User talk:Ejgreen77/Archives/2013/February

RfA: thank you for your support

Ejgreen, thank you for your kind words and support during my RfA. Your late-breaking support, even in the face of much storm and fury at the end, meant a great deal to this candidate. Warm regards, Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:51, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

College football rivalry articles

Ejgreen77, thanks for all your recent contributions. I've noticed many of the articles about college football rivalries that you've created in recent weeks. A couple thoughts here:

1. Links in the lead ought to direct to the most specific articles relevant to the subject. This means prioritizing links to the articles about the football teams overs the articles for the school and the school's athletic program. See my edit to Albany–Stony Brook football rivalry.
2. You seem to be intent on creating articles for many (possibly many more) college football rivalries involving mid-major/FCS teams. There's a lot of sentiment about curtailing the number of articles about rivalries, deleting/merging many of the existing ones of lower note, and building a policy that's restrictive about what sorts of rivalries deserve stand-alone articles. It would be great if you could summarize your own thoughts and plans at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football.

Thanks again and all the best, Jweiss11 (talk) 11:07, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Jweiss11. Right now, I'm currently working on articles for Battle for the Brice-Cowell Musket (102 meetings between Maine and New Hampshire) and Sitting Bull Trophy (94 meetings between North Dakota and South Dakota). Beyond that, I'm not really planning anything else, though there are some redlinks at Template:Mountain West Conference football rivalry navbox that probably should get filled out with articles, but, quite frankly I haven't even really looked at any of them yet. I'm also looking at improving some existing articles, as well.

As far as my thoughts on these rivalry articles, I actually do have some thoughts, but I'm a bit hesitant to bring them forward after some of the recent blow-ups on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football. The bottom line, for me, is that when 15 games between two otherwise completely unconnected programs can be written up as a rivalry article and then sail through AfD with flying colors, the bar is set pretty low for these articles - probably too low.

With that in mind, this would be my own "modest proposal" for a standard, similar to a WP:CFBSEASON standard for rivalry articles, perhaps WP:CFBRIVALRY:

A rivalry can be considered to exist between two football programs if it meets at least TWO of the following FOUR rules:

1. There is an actual, physical trophy that is (or was) exchanged between the two schools (ex. Stanford Axe) Going along with the discussion going on at WP:CFB right now, the trophy doesn't need to have it's own article, a redirect to the rivalry article is fine.
2. The two teams compete in the same conference, and play regularly scheduled conference games against each other. (ex. Michigan–Ohio State football rivalry)
3. The two schools are located in the same state, or general geographic area. (ex. Clean, Old-Fashioned Hate, The Battle of I-10)
4. The two teams have met on the football field a minimum of 30 times. (ex. Notre Dame–USC football rivalry)

The last number was chosen a bit at random, I will admit. It seemed to me that somewhere around the quarter-century mark (25-30) seemed to be a good place for a minimum to be set at. Perhaps exceptions to some of these rules (specifically #2) could be granted for historic rivalries among former conference rivals who have been uprooted because of modern conference realignment. I have no doubt that some people will find these proposed standards far too loose, while others will find them far too strict. Perhaps there are other factors that could or should be considered. Still, to me this seams like a fair proposal. Ejgreen77 (talk) 19:32, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Ejgreen77, thanks for the thoughtful response. You're first rule above does strike me a compelling. If there is a trophy there's almost certainly something substantive to the rivalry. That being said, just because there's a trophy, does that make the rivalry notable at the FCS or lower levels? I'm not sure there. Probably not in many cases. The other three rules seems pretty loose. Michigan vs. Northwestern, for example, satisfies #2 and #4 and maybe #3 as well, as do many, many other in-conference match-ups across the nation that aren't very special. I understand your reservations about opening up discussion at WP:CFB, but in the long-term interest of minimizing the loss of anyone's hard work to AfD, I think it makes sense to have a new conversation and build some consensus about this sort of criteria for stand-alone rivalry articles. Thanks again and all the best, Jweiss11 (talk) 23:03, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

I thought about making it 3 out of 4, but then such obviously notable rivalries as Notre Dame–USC football rivalry would be excluded (only meets #1 and #4). 2 out of 4 seemed like a pretty reasonable compromise. These 4 rules are basically a written down version of my own thought process used when composing these articles. Perhaps there are other things that could be considered, as well. I really don't think the level of play matters when it comes to rivalries (again, this tends to go back to the WP:FAN attitudes of editors who are fans of BCS programs, IMHO). I guess it all boils down to the exact definition of what exactly a rivalry is being extremely subjective. In the long term, there probably does need to be some sort of discussion at WP:CFB to determine exactly how to deal with these rivalries, it's just that arguing and getting into virtual shouting matches with people just isn't my thing, I'd rather spend my time writing actual articles (imagine that!). Thanks, Ejgreen77 (talk) 23:56, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

I hear you about the virtual shouting matches. They are frustrating. The best rule of thumb regarding these rivalry article is one that incorporates the tenets of notability and reliable sourcing, i.e. is there reliable third-party coverage of a given series between two teams that regards it as a rivalry? This is surely the case for Notre Dame vs. USC. Jweiss11 (talk) 00:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC)