Knowledge talk:WikiProject National Football League/Archive 3

1584:

somewhat important, since it defines a particular era for the team. I note that the NHL teams that were members of the WHA have separate categories to define players who played for the four teams that merged; there are separate categories for the Edmonton Oilers and Edmonton Oilers (WHA). Perhaps we could do the same, i.e. San Diego Chargers and San Diego Chargers (AFL)? All of the requisite AFL team categories would therefore be included in the American Football League players category, which would be devoid of individuals like the NFL players cat. With respect to the CFL, I've been going through players who played in the NFL and CFL and deleting the extra CFL players cat if they have the team cats, much like the NFL. Finally, I'm sure we can find/create a few more player articles for the AAFC; it was an important era in pro football history, and should not be neglected. Well, those are my thoughts, tired though my brain may be. I'm off to bed, to sleep, perchance to dream... of a Knowledge where everything is categorized neatly, and there are no stubs...

1627:, that's going overboard with the concept of merging the AFL & NFL. They merged, but the NFL still recognizes the AFL existed. I think we should do the same on Knowledge. My main thing is recognizing a point in history; that's why we have separate cats for the Chicago, St. Louis, Phoenix, and Arizona Cardinals. If we simply create a New York Jets (AFL) cat, all it does is merely create one more cat for Joe Namath. But we can link him to players who played in the AFL and never played in the NFL, guys whose careers didn't last all those seven years. My main point, simply put, is that we shouldn't ignore the AFL simply for ease of categorization. Just my thoughts. I'll go along with whatever the majority is, but I'm strongly voicing an opinion that we create separate AFL cats for the AFL teams. 2938:

I don't think we'll be able to find out who Chicago obtained their second-round pick from in 1963... just saying. As far as the overlinking goes, it seems to be the majority opinion that once a position/school is linked, that's it. Fine with me, although I disagree with Kramar about USC... I don't think people are going to confuse the Gamecocks with the Trojans. We could use USC for Southern Cal and South Carolina for the Gamecocks. Also, when we say Maryland, it almost always refers to College Park, not any other campus, so I think putting "Maryland-College Park" is unnecessary. I've got more questions, but they're unrelated to this topic, so I'll save them for after the season when we go through our overhaul of the team articles.

1120:- because I'm familiar with most of the best sources for information on Packer players). I've been doing basically what Anthony above described; finding information from either the team's website bio or other sources and putting the content into the article. The organizational structure I've been following (High school, College, Professional, Personal information) seems to be thorough enough for a reasonably comprehensive article for any player in the NFL - even those backup linemen, though one of the biggest problems writing much detailed information for offensive linemen is that most of their effort is transparent, represented in the success of the quarterback and running back rather than direct accolades. 2181:, but I am in weak opposition to changing the redirects. First, because of the AFD discussion I mentioned above was so heated, I would prefer the status quo because many opposition votes on that discussion also contribute to some of the NFL articles, and thus will probably revert the changes before even coming here. Secondly, there still should be at least some overall article that summarizes the team through its various incarnations. Thirdly, I am not sure about breaking up the Cardinals history – there is not much to say about a team that has only been to the playoffs 5 since their 1947 Championship. 482:. I also changed the template (please check my work - I'm not totally comfortable with the syntax) so that it behaves gracefully when either the "image=" is left empty, or when it's omitted altogether. We definitely don't want to encourage the masses to start adding images to every player, because most of them will have unknown/dubious copyright status - athlete pages are a mess with them already. It might be worth making the other fields "optional" too, but it's sometimes a good thing be able to explicitly see when a piece of information (e.g. DOB) is missing. Two questions: 1706:. I realize it's quite a bit of work, but it's for the sake of consistency. Also, would we want to include (AFL) after the Boston Patriots, New York Titans, and Los Angeles Chargers cats, even though there are no other teams with that name? If it's a matter of doing the work, I'm willing to do the work myself, all I'm asking for is approval from the other members of the Project. If it's in everyone else's opinion that it's not necessary, then I'll do whatever we decide is best. But as I said above, I'll do all the work, just give me the thumbs-up. 111:). He claims it is overbroad and thus not useful. In addition, he suggests recategorizing, and (if I'm correct in assuming this), essentially deleting the category. Finally, when I created the team categories, I made them sub-cats of American football players, rather than National Football League, which in light of the fact that there is not one non-NFL team category probably means that it should be a subcat of the NFL rather than American football as a whole. In summation... what the hell should we do here? 31: 2973:

removed all acronyms (save UCLA) because USC could theoretically because SoCal or South Carolina, even if most people are referring to the former. Additionally, I expanded those that just said State when they meant Uof State-City, because there is more than one Uof State. Additionally, position links did not follow capitilization guidelines in the MoS and created unnecessary redirects. I think that's all I did to the 2005 page, which took me hours IIRC. Just my input.

1010:(right or wrong) has a lot more interesting info about him, and might be worth of an article due to his controversy. We can get player bios on any team or sports website, just about. I don't know that every player needs much more than a stub unless there is something truly remarkable in their careers. Otherwise, I'm fine with a stub. Maybe only HOF player (as Meegs wrote above) would be a good place to start, and then we can start to fill in the blanks afterward. 383:

format. Secondly, wikify the position, and Pro Bowl (on the left-hand side; once we get more Pro Bowl articles, we can wikify the Pro Bowl years as well). Third, possibly add Super Bowl appearances in there? I know Montana will have a lot, and others won't have any, but I think it's of enough importance to include in an infobox. Those are just some of my thoughts, but I definitely think it's not a bad idea to create a standard box for all NFL players.

1101:, taking the information and turning it into an article. I'm well aware that a backup offensive lineman probably isn't going to become a Featured Candidate anytime soon, but at the very least make it beyond a single sentence and lone cat. If we can do that for all the current NFL players, then move beyond to the former players, HOFers, and so on, we could have an excellent compendium of football knowledge at our fingertips. Just my thoughts. 302:. Basically, if you adapt an article to the above format but the player's college is not noteworthy enough for a category (yet), don't create a non-linked category; just put the player on this list. Eventually some of them will move off this list into their own categories. We're trying to avoid categories which only contain one player for the time being, just to avoid clutter. This seems a good solution for now.-- 154:(and a whole lot of other such categories) and made sure they were sorted by team and/or country, and so I'm biased when I say that I think doing the same with the NFL players is a good idea. I agree that few people are interested in these broad listings, but a lot of people would be interested in the players by team. I've also started to make this process friendlier to college football, by creating 2323:, and I wasn't sure if we should CfD it or what the consensus was, because I created the team cats for uniformity. I've asked him to join the project, since we want to encourage activity and improvement in all the NFL player pages, and not discourage people who are trying to help (even though I took offense to someone objecting to my edits when I was a mere n00b myself). Thoughts? 411:

drafted team on top, and any subsequent teams underneath. This way, if it changes, we just make additions to the bottom, rather than shifting teams down the list. I'm also suggesting this discussion, once we agree on a compromise and finalize it, be transferred to the talk page of the template, this way any newbies who want to start adding it to pages know how to set it up.

401:

superbowls listings for the same reasons. Also, if we're listing teams, I'm not sure the drafting team (or even the last team of retired player) should get its own entry. I'd suggest at least combining "drafting team" with "other teams" to make "previous teams". As it is, it's pretty confusing: listing the first team, then the last team, then any teams in the middle.-

3838:, just as an example)...they do a pretty good job of rounding up the stats in a table form, include a picture, have game logs, have situational stats...all in all a fairly useful source. Would people be in favor of regularly linking to these sites in player pages? And secondly, would the pictures on these sites qualify as fair use, as they are publicity photos? -- 2893:

anyone else thinks. As far as the individual draft articles, I say we link everything, even if it's repeated, because if you're looking in the 5th round for a person, and you want to look up the school, it's a hassle to have to find the original wikilink in the article to find it. I've got nothing against overlinking in a situation like this. Again, that's IMHO.

1594:

categories. Just my opinion, though. (As for the time thing, I find my Wikipediing goes up as my workload goes up; the faster I'm trying to get a game written, the more my brain needs the downtime of mindlessly categorizing things. So I get both done at a faster rate, oddly enough. Which is a logic that doesn't apply to, say, my closet.)--

2337:, it looks like Zellin just didn't know about the team categories. There's another issue, though, that some people seem to interpret the team categories as being exclusively for the team's current players. I can't think of anything we can do about it though — it's not worth renaming the categories to something wordy and awkward. 1717:

situation made our decision for us: If we're going to have the Dallas category (which would move people out of AFL), we should have all of them. So yeah, I'm on board with Anthony if he wants to have separate team categories. Here's the problem I see: Some anti-abbreviation commando is probably going to tag all of them with a

890:

here and there, no matter how obscure). I also like the strikethrough on records that have recently been broken, in order to add the new one (although I know that was not your intent above). Right now, I am just concentrating on data and formatting and hopefully others will get involved in this page and add more records.

2972:

Alright, I just wanted to get my position in on this. I got rid of excessive linkage because the 2005 draft page was, IIRC, 37 kb, and by getting rid of the excess linkage I got it under the preferred article limit. Tables definitely need to be wiki-syntax. Long names for schools are not needed but I

2937:

Just to chime in again, with respect to the older drafts, it's going to be hard to find out who had the original draft pick... when I worked on some of the older ones, all I could find was who made the pick, now how they obtained it. Obviously with the more recent drafts that won't be a problem, but

1964:

I've been excluding both classes (anyone who didn't see playing time and sometimes even a few who saw a little), and leaving some players categorized by position (and sometimes college & CFL team) only. I don't agree, but I'm willing to change to Mike's standard without debate. As I understand

1636:

Question - Anthony, I started this whole thing by suggesting we get rid of the AFL category, but do you prefer the current system, where Namath is a Jet and a AFLer, or your proposed system where he's just a Jet (NFL) and a Jet (AFL)? I'm not sure how big the existing AFL category would become if we

1607:

teams that really don't belong where they are now), but would make the system more complex and less accessible for some. One could also argue that experience of pre-merger NFL teams changed just as much as it did for the AFL teams, but splitting the Packers in two obviously isn't on the table. I'm

549:

to look at. I'm fine with it, but one thing that some might disagree with is the inclusion of the draft round, and/or the exclusion of the "overall" pick number. Someone might argue for the exclusion of the image field — as I write this someone is uploading random Cowboys pictures tagged "fair use:

3655:

Madden aside, there are relatively few people with more than one football career ∈ {player, coach, analyst} where one doesn't completely overshadowed the others, and fewer yet of those with name-collisions that need disambiguation. I say that only because I don't want want to make a policy based on

3055:

page. I was surprised at how many definitions and clarifications I could add, just off the top of my head. With the help of 3 or 4 other knowledgable editors (much less everyone on this project!), we could make this page very comprehensive. I thought I'd post on here to bring this page to everyone's

410:

Fair point on the Pro Bowl and Super Bowl appearances... they are a pretty small number of players on the overall. I still think the position should be wikified. As per the team question, I say the "Current team" goes on top, and under "Other teams", they should be listed chronologically, with the

3863:

Seems that User 24.48.96.44 was pretty busy inserting spam links for the AFL "Hall of Fame" website in a lot of player bios today. A lot of them were removed by myself and someone else, but a few might still remain. Keep on the lookout. Whoever 24.48.96.44 is, they are simply inserting a link to

1769:

OK, so what's the consensus? Is it New York Jets (AFL) or New York Jets (American Football League)? I'm against adding (NFL) to the existing cats, just because it's unnecessary, like Meegs said. I'm in favor of making it a simple (AFL) addition, and worrying about whether some "anti-abbreviation

1593:

Well, I don't think I want to distinguish, say, the Chargers of the AFL from the Chargers of the NFL, because the two sets of teams flowed seamlessly (if acrimoniously) into each other. That seems like overcategorization. If someone was a Charger when the merger happened, I don't think he needs two

