Talk:December 2004 in sports

message: OK, first, unrelated, why does this redirect to Talk:August 2004 in sports?  Just wondering.
: The next time this page is moved, please don't move the associated talk page with it, please. :)
Anyways, I hesitated adding the college football bowl schedule at first because I know it's a number of games.  I finally decided to do so (although, apparently not everyone feels the same way), but here's my reasoning:
# All other sports have their playoffs/postseasons added to the list, college football should have theirs listed as well.  Even if the system is lengthy, complicated and nonsensical (which it is).
# It's December and the number of events running at this time of year is minimal and, thus, having some more events should be a good thing.  Similarly, half of the events happen on three days and the list will be nearly empty again come January 2.
# If your argument includes that you don't think college football is important or is a dumb, Ameri-centric sport, bear in that I probably think your favorite sport is dumb, too.  However, I have come to realize that not everybody thinks the same way, and I leave cricket, boxing, snooker, etc. alone because of that.  So, I hope you extend sports I follow the same courtesy that I extend sports that you follow.
# Finally, I'd rather not trim the number of bowl games down because then that's making a determination as to which games are important and which aren't.  Each one is important (at the very least) to the tens, if not hundreds of thousands of students, alumni, etc.
Anyways, I don't want to get into a revert war or anything, but I wanted to outline my rationale somewhere since there's not enough room in the edit summary.  RADICALBENDER★
:I'm going to revert again. If every sports fan did what you are doing with their favourite sport, we'd soon get a very long, and very useless list. It's easy to find events that attract tens of thousands of sports (every match in the Premier League in the UK would count). There are too many "big" games around the world, and I'm against setting a bad precedent. I've left in the Rose Bowl, as I know it's a big one. Add one or two others, but please, no more. As an alternative you could merge them all into a one-liner: "American football: College Bowls" maybe. jguk 19:59, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Except, that the bowl games are "postseason" for college football.  I'm not suggesting to add every important game in every important league worldwide, but the "playoffs" in all sports should count for something worth listing. RADICALBENDER★ 20:40, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

text: So list them all under a one-liner: "American football: College Bowls", with the link going to a detailed list of them. A policy of listing every "playoff" is also too US-biased since the US has many of them, other countries, not so much. jguk 20:56, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

text: Assuming I've read the Bowl Championship Series page right and there are 4 such games, that seems ok. I wouldn't want to see any more than 4 go up. We need to think of other readers interested in other sports. jguk 23:19, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, Jguk; there are only four BCS games, at least this year. Next year, a fifth BCS game will be added, but it won't be part of the national championship rotation. Dale Arnett 03:28, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: College football

message: Is it really "sports news" to note that the brother of a famous sportsman has decided to stay in the army? Let's keep a grip on things, people, else we'll be noting what sportpeople's dogs or cats are doing next! -- Arwel 12:00, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Relevance

message: Might we agree on listing each day's events alphabetically by sport? That way it would be very quick'n'easy for readers to check out the sports events for whatever sport they follow which is listed. Just a suggestion; what do you think? --Wernher 23:50, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No point on agreeing this, it would just be ignored. As it is, the instruction is to add new entries at the top, and that instruction is ignored. Similarly, we can't agree to list them in order of what is the most important: how do we determine what the most important is? To biathlon fans, that was the biggest sporting event of the day. And why restrict it to what's the biggest sporting event in either North America or Western Europe? Leave it as it is: an instruction to add new info at the top (which admittedly will be ignored by some). jguk 21:50, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Alphabetic order

message: Just to let you guys know, I've created Template:Current sports (based on Template:Current) for articles regarding about sports only. Please feel free to use it. =) --Andylkl 19:37, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that this template has now been voted for deletion at TfD. -Splash 21:48, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Current sports events template

message: After seeing the format for the NBA scores, I figured that we should do the same for the other major sports (NFL, MLB, et al.) Examples of this format on NFL reports can be found on the December 18, 2004 section of the article. Wouldn't that be a good idea? JB82 16:08, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  ...xxx|in xxx 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on December 2004 in sports. 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/20050404032829/http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/recap?gid=200412040064 to https://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/recap?gid=200412040064
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) 19:14, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified