Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League

Infobox NFL team sprawl

Looking at Chicago Bears, it seems that Template:Infobox NFL team is getting too long with less notable lists like the team's historical list of owners and presidents. They don't seem more notable than head coaches and GMs, and comes off as worshipping organizational hierachy. Certainly useful information, which I suggest moving into the body and sourcing (eventually). Then we can remove the parameters from the infobox.—Bagumba (talk) 03:21, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

• Support: I do agree that we shouldn't include the full owner and president history in the team infoboxes like that. I do think though that we could possibly wikilink some of the listed personnel to a list of the team's personnel, if it exists. For example, on Green Bay Packers, linking General manager to List of Green Bay Packers presidents, head coach to List of Green Bay Packers head coaches, president to List of Green Bay Packers presidents, etc., while still listing the active person in that role beside it. That would be one way to still provide that info, if it's available. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:17, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
• Support that is what the lists are for. What is next a list of head coaches? Imagine if all of the countries had a list of monarchs and prime ministers in their infobox?-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 15:06, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
• Support but only if the ownership information is preserved in the article body, like what I've done here with the Washington Commanders. I'm indifferent on maintaining a list of team presidents, as they are a hired position that aren't notable in most cases (could any of you name 10 active ones without looking it up?). A list of general managers would make more sense. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 22:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

• Actually, I'm going to redo the list of NFL franchise owners page and add the same information under individual team headers. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:46, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

  @Dissident93: That article was actually on my to do list to rework and nominate for featured list status, so I'm open to working on it with you. But, based on your description, I think maybe a List of NFL franchise owners and List of current NFL franchise owners might be useful as different lists. That way we could have an "at a glance" for current ones and a full historical page for all that info. Thoughts? Hey man im josh (talk) 21:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

  I was actually thinking it would be best to prominently list the team's current owner first and then list the ownership history below. Having two articles makes more sense if we decide to list them in chronological order with notes on each (if possible) like the Commanders example. But anything is better than the current status of the article. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 21:04, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

  List of current NFL head coaches and List of NFL head coaches provides a precedent for the layout that Hey man im josh is proposing. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:08, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

  I love the idea of all the information in one place, but I do worry that if we include it ALL in one list, the entire ownership histories, we'd be doing a disservice to readers. I expect that they'd be normally searching for a current list first and foremost with the historical list of owners being a secondary thought. We could strike a good balance I think. Hey man im josh (talk) 21:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

  For my first example, I was imagining a smaller condensed table for the previous owners that omitted prose and only included years owned, purchase price, and team achievements overseen. The current owner would be the one with a historical summary of their ownership that includes all of the above. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 21:19, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

  Purchase price was a difficult aspect for me when I was brainstorming about the owners list in the past. I thought about an acquired column instead of purchase price, where you could state it was inherited or purchased, and use either notes to include how that happened (at least when thinking about the "current" list) or an extra column. I'd think for a historical list you'd simply include a notes column that gives you the info instead of using notes themselves for that info, based on the goals of such lists. Hey man im josh (talk) 21:29, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

  Another thing I'd like to work is changing the scope of Glazer ownership of Manchester United to include their Bucs ownership. Glazer family redirecting to Malcolm Glazer, somebody who has been dead for 10 years, isn't ideal. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 15:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

  I'd support the scope change, however, the article is already promoted to good article status... that makes it a little more difficult of a sell. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:54, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

  Maybe then a subsection on Malcolm page? ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 19:16, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Support: Yeah these seem a bit much to include in infoboxes. I agree with Dissident93 that the info should be in the body in a table. ULPS ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:35, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

If a player has only played in college, can it be made into an article?