1077:

They're all important, by I personally prioritize #3 and #1 above #2, mainly because casual wikipedia users are best at improving #2, whereas it often takes a concerted effort to start articles about players who aren't in the spotlight (#3), or do extensive research and rewriting (#1). With #3, it

1031:

is accomplished and interesting enough to support a full article, and I wish he already had one, but there are there are dozens of players of his caliber with similar problems. Defensive players an OLmen lag behind the others, but that's not surprising. Players for some teams like the Eagles, the

849:

Ideally we would annotate every record with the date that it was last confirmed to be current - but that is probably unmanageable. Most people realize that recently-broken records are frequently absent from lists like this. There is one kind of record, at least, that I think we really should do it

763:

Here's a suggestion for a bit of a flavor addition - how about an option to use the player's current team logo as a sort of placeholder image when a photo of the player isn't available? It could help add some visual flair to the pages of players who don't have any usable/decent images to upload for

740:

You're right, it would not show-up if they used "subst:", and the resulting table would be indistinguishable from any of a handful of other ad hoc tables that are scattered around the player pages. Also, if it is used that way, they've lost the ability to update all of the boxes at once, which is

323:

where you can use (and create, as I have been doing) templates for your user page to indicate your fandom for a particular sports team. For the NFL, so far we've got the Colts, and the Panthers template I created (natch). If you want to make your own, just follow the format: use the HTML from one

2892:

I prefer the succession box, since it's more in line with many of the football articles... the only templates with a full listing are the NFL itself and the Super Bowl. The Heisman and a few others use the succession box, and it takes up less space. That's my personal preference, don't know what

2122:

I'm adding this non-related issue as a semi-warning: a lot, and I mean a LOT of the AFL players are copyvio off the AFL Hall of Fame website. As in, direct copying from the text on the site. So if you guys are going through and changing cats and stuff, rewrite it so it's not copyvio. It's hard,

889:

I agree that it would be ideal to add the current dates, but I too think that it might not be possible, esp since there are already a clutter of numbers on these anyway. I would just ask any Wikipedians to take note of any records that are broken on any given week (which there are usually a couple

669:

There's nothing official about the new infobox, we're merely trying to create continuity between all of the player articles (active/retired, all-pro/3rd-string) and present a small amount of essential info in a compact form. The good news is, there's nothing keeping us from making it better. For

2250:

This is a common problem amongst Wikipedians, but I'm curious as to the copyright status of football cards. In other words, if I scan in a football card, and use that image on a player's page, is that fair use, copyright, or what? (I know it's not public domain.) I'm just curious because I was

1884:

categories for the two separate stints the team had in Oakland? If we're creating different cats for each period of a team's existence, and every time a team moves it gets its own category (see: Cardinals, Rams, Chiefs, et al.), do we want to create two separate Oakland categories to distinguish

1839:

I didn't change my opinion after thinking about it a bit. We should break that category out by teams just like Anthony said, using the AFL tag (only) as necessary. We might want to make the Arena categories now just to stake out the namespace of using the (Arena) tag on the Dallas Texans. There's

400:

again, so it should look the way you want it to if your preferences. Second, I think Pro Bowl listings are unnecessary. They're not important, they make the box taller (it's already taller than a lot of players' articles), and most players have none to list. I would argue even stronger against

1583:

Nice job, guys. I'm surprised we were able to get it done that quickly. I've been helping out when I can, although with law school I don't exactly have all the time in the world to sit on Knowledge and update thousands of pages (if only...). I think the American Football League categories are

3121:, I guess) be renamed to reflect that they're only for head coaches? The categories look like they're basically free of coordinators and position coaches already, so maybe it's not worth fixing what isn't broken. I have no real opinion, but this kind of change is better made sooner than later. 1930:

by a team got to go under their team categories; otherwise, some of the more recent classes had no link to any team. This is a fan's link to info about their teams, so since that's part of their history, I left it in. Also, I think it's kind of fair in a they-also-serve sort of way. Note that I

1721:

tag, and the damn thing is that he'll be right to do so, based on the Dallas/Arena thing. We can't just ignore the chance that an Arena fan might show up and surround Art Donovan with half-fielders. I'm not sure what's the best thing to do here. (One thing I'm certain of: I don't want to give a

382:

I like the idea. I have a few suggestions, however. For starters, we should wikify the birthday, and put it in the mm/dd/yyyy format, instead of dd/mm/yyyy format. Typical US formatting for dates is mm/dd/yyyy, and since we're doing this for American football players, we should stick to that

3631:

I think that breaks with someone like John Madden. You'd want to disambig him from the hockey player of the same name, but he's currently a broadcaster and was a coach. John Madden (American football broadaster) pigeonholes him. We're also left with a hodgepodge of (American football player),

3343:

page, which talks almost entirely about schools and says nothing about professional sports teams (and rightfully so- I'm not sure I've ever heard a professional athlete called an "alumnus" of their team). Not to say I'm completely against it, just that it might be a little confusing to some.

1716:

I don't think it's a matter of work, as it's not that hard either way. I certainly don't have an objection to recognizing this stage of football, and it's an identical number of entries per player whether it's "Jets (AFL)" or "AFL players". So we do one or the other. I think the wacky Dallas

324:

of the existing templates, punch in the image for your team, change the cat names, and if you so choose (as I do), use one of the team's colors, instead of the bland "user:blank" one for the Pacers and Colts. Posted this here mostly to get the interest of all the fellow football fans here.

651:

I'd like to see a slightly wider box to accommodate longer entries, the players' name at the top of the box, the ability to customize colors to denote present team (or, in the case of a retired player, the color of the team he is most associated with — e.g., orange for Boomer Esiason of the

2086:

I know one of the sources of debate and discussion on this project has been the history aspect of the franchises. Well, being a hockey fan as well as a football fan, I've been perusing our sister project of Ice Hockey and noticed that NHL franchises have individual pages for the separate

443:, specifically the "professional clubs" section. Even though the current team isn't a special field, it's still easy to pick out immediately (especially with the dates). And putting all of the teams together in a single list seems to make much more sense for retired players too. - 204:

On a related topic, I made team categories for the active teams that didn't already have one (in line with what they have in MLB and what Mike Selinker has been adding for college teams). Team player categories for renamed teams are members of their current team's category (e.g.

1529:(76 members) - that it be drained and deleted. I neither added nor deleted the category from players as I went though categorizing by NFL team, but I observed that most AFL players do not currently belong to this category, especially ones whose career lasted though the merger. 2917:

I think that as long as we use the same abbreviation for colleges (eg Southern Cal, USC) in every round, we should avoid overlinking. control-f isn't that hard. We should also not overlink the teams and positions. That helps with seeing the first player of each position, as a

986:

For example the Jason Taylor article barely has info on his NFL, or college info. Just his high school carrer and info that he was picked for People magazine Ten Sexiest atheltes which is sad in my opinion. We should fix the articles on this year pro bowls starters at least.

1734:

I'm keeping my neutral position on Anthony's plan vs. the keeping the AFL category, but I'd like to wait on enacting it for a few days to see what others have to say. It's not much work at all, but doing and then undoing it would be. I'm slightly concerned about having

2818:

I agree with Alhutch... it has all the info, and I don't think we need to type out stuff like "Fresno State University" when a simple "Fresno State" will suffice. Now, once a consensus is established, are we going to re-do all the draft articles so they're all uniform?

1885:

between the first time (1970-1982) and the second (1995-present)? Obviously a separate AFL cat will be created; that goes without saying. But I'm only asking to see what everyone else thinks, since Al Davis had to go make life difficult for us (and everyone else).

3632:(American football coach), (American football executive) and so on. For brevity I think (American football) is better. (And goodness forfend we start seeing (American football player/coach) and other such abominations.) Anyway, I think sports is different enough to 820:

Should we being a list of the all time leaders in any given category? (Passing yards, rushing yards, catches, sacks, etc.) We can update it every year, so no one has to worry about every week. We could do the top 100 in the categories so we have an exhaustive list.

2566:

Now that the NFL season is winding down, I think it is time to field ideas for a new layout for the team articles. As stated in other discussions, there seems to a consensus to split up the history sections and reduce the game-by-game summaries. The discussion on

580:

Very nice work! I think that unless anybody objects in the next few days, it would be okay to start using it. Perhaps we could put it on the 32 starting quarterbacks. That would give the template enough visibility that we'd know if there were any huge objections.

951:. In any case, whether it be problematic long articles, or stubby articles of major players, I like the idea of defining some small subset of the bios and mobilizing to fix them up as models. HOFers might be a good set., or maybe this year's Pro Bowl starters. 647:

Meegs edited the infobox I had created for Carson Palmer. It was a beaut, too. I don't like the new official NFL player infobox one bit. I know it's not your fault, Meegs. You're only following the rules. But the truth is that the official one sucks.

913:

I normally work on the football bios here and I'm noticing that alot of the current bios we have are either horribly written or sad-subs. I have completely rewritten a few articles today, and I'm noticing that there is just too much to be done. Examples

1096:

I've been doing expansion on several football articles, mostly on Carolina Panthers players (yes I'm biased, but I don't let it affect my writing). Namely what I do is go to the team website of the player's current team, and check their bio. Then,

551:

This kind of trouble will only get worse with the infobox. Also, we could add Anthony's pro bowl appearances as an optional row somewhere (I'm neutral on the topic, though I still oppose listing superbowls). It is sort a traditional stat to report.

1943:

Agree. In other words, players who were drafted but cut (e.g. Bill Goldberg from the Carolina Panthers) get the team cat, but players who signed in training camp but were cut (e.g. Taylor Stubblefield) don't get the team cat. That how it works?

1551:

You're saying that the AFL category gets removed from each player and replaced (if necessary) by team name? I'd be fine with that. In fact, this will probably lead us to do the same with Canadian teams, though I claim no particular expertise with

3240:

It's a good article, and good luck with getting it as a feature. One minor point that I don't like: In the roster, some links head back to the article. They should be red links if there's no articles on those players, not redirects. Seems like

3700:

is right out. I'm not really married to any one term, but rather more to the idea of having consistency. I was hoping to have a single term that we could use on all (American) football people and topics that need disambiguation, but I'll take

1252:

I finished going through all the college football player categories and making sure each player had their college (obviously), their position, and their pro team categories listed, and no NFL player category. I couldn't find positions for

2406:

I've speedied a few obsolete categories, but I'm so confused by all of the Texans and Dodgers and Bills and Colts and Yanks (Oh My!), that I want to make-sure I'm not forgetting anything. As far as I know, these are the remaining issues:

2568: 3018:, I think our ultimate goal should be to get all the draft pages up to the standard of these 2...If we see something we like from an old one make sure it is implemented into the 2 FL's and we can start doing that for every one. 2251:

considering scanning in football cards to provide images of players, but I don't want to do it if they're just going to end up deleted in 2 days anyway. Can an admin or someone with superior knowledge of this answer my query?

2202:

I don't have an opinion on this, except that I do want the St. Louis Rams page to contain the complete history of the Rams. Whether there's a separate, more detailed page for the LA Rams is not something I have a strong opinion

1998:

Maybe you folks have already discussed this. I noted this project's ultimate goal above is to compete with the cricket Wikiproject for number of articles and such. I'd just like to point out that I very much want to avoid doing

3089:

Thanks. I wasn't suggesting that the Glossary become part of the WikiProject, I just figured I'd use this talk page as a good way of contacting editors interested in American football and bring the Glossary to their attention.

1774:

it later. For purposes of simplicity and length I suggest making it (AFL). I'm just trying to figure out what everyone's opinion on this is before I start working, because once I start, I want a clear standard for all cats.

