Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College Basketball

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

College Basketball
WikiProject
Information
Project page talk
College Basketball Portal talk
Participants talk
2007-08 NCAA DI Season talk
2007-08 Rankings talk
2008 DI Tournament talk
Project category talk
Master Table talk
Team images talk
Year Page Format talk
Departments
Assessment talk
  •Worklist  •Log
Collaboration of the Month talk
Tools
Project banner talk
Coach infobox talk
Player infobox talk
Season infobox talk
Persondata talk
{{subst:CBBwelcome-project}} talk
Userboxes
Project Userbox talk
NCAA Teams talk
edit · changes


To-do list for Wikipedia:WikiProject College Basketball: edit · history · watch · refresh

Major Core Improvements Needed

  • Merger still not complete Merger completed
  • Sub-Projects not ready
  • Ranking system for articles not complete
  • Unflashy WikiProject Page (see WikiProject Judaism for good example)

Maintain and Improvement

To be Created

  • Write team articles
  • Infoboxes n' Templates not finished
  • Write coach articles
  • Make a 'College Basketball Barnstar'. Of worthless importance, but if someone's bored, it could be fun.
  • Make 'welcome' templates

Contents

[edit] Coach and player infoboxes

We need to create a standard coach and player infobox. I used the college football coach one for Dean Smith and I think that works well. I am sure we could use a similar one for players. Remember 16:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I've created Template:Infobox NCAA Athlete. It has a small error with a spurious pipe "|". I've been unable to discover the cause. Please offer suggestions or modifications.

[edit] Templates

I've created poll templates which can list the top 25 for whatever poll. They were designed to reduce some of the work in pages such as 2006 NCAA Division I-A football rankings where you can see what the {{16ColPollTable}} would look like in finished form. I'd like to know how many weeks the college basketball typically has polls for. In football it's typically 16 and maybe 17 and never any longer. But is the basketball season longer (I'm ignorant here, sorry!). How many weeks maximum would you folks need?

Also, I'd like to create the project template for you folks. For the project template, do you want ratings categories which the College football project (and others) has used which then adds the class (stub, start, B, GA, A, FA) and importance or priority (low, mid, high, top) tags. You can always add it later if you decide you don't want to worry about that for now.

A few suggestions as well: I have found the navigation box and a "Master Team Table" that we developed for the CFB project invaluable. You can see them at: {{WPCFB}} and Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/MasterTeamTable. The navigation box mainly goes within the project pages, but I've added it to my user page as well which makes things even easier for me to find. We even have a partially filled table that lists some basketball items as well at Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Team Articles. I could help set some of this up for you as well.

Anyways, let me know what I can help you with and I'll get to work. Thanks. --MECU≈talk 16:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

For starters, I'm for the most part a college football fan who finds himself entertained by college basketball in the off-season. That said, I checked the ESPN website for the amount of weeks in a season. In seasons past, there have been nineteen weeks of basketball - though, I'm sure it may vary from time to time, I think that's what you should go with.
I'd love it if we could have a real rating system with class and importance like the college football article has - it makes life a lot easier in the long run. For the record, I note that the other college basketball Wikiproject that hasn't yet been merged, has this template available. However, it links to the wrong project - a rather easy problem to fix, however - it still needs the ratings and class stuff thrown to the bottom of it.
On top of all the suggestions you threw out there, we need to complete this merger soon. Nothing says "Don't join" like a merger tag, no flashy graphics, and a starter project. Despite its age, it really hasn't gotten off the ground from what I can tell - the [[1]] is the best example of that.
Your help's greatly appreciated - and I hope you can help get this project off the ground (or what it's at now). --NomaderTalk 22:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm with you Nomader. Any help you can provide (Mecu) is greatly appreciated. I like the look of most of those CFB templates. I'd love to see them adopted. The Master Team Template is great, although we'll have many more teams, even if we just stick to D-I basketball.
Also, let's definitely do this merge.
I'm the one who created the CBB portal a few months ago, and I've let it sit idle. Now that the season is started, I'm ready to get back engaged and get it going again. Daveahern 16:06, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
MECU, I greedily copied the navigation box from the CFB project and created a CBB version. I'm linking it on the main project page now. We can decide what sections we do or do not want. Only a few are currently populated. - Daveahern 19:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
For the record, I'll be changing a few of the colors on that navigation box - if this ends up being only a temporary addition, that's fine by me. Anyhow, what we need now is to have an avaible set of quality and class rankings for our tags on talk pages, neither of which have been made. Also, I've been recently editing the Basketball Portal - I think we all need to give a little bit more attention to it if we want this WikiProject to succeed. --NomaderTalk 20:39, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Edit: I have changed the current template's colors to a more orange-red scheme to make it look less like College Football's. --NomaderTalk 20:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Agreed on the Portal page needing more work. I did some edits on it this morning and will hope to get to some more soon. -- Daveahern 21:07, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Looks like things are starting to move. Great! I found these templates too {{NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament}} and {{National Invitation Tournament}} so someone (you should recruit those who edited a lot on the history pages) has been at work. I'll make up to 19Col/week of my poll table then. --MECU≈talk 14:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Priorities

So what are our priorities here? I see listed on the main page:

  1. Create non-existing teams' articles and edit existing college teams' articles.
  2. Keep the quality of the articles maintained up.
  3. Share our comments and feedback.

