Wikipedia talk:WikiProject American Football League

message: I've converted Trade deadline from a redirect page to an article stub. I was really, really surprised that there was no article about this significant sports terminology. (The term had redirected to a disambiguation page concerning its purely commercial/financial sense.) However, knowing next to nothing about AFL I'm hoping others can help in expanding the article as regards trade deadlines in AFL, and also correct any errors I may have made in the term's definition etc.. Cheers, A bit iffy 15:39, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Trade deadline

message: I would be glad to help in any way possible in this project.  I have original clippings, photos, etc. of American Football League games.  I have a private website at http://www.remembertheafl.com/AFL.htm which contains or links to biographies and photos of hundreds of American Football League players.  I have a database of American football League players showing every man who played in the American Football League.  I created and am continually addng names to List of American Football League players, and creating or updating pages for those players.  I am in e-mail contact with over 300 former American Football League players, as well as with several authors of books about the American Football League, and can ask them for clarification or confirmation of their own or teammates' and opponents' performances.
===Suggestions===
* Wikipedia templates like "NFL player", "NFL player retired" and "NFL PlayerCoach" are generally incorrect when the player served in a league other than the NFL. Many American Football League players never played in the NFL: many NFL players also played in other leagues, including the American Football League.  I created templates "Infobox Pro Football player" and "Infobox Pro Football player retired", which permit correct display of a player's American Football League draft information, and his American Football League All-Star Game appearances, which were NOT "pro bowl" appearances.  That appellation is a convenience by the NFL and writers/webmasters not wanting to take the trouble to identify the American Football League's All-Star games.  "Infobox Pro Football player" and "Infobox Pro Football player retired" also differentiate between the player's service for American Football League teams and NFL teams. Joe Namath, for example, played for the American Football League Jets from 1965 through 1969, and the NFL Jets from 1970 through 1976.  The template "NFL PlayerCoach" is an incorrect reference, for example, for Tom Flores and Art Shell, and should be changed to "Pro Football PlayerCoach".  Wikipedia's "NFL Player" and other "NFL Project" templates also incorrectly show draft information: they show only NFL draft data, and they cite the non-existent 1967, 1968, and 1969 "NFL drafts".  The draft in those years was a Common Draft held by the American Football League and the NFL after the NFL agreed, after the 1966 season, to merge with the American Football League.  The actual merger took place in 1970, but the Common Draft began in 1967, and was not called the "NFL draft". 
* I would be glad to discuss this with you through e-mail.  My address is RemembertheAFL@aol.com.   Read my bio at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angelo_Felice_Coniglio SugnuSicilianu 16:39, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: AFL Project

message: * Wikipedia templates like "NFL player", "NFL player retired" and "NFL PlayerCoach" are generally incorrect when the player served in a league other than the NFL. Many American Football League players never played in the NFL: many NFL players also played in other leagues, including the American Football League.  I created templates "Infobox Pro Football player" and "Infobox Pro Football player retired", which permit correct display of a player's American Football League draft information, and his American Football League All-Star Game appearances, which were NOT "pro bowl" appearances.  That appellation is a convenience by the NFL and writers/webmasters not wanting to take the trouble to identify the American Football League's All-Star games.  "Infobox Pro Football player" and "Infobox Pro Football player retired" also differentiate between the player's service for American Football League teams and NFL teams. Joe Namath, for example, played for the American Football League Jets from 1965 through 1969, and the NFL Jets from 1970 through 1976.  The template "NFL PlayerCoach" is an incorrect reference, for example, for Tom Flores and Art Shell, and should be changed to "Pro Football PlayerCoach".  Wikipedia's "NFL Player" and other "NFL Project" templates also incorrectly show draft information: they show only NFL draft data, and they cite the non-existent 1967, 1968, and 1969 "NFL drafts".  The draft in those years was a Common Draft held by the American Football League and the NFL after the NFL agreed, after the 1966 season, to merge with the American Football League.  The actual merger took place in 1970, but the Common Draft began in 1967, and was not called the "NFL draft". 
* I would be glad to discuss this with you through e-mail.  My address is RemembertheAFL@aol.com.   Read my bio at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angelo_Felice_Coniglio SugnuSicilianu 16:39, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestions

message: Is this project limited to the AFL that existed between 1960 and 1969, or will it expand to cover the 1926, 1936, and 1940 editions that had some claim to major league status? Should it also include the 1938 version that made no such claim (or the American Professional Football Association of that same time period)? Of course, there could be a Wikiproject covering all the defunct professional leagues... but then it would include the fourth (fifth?) AFL which is the focus of this Wikiproject. 147.70.242.40 (talk) 19:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does the project cover one AFL, 3 of them... or 4? 

message: Can I ask why there are no player's heights and weight on individual players? Its a surprising ommission given these stats are so often quoted.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yozick72 (talk • contribs) 20:20, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Players Height & Weight 

message: Oakland Raiders has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM)  16:25, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oakland Raiders GAR warning 

message: As you may know, we currently have 400 good article nominations, with a large number of them being in the sports and recreation section. As such, the waiting time for this is especially long, much longer than it should be. As a result of this, I am asking each sports-related WikiProject to review two or three of these nominations. If this is abided by, then the backlog should be cleared quite quickly. Some projects nominate a lot but don't review, or vice-versa, and following this should help to provide a balance and make the waiting time much smaller so that our articles can actually get reviewed! Wizardman 23:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  GAN backlog reduction - Sports and recreation 

message: There is discussion ongoing at Wikipedia_talk:BIO#RFC:_WP:Athlete_Professional_Clause_Needs_Improvement debating possible changes to the WP:ATHLETE notability guideline.  As a result, some have suggested using WP:NSPORT as an eventual replacement for WP:ATHLETE.  Editing has begun at WP:NSPORT, please participate to help refine the notability guideline for the sports covered by this wikiproject. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 03:18, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sports Notability 

message: For whatever reason this project's project banner was tagging its articles with"National Football League" assessment categories, rather than "American Football League" categories. This was causing confusion when articles were tagged with different assessments for the two projects; when this occurred, the article was appearing in two different NFL assessment categories. I've corrected this and created a new set of assessment categories specifically for this project. — DeeJayK (talk) 18:26, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Created separate assessment categories for this project 

message: Hi fellows! A user became in active and then this was started. This page was nominated by them and there is no one to fix the issues. I tried but I know nothing about the game and I m having trouble in dealing with it. I will not be able to do any more to it so can anyone from you please try to fix the problems. I'd appreciate any help. Thanks! →TSU tp* 14:29, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Talk:Aaron_Rodgers/GA2]] 

message: An RfC discussion about the MOS:FLAG restriction on the use of flag icons for sportspeople has been opened at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons. We invite all interested participants to provide their opinion here. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:44, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: RfC on the use of flag icons for sportspeople

message: :File:AFL Football.png, which is used in Template:User WikiProject American Football League, is missing evidence of permission, and may be deleted after 1 March 2013, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion, unless evidence can be provided that the creator of the image has agreed to release the image under the GFDL or another free license. —Bkell (talk) 03:36, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  File:AFL Football.png is missing evidence of permission 

message: This is a courtesy message to inform the members of this project that I have nominated Portal:Sports for featured portal status. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Sports. The featured portal criteria are at Wikipedia:Featured portal criteria. Please feel free to weigh in. Sven Manguard Wha? 18:40, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portal:Sports is up for featured portal consideration 

message: Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment on the WikiProject X proposal 

message: Hello everyone!
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject X is live! 

message: I've nominated the 1967 American Football League draft article for deletion. This and the subsequent two years the NFL and AFL participated in a Common draft. As such, this topic is covered in more detail in the 1967 NFL draft article. If you'd like to share your opinion on the topic, please do so on the AfD discussion page or on the article talk page. — DeeJayK (talk) 16:53, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The discussion on this topic has expanded to how to deal with the entire series of articles that cover the NFL/AFL common draft era. We'd love to get more input from NFL and football editors at the AfD discussion page. — DeeJayK (talk) 15:21, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  AfD: [[1967 American Football League draft]] 

message: An RFC has recently been started regarding a potential change to the notability guidelines for sportspeople. Please join in the conversation. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 23:07, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: RFC on sports notability

message: We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month,  will post at /Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of .
 
We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
* The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
* The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
* The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).
We're grateful to  for his original , and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of , and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.
Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular pages report 

message: The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.
Portals are being redesigned.
The new design features are being applied to existing portals.
At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template .
The discussion about this can be found here.
Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass.  Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.
=== Background ===
On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace.  On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.
There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.
Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.
So far, 84 editors have joined.
If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.
If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.
Thank you.     — The Transhumanist    10:53, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject collaboration notice from the [[WP:WPPORT|Portals WikiProject]] 

message: On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace.  On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.
There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.
Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.
So far, 84 editors have joined.
If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.
If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.
Thank you.     — The Transhumanist    10:53, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background 

message: Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:23, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for information on WP1.0 web tool 

message: New stub: Cannabis and sports. Any project members care to help expand the American football section? ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:55, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cannabis and sports 

message: I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
*John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.)
and turns it into something like
* John Smith "" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
It will work on a variety of links, including those from ,  and .
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
-  Headbomb {t · c · p · b}
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  User script to detect unreliable sources 

message: There is a requested move discussion at Talk:National Football League#Requested move 3 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:49, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move at [[Talk:National Football League#Requested move 3 March 2024]] 

message: Kansas City Chiefs 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. Hog Farm  Talk 18:47, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good article reassessment for [[Kansas City Chiefs]]