Template talk:Atlanta Falcons roster navbox

To the user who keeps reverting back to having separate PUP and IR lists

The standard for all NFL roster navbox templates is to have a single "reserve" group, not different ones based on the type of reserve tag. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:19, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

2015 discussion

It appears some editors wish to use non-standard organization for the template. Please discuss on talk page rather than reverting/re-implementing changes over and over again. Please explain your stance below. Sergecross73 msg me 01:27, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

• I say we just make standard the way every other team template has been handled for years now. Below is an example on how this template (and all the others) should look during the season.

Simple, clean, effective, and already in use without controversy by 31 other roster navbox templates, so why should this specific one be any different? There is no need for a "Free agent" group, since it's cleaner and easier to maintain if we just removed all the free agents since they're not even under contract with the team anymore. There is also no need for an "Unsigned draft picks" group, since all the draft picks are signed to the active roster soon after anyway.

For future reference, these are the abbreviations to be used with a "small" wikitag in the Reserved lists group only (I might be forgetting one or two):

• (Susp.) = Suspended
• (IR) = Injured Reserve
• (PUP) = Physically Unable to Perform

By the way, to the user who has been doing this for months, I don't mean to be hostile towards you, I just want to see this template follow standards and be consistent with the other 31. You're a huge Falcons fan, great, but that doesn't give you sole right to control how this template looks. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 02:57, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 3 May 2015

This is not right for this roster box to be locked and 31 others are unlocked I have been doing the falcons roster for about 2 years now I am a die hard fan and I would like it to be decent thats why I fix it up. Falconfanatic (talk) 05:10, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

@Falconfanatic: Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:33, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Discuss in the section right above this, and come to an agreement, and it'll be unlocked. Sergecross73 msg me 15:23, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Did you read any of the above? Only this specific template has these problems, so none of the other ones needed protection. I've also been doing these roster navbox templates for about 2 years, and being a die hard fan does not give you right to introduce non-standard groups. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:30, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Look I how do you have the right to edit the page and I don't its not a paid job its free and it's not even a job I do it because I care. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Falconfanatic (talk • contribs) 22:40, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Falconfanatic: Using bad grammar isn't going to help your case. Why can't you just follow the standards that the 31 other templates use, if you care so much?
• @Sergecross73: I'd like to have this template open again, but it seems Falconfanatic will just revert to his old ways and disregard what I've said above once you unlock it. If other users that only focus on their favorite team such as RevanFan, Tbbucs77, Raider Duck, and Diddykong1130 can allow follow the standards without being told, (or simply told once) there is no reason why this user can't. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 06:51, 2 June 2015 (UTC)