Talk:BYU–Utah rivalry

message: Lethargy, could you be more specific? What would you like to see changed here? I'll get on it if you'll let me know. JefeDeJefes 14:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I didn't see your request until today. The article is full of information impossible to verify "Fans of these schools constantly argue about which has the better academics, which has the more attractive co-eds, which has a nicer campus..." (Wikipedia:No original research) and does nothing but show off the topic "Few rivalries in collegiate athletics can match the passion and intensity..." (Wikipedia:Avoid peacock terms). --Lethargy 23:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Unreferenced can appear at the bottom, but I have never seen a merge tag or inappropriate tone placed at the bottom. --Lethargy 23:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see.  Thanks!  CincyUte 23:45, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Inappropriate Tone?

message: Why is this section called the Rise of Utah Basketball?  A look into Utah Bball history proves otherwise.  
It makes it sound as if Utah Basketball unlike BYU football (before the Edwards Era) was poor to average prior Rick Marjerus' arrival.  Wouldn't a more appropiate name be The Revival of Utah Basketball or something else?TucsonUte 19:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you're right.  Headlines can be tough.  If you think of something more appropriate, please make the change.  I'll be thinking of something as well.CincyUte 19:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Rise of Utah Basketball

message: :Image:1942Utah-BYUFootball.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 00:19, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:1942Utah-BYUFootball.jpg

message: "Few rivalries in collegiate athletics can match the passion and intensity of the rivalry between the University of Utah and Brigham Young University ("BYU")".  The author simply cannot be serious--it doesn't get more POV than this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.184.105 (talk) 04:56, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: After reading some more of this article, I can now say that almost all of it is POV.  The entire article needs to be re-written.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.184.105 (talk) 04:59, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely. I'll go ahead and add a  tag to the article.--Jonpro 21:32, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

text: It may sound POV, but it's not. Source after source among national publications place this rivalry in the top 10 or top five. Few rivalries do match it, it's true. Wrad (talk) 22:57, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Wrad.  That the rivalry is significant has sourced citations under the section "The Present", in particular a Nov. 2005 article in the Wall Street Journal that has it ranked as the #4 top rivalry.  That is not POV.  Unless the POV tag is for something besides the notability of the rivalry, it should probably be removed.  Alanraywiki (talk) 16:37, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the tag and reworded the intro. It was an odd way to start the article, admittedly. Wrad (talk) 16:37, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice work.  I think that reads much better. CincyUte (talk) 18:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: First sentence 100% POV

message: :Image:BYUCougars.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 19:40, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:BYUCougars.png

message: I propose we remove the section titled "Nepotism."  Not only does "Nepotism" appear to be a misnomer, but I don't think the facts contained within the section really add anything to the rivalry.  While it is my understanding that the Presidents of each school are indeed former alums of the other school, I just don't believe it has any real effect on the overall relationship between the schools. Any thoughts? CincyUte (talk) 18:49, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  It is an interesting little tidbit of information, but definitely a misnomer Epachamo (talk) 15:33, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I don't consider it to be a part of what makes the rivalry great.  Merely a "interesting little tidbit," as you say; probably more appropriate for inclusion in some sort of Trivia section.  Perhaps the biggest problem with this paragraph is the title.  I think "Nepotism" is a misnomer. CincyUte (talk) 16:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Nepotism"

message: This article is getting too long.  One solution would be to create new articles that present all the information.  For example, we could have an article "BYU - Utah football game highlights" Epachamo (talk) 15:33, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's a very good idea.  I think it would also be nice to have a seperate article that contined the Football and Basketball results chart, as well as another chart that listed the schools' head-to-head records in the other sports (baseball, women's sports, etc.).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by CincyUte (talk • contribs) 22:56, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Article is too long

message: Today may be a good time to mention this: we need to be careful when we add recent game summaries to the HIghlights section.  Obviously, only the really exceptional games should be included, and I don't think BYU's basketball victory on Feb. 20, 2008 qualifies.  But whether or not we decide to include it, or any other game for that matter, the game nicknames (such as "LaVell's Last Miracle," or "The Rice Bowl") should only be included where there has been a well-established nickname. Usually it takes a long time for these nicknames to stick. CincyUte (talk) 17:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Highlight Updates

message: "The matches have proved to be so intensive and compelling that in 2008 Deseret First Credit Union decided to sponsor the matches between the two schools" -- It is extremely unremarkable that a local credit union was solicited, and agreed, to kick a couple bucks worth of an ad contract toward this game. The tone in this sentence is beyond comedy. I would like consensus to delete everything from "the" to "that." BlueSalix (talk) 16:58, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  this line is ridiculous