User talk:Cbl62/Archive 2022

On 5 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mally Nydahl, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Mally Nydahl, "one of the greatest backs ever to come out of the Middle West", used his football earnings to pay for medical school and became a professor of orthopedic surgery? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mally Nydahl. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Mally Nydahl), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Cbl62. (May I call you Cb?) I was looking at recent DYKs without images to add images to (I do that occasionally), and found this article. Since it's an early 20th century US subject, those sometimes have images that have entered the public domain. So I looked at Newspapers.com and found a photo on The Minneapolis Star, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 15 Mar 1927, Tue Page 13, that I was ready to upload under https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-US-no_notice (that issue is only 16 pages long, and I couldn't find a copyright notice on any of them; if I had found one, I would have searched copyright records to see if it could be https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-US-not_renewed) ... when I noticed that someone with a somewhat similar username to yours had clipped it the very day that you started work on the Mally Dydahl article. So - um. Any chance you've already seen this image, and rejected it for some reason? Is there a copyright notice somewhere on those pages that I missed? Or any other reason you didn't think it worthy of uploading? I mean, it's not the best conceivable photo, it's a little bit grainy, but it is full face, distinguishable, I'd certainly call it better than nothing. If there is a reason you considered it and specifically don't want it, I won't upload it, but otherwise, ready when you are, Cb. --GRuban (talk) 22:15, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GRuban: I am sometimes unsure about using images that are not in public domain based on age, but if you think the image is usable, then by all means ... and thank you for your help. Cbl62 (talk) 23:28, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I was hoping it was something like that. Yeah, image copyright can be complex and scary; I didn't mess with it much in my first 5 years here, then gradually got more confidence by watching and reading debates as some images were successful and which got deleted. I still make mistakes, everyone does, but I would like to think I understand a fair bit more now. All we can do is the best we can. Hope you like. --GRuban (talk) 01:30, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 5 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Art Pharmer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that former NFL halfback Art Pharmer pursued, tackled, and captured a shoplifter who ran from the sporting goods store where Pharmer worked? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Art Pharmer. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Art Pharmer), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:03, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 7 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Francis Bacon (American football), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Francis Bacon played in the first National Football League game and became the first NFL player to return a punt for a touchdown? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Francis Bacon (American football). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Francis Bacon (American football)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 3796 views (316.3 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of January 2022 – nice work!

On 8 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Steve Hamas, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Steve Hamas played in the National Football League and later beat two former boxing champions in the ring? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Steve Hamas. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Steve Hamas), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1912 Army Cadets football team, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a future president of the United States played halfback for the 1912 Army Cadets football team? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1912 Army Cadets football team. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 1912 Army Cadets football team), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 6,944 views (578.7 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of January 2022 – nice work!

– Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 07:32, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance you'd be willing to revisit the Amanda Dennis AfD now that I've made a full source assess table? The most comprehensive source from S.A. Julio's comment turned out to be an unattributed direct copy of a PSU press release. The Patch article was also a press release from her club ("—News release submitted by Arsenal FC and Elite Clubs National League"). JoelleJay (talk) 18:03, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cbl62! I wanted to reach out and see if you could help me out with something. I'm drafting an article for the 2007 Shepherd Rams football team, and wanted to ask if you could maybe run a search on Newspapers.com for any articles on games/playoff games or rankings? I don't find much on Google and don't want to rely solely on Shepherd or other schools pages for a source. Given that they won the WVIAC and made it to the Quarterfinals, I figured it was a notable enough season. Let me know if that's something you'd be able to help with. Thanks! Spf121188 (talk) 21:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Spf121188: This page (here) links to individual game recaps and box scores. As for press coverage, here are a couple: [1], [2]. Cbl62 (talk) 00:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thank you!! Spf121188 (talk) 13:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am very discouraged at how universal the opposition to the reasonable rise of the notability criteria to playing at least 3 fully professional games was. We seem a long way off from getting even semi-reasonable inclusion criteria for sportspeople.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:58, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cbl62! I noticed you made an edit to my sandbox about Findlay (I'm using the sandbox now to create a template for a new Shepherd page,) but I had the 2017 Shepherd page published already. I went by what the NCAA article noted, that it was Findlay's first ever postseason appearance, but I didn't realize they had been in the postseason in the NAIA (per the pages you noted in your edit summary.) So, in the 2017 page, I went ahead and specified that [3], so I appreciate your letting me know! I'm still kind of getting a grip on making new articles, so any help is appreciated. Thanks again! Spf121188 (talk) 12:51, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See this. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:02, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 20 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Arnold Oehlrich, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Nebraska's "Itch" Oehlrich was lured by the "scratch" of $100 per game to play in the National Football League? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Arnold Oehlrich. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Arnold Oehlrich), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Something is going on that seems odd. In reverting your edit on Gösta Grandin that changed it to a redirect, the editor that did so gave as his reason "jpl by proxy". This seems very odd since I never even mentioned Grandin in my edits, and I never proposed redirecting all these articles. The fact that the same editor started 3 nominations yesterday to delete articles that I created, also seems very interesting. A large percentage of the Olympic articles I have nominated were created by this editor, but this is largely a function of this editor havingcreated so many articles on Olympians. There is something a bit odd about the whole set of interactions.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:21, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:ANI#Lugnuts and revenge AfDs. Fram (talk) 14:03, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Moving this to your talkpage, as it is starting to distract from the RFC. First, the notice I replaced yours at WP:NSPORT with is a standard template. It doesn't provide much information, in order to ensure that it is not a biased message.

Second, the primary issues with your message are relating to how it twice suggests that NSPORT is being unfairly targeted, with language like "targeted solely at NSPORTS", though the rest of the message isn't ideal and would have been better as a standard template. As for the issue of the audience being partisan, I feel that is obvious. As such, I again ask that you remove those notices, and neutral ones can be added to various nonpartisan noticeboards, as well as to WP:CENT. BilledMammal (talk) 15:43, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@BilledMammal: I endeavored to be neutral in my notice and believe I did so. However, in response to your notes, I am modifying it to eliminate "targeted" and a couple other tweaks, including bolding, to address your concern. That said, I do believe it is essential notify the projects that are directly impacted by the proposal. As I noted at the RFC, such dramatic changes should not be made without notice to the impacted projects. If you believe neutral notices should also be provided elsewhere, I do not object. Happy to continue the discussion if you have further thoughts. Cbl62 (talk) 15:48, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would ask that you replace it entirely with the standard template, as I believe there are still bias issues with the altered notice that I have seen, at WP:NSPORT.