2216:), though its LA-era content can be condensed considerably if a separate article is spun-off. Any LA Rams article should be auxiliary to the St. Louis one, not its peer, and I'd be much more comfortable with it being called 1829:

Yeah, let me think about it for a day or two. I'm leaning toward just doing the (AFL) for every team that needs it and saying the hell with it, but I sure don't want it done twice. Meantime, I think I'll go check the draft

1165:

More than 30 years ago, an End only referred to an offensive player who just assisted the guards, tackles, and center in blocking defenders. But this position was largely replaced by using another wide receiver or tight

2052:

Ahh, gotcha. However, would it be a bad idea to do what they were suggesting, as far as the WikiBook concept goes? Create a compendium of standings, stats, results, etc. Just something to consider in the offseason.

1078:

has to be considered that it's not realistic to have an article for every single player, at least not anytime soon. There are a lot of pages out there for players drafted this year and whose careers appear to be over.

3141: 2913:

I've noticed in the older draft pages we don't say who the pick originally belonged to, and who it went through. While the tables look neater without that information, I think it's important and should be in there.

510:

Very cool! I didn't know anything about that "hiddenStructure" trick before. I added a 'place of birth' field to address your first point, and for your second point, I tried to address it by creating a new page for

3517:

How about those rare instances with two players with the same name (e.g., Ricky Williams). Disambiguate by position? Might not help. By team? They move around a lot. (Too bad the NFL doesn't have a policy like the

3070:

I have noticed that the articles on American football in general have been a little neglected. But keep in mind that this WikiProject you are looking at here is primarily only concentrated on NFL articles—that was

236: 3181:

by about a factor of ten and allowed all kinds of assistants to be members. Question: Should there be separate categories for AFL coaches as there now are for AFL players? Membership would be extremely low in

942:

I agree that writing quality (along with a lack of citation) is a particular problem in the player bios. I'm not really bothered by the stubs at all, though. What, for example, is your biggest complaint about

1493: 264: 2411: 1805:

Gotcha. BTW, does someone (preferably someone with a tad more experience and authority than I) want to archive some of these discussions... I'm getting a page size warning when I'm adding to the talk page.

1405: 3508:(American football) seems the right answer to me. Even if we do nothing else, though, we should change any with (athlete), since the predominant wikipedia usage of that term is "track and field athlete."-- 1965:

it, include anyone who plays a down in a real game or is drafted by the team. Actually, is being on the roster for a real game good enough? That info isn't always available, but we should have an ideal.

1622:

I'm merely proposing it to give credit to those players who played in the AFL. Otherwise, there's really nothing that recognizes the players who played for those 7 (?) years in the AFL. If we eliminate

1197: 232: 176: 2983:

i went and fixed up the third round of the 2004 draft. I'll make it my goal to fix that draft up as much as I can, as that one's REALLY a mess right now (missing picks, different formats, no 7th round)

1375: 1268: 565:'s uses it. It could display either a list of years or a single number (# of appearances). I also made a little banner that could appear at the bottom of HOF players – again, only used on Montana's. 3339:

I've always liked "Not to be forgotten" as well. One problem with using "Notable alumni" or "Other notable alumni" might be that it would likely direct someone who is unfamiliar with the term to our

2445: 2395: 1519: 2425: 1889: 1710: 652:

Cincinnati Bengals or green for Joe Namath of the New York Jets.) And how about an option for overall draft position? To give you an idea of what I'm talking about, check out the one I did for

3718:(there were two people in one article -- weird) and I have him listed as B.J. Sams (football player). Has this been agreed upon as the proper way to denote football players as of yet? Thanks! 1151: 2435: 780:

We've considered that. The fair use claim for the logos is much weaker in articles are not about the organization whose logo is it is. There're also potential problems with points 8 and 9 in

2527: 2398:

is currently serving both the NFL and the AAFC. I ruthlessly split the Boston Patriots category for the one season they played in the NFL, but I haven't had the heart to do the same for the

1464: 299: 2515: 1350: 166:

tag from all the 1,000+ articles in the category, we can use that opportunity to add their college backgrounds and create a lot of really useful subcategories. I'd help with that, anyway.--

2301:. I was tempted to use the NFL logo, but I figured some fair use nutjob would go crazy and either delete the template or replace it with "NFL", so I put a standard picture of a football. 3657: 2995:

Okay, so an admin went and changed the colors of the draft. Not a big deal I guess, we'll just have to change all the other drafts to that color. I'm slowly but surely takign care of the

515:, and then linking to it in the template. But I'm open to other suggestions. However, it's a lot easier to change labels after 'launch' than fieldnames, so unless anyone objects, I think 137:

is just overcrowded, and I don't see people browsing it to say, "Hmm, who else plays in the NFL?" IMHO people are more likely to wonder who else plays on or has played on a certain team.

3178: 3118: 2007: 1364:

article into featured status. But I really need images including a couple of him in his playing days and one of him in the Fox studios. Could anyone help me with those images. Thanks --

269: 155: 115: 1848: 3729: 3526: 3512: 2526:

into individual games. At least, not unless we were going to be adding a substantial about of prose about each game, and in that case, the articles should probably closely resemble

3449: 2207: 2017: 1957: 1948: 1935: 1834: 1779: 1726: 1631: 1598: 1588: 3003: 2988: 2942: 1788:

if we do the splits. The question is whether each AFL team should have its own player category, or whether we should keep the status quo of a single category for all AFL players.

3272: 3263: 3245: 3022: 2555: 1979:

Certainly being on the roster should be good enough. Imagine if Carson Palmer had decided to retire after the 2004 season. We'd still want him in the Bengals category, I think.--

377: 217: 170: 3770: 2069: 1178: 1014: 356: 3554: 2966: 2543: 1454: 1105: 387: 145: 3678:

since it doesn't require any extra words or thought to be read as prose: "Ken Anderson, football player". It's not a big deal to me really, so long as we can agree not to use

3254: 3235: 3162: 3148: 3029: 2620: 2604: 2280: 2233: 2197: 2188: 2144: 2115:, why not give them all their own separate pages detailing the histories of the franchise during those years? Granted, certain franchies wouldn't get such a luxury, say, the 2057: 2047: 1983: 1974: 1913: 1862: 1764: 1617: 1574: 1556: 1546: 728:

Thanks Meegs. I'm no expert on user boxes, but couldn't someone have used "subst:" to put the infobox on an article, in which case it would not show up int he Whatlinkshere?

306: 192: 183: 130: 89: 3709: 3691: 3640: 3626: 2832: 1087: 894: 882: 3951: 3902: 3893: 3821: 3812: 3039: 2951: 2897: 2823: 2501: 2346: 1904: 1824: 1810: 1800: 1646: 1444: 1435: 997: 473: 415: 405: 81: 76: 64: 59: 3297: 1463:

is scrubbed of individuals. Everybody who was there now has a position category, some number of pro team categories, and either a college team category or an appearance in

3787: 3574: 3414: 3392: 3352: 3332: 3323: 2320: 2168: 1426: 1124: 701: 3382: 2508: 1130: 977: 960: 775: 612: 598: 585: 523: 505: 460: 447: 3082: 2813: 750: 735: 723: 691: 683: 3357:

Good point, it might be better to keep creative language out of headlines. I recommend the Patriots return to "Not to be forgotten" until a third option comes around.

2319:, and cleared all the players from the broad category to some individual team cats (much as we've been doing with the NFL and AFL player cats). Zellin has now created 1926:

The draft categories are all fixed up, with correct links to teams and players with appropriate categories. Along the way I had to make a decision that players who got

802: 793: 3598: 3366: 3098: 2846: 2590: 3864:

the AFL Hall of Fame, which is nothing more than a fan-created site. They are also inserting a sentence linking to what used to be a Wiki article about the site. --

3064: 1006:

is a fine player, but he's not necessarily worthy of a large, exhaustive article, as his career may not be considered that interesting, overall. Whereas someone like

3502: 2863:). Should we do this? I personally don't feel bound by overlinking guidelines in tables like these, and think linking everything is better-looking and more useful. 2977: 2548:

I agree. This is an encyclopedia after all. And any covering games in-progress is somewhat futile because it is going to be radically changed once the game ends.

2469: 2929: 2255: 836: 3597:

as they state the person's profession and not simply their field. I can't find any guidelines to backup my feeling, but it is consistent with the examples at

433: 254:, one for each team that they played for (or at least the ones they saw significant playing time for). Some of us have already started to process. Once empty, 2127: 346: 2483: 1247: 2327: 2305: 637: 574: 556: 328: 3851: 2000: 1880:

Just curious... and I'm only asking this because I believe it's not necessary, but for the sake of continuity I'll ask it anyway: do we want to create two

1368: 1240: 995: 934: 596: 3868: 3602: 2886: 2803: 2193:

Well, this is why I threw it out there, as a suggestion. I say we let the idea sit for a while before acting on it (or not acting, as the case may be).

1931:

didn't put people who later tried out a for a team and didn't make it, because that's not the use of a precious resource by the team. Agree or disagree?--

1751:. I'm just not sure that 35 years post-merger vs. 10 years pre-merger is enough imbalance to allow it to go undisambiguated. On the other hand, adding 1702:

Note that the Los Angeles Chargers cat would not have to be created, and I've already moved it temporarily to the AFL cat, until we create (I'm assuming)

936: 3218: 3207: 3130: 2389:

There's no category for the "Brooklyn-New York Yankees" that played in AAFC in 1949 because I'm trying to figure out if they're really distinct from the

47: 17: 3802: 3225: 2036:

game. So far we have limited the NFL articles to championship, playoff games, Super Bowls, and the significant games of NFL lore. The only reporting of

1993: 1370: 3853: 1002:

I would submit that not every player needs a full-fledged article, as some players have plenty of material on other websites about them. For example,

663: 3842: 3174: 3114: 2371: 2366: 1703: 1530: 1503: 621: 251: 240: 97: 2480: 2361: 1534: 439:

I've looked at the boxes for a few other sports, and of the ones that don't take a minimalist approach, the one like the most is futbol;) Look at

3848: 3755: 2486: 2029: 1365: 1237: 1231: 992: 931: 711: 593: 850:

for: the active streaks of doing something in consecutive games. I looked quickly through the two pages and found three that might be ongoing:

290: 3767: 3745: 1242: 343: 3140:

then. Never was a head coach, likely never wants to be. What's wrong with position coaches in those categories, anyway? It's not like we have

2504:

for all to see. Please make suggestions here. I think it is imperative that we have an official game format for consistency between articles.

2134: 1431:

Once the season ends, it might be worth recruiting one person (or more) to oversee each team article to ensure they don't get out of hand. --

393: 175:

I agree completely. And after all the players recategorized in the 42+ team categories, the category that holds them should be renamed from

159: 3817:

Many thanks! There are still a few minor ideas and things I want to fix up in the article. Perhaps we can get it on the front page someday.

2770:

I think it would be best to settle on one format ASAP before any more articles are started. As far as I can tell, the choices to make are

3374:

I don't have a problem with not to be forgotten, but Notable alumni sounds good too. What if we used notable alumni and didn't link to the

3035:

There is now a discussion going on over there about what counts as a draft bust and what doesn't. Check it out and chip in your two cents.

1921: 3847:

We could link the nfl.com bios in the players page, but clearly not get the images as they are still copyright and not fair use. Thanks --

3153:

Nothing, I guess, only no one has so far put any assistants in the team-specific categories. I'd be fine with leaving them inclusive too.

2613:

was recently named as an FA a few days ago, and thus, of course, I suggest that all of the NFL team articles be modeled after that one...

3660:, and it would be nice to use a manner of speech parallel to the non-football articles we're disambiguating from. That is, to not have 3544: 2519: 352:

I like that one. What I especially like about it is that it doesn't load itself up with fantasy numbers and details. Clean is better.--

320: 3754:, which is looking to identify quality articles in Knowledge for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing using 2522:. Playoff games would be the next step if we were to expand coverage, but I personally don't think we need to split-up articles like 2270: 3110: 2212:

That is my position exactly. The one article that should contain a complete franchise history should be the current team's article (

1624: 1562: 1526: 1460: 948: 255: 247: 163: 134: 98: 2852:

I've brought all the tables up through 2002 into rough compliance with the discussion above. I have two more issue for discussion:

2479:

Does anybody in this project have a membership at KFFL.com? I've found it extremely valuable in finding information about players. -

2065:

already houses a rather formidable database of historical stats and results. Not sure it would be worth the effot to duplicate. --

3910: 3250:-=nods=- thanks for pointing that out; I believe I took care of all of them by creating stubs with the appropriate tags and style. 2419: 2267:

This image qualifies for fair use in ] because it is used for information purposes only since it shows the subject of this article.

2261:

Short answer: If the image is only used to illustrate the subject of the article, it can be used under fair use. You tag it with {{

537:

Let's give everyone a couple of days to weigh-in on the field names, because they won't be easy to change after rollout. We've got

3564: 3466: 3444: 3284: 1483: 3259:

Neat. The players should have college and position categories too. If you can get to those, great. If not, I'll do them later.--

3540: 2137:. There was a very heated discussion on whether the history of the Montreal Expos belongs in the Washington Nationals article. 3044: 1533:

already has categories for all of the AFL team names, including the ones that never made it to the NFL. I also suggest that

991:

is pretty bad also for one of the best wide recivers in the league. We should start there and improve the writing quality. --

1135:

When a player from the early years of the NFL is listed as an "end" (or with an "E"), is he a defensive end or a tight end?

3883: 3751: 3028: 2561: 2429: 222: 3400: 927: 3072: 930:

and maybe that could be a start and maybe we could have a few weeks exclusively for fixing all those articles. Thanks --

3560: 3536: 2571:

also brought to light other ideas and problems. My suggestion (I have said this already) is to try to model them after

210: 2352: 1841: 947:'s stub? Is it just its brevity? There's more content there than 3/4 of the articles I've seen while re-cataloging 2491: 1473: 3403:, it was changed in the first place to make it less POV. But I still have mixed feelings. Basically, I agree with 3217:

For a few days, I've been working on improving the Patriots article to featured status. Here is the peer review:

3936: 2217: 2178: 1392: 1388: 3918: 3911: 3674: 3429: 1853:

Ok, let's do it. And yeah, we might as well make the Texans (Arena) cat. A good defense is a good offense ;)

1537:(1 member) be given the fate, or, alternately, kept and populated with everyone that ever played in the AAFC. 973:

infobox described above -- there's still some tweaking going on, but it seems to be doing okay in the wild. --

3898:

Probably when he is booted. I appreciate his zeal for the AFL, but this childish behavior needs to stop. --

3420: 3052: 3045: 2809:

the top one looks the best and makes the most sense to me. i don't believe long school names are necessary.--

2295: 2262: 1384: 671: 642: 469:, to test that the draft round linking worked correctly (we don't have a 1979 draft page for Montana yet.) -- 1755:

to the ten post-AFL teams is pretty obnoxious. I'm bothered by both names schemes about the same, I guess.

162:, so that notable players can be referred to by their college team as well. If we go through and remove the 3724: 2947:

Have you ever lived in the South? When I was in Georgia, USC=South Carolina. Agreed on Maryland, though.

2999:, though I think we also have to decide what will be internally linked (with the ]'s and what won't be. -- 659:

And speaking of Hall of Famers, how about a logo denoting them like there is for baseball Hall of Famers?

3715: 2316: 970: 516: 362: 333: 3314:, since the section should omit players from the lists that preceed it (retired numbers, HOFers, etc.). 3190:, but having matching player and coaching categories is kind of elegant (compare the subcat sections of 2780:

the treatment of positions (parenthetical or in a separate column), (full name or 2-letter abbreviation)

694:, which predates the NFL player infobox. I don't know how many articles, if any, it has been used on. 3191: 2245: 1218: 781: 206: 38: 1722:

player a tag for a team he didn't play for, so dumping Boston Patriots into New England is no good.)--

3472:

I'm willing to do the grunt work to rename articles if we can decide on what the standard should be.

3439: 2628: 2518:, about whether we should have articles for non-Super Bowl games and the few games that have entered 2399: 2108: 1603:

The plan would clear-up some problems with our current system (especially if we did the same for the

1320: 1217:. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on 1032:

Patriots, and the '85 Bears seem to have unusually good coverage too. It might be fair to subdivide

272:– currently holds 63 subcategories for the biggest D1 schools + a united category for the Ivy League. 456:

to see how it looks now. Is it okay, or at least close enough to start using on a few more pages? --

3879: 3434: 3104: 3056:

attention, since I think the lack of publication is the only reason this page isn't already great.

2154: 862: 825: 814: 3014:

for a featured list and it succeded a while back. I made everything as uniform as possible with

2859:

has started unlinking all positions and colleges after their first occurrence in the tables (see

2390: 2081: 1412:

Oh, how I long to get these NFL team articles back into some sort of reasonable shape (like, the

179:. I'll help with the process, and taking the opportunity to add college info is a good idea. - 129:

which is empty except for the categories by team (in fact, I'm thinking of having it retitled to

3195: 2828:

Yep, the top one looks good to me. I'll start on this project now; you all are welcome to help

2092: 969:. Some of the players still have red links. For any new pages created, I'd recommend using the 908: 512: 2866:

Navigation needs to be eased. Does anyone have a preference between a simple succession box (

1498:

Not worth doing. There can't be many articles in there without pro or college team categories.

1196: 3858: 3459: 2871: 2523: 2334: 2310: 2286: 2158: 1339: 1203: 922:

article is just a sad stub and I've seen much worst around. We need to fix that. I nominated

396:, then the preferences of the reader determine the format dates are displayed in. I changed 314: 108: 3808:

Congratulations. I've been watching the work and am very impressed. Keep up the good work.--

3656:

a couple of individuals. The "profession convention" seems quite dominant browsing through

3491:(American football player) is out of place on someone who becomes a coach, broadcaster, etc. 3763: 3483: 3290: 2610: 2496:

I have made a rough possible format for all games that we have on the site, such as in the

1815:

actually, Zzyzx11 just did that about 36 hour ago. Everything left is < three weeks old

1355: 151: 126: 3886:), aka the owner of the Remember the AFL web site) is doing it again? When will he learn. 3672:. The weak de facto convention aside, I also have a very slight personal preference for 2224:. And I see nothing wrong with having these articles for some franchises and not others. 2032:

was brought up because they were creating seperate entries left and right of every single

8: 3948: 3875: 3829: 3793: 3519: 3425:

Can we get some consistency in how we disambiguate player names? Here are some examples:

3212: 2974: 2867: 2856: 2665: 2505: 2150: 628:

made the following suggestions, which I moved from the top of this talk page to here:

452:

I've reformatted the teams/years section to work like it does for futbol. Take a loot at

3762:, with no POV or copyright problems. Can you recommend any suitable articles? I noticed 2022:

Actually my understanding was to compete with the cricket Wikiproject for the number of

878:

Streaks for consecutive years might be worthwhile too, though they move a lot slower. -

3719: 3509: 3260: 3242: 3145: 3036: 2680: 2204: 2088: 2004: 1980: 1954: 1932: 1910: 1845: 1831: 1723: 1595: 1553: 1516: 1347: 1148: 829: 353: 303: 189: 167: 2910:

only has the first two rounds in the new format. We need to continue to fix that page.

1561:

Possibly. There are a lot of US college players and some forgotten NFL transients in

3890: 3784: 3706: 3705:

as a start. I am concerned about confusion with the sport us Merkins call "soccer". —

3637: 3571: 3551: 3523: 3499: 3454: 3411: 3079: 2926: 2829: 2617: 2587: 2552: 2277: 2185: 2165: 2141: 2116: 2112: 2100: 2096: 2044: 1423: 1402: 1343: 1292: 1175: 1143:

await your answer, at least in spirit. Also, does anyone know what football position

1011: 891: 870: 833: 338:

I'm surprised there isn't one. Perhaps we should create one... what should be on it.

2939: 2894: 2820: 2601: 2324: 2302: 2252: 2221: 2194: 2124: 2104: 2054: 2014: 1945: 1886: 1807: 1776: 1707: 1628: 1585: 1102: 412: 384: 325: 112: 3926: 3614: 3349: 3095: 3061: 2701: 1881: 1254: 1228: 1144: 988: 542: 479: 3766:

is a FA, are there any others? Please post your suggestions here. Thanks a lot!

2597: 2534:

says, "Knowledge should not offer first-hand news reports on breaking stories".

46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

3941: 3899: 3865: 3818: 3799: 3599:

Knowledge:Naming conventions (people)#Qualifier between brackets or parentheses

3329: 3294: 3269: 3268:

Okay, I'll try to look up some more info on a few of the players after dinner.

3251: 3232: 3222: 3015: 3011: 3000: 2996: 2985: 2907: 2860: 2757: 2213: 2066: 1432: 1361: 1308: 1300: 1284: 1158: 1140: 915: 3931: 3835: 3633: 3404: 3019: 2716: 2580: 2531: 1296: 1272: 1069: 1007: 974: 966: 582: 520: 470: 457: 440: 430: 429:

I've updated the infobox to reflect the above (I think). How's it looking? --

374: 261:

When re-categorizing players, consider checking that they are also listed in

138: 104: 2087:

incarnations of a franchise. For example, there are separate pages for the

3887: 3809: 3781: 3777: 3759: 3568: 3548: 3532: 3408: 3389: 3379: 3310:

liked it. If there's to be a change across all of the articles, I suggest

3137: 3076: 2963: 2810: 2762: 2706: 2614: 2584: 2576: 2572: 2549: 2497: 2474: 2274: 2182: 2162: 2138: 2041: 2024: 1909:

Yeah, one category is fine. The team and league designation is identical.--

1658:

Jet (NFL) and Jet (AFL). Here are the cats that would have to be created:

1441: 1420: 1416: 1413: 1399: 1258: 1172: 1136: 1113: 1063: 1047: 1028: 1003: 944: 919: 729: 695: 660: 625: 3378:

page? People could probably figure out what the term meant from context.--

2962:

I agree with ignoring the overlinking guidelines. they don't apply here.--

2530:. In any case, I don't think covering games in-progress is appropriate. 2153:

who is in fact the owner of the AFL Hall of Fame website: (see the top of

832:. The formatting isn't all complete, but the records are fairly detailed. 3839: 2711: 2675: 2062: 1331: 1304: 1288: 1209: 1184: 1121: 1117: 1051: 799: 772: 562: 538: 453: 397: 370: 366: 339: 3479:(NFL) ignores notable college players or those in leagues beside the NFL 2579:. In fact, it looks like someone has already begun the process with the 494:? I has to fit on one line, and can only really be 10 or 11 characters. 3688: 3623: 3363: 3345: 3320: 3204: 3159: 3127: 3091: 3057: 2948: 2883: 2843: 2800: 2751: 2670: 2540: 2466: 2343: 2230: 1971: 1901: 1859: 1821: 1797: 1761: 1643: 1614: 1571: 1543: 1316: 1312: 1262: 1213:, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the 1084: 1059: 1040: 957: 923: 879: 790: 747: 720: 680: 634: 609: 571: 561:

I added a Probowl field It's an optional parameter and right now only

553: 546: 502: 466: 444: 402: 287: 214: 180: 2633:

There seems to be three different styles of NFL Draft articles going:

1323:. Anybody who feels like checking those guys out is welcome to do so. 855:

Most Consecutive Games Scoring, 370, San Francisco 49ers(1977-current)

213:). There currently are no team player categories for defunct teams. - 3375: 3340: 2385:

name that's existed since 1940. Actually, there are two exceptions:

1280: 1276: 1214: 319:

Not really NFL per se, but if anyone's interested, there's a page at

3567:

because we normally do not use the term "footballer" in the States.