There are a few players that did not player or even make an NFL team yet they have Wikipedia pages. Is it important enough or no? WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 17:38, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

They can have independent articles if they meet WP:GNG. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:43, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

OK, so should I start it as a draft then, rather than just making a page? WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 17:46, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Not a bad idea to start it in draft space if you are unsure. I do that often. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:55, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

How did this look? Michael Geiger (American football) WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 21:11, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

I'd remove the cookie-cutter prose listing his stats which are already listed in the table below and get rid of the professional section since he clearly never played or even tried out for a pro team. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 22:19, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

FLRC

I have nominated List of Minnesota Vikings starting quarterbacks for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:25, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Standardized naming for Category:American football team records and statistics

Within WP:NFL we have a tiny mess regarding the naming of lists related to records and statistics, as well as awards. Some examples:

• List of Green Bay Packers records
• Minnesota Vikings statistics
• List of Carolina Panthers records and statistics
• List of Chicago Bears team records

Regarding awards, we have:

• Baltimore Ravens awards
• List of Chicago Bears award winners

I propose we standardize these in the following ways:

• List of *TEAM* team records (i.e. List of Green Bay Packers team records): this clarifies the content of each list, which is "team records" and not an indiscriminate list of statistics
• List of *TEAM* award winners (i.e. List of Green Bay Packers award winners): this also clarifies the content of each list, which is a list of award winners (not a list of team awards)

Thoughts? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:22, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Unless anyone objects in the next few days, I plan to make the moves as non-controversial. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:11, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

I support standardization. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:21, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Also lending my support. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 03:51, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

All cleaned up now. Moved to Category:NFL team records and Category:NFL team award winners. All pages moved. Created the {{NFL team records}} template to keep them organized as a whole set. The pages are all in a pretty sad state, and we only have 14/32 created, if anyone is interested in a project. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:54, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

When does the season begin?

I changed the description of the 2024 NFL season in the infobox of National Football League, from current season to upcoming season, but my change has been rejected to. When does an NFL season begin? GoodDay (talk) 20:12, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Interesting question. The NFL has "league years", and based on this it would appear that the 2024-2025 league year began June 17 with the first official deadline for certain transactions. That said, you could argue the actual "season" begins with the first game and ends with the last game. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:21, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

@Gonzo fan2007: I believe the league year actually starts in March. The link you shared, I believe, updates, given that the draft and other significant events are no longer listed. If you scroll down to 12-Mar, you'll see that it says "The 2025 League Year and Free Agency signing period begin at 4:00 p.m., New York time." Hey man im josh (talk) 15:52, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

What josh said haha « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:53, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I've found a number of other sources on. It began March 13 this year as well, per the Giants, the Raiders, the Chiefs, Sports Illustrated, etc. It's probably regularly scheduled to be March 13, but that's just a pure guess based on it matching between last year and this. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:56, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

I reverted you once, mostly because in my past experience, the "current season" parameter in the infoboxes on team articles as well as on the NFL article has been updated when the new league year starts, so that's what I've gone by.

However, it's a good question. Whether league year and season are the same. All team season pages currently talk about the 2024 season being the "upcoming" season for a team, and we still consider this time period before the preseason to be offseason. It's all a minor thing, but if we're going to say that the 2024 season hasn't started yet we'll also have to change Template:Infobox NFL team with a parameter for upcoming season for consistency, as they all say "Current season". KristofferAG (talk) 12:57, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Personally I'd prefer upcoming season only be used between the conclusion of the Super Bowl and March 13th, since that's when free agency begins. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:01, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 14:13, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

This is how I've always looked at it. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 15:33, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

I support this also (noting that the exact date the league year starts varies within mid-March each year). Frank Anchor 19:49, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

I'd say the season starts with the first week 1 game and ends with the Super Bowl, and is something separate from the league year that begins in March. Not too bothered if the vote goes the other way. Harper J. Cole (talk) 22:48, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

I can see the wording being a bit tricky. League - after March 13th and season - week 1. Someone actually said it to me last week, that they just planned their vacation so they don't miss the start of the season (Reg. season - in September). Even though we know there are preseason games prior to that. Like H. J. Cole said, not bothered with the vote either way. Bringingthewood (talk) 00:05, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Disagreement on the "We want the ball" game