For example, the line The new proposal is directed solely at NSPORTS and would not impose similar changes on SNGs for academics, entertainers, politicians, businessmen, or any other group or category is not necessary, and continues to suggest that NSPORT is being unfairly targeted.

As for the audience, a simple question: Do you believe that the members of the wikiproject are more likely, less likely, or equally likely to support the proposal compared to the average wikipedian? BilledMammal (talk) 15:52, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I made changes as you suggested. In what other ways do you believe the notice is still not neutral?

If you follow NSPORTS, you will see that it's a mixed bag that includes viewpoints from all sides of the spectrum. I view myself as a centrist but I tend to vote "delete" more often than "keep" at sports AfDs. The central issue here is that these projects are directly impacted by the proposal and deserve to be notified of significant proposed changes to guideline governing their efforts. Cbl62 (talk) 15:56, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I also have now stricken "directed". I do think it's important to note that it only changes NSPORTS and not other SNGs. Indeed, there was confusion on that point, and you yourself thought it was important to clarify/emphasize in your comments: ""I believe this will only affect WP:NSPORT". Cbl62 (talk) 16:02, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

NSPORTS involves more editors than just those from the sports wikiprojects. I have no issue with a notification being issued there. The issue is the wikiprojects, and I believe it is a fair assessment that they are more likely than the average editor to oppose the proposal. Indeed, four five editors show up shortly after you issued the notifications; two three of them are members of notified Wikiprojects (Tennis, Cricket, and Ice Hockey), a third fourth appears to be closely connected with another notified Wikiproject, Football. All of them !voted "oppose" (the fourth fifth !voted "support", and there is no obvious connection with a wikiproject yet), and while this is a small sample size, it does suggest that the notified audience is partisan and so notifying them violates WP:CANVAS.

I see you have been changing small aspects of that quoted sentence, but I still believe it is entirely inappropriate - it continues to suggest the NSPORTs is unfairly targeted. Further, I see no reason for it - why does it matter to WP:FOOTBALL that WP:TENNIS is affected but WP:NSCHOLAR is not? Honestly, the only solution to the messaging problem is the standard template.Turns out, not the only solution. BilledMammal (talk) 16:10, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am striking the sentence that you object to. Cbl62 (talk) 16:14, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I just saw that - the message seems generally appropriate now. However, the issue of the partisan audience remains. BilledMammal (talk) 16:16, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I think it was neutral to begin with, but I am ok with your suggested changes. As for the audience issue, RfC rules expressly authorize (even encourage) notice to relevant Wikiprojects. See Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Publicizing an RfC: "To get more input, you may publicize the RfC by posting a notice at one or more of the following locations: ... Talk pages of relevant WikiProjects." The wikiprojects where I posted are precisely that, "relevant WikiProjects." Cbl62 (talk) 16:21, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFC is an information page; if it conflicts with a behavioural guideline like WP:CANVAS, then the guideline should be followed, not the information page. In general though, it doesn't matter how a partisan group is organized; CANVAS tells us that they shouldn't be notified, as it causes a vote stacking issue. BilledMammal (talk) 16:33, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly disagree. Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Publicizing an RfC is intended to ensure that there is fundamental fairness in making significant changes to policy/guidelines. A key element of such fundamental fairness is that constituencies directly impacted by a rule change receive notice (and an opportunity to comment) before the change is adopted and implemented. Such procedural fairness is of paramount importance in any democratic/consensus-based system. Cbl62 (talk) 16:38, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter why it is there; WP:RFC is an information page, and if it is contradicted by a guideline then the guideline must be followed, not the information page. I would further note that WP:RFC actually references this, stating: Take care to adhere to the canvassing guideline, which prohibits notifying a chosen group of editors who may be biased. BilledMammal (talk) 16:41, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly disagree with your view that it is improper to leave a neutrally-worded notice to relevant WikiProjects about an RfC that directly impacts the scope of their work. Indeed, such notice is essential to ensure that procedural due process is satisfied. We shouldn't be adopting significant rule changes targeted at specific WikiProjects without giving those WikiProjects notice and an opportunity to be heard. This is pretty fundamental. Cbl62 (talk) 16:47, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

CANVAS tells us that if the audience is partisan, then the notification is improper. In this case, the audience is partisan, and so under current policy the notification is improper. I understand why you disagree with this, and sympathize to a certain extent, but the correct response is an RFC to alter WP:CANVAS, not to ignore it. BilledMammal (talk) 16:51, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the notices were compliant with CANVAS as originally formulated. As modified (with your agreement they are now neutral), they are even more clearly compliant. This is not as though I selected particular editors who I believed would vote one way or the other. I have simply selected the NSPORTS projects that are directly impacted by the proposed change. Sunlight is good for democracy. Cbl62 (talk) 17:00, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTDEMOCRACY BilledMammal (talk) 17:03, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then, sunlight is good for consensus. A "consensus" reached in the dark without notice to the impacted parties is not a real "consensus". Cbl62 (talk) 17:05, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Having read both of your arguments, I am of the opinion that notifying WP:NSPORTS was appropriate under WP:APPNOTE. I really don't see a reason to keep them in the dark. However, I agree with BilledMammal that the notification was not neutrally worded: the more neutral title was the one employed by the proposer, and I think you've misconstructed the proposal with the bolded quote as being integral to the proposal, instead being one of the potential additional guidances (I'm stressing the "could" part of the sentence of the original proposal). In my opinion, that's close to canvassing. Pilaz (talk) 08:07, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• @Pilaz: I realize I haven't been entirely clear; to clear things up, I had no issue with notifying WP:NSPORTS, except with the particular message chosen. What I had an issue with was the decision to notify the various wikiprojects. BilledMammal (talk) 08:17, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cbl62 - hope you are well. Seeing as I didn't mention it in the ANI thread, I wish to apologise for saying you were acting as a proxy for JPL. It was wrong, and I should not have said it. Sorry for the belated reply. I understand if you're not interested, and want to remove this. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:11, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, User:Lugnuts. No hard feelings on my end. You were defending your work, and we can all get sensitive/prickly when we feel our work is being attacked. Cbl62 (talk) 19:36, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Thnakyou for your comments on Stefan Lindeberg. It seems to me that some people are intent on ignoring the spirit of the ruling on Olympic notability by trying to preserve most of the existing articles, at least at the level of categories, as redirects. They seem to do this even when there is clear evidence that there is no reason to presume this would be the primary use of the name. This is just assuming this specific spelling. There evidently was a recurring character in a Danish TV show named Stefan Lindberg. I am not sure how likely Danish/Swedish speakers are to confuse those names, but as an English speaker I did.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:59, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May be of interest: [4]

