Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Oklahoma Sooners head football coaches/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Juliancolton 02:43, 27 October 2009 [1].

List of Oklahoma Sooners head football coaches

[edit]
Nominator(s): —NMajdan•talk 15:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

I have created this list based on the current FL List of East Carolina Pirates head football coaches. It's a fairly short list and I believe it meets all the criteria.—NMajdan•talk 15:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Resolved comments from Chrishomingtang

Comment

  • "This is a complete list of Oklahoma Sooners head football coaches" - FLs no longer start like this, just remove it will be fine
  • dashes in empty cells should be emdashes
  • Table should be sortable

—Chris!c/t 00:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the first sentenced. Changed the empty cell dahses to emdashes. On the sortable table suggestion, there are over 50 existing FLs for NBA, MLB, Soccer, NFL and college head coach articles and none of them have sortable columns (if they have 2-row headers). I would have to reformat the header row to get rid of the two-row header in order for the sort to work.—NMajdan•talk 04:41, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, most of the coaches FLs don't have sortability. I brought it up because I don't know if they should be be required to be sortable. That has been discussed before, but may still need further discussion. Also The alt text is good, but there is no need to mention the name of the person since people who can't see the image don't what he looks like anyway.—Chris!c/t 22:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are head coach FLs that do use sortability rather than a two-row header; see List of Philadelphia Phillies managers, List of Minnesota Twins managers, List of Baltimore Orioles managers, and the soon-to-be-promoted List of Kansas City Royals managers. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:56, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Those are baseball lists. They don't have multiple sets of the same classification (multiple Wins/Losses/Ties columns). Look at any NFL list, college football list, or NHL list.—NMajdan•talk 13:08, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm aware; I wrote most of them. I'm just clarifying your above statement that said "none of them have sortable columns", which included MLB. They do have "multiple sets of the same classification": there are regular season and playoff statistics contained in the tables. The MLB lists had their header formats changed to be sortable. This list should too. Just because other lists use a certain format is no reason to limit this one; the criteria are dynamic, they change and evolve, and WP:OTHERSTUFF is no reason not to change with them. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 13:32, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're right. I included MLB when most of them are single row headers. However, just one list uses a certain format does not mean they all should. FLs can establish precedent and when every single football coach list is structured a particular way, then that establishes precedent. Criteria can evolve but this is not an evolution. This is an abrupt change. Looks like the last NFL, CFB, or NHL coach-related article to go through FLC was List of Chicago Blackhawks head coaches in June and the sort issue was even raised. Also, making this table sortable would mean that the code would have to be changed to include the {{sort}} template which I think over-complicates an article making it nearly inaccessible to new editors. Not to mention this is a list with 21 items, not an overbearing number that would require sorting. I will address your other issues below shortly.—NMajdan•talk 14:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe that this can be considered an abrupt change; sortability has been part of the criteria for quite some time. It doesn't hurt the quality of the list for it to be made sortable, and what we're trying to accomplish is Wikipedia's best work, and meeting the criteria as closely as possible while doing so. I don't think this is something to be ignored. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 14:57, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(outdent) Now that I think about this, the table should be sortable. There is no reason not to other than arguing that it is not consistent to other coaches FLs. But all of those non-sortable lists should be sortable as well. I guess I will have a word with the editors or wikiprojects involved to request that.—Chris!c/t 21:29, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from KV5
Further comments from KV5
  • No need to duplicate first and last names in the lead; once the name has been mentioned, last name only will suffice.
  • "eight coaches have brought" - have led would be better
  • "Bennie Owen is the all-time leader in games coached and years coached" - comma after
  • "with .000 despite Harts having lost the only game he ever coached" - the wording is confusing.
    • Changed the wording. Does it flow better?—NMajdan•talk
      • Wasn't quite what I was looking for, but I made some minor changes and it should flow all right now.
  • Do not use color as the sole indicator of a fact, per WP:COLOR and WP:ACCESS.
  • Do not space en-dashes in year ranges.
  • Link "Win–Loss percentage" to winning percentage
  • "National Awards" should be "National awards", and should not be two lines.
  • Incorrect usages of bold in the table, per MOS:BOLD
  • "1999 – present" - remove italics, unnecessary
  • What makes SoonerSports.com a reliable source?
  • The navbox doesn't have a direct link to this article; it needs one or it should be removed.

