Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League

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

Wiki-Code Formatting Adjustments using color data from Module:Gridiron color/data

[edit]

Is there a way to change the wiki-code formatting for Template:Gridiron alt primary style so that the border color in that specific template uses Template:Gridiron tertiary color raw instead of Template:Gridiron primary color raw? I'd change it myself, but I'm not technically proficient enough to implement this change by myself. Would anyone be opposed to changing the wiki-code formatting here? If not, would someone who knows how please help me implement this change? Also, how would I change the wiki-code formatting for the rowcells in Template:Infobox NFL team back to where they were at a normal size? Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 03:44, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unless I'm misunderstanding, the whole point of using the alt style is to use the secondary color as the filler and the primary color as the border (which makes it an inverse of the primary style). And the NFL team infobox is now using |rowstyle= instead of |headerstyle= to provide alternating styles, which seems to not work in exactly the same way. Personally I don't think we need every header to be the same size as the title header anyway as it just takes up additional space for no reason, but if others disagree then I can take another look at it. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 16:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dissident93: I mean, the only reason why I'm even proposing a wiki-code formatting change for Template:Gridiron alt primary style is because if you look at the wiki-code formatting for the Baltimore Ravens at Module:Gridiron color/data, the Ravens use  gold  as their tertiary team color (i.e., border color), but then that color can't be used in Template:Gridiron alt primary style. I'm just using the Ravens as an example, but my point is that the same tertiary border color should be used for both Template:Gridiron primary style & Template:Gridiron alt primary style for all teams that have a different tertiary color for the borders. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 04:26, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would implementing your proposed change affect other teams and if so, would the module data have to be fixed for to account for it? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 14:48, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dissident93: Yes, implementing my proposed change would affect the following NFL teams: the Baltimore Ravens, the Arizona Cardinals, the Indianapolis Colts & the New York Jets. It would also affect the following CFL teams: the Calgary Stampeders & the Saskatchewan Roughriders. All I would like to see is the same tertiary border color for these teams that's used in the |titlestyle= be used in the |basestyle=. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 22:23, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hey man im josh and Gonzo fan2007: Please explain to me how implementing these changes would affect a wide number of pages and why you both don't see this as an improvement? Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 02:07, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty dense when it comes to all the colors stored: "primary color", "secondary color", "tertiary color raw", "alt primary", "alt secondary". Is there a primer on how we typically use one color setting versus another?—Bagumba (talk) 04:21, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting

[edit]

I am trying to get a consensus on this to see what people here in the project think…

For example: On Giorgio Tavecchio an editor put in for each year that if Tavecchio was on the practice squad (with an asterisk) like 2014, 2015 and 2016, 2017 did not have an asterisk as he was on the active roster. It seems a bit complicated and clunky to me but I will leave you guys up to that and to get a consensus. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 00:22, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For reference, the two formats on that page have been:
[1] —Bagumba (talk) 07:20, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree that the explicit one looks clunky, while the more compact one misleads that he played four seasons on the main roster, when in reality he was released in the preseason in the first three seasons. I never understood overblowing the infobox tenure with "offseason" stints (does any other project do that?), even if I accept listing practice squads. —Bagumba (talk) 07:42, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Packers–Seahawks rivalry at WP:GAN

[edit]

Would anyone feel like doing me a real solid and reviewing Packers–Seahawks rivalry at WP:GAN in the next week or so? The Packers and Seahawks play each other on December 15, I thought it would be cool to get it to DYK on the day of the game, but obviously need the GAN to make it eligible for DYK. Cookies, barnstars and QPQ would be freely offered! :) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:32, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:American football positions (2024)

[edit]

My attempt to change (revision) the {{American football positions}} was reverted (diff). I discussed this matter to the editor who reverted the changes. He suggested that I come here, hoping that you guys figure out what to do with the template. Happy Thanksgiving! George Ho (talk) 19:30, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't find the version that George Ho swapped the template to to be better than what was there, but I also recognize what was there wasn't great. I'm hopeful someone here has an idea on a better implementation. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:33, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd redesign it using the standard {{Navbox}}, with high-level groups for offense, defense, and special teams. I don't see any particular significance to the current custom organization–it's not a visual alignment of X's and O's by position. —Bagumba (talk) 19:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did just that :) Feel free to tinker and or revert. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:16, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for History of the New York Giants (1994–present)