All the best, JBL (talk) 23:25, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks User:JayBeeEll: Loved the bit about "And who might Cbl62 be?" Cbl62 (talk) 03:16, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Haha yes :). I am always surprised when I mention to friends that I edit Wikipedia just how opaque this side of things is to them. Happy editing, JBL (talk) 11:18, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning Cbl62! I wanted to see if I could get some help with newspapers.com, specifically looking for some press coverage of the 2005 Shepherd Rams football team. I have the draft submitted to AfC here, but a simple google search doesn't bring up too much. This particular year, Shepherd won their conference and made playoffs, so I'm thinking there has to be some coverage. Is this something you can help with? I appreciate your help! Spf121188 (talk) 15:02, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Avoiding the fray for a bit. You probably were aware that the two sources you cited at the Fitzgerald AfD as "three paragraphs in length" were at the same time only 3–4 sentences too. Considering your NSPORTS proposal #5, I'm anticipating that people would expect more from that one source minimum, if enacted. The interesting thing is that WP:SIGCOV keeps morphing over time. Currently, its vague whether it's signifcant coverage in each of multiple sources, or cumulative signficant coverage from even multiple smaller mentions. Fitzgerald looks like more of the latter, which might arguably be deleted with proposal 5. Food for thought.—Bagumba (talk) 06:13, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cbl62 hope u r well. I happen to be watching Bitchin': The Sound and Fury of Rick James, a 2021 documentary on Amazon Prime until 2/28, which happens to show overhead footage of what was a spectacular home of Rick James off Coldwater Canyon. This is after 49:00 in the documentary, includes James saying "We were living in Randolph Hearst's mansion...I mean, we were, like living big time" and it was a party house. Nate Hughes: "I mean, the house was so big, you rarely ran into each other." Levi: "there was some stupid shit going on out there" and it goes on, and it related to James' bad boy persona. I wondered if the house could be what I recalled from way back, the Harold Lloyd Estate (article which you developed back in 2008 and which i earlier tried to photo from afar, from a ridge which might or might not have overseen it, but i zeroed in on the wrong place on the split-up property), but it is not. Certainly a great house, akin perhaps to The Manor (Los Angeles) 2009 article, it seems to me like it should be one covered in Wikipedia. AFAICT it is not NRHP-listed, and is not in California Historical Landmarks in Los Angeles County. And I think it is outside of City of Los Angeles so not a LAHCM. There is good amount of coverage of the house though, including: LATIMES 1989 article "Onetime estate of L.A. publisher David Whitmire Hearst lists for $13.5 million": "The hacienda-style estate in the Beverly Hills Post Office area ..."

Also David Whitmire Hearst is the only one of 5 children of William Randolph Hearst and Millicent Hearst without a Wikipedia article, and there is enough about him in sources for an article, including David Whitmire Hearst, Official of Hearst Corp., Ex-L.A. Publisher, Dies", LATimes obit of May 13, 1986. Some coverage and photos of Hope Chandler and David in this New Yorker stuff who were married 1938 until his death in 1986. (Not same as David Whitmire Hearst Jr. (in a Forbes profile), who bought a Couer D'Alene estate which might possibly also be referred to as a David Hearst House.

I wonder if you might be interested in developing, or helping me develop, one or two articles here? Perhaps to try at Draft:David Hearst House, hopefully to include some Rick James coverage from the documentary (or from elsewhere, but I am doubtful that other will be easy to find). --Doncram (talk) 16:01, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

serious question Cranloa12n (talk) 02:22, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cranloa12n: Just type Withdrawn in bold at the bottom of the AfD discussion. Cbl62 (talk) 02:36, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you have time, Larry Archambeault could use some TLC. Cheers! Flibirigit (talk) 15:04, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, since you responded JoelleJay knew that, as we expressly discussed it, which suggests you were disappointed by what I said: I wanted to clarify my comment on subproposal 5 was intended to support your argument, not detract from it. I just wanted to point out the absurdity of his "from inception" interpretation, I wasn't commenting on the question of whether or how to apply #5 to existing articles.

I think many of the closing statements (but not the outcomes necessarily) should be taken to DRV, they are just too wildly divergent from the proposals themselves as well as the results. Closing statements are so critical to precedent, especially in gigantic discussions where future readers are obviously not going to read even 1/10th of one subproposal; they absolutely should reflect the actual consensus and accurately characterize participants' arguments. In my opinion Wug approached the close with preconceived opinions on what he wants NSPORT to say, but lacked the familiarity with the guideline to understand what the subproposals intended in the context of the existing NSPORT text, which is what led to his utterly idiosyncratic interpretations. For example, if he understood a) what the second sentence meant and why it is there and b) the concept of "presumption of GNG", he would not have had any issues with the "from inception" phrase in subproposal 5 and would have correctly deduced the only real point of contention was if existing articles would be grandfathered in or not. Unfortunately he has a history of being insultingly dismissive and resistant(*) toward other editors explaining how NSPORT functions, so I do not have high hopes he will make any amendments to his closes himself.

(*)This was his response to me in the NOLY thread:

Your comment is based on multiple false premises. NSPORT specifically requires article subjects meet GNG This is so false I suspect you haven't actually read NSPORT or N. To quote the big bold text at the top of NSPORT: The article should provide reliable sources showing that the subject meets the general notability guideline or the sport specific criteria set forth below (emphasis original). You incorrectly interpret policy on the talk page of that policy, and yet you seem to think that making more and more restrictive rules will improve compliance? Call me suspicious.