Hope these comments help. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 13:44, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestions.—NMajdan•talk 15:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. My comments above have been resolved; as a note, though, you should allow reviewers to strike their own suggestions when they feel they are completed to their satisfaction. A notation saying which comments are completed is sufficient when responding. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 15:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Coming back from a multi-year hiatus. Some protocols have changed.—NMajdan•talk 15:27, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, no problem, I figured it was something like that. Hope to see you around FLC often. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 15:31, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support from KV5 – a job well done by Nmajdan, and a nice-looking list that presents a plethora of information in an organized and coherent fashion. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 14:34, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (17–14) 21:27, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – There's a discussion on FLC talk about whether or not this should be removed as a second nomination in quick succession. Since I need to know if a review should be provided, is this staying up? Giants2008 (17–14) 20:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what the problem is with having two listing. Its not like FLC moves so fast that an editor can't handle two. The user that responded to me on the talk page said he/she would take care of it so I never took action. I think since this listing has already been active a week and already generated discussion, may as well leave it up. Unless the FLC director or another user has an issue with leaving it up. Regardless, any comments you have would be appreciated since even if this is removed, I will put it back up very soon.—NMajdan•talk 20:35, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I decided to keep this listing up since it had already received several comments. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 02:22, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Good. Now that that's settled, I'll review the list as usual:
  • Link Oklahoma Sooners in the first sentence to the article on the football team.
  • One key aspect is completely missing from the list: national championships. I'd expect mention of coaches that won them in the lead at least, and probably in the table as well.
  • The three coaches to win Coach of the Year could be named in the lead as well.
  • Note 5 needs a cite.
  • Names should not generally be included in alt text.

Support – Dabomb stated at the seasons FLC that he thinks the sources are all right, so I'm willing to go along with what he says. Everything else was fine before, and I appreciate the added sorting function. Giants2008 (17–14) 16:18, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Would be nice if you make the table sortable like List of Minnesota North Stars head coaches. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 02:47, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:22, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

Sources Per my comments at the Sooners seasons FLC, I lean toward the sources' being reliable, but other reviewers may have other opinions. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:22, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The list is now sortable. I also separated the conference championships and national championships into two columns so you could sort by those as well.—NMajdan•talk 17:55, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • "Oklahoma Sooners football program are a college football team ..." program is singular, are is plural, a college football team is singular. Confusing start.
    • The first sentence was added by another editor. I changed it to is.—NMajdan•talk
  • "team has had 21 head coaches. Oklahoma started organized football with the nickname Sooners in 1895." I would merge these otherwise the prose in the lead is very choppy.
  • "in a total of " a total of is redundant.
  • "giving him a .000 winning percentage" I think this is not needed as you've already said he lost the only game he coached.
  • Stoops caption is an incomplete sentence so doesn't need a full stop.
  • Is it postseason or post-season?
    • I think hyphenated but could be wrong.—NMajdan•talk
  • Should Conference championships be Conference Championships?
  • Some have 0's for CT some have en-dashes. Why?
    • For conference ties, you're probably referring to the two most recent coaches. Note A3 says that rules were enacted in 1996 to prevent ties, so the dashes simply indicate that ties are not possible for those coaches.—NMajdan•talk
  • Note 4 - this isn't how other sports compute winning % - do we have a reference for this?
    • I'd be curious how other sports that allow ties compute winning percentage. I did originally look for a source, but couldn't find one and its made harder by the fact that ties are impossible now. So I either need to find a source that says here's how you compute winning percentage when there are ties or find a college football-specific source from before 1996.—NMajdan•talk

The Rambling Man (talk) 09:37, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Oklahoma_Sooners_head_football_coaches/archive1&oldid=1143879508"