[edit]

History of the New York Giants (1994–present) 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) 01:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well this would put Wikipedia:Good topics/History of the New York Giants on the path to be a candidate for removal. It's one of our five NFL topics that have been promoted, so hopefully someone interested in good articles and their improvement is up for the task. The only Giants fan that springs to mine for me is @Giants2008. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:59, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Football biography cleanup

[edit]

We made a lot of progress in 2023 and early 2024 with the article improvement campaign at Wikipedia:WikiProject National Football League/Football biography cleanup, but progress has stalled in recent months. There are still a lot of stubs lacking SIGCOV that could use work. Cbl62 (talk) 03:20, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Chicago Bears–Detroit Lions Thanksgiving game

[edit]

I mean, ridiculous game, but long term notability? Thoughts? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 22:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are always difficult. Per WP:LASTING:

It may take weeks or months to determine whether or not an event has a lasting effect. This does not, however, mean recent events with unproven lasting effect are automatically non-notable.

Or WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE:

Events that are only covered in sources published during or immediately after an event, without further analysis or discussion, are likely not suitable for an encyclopedia article. However, this may be difficult or impossible to determine shortly after the event occurs, as editors cannot know whether an event will receive further coverage or not. That an event occurred recently does not in itself make it non-notable.

YMMV on how recentism may skew an AfD.—Bagumba (talk) 02:09, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These are always hard to suss out, but something I will mention without really taking a side is that the game did, more or less, lead directly to Eberflus' firing, which is the first time in da Bears' extensive history that they have made an in-season coaching change. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 19:05, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 Chicago Bears–Detroit Lions Thanksgiving game. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:55, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Madhouse in Maryland" name

[edit]

Discussion to garner consensus on a name for the Madhouse in Maryland Hail Mary play a couple of weeks ago on its talk page. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 15:54, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Forbes Field

[edit]

Forbes Field 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) 03:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Using Template:Gridiron alt secondary color

[edit]

