa Margarita, California)". Cbl62 (talk) 13:47, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
    comment It's two lines here: Klay Thompson. You have to use the line break(< br >) + (nowrap) Edday1051 (talk) 15:34, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
    Comment Actually, in the case you stated it would be "Rancho Santa Margarita Catholic (CA)" according to the shortening rule above. --bender235 (talk) 23:31, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
    Except that it's unclear if your proposed shortening rule would be accepted. Edday1051 and Rockchalk have stated that they are opposed to it. Cbl62 (talk) 00:06, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
    The fine tuning can be decided later. The major issue to close first is the general format of using parentheticals or not.—Bagumba (talk) 01:53, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
    Maybe yes, maybe no. As noted above, seems like there's a pretty fundamental split on Bender's proposed shortening rule. Which side to you support, Bagumba? Cbl62 (talk) 02:42, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
    Fundamentally, they 100% agree that it's better to have the city information of the school available. The area open for discussion is the 10% (perhaps) of the cases where the school name already includes the city name, and whether that should be optimized to drop the city name and only list the state. I can go either way on what optimization is needed, and more discussion might sway me. I'm content with only being a tie-breaker on that, if needed. Would you change your !vote if there was more certainty of how something like Santa Margarita Catholic High School was to be handled?—Bagumba (talk) 10:22, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
    I still prefer school name only, but if that does not prevail, I much prefer bender's shortened form, as repetition of a city name (particularly a long city) strike me as the worst of all choices. 14:42, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
    responding to bender's comment above: as I wrote in a previous comment, Santa Margarita Catholic should not even qualify for bender's exception/shortening rule because the city is RANCHO Santa Margarita. The school name does not contain Rancho, so using "Rancho Santa Margarita Catholic (CA)" is just wrong imo. It makes it appear the school name is "Rancho Santa Margarita Catholic," when the actual school name is "Santa Margarita Catholic." And this is exactly why I'm opposed to bender's exception/shortening rule as it just creates additional formatting confusion. Under the no exceptions nba style, were not even having this discussion. You simply input city and state no matter what. Simple. No exceptions. Under both Bender's format and the nba format, the correct version is the way it is presented here: Klay Thompson. Edday1051 (talk) 19:45, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
  2. Per Cbl. Lizard (talk) 15:38, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  3. Per my previous arguments/Cbl. It doesn't matter if it "only takes up one more line", why is nobody arguing for college location with this logic then? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 18:33, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
    comment come on dissident, don't be disingenuous. You were part of the discussion above. Your question was addressed multiple times in that discussion. Edday1051 (talk) 10:45, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
    And my opinions have not changed from anybody's counter-argument thus far. Keep high school location cruft in prose; the infobox is not meant to be all encompassing. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:45, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
    so player x attended Central High School and we should just leave it at that. Let's put them on a treasure hunt to figure out which of the dozens of "Central" High Schools this player attended. The other option is we put city and state right next to the school name in the infobox like they do for NBA player pages. It takes up a whopping extra line in the infobox and in many cases, an additional line isn't even required as is the case here: Nick Collison, Russell Westbrook, Kyle Singler, etc. This argument that it clutters the infobox.....I just don't get it. Nobody here is suggesting we add 50 lines of new information in the infobox. This isn't even about adding city and state as a point of adding additional information just for the sake of adding additional information. City and state is important here to differentiate high schools due to the fact that there are 25,000+ high schools in America and many of them share similar or identical names. If you believe a reader should have to scroll to the body of the article or click on an additional link to find location information, and you believe "clutter" is such a huge issue with infoboxes, then you should be voting to get rid of the high school parameter altogether. Edday1051 (talk) 20:41, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  4. Agree with Cbl62. Listing school's name is enough, because city/state adds unneeded clutter as infobox is supposed to be as short as possible. – Sabbatino (talk) 18:49, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Comment So what was the rationale for using a parenthetical state code for colleges, but not for high schools? Seems it's more needed for high schools given that they are intrinsically lesser-known than colleges. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:15, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Are you referring to exceptions for colleges like Miami (OH)?—Bagumba (talk) 01:45, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
@Bagumba:, sure like Miami (OH) and a host of other lower division colleges and colleges that once had ambiguous names. See the infoboxes of Justa Lindgren, Maurice J. "Clipper" Smith, Bob Reade, Floyd J. Egan, Jeff Devanney, Earl Gartman, etc. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:57, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
@Jweiss11: "Miami (OH)" is common format used in boxscores and even sometimes in prose (New York Times). Sports, or not, Columbia usually brings to mind the New York university, not the Columbia in Oregon that is now University of Portland. So I guess the convention has been to disambiguate colleges instead of forcing users to click, which is also not an option for print versions. At any rate, listing the state does not necessarily have to be all or nothing for both colleges and high schools. With colleges, readers are familiar with the big name ones, even moreso if they are sports fans. Disambiguation can continue to be used on an as-needed basis. Same can't be said for high schools, where most readers wouldn't know the overwhelming majority of them by name only, for example Junípero Serra High School for Tom Brady, let alone when it's some format like "San Mateo (CA) Juniper Serra".—Bagumba (talk) 16:10, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