Hello, looking for some help and consensus on a disagreement between Clarityfiend and myself regarding my recently created article "We want the ball and we're going to score!". First, I agree with their assessment that the article title should not have punctuation in it, so whenever this is resolved, happy to fix that and clean-up after the move. The crux of the issue though seems to focus on whether the eponymous name of this topic refers to the game itself, or just the comment by Hasselbeck. From my perspective, this game is notable for a few reasons: its the playoffs, it was the first consequential game in the team's rivalry, it was a competitive game, it went to overtime and then obviously what really did it was Hasselbeck's comment and then subsequent interception returned for a TD. I did consider just naming the article 2004 NFC Wild Card playoff game (Seattle–Green Bay), but that is clearly not its WP:COMMONNAME. Also, although the comment by Hasselbeck is obviously important, the actual play that is most notable is the interception returned for a TD. As I mentioned to Clarityfiend, this game was ranked as the 72nd greatest game in NFL history, so the game appears notable (noting that every source provides an overview of the game itself, not just the comment made by Hasselbeck). For assistance, Clarityfiend is proposing changing the opening lines to this version. I do not support that change because the topic of the article is not Hasselbeck's comment, its the NFL game that occurred in which he made his comment. Thank you for any assistance you can provide. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:23, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Can you provide any sources calling/naming the game itself "We want the ball and we're going to score!"?

I've never heard the game itself referred to directly as "WWtBaWGS". That's the problem with the current lead sentence, and I agree with the other user that it's awkward phrasing. The "WWtBaWGS" game... would be better.

The "We want the ball and we're going to score!" game was the 2004 NFC Wild Card playoff game between the...

Or have the lead sentence describe the phrase and then the rest of the lead and the article describe the game, as their edit does.

Article title is a separate matter that can be decided later through WP:RM.

PK-WIKI (talk) PK-WIKI (talk) 16:22, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

PackersNews.com is titled "'We want the ball and we're gonna score!': Looking back at Packers-Seahawks classic". I think the point about moving the article would resolve the main concerns, because the first sentence would likely no longer have a bolded title in it. I think the point I want to get across though, is that the topic of the article is the game itself, not Hasselbeck's comment. Had the game ended in a Packers' field goal or some other non-dramatic way that included Hasselbeck, its likely the game doesn't get anywhere close to the coverage it has gotten. Note that we typically try to avoid (at least in my experience) repeating what the topic is, so The "WWtBaWGS" game...was a game is not preferred. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:31, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't think the sourcing is there to name the game itself "WWtBaWGS". That phrase is often used as a "headline" for articles about the game, but I doubt we would ever see the game itself described as such in prose without being wrapped as "The WWtBaWGS game".

Note that I have no problem with the article title being "WWtBaWGS". Just that the lead sentence should be phrased with "The WWtBaWGS game" or describe the statement by Hasselbeck or some other solution like that. Likewise I have no problem with the article describing the full game + statement, rather than just the statement.

PK-WIKI (talk) 21:26, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Taken from Gonzo's talk page: The phrase is the proper name of the article, since that is what people remember (though there should not be quotes - see Category:Quotations and particularly Category:Quotations from sports). So really, this should be a quotation article, not a game one. And, as I have just noticed, A drive into deep left field by Castellanos uses pretty much the exact same phrasing as I did. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:30, 27 June 2024 (UTC) – While I don't have an opinion on the article title, I disagree with Clarityfiend on what the focus of the article should be. Those are two entirely different situations and, despite a quote from each being notable, they're not really comparable. I agree that the focus should be on the game, but I'd find it perfectly acceptable to expand aftermath section. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:47, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

The problem, as I see it now, is that both the game and the phrase are notable in and of themselves, but there is too much overlap to justify two articles. So I now propose that the article be moved to "2004 NFL wild card game (Green Bay–Seattle)" and the original title (less quotes) point to the Overtime section.

Is the game notable in itself, or is it notable because of Hasselbeck's hubris? The top 100 list mentioned above is about "the 100 greatest across five categories – Plays, Games, Characters, Game Changers and Teams", not just games, and this particular entry talks only about the quote and the overtime result, nothing about the game in regulation. Without the QB's boast coming back to bite him in the ass, would the game qualify? Only one of the references (#21) supports the contention that it is notable, while several are about the Hasselbeck's outbreak of foot-in-mouth disease.

