Talk:Sam Bradford

message: I changed the QB abbreviation in the infobox to Quarterback because I think it is better to use the full name as opposed to the abbreviation as it gives more detail to somebody who may not be familiar with the sport well enough to know abbreviations. My change was reverted. I am going to change it back in hopes the person who reverted my change will comment here before reverting back. This definitely isn't something to get into a revert war over.↔NMajdan•talk 23:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted it, because we are using abbreviations for football positions basically everywhere on Wikipedia, and since “QB” links to quarterback everyone who does not know what “QB” means knows where to look. By the way, someone who does not know anything about football won't know what a “quarterback” is anyway. He will have to read the quarterback article whether we write “Quarterback” in this article's infobox or not. ––Bender235 08:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I still think when we have enough room, and there is more than enough in this template, we should try to not use abbreviations. But, I'm not too concerned about it.↔NMajdan•talk 16:27, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abbr in infobox 

message: I don't think the fact that Bradford is Cherokee has anything to do with his football carrer. Articles such as Malcolm Kelly or Jason White dont mention their race. I am going to delete the part about his 1/16th Cherokee blood and this grandma Walkingstick in a few days if no one has any comments against it.--CPacker (talk) 23:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, very few Native Americans are the starting QB for a major university. Now, if there was a source that said this, I would think it would be worth mentioning in the article. But, you're right, just saying he's Cherokee probably shouldn't be in there. We need a source that says why this is significant.↔NMajdan•talk 15:15, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree with Nmajdan that the fact that Bradford is Native American is worth to be mentioned, although not in the lead. --Bender235 (talk) 15:20, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Thanks for changing it Bender235, it is alot better now.--CPacker (talk) 20:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Included that information from the NY Times article. How is the personal section of this article now? BlueAg09 (Talk) 03:53, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cherokee 

message: There seems to be some confusion about this award and the Heisman.  A certain user made edits that show Vessels, Owens, and Sims winning this award and removing Heupel from this list.  That information is inaccurate.  This award has only been around since 1998, making it impossible for Vessels, Owens, and Sims to have won it.  Vessels, Owens, and Sims were HEISMAN winners, NOT AP Player of the Year Award winners.
I've reverted those edits back to accurately reflect that the three Sooners to win this award are White, Heupel, and Bradford.    —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.2.67.17 (talk) 19:52, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  AP Player of the Year Award 

message: This article seems to be under attack and needs to be locked for a couple weeks until the Heisman stuff dies down. - 4.240.165.22 (talk) 05:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Protected on 02:47, 14 December 2008. BlueAg09 (Talk) 03:53, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

text: The activity on this article does not justify any form of protection. You need to get in the dozen or two vandals/day before protection is considered. It was previously protected around the end of last season around the Heisman Trophy ceremony when there was a lot of activity on the page.↔NMajdan•talk 01:34, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page Protection for this Article? 

message: Sam Bradford's profile picture should be clearer and show more of his face! Does anyone agree? How about a picture of him giving his speech after winning the Heisman trophy? Any other good photo ideas?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.112.24.80 (talk) 19:21, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem with images on Wikipedia is that only free images are allowed to be uploaded. All the images here are mainly user-generated, and are usually poor-quality. If you can find a free image somewhere, that would be great, but for now, this is the best we have. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:58, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Definitely. But that's copyright for ya. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:04, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: We have a picture that shows his face. But, someone keeps adding a picture of him in his Eagles uniform. I agree, I like the picture from 2012, which shows his face in the userbox. Please don't put the one from the Eagles uniform in the userbox, because it doesn't show his face.  //nepaxt 04:12, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Profile Picture 

message: Is there a reason why the section entitled "Sophomore Season" has very little information about Bradford's performance that season and is nearly 50% taken up by an unnecessarily detailed breakdown of the Heisman voting? Is there any reason, at all, why such a breakdown is even necessary in the first place?  It just feels really off like someone is qualifying his Heisman victory by saying oh he won...but Tebow got more first place votes.  The level of detail is just unnecessary especially since nowhere does it mention his incredibly noteworthy accomplishments that led to him getting the Heisman.  I'm just going to put this up here as fair warning that at some point I intend to come back and edit the section by deleting most of the Heisman voting breakdown (again it is unnecessary and I fail to see how it's noteworthy) and actually write about his accomplishments that season.  If anyone objects please say so.Jdlund (talk) 07:53, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Sophomore Season

message: It was confirmed by both teams that Sam Bradford was traded. I have been editing NFL player pages so frequently and have kept up to date with all transactions and made sure all player pages have the correct information. I even fixed plenty of pages with significant errors that other users have made and provided information that others have neglected to do.
Jrooster49 (talk) 17:45, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Please, if you will. I and many others have the page watched for erroneous edits. Semi-protection should suffice. Lizard (talk) 17:54, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Yh, there's no reason to fully protect, semi is good enough. It gets rid of all the IP vandals and new accounts, which is really the only problem. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 17:57, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

text: Already done Dat GuyTalkContribs 20:32, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: In the future, could this level of protection never be done again? The majority of the edits come from people who wouldn't be able edit through semiprot, so this was highly unnecessary. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:56, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  As I was reverting an administrative action performed by another administrator without the chance to discuss it with them first, I took the smallest action I could while fixing the immediate issue of factual inaccuracies, which was to lower protection from full protection to ECP. Whether the article should have been fully protected in the first place is something you'd have to take up with . Please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Extended confirmed protection policy; the community has endorsed the use of extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption where semi proved ineffective. In this case, since the disruption continued via users who were confirmed but not extended confirmed within minutes of semi being applied, I believe  would have been justified in applying 30/500 for a very small period of time (ideally, 24 hours or less) under the protection policy. ~ Rob13Talk 21:08, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  I wasn't on earlier, but if that's the case then it's fine. (as long as an admin is able to respond and edit the article in the the mean time). ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:12, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeh there's no excuse for what just happened. I don't know what the admin was thinking. Full protection? For three days? And then six different edit requests in an hour go completely ignored. Wow. Where are these admins when player pages are actually being vandalized? Peyton Manning and Tom Brady would be under discretionary sanctions by now. Lizard (talk) 21:18, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: To be clear, I'm not saying the full protection was fine, just that applying 30/500 from the start would have been justified. ~ Rob13Talk 21:23, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected edit request on 3 September 2016 

message: Sam Bradford has been traded to the Minnesota Vikings from the Philadelphia Eagles with both teams and multiple media outlets confirming the trade. 
Vikings: http://www.vikings.com/news/article-1/Vikings-Acquire-QB-Sam-Bradford/6f8c6ac1-3564-4547-b705-fce0c3bf015a
Eagles: http://www.philadelphiaeagles.com/news/article-1/Sam-Bradford-Traded-To-Minnesota/390017a6-3441-4a43-b39b-eeb1a65dbe64
NFL: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000694979/article/sam-bradford-traded-to-vikings-for-two-draft-picks
This change in his roster status needs to be updated in article.
Iamcool234 17:56, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Already done Dat GuyTalkContribs 20:32, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected edit request on 3 September 2016 

message: Please change sam bradfords status as a member of the philidelphia eagles organization to a member of the minnesota vikings, as he was traded this morning in exchange for a first round draft pick in 2017 and a fourth round pick in 2018. This is 6 months to the day after being signed to a two year deal by the eagles.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Broncosfan71888 (talk • contribs) 20:25, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Traded to the vikings 

message: The Cardinals have signed him for a year. Please try to change that he is an Arizona Cardinal, not Minnesota Vikings ASAP.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.235.178.22 (talk) 22:02, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not a newspaper. Its purpose isn't to provide up-to-the-second info. There's no rush. Lizard (talk) 22:03, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arizona Cardinals sign him