List school name and state: <school> (<state>)[edit]

Remove high school from the infobox[edit]

Next steps for HS[edit]

If we agree that the consensus is to go with the format of <school> (<city>, <state>), the optimization questions would be whether to alter anything if the city is already in the school name, and whether the state should be abbreviated or not.—Bagumba (talk) 12:34, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

  • Short form where city and school name are the same, e.g., Cleveland Heights (OH) [22 characters long] rather than Cleveland Heights (Cleveland Heights, Ohio) [43 characters], and East St. Louis (IL) [19 characters] rather than East St. Louis (East St. Louis, Illinois) [41 characters]. The short formulation helps to trim excess verbiage with no loss in useful content. Cbl62 (talk) 15:53, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  • in favor of strict, no exceptions nba style by adding exceptions to the rule, the shortening rule only creates confusion and more debate. We are assuming the average reader is knowledgeable about the formatting exceptions. Even most of the editors won't be aware of the formatting exception, except for the few of us that are participating in this discussion. I believe it should be crystal clear what the name of the school is and what city and state that school is located in. Unless you are from the area, you wouldn't know Cleveland Heights is it's own city. With the nba style, it is crystal clear that Cleveland Heights is the name of the high school and the school is located in Cleveland Heights, Ohio. And as I've said in the comment above, what do we do when there is an additional word like "Catholic" or "East" like in "Paramus Catholic" or "Olathe East." Were just adding to the problem here by creating additional formatting exceptions to the base rule. I just don't understand this verbose argument. Were adding 3-4 words at most and for the sake of consistency and clarity, it's well worth it IMO. It works totally fine on the nba pages. And I'm largely against abbreviations as a whole. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and the use of abbreviations should be limited. It should never be assumed that readers are knowledgeable of abbreviations of US states. Granted the vast majority of American football fans are American, but there are surely readers from outside the US that frequent these pages. So to be clear, I'm for no exception nba style, where we input (school name + (city and state)) no matter what for all scenarios/examples, even for examples where the school and city share the same exact name. Edday1051 (talk) 21:20, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  • As always, I say we go even simpler with just the school's article name. No need to put in city/state which belongs in prose instead. Everything else is just overcomplicating things, which can be see by how long this debate has been going on for with no resolution. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:27, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
dissident, I think were past that point. I don't know if we've officially closed the poll, but as of the moment, NBA style is the consensus with a margin of 7-4. Now we are discussing whether we should create exceptions to the rule. Considering you have expressed a viewpoint previously agreeing with Cbl62 about verbosity, I assume you would be in favor of the shortening rule, but you also don't want to overcomplicate things, which in that case, you might be more inclined to share my opinion that there should be no exceptions at all and we go with the strict nba format for all scenarios. You should state your viewpoint on the topic at hand. We've come a long way here, let's not go backwards. Edday1051 (talk) 21:51, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
Not sure how favoring the most simple and clean option, which we already for colleges, is "going backwards". While not ideal, the NBA style is better than the current version (but literally anything is), and I'll just leave it at that. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:12, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
"going backwards" as in you are attempting to go back to the long discussion we've already had on that topic and ignore the consensus that has been established by the poll on said topic. This section is specifically referring to what exceptions we should or should not make under the nba style format. You are going backwards by still suggesting we use the high school name only format. Edday1051 (talk) 01:54, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
  • NBA style Ceding because the current convention needs to be done away with. Lizard (talk) 00:59, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
  • NBA style is straightforward and been working for years with no issues for NBA bios.—Bagumba (talk) 15:42, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
  • NBA style I had already started editing it this way thinking we had already reached a consensus. It just makes more sense. I never saw the logic in the old way were the city was included with the school name even if it's not a part of the school's name. Any other way would cause confusion and more debate.--Rockchalk717 22:45, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Strongly oppose As someone who has worked extensively to improve thousands of infoboxes by supplying high school information, I'd just like to chime in and say that I am gravely disappointed to see my work be rendered pointless by a small group of users deciding on some new consensus amongst themselves. I cannot say in strong enough terms how much I oppose this change. I'm sure my opinion is long past mattering in the face of this "new consensus" but I did want it to be known. Saget53 (talk) 23:26, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Initial HS changes[edit]

