Talk:Florida–Tennessee football rivalry

message: The addition of the 2001 game is long overdue (I didn't have the stomach to initiate it). I'm thinking that the '95 game should be added and the '98 game should be given its own section, removing the '97 info but mentioning the "no citrus without UT" crack in the intro. That section is already very 90's-heavy, but the era deserves all the coverage, imo.
Thoughts? Zeng8r (talk) 23:47, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  memorable games 

message: If you compare the 2013 game with the other games listed in that section, it's pretty clear that it doesn't deserve its own entry. Heck, I attended that sloppy mess of a football game myself and would certainly not call it "memorable" in any sense of the word.
I'm not sure if the 2012 game really belongs in that section, either, but it's been there for a while so I'll let it be pending further comments. As for yesterday's game, I'm going to go ahead and remove it. Any thoughts, anyone? Zeng8r (talk) 15:29, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, but the 2012 game should be retained as notable because ESPN College Gameday showed up to hype the 'rivalry'. There isn't a much more notable source than that for a Saturday football game being 'big'. It may not have been memorable, but it was notable.VmZH88AZQnCjhT40 (talk) 00:04, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The more time passes, the more it becomes obvious that the 2012 game really doesn't belong in that section. No championship implications, no truly memorable plays or controversy, nothing that makes it stand out like all of the other games in that section. When I have some free time (ha!), I'm also going to clean up the text in the main article. It's turning into a series of over-long and over-specific game summaries when it should be an overview of trends and changes. Thoughts, anyone? --Zeng8r (talk) 10:43, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recentism in the memorable games section 

message: While I'm taking a hard look at this article, I noticed that the 2001 Tennessee vs. Florida football game has in independent article that was created in June. I'll start a discussion on that talk page, but since I'd bet it's not on too many watch lists (it wasn't on mine until 10 minute ago), I'll repeat it here...
Is that game really notable enough for an independent article? While the college football wikiproject notability guide is a little vague on single-game articles, I don't think that it qualifies. The summary in the "memorable games" section of this article on the UF and UT 2001 season articles is plenty of coverage for a regular season game that didn't end of producing a champion of any kind, imo. Accordingly, I'm thinking of putting it up for deletion. What says anybody else? --Zeng8r (talk) 23:38, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: 2001 game independent article

message: If the 2015 game is to be considered notable, should it be called "Wide Right" or "5 for 5 on 4th down?"  As for notability, I would wait until later in the season to see how this game impacts the SEC Eastern Division standings.  If there is a significant impact, then I would think that it would be notable not only because of McElwain's first signature win and the Gators' comeback, but also because of Tennessee's second fourth quarter meltdown.  Thoughts? BenYes? 14:31, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I was there (and still haven't gotten my voice back), so my initial reaction is yes, it should be included. But stepping back and looking at it objectively, we should wait and see how the season develops for both teams. If it's a big turning point, than we can add it later. If it's not, then a brief mention in the main article text would be enough. Just my two cents. Zeng8r (talk) 15:19, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

text: * We should not make up cutesy names for individual games; we should rely on the mainstream sports media (i.e. reliable sources) to coin memorable game names, if any.  Otherwise, game sub-headers should be factual and neutral.  I agree with Zen that we should at least wait until the end of the 2015 season before deciding of 2015 represents one of the all-time great games in the series.  Too often, "notable games" sections in rivalry articles suffer from "recentism."  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:13, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

text: We all seem to be in agreement here.  I think that waiting until December is best.  BenYes? 18:16, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  2015 notable? 

message: Gators beat Shuler  and the Vols in a shootout by a single touchdown; biggest win of regular season if not the year. Cake (talk) 00:02, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Any reason not to include 1993?