One off-tangent point:

There should be a Category:National Football League plays (and also playoff plays); The Immaculate Reception, Butt Fumble, etc. are currently listed in Category:National Football League games. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:12, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

My view is generally what happens in a game is what makes that game notable. So if the game has a memorable play or some other single thing that happened, what becomes notable is the game. The event that is occurring is a game, not just a single play. Almost always, a play is only notable with the full picture of the game (there are exceptions, like the Butt Fumble, which had almost nothing to do with the game and more to do with the absurdity, lol'ing and meme culture afterward). The Immaculate Reception was notable not just because it was a crazy catch or there was controversy on whether it was a catch, but because it was a playoff game and a walk-off win. This is also why all of these articles still use {{Infobox NFL single game}}, have {{Americanfootballbox}} and almost all provide a synopsis of the game. Again, the phrase isn't notable without the lead-up (a playoff game going to overtime) and then the fact that Hasselbeck threw a pick six to end it.

I could live with a move to 2004 NFC Wild Card playoff game (Seattle–Green Bay), if everyone feels good that that would resolve some of these concerns. It's kind of funny, but I always thought these common name titles should have "game" after them, but we seem to not self-reference what things are in article titles unless that is clearly the common name (i.e. I Have a Dream and not I Have a Dream speech; and Day of Infamy speech and not Day of Infamy). So in my mind it should be the Immaculate Reception game. But I'm clearly in the minority there. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:06, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

@Gonzo fan2007: There is nothing particularly notable about the game itself, only how it ended, and that is tied to Hasselbeck's comment. Playoff games that go into overtime, while rare, are not normally given articles solely on that account. The 2014 NFC Championship Game is another, much more unusual overtime playoff game that involved the same teams, and that one doesn't get an article. There are no good grounds to have two articles, and the quote is what football fans remember most. There are plenty of sources for the quote, almost none for the game itself, and the only one in the article for the game is just as one of a group of games involving the Packers and Seahawks. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

I think that's where some of us disagree. This article is about the game and it absolutely should be from my point of view. The quote is what pushes it over the top in terms of notability. Without the game the quote wouldn't be notable and vice versa, they co-exist. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:12, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Clarityfiend, with respect, I just don't see any support for your position. You are welcome to try a larger venue, like WP:RM or WP:AFD. That said, Seattle Sports names the game as one of the most memorable in the rivalry SB Nation does too, noting it was the first playoff game and one of the first close games in the rivalry and NFL.com ranked it as one of the 100 greatest games ever, with most of the excerpt covering the game itself, not Hasselbeck's quote. Many sources cover a lot more than just the quote: the Associated Press story after the game dedicates just one sentence to Hasselbeck's comment, reserving the rest for the game itself and the Milwaukee Journal dedicates more than half the article about the game.

To your 'another article doesn't exist so this one shouldn't' argument, ironically enough two weeks ago I tagged that article (2014 NFC Chapionship Game with {{R with possibilities}} because I plan to make an article about. I am working on Packers-Seahawks rivalry right now, but it will likely be next up on my list. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:26, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Kane (American football)

Discussion within scope of this project. Cbl62 (talk) 18:03, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

• Same issue at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Quast. Cbl62 (talk) 18:39, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Early NFL players redirected

A large number of early NFL players were recently redirected. Help in finding sources to restore any notable ones would be appreciated. See:

1. Henry Lewis (1921)
2. Johnny Nagle (1921)
3. Charlie Lungren (1923)
4. Swede Erickson (1924)
5. Bill O'Toole (1924)
6. Ivan Quinn (1924)
7. Jack Daniels (1925)
8. Fred Beach (1926)
9. Steve Hanson (1926)
10. Red Quam (1926)
11. Gerry Sherry (1926)
12. Ted Nemzek (1930)
13. Wilmer Fleming (1931)
14. Porter Lainhart (1932)
15. Carmen Scardine (1932)
16. Harry Marker (1933)
17. Gil Robinson (1933)
18. Babe Scheuer (1933)
19. David Ward (1933)
20. Ollie Savatsky (1935)
21. Dominic Vairo (1935)
22. Zed Coston (1939)
23. Emmett Kriel (1939)