I think we also need to add maintain the CBB portal like Nomader talks about above. Probably also that we want to have timely information? For example current rankings (polls) and news about recent games or events? (See the College Football rankings)

In addition to that, what are the WikiProject management (meta) priorities? Obviously creating some templates is one. Anything else? I'm new to the whole WikiProject thing. - Daveahern 21:23, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I think our first goal should get the WikiProject up and running. We need to get cracking on the articles themselves, but it's rather worthless for us when we still have these problems ahead of us:
  • Merger still not complete
  • Sub-Projects not ready
  • Ranking system for articles not complete
  • Unflashy WikiProject Page (see WikiProject Judaism)
  • Infoboxes n' Templates not finished
Once we finish with all that, it gets no easier, as we have some other things we have to do.
All that aside, we could then do a few more things with regards to the project itself, not college football.
  • Make a 'College Basketball Barnstar'. Of worthless importance, but if someone's bored, it could be fun.
  • Make 'welcome' templates
  • Make 'You might be interested in us!' templates
And, there you have it. My priorities - bolded priorities are the most important in my opinion. --NomaderTalk 22:13, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
No arguments from me so far. As far as the merger - there's only one user over on the other CBB wikiproject, so I think we can get this taken care of quickly. I've copied over all the links to the templates listed over there. Then the only issue is whether our goals/scope need to be adjusted to include what Orlière wants with the other one. As far as I'm concerned, it's close enough. If Orlière wants to add anything to our goals/scope, more power to him/her. -- Daveahern 23:07, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Also, I think I'll start copying the CFB assessment/rating pages over here. (I'm sure they won't mind as they "borrowed" it from someone else anyway :-). Once we have it started, we can discuss what changes/differences we want. -- Daveahern 23:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Don't worry, the college football standards are for the most part, standard, with the exception of specifics, which will need to be edited anyhow for this project. Pretty much, it's time to get to work - I'm beggining work on the Collaboration of the Month page. --NomaderTalk 04:34, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

What are the "subprojects" that need to be worked on? Wrad 19:29, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:NCAA Tournament MOP Men

Template:NCAA Tournament MOP Men has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --American Patriot 1776 17:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Monthly Collaboration has begun

Alright, I've created the monthly collaboration page - for it to work, we'll need everyone's help to keep it going. Even if you don't know much about the subject chosen, you can still give a hand by looking a few things up and finding out about them. I've nominated for a creation of the UNC Tar Heels page - I request that we stave off the college basketball page for a bit until we get a few more users on board. If anyone thinks that the UNC page would be a bad choice, feel free to nominate something else, but we should get this started in a few days. --NomaderTalk 05:01, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] College coach template

Probably should add Template talk:College coach infobox to the templates section. Remember 15:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Naming Standard

I propose that the WPCBB project uses the following naming standards:

  • General Schools
  • General Athletics
    • <School> <Mascot>, ie Colorado Buffaloes (whereas University of Colorado at Boulder Buffaloes is wrong)
  • Sport specific
    • <School> <Mascot> (wo)mens basketball, ie Colorado Buffaloes mens basketball (whereas Colorado Buffaloes basketball is wrong)
    • If the mens and womens are known by different nicknames (aka <Mascot>), whatever is appropriate should be used in the article title
    • Even if a school only has a mens team (for example), it shall still use the mens in the title. If the article Colorado Buffaloes basketball was erroneously created for whatever reason, it shall be changed to a redirect into the general athletic article for the school (ie, Colorado Buffaloes, whereas a redirect to either mens or womens page would be preferential and wrong)
  • Season specific pages
    • 20xy-xz <School> <Mascot> (wo)mens basketball team, ie 2006-07 Colorado Buffaloes womens basketball team (whereas 2006 Colorado Buffaloes womens basketball team is wrong and if created, merely moved/redirected to the 2006-07 page)

The first two are in line with the WPCFB project and the rest of the university naming conventions. The third is to give no preference to mens or womens at a school and also in line with WPCFB. The fourth is also in line with WPCFB with the added -xz to make clear the season, since basketball spans the calendar year and having just 2006 or 2007 (for example) would be ambiguous. This system has worked well for the WPCFB, and having similar naming convention across Wikipedia would bolster both projects.

