Talk:Illinois Fighting Illini

message: What about the Marching Illini, they have a very close relationship to athletics 68.78.121.92 07:00, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * Added as a 'See also' entry. -- Upholder 19:25, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marching Illini 

message: Someone (they don't have a username) keeps deleting the "Final Fours" from the Men's Basketball championships section, citing that Final Fours are not in fact championships and should not be listed. They are, however, noteworthy accomplishments for which every school receives a banner to hang in their arena rafters, and are routinely listed as major accomplishments in most sports and media guides. Furthermore, most people are quite aware that Final Fours are not in fact championships (even though I own a t-shirt that says "Illinois: 2005 Chicago Regional Champions), so I feel any ambiguity in this area is well understood by a reader. I don't feel like changing the "Championships" heading to "Championships and Other Noteworthy Accomplishments" just for this one line, so I feel that status quo should be maintained, with the Final Fours listed under "championships." Chiwara 22:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine. Chiwara 02:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone has changed the Final Four section again. Please, if you are going to undo previous edits in relation to the Final Fours or name of the section, please discuss it on the Talk Page first. Chiwara 17:20, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: what about your agreement above? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.114.16.210 (talk) 14:07, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved the heading from "Championships" to "Athletic Accomplishments" in order to include other noteworthy Illini moments such as NCAA Final Fours and Bowl Game wins. You can't change the section back and then take out things like Final Fours just because you feel they should not be included. As the main Illini athletics article, this is to be a record for major accomplishments of the Illinois athletics program, and I intend to list them. Chiwara 18:07, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: a section with every atletic accomplishment for everyteam would be unmanagable...this would and should be a seperate section and/or inclueded in seperate article about each team/sport —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.114.16.210 (talk) 18:49, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We are not listing every thing, only major accomplishments. Until you provide a CREDIBLE SOURCE as to why the heading of "Athletic Accomplishments" and the information currently contained therein is somehow unsuitable for a Wikipedia article, your edits are completely baseless. Since I know such a source cannot and will never be found, please stop changing the heading for this section. Thanks.Chiwara 18:53, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NCAA Final Four

message: the article claims that it is "a well-established fact" that 
a "large majority" of the students are "Pro-Chief";
surely for such a "well-established fact" a cite can be found?
SmaleDuffin 21:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a really tough thing to prove. A 2004 referendum on the Chief had 2/3 of the students support his presence, but that is the only thorough study that's been done. Also dosesn't account for varying levels of support, or how students views may have changed in the past 3 years. I'd take it out - definitely not well-established.Chiwara 03:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

text: The referendum had 69 percent of the 13,000 voters supporting the Chief, and 31 percent opposing.  But, only 13,000 out of 37,000 voted.  Hence 24 percent of the students support, 11 percent don't, 65 percent didn't vote.  When I was at UIUC, the student government was largely dominated by the Greek system, which was largely pro-Greek.  I would not think that the voters in this referendum constituted a random sample of the students.  We cannot accurately ascribe any position to the 24,000 who did not vote.  I know when I was there, many of the people I knew just wished both sides would go away; taking it out seems like the right move to me.  SmaleDuffin 21:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Student Support of the Chief? 

