Talk:Stanford Cardinal

1940 College football championship

Stanford's own official championship page does not include the 1940 football championship. The official NCAA football championship page does include it as the winner according to Helms and Poling. From the Notre Dame Football Championships entry it appears that what the university claims is the most important factor as to whether to include a national championship or not. Since the Stanford website doesn't include it, I think it's reasonable to take out the 1940 championship from this list. Dadadave (talk) 04:39, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree. The Stanford list is the one I used to make the list initially; I'm sure the recent 1940 entry was a good-faith addition, so thanks for documenting your reasoning for future reference. --Esprqii (talk) 05:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Olymic medalist table

The Olympic representation section only covers the 2008 olympics, and the table of medalists takes up a disproportionate amount of space in the article --Mugsywwiii (talk) 01:15, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Hall of Fame

I find it hard to believe that Tiger Woods is not included in the Stanford athletics hall of fame under men's golf. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.190.31 (talk) 02:52, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

You just needed to wait another day until he was actually inducted to the HoF. --Esprqii (talk) 19:06, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Cardinal, not Cardinals

There are the Cleveland Browns and Cincinnati Reds, but in college football, the Stanford Cardinal and Alabama Crimson (Tide). I've just corrected the links to Stanford Cardinals, as that redirect was recently marked as a misspelling. Go Scarlet and Gray! Wbm1058 (talk) 13:40, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Just one little problem. They were actually the "Cardinals" from 1972 through 1981. So, in that context, it's not an error to use the plural. Just don't link to plural. To avoid getting flagged as an error, link intentional use of the plural form as:

[[Stanford Cardinal|Stanford Cardinals]]: Stanford Cardinals

That name didn't fly, as the St. Louis Cardinals and Arizona Cardinals did. Wbm1058 (talk) 14:38, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

And Louisville Cardinals. The St. Louis variety looks friendly (they can land on my bat anytime), and the Arizona species looks like it's on a serious mission, but that Louisville redbird (er, cardinal-bird) mutation looks downright menacing! Oh, yea. The team pages for 1972–81 use an infobox parameter that I changed to Stanford Cardinal football{{!}}Stanford Cardinals. A kludge, but it works. Wbm1058 (talk) 18:15, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

The problem with that kludge is that it breaks the previous/next year navigation at the bottom of the infobox. I'm not sure what problem you were trying to solve. I think we should revert to the previous versions, which worked OK and showed the correct name for that 72-81 time period. --Esprqii (talk) 18:49, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

(update) I read back and see there was an issue with some kind of spell-check error flag (where does that show up?) Could we could address this instead with a note in the source code rather than a workaround that breaks part of the infobox? --Esprqii (talk) 18:59, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

I see. Right, the problem I'm trying to solve is to remove Cardinals-linking pages from the weekly bot-generated Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked misspellings list. Investigating further, further info forthcoming... Wbm1058 (talk) 19:09, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Ahh, that is annoying, and right at the top of the list, too! Thanks for investigating. --Esprqii (talk) 19:17, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Stanford Cardinals was marked as a misspelling with this 23 October 2015 edit by User:A window cleaner me, who made over 630 edits which are still live, and over 700 edits which have been deleted (many useless redirect creations) during the last ten days of October, before being blocked as a "sockpuppet". A significant portion of their edits related to the Cardinal(s). So, now I just discover this after making ~100 edits which mostly just bypassed a redirect. There is a legitimate argument for flagging many of these for correction, but I see how this can be taken too far. I think we can fix this by downgrading the problematic {{R from misspelling}} tags to {{R from incorrect name}}. I don't think the spell-checker bot cares about those. I'll work on cleaning this up. Thanks for pointing out the navigation issue. – Wbm1058 (talk) 19:44, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

• Actually, {{R from former name}} is better. – Wbm1058 (talk) 20:19, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

This is fantastic. Thanks for getting this cleaned up. --Esprqii (talk) 21:13, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

American English Grammar

If you aren't a native American English speaker then you shouldn't be making edits concerning American English language. The single plural form is wrong. Obviously. If you continue to pursue the matter I suggest you should have your credentials to edit articles suspended.

Rowing and sailing and co-ed sports

I've been viewing a lot of college sports pages lately and the sport of rowing has me a little confused. Some pages list the sport as rowing and others list it as crew. Crew and rowing are the same thing with different names, probably depends on where you're from as to which name you use. The confusing part comes in when some pages like this one list Rowing lightweight. I assume this means there is no men's lightweight rowing at Stanford. But what about the pages for other colleges? If lightweight isn't listed at all, does that mean that college has no lightweight rowing or does it mean they have both but feel no need to list it separately? Also on this page, sailing is listed as co-ed and under the men's category. Does this mean there is a co-ed team and a men's team? The Stanford Cardinal web page lists sailing and fencing under both men's and women's sports. They don't show a co-ed category.Jdtrue63 (talk) 10:22, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

@Jdtrue63: Rowing is in both men and women here, but there is only a lightweight rowing team for the women per the website. Sailing was just an error in the men's side and should only be in the co-ed section. Corky ^{Buzz by the Hornet's Nest} 03:58, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction to the sailing category. But in the rowing, did you mean there is both womens's rowing and women's lightweight rowing? Both are listed on the wikipage and the college page you linked too. Your link was to the Rowing Ltw college page, but if you look under women's sports you'll see both. I read the wikipage on college rowing and women's openweight is the only NCAA sanctioned rowing category. Other categories are men's heavyweight and men's and women's lightweight. With some cross referencing of the college rowing wikipage, the individual college sports wikipage and the colleges website I can probably figure most of these out, but it would help if the authors of the individual college sports wikipages would specify by separating the different categories like the Stanford page or by specifying "heavyweight only" or "openweight only" or "both heavyweight and lightweight."Jdtrue63 (talk) 06:06, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, if you click the link I gave you to the Stanford Athletics website... they clearly list two different sports for lightweight and regular rowing for women. I'm not much of a sports guy to know the difference between the two, nor do I care . I just copied what was on the page before and what is listed at the athletics website... Corky ^{Buzz by the Hornet's Nest} 06:16, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Tennis?

Shouldn't the tennis team have an article? --2604:2000:E020:9500:6CA4:5131:C52B:4770 (talk) 18:51, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Merge

I'd like to merge Stanford Cardinal men's volleyball here since it's very short and lacking in references. Seems like it may belong here. Andre🚐 21:10, 21 December 2023 (UTC)