I've gone ahead and made changes to Tom Brady, Todd Gurley, and Aaron Donald per consensus above. Let's see if there is any remaining feedback.—Bagumba (talk) 12:50, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Changes seem stable. I've also changed at other popular NFL pages like Terry Crews, O. J. Simpson, Suge Knight, Michael Oher, and J. J. Watt.—Bagumba (talk) 21:52, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Broken player profile external links[edit]

Just a heads up, but it appears recent updates for various team websites (Redskins and 49ers, maybe more) have broken the old external link URLs for on player's pages, and should be updated with the new links manually rather than archiving the old versions. I'm personally going to fix the Redskins' players links, but if this is some league issued mandate to standardize website links, then we may have to find a way to automate doing this for the other teams. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 04:23, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Bump. The player page URL structure on the official team site has changed, ex. for LA Rams' Dominique Easley where the OLD URL is 404:
While Ravens' Brandon Williams (defensive tackle) OLD URL redirects to NEW per
This implies that the redirects may be present on a per-teamsite basis. UW Dawgs (talk) 12:06, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I'm late to the conversation here, but the URL changes aren't just restricted to the roster pages. Many of the news stories on team pages that I have cited as references are now dead links. So far, I have found examples from,,, and caknuck ° needs to be running more often 18:25, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Draft Histories Lists[edit]

What is everyone's opinion on articles like this: Green Bay Packers draft history? At first glance, it is WP:LISTCRUFT to me. We have consistently noted that first round draft picks are notable as a group, as they are routinely discussed in sources together (such as List of Green Bay Packers first-round draft picks), but very few sources discuss every draft pick a team has ever made in the same source (except sources that just list team data). I am inclined to WP:AFD it, but wanted to hear some opinions first. Thanks, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:27, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