JoelleJay (talk) 18:31, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is an interesting case. When I search for Fernando Huergo I come up with information on a contemporary Jazz musicians in google. I am not sure if he is notable, but if he is he would probably be the primary search term. When I search in google books my first hit is this [5] which is a note about a letter that was either to or from what seems likely to be this Fernando Huergo, but I am not sure I can be sure of this. Also he is in a category for being a Pan American game medalist, but no text in the article itself seems to say anything about that. This source [6] does support that he was part of a team of g from Argentina who got a silver in the 1951 Pan American Games Sabre competition. I am not sure if Silver at the Pan American games is quite enough to be sports notable, but we would still want something more than a bare name in a table which is all I have found so far. I am suspecting there might be some actual in-depth sourcing, but I have not found it yet. I was wondering if you thought you might be able to find some.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:56, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• @Johnpacklambert: I found this, this and this which discuss an Argentine general of the same name who was president of the Argentine sports federation that was in charge of selecting the 1956 Olympic team. Unclear if this is the same guy or not. Also, I don't think these are SIGCOV about Hergo. Cbl62 (talk) 13:13, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 March 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mike Koken, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after surviving D-Day, former quarterback Mike Koken wrote that playing American football for Notre Dame left one "prepared for the toughest stuff the Jerries can throw at you"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mike Koken. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Mike Koken), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Schwede66 12:02, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clb62, I admire your ability to unearth hyper-specific newspaper citations from long ago. In the spirit of WP:CFB collaboration, would you mind helping me put a bow tie on the references for Southern States Conference? Back in December / January, I spent probably more than 50-60 hours finding refs to beef up the history of the SSC, the members, the members' timelines, etc. It became an unexpected passion project. I previously pinged the college football project but got no response.

But then I hit a huge wall, specifically for:

1. The exact year Talladega College joined
2. The exact (or even approximate) year Selma College joined
3. Verification of the football champs in 1947 & 1950–1959 (I don't know if these are the champions however, I was just running with the teams that had previously been listed on the article before I began expanding it... some of those champs might be wrong)

Might this be an article you'd be interested in running the final turn of the 4x4 on? SportsGuy789 (talk) 16:01, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 22 March 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bill Smyth (American football), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Bill Smyth fought as a Marine at Iwo Jima and later played four seasons for the Los Angeles Rams? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bill Smyth (American football). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Bill Smyth (American football)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

I am realy frustrated how people are allowed to engage in rude person attacks at the discussion page involving the discussion of deleting this article. I am also frustrated at how much people get away with arguemtns that boil down to we have lots of unsubstantial articles on Olympic competitors so much so we should keep every possible unsubstantail article on an Olympic competitor.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:31, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnpacklambert: I am sure it must be frustrating, but in the case of Starkey, your nomination and arguments have been squarely on point. Your one-off error in referring to "olympia" instead of "olympedia" is the sort of mistake that we all make and certainly didn't IMO warrant the attack on your competency. Don't let it get you down. Cbl62 (talk) 21:35, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou. I try to tell myself at least the status of Olympians is not being preserved with as much foot dragging against change as has been seen with some other sets of articles that were deemed to no longer be default notable. It is a slow process though.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:48, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Franz Barta's entry at Olympedia is an example of exactly why it is so outreageous that some people are acting like Olympedia is a source that across the board provides in-depth coverage.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:08, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cbl62, I moved Template:1946 North State Conference football standings back to its original name from "North Carolina State Conference" per the common usage in newspaper coverage. Category:1946 North Carolina State Conference football season needs to be deleted. Even if "North Carolina State Conference" was the common name here for 1946, Category:1946 North State Conference football season already exists. The proper move would be to rename that category accordingly. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:30, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Even though the Official NCAA Football Guide for 1947 refers to it as the North Carolina State Interstate Conference, you appear to be right about the common usage in newspapers. Cbl62 (talk) 21:44, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day! Hi Cbl62! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 13:18, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Cbl62/Archive 2022,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more. ​

Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 14:17, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 May 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of San Buenaventura, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Battle of San Buenaventura was described by the Los Angeles Times as a "quirky skirmish ... that emptied the mission of wine and left its adobe walls pockmarked by cannon fire"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of San Buenaventura. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Battle of San Buenaventura), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 31 May 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Drane Scrivener, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that All-American cornerback Drane Scrivener later became a published author on fire safety issues involving children with special needs, newborns, and older adults? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Drane Scrivener. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Drane Scrivener), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cbl, thanks for creating those new Missouri Valley Vikings season articles. A bunch of the articles refer to a 41-game winning streak sourced to Volney Ashford's College Football Hall of Fame profile. But Missouri Valley appears to have played in 1943 and 1944 without Ashford coaching; he was serving in the navy during WWII. See:

• https://web.archive.org/web/20150913062633/http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/incomplete_data/game_by_game_current.php?teamid=2061&year=1943,
• https://web.archive.org/web/20150913062900/http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/incomplete_data/game_by_game_current.php?teamid=2061&year=1944
• https://www.newspapers.com/clip/103005724/the-des-moines-register/.