message: I have again reverted the "Co-Champion" language attached to the Football listing to the language used on the NCAA site referenced.  I have also again removed the "Helms Athletic Foundation" language from the Basketball entry as it is not present in the Illinois Media guide and is adequately covered in the attached reference.  -- Upholder 19:39, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You've made the assertion that the Helms Foundation has been widely disputed.  Please provide supporting evidence from a reliable source. -- Upholder 14:32, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Please provide citations to back your claim.  The Illinois Sports Information Department doesn't qualify the 1915 National Championship in any way in the Basketball Media guide, it is listed simply as "National Champions".  See page 4 of the Illinois Media Guide PDF in the upper right hand corner. -- Upholder 15:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Since you haven't provided citations (per WP:RS) I have again removed the language. -- Upholder 15:18, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really see what the Wikipedia articles of other schools have to do with this. If anything, our source should be the official Illinois Media Guide (see above) and it echoes the list we have on this article. I agree with Upholder on this, if you can't find a more credible citation than the IMG to go against it, the list stays as is.Chiwara 02:04, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Simply asserting something is not enough.  You must provide citations.  If you are unable or unwilling to abide by Wikipedia policy, you are in danger of being blocked from editing.  I will not continue this edit war, but instead ask for consenus to be reached. The language that has been used in the article matches the language used int he Illinois Media Guide as published by the Illinois Sports Information Department and as such is what I view as most appropriate for the article.  I ask that all editors weigh in on one side of the discussion or the other.  -- Upholder 17:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, I re-iterate my agreement with Upholder on this. The Helms Foundation is usually regarded as the definitive National Championship guide prior to the NCAA Tournament in 1939. No other established organization has ever claimed to name basketball champions prior to the NCAA, and for that reason the Illinois Media Guide lists them. Chiwara 01:15, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: here is a "source," the NCAA... http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/champs_listing1.html ...the NCAA considers the fighting illini to have only 17 National Championships (not including football) and NO basketball champtionships...simply select Illinios from the drop-down box... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.114.16.210 (talk) 14:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not a source about the Helms Foundation being disuputed, just that the NCAA did not name a national champion in that era.  Your citations must back your claim, which you have repeatedly said is that "The Helms Foundation championships are widely disputed." -- Upholder 16:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: and I cited four examples where their conclusions were disputed by the NCAA.  Bottom line, when people say National Championship, they are talking about NCAA national championships.  Illinois has not won one of these.  see my NCAA link above unsigned comment was added by 207.114.16.210 (talk) 18:44, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your source says nothing about the Helms Foundation at all -- for or against.  It is not evidence that it is "widely disputed".  As you still have not provided any evidence and what little consensus we have is for removing the language, I have again done so. -- Upholder 23:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: nope, that source seems to stand for the proposition that illinois has never won a championship in basketball —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.66.51.129 (talk) 01:53, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why don't we do this using inductive logic. Everyone here agrees that in 1915, many schools in the country played college basketball, including all members of the Big Ten Conference at the time. The NCAA awarded no championship that year, since it did then not govern basketball championships (just like it doesn't do D-IA football now.) So, IF there was a National Champion in 1915, then WHO was it? The Helms Foundation asked that very question after the fact, and noting that Illinois that year went undefeated, the only team in the country to do so, they determined that they are unequivocally the 1915 National Champions. They very soundly argued that if you are the only school to go undefeated in a certain year, the you must be the national champions (except if you are the Boise State football team). The NCAA can never make such a claim, since its sole and expressed purpose is to award championships during its own tenure. So, as others have said before, until someone provides a credible source that declares the Helms Foundation as invalid, the footnote on the page should be plenty to alert readers that it is not, and never will be an "NCAA Championship." Chiwara 23:26, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What they won was the "Helms Foundation National Championship" so that it what it should say--- Retroactive titles are perfectly good fodder for conversation over a beer, but any program that claims them as legitimate titles should be ashamed of itself.  If tomorrow some organization -- the Elias Sports Bureau, for example -- decided to name world champions in major league baseball for the years that preceded the World Series, would you have respect for any team that tried to claim those championships as legitimate ones? I wouldn't, but then I wouldn't have to: No major league team would ever do that.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.114.16.210 (talk) 12:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually, neither the Kansas nor Purdue page actually debated the issue, it was just decided. Of the three, this page is the only one with a debate. I really don't see what is so wrong with the footnote, placed very obviously next to the 1915 date. But if you are going to kick and scream (and never sign your posts) then I will change the article so we can end this silly dispute. Chiwara 19:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Im sorry that we had to go back and forth like that, but I just don't think that people who come to wikipedia should be misled into thinking that Illinois has won a national championship, when, in reality it is a second tier program that probably never will. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.114.16.210 (talk) 19:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your input on the 2005 NCAA Runner-Up, but if your edits are motivated by your biased opinion towards the Illinois Men's Basketball team, this leaves them less than credible. Chiwara 00:18, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Championship language disputes 

message: Looks like this is largely solved, but just for reference: Wikipedia content must be verifiable to reliable sources, and must specifically not be based on an editor's own knowledge or original synthesis. If the anonymous editor can find a reliable source to back up the claims, the content is suitable for the article. Else, it is not. It doesn't come down to anything but that. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Third opinion

message: I don't know a thing about Illinois basketball, so am about as unbiased as can be (don't even know what conference they're in).  It really doesn't seem to matter either way, so the decision should go with the consensus, which seems to be that no "none" qualification is needed. Wrad 21:39, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fourth Opinion

message: I know that two of the Illini's lost Title IX sports (Hockey and Men's Soccer) that are now club teams have had some success is recent years (both won national championships in 2005). Should these be included in the article as well, or should we stick to NCAA sports? Chiwara 04:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If they are included (and I'm not certain they should be), a separate section for them as club sports would be needed.  It might be better to put them into a separate article and link that from a "see also" section. -- Upholder 04:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Non-NCAA Sports?

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 08:13, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: :Image:Illinilogo.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 ensure 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) 22:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Illinilogo.png