3922: 2040:

games have been limited to the team articles by over-zealous fans.

1376:

If you thought the running game-by-game commentary trend was bad...

867:

Most Consecutive (Kicking) Points After Touchdown, 371, Jason Elam

3613:). For multiple football players, I'd recommend positions (like 3488:(athlete) is too broad, and Mr. Young really only played football 1608:

pretty-much neutral, but I'll definitely help if others like it.

1467:. So what's left to do in this regard? I would say these things: 1271:

is a bit less settled. I couldn't find positions for these guys:

1055: 1043:. "Future Hall of Famers" probably deserve stellar articles too. 653: 603:

Me too. I'll sweep through the 16 AFC quarterbacks right now.

1112:

I've done work on two player biographies so far (both Packers -

3289:

I recommend this header be changed to "Notable Alumni" per the

3075:. But feel free to work on the American football articles too. 1068:

non-benchwarmers with no article at all, including some in the

298:

Please note that I've created, with Meegs's aid, a list called

3798:

Many thanks to all who helped out! More info in the talkpage.

392:

If the dates are entered in square brackets, as suggested in

369:, with a couple additional fields. I then applied it back to 3531:

How about this issue I saw earlier in the day: A user moved

1380:...now we have people computing the tie-breaking scenarios! 2730: 2291:

If anyone wants to use it, I've created a user template at

1604: 1335: 859:

Most Consecutive Games Scoring Field Goals, 38, Matt Stover

373:

so it could be seen in context. Any thoughts/objections? --

3780:

and featured content, I cannot think of any at this time.

3482:(football) and (football player) would lend many to think 2569:

Knowledge:Featured article candidates/New England Patriots

490:

Can we think of a cleaner way to label the stats row than

3494:(college footballer) is awkward, and ignores a pro career 487:

Should we include place of birth? Most bio infoboxes do.

2921:

I like the succession box, I think it just looks neater.

2099:. So I thought, instead of making redirects out of the 1784:

No, no, I think everyone is in favor of the abbreviated

361:

I've come up with a draft of a parameterized infobox at

107:

and I are discussing how to utilize this category (see:

3603:

Knowledge:Manual of Style (disambiguation_pages)#People

2575:, the only sports team so far that has been named as a 2514:

There was a brief review on this page a few weeks ago,

246:

Once that is done, all players should be removed from

3388:

or perhaps something like 'notable former players'?--

2149:

Oh yeah, many of the the AFL articles were edited by

1525:

I'd also like to suggest giving similar treatment to

1455:

now that that's out of the way... more category work

1039:

Superstars with detailed, but flawed articles, like

3219:

Knowledge:Peer review/New England Patriots/archive1

2271:

Knowledge:Image description page#Fair use rationale

2161:as that IP address has been also been used by him. 741:one of the biggest advantages of using a template. 18:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject National Football League

3834:Each player has an official page through nfl.com ( 243:. This will likely go through around December 23. 3175:Category:National Football League coaches by team 2372:Category:National Football League players by team 2367:Category:American Football League players by team 1704:Category:American Football League players by team 1531:Category:National Football League players by team 1504:Category:National Football League players by team 1440:I'll volunteer to handle the Patriots article!!-- 1131:a question I should know the answer to, but don't 258:will be designated to hold only other categories. 252:Category:National Football League players by team 241:Category:National Football League players by team 3142:Category:American football starting quarterbacks 2362:Category:All-America Football Conference players 1637:applied it consistently. Probably not too big. 1535:Category:All-America Football Conference players 1326:Best line that I had to edit out of existence: " 3758:, and we are looking for A-class, B-class, and 2870:) and a template with a full listing of years ( 2030:Knowledge:Centralized discussion/Sports results 1476:and check the categorization of everyone there. 918:is just one sentence with a few words, and the 824:I have added two new articles for NFL Records: 714:, it looks like it's not used on any articles. 712:Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Football infobox 2402:, who were in the NFL during their final year. 1494:Category:American football players by position 965:If you haven't seen it yet, there's a list at 265:Category:American football players by position 3401:Talk:New England Patriots#Not To Be Forgotten 2448:– should it stay, or should it be split into 1248:college football players categories are clean 394:Knowledge:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) 160:Category:Michigan Wolverines football players 3539:so a dab page could be created to also list 2600:... the other sports-team featured article. 2412:Category:Brooklyn Dodgers (football) players 2013:What part of "this" are we trying to avoid? 2777:the order of columns (team or player first) 2742: 2739: 2736: 2377:so that we now have one for every franchise 2135:Knowledge:Votes for deletion/Montréal Expos 1496:'s subcategories and check those for teams. 1360:Right now I'm currently trying to work the 3714:I just had to create a disambiguation for 3545:Jason Taylor (Australian rules footballer) 3051:Earlier today I happened to come upon our 2733: 1502:Go through (ulp) all the subcategories of 1207:has been updated. A fact from the article 690:Hello, FYI, I have found another template 670:reference, here is GeorgeC's nice-looking 233:Category:American football players by team 188:Count me in however you want to do that.-- 177:Category:American football players by team 3407:comment there: "In the end its all POV". 3111:Category:National Football League coaches 2502:User:KramarDanIkabu/Sandbox#Football game 1625:Category:American Football League players 1563:Category:Canadian Football League players 1527:Category:American Football League players 1461:category:National Football League players 1269:Category:Entertainers who played football 949:Category:National_Football_League_players 592:I'm going to start using it right now. -- 256:Category:National Football League players 248:Category:National Football League players 164:Category:National Football League players 135:Category:National Football League players 99:Category:National Football League players 2446:Category:Baltimore Colts (1940s) players 2420:Category:Brooklyn Dodgers (AAFC) players 2396:Category:Baltimore Colts (1940s) players 3565:Jason Taylor (American football player) 3445:Brad Johnson (American football player) 1484:Category:National Football League Draft 365:, based on the nonparameterized one at 14: 3746:Articles for the Knowledge 1.0 project 3541:Jason Taylor (rugby league footballer) 3475:I prefer (American football) I think. 2426:Category:Dallas Texans (1960s) players 2357:I've added the last few categories to 2063:http://www.pro-football-reference.com/ 2028:, not overall number of articles. The 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 3073:the original intent when I created it 2903:2 things that I think are important: 2436:Category:Dallas Texans (1952) players 2428:– should be deleted now that we have 3752:Knowledge:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team 2430:Category:Dallas Texans (AFL) players 1922:who qualifies as a player for a team 1465:Football players from small colleges 798:Makes sense. I can live without it. 465:Also, I've put it on one more page, 300:Football players from small colleges 250:, and added to the subcategories of 25: 3917:You should probably take a look at 3306:is a little hokey, but I've always 2123:but I'm trying my best. Just FYI. 928:Knowledge:Article_Improvement_Drive 23: 3658:Category:Human name disambiguation 3561:Jason Taylor (American footballer) 3537:Jason Taylor (American footballer) 2783:Short or Long Schools names, e.g. 782:Knowledge:Fair use#Fair use policy 550:website screenshot" <groan: --> 211:Category:Chicago Cardinals players 158:and a bunch of subcategories like 24: 3962: 3179:Category:College football coaches 3119:Category:College football coaches 1842:Category:Austin Wranglers players 519:is good enough to start using. -- 270:Category:College football players 156:Category:College football players 3919:The talk page on WikiProject AFL 3912:The talk page on WikiProject AFL 2438:– should it stay, or be renamed 1474:List of current NFL team rosters 1195: 29: 3450:Brad Smith (college footballer) 3399:According to the discussion on 3231:Pats are up for FA nomination. 2218:History of the Los Angeles Rams 2179:History of the Los Angeles Rams 2119:. But what do you guys think? 2003:, regardless of what they do.-- 1046:Stars with minimal stubs, like 620:The infobox is now on about 25 3921:(see the bottom discussion re 3675:Ken Anderson (football player) 3430:Ken Anderson (football player) 2456:(for that pesky 1950 season) ? 1994:this project's "ultimate goal" 13: 1: 3903:14:23, 16 February 2006 (UTC) 3894:06:46, 16 February 2006 (UTC) 3869:04:50, 16 February 2006 (UTC) 3053:Glossary of American football 3046:Glossary of American football 2837:Good, I like the top one too 2265:}} and write something like: 1953:Yup, that's how I meant it.-- 1835:18:39, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1825:04:11, 31 December 2005 (UTC) 1811:18:13, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1801:17:59, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1780:17:43, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1765:17:40, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1727:16:25, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1711:14:55, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1647:14:13, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1632:13:31, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1618:06:41, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1599:06:25, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1589:05:53, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1575:04:52, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1557:03:57, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1547:03:35, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1520:01:36, 30 December 2005 (UTC) 1427:09:00, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1406:08:56, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1371:02:09, 26 December 2005 (UTC) 1351:23:11, 23 December 2005 (UTC) 1243:17:39, 22 December 2005 (UTC) 1232:15:59, 22 December 2005 (UTC) 1219:the "Did you know?" talk page 1179:20:05, 21 December 2005 (UTC) 1152:18:24, 21 December 2005 (UTC) 1125:18:08, 14 February 2006 (UTC) 1106:01:26, 24 December 2005 (UTC) 1088:01:01, 24 December 2005 (UTC) 1015:23:35, 23 December 2005 (UTC) 998:20:40, 23 December 2005 (UTC) 978:23:01, 23 December 2005 (UTC) 961:09:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC) 937:01:51, 21 December 2005 (UTC) 895:22:35, 13 December 2005 (UTC) 883:19:36, 13 December 2005 (UTC) 837:05:28, 13 December 2005 (UTC) 803:19:27, 14 February 2006 (UTC) 794:19:11, 14 February 2006 (UTC) 776:18:48, 14 February 2006 (UTC) 684:10:14, 21 December 2005 (UTC) 664:09:05, 21 December 2005 (UTC) 638:09:53, 21 December 2005 (UTC) 613:02:51, 21 December 2005 (UTC) 599:02:09, 21 December 2005 (UTC) 586:19:33, 18 December 2005 (UTC) 575:02:51, 18 December 2005 (UTC) 557:04:37, 17 December 2005 (UTC) 524:03:07, 17 December 2005 (UTC) 506:02:40, 17 December 2005 (UTC) 474:01:15, 17 December 2005 (UTC) 461:01:05, 17 December 2005 (UTC) 448:23:13, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 434:22:22, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 416:22:00, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 406:21:24, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 388:20:19, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 378:16:59, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 307:03:24, 21 December 2005 (UTC) 291:19:06, 19 December 2005 (UTC) 218:09:18, 12 December 2005 (UTC) 193:21:33, 16 December 2005 (UTC) 184:08:45, 12 December 2005 (UTC) 146:22:43, 30 November 2005 (UTC) 116:20:32, 30 November 2005 (UTC) 3854:20:55, 9 February 2006 (UTC) 3843:15:00, 5 February 2006 (UTC) 3822:20:41, 3 February 2006 (UTC) 3813:04:16, 3 February 2006 (UTC) 3803:03:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC) 3788:20:53, 3 February 2006 (UTC) 3771:17:40, 2 February 2006 (UTC) 3710:13:41, 2 February 2006 (UTC) 3692:09:36, 2 February 2006 (UTC) 3641:20:32, 1 February 2006 (UTC) 3627:20:21, 1 February 2006 (UTC) 3617:x3) or dates of some kind. 3575:20:17, 1 February 2006 (UTC) 3555:20:14, 1 February 2006 (UTC) 3527:19:37, 1 February 2006 (UTC) 3513:18:34, 1 February 2006 (UTC) 3503:18:18, 1 February 2006 (UTC) 3415:03:07, 30 January 2006 (UTC) 3393:02:45, 30 January 2006 (UTC) 3383:02:44, 30 January 2006 (UTC) 3367:02:34, 30 January 2006 (UTC) 3353:01:56, 30 January 2006 (UTC) 3333:01:54, 30 January 2006 (UTC) 3324:01:42, 30 January 2006 (UTC) 3298:01:02, 30 January 2006 (UTC) 3273:00:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC) 3264:00:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC) 3255:21:38, 28 January 2006 (UTC) 3246:21:24, 28 January 2006 (UTC) 3236:21:08, 28 January 2006 (UTC) 3226:19:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC) 3208:01:57, 1 February 2006 (UTC) 3163:02:12, 27 January 2006 (UTC) 3149:01:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC) 3131:01:04, 27 January 2006 (UTC) 3099:05:20, 23 January 2006 (UTC) 3083:04:52, 23 January 2006 (UTC) 3065:21:21, 22 January 2006 (UTC) 3040:04:51, 18 January 2006 (UTC) 3030:Talk:List of NFL Draft busts 2978:16:40, 17 January 2006 (UTC) 2967:16:22, 17 January 2006 (UTC) 2952:19:18, 17 January 2006 (UTC) 2943:19:10, 17 January 2006 (UTC) 2930:14:51, 17 January 2006 (UTC) 2898:14:16, 17 January 2006 (UTC) 2887:10:05, 17 January 2006 (UTC) 2847:21:04, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 2833:20:16, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 2824:16:49, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 2814:08:01, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 2804:07:59, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 2621:06:56, 9 February 2006 (UTC) 2605:06:52, 9 February 2006 (UTC) 2591:02:41, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 2562:New format for team articles 2556:01:36, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 2544:22:48, 15 January 2006 (UTC) 2516:this project's ultimate goal 2509:21:56, 15 January 2006 (UTC) 2487:20:44, 15 January 2006 (UTC) 2470:01:06, 15 January 2006 (UTC) 2347:02:27, 15 January 2006 (UTC) 2328:20:09, 14 January 2006 (UTC) 2306:15:21, 14 January 2006 (UTC) 2177:I would not mind a seperate 2070:03:31, 21 January 2006 (UTC) 1914:04:25, 26 January 2006 (UTC) 1905:03:10, 26 January 2006 (UTC) 1445:07:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC) 1436:03:34, 21 January 2006 (UTC) 751:21:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC) 736:17:22, 18 January 2006 (UTC) 724:04:01, 18 January 2006 (UTC) 702:23:26, 17 January 2006 (UTC) 357:15:57, 7 December 2005 (UTC) 347:01:21, 5 December 2005 (UTC) 329:03:59, 2 December 2005 (UTC) 171:15:56, 7 December 2005 (UTC) 131:Category:NBA players by team 7: 2460:Have I forgotten anything? 