So this was 41-game winning streak for Ashford, but not for the program. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:07, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I read the articles differently. As I understand it, the Navy took over the school during WWII, and the 1943 and 1944 teams were V12 programs that weren't counted against the team's winning streak. Cbl62 (talk) 03:10, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The contemporary press widely reported on the streak, excluding the 1943 and 1944 V12 teams. See e.g., here (AP tory reporting that MV with its 39th consecutive win had tied the all-time college football record) and here (reporting on the end of MV's streak at 41 games). Cbl62 (talk) 03:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The United Press also recognized the record-breaking streak. See here ("Vikings Set New All-Time College Record Of 40 Straight Wins"). Cbl62 (talk) 03:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay. It was a V12 deal. Thanks for clarifying. That should be probably be mentioned when explaining the streak. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:42, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, and done. Cbl62 (talk) 03:45, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you like baseball streaks, check this guy out, other end of the scale. Gets called up straight out of college (never played in the minors), plays backstop for three pitches in the ninth, team loses. He never plays again, never bats, then retires at the end of the season. Jimmy Boyle (baseball) Likely one of the shortest (if not the shortest) pro careers. Even had to pay for his road and home uniforms, which he only likely wore a few times. Oaktree b (talk) 19:38, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I hope all is well. Whereas all the Michigan men at Template:Big Ten Swimmer of the Year navbox have articles a handful of ladies don't. I have not looked any of them up, but doubt that the women are any less spectacular than the men. Maybe you could find some stuff for some of them.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:29, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Checking back and I just noticed User:Cbl62/Todolist in your edit history. I guess these ladies will be red for a while.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:44, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 16 June 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Russ Hoogerhyde, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that six-time American national archery champion Russ Hoogerhyde performed trick shots including shooting a cigarette from the lips of a spectator? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Russ Hoogerhyde. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Russ Hoogerhyde), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cb162, Good day. I was reading about the removal of all Sport Specific Guidelines (SSG) and understand that which was reject based on what you wrote here and I believe the RfC was related to Implementing the RfC - participation criteria - interim status was closed as "Obsolete discussion" and the issue would be discuss under Sport by sport review. What happen if certain sport was not part of the discussion? would the same (existing) SSG (MMA) remain unchanged? Kindly advice the update. Cassiopeia talk 08:48, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure I understand the question. The proposal to eliminate NSPORTS in its entirety was rejected. There were a couple of sub-proposals that passed, including the elimination of NFOOTY, NGRIDIRON, and other participation-based criteria, and those have been implemented. Cbl62 (talk) 13:38, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cb162, Thank you for answering the questions. When you said "sub-proposals that passed" you meant the discussion on Sport by sport review? And if the sport (mixed martial arts (MMA)) was not discussed that would means the existing MMA SSG remain the same? Thank again and waiting for your reply. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 00:52, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about MMA specifically, but it would have remained the same unless it had a "mere participation" criterion. Such participation criterion were eliminated as a result of the Village Pump sub-proposal that did pass. Hope that helps. Cbl62 (talk) 00:54, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cb162, could you pls define "mere participation" criterion pls? so I may understand how it apply to MMA. Thanks in advance. Cassiopeia talk 01:03, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The proposal that passed eliminated those parts of NSPORTS that created a presumption of notability based on "mere participation" in a game or match. It left unimpacted those portions that were premised on particular levels of achievement, awards, etc. Cbl62 (talk) 01:06, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So if a MMA fighter fought in a top tier organization (highest level in the world league) but not for title fight would this be considered under "mere participation" criterion ? Cassiopeia talk 01:14, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the specifics of MMA, but it sounds like that would be a participation criteria. In like manner, portions of NSPORTS for those who played in NFL, NBA, NHL, and MLB (all of which are the highest level in their respective sports) were eliminated. Cbl62 (talk) 01:18, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So you meant (1) NFL, NBA, NHL, and MLB players could only have a page if they pass GNG? and (2) moving forward current WP:NMMA and GNG would be applied to MMA fighters then? I believe we could add fighter who won major league title fight could pass NSPOR/NMMA too even thought it is not stated in NMMA.Pls clarify and advise how to get approval to add it in. Cassiopeia talk 01:24, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about MMA, but, yes with respect to NFL, NBA, NHL, and MLB players - GNG is the applicable standard currently. Cbl62 (talk) 01:28, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Any proposal to establish a new MMA guideline would need to be approved at the NSPORTS Talk Page. Cbl62 (talk) 01:29, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

, OK Cbl62, thank you for taking so much of your time to explain and clarify my questions. I will relate back to the WikiProject MMA editors on this matter. Thanks again. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 01:32, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cbl, when you created categories like Category:Bemidji State Beavers football seasons, don't forget to include Category:College football seasons by team as a parent cat and the sort key on main program category, "Seasons" on Category:Bemidji State Beavers football. Thansk, Jweiss11 (talk) 03:59, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I'll try to remember. Cbl62 (talk) 04:06, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The American Football Barnstar
		In my time participating on Wikipedia, it's been obvious to me that you're easily one of the most deserving people of this award. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:07, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, @Hey man im josh:. Cbl62 (talk) 18:15, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for your comments on the article on Hugo Nielsen. I am starting to think we have turned a corner this year in Wikipedia guidelines, and maybe in the future we will start moving away from micro-stubs and towards articles with more substance. I am trying to not get too hopeful for such developments, because it seems that every time we start to move towards such there are people who try to block such improvements. The volume of AfD for bios used to mainly be in the 200s at any given time, it is currently in the 300s, and was in the 400s in late June. We shall see what happens further on. Of couse since the volume is somewhat effected by speed of closure as well as total number of nominations it is not a clear indicator.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:55, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to find link to the topic ban on me. I may have been misremembering a word. I wanted to look over it. I was not able to quickly find it. Do you have a link or could you tell me how to quickly find it, please?John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:23, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RESTRICT#Johnpacklambert is one of them - scroll down for the other one. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:28, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou. I had thought it limited me to one nomination every 24 hours. Luckily if you do every 24 hours it comes out the same, since if you wait at least 24 hours you do not have any possibility of doing it in the same calendar day. Knowing it is written how it is makes it so I can now know that I do not have to actually wait until 24 hours have passed, just make sure it is a new day by the time standard. This will probably not matter, because it looks very likely I will be put under a new ban from all editing of anything even vaguely related to AfD, and may be just plain banned from editing Wikipedia period. However, thankyou for the link.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:29, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering if there was anything that you could tell me about the speed at which Arb com decisions are made. Is it possible to find some links to past decisions so that I can review how they go down. I probably should have done this early, but I have not.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:08, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have no background into Arb com's timeline for deciding cases. Sorry. Cbl62 (talk) 07:30, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cbl62. Can you tell me if you think this is notable? Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:09, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@BeanieFan11: Probably but not 100% for sure. For modern players who played for teams below the FBS level and did not (a) win a major award, (b) set a significant record, or (c) play in the NFL, I tend to apply GNG a bit more strictly. A few questions: Other than the FanSided blog, what evidence do we have that he was actually picked by the AP as a second-team All-American? Do we know whether it was the official AP college football A-A team or a more specialized FCS team? Also, I'm unsure on whether the "Sports Illustrated" piece was really published by Sports Illustrated or was just part of a blog (FanSided) included on the SI.com web site. Cbl62 (talk) 20:29, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Murphy was selected as part of the AP FCS All-America team, see here. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:33, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think it would be alright if I moved it to mainspace or do you think it needs to go through another round of AFC? BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:30, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest not pushing the envelope and letting the AfC process run its course. There's no particular rush as far as I can see. Cbl62 (talk) 23:38, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 7 August 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Strike (Westinghouse Studio One), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that "The Strike" (1954), about an American officer's turmoil in ordering an air strike on his own men, was rated as Rod Serling's best script he had written to date? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Strike (Westinghouse Studio One). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Strike (Westinghouse Studio One)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:48, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 13,509 views (562.9 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of August 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 15:56, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Charles H. Crawford.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:09, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm late to your ping, but it seems to be close to being resolved now. Didnt want to complicate things there, but from a purely football perspective, the Doak Walker Award watchlist is more prominent for me than a breakout list mention. I suppose there is some merit to "global" appeal. Cheers. —Bagumba (talk) 02:30, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And perhaps remove the MOS:EGGy links in 3b to Emmitt Smith and RB. To me, they discourage clicking on the bolded link.—Bagumba (talk) 02:47, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 14 August 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hazelwood massacre, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1971 Hazelwood massacre was the largest mass murder in the history of "Murder City"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hazelwood massacre. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Hazelwood massacre), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 August 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rock Road massacre, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a livestock auctioneer and former Army sharpshooter shot and killed seven family members in the Rock Road massacre? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rock Road massacre. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Rock Road massacre), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:04, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 18,932 views (788.8 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of August 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 03:32, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your analysis of hook performance. I replied to one, but also fixed the html which confuses the editor. Please, if you need br for a new line (which I doubt), close it by a slash, br /, or the editor is confused and shows everything following in pink. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:28, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On the general topic: you mention attention-grabbing words such as "rape" (last week) or "Nazi", you get a few thousand extra clicks, only: is that what we want, feed sensationalism? If a hook is for Christmas eve, it will perform poorly, predictably - who reads Wikipedia on Christmas Eve= - but that's no reason to show it a different day. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:31, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: Thank you for your comments. I agree with everything you said. The point of such an exercise should not encourage sensationalism or using eye-catching words -- simply to help us focus on what makes hooks more interesting. And of course it makes sense to run a hook about a Christmas Eve performance on Christmas Eve. Cbl62 (talk) 19:47, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One more: you may want to also link the nomination, for a quick reference. Which might show - taking the Salmo 150 hook as example - how a hook changed, + this one was completely rearranged in prep. Very often the hook approved isn't what the reader will see. Sometimes I'd like to make an experiment: running two versions of a hook in similar conditions. Take Kai Bumann, not yet on the Main page. A hook was proposed in June. Another which is basically the same minus mentioning an opera was approved yesterday. Is one really better than the other? Was it worth arguing for months? - Another consideration: when we have two sets, European topics in the first set almost always perform poorly, because Europe sleeps for most of the time, and others seem to be less interested. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Cbl62! I'm sorry to bother you on your talk page. I wanted to ask you a question (kind of about this edit.) So, there are a number of articles created by what was a sock account pertaining to several ski mountaineers that don't seem to meet GNG. I've gone through several articles that this user has created, and there have been several (not all) articles that would be useful to redirect to (as you noted,) the Military patrol for Olympics that WP currently has. I feel like I could just be bold and redirect some of these articles to the Military Patrol articles that have been noted rather than putting them through AfD, but I haven't actually redirected an article yet. Is there a direction you could point me toward for some guidance? Any help would be greatly appreciated! I don't want to add any more articles to AfD if I can help it, and this would probably be helpful. I appreciate any guidance you can provide. Thanks! SPF121188 ^{(talk this way) (contribs)} 23:07, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if I can add, I also never knew that Military Patrol was an Olympic event either! Kind of fascinating to learn about (Wikipedia literally teaches me new things every day, which is awesome.) SPF121188 ^{(talk this way) (contribs)} 23:09, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Spf121188: I think redirects could be appropriate. My suggestion, however, would be to do them with the same WP:BEFORE that you would in advance of an AfD. If no SIGCOV is found, and none is present in the article, then the article is, at a minimum, in violation of WP:SPORTBASIC ("Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources."). Accordingly, redirecting would be appropriate IMO, and if anyone disagrees, they are free to undo the redirect. Then, if you still think the article is lacking, you could bring it to the community at AfD. Cbl62 (talk) 23:16, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I added your username to your signature on your most recent entry at Notability (sports) Basketball discussion. Only the time stamp was produced by the software. Here is the diff [7]. Regards, ---Steve Quinn (talk) 19:30, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 27 August 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Walter Nolen, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Walter Nolen was ranked by ESPN and USA Today as the number-one player in the 2022 college football recruiting class? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Walter Nolen. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Walter Nolen), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 28 August 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Larry Kelley, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Heisman Trophy winner Larry Kelley turned down multiple offers to play professional football to become a school teacher? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Larry Kelley. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Larry Kelley), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Vanamonde 12:03, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article E. J. Smith (American football), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Stanford's E. J. Smith, son of the National Football League's all-time leading rusher, was named a 2022 breakout candidate at his father's position? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/E. J. Smith (American football). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, E. J. Smith (American football)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cbl62,

I wanted to let you know that I appreciate your participation in AFDs. I just started reviewing them in January and you always make a thoughtful contribution to the discussion, mentioning sources that you have found. I just wondered why you often don't state the outcome you would prefer to see happen with these articles. Are you on the fence with many of these articles or just wanting to stay "neutral"? I'd value hearing what you'd like to see occur with the articles being proposed for deletion. Thank you! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:51, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• @Liz: Thank you for your kind words. If it's a topic where I feel I have particular subject-matter expertise (American football, baseball, historic sites), I will almost always advocate a specific outcome. But there are occasions where I don't have the time (or subject-matter expertise) to carefully assess the coverage to determine whether the sources are reliable or the subject truly notable. In those cases, I will occasionally simply offer examples of the coverage I've found and leave it for others to draw their own conclusions. If there are specific cases you have in mind, let me know and I'll have another look. Cbl62 (talk) 06:07, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I understand. I wish all AFD participants were as thoughtful as yourself. I am having trouble with one editor who simply adds "Delete per nom" on many AFDs. I don't know if they even look at the articles, much less look for sources. All editor input on deletion discussions is not equal! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:59, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Russ Morrow, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charlotte Clippers.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 4 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Willie Hernández, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Puerto Rico's Willie Hernández (pictured) became the highest paid player in Detroit Tigers history after winning Cy Young and Most Valuable Player awards and a World Series? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Willie Hernández. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Willie Hernández), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:02, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 6,069 views (505.8 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of September 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 03:01, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Mykel Williams, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
• It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
• It appears to be about something made up, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Mani ^Talk 16:41, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 10 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Milt Wilcox, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Milt Wilcox, winning pitcher of Game 3 of the 1984 World Series, credited "throwing bowling balls" with rescuing his Major League Baseball career? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Milt Wilcox. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Milt Wilcox), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Larry Herndon, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Larry Herndon, baseball rookie of the year in 1977, hit a game-winning home run in the 1984 World Series and a playoff-clinching home run on the last day of the 1987 season? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Larry Herndon. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Larry Herndon), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 14 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Troy axe murders, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in the Troy axe murders a former fireman killed his wife, five-year-old daughter, and five stepchildren and left love notes on their bodies? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Troy axe murders. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Troy axe murders), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 17 September 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Rommy Hunt Revson, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 01:03, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 17 September 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article John Gamble (baseball), which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 14:54, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of homicides in California is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of homicides in California until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