There's also, in addition to the AFDs on John Quast and George Kane above, an AFD for Tony Mehelich. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

• I made the above redirects (all one-game players from the early NFL) after tagging the articles back in 2022 for lack of SIGCOV. No improvements were made in the 18 months that followed. If you are able to find and add SIGCOV, feel free to return to main space. But per WP:SPORTBASIC, prong 5, these should not be returned to main space unless there is actual SIGCOV. Cbl62 (talk) 23:57, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Charlie Lungren and Ted Nemzek are not one-game players. They are four-game players and sub-stubs that I personally created before SPORTBASIC #4 was adopted. I have searched hard for SIGCOV without success, so I've redirected to the applicable team-season article. If someone can find and add SIGCOV, they are a better researcher than me, and they have my blessing to restore to main space. Cbl62 (talk) 14:18, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

• Additional one-game redirects were created in 2022. The process has shown us that the vast majority of these one-game players do not satisfy GNG. However, if anyone wants to take another look, help in searching for SIGCOV is welcome.

1. Les Asplundh
2. Burl Atcheson
3. Earl Bartlett
4. Eddie Benz
5. Mil Berner
6. Stub Blackman
7. Fred Borak
8. Les Borden
9. Phil Branon
10. Eddie Bratt
11. Phil Brennan
12. Rankin Britt
13. Max Broadhurst
14. Chuck Brodnicki
15. Matt Brown
16. Fred Brumm (AfD)
17. Bill Bucher
18. Al Burgin
19. Hal Carlson
20. Red Chenoweth
21. Bob Choate
22. Fred Clarke
23. Herbert Clow
24. Bill Connell
25. Ham Connors
26. Don Cosner
27. Zed Coston
28. Fred DaGata
29. Slats Dalrymple
30. Darroll DeLaPorte
31. Winnie Denton
32. John Depner
33. Don Dimmick
34. Emil Dobry
35. Sonny Doell
36. Bob Dwyer
37. Jim Eiden
38. Red Emslie
39. Arch Erehart
40. Al Espie
41. Charlie Essman
42. Fred Failing
43. Nick Farina
44. Bill Fiedler
45. Louie Fritsch
46. John Gabler
47. Patsy Gerardi
48. Fred Getz
49. Art Goerke
50. Tom Golsen
51. Aubrey Goodman
52. Glenn Greenwood
53. Len Gudd
54. Harry Hall
55. Hal Hansen
56. Fatty Harris
57. Wilbur Henderson
58. Fritz Henry
59. Hoot Herrin
60. Andy Hillhouse
61. John Hollman
62. Clarence Hosmer
63. Bill Houser
64. Karl Hower (AfD)
65. Cliff Jetmore
66. Lorne Johnson
67. Charlie Jonasen
68. Carl Kane
69. Sam Kaplan
70. John Kauffman
71. Adolph Kliebhan (AfD)
72. Charlie Knox
73. Steve Kobolinski
74. Lou Koplow
75. Mike Koziak
76. Emmett Kriel
77. George Kuhrt
78. Zvonimir Kvaternik
79. John Kvist
80. Doc LaDuron
81. Pete Lauer
82. John Law
83. Bernie Leahy
84. Franklin Lewis
85. Harry Livers
86. Roy Longstreet
87. LaDue Lurth
88. Max MacCollum
89. Herbert Magida
90. Joe Mantell
91. Phil Marshall
92. Gus Mastrogany
93. Charlie McBride
94. Bob McGee
95. Brian McGrath
96. Jack McKetes
97. Ralph Meadow
98. Bill Meisner
99. Buck Miles
100. Dutch Miller
101. Red Morse
102. Bill Muellner
103. Jim Nicely
104. Dick Noble
105. Clem Nugent
106. Henry Orth
107. Charlie Payne
108. Art Peed
109. Joseph Plunkett
110. Phil Poth
111. Spencer Pope
112. Bill Potts
113. Roger Powell
114. Bill Preston
115. Frank Primeau
116. Ken Provencial
117. Ed Rate (AfD)
118. Ed Reagen
119. Harry Richman
120. Speed Riddell
121. Rollin Roach
122. Loyal Robb
123. Gil Robinson
124. Glynn Rogers
125. Tony Rovinski
126. John Rupp
127. Reggie Russell
128. Bill Sanborn
129. Buck Saunders (AfD)
130. Carmen Scardine
131. Babe Scheuer
132. Art Schiebel
133. Jim Schuber
134. Heinie Schultz
135. Twing Seeds
136. Joe Setron
137. Frank Seyboth
138. Ronald Shearer
139. Fred Sheehan
140. James Sheldon
141. Stan Sieracki
142. Pete Slone
143. Bill Slyker
144. Marv Smith
145. Spike Staff
146. Mike Steponovich
147. Howie Stith
148. Aubrey Strosnider
149. Hew Sullivan
150. Jim Talbott
151. Charlie Tallman
152. Jim Tarr
153. Bob Tarrant
154. Rex Tobin
155. Ed Tolley
156. Hal Truesdell
157. Tiny Turner
158. Pete Vainowski (AfD)
159. Dominic Vairo
160. Roy Vassau (AfD)
161. Elmer Volgenau
162. Eddie Wall
163. Bill Wexler
164. Tommy Whelan
165. Walker Whitehead