2317:Category:NFL Europe players 2281:22:23, 5 January 2006 (UTC) 2256:18:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC) 2234:19:56, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2208:18:23, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2198:18:19, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2189:18:10, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2169:17:16, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2145:17:16, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2128:17:00, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2058:17:06, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2048:17:05, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2018:16:32, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 2008:15:29, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1984:15:51, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1975:15:36, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1958:15:27, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1949:15:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1936:14:22, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1890:18:06, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1863:14:31, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1849:14:22, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 1072:, and some old-timey HOFers 971:Template:Infobox NFL player 517:Template:Infobox NFL player 363:Template:Infobox NFL player 226: 10: 3967: 3591:(American football player) 3192:Category:Arizona Cardinals 3004:00:26, 13 April 2006 (UTC) 2989:04:05, 28 March 2006 (UTC) 2321:Category:NFL Europe alumni 2133:You might want to look at 1686:New England Patriots (AFL) 207:Category:Arizona Cardinals 3952:10:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC) 3927:Rudy Gay's deletion entry 3440:Michael Bishop (football) 3173:Mike and I have expanded 3023:22:18, 11 June 2006 (UTC) 2774:Wiki or HTML table syntax 2400:Baltimore Colts (1947-50) 2353:NFL, AFL, AAFC categories 2109:St. Louis Cardinals (NFL) 1486:articles and check those. 1321:Steve Williams (wrestler) 1236:Is this our first DYK? -- 692:Template:Football infobox 125:it per se, but more like 3750:Hi, I'm a member of the 3730:05:11, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 3435:Tony Banks (quarterback) 2492:Proposal for game format 2155:User talk:RemembertheAFL 1895:I agree, not necessary. 1698:San Diego Chargers (AFL) 1680:Kansas City Chiefs (AFL) 1668:Cincinnati Bengals (AFL) 1157:The second paragraph of 826:NFL Records (Individual) 150:I'm the one who emptied 3136:Good luck categorizing 2789:Fresno State University 2763:Fresno State University 2690:1983, 1990 - 2001 style 2391:New York Yankees (AAFC) 1189:From my user talk page 342:'s isn't all that bad. 3196:Category:New York Jets 2093:Colorado Rockies (NHL) 1790:Vote early, vote often 1770:commando" will try to 1513:I call "not it" on #4. 1506:and check those folks. 771:Oops, forgot to sign. 513:Pro Football Reference 3460:Steve Young (athlete) 3421:Player disambiguation 3350:(Leave me a message!) 3328:-=nods=- Good point. 3285:"Not to be forgotten" 3096:(Leave me a message!) 3062:(Leave me a message!) 2637:1989, 2003-2005 style 2524:NFL playoffs, 2003-04 2159:User talk:24.48.96.44 1695:Oakland Raiders (AFL) 1340:Waterproof, Louisiana 1036:articles into three: 321:Knowledge:Sports Fans 133:). As it stands now, 42:of past discussions. 3874:So 24.48.96.44 (aka 3764:New England Patriots 3484:Association Football 3312:Other notable alumni 3291:New England Patriots 2728:(HTML syntax table) 2692:(HTML syntax table) 2639:(wiki syntax table) 2611:New England Patriots 2609:Whatever. Actually, 2528:our Super Bowl model 2500:articles, posted at 2414:needs to be renamed 2296:user WikiProject NFL 2263:Non-free fair use in 1683:Miami Dolphins (AFL) 1677:Houston Oilers (AFL) 1674:Denver Broncos (AFL) 1671:Dallas Texans (AFL) 152:Category:NBA players 127:Category:NBA players 3595:(American football) 3520:Screen Actors Guild 3304:Not to be forgotten 2857:User:KramarDanIkabu 2666:San Francisco 49ers 2484:(Er...let's shimmy) 2151:User:RemembertheAFL 1689:New York Jets (AFL) 1665:Buffalo Bills (AFL) 334:NFL player infobox? 3115:team subcategories 2246:Question on images 2089:Kansas City Scouts 1328:John Henry Johnson 830:NFL Records (Team) 478:I like it. I did 3587:(football player) 3559:In fact, I moved 3455:Steve Walsh (NFL) 2768: 2767: 2722: 2721: 2686: 2685: 2629:NFL Draft results 2418:now that we have 2117:Green Bay Packers 2113:Phoenix Cardinals 2101:Chicago Cardinals 2097:New Jersey Devils 2025:featured articles 1344:American football 1293:Christopher Judge 1225: 1224: 1058:+ retirees like 622:prominent players 280: 279: 144: 95: 94: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 3958: 3944: 3939: 3934: 3727: 3722: 3670:Tom (politician) 3465:And that's just 3105:Coach categories 2872:like the Grammys 2731: 2726:1986, 2002 style 2695: 2694: 2642: 2641: 2577:featured article 2300: 2294: 2222:Los Angeles Rams 2105:Racine Cardinals 2038:non-championship 2034:non-championship 1414:featured article 1199: 1192: 1191: 1147:played at USC?-- 1027:I have no doubt 815:All-Time Records 227: 143: 141: 73: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 3966: 3965: 3961: 3960: 3959: 3957: 3956: 3955: 3942: 3937: 3932: 3915: 3861: 3832: 3796: 3748: 3725: 3720: 3703:football player 3615:Tyrone Williams 3423: 3287: 3215: 3113:and all of the 3107: 3049: 3033: 2914:agree/disagree? 2868:like the Oscars 2702:Atlanta Falcons 2631: 2564: 2494: 2477: 2355: 2333:From Anthony's 2315:I went through 2313: 2298: 2292: 2289: 2248: 2084: 2082:Possible option 1996: 1924: 1882:Oakland Raiders 1692:New York Titans 1662:Boston Patriots 1515:Guess I lied.-- 1472:Go through the 1457: 1378: 1358: 1255:Jackie Robinson 1250: 1187: 1145:Jackie Robinson 1133: 1099:without copyvio 1034:the problematic 989:Marvin Harrison 911: 817: 645: 480:Morten Andersen 336: 317: 225: 139: 102: 69: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3964: 3925:), as well as 3914: 3909: 3908: 3907: 3906: 3905: 3876:RemembertheAFL 3860: 3857: 3836:Tedi Bruschi's 3831: 3828: 3827: 3826: 3825: 3824: 3795: 3792: 3791: 3790: 3756:these criteria 3747: 3744: 3743: 3742: 3741: 3740: 3739: 3738: 3737: 3736: 3735: 3734: 3733: 3732: 3662:Tom (football) 3646: 3645: 3644: 3643: 3634:buck the trend 3583: 3582: 3581: 3580: 3579: 3578: 3577: 3496: 3495: 3492: 3489: 3486: 3480: 3463: 3462: 3457: 3452: 3447: 3442: 3437: 3432: 3422: 3419: 3418: 3417: 3396: 3395: 3372: 3371: 3370: 3369: 3337: 3336: 3335: 3286: 3283: 3282: 3281: 3280: 3279: 3278: 3277: 3276: 3275: 3248: 3214: 3211: 3168: 3167: 3166: 3165: 3106: 3103: 3102: 3101: 3086: 3085: 3048: 3043: 3032: 3027: 3026: 3025: 3016:2005 NFL Draft 3012:2006 NFL Draft 3007: 3006: 2997:2004 NFL Draft 2992: 2991: 2975:KramarDanIkabu 2970: 2969: 2959: 2958: 2957: 2956: 2955: 2954: 2923: 2922: 2919: 2915: 2911: 2901: 2900: 2876: 2875: 2864: 2861:2005 NFL Draft 2850: 2849: 2835: 2826: 2816: 2793: 2792: 2781: 2778: 2775: 2766: 2765: 2760: 2758:Houston Texans 2755: 2749: 2745: 2744: 2741: 2738: 2735: 2724: 2720: 2719: 2714: 2709: 2704: 2699: 2688: 2684: 2683: 2678: 2673: 2668: 2663: 2659: 2658: 2655: 2652: 2649: 2646: 2630: 2627: 2626: 2625: 2624: 2623: 2563: 2560: 2559: 2558: 2546: 2506:KramarDanIkabu 2493: 2490: 2476: 2473: 2458: 2457: 2443: 2433: 2423: 2404: 2403: 2393: 2375: 2374: 2369: 2364: 2354: 2351: 2350: 2349: 2312: 2309: 2288: 2285: 2284: 2283: 2247: 2244: 2243: 2242: 2241: 2240: 2239: 2238: 2237: 2236: 2214:St. Louis Rams 2174: 2173: 2172: 2171: 2083: 2080: 2079: 2078: 2077: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2073: 2072: 1995: 1992: 1991: 1990: 1989: 1988: 1987: 1986: 1962: 1961: 1960: 1923: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1878: 1877: 1876: 1875: 1874: 1873: 1872: 1871: 1870: 1869: 1868: 1867: 1866: 1865: 1827: 1767: 1700: 1699: 1696: 1693: 1690: 1687: 1684: 1681: 1678: 1675: 1672: 1669: 1666: 1663: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1653: 1652: 1651: 1650: 1649: 1620: 1581: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1510: 1509: 1499: 1489: 1479: 1456: 1453: 1452: 1451: 1450: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1409: 1408: 1395: 1394: 1390: 1386: 1377: 1374: 1362:Terry Bradshaw 1357: 1354: 1309:Randy Thornton 1301:Ryan McPartlin 1285:Richard Grieco 1249: 1246: 1223: 1222: 1200: 1186: 1183: 1182: 1181: 1170: 1169: 1168: 1159:End (football) 1141:Gene Stallings 1132: 1129: 1128: 1127: 1109: 1108: 1094: 1093: 1092: 1091: 1090: 1075: 1074: 1073: 1066: 1044: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1017: 983: 982: 981: 980: 916:Donnie Spragan 910: 909:Football-Bios. 907: 906: 905: 904: 903: 902: 901: 900: 899: 898: 897: 876: 875: 874: 873: 872: 869:ended in 2002 864: 861:ended in 2001 856: 842: 841: 840: 839: 816: 813: 812: 811: 810: 809: 808: 807: 806: 805: 766: 765: 760: 759: 758: 757: 756: 755: 754: 753: 705: 704: 687: 686: 644: 641: 618: 617: 616: 615: 589: 588: 535: 534: 533: 532: 531: 530: 529: 528: 527: 526: 499: 498: 497: 496: 495: 488: 427: 426: 425: 424: 423: 422: 421: 420: 419: 418: 335: 332: 316: 313: 312: 311: 310: 309: 278: 277: 276: 275: 274: 273: 267: 259: 244: 239:to be renamed 224: 221: 202: 201: 200: 199: 198: 197: 196: 195: 101: 96: 93: 92: 87: 84: 79: 74: 67: 62: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3963: 3954: 3953: 3950: 3949: 3946: 3945: 3940: 3935: 3928: 3924: 3920: 3913: 3904: 3901: 3897: 3896: 3895: 3892: 3889: 3885: 3881: 3877: 3873: 3872: 3871: 3870: 3867: 3859:More AFL spam 3856: 3855: 3852: 3850: 3845: 3844: 3841: 3837: 3823: 3820: 3816: 3815: 3814: 3811: 3807: 3806: 3805: 3804: 3801: 3789: 3786: 3783: 3779: 3775: 3774: 3773: 3772: 3769: 3765: 3761: 3760:Good articles 3757: 3753: 3731: 3728: 3723: 3717: 3713: 3712: 3711: 3708: 3704: 3699: 3695: 3694: 3693: 3690: 3687: 3686: 3681: 3677: 3676: 3671: 3667: 3666:Tom (chemist) 3663: 3659: 3654: 3653: 3652: 3651: 3650: 3649: 3648: 3647: 3642: 3639: 3635: 3630: 3629: 3628: 3625: 3622: 3621: 3616: 3612: 3608: 3604: 3600: 3596: 3592: 3588: 3584: 3576: 3573: 3570: 3566: 3562: 3558: 3557: 3556: 3553: 3550: 3546: 3542: 3538: 3534: 3530: 3529: 3528: 3525: 3521: 3516: 3515: 3514: 3511: 3510:Mike Selinker 3507: 3506: 3505: 3504: 3501: 3493: 3490: 3487: 3485: 3481: 3478: 3477: 3476: 3473: 3470: 3468: 3461: 3458: 3456: 3453: 3451: 3448: 3446: 3443: 3441: 3438: 3436: 3433: 3431: 3428: 3427: 3426: 3416: 3413: 3410: 3406: 3402: 3398: 3397: 3394: 3391: 3387: 3386: 3385: 3384: 3381: 3377: 3368: 3365: 3362: 3361: 3356: 3355: 3354: 3351: 3347: 3342: 3338: 3334: 3331: 3327: 3326: 3325: 3322: 3319: 3318: 3313: 3309: 3305: 3302: 3301: 3300: 3299: 3296: 3292: 3274: 3271: 3267: 3266: 3265: 3262: 3261:Mike Selinker 3258: 3257: 3256: 3253: 3249: 3247: 3244: 3243:Mike Selinker 3239: 3238: 3237: 3234: 3230: 3229: 3228: 3227: 3224: 3220: 3210: 3209: 3206: 3203: 3202: 3197: 3193: 3189: 3185: 3180: 3176: 3172: 3164: 3161: 3158: 3157: 3152: 3151: 3150: 3147: 3146:Mike Selinker 3143: 3139: 3135: 3134: 3133: 3132: 3129: 3126: 3125: 3120: 3116: 3112: 3100: 3097: 3093: 3088: 3087: 3084: 3081: 3078: 3074: 3069: 3068: 3067: 3066: 3063: 3059: 3054: 3047: 3042: 3041: 3038: 3037:Youngamerican 3031: 3024: 3021: 3017: 3013: 3009: 3008: 3005: 3002: 2998: 2994: 2993: 2990: 2987: 2982: 2981: 2980: 2979: 2976: 2968: 2965: 2961: 2960: 2953: 2950: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2941: 2936: 2935: 2934: 2933: 2932: 2931: 2928: 2920: 2916: 2912: 2909: 2906: 2905: 2904: 2899: 2896: 2891: 2890: 2889: 2888: 2885: 2882: 2881: 2873: 2869: 2865: 2862: 2858: 2855: 2854: 2853: 2848: 2845: 2842: 2841: 2836: 2834: 2831: 2827: 2825: 2822: 2817: 2815: 2812: 2808: 2807: 2806: 2805: 2802: 2799: 2798: 2790: 2786: 2782: 2779: 2776: 2773: 2772: 2771: 2764: 2761: 2759: 2756: 2753: 2750: 2747: 2746: 2732: 2729: 2727: 2718: 2717:Virginia Tech 2715: 2713: 2710: 2708: 2705: 2703: 2700: 2697: 2696: 2693: 2691: 2682: 2679: 2677: 2674: 2672: 2669: 2667: 2664: 2661: 2660: 2656: 2653: 2650: 2647: 2644: 2643: 2640: 2638: 2634: 2622: 2619: 2616: 2612: 2608: 2607: 2606: 2603: 2599: 2595: 2594: 2593: 2592: 2589: 2586: 2582: 2581:Chicago Bears 2578: 2574: 2570: 2557: 2554: 2551: 2547: 2545: 2542: 2539: 2538: 2533: 2529: 2525: 2521: 2517: 2513: 2512: 2511: 2510: 2507: 2503: 2499: 2489: 2488: 2485: 2482: 2481:Tim Rhymeless 2472: 2471: 2468: 2465: 2464: 2455: 2451: 2447: 2444: 2441: 2437: 2434: 2431: 2427: 2424: 2421: 2417: 2413: 2410: 2409: 2408: 2401: 2397: 2394: 2392: 2388: 2387: 2386: 2384: 2380: 2373: 2370: 2368: 2365: 2363: 2360: 2359: 2358: 2348: 2345: 2342: 2341: 2336: 2332: 2331: 2330: 2329: 2326: 2322: 2318: 2311:NFL Europe... 