OK. What does everyone prefer to be used in the |above= field of all 32 NFL team templates? Should we use Template:Gridiron alt primary style or should we use Template:Gridiron alt secondary color? Please comment? CharlesEditor23 (talk) 03:48, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you share some examples here of the differences so that people can comment without digging and testing to view the differences themselves @CharlesEditor23? Typically that works best when proposing changes. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:42, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Here's the coding difference for the Cincinnati Bengals:
Mine:
* Based and headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio
Hey man im josh's:
* Based and headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio
Admittedly, it's a slight difference, and I know you'll all say it's indistinguishable, but it makes a difference if we ever decided to add |border=2 to the |basestyle= of NFL team templates. Here's how the template looks with and without the |border=2 wiki-code formatting:
With:
| basestyle = background-color: #FB4F14 !important; color: #000000 !important; box-shadow: inset 2px 2px 0 #000000, inset -2px -2px 0 #000000;; brings this:
 Cincinnati Bengals - primary set (with border)
Without:
| basestyle = background-color: #FB4F14 !important; color: #000000 !important; ; brings this:
 Cincinnati Bengals - primary set (without border)
OK. That said, here's what the visual difference in the wiki-code formatting using Template:Gridiron alt primary style & Template:Gridiron alt secondary color looks like:
Gridiron alt primary style (with border):
 Based and headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio - primary set
Gridiron alt primary style (without border):
 Based and headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio - primary set
Gridiron alt secondary color (with border):
 Based and headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio - primary set
Gridiron alt secondary color (without border):
 Based and headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio - primary set
That's what I was trying to show you all when I was attempting to make my edits. Again, I'm sorry if it came across as me engaging in WP:Editwarring. Also, for the record, Template:Infobox NFL team uses |border=2 as its wiki-code formatting in the infobox as it currently stands. Here's how that looks:
| rowstyle1 = background-color: #ACACAC !important; color: #000000 !important; box-shadow: inset 2px 2px 0 #DCDCDC, inset -2px -2px 0 #DCDCDC;; text-align:center; padding:5px;
I'm just saying that all I want is consistent wiki-code formatting in the infobox & main templates. It does not make sense to me to use |border=2 in the infobox, but not in the |basestyle= of each NFL team template. Either we use |border=2 in both the infobox & main team template, or we don't. That's the WP:CONSENSUS I'm trying to achieve. CharlesEditor23 (talk) 20:46, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll repeat my (unanswered) question from #Wiki-Code Formatting Adjustments using color data from Module:Gridiron color/data above: I'm pretty dense when it comes to all the colors stored: "primary color", "secondary color", "tertiary color raw", "alt primary", "alt secondary". Is there a primer on how we typically use one color setting versus another? —Bagumba (talk) 16:02, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. What I was trying to get across was that I wanted to see the Baltimore Ravens' template look like this:
Baltimore Ravens by Module:Gridiron color and Module:Gridiron color/sandbox (this is the wiki-code formatting for the |titlestyle=):
 Baltimore Ravens - primary set
Notice how  purple  is the primary background color,  white  is the secondary text color, and  gold  is the tertiary border color. That's how it is now. This is what it looks like in the |basestyle=:
 Baltimore Ravens - secondary set
Notice how  black  is the predominant color in the |basestyle= (because black is the secondary color for the Ravens) and  white  is the alt secondary color. Also, notice how the |border=2 color changes from  gold  to  purple . All I'm trying to do is unify the |border=2 color for both the |titlestyle= & the |basestyle= that uses its color data from Module:Gridiron color/data & uses Template:Gridiron tertiary color raw. I'm trying to make sure the |border=2 color in the |basestyle= of the Ravens' template specifically uses  gold  (because metallic gold is the Ravens' third team color). I believe the wiki-code formatting should look like this: <div style="background:# black ; color:# white ; border:2px solid; # gold ; in the |basestyle= for the Ravens. CharlesEditor23 (talk) 20:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
CharlesEditor23, can you elaborate on what downstream changes or unintended consequences this would have for other templates using these modules? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not 100% sure on what downstream changes or unintended consequences there would be. Also, what do you mean by downstream changes? Hopefully there are other editors smarter than me that can help me out? I definitely see your point. These changes probably should not be implemented until we can figure out what downstream changes or unintended consequences there are and how to work around or bypass them completely. CharlesEditor23 (talk)! CharlesEditor23 (talk) 22:57, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As an example, you may only intended to make changes that impact certain teams, but by implementing this, you end up making changes for other team templates you don't necessarily intend. That would be a downstream change. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 23:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK. That's actually helpful. Thank you for that. Now that I think about it, I don't believe there would be any downstream changes or unintended consequences for implementing these changes, though I think further discussion is obviously warranted here. Waiting for Hey man im josh to comment. CharlesEditor23 (talk) 00:08, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's the reason I didn't immediately implement your requests a few weeks ago. The thing is pretty convoluted and making formatting changes for individual teams could easily break another's. The intent when I was editing them myself a few weeks ago was to inverse the primary and secondary colors for the alt style, but I guess I either overlooked something or broke it myself. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:46, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've been here and watching. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:26, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would the proposed changes be done to specific team templates, or would it be to a generic template used by all teams? —Bagumba (talk) 00:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a very fair and very valid question. In the interest of fairness, I would vote for these changes to be implemented to a generic template used by all teams, but we need more discussion about any downstream changes or unintended consequences first. CharlesEditor23 (talk) 00:45, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per your earlier response (didn't see it), but Template:Gridiron primary style and Template:Gridiron alt primary style are the only ones we use within templates. The other ones aren't really directly used and both baseball and basketball colors work fine with only five modules (gridiron uses nine), so I don't see why we couldn't simplify them here. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dissident93 I would 100 percent definitely vote for what you're proposing, because it seems to me like it's the most reasonable and straight forward solution (to only use color data and wiki-code formatting using Template:Gridiron primary style & Template:Gridiron alt primary style). What does everyone else think? CharlesEditor23 (talk) 01:02, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't think of a single case where one of the other templates are directly used, at least anymore. They surely had a use prior to the color module's creation in 2018 and could probably be safely deleted now, but we'd need to ensure nothing would break on account of that. Where's a link to that tool that can check to see where a template is used? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 01:10, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if there is a link to a tool to check to see if a template is used, or where it would be. That I don't know. Would anyone else be opposed to deleting all the other unnecessary templates linked to Module:Gridiron color? CharlesEditor23 (talk) 02:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does entering hastemplate in a search box suffice? —Bagumba (talk) 03:07, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No better than using the "What links here" tool, but it does look like all of the "raw" templates aren't used anywhere while the other templates have occasional uses. Just to be safe, I've merged the raw templates with their respective templates for now to see if anything is broken before I request deletion. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 17:04, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are there concerns regarding accessibility? I'm noting that some past discussions did center around this. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:34, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the majority of them were addressed. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 16:41, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Color contrast ratio says that normal-sized text should have contrast >= 4.5, but teams like the Dolphins (3.95) and Chargers (4.28) are below that at Module:Gridiron color/data. If the alt primary and alt secondary should be used instead, is that swapped at Module:Gridiron color/data or it's the responsibility of the calling templates to swap the colors? —Bagumba (talk) 17:05, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, my whole thing is that the Miami Dolphins template needs to use  #008E97  as the shade of aqua, because that's the shade the team uses, even if it means that the text color needs to be black for WP:CONTRAST purposes. Likewise, the Los Angeles Chargers template needs to use  #0080C6  as the shade of powder blue, because that's the specific shade that team uses. So if the color codes for the primary team colors for the Dolphins & Chargers need to be changed, then so be it. CharlesEditor23 (talk) 05:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's no traceability of where these colors come from. At Module:College color, it has citations at least. If we don't use the "official" team colors due to accessibility, how is that tracked so someone later doesn't come along and fix the "wrong" colors? —Bagumba (talk) 05:44, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is why any time I have changed the team color codes over at Module:Gridiron color/data, I have always tried to give a URL source so that other editors can check it or use it as a reference, or for traceability purposes. I have never tried to insert color codes based on WP:OR. Most of the time, the current team color codes for all 32 teams are referenced from CreativeAssets.NFL.net. The NFL Throwback YouTube channel also has a video called "Evolution of EVERY Team's Logo and Helmet | NFL Explained!" (that video is found here). Admittedly, this video is now more than two years old, but it's the most recent video published by the NFL that gives historical HTML color code data (some of the historical HTML color codes are approximations) for all 32 teams. CharlesEditor23 (talk) 05:30, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So my question is this: where does the community land on the debate as to whether the |border=2 parameter should be included in the |basestyle= of all NFL team templates? I obviously would like to see it included because I feel like having a |border=2 in the |basestyle= improves the visual appearance of the template. I also know there's opposition to having it included, so if at all possible, could I get some feedback as to why other editors don't want the |border=2 parameter included in the |basestyle= so we can continue to discuss it to reach a WP:CONSENSUS? CharlesEditor23 (talk) 04:27, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Tip (American football)

[edit]

I would like some opinions on this article. Right now, it is very much written as an article on the play itself, Sherman's tip in the end zone that was then intercepted. However, in the realm of notable plays, this doesn't seem to hold muster. Deflections that end in an interception happen often. And interceptions to end games, even playoff games, happen often. I am not seeing anything that truly makes this notable as just the play. That said, there are some confusing aspects that may come into play: the article uses {{Infobox NFL game}}, it is categorized in Category:NFC Championship Games and Category:National Football League playoff games, and it includes info commonly found for game summaries (starting lineup and officials). I am contemplating AFDing this, but if the article were rewritten to be about the entire NFC Championship Game itself, I think it easily holds muster. Thoughts? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:56, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Football_League&oldid=1263414548"