AldezD (talk) 21:07, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy adminship anniversary! Hi Cbl62! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 06:14, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wishing Cbl62 a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! BananaBreadPie12 (talk) 15:42, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 25 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Court-martial of William T. Colman, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the court-martial of William T. Colman, the commander of a U.S. air base, created a storm of protest when he was merely reduced in rank after shooting a black soldier? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Court-martial of William T. Colman. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Court-martial of William T. Colman), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 17,020 views (709.2 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of September 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 03:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks leeky, I'm delighted that this little piece of America's racial/military history found such a wide audience. Cbl62 (talk) 05:03, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lance Parrish you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Muboshgu -- Muboshgu (talk) 18:40, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 October 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Royal Oak post office shootings, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that an investigation into the Royal Oak post office shootings led one congressman to accuse the Postal Service of having been "asleep at the switch"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Royal Oak post office shootings. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Royal Oak post office shootings), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:38, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 6 October 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cephas L. Bard, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Cephas L. Bard, the first American physician in Ventura, California, was also the first person to die in the hospital he built there? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cephas L. Bard. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cephas L. Bard), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article $1,000,000 Worth of Twang is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/$1,000,000 Worth of Twang until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

QuietHere (talk) 07:00, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 October 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article M Club banner, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Michigan banner survived an attack by uniformed men from Ohio during the Ten Year War? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/M Club banner. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, M Club banner), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for your comments. I very much appreciate them.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:35, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 20 October 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Murder of the DeLisle children, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a 28-year-old tire store manager drowned his four children in the same station wagon in which his father fatally shot himself in the head? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Murder of the DeLisle children. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Murder of the DeLisle children), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:03, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 11,595 views (966.3 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of October 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 18:25, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 October 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rommy Hunt Revson, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that nightclub singer Rommy Revson earned millions of dollars from her 1986 invention of the scrunchie (examples pictured), which she originally named after her pet poodle? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rommy Hunt Revson. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Rommy Hunt Revson), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 8,787 views (732.3 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of October 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 01:30, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 30 October 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Richard Frederick Dixon, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after his release from a hospital for the criminally insane, Richard Dixon burgled $16 from a credit union and hijacked a jet to Cuba? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Richard Frederick Dixon. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Richard Frederick Dixon), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 8,663 views (721.9 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of October 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 01:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 November 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dale Haney, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Dale Haney has walked presidential pooches from Richard Nixon's King Timahoe to Joe Biden's Commander and safeguarded George W. Bush's pets during the September 11 attacks? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dale Haney. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Dale Haney), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:02, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 9,771 views (814.3 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of November 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 01:33, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 6 November 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Eyabi Okie, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Michigan defensive end Eyabi Okie, ranked number 3 in the 2018 college football recruiting class, changed his surname from "Anoma" to recognize his mother who lives in Africa? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Eyabi Okie. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Eyabi Okie), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 17 November 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Carson Steele, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Carson Steele, known as the "Man of Steele", has a pet alligator named Crocky-J and has been called "the most interesting man" in college football? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Carson Steele. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Carson Steele), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:04, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 November 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Beryl Benacerraf, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Beryl Benacerraf, pioneer of the nuchal scan, wrote that dyslexia caused her to live in a world of images where "anomalies jump out at me like a neon sign"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Beryl Benacerraf. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Beryl Benacerraf), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! You've edited some "year in Michigan" articles (like 1948 in Michigan) to change some population numbers. Thing is, the changes are largely unreferenced. A couple have individual references, but you've added a referenced named "detpop" to each one -- but that reference isn't defined. Are you able to supply references for these changes? Seems like they shuld be reverted, otherwise. -- Mikeblas (talk) 21:18, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikeblas: I'm confused by the question. The 1946 population estimates I inserted are all cited. See Template:Population of Michigan cities and counties (1940 Census). Cbl62 (talk) 21:21, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think I see the issue you found. "detpop" was defined in 1946 in Michigan. I've now added the full cite to the template. Cbl62 (talk) 21:25, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks for the fix! Your previous edits to that same template also made changes that I thought weren't referenced, but it looks like you were just removing the 1930s column from the template. Why was that information removed? -- Mikeblas (talk) 21:30, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikeblas: I had previously created this template with the 1930 column but on reflection concluded that the most pertinent data points were 1940, 1950, and "1946" estimates as a rough midpoint in the decade. If you strongly disagree, I'd be ok with re-inserting the 1930 column. 21:42, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't strongly disagree, but it does seem like the population info from the 1930s lent context to the information about the 1940s. -- Mikeblas (talk) 22:11, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Problem is, they're not all cited. Or, they were not until a couple of minutes ago, when you made this edit to fix the undefined reference in the template. -- Mikeblas (talk) 21:26, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikeblas: As noted above, the "detpop" cite was included in 1946 in Michigan but did not get added in full to the template. Thanks for calling this to my attention. Cbl62 (talk) 21:30, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I was gobsmacked in an art exhibition to learn that Josef Albers painted album covers. I found the Persuasive Percussion Volume 3 article you started and added a note to that effect. Then I went down the rabbit hole and organized all the Persuasive/Provocative Percussion albums into a sequence, and added the missing Provocative Percussion Vol. III. However, that's flagged with {notability}, because I don't have access to The Billboard Book of Top 40 Albums to prove how successful or not it was. Can you help? Thanks! -- Skierpage (talk) 01:16, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, since I started composing this, @78.26 added reviews and info and removed {notability}, but I'm still curious whether this had similar chart success to other Enoch Light albums. -- Skierpage (talk) 01:23, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I had no idea the covers were by a noted artist. Nice. I will try to dig to dig out my billboard book to check on III's chart position. Cbl62 (talk) 01:25, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Skierpage: unlike the first two volumes of Provocative Percussion, the third volume did not appear on the Billboard album charts. Happy editing! If you make more articles from albums of this era, and need help with sources, send me a message and I'll see if I can help. By the way, I think it would be better to source the information currently credited to discogs to the album itself, if possible. Discogs is kinda like a cousin to Wikipedia, great site, not a reliable source because it's user generated. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:16, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I couldn't find a template {{Cite I read this info off pictures of the record that I found on the web}} 😉. I see Persuasive Percussion Volume 3 has a bare <ref> "Liner notes on back cover and inside the gatefold of the album" that is basically what I did, so should I change to a similar ref? Skierpage (talk) 09:49, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Skierpage: Well, that's better than nothing, but if it helps here's what I did for one of my articles. See reference #2 in None but One. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:47, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks User:78.26 and User:Skierpage. The discussion prompted me to put on some excerpts from Provocative Percussion III. My dad had many of these "hifi" testing albums when I was young and used to play them on his stereo system. This music brings back good memories. Cbl62 (talk) 02:23, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, they evoke Don Draper knocking back a scotch in a walnut Eames chair digging "new dimensions in sound recordings" playing on his console stereo. A decade later record labels and hi-fi companies hoped so hard that quadraphonic sound would be as cool. Cheers! Skierpage (talk) 00:11, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - you seem to have created many of the team articles related to Black college football national championship. Do you have a source for the Pittsburgh Courier champions? I'm having trouble locating one in the article or elsewhere.