Cbl62 (talk) 01:06, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm definitely gonna go rummaging through newspaper archives searching for SIGCOV just you can AfD it anyway. And you know full well that Newspapers.com doesn't have everything. You yourself used to use News Library before we had to pay for it. And there was a lot of SIGCOV on there that we couldn't find anywhere else. Links go dead on the internet all the time. Also, in regards to one of your messages on Beanie's talk page, the "wolves" are going to come if we appease them anyway. Once the one-gamers are gone, they'll just move on to the two-gamers. Deleting NFL players who actually played would have been unheard of 10 years ago. We used to just argue over practice squad, training camp, and college players. I suspect in another 10 years time base GNG might not even be good enough, there might be an explicit clause added to discount local/routine coverage. You do a lot of good work here but I felt like I should leave this comment. I'll move on now. Thanks for coming to my TED Talk. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:28, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, WO-9. We both care a lot about wikipedia's coverage of football history. And, yes, I do worry about the anti-sports wolves circling back to take deeper bites out of the herd. The best way IMO to fend that off is for us to act responsibly, to abide by the existing community consensus. to show that we are capable of policing our own project, and to avoid resorting to IAR arguments that just piss people off. The NFL of the 1920s did not generate the same level of publicity, and many (probably most) of the one-game players of the early years (and a lot of players with multiple games) fail to meet the current guidelines. Cbl62 (talk) 22:04, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks Cbl. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 22:41, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

I think you both, as well as Beanie, have great intentions to provide high quality content, which has been reflected in your many combined years of editing. I am probably one of the few who has wavered the most on this issue, at one time being a deletionist while other times wanting to save them. I have always been surprised and impressed on what Beanie has been able to convert into a great article, and I think for many of these it will come down to an article-by-article assessment. Either way, I think everyone here appreciates all of your hard work to provide high quality content across the history of AmerFoot. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 23:06, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

New AfDs

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Chrape - 1929 NFL stub (I created)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alec Anderson (American football, born 1894)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Red Shurtliffe - 1929 NFL stub (I created)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Herm Young - 1930 NFL stub (I created)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Meinhardt - 1923 NFL stub (I created)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charlie Lanham - 1922-23 NFL stub (I created)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charlie Olmstead - 1922-23 NFL stub (I created)

Cbl62 (talk) 22:05, 2 July 2024 (UTC)