Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League: Difference between revisions
→Good article reassessment for Jamaal Westerman: new section |
Dissident93 (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tag: Reverted |
||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
|archive = Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League/Archive %(counter)d |
|archive = Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League/Archive %(counter)d |
||
}} |
}} |
||
== "[[:2030 NFL season]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] == |
|||
[[File:Information.svg|30px]] |
|||
The redirect <span class="plainlinks">[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2030_NFL_season&redirect=no 2030 NFL season]</span> has been listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|redirects for discussion]] to determine whether its use and function meets the [[Wikipedia:Redirect|redirect guidelines]]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{section link|1=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 June 1#2030 NFL season}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> [[User:Left guide|Left guide]] ([[User talk:Left guide|talk]]) 22:33, 1 June 2025 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Jayden Daniels]] feature article nomination == |
== [[Jayden Daniels]] feature article nomination == |
Revision as of 21:10, 22 June 2025
This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject National Football League and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26Auto-archiving period: 21 days ![]() |
![]() | This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
|
![]() | WikiProject National Football League was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 20 November 2013. |
Jayden Daniels feature article nomination
My feature article nomination for Jayden Daniels is at risk for archival after receiving no comments since starting it in May, so I'm posting here for awareness. Ideally it would be reviewed by editors from outside the NFL space, but it's received some compliments from a few project members and I'd hate to see it stuck in nomination hell simply from being missed/ignored. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 18:30, 8 June 2025 (UTC)
- I left a comment there about some potentially questionable sources I spotted. Left guide (talk) 00:12, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
- When those sources are addressed, whatever they are, then it should go forward, not archived. You did a great job! Bringingthewood (talk) 00:16, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
- Keep it going, D93, I believe this accomplishment could be reached! Bringingthewood (talk) 21:29, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
- I pinged all involved for final comments/suggestions, but it was archived as it "received no supports". I'll just renominate it in two weeks and explicitly ask the previous commentators if they support promotion or not to avoid wasting time with another nomination. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:26, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Dissident93: That strikes me as weird. You've been doing some very nice work there improving the article to meet a wide range of expectations. I don't hang out at FARs in general, and my time and attention gets randomly divided sometimes, but it seems excessively bureaucratic and rulesy to claim that it has to archive just because nobody technically voted "support", especially since consensus is about discussion and not voting. If the required wait time to re-nominate is only two weeks, I guess it's not so bad though. Left guide (talk) 03:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
- I agree with @Left guide. If there was a Yay or Nay somewhere on one of these pages and I missed it, I apologize. Please send me a seeing eye dog when things matter. ;) Bringingthewood (talk) 04:04, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
- Strange that the rationale wasn't mentioned at "Closing note" but was instead buried mid-page. Not a very "featured" process. —Bagumba (talk) 04:08, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Dissident93: That strikes me as weird. You've been doing some very nice work there improving the article to meet a wide range of expectations. I don't hang out at FARs in general, and my time and attention gets randomly divided sometimes, but it seems excessively bureaucratic and rulesy to claim that it has to archive just because nobody technically voted "support", especially since consensus is about discussion and not voting. If the required wait time to re-nominate is only two weeks, I guess it's not so bad though. Left guide (talk) 03:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
- I pinged all involved for final comments/suggestions, but it was archived as it "received no supports". I'll just renominate it in two weeks and explicitly ask the previous commentators if they support promotion or not to avoid wasting time with another nomination. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:26, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
- Keep it going, D93, I believe this accomplishment could be reached! Bringingthewood (talk) 21:29, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
- When those sources are addressed, whatever they are, then it should go forward, not archived. You did a great job! Bringingthewood (talk) 00:16, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
Right now, {{Infobox NFL single game}} has two parameters that build out the location of the game: |stadium=
and |city=
. For example, in Instant Replay Game, |stadium=Lambeau Field
and |city=Green Bay, Wisconsin, U.S.
creates the continuous string:
I wonder if it would be better to force a break in between the two, so that the string comes out as:
This has two key benefits: (1) it likely prevents weird line breaks in the infobox, and (2) it prevents WP:SEAOFBLUE concerns, which I had an editor bring up recently on a DYK I had on the Main Page. Honestly, I also think it reads nice and cleaner. I have seen users jerry rig this by adding their own break after the |stadium=
parameter, but then this has the weird affect of keeping the comma after the stadium. Thoughts? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:45, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
- That definitely makes sense to me. Hatman31 (he/him · talk · contribs) 01:50, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
- I implemented it. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:35, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
If anyone could provide a review at the above football player featured article nomination, it would be appreciated. Thanks, BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:53, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
Please consider participating in the discussion linked above. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:19, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
Questionable conference championship redirects
Hey man im josh appears to have serially created redirects for individual conference championship games where the calendar year in the redirect title differs from the calendar year the game was actually played, which is plausibly confusing or misleading to readers. An example of this problem can be seen in how 2010 NFC championship game points to the game that was played in 2011, and 2011 NFC championship game points to the game that was played in 2012. It would be an extreme amount of WP:RFD paperwork I'd prefer to avoid if possible, so I'd like to see if a project consensus can be reached on how to handle these. Or Hey man im josh, would you consider self-deleting these as WP:G7? Left guide (talk) 08:54, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- There are also capitalized versions at Category:AFC Championship Games and Category:NFC Championship Games. Left guide (talk) 09:06, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- This confusion is further compounded by the fact that individual annual "playoff" redirects appear to point to tournaments based on when the games were actually played. For example, 2010 NFL playoffs points to 2009–10 NFL playoffs, and 2011 NFL playoffs points to 2010–11 NFL playoffs. So there's also an inconsistency in how these are treated. Left guide (talk) 09:19, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Jamaal Westerman
Jamaal Westerman 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) 15:08, 22 June 2025 (UTC)