Talk:First Four

message: Is there a reason "play-in game" redirects here? Shouldn't it go to a page discussing what a play-in game is? Smartyllama (talk) 20:08, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I redirected the page to the title that is correct. and took all the discussion with it. "Play-In" changed to "Opening Round" January 15th, 2009 Moonraker0022 (talk) 06:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect? 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
* Support This is how the NCAA recognizes it, the article even says something like will now be known as the opening round game. Moonraker0022 (talk) 07:52, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Opening Round game. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100428225942/http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com:80/2010/basketball/ncaa/04/22/tournament.expansion.ap/index.html?eref=BrkNews to http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/basketball/ncaa/04/22/tournament.expansion.ap/index.html?eref=BrkNews
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:49, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have a more general question: why does this article exist?  The opening round of a tournament is only notable in the context of the tournament, if the lack of references is any indication.  Delete?  NewkirkPlaza (talk) 19:48, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  notability 

message: The "Team Faced" column seems like arbitrary information in the results section. This looks like it should either be removed or be replaced with complete tournament results. It seems to be a round about way to say what seed that winner of the First Four game was given after winning and joining the round of 64. Personally, I think adding the complete results of each team adds supporting evidence to the success of the First Four and is interesting and pertinent information.Terpfear (talk) 13:37, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I generally agree. The seeding of the teams in the Opening Four games should be shown explicitly. Also of interest is whether a team is an automatic qualifier. The complete results of the winner of the games is of interest as it provides some indication of whether playing an Opening Four game is a detriment to a team. For this, the content of the Scores column of the table at How First Four teams do at the NCAA tournament is pertinent. TimberFeller (talk) 14:47, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

text: I just published an upgrade to address this talk thread. Note that the links to each team's wikipedia page is to the general team page. In many cases there is a page specific to the year but they are not used. These year-specific pages are, for example, linked to from the page for that year's tournament page. TimberFeller (talk) 22:15, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Results Section