The picks from individual years is presumably already in it's respective page at Category:Green Bay Packers seasons. Don't think it's special enough to duplicate in a master list.—Bagumba (talk) 16:36, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
For some perspective, this type of list article is frequently used by other sports projects (List of Boston Bruins draft picks, etc.) and is commonly accepted there. Ejgreen77 (talk) 12:36, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
FWIW, and while flowing in the opposite direction, comprehensive, all-time lists of NFL players drafted "from" particular universities have also become common. See List of Alabama Crimson Tide players in the NFL draft, Category:Lists of National Football League draftees by college football team. Cbl62 (talk) 13:35, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
Was going to point out this same thing. And also, a team's draft history can very well be notable; the Jets are notorious for their numerous draft blunders, while the Jaguars have consistently hit home runs (although they're only just recently capitalizing on them). Lizard (talk) 14:41, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
I guess the question I was asking is whether a team's entire draft history is notable just because it exists as a fact that the team has drafted people. In my mind it's a slippery slope, could we have List of players traded by the Green Bay Packers, List of players who have scored for the Green bay Packers, etc.? Sure these lists could be factual and properly sourced, but the topic of the article, imho, lacks notability as a group. It's not like there are any sources out there that list every player drafted by the Packers, except the data heavy sources (Pro Football Reference,, etc) that merely list the fact they were drafted, and don't discuss the group as a whole. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:15, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
I think your points are valid, but it would also seem "wrong" to just delete these lists too, so I'm not sure what the best way to handle this is. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 18:34, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, that's why I posted here instead of AFD, Dissident93. My initial thought was that this information is already covered in the yearly NFL draft articles (i.e. 2018 NFL Draft) and/or the team's season article (i.e. 2018 Green Bay Packers season). Based on sourcing and notability, draft selections seem more appropriate in these articles than in full draft history lists. Just my opinion though. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:01, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
Yeah that's true, the information would just be contained in the relevant season article. In that case, I'd support deleting all these team draft list articles. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 01:26, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps try redirecting pages like Green Bay Packers draft history to Green Bay Packers first-round draft picks. If there is any subsequent objection, we can proceed to AfD. It does seem like a valid search term.—Bagumba (talk) 09:45, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Packers sweep Review[edit]

All, I just created Packers sweep (after like three years of wanting to do it). If anyone has a minute to review/copyedit, I would greatly appreciate it. I would love to take it to WP:GA someday, but having never worked on GAs before, it would be awesome to have some input before I nominate it. Thanks! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:21, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Problem with statistics at[edit]

I just ran into a problem with statistics at which I'm not sure what to do about. See Talk:Rob Ninkovich#Touchdowns by Ninkovich. In short, I think the stats line for 2014 for Ninkovich is incorrect, and I'm looking for an alternate source so I can fix the stats on the Wikipedia page - at the moment, I've convinced myself that the current values are incorrect. Any ideas on where else to find stats, or how to get to take a second look at their own stats? Tarl N. (discuss) 04:57, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@Tarl N.: lists the TD as a fumble return, not an interception return.[4] So looks to be correct, though incomplete.—Bagumba (talk) 12:05, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Ah. So TDs is specific to interceptions, not total TDs by the player. That was my misunderstanding - and the cite I need is here. Thanks! Tarl N. (discuss) 15:58, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

What do you think[edit]

I don't necessarily want to submit this as an official move discussion, I just would like some input. So after Patrick Mahomes was drafted, I moved the page to include his suffix because it had appeared initially the Chiefs would include his suffix. Well, a little over a year later, they aren't listing the suffix and his jersey doesn't include it. So I went to move the page, but then I got to thinking right before I submitted it, should we keep the suffix to prevent confusion with his father's page or would the distinguish header be sufficient?--Rockchalk717 04:52, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

With only limited research, my impression is that the dad goes by "Pat" and the son mostly by "Patrick" sometimes "Patrick II' and even less so as "Pat". Names should be based off WP:COMMONNAME as found in all reliable sources (e.g. Google News search"), not just based off of what their team lists them as. Therefore, "Patrick" should be distinguishing enough and is more WP:CONCISE than "Patrick II", and the hatnote would get someone to his father's page if they somehow used the dad's full birth name.—Bagumba (talk) 10:03, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Move to "Patrick Mahomes" per WP:COMMONNAME. It should only be kept at "Patrick Mahomes II" if his dad's article name was "Patrick Mahomes" (which it isn't currently), per WP:NATURALDIS. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 14:15, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
That's kinda what I was thinking. I'll go ahead and move it then.--Rockchalk717 22:02, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

How to handle player's unofficial retirement[edit]

So I have a question. For players who have unofficially retired or are highly unlikely to ever play again (looking at Kam Chancellor), but officially remain on the team's roster via reserve lists they can't be activated off of until the next league year, would it make sense to consider them retired/off the team in the lead and infobox, whilst keeping them in the team roster navboxes? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 14:44, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Nobody has any differing opinions? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 16:11, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Similar situation was presented with Prince Fielder in MLB, he was listed as a current player. Kam is still on the roster he is just not cleared by team doctors, until he is removed from the roster and actually retires he should be listed as a current player.
    • He was placed on the team's reserved list, meaning he can't actually play this year (can't be activated until the 2019 league year). He's also being treated by the team as if he is unlikely to ever play again, which is why I made the post. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 23:29, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
As long s he's listed on their roster, he's on their team. We don't do WP:CRYSTALBALL, guessing what the future holds, even if it seems blatantly obvious. As long as there is a reliable source that lists him on the team, he should stay on the WikiRoster, if nothing else to avoid edit wars over whether he belongs. Right now, an official source says he's on the team, inactive under PUP, that should end the question. Tarl N. (discuss) 05:12, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
I'm not arguing that, but just saying that since third-party sources state he's done with football, that him being on the reserve/PUP list only means he should be listed on the rosters here. Calling him an active member in the team or not in prose is what I'm trying to get consensus for. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 15:32, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
He's part of the team, so it should remain in the opening sentence. Somewhere in the body can mention that he is on reserve/PUP. It's speculation to say he's unquivocally retired. If it's a really prominent opinion, WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV should be followed if it's to be mentioned at all.—Bagumba (talk) 16:21, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
But is it speculation if plenty of third-party sources claim it, as well as Kam basically saying his playing career is over as of today? Apparently he will be making a media appearance soon, where he is likely to clarify the situation. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 16:32, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
As long as we need to use words like "claim" or "basically", it's speculation. Now it could be WP:DUE weight to mention something, and there might be consensus for it, but the fact is that he is a member of the Seahawks still. If someone was living off of a machine and sources and family "basically" consider them all but dead, we'd still write as if that person is alive, but can balance it with widely-held opinions.—Bagumba (talk) 16:45, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
I get that, but if he comes out and clarifies that he's officially done with playing, his status on the reserve list should just become ceremonial, right? We already do this for players who are placed on the reserved/retired list. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 16:49, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Ceremonial or not, he's currently on the roster. We don't remove someone from rosters if the teams still claim them. Tarl N. (discuss) 17:31, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Again, I'm only arguing against keeping that info from the lead and infobox, not removing him from the rosters. I think you guys are missing the original point. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 22:26, 7 August 2018 (UTC)


Infoboxes are a subset of the issue of WikiRosters. As long as a team claims them (by listing them on their roster), they are members of that team. Adding something in the lead that they plan on retiring is acceptable, but it should still say "of the Seattle Seahawks" rather than "free agent" or "retired", until bureaucratic mechanisms finish unwinding. Tarl N. (discuss) 23:15, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Well I've added a note on his article saying to check here before editing, as it seems to be something that needs watching. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 17:06, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Proposal to Archive Sub-projects[edit]

I imagine this has been brought up before, but I would like to propose that WP:NFL formally mark all of the team-based sub-projects with {{Historic}}. The only sub-project with any semblance of activity is the Green Bay Packers WikiProject, mostly because I and a few others keep it alive. I have moved WP:PACKERS to a "related WikiProject" on the NFL page instead of a sub-project and am happy to continue maintaining it and keeping it going. However, after reviewing the other sub-projects, I think it would be best if we move forward and archive them. None of them have had any real activity for years. Marking them as historic would be the easy part, but the next part would be nominating all of the associated templates and WikiProject-categories for deletion.

Many may wonder why I think think this is important. Having started and restarted WP:PACKERS, I can tell you how much time and effort it takes to get everything organized, tagged, and cleaned-up to make it all work. If we get new editors to WP:NFL, I would much rather they focus on improving NFL pages for whatever team they like, instead of spending a lot of time trying to restart a sub-project.