2308: 2307: 2304: 2297: 2287:User template 2282: 2279: 2276: 2272: 2268: 2264: 2260: 2259: 2258: 2257: 2254: 2235: 2232: 2229: 2228: 2223: 2219: 2215: 2211: 2210: 2209: 2206: 2205:Mike Selinker 2201: 2200: 2199: 2196: 2192: 2191: 2190: 2187: 2184: 2180: 2176: 2175: 2170: 2167: 2164: 2160: 2156: 2152: 2148: 2147: 2146: 2143: 2140: 2136: 2132: 2131: 2130: 2129: 2126: 2120: 2118: 2114: 2110: 2106: 2102: 2098: 2094: 2090: 2071: 2068: 2064: 2061: 2060: 2059: 2056: 2051: 2050: 2049: 2046: 2043: 2039: 2035: 2031: 2027: 2026: 2021: 2020: 2019: 2016: 2012: 2011: 2010: 2009: 2006: 2005:Mike Selinker 2002: 1985: 1982: 1981:Mike Selinker 1978: 1977: 1976: 1973: 1970: 1969: 1963: 1959: 1956: 1955:Mike Selinker 1952: 1951: 1950: 1947: 1942: 1941: 1940: 1939: 1938: 1937: 1934: 1933:Mike Selinker 1929: 1915: 1912: 1911:Mike Selinker 1908: 1907: 1906: 1903: 1900: 1899: 1894: 1893: 1892: 1891: 1888: 1883: 1864: 1861: 1858: 1857: 1852: 1851: 1850: 1847: 1846:Mike Selinker 1843: 1838: 1837: 1836: 1833: 1832:Mike Selinker 1830:categories.-- 1828: 1826: 1823: 1820: 1819: 1814: 1813: 1812: 1809: 1804: 1803: 1802: 1799: 1796: 1795: 1791: 1787: 1783: 1782: 1781: 1778: 1773: 1768: 1766: 1763: 1760: 1759: 1754: 1750: 1749:Broncos (AFL) 1746: 1745:Broncos (NFL) 1742: 1738: 1733: 1730: 1729: 1728: 1725: 1724:Mike Selinker 1720: 1715: 1714: 1713: 1712: 1709: 1705: 1697: 1694: 1691: 1688: 1685: 1682: 1679: 1676: 1673: 1670: 1667: 1664: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1648: 1645: 1642: 1641: 1635: 1634: 1633: 1630: 1626: 1621: 1619: 1616: 1613: 1612: 1606: 1602: 1601: 1600: 1597: 1596:Mike Selinker 1592: 1591: 1590: 1587: 1582: 1576: 1573: 1570: 1569: 1564: 1560: 1559: 1558: 1555: 1554:Mike Selinker 1550: 1549: 1548: 1545: 1542: 1541: 1536: 1532: 1528: 1524: 1523: 1522: 1521: 1518: 1517:Mike Selinker 1514: 1507: 1505: 1500: 1497: 1495: 1490: 1487: 1485: 1480: 1477: 1475: 1470: 1469: 1468: 1466: 1462: 1446: 1443: 1439: 1438: 1437: 1434: 1430: 1429: 1428: 1425: 1422: 1418: 1415: 1411: 1410: 1407: 1404: 1401: 1397: 1396: 1393: 1391: 1389: 1387: 1385: 1383: 1382: 1381: 1373: 1372: 1369: 1367: 1363: 1353: 1352: 1349: 1348:Mike Selinker 1345: 1341: 1337: 1333: 1329: 1324: 1322: 1318: 1314: 1310: 1306: 1302: 1298: 1297:Nikita Koloff 1294: 1290: 1286: 1282: 1278: 1274: 1273:Hugh Beaumont 1270: 1266: 1264: 1260: 1256: 1245: 1244: 1241: 1239: 1234: 1233: 1230: 1220: 1216: 1212: 1211: 1206: 1205: 1204:Did you know? 1201: 1198: 1194: 1193: 1190: 1180: 1177: 1174: 1171: 1167: 1163: 1162: 1160: 1156: 1155: 1154: 1153: 1150: 1149:Mike Selinker 1146: 1142: 1138: 1126: 1123: 1119: 1115: 1111: 1110: 1107: 1104: 1100: 1095: 1089: 1086: 1083: 1082: 1076: 1071: 1070:2006 Pro Bowl 1067: 1065: 1061: 1057: 1053: 1049: 1045: 1042: 1038: 1037: 1035: 1030: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1021: 1016: 1013: 1009: 1008:Terrell Owens 1005: 1001: 1000: 999: 996: 994: 990: 985: 984: 979: 976: 972: 968: 967:2006 Pro Bowl 964: 963: 962: 959: 956: 955: 950: 946: 941: 940: 939: 938: 935: 933: 929: 925: 921: 917: 896: 893: 888: 887: 886: 885: 884: 881: 877: 871: 868: 865: 863: 860: 857: 854: 853: 852: 851: 848: 847: 846: 845: 844: 843: 838: 835: 831: 827: 823: 822: 819: 818: 804: 801: 797: 796: 795: 792: 789: 788: 783: 779: 778: 777: 774: 770: 769: 768: 767: 762: 761: 752: 749: 746: 745: 739: 738: 737: 733: 732: 727: 726: 725: 722: 719: 718: 713: 709: 708: 707: 706: 703: 699: 698: 693: 689: 688: 685: 682: 679: 678: 673: 672:Carson Palmer 668: 667: 666: 665: 662: 657: 655: 649: 640: 639: 636: 633: 632: 627: 623: 614: 611: 608: 607: 602: 601: 600: 597: 595: 591: 590: 587: 584: 579: 578: 577: 576: 573: 570: 569: 564: 559: 558: 555: 548: 544: 540: 525: 522: 518: 514: 509: 508: 507: 504: 500: 493: 489: 486: 485: 484: 483: 481: 477: 476: 475: 472: 468: 464: 463: 462: 459: 455: 451: 450: 449: 446: 442: 441:David Beckham 438: 437: 436: 435: 432: 417: 414: 409: 408: 407: 404: 399: 395: 391: 390: 389: 386: 381: 380: 379: 376: 372: 368: 364: 360: 359: 358: 355: 354:Mike Selinker 351: 350: 349: 348: 345: 341: 331: 330: 327: 322: 315:Fan templates 308: 305: 304:Mike Selinker 301: 297: 296: 295: 294: 293: 292: 289: 286: 285: 271: 268: 266: 263: 262: 260: 257: 253: 249: 245: 242: 238: 234: 231: 230: 229: 228: 220: 219: 216: 212: 208: 194: 191: 190:Mike Selinker 187: 186: 185: 182: 178: 174: 173: 172: 169: 168:Mike Selinker 165: 161: 157: 153: 149: 148: 147: 142: 136: 132: 128: 124: 120: 119: 118: 117: 114: 110: 106: 100: 91: 88: 85: 83: 80: 78: 75: 72: 68: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 3947: 3930: 3916: 3862: 3846: 3833: 3797: 3749: 3721:Panchitavill 3702: 3697: 3684: 3683: 3679: 3673: 3669: 3665: 3661: 3619: 3618: 3610: 3606: 3594: 3590: 3586: 3533:Jason Taylor 3497: 3474: 3471: 3467:quarterbacks 3464: 3424: 3373: 3359: 3358: 3316: 3315: 3311: 3307: 3303: 3288: 3216: 3200: 3199: 3187: 3183: 3170: 3169: 3155: 3154: 3138:Monte Kiffin 3123: 3122: 3108: 3050: 3034: 3010:I nominated 2971: 2924: 2902: 2879: 2878: 2877: 2851: 2839: 2838: 2796: 2795: 2794: 2788: 2785:Fresno State 2784: 2769: 2725: 2723: 2707:Michael Vick 2689: 2687: 2636: 2635: 2632: 2598:IFK Göteborg 2573:Arsenal F.C. 2565: 2536: 2535: 2498:NFL playoffs 2495: 2478: 2462: 2461: 2459: 2453: 2449: 2439: 2415: 2405: 2382: 2378: 2376: 2356: 2339: 2338: 2314: 2290: 2266: 2249: 2226: 2225: 2157:). Also see 2121: 2085: 2037: 2033: 2023: 1997: 1967: 1966: 1927: 1925: 1897: 1896: 1879: 1855: 1854: 1817: 1816: 1793: 1792: 1789: 1785: 1771: 1757: 1756: 1752: 1748: 1744: 1743:rather than 1741:Brocos (AFL) 1740: 1736: 1731: 1718: 1701: 1657: 1639: 1638: 1610: 1609: 1567: 1566: 1539: 1538: 1512: 1511: 1501: 1491: 1481: 1471: 1458: 1417:Arsenal F.C. 1379: 1359: 1356:Need Images. 1327: 1325: 1267: 1259:Ralph Jordan 1251: 1235: 1226: 1208: 1202: 1188: 1164: 1137:Woody Strode 1134: 1114:Nick Collins 1098: 1080: 1079: 1064:Ben Davidson 1048:Jason Taylor 1033: 1029:Jason Taylor 1012:Bill shannon 1004:Jason Taylor 953: 952: 945:Jason Taylor 920:Jason Taylor 912: 892:Bill shannon 866: 858: 834:Bill shannon 786: 785: 743: 742: 730: 716: 715: 696: 676: 675: 658: 650: 646: 630: 629: 619: 605: 604: 567: 566: 560: 536: 491: 428: 337: 318: 283: 282: 281: 203: 122: 109:my talk page 103: 70: 43: 37: 3830:Player Bios 3794:Patriots FA 3611:(Chemistry) 3241:cheating.-- 3213:Peer review 2676:Quarterback 2602:Daniel Case 2596:You forgot 1492:Go through 1482:Go through 1332:November 24 1289:Harold Hoag 1210:Greg Landry 1118:Samkon Gado 1052:Zach Thomas 643:Suggestions 563:Joe Montana 454:Joe Montana 398:Joe Montana 371:Joe Montana 367:Joe Montana 340:Joe Montana 36:This is an 3707:Wrathchild 3698:footballer 3680:footballer 3638:Wrathchild 3524:Wrathchild 3500:Wrathchild 3184:Jets (AFL) 2752:David Carr 2671:Alex Smith 2273:for more. 1840:already a 1419:shape)... 1317:John Wayne 1313:Erik Watts 1305:Ed O'Neill 1263:Cliff Hare 1229:Gurubrahma 1060:Eric Allen 1041:Dan Marino 924:Dan Marino 547:Alex Smith 467:Alex Smith 121:Well, not 90:Archive 10 3900:Cholmes75 3866:Cholmes75 3819:Deckiller 3800:Deckiller 3716:B.J. Sams 3607:(Chemist) 3585:I prefer 3376:alumnus/a 3341:alumnus/a 3330:Deckiller 3295:Deckiller 3270:Deckiller 3252:Deckiller 3233:Deckiller 3223:Deckiller 3188:NY Titans 3001:Wizardman 2986:Wizardman 2583:article. 2335:talk page 2067:Cholmes75 1844:to use.-- 1433:Cholmes75 1342:) was an 1281:Ric Flair 1277:Ward Bond 1215:Main Page 492:Stats:PFR 237:nominated 235:has been 209:contains 82:Archive 5 77:Archive 4 71:Archive 3 65:Archive 2 60:Archive 1 3923:Rudy Gay 3884:contribs 3776:Besides 3696:Ick. No 3664:next to 3405:Assawyer 3020:VegaDark 2740:NFL Team 2657:College 2654:Position 2648:NFL Team 2520:NFL Lore 2432:, right? 2203:about.-- 1732:Abstain! 975:Arcadian 926:for the 583:Arcadian 543:Andersen 521:Arcadian 471:Arcadian 458:Arcadian 431:Arcadian 375:Arcadian 140:howcheng 123:deleting 105:howcheng 3943:gerthat 3888:Zzyzx11 3849:Jaranda 3810:Alhutch 3782:Zzyzx11 3768:Gflores 3569:Zzyzx11 3549:Zzyzx11 3409:Zzyzx11 3390:Alhutch 3380:Alhutch 3308:kind of 3171:Update: 3109:Should 3077:Zzyzx11 2964:Alhutch 2940:Anthony 2927:J Train 2895:Anthony 2830:J Train 2821:Anthony 2811:Alhutch 2743:College 2615:Zzyzx11 2585:Zzyzx11 2550:Zzyzx11 2325:Anthony 2303:Anthony 2275:Zzyzx11 2253:Anthony 2195:Anthony 2183:Zzyzx11 2163:Zzyzx11 2139:Zzyzx11 2125:Anthony 2055:Anthony 2042:Zzyzx11 2015:Anthony 1946:Anthony 1928:drafted 1887:Anthony 1808:Anthony 1777:Anthony 1737:Broncos 1708:Anthony 1629:Anthony 1586:Anthony 1552:that.-- 1442:Alhutch 1421:Zzyzx11 1400:Zzyzx11 1366:Jaranda 1238:Jaranda 1173:Zzyzx11 1161:reads: 1103:Anthony 1056:Ed Reed 993:Jaranda 932:Jaranda 731:Johntex 697:Johntex 661:GeorgeC 654:Ray Guy 626:GeorgeC 594:Jaranda 539:Montana 413:Anthony 385:Anthony 344:Gflores 326:Anthony 223:Summary 113:Anthony 39:archive 3891:(Talk) 3840:jfg284 3785:(Talk) 3609:, not 3605:(e.g. 3572:(Talk) 3552:(Talk) 3412:(Talk) 3293:page. 3080:(Talk) 2737:Player 2651:Player 2645:Pick # 2618:(Talk) 2588:(Talk) 2553:(Talk) 2532:WP:NOT 2450:(AAFC) 2278:(Talk) 2186:(Talk) 2166:(Talk) 2142:(Talk) 2111:, and 2095:, and 2045:(Talk) 1747:& 1739:& 1424:(Talk) 1403:(Talk) 1330:(born 1319:, and 1176:(Talk) 1122:Kybard 800:Kybard 773:Kybard 545:, and 3778:WP:GA 3689:Meegs 3624:Meegs 3364:Meegs 3346:EWS23 3321:Meegs 3205:Meegs 3160:Meegs 3128:Meegs 3117:(and 3092:EWS23 3058:EWS23 2949:J1729 2918:bonus 2884:Meegs 2844:Meegs 2801:Meegs 2541:Meegs 2467:Meegs 2454:(NFL) 2440:(NFL) 2416:(NFL) 2344:Meegs 2231:Meegs 2220:than 1972:Meegs 1902:Meegs 1860:Meegs 1822:Meegs 1798:Meegs 1786:(AFL) 1762:Meegs 1753:(NFL) 1644:Meegs 1615:Meegs 1572:Meegs 1565:too. 1544:Meegs 1508:Done. 1488:Done. 1478:Done. 1398:Ugh! 1085:Meegs 958:Meegs 880:Meegs 791:Meegs 748:Meegs 721:Meegs 710:From 681:Meegs 635:Meegs 610:Meegs 572:Meegs 554:Meegs 503:Meegs 445:Meegs 403:Meegs 288:Meegs 215:Meegs 181:Meegs 16:< 3880:talk 3668:and 3601:and 3543:and 3194:and 3186:and 3177:and 2908:2004 2754:(QB) 2734:Pick 2681:Utah 2475:KFFL 2452:and 2381:city 2269:See 2001:this 1605:AAFC 1459:The 1346:."-- 1336:1929 1261:and 1166:end. 1139:and 1116:and 828:and 764:use. 3682:;) 3636:. — 3593:to 3589:or 3563:to 3535:to 3522:. — 3198:). 3144:.-- 2787:or 1772:cfr 1719:cfr 1338:in 1185:DYK 1062:or 624:. 3929:. 3882:• 3547:. 3469:. 3348:| 3221:. 3094:| 3060:| 2984:-- 2874:). 2712:QB 2299:}} 2293:{{ 2107:, 2103:, 2091:, 1334:, 1315:, 1311:, 1307:, 1303:, 1299:, 1295:, 1291:, 1287:, 1283:, 1279:, 1275:, 1265:. 1257:, 1227:-- 1221:. 1054:, 1050:, 784:. 734:\ 700:\ 674:. 656:. 581:-- 541:, 501:-- 86:→ 3938:o 3933:R 3878:( 3726:e 3685:× 3620:× 3498:— 3360:× 3317:× 3201:× 3156:× 3124:× 2925:- 2880:× 2840:× 2797:× 2791:. 2748:1 2698:1 2662:1 2537:× 2463:× 2442:? 2422:. 2383:× 2379:× 2340:× 2227:× 1968:× 1898:× 1856:× 1818:× 1794:× 1758:× 1640:× 1611:× 1568:× 1540:× 1081:× 954:× 787:× 744:× 717:× 677:× 631:× 606:× 568:× 552:- 284:× 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge

talk:WikiProject National Football League/Archive 3 - Knowledge

Index