I'm particularly curious why multiple champions were awarded by the PC in the early years, mainly in the case of the the 1924 Paul Quinn team, but I can't find any evidence of their national championship-ness. This FCS records PDF[8], page 87, lists Wiley, not PQC, in 1924. Woodshed (talk) 08:40, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• @Woodshed: Thanks for your interest in this neglected corner of college football history. The championship navbox I created in 2019 (Template:Black college football national champion navbox) was based in large part on the chart found at Black college football national championship. That chart is the product of efforts of multiple editors over the past 15 years. For most of the season articles I created, I dug into the Pittsburgh Courier archives (available through Newspapers.com) to verify and add sourcing. See e.g., 1951 Morris Brown Wolverines football team, fn. 1. It doesn't appear I did that digging for the 1924 Paul Quinn team. Any efforts on your part to move the process forward will be appreciated. Cbl62 (talk) 00:53, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 December 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Carlton Martial, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that linebacker Carlton Martial, who broke the college-football record for the most tackles in November 2022, began his career as a walk-on? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Carlton Martial. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Carlton Martial), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cbl, when you create redirects like 2022 Adams State Grizzlies football team, it would be helpful if you include the proper sort key, so that Adams State sorts under A in the conference category. Also, if you can tag the talk page for these redirects with the WikiProject College football banner, that would be very helpful as well. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) Jweiss11 (talk) 04:15, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 17 December 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Chase Brown, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Canadian running back Chase Brown ranked second in American college football with 1,643 rushing yards in 2022? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Chase Brown. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Chase Brown), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 22 December 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Benton Bangs, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that pigeon racer "Biff" Bangs previously played for two different teams in Rose Bowl football games? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Benton Bangs. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Benton Bangs), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Jennings (American football) to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence Talk:Anthony Jennings#Requested move 24 December 2022. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you.4meter4 (talk) 19:57, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• @4meter4: I respectfully disagree. Canvasing involves notifying others of a discussion with the "intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way." I had no intention to influence the move discussion and, indeed, didn't even link to the move discussion. My intention was to notify the closer of the AfD of circumstances suggestive of a possible ulterior motive in initiating the AfD. Further, I note that your dismissive attitude and borderline badgering of "sport" editors was not helpful to the discussion or to your position. If you care to know, I only vote to "keep" in about one in three sports related AfDs. This one, involving a Division I FBS Power 5 quarterback, IMO happens to be a slam dunk in terms of notability. Cbl62 (talk) 20:53, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad to hear that was not your intention. I do think canvassing was an unintended consequence though. It has driven voters from the AFD to the move discussion and has influenced the consensus building process at the move discussion. Please consider assuming good faith in future, and also how notifications like that might impact consensus development. Have a very Merry Christmas and enjoy the rest of your day!4meter4 (talk) 21:00, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@4meter4: I agree wholeheartedly that we can all benefit from trying harder to assume good faith. I note this could apply as well to your AfD comment that, "This just re-affirms my experience that editors in the sports area consistently ignore policies widely applied and upheld elsewhere". We can all do better in the future. And, of far greater importance, I reciprocate your holiday wishes. Merry Christmas to you as well! Cbl62 (talk) 21:07, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is history behind that sentiment after participating in many sports related RFCs and AFDs over the years. Let's just say I am very happy over recent RFC rulings in sports SNGs, and that in general I try to avoid sports AFDs unless they are not controversial opinions on my part. I have some built up frustrations that aren't necessarily fair to the editors in this current discussion. I have to remember that past negative experiences are not accurate predictors of the current state of things. Best.4meter4 (talk) 21:16, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The 12 Days of Wikipedia On the 12th day of Christmas Jimbo sent to me 12 BLPs 11 RFAs 10 New Users 9 Barnstars 8 Admins Blocking 7 Socks Socking 6 Clerks Clerking 5 Check Users Checking 4 Oversighters Hiding 3 GAs 2 Did You Knows and an ARB in a pear tree. -May your holiday season be filled with joy, laughter and good health.--Chris Troutman (talk) 03:21, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply] This message was generated using {{subst: The 12 Days of Wikipedia}}

On 28 December 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Junior Colson, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Junior Colson, the leading tackler on the 2022 Michigan Wolverines football team, lived in a Haitian orphanage prior to his adoption at age nine? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Junior Colson. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Junior Colson), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

-- RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]