message: Yes, Tennessee is orange and white.  However, Florida is orange and blue, and white on blue is used for Florida because of WP:COLOR compliance (orange on blue is not compliant).  White on orange is not in compliance with WP:COLOR policy either.  Black on orange is, which is why I changed it.  Click here to check the contrast.  Per WP:COLOR, "ensure the contrast of the text with its background reaches at least WCAG 2.0's AA level."  BenYes? 02:06, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Results table coloring 

message: In the "Schedule" section, the following statement is made : "Florida and Tennessee have played on the third Saturday of September almost every year since 1992, giving the rivalry its nickname."
Nowhere in the article is the nickname of the rivalry actually stated.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.68.1.173 (talk) 14:59, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification needed. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Florida–Tennessee football rivalry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120402035222/http://web.gatorzone.com/football/media/2011/media_guide.pdf to http://web.gatorzone.com/football/media/2011/media_guide.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120402035222/http://web.gatorzone.com/football/media/2011/media_guide.pdf to http://web.gatorzone.com/football/media/2011/media_guide.pdf
*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5yxZ7ROzm?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.la84foundation.org%2FSportsLibrary%2FCFHSN%2FCFHSNv06%2FCFHSNv06n2g.pdf to http://www.la84foundation.org/SportsLibrary/CFHSN/CFHSNv06/CFHSNv06n2g.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:11, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: As I have for the past five years in a row (!), I'm going to go ahead and delete the latest entry in the notable games section, at least for now. You can read my reasons over and over again in previous discussions further up this talk page, so I'm not going to repeat them all again. Suffice it to say, Wikipedia is not supposed to be a breaking news site but is supposed to take a wide-perspective, long-term view of events. As a life-long Gator, the "Hail Feleipe" instantly jumped into my personal top 10 most enjoyable moments. As long-time Wikipedia editor, however, I know that writing a breathless account of an amazing play minutes after the fact is probably not for the best. It's only September; the full impact of yesterday's game won't be known until December, at least. If we still think it's truly memorable, the section can be re-written and re-added then.
Feel free to argue, of course, but before you do, please review the previous discussions from prior years on this talk page. I'm still cleaning up from Hurricane Irma; don't have time to retype all that stuff right now. --Zeng8r (talk) 13:58, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  2017 recentism 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Florida–Tennessee football rivalry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110727234334/http://www.utsports.com/uploadedFiles/Sports/Football/07fb-p124-185.pdf to http://www.utsports.com/uploadedFiles/Sports/Football/07fb-p124-185.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.utsports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/2010-fb-media-guide-records.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121016001011/http://cfreference.net/cfr/schools/tennessee/341/1995 to http://cfreference.net/cfr/schools/tennessee/341/1995
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121013204948/http://cfreference.net/cfr/schools/florida/443/1995 to http://cfreference.net/cfr/schools/florida/443/1995
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.la84foundation.org/SportsLibrary/CFHSN/CFHSNv06/CFHSNv06n2g.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:48, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Looking over this article and its talk page just now gave me an idea. The games from 2014 to 2017 were not very particularly important in the big picture of college football, but they all featured dramatic second half comebacks. So instead of listing them separately with a lot of details for each game, they could be combined into one long-ish entry that focuses on the fourth quarter heroics. I'll do the rewrite over the next couple of days unless anyone has other ideas. Zeng8r (talk) 14:10, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, btw. I'm not so sure about the Dickey / Graves / Woodruff table, but I put it in to try to clarify the confusing interconnections between the schools. It would be nice if somebody could color code the table cells and add a caption, as my table-making skills are weak. Zeng8r (talk) 14:21, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Combining comebacks in the "memorable games" section 

message: Before anybody jumps in, let me say that no, I do not think this year's contest belongs in the memorable games section. Yes, you could argue that there were some unique aspects to it, but you can say that about almost any game in the series. As hashed out repeatedly in prior years, the section should only include games that stand out due to high stakes or remarkable events, or both. Another rule of thumb - if a game gets only a 30 second (or less) recap near the end of the ESPN college football wrap-up show, it probably doesn't belong on the list. We should reevaluate at the end of the season, of course. Zeng8r (talk) 14:21, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: 2018 game