For a list of which projects I am discussing, see Wikipedia:WikiProject National Football League#Individual projects. Note that I was bold and tagged the Defunct teams and Referee sub-projects as {{Historic}} because neither sub-project had any real activity (articles weren't tagged with a banner template). Interested to see what everyone's opinion is. Thanks for considering. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 01:28, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

To elaborate, this would also entail the deletion of all of the WikiProject banners (such as {{WikiProject Chicago Bears}}) for these sub-projects, as well as associated assessment categories. Seems like it would be easier to just add the NFL banner, instead of a bunch of teams. Does anyone have an opinion on this? I would like to have some consensus before nominating them for deletion. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:58, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
I say go for it, small time Wikiprojects are both mainly unused and don't serve a purpose that WP:NFL (with way more activity) can't. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 16:13, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
It has been  Done. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:03, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
I didn't notice this proposal until today, and I object. Just because the Vikings subproject (for example) hasn't seen any activity for a while doesn't mean the project isn't still useful. – PeeJay 22:12, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
PeeJay2K3, most of the sub-projects haven't had edits in years (some upwards of 10 years), but if one or more are still useful, than removing the historic tag for that project is fine by me. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 22:27, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Saquon Barkley's height[edit]

We have a problem. I am sure some of you are aware of constant reverting on Saquon Barkley's page regarding his height. The problem is that neither side is wrong, because both 6 ft 0 in (1.83 m) (sources:, NFL Combine) and 5 ft 11 in (1.80 m) (source: are easily verifiable. How do we deal with this? – Sabbatino (talk) 16:08, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

I would use the NFL source height, and then add a footnote explaining the discrepancy between sources. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:14, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
I prefer team info as they get the info directly from the player. is also outdated at times, not showing jersey number updates or position changes for weeks/months. I can almost guarantee that eventually, will show 5 ft 11 in (1.80 m). ~ Dissident93 (talk) 18:09, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Unless we come up with a consensus on which source to rely on, we will have people changing his height. I do not have a strong opinion on which source (team or NFL) we should use so I would be happy with any outcome. – Sabbatino (talk) 13:40, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Relevant Merge Discussion[edit]

Regardless of where your opinion may stand on this proposal, please note an ongoing discussion regarding a merge proposal that falls under the purview of this WikiProject. Any input to help determine consensus would be appreciated: Talk:Green Bay Packers#Merge proposal. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:52, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

I think I broke a couple of NFL pages[edit]

I was updating the high schools to the new format and was updating the pages of Crespi Carmelite alumni. I updated Devin Lucien's page with no issues. I get to Randy Cross and the same exact edit seems to have broken the page. I'm not sure if this is only happening on my end, but if it's happening with everyone else, you guys can see that the infobox sections have empty space. Can anyone can confirm that you guys see this and if you do, can you figure out why it's happening. I even reverted my edit and it remains the same. I'm pretty sure my edit is what caused it, but weirdly I go to older versions of the page, and the same issue is present. It's very odd. I copy and pasted a different nfl infobox on the same page, and the same things happens, so it seems it's the issue is happening on these specific pages. Same thing is happening with Christian Fauria, Hroniss Grasu, Chris Harper, Babe Laufenberg, and a couple of other Crespi Carmelite alumni pages. Edday1051 (talk) 18:16, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Don't know why this is breaking the infobox, I've fixed it (on my end anyway) by changing the <br> tag in the high school parameter to <br/>. Ideally, you should be using the unbulleted list template {{ubl}} instead of breaks anyway. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:11, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
thanks man. Everything looks normal on my end. Strange that the lack of the dash did that. I've updated a bunch of pages already and this is the first time that has happened. Thanks again for the help. Edday1051 (talk) 20:03, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
There must be some sort of bug with the football infobox, because I've never seen an issue like this in other infoboxes. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 04:54, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Kansas City Blues / Cowboys[edit]

I added some information to this topics talk page but I did not want to edit the topic. The information relates to who owned the team. I included a link that lists George E. Muehlebach as the owner. I have had a few books in the past that also listed him as the owner but I no longer have them and can't remember the books names so that its difficult to find sources online. But, you are free to add the information or use it to maybe find more information about this online. I have put in a question with one of the citys libraries but other than this, I can't really be of further service. It seems the NFL itself doesn't have the information. So, if you can verify the info, you might just get something from the NFL to say thanks. Armorbeast (talk) 04:10, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Shoe Steels to Spartans to Lions and Jim Thorpe[edit]

I added the information with links. It's up to you guys if you want to add the information to the topic. It's worth discussion.

Armorbeast (talk) 11:49, 17 August 2018 (UTC)