When linking from articles to another school, it is preferred to link to the sport/same gender page if available. If not, the general athletic page and if not available, then the school page (which all are available) and if not available then left as a red link. Linking to the season specific page should only be done from another season specific page with a {{seealso}} from a game-by-game breakdown or a See Also section at the bottom. See 2006 Colorado Buffaloes football team for an example. --MECU≈talk 17:21, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

This all sounds rather reasonable to me. -- Daveahern 19:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Personally, I think that names should include both men and women in the same page, making it things like Duke Blue Devils basketball and North Carolina Tar Heels basketball. Both genders on the same page makes it easier to edit, and adds more good content, though, I'm not too strong on this opinion. --NomaderTalk 21:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
I'd have to think that the content between men's and women's basketball teams would be different enough that we'd want to separate them. The team history, coaching history, possibly the arena, everything could be different. I lean toward separate pages. -- Daveahern 14:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Have any of these pages been created? The only one I could find was 2007 Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets basketball team. I'm about to create the Virginia Tech and UVA pages. We want to name these 2006-07 Virginia Tech Hokies men's basketball team, 2006-07 Virginia Cavaliers men's basketball team, 2006-07 Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets men's basketball team, 2006-07 Duke Blue Devils men's basketball team, etc, right? --BigDT 01:54, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Should we be moving pages named in the incorrect fashion and redirecting? matt91486 01:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Uniform Record Box for coaching

I have added several coaching record boxes to articles and I just thought others may be interested in adding these. Therefore, I thought we should discuss here how to make them all consistant. Here is an example of one of them, let me know if anyone wants to revise it. Remember 20:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

School Year Record Postseason
Kansas 1988-89 19-12 (Probation)
Kansas 1989-90 30-5 NCAA 2nd round
Kansas 1990-91 27-8 National Runner-Up
Kansas 1991-92 27-5 2nd round
Kansas 1992-93 29-7 Final Four
Kansas 1993-94 27-8 Sweet 16
Kansas 1994-95 25-6 Sweet 16
Kansas 1995-96 29-5 Elite 8
Kansas 1996-97 34-2 Sweet 16
Kansas 1997-98 35-4 2nd round
Kansas 1998-99 23-10 2nd round
Kansas 1999-2000 24-10 2nd round
Kansas 2000-01 26-7 Sweet 16
Kansas 2001-02 33-4 Final Four
Kansas 2002-03 30-8 National Runner-Up
UNC 2003-04 19-11 2nd round
UNC 2004-05 33-4 National Champions
UNC 2005-06 23-8 2nd round
TOTAL OVERALL RECORD: ???
We could also add in conference record/championships and final poll rankings like this example from the Duke basketball page. -- Daveahern 21:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Season Overall Record ACC Record ACC Regular Season
or Tournament Champions?		 Final AP
Ranking		 Postseason
1980-81 17-13 6-8 Neither NIT
1981-82 10-17 4-10 Neither ---
1982-83 11-17 3-11 Neither ---
1983-84 24-10 7-7 Neither NCAA Tournament
1984-85 23-8 8-6 Neither NCAA Tournament
1985-86 37-3 12-2 Both 1 NCAA Championship Game
1986-87 24-9 9-5 Neither 17 NCAA Sweet Sixteen
1987-88 28-7 9-5 Tournament 5 NCAA Final Four
1988-89 28-8 9-5 Neither 9 NCAA Final Four
1989-90 29-9 9-5 Neither 15 NCAA Championship Game
1990-91 32-7 11-3 Regular Season 6 NCAA Champion
1991-92 34-2 14-2 Both 1 NCAA Champion
1992-93 24-8 10-6 Neither 10 NCAA 2nd Round
1993-94 28-6 12-4 Regular Season 6 Championship Game
1994-95* 13-18 2-14 Neither --- ---
1995-96 18-13 8-8 Neither --- NCAA Tournament
1996-97 24-9 12-4 Regular Season 8 NCAA Tournament
1997-98 32-4 15-1 Regular Season 3 Elite Eight
1998-99 37-2 16-0 Both 1 Championship Game
1999-2000 29-5 15-1 Both 1 Sweet Sixteen
2000-01 35-4 13-3 Both 1 NCAA Champion
2001-02 31-4 13-3 Tournament 1 Sweet Sixteen
2002-03 26-7 11-5 Tournament 7 Sweet Sixteen
2003-04 31-6 13-3 Regular Season 6 Final Four
2004-05 27-6 11-5 Tournament 3 Sweet Sixteen
2005-06 32-4 14-2 Both 1 Sweet Sixteen
Coach K Overall record: 648-187 (.776)
Duke overall record (1906-2006): 1799-792 (.694)

Per the Wikipedia policy, you shouldn't link the same item over and over in a table. The first instance in a table is fine. And while linking dates, years, is acceptable, I'm against just linking years in tables, but there's no real consensus on it. I think it's just useless linking in that instance. --MECU≈talk 21:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Just as a note, I've developed a series of templates for the college football WikiProject that may be adapted to serve college basketball coaches and teams as well. Take a look and let me know if there's anything I can do to help with adaptation or implementation. -- PSUMark2006 talk | contribs 03:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I very much like PSUMark2006's coaching tables. They are very sharp and more comprehensive. UCLA used it and I will be using it for Arizona and Indiana men's pages as well. Here's a sample from John Wooden's coaching box:Tedmoseby (talk) 06:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Season Team Overall Conference Standing Postseason
Indiana State (Missouri Valley Conference) (1946 — 1948)
1946-1947 Indiana State 17-8
1947-1948 Indiana State 27-7
Indiana State: 44-15
UCLA (Pacific Coast Conference) (1948 — 1959)
1948-1949 UCLA 22-7 10-2 1 (South)
1949-1950 UCLA 24-7 10-2 1 (South) NCAA Regional 4th Place
1950-1951 UCLA 19-10 9-4 1 (South)
1951-1952 UCLA 19-12 8-4 1 (South) NCAA Regional 4th Place
1952-1953 UCLA 16-8 6-6 3 (South)
1953-1954 UCLA 18-7 7-5 2 (South)
1954-1955 UCLA 21-5 11-1 1 (South)
1955-1956 UCLA 22-6 16-0 1 NCAA Regional 3rd Place
1956-1957 UCLA 22-4 13-3 2
1957-1958 UCLA 16-10 10-6 3
1958-1959 UCLA 16-9 10-6 3
UCLA (Pacific-8 Conference) (1968 — 1976)
1959-1960 UCLA 14-12 7-5 2
1960-1961 UCLA 18-8 7-5 2
1961-1962 UCLA 18-11 10-2 1 NCAA 4th Place
1962-1963 UCLA 20-9 8-5 1 NCAA Regional 3rd Place
1963-1964 UCLA 30-0 15-0 1 NCAA Champions
1964-1965 UCLA 28-2 14-0 1 NCAA Champions
1965-1966 UCLA 18-8 10-4 2
1966-1967 UCLA 30-0 14-0 1 NCAA Champions
1967-1968 UCLA 29-1 14-0 1 NCAA Champions
1968-1969 UCLA 29-1 13-1 1 NCAA Champions
1969-1970 UCLA 28-2 12-2 1 NCAA Champions
1970-1971 UCLA 29-1 14-0 1 NCAA Champions
1971-1972 UCLA 30-0 14-0 1 NCAA Champions
1972-1973 UCLA 30-0 14-0 1 NCAA Champions
1973-1974 UCLA 26-4 12-2 1 NCAA 3rd Place
1974-1975 UCLA 28-3 12-2 1 NCAA Champions
UCLA: 620-147[1] 316-67
Total: 664-162

      National Champion         Conference Champion         Conference Tournament Champion


[edit] Uniform Team Infoboxes

Alright - currently, we have two seperate team infoboxes, one official, one not.

The NC State Wolfpack basketball page shows our official template. The North Carolina Tar Heels men's basketball page shows the un-official one.

Personally, I'm amazed that the official one is actually official - really, the second one in my personal opinion looks better, though, I created it. Therefore, I ask everyone else's opinion on the matter. --NomaderTalk 21:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

There's no reason you can't improve the "official" (who blessed it anyways?) one with yours that does have improved capability and information. Just be sure that your changes are optional so they don't mess up pages that use the current official one, or be willing to go through all of them (all 4!) and fix them so they work. I would think in the long run, upgrading the "official" one would serve Wikipedia and this Project better. If you need help, let me know. Also, we just developed one for CFB so you may get some ideas at Template:NCAAFootballSchool. --MECU≈talk 22:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Sadly, I'm going to have to ask for you to do it - I tried my hand at it, and it all came up as some 'mumble-jumble' of code. Apparently, I'm alright at making simple things, but this was too much - I'd appreciate it if you could help convert it, maybe if you wanted to, add some stuff about pagentry - anyways, I'd appreciate your help in the matter. --NomaderTalk 02:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
How does this look to everybody? I think this is a nice balance between having enough relevant information and not having some things (game records, etc.) that would need to be updated so frequently that we possibly can't keep up. --fuzzy510 19:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Fuzzy510/Template:fuzzy510test

[edit] AFD on CBB player

Aaron Gray has been nominated for deletion. Please weigh in there, and this would be a good way for the WP:CBB to declare precendence and help determine what players deserve articles. --MECU≈talk 15:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] University of Pittsburgh

The University of Pittsburgh Panthers article is a mess - I'm rather unsure where exactly to start helping to clean it up. If there's anyone here more familiar with the university or even just Big East athletics in general, it would help a great deal, since I'm mainly going to be focusing on cleaning up formatting and fact checking. The athletics section of the UPitt article leaves a lot to be desired, as well, especially in terms of NPOV. I know that this project focuses on basketball (I've also mentioned this on WikiProject College fasketball), but since to my knowledge there's no overarching college athletics project or coordinated effort, I figured I'd toss this out here. -- PSUMark2006 talk | contribs 03:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Team coach template naming convention

I've been going through to try and complete the master team list, and I've come across some templates already made for each individual team's coaching history. Some are well-named, and others, such as {{WildcatsBBCoach}} are named terribly.

(Props if you guessed that was Kansas State without looking at it, by the way)

I think it's clear that there needs to be one set naming format for all templates - for that one, maybe as "simple" as {{KansasStateBBCoach}}. One problem we run into is that we can't use the WP:CFB standard, since there's only about a third of the teams to keep track of, and unlike over there, there's a LOT of nickname overlap.

Suggestions? --fuzzy510 09:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 1997-98 Lady Vols

I was hoping to make an article on this team, but can't find information. I was looking for box scores, weekly AP rankings, and the tournament bracket. I've found scores (not box scores) and game summaries, but still am looking for the rest. Any suggestions on where to look? I've gone through several pages of Google already. Dlong 01:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Could you look through old Tennessee newspaper archives? Whether at the newspaper's website or at a library?↔NMajdan•talk•EditorReview 22:05, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Basketball season infobox

Is there a basketball equivalent of {{NCAATeamFootballSeason}}? If not, would someone like to make one? —Disavian (talk/contribs) 06:45, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll work on one today if nobody has started yet. I'll keep you up to date on my progress.↔NMajdan•talk•EditorReview 13:55, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
1st draft up at User:Nmajdan/Test. Also, I might be able to work this template to have both football and basketball. We'll see.↔NMajdan•talk•EditorReview 14:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Wow, somebody beat me to it (that is, copying the above discussion from that template talk page to here). As I said above, I have a working prototype in my userspace. I have since edited it to be combined with the existing template so we will have one template for both college football and basketball. Please take a look and let me know what you think. Please leave any comments on my talk page as I will see it there a lot quicker than I will here.↔NMajdan•talk•EditorReview 20:54, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Any opinions on this?↔NMajdan•talk 15:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Looks like everything is in order...great work getting it to work with both sports! — PSUMark2006 talk | contribs 15:30, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Any news on this? —Disavian (talk/contribs) 07:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article tagging

I'm not even a member of this WikiProject (yet) but I saw that only 69 articles are currently tagged and I know there are many more articles on Wikipedia within the scope of this project. I have requested the bot Ganeshbot to go through Category:College basketball and tag every article. So, hopefully, within a few days, the number of articles on this project will grow exponentially.↔NMajdan•talk•EditorReview 22:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Sagabot has been tagging a bunch of talk pages as WP:WPCBB, but most of the ones I saw are players who are currently playing professionally in the National Basketball Association. Shouldn't these be tagged as WP:NBA instead? — CharlotteWebb 03:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

In WikiProject college football, we tag the pro's since they played college ball at one time, so I am assuming your project should work the same...although I see now that a bot is going through and removing the tags off talk pages for some reason. I can't imagine you would have much to work with for only the basketball players who are current college players or people that never went pro (the vast majority of which from both of those groups are not notable enough for articles). VegaDark 07:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
That seems kind of redundant, as the majority of professional players in any sport have previously played the same sport at the college level, so this sounds like a lot of talk page clutter and not much benefit. — CharlotteWebb 04:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Welcome to the world of WikiProjects. Talk page clutter is always a concern and there are currently discussions on how to resolve this. It is very possible that sometime soon, the college football WikiProject and the NFL WikiProject may just be "task forces" under the American football WikiProject. And the NBA and college basketball WikiProjects may be "task forces" under the Basketball WikiProject. But, until then, if a player falls under both WikiProjects' scope, I say they should be tagged with both. Also, now that the bot has tagged many articles, its time to start assessing.↔NMajdan•talk 15:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
I use {{WikiProjectBanners}} on a talk page with three or more project templates. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 22:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Linking to team pages that might not exist

One of the slightly annoying problems with team year pages is that some of them don't exist. So when we make a schedule section for the 2006-07 Virginia Tech Hokies men's basketball team and the Hokies play Duke, Duke doesn't have an article right now. But at some point in the future they might. A similar problem might occur if we want to refer to the Southern Methodist Mustangs men's basketball program. Right now, there is neither an article about their basketball team nor even about their athletics department. So I would have to link to the school and at some point when one of the articles gets written, we have to go through the annoying process of fixing the link.

Well, I've created a new template that will solve this issue: {{alternate links}}.

If I want to link to the SMU football team, I would use this line:

{{alternate links|Southern Methodist Mustangs men's basketball|Southern Methodist Mustangs basketball|Southern Methodist Mustangs|Southern Methodist University|title=SMU}}

The resulting link would be: SMU

The same would work for team year pages. The 2006-07 Florida State Seminoles men's basketball team page doesn't exist yet, but it might at some point:

{{alternate links|2006-07 Florida State Seminoles men's basketball team|2006-07 Florida State Seminoles men's basketball|2006-07 Florida State Seminoles basketball|Florida State Seminoles|Florida State University|title=Florida State}}

This would give us: Florida State.

So anywhere that we have a table of opponents, we can use this template and it will always generate a blue link and will always have the best available link available.

My suggestion for a naming convention / link order is:

  1. Year SchoolCommonName Mascot men's basketball team (if applicable, eg 2006-07 Virginia Tech Hokies men's basketball team)
  2. SchoolCommonName Mascot men's basketball (eg Virginia Tech Hokies men's basketball)
  3. SchoolCommonName Mascot basketball (eg Virginia Tech Hokies basketball)
  4. SchoolCommonName Mascot (eg Virginia Tech Hokies)
  5. SchoolFormalName (eg Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University)

By using this template, we will always have a blue link and it will always link to the most relevant available article. --BigDT 06:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

FYI, I have also made {{cbb link}}, which is similar, but customized for our naming confentions. --BigDT 00:58, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Conference Tournament Pages

I am creating pages for men's basketball conference tournament history. There are few pages outlining conference tournament histories, and those that do exist are weakly connected and organized. The two best are for the ACC, Pac 10, and Big 12. I created a template that may help organize such pages here. My hope is that when the year rolls around and conference tournaments are happening again, there will be a format in place to record the games so that people can easily see what is happening. Anyone able to create pages similar to the ACC and Big 12 ones for other Conferences would be a great help. Wrad 10:30, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for semi-protection

Please put a semi-protection page for the 2007 NCAA Women's Division I Basketball Tournament page as the brackets will be released on March 12, 2007. NoseNuggets 9:29 PM US EDT Mar 11 2007.

It's probably moot now, but requests like that should go to WP:RFP. They will be seen much more quickly than if they are placed here. --BigDT 01:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Not to mention that for future reference, semi-protection cannot be applied until vandalism has occurred - it's not a preventative measure. — PSUMark2006 talk | contribs 01:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Evaluation request

I'd like to request a quality rating on this article. Thank you. Dlong 02:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:SouthwestMinnesotaStateBasketballCoach

Just an FYI for interested members of the project, Template:SouthwestMinnesotaStateBasketballCoach (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) is up for deletion. You can participate in the discussion here. — PSUMark2006 talk | contribs 14:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Same now for {{MaineBasketballCoach}} —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fuzzy510 (talk • contribs) 16:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Importance Evaluation

There aren't good importance guidelines and right now evaluations are wildly inconsistent.

Can anyone explain to me why Gary Williams is of high importance but Billy Donovan is mid? Why is North Carolina Tar Heels men's basketball of high importance but Duke Blue Devils men's basketball is mid?

I understand that not all programs and coaches are created equal, so I guess the question is, are we content with some programs, players, or coaches being high importance while others are mid or even low? Do individuals even belong in the high-importance category (right now it's mostly tournaments). What do you guys think? Oren0 22:03, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tennessee Lady Volunteers basketball

I nominated Tennessee Lady Volunteers basketball for Good Article. Please feel free to go check it out and review it! Seancp 00:22, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Coaching Articles

I'm working on just getting articles up for as many current and recently employed coaches as I can. You can look at my recent work. They're not especially elaborate articles, but they get the information out there in a concise, coherent way. I was wondering if anyone in the project would be willing to help me focus on coaches, either in, like me, contributing new articles about coaches, or in going through and expanding the articles I post. Also, if anyone has a good way of getting pictures of coaches, TONS of them need images and it would be incredibly helpful if we could get some up. Maybe create a template of college basketball photo request to better sort ours, differentiate from the masses, and make them more likely to get filled? Just throwing some ideas out there, let me know if anyone can help me out. matt91486 05:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Not to dwell on coaches exclusively, but we need to think of a way to get images of coaches. Very few even big name coaches have pictures on here. I was looking to add a coach picture or two to the Tulsa basketball article I just finished, and there really aren't options. Of the coaches I looked up, only Tubby has a picture up and that's fair use for his article only. Does anyone have any ideas? Coaches like Nolan Richardson and Bill Self should really have pictures we can use.

[edit] Listing "none" for teams with no championships

There is a dispute (edit war) at Talk:Illinois Fighting Illini men's basketball about whether "none" should be listed in the championships section to indicate that Illinois has no basketball titles. Could some people familiar with standard practice offer a comment about this issue? Thanks. --BigDT 18:08, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

The premise is quite simple, wikipedia articles should contain as much information as possible. To this extent, if someone visits, for instance, the Penn St. mens bball site to determine whether they have won the B10 tournament, there is NO notation. As such, it is impossible to tell if they have in fact not won the tournament or if that information has simply not been provided in wikipedia as of yet. By putting an "N/A" or "none" in the box, this question is answered. Such confusion may be less likely with illinois and NCAA tournament championships, but, by including all sections of the infobox in all articles, this project becomes easier to use and easier to rely upon. I am not asking that we write whole articles or paragraphs for what teams havent done...just that where a complete and easy to use template is available, we make the info in it as complete as possible. Another example: the Illinois infobox does not list NIT champiomships. However, looking at the article I do not know if Illinois has not won the NIT or if it simply isnt included as an option in the infobox. On the other hand, if all categories are displayed and I see that even those not applicable are displayed with an "N/A" or "none", I would be able to quickly and easily conclude that information related to the NIT is not included in this infobox and that I should draw no conclusions from it regarding the NIT. While it may be unflattering for some schools to have a "none," "N/A" or "-" under the various categories, I don't think these articles are supposed to be advertisements for the programs. The articles should present as much accurate and organized information as possible, regardless of whether it portrays the subject in a flattering light. 207.114.16.210 18:11, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
It should be noted that 207.114.16.210, thus far the sole proponent of his point of view at Talk:Illinois Fighting Illini men's basketball, has made comments in prior disputes (specifically referring to Illinois as "a second tier program that probably never will [win a national championship]") that demonstrate a lack of neutral point of view and conflict of interest in matters concerning University of Illinois athletics. ~ João Do Rio 21:59, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't believe this alleged POV or COI problem comes into play where the format I am suggesting applies equally to all articles in this project 207.114.16.210 23:56, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Note: I consider myself to be a neutral observer here as I don't root for or against UoI, and don't follow college basketball much at all. I actually like the idea of fully completing templates, as a lack of information cannot (and generally should not) be construed as information. (To use an earlier example: the lack of any NIT championships listed for a particular team does not necessarily mean they have never won any.) However, assuming that João's quotation is true [João - might I suggest that you edit your note to include a link to that quote for attribution's sake?], we have valid reason to suspect that 207.114.16.210's motives may be disingenuous. So I would like to propose a compromise. Let's give 207.114.16.210 an opportunity to prove that his claimed motives (i.e. the betterment of Wikipedia) are pure and that his edits are not meant to denigrate the Illinois basketball program. Here is my proposal:
  1. Unprotect the Illini basketball page
  2. Remove the 'none' from the NCAA Championships section of that page's infobox
  3. Re-protect the page
  4. Allow user 207.114.16.210 an opportunity to visit every college basketball team's wikipedia article and fully populate their infoboxes with his suggested "none/NA" enhancements
    1. For each infobox edit made in this manner, 207.114.16.210 should include an edit summary pointing users to this page to weigh in on the approach
    2. 207.114.16.210 should create stub articles for any NCAA basketball team that does not already have one and fully populate that team's infobox
  5. Once this process is completed, if the changes 'stick' (without edit wars) for at least 50% of the (non-stub) pages, then the Illini page should be unprotected and 207.114.16.210 allowed to populate his desired infobox enhancements to that page
That's my attempt at mediating this before it ends up on the WP:LAME page. 69.241.82.132 16:24, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
I actually suggested this earlier, but filling out infoboxes for all 330 Division I basketball teams would take an eternity. But I agree, such an undertaking would truly settle the matter. Chiwara 16:28, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Good grief, no. The last thing we need is to expand this edit war beyond a single page. We are here to build an encyclopedia, not to fight over meaningless details. Given that nobody other than this one user believes that we should list none or n/a, I think it's pretty reasonable to conclude that we have as much of a consensus as we're going to get. If nobody objects in the next few hours, I'll unprotect the page and it can move on with life. --BigDT 16:29, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
That proposal is beyond absurd. I do believe that each page should say championships: none since, as stated above, a lack of information is not useful and more info is better. Oren0 03:08, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Going through some of the team pages done by our "brothers" at the college football WP, it would seem as if the majority of teams who don't have a title to their name don't go to the trouble of listing "none". Personally, I tend to agree with this format. --fuzzy510 03:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Oren0's rationale. More information is better. Dlong 12:09, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
It seems to me that it should be fairly obvious to any reader that if no NCAA Championships are listed, than none have been won. College football and pro football pages function the same way in regards to National Championships and Super Bowls. I just can't see that benefit in taking so much time to fill out these infoboxes to clarify statements that already seem obvious with the current userbox.Chiwara 13:08, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
But it applies to conference titles, tournament titles, etc. For instance, right now in the Indiana infobox, Coference Tournament Champions isnt listed. Does that make it "obvious" to everyone that they havent won a conference tournament. I would say "no". I think it would be just as reasonable to conclude that conference tournament championships arent part of the info box. By simply adding a "-" or a "none" we have conveyed considerable information with little effort. No one has articulated any rationale for not making this change other than "it isnt done right now" or "it will take to long." 207.114.16.210 15:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
I would say "yes." It was pretty obvious to me, and the fact that every other NCAA bball page is done this way sure makes it seem like it is obvious to just about everyone else. Or that no one wants to spend the time to edit pages just to reflect a negative amount of information. Chiwara 16:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Here's another reason: It goes against the nature of infoboxes. If nothing is put in a certain field in an infobox, that field is not even displayed. This is true for all of wikipedia. Very few articles say 'none' in their infoboxes because it just gets bulky and ugly. Wikipedia isn't just a gathering of information, it tries to keep things looking nice, too. Nobody wants to list 'none' in every single field on an infobox, even if it does add information, because it just doesn't look good. That kind of stuff can be in the rest of the article, if it's really important. That's the infobox default, I guess you could say. Wrad 16:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Help with update for infobox?

So I've been thinking that it would be nice for the coaches' records to utilize a function to calculate the win percentage and display it alongside the win-loss record, taking the wins and losses in as input. The problem is that I'm not exactly experienced enough with the code syntax to figure this out myself. Is there anybody out there who would be able to help me out with this one? For reference, I'm thinking of something that would look similar to the infobox at Tim Welsh. Thanks! --fuzzy510 05:21, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Remove succession boxes?

So with the creation of damn near every school's coaching history template, I'm wondering if it's really necessary to keep the different succession boxes around. I'd argue that they're completely unnecessary, since they just show the same information in the templates save for years, which should show up in a coaching infobox. Removing them would make for cleaner articles, I'd think. Thoughts? --fuzzy510 02:39, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I strongly concur. Let's remove them. The coaching templates contain the same information in a much more attractive and concise package. Вasil | talk 15:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to start removing these as I see them, since I don't see any argument to the contrary. I won't, however, remove anything besides the college basketball boxes for coaches who have multiple lists, since I don't want to encroach on anyone else's project. --fuzzy510 04:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I, also, concur. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 04:04, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Category for Team Infoboxes?

A problem I've run into with the Gophers page is retroactive national championships, awarded before tourney play. If there's a consensus that the team is the best in a season, I feel like that should be recognized to the quick view, but there's really no good place to put them. Do you think we could add another category to the infobox that says "Retroactively Awarded National Championships?" This would avoid stepping on anyone's heels with the tournament championship category and could still recognize the teams that had success in the early years of college basketball. I definitely don't know how to code this, though, so if we decide to go for it, someone else with better experience should do it. matt91486 21:13, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, does anyone outside of the University of Minnesota recognize these national championships? I struggle to find a list of any national champions that starts before Oregon in 1939, so I wonder if it truly matters on a wide perspective or if it's just Minnesota's way of saying that they were on top at one point. At this stage, until we can see if any pre-1939 titles are even acknowledged, I don't think there's any reason to create a whole new category in the infobox for them. --fuzzy510 23:00, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, I think most programs of the era acknowledge them. It's hard to say, though, most of the dominant early programs don't have pages up yet, like Yale and Dartmouth. There is a page for the Helms Foundation, though, which is one of two that retroactively awards them. matt91486 23:24, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
The Illinois and Pittsburgh pages had similar problems, and both of these schools recognize the titles. The problem is is that the Helsm Foundation awarded these titles in 1936, 2-years prior to NCAA tourney play, so for those two seasons they were the only National Championships that had ever been awarded in Men's Basketball. When the NCAA tourney finally did come out there was a long rivalry between the NCAA and the NIT, so the Helms kept awarding championships as some of the better teams did not even play in the NCAAs. Given all that, a new infobox category would probably be helpful, with a clear designation of what these championships are.Chiwara 02:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Outside of the schools and the awarding groups though, does anybody else acknowledge them? Obviously those two groups will - they'll take any credit and attention they can get, and routinely do so for things like preseason rankings. If nobody else seems to care or notice though (for instance - the Big Ten's [basketball history write-up makes no mention of pre-1939 national titles despite multiple conference schools winning them), then I'd argue that it's not truly notable enough to justify putting up. --fuzzy510 03:04, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, outside of the schools and groups few people recognize them, mostly because the NCAA tourney has become the main standard of greatness since it was instituted. They pre-NCAA championships are always interesting pieces of a school's history, but they definitely don't currently carry the prestige or importance of an NCAA title.Chiwara 06:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
What I would say would be the smarter decision instead of creating a new category which only affects a few schools and will never affect another school again is to just list them under the tournament championship section with a tag of (MNC) next to them, separating lines for school that have won titles pre- and post-1939. I think that would be a clear enough disctinction without having to further potentially elongate the infobox. --fuzzy510 04:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Great idea. I'll use that on the Illinois page and see what people think.Chiwara 12:55, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't agree with this idea. The infobox category is "NCAA Tournament Championships." The only items that should be listