Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive-Sep2006

message: I am attempting to fill in the mascots on the Team Articles chart, and I am looking for some thoughts on a part of this.  For many teams (for example, Baylor) have a seperate costumed mascot and a live mascot (in Baylor's case, Bruiser & Judge).  Should we have seperate pages for each in these cases, or a combined page, as many of them (with the possible exception of Auburn's War Eagle) come from the same origins?  Looking for thoughts on this matter.... ToddC4176 21:40, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would expect that you will not be able to find enough good (i.e. citable) information for two separate articles for most schools.  Notable exceptions would be for programs like Texas where Bevo is going to have enough information for a dedicated article, even if Hook 'em doesn't. Personally, I think that it would be fine for most schools to have just a School Mascots page (or even just section on their athletics page) and only the really recognizable or notable mascots have their own page (Bevo, Sooner Schooner, Uga, etc.). z4ns4tsu\talk 16:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Bevo and Hook 'em Horns both have fairly extensive (and referenced) articles.  But for a counter-example, the 3 Red River Shootout trophies are combined into one article.  So, I don't think there can be a hard and fast rule.  Just create the page(s) and they can be split or merged later as needed. Johntex\talk 03:29, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just came accross this List of U.S. college mascots article. While it probably shouldn't be part of this project, we should check it out to see what pages exist and add/link to ones that aren't there. They didn't have Ralphie linked, so I did that, for example. --MECU≈talk 12:53, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mascots & Nickname Articles 

message: I've created the bare bones for the 2004 NCAA Division I-A football rankings page, if anyone wants to help fill in the tables that would be great. VegaDark 20:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: USC and OU were 1/2 all year, I believe that was a first (to have both 1 and 2 locked throughout).  --Bobak 21:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I seem to remember there being some discussion of it, yeah.  I don't remember if it was a first, but I'm pretty sure it had been a long time. z4ns4tsu\talk 22:00, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: This might be harder to create since it'll be harder finder sources with a week-by-week account of all major polls. Here are some preseason polls.--NMajdan•talk 22:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, check this book: ESPN College Football Encyclopedia: The Complete History of the Game ; it has week-by-week for all seasons up to last season!  I can't remember if it has first place votes, though... --Bobak 22:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 2004 NCAA Division I-A football rankings

message: Okay, so we have a really good start on the season rankings pages with 2005 already a featured list and 2006 coming along nicely.  We also recently got started on 2004 and it's about 10% complete...maybe less.  I've been thinking about other cool things that we could do with these tables, though, and I came up with an idea that I want to bounce off of this group before I start trying to implement it.  I think it would be really neat if you could click on a cell in the table and then all other cells for that team would be highlighted so you could easily see how a team moved in the rankings. I'll start the brainstorming here and feel free to jump in and add your thoughts.
*Requirements
**Should be built in javascript so that it matches the other scripts on WP
**Should have as low as possible server load...javascript and vbscript both have none, so that's good
**Should not have to click on team's name or have each instance a hyperlink (aesthetics mostly)
*Problems
**Would have to redo all the tables and name each cell (probably)
**Would have to figure out how to read contents of cell and match the correct team name no matter the record or number of votes (regular expression on the cell value almost definitely)
**Would have to attach to the page somehow (no idea about WP policy on custom scripts)
**Would take a ton of work to get it going and a lot of sandbox testing before putting it live
**Have to make sure that adding the script wouldn't change 2005's featured list status
Anyway, add your thoughts and comments. I can write it, but if anyone is a javascript god, it would go faster 'cuz I'm not. I do PHP and vbscript, but javascript is a bit different and I haven't really worked with it much. z4ns4tsu\talk 05:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So, all this just so someone could highlight a team to see how they progressed? I'm not sure it's worth the effort for just that. If we could do other things as well then I wouldn't complain about this feature being a part of it. I think having some kid of bot that can create the rankings automatically to take out the boring part of doing it manually would be more useful. Something like on a user sub-page we just list the raw data in an easily editable human format, like:
2006 AP
-Week1
1-Ohio State
2-Texas
3-
...
-Week2
1-Texas
2-Ohio State
3-
...
So that each week, someone just has to type it out on the page. The bot then can put it in the right place, link it, color it rightly, and so forth. It could also check it daily to see if there's some vandalism that us humans didn't catch.
Or what about a template for each 1-25? Just pass a few variables and it would make editing easier. I could put that together today. We wouldn't have to go back and redo the existing ones either. Course, tables go horizontal in data but we'd want it to go vertical. I'd have to think on that one. MECU≈talk 13:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I think that sounds like a lot of work for not a lot of reward. I think the effort that would go into that change would be better spent on creating rankings pages for 2004, 2003, etc. There's already enough disdain for javascript on Wikipedia already (many people dislike the javascript dropdowns such as the type used for the GA categories).--NMajdan•talk 13:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My idea of using templates for each ranking won't quite work unless someone knows how to join tables together somehow. See User:Mecu/Rankings. It uses User:Mecu/StartRanking, User:Mecu/Rank and User:Mecu/EndRanking. Feel free to play with those on there to try and get it to work if you wish. MECU≈talk 13:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Script for rankings tables 

message: Hey, I've created Template:Infobox college athletics, based on an infobox at USC Athletics.  It's not football-specific, but it seems sufficient for pages like Missouri Tigers, which for most teams includes all the information on their football programs.  If anyone has any suggestions or alterations for it, I'd appreciate your input.  I've added it to a few athletic program pages, and will add it to more over the next few days. -Elmer Clark 06:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In general, College Athletic pages aren't part of this project. They do (and should) contain some football information, but in general we don't really do too much to them. Also, to list a template to type this . It gets the same end result, so no big deal. --MECU≈talk 12:32, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  College athletic programs infobox template 

message: I've started the Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Collaboration of the Month department. I don't care to run it if someone else wants that charge. Nonetheless, please participate and help out. --MECU≈talk 18:07, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collaboration of the Month 

message: Hi. If you still have work to do tagging talk pages and assessing articles, my AWB plugin might be of interest to you.
The plugin has two main modes of operation:
*Tagging talk pages, great for high-speed tagging
*Assessments mode, for reviewing articles (pictured)
As of the current version, WikiProjects with simple "generic" templates are supported by the plugin without the need for any special programatic support by me. I've had a look at your project's template and you seem to qualify.
For more information see:
*About the plugin
*About support for "generic" WikiProject templates
*User guide
*About AWB (AutoWikiBrowser)
Hope that helps. If you have any questions or find any bugs please let me know on the plugin's talk page. --Kingboyk 12:09, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tagging talk pages and assessing articles

message: An article explaining the term, origin, etc. is being put through a deletion nomination (for the sake of full disclosure, I started the article).  The main argument seems to be that no one in college football uses it.  I (obviously) challenge that notion, however please share your opinion, for or against.  Your opinions are your own, I won't take anything personally --I just people who actually (ostensibly) pay attention to CFB to have some input, then I'll be more comfortable with any result.  My position is stated on the AfD page. --Bobak 14:43, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That AfD page is here, btw. z4ns4tsu\talk 18:07, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, I've never seen a 5-2 vote get called "no consensus" before.  Oh well, at least the page was kept. z4ns4tsu\talk 15:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ever heard the term "[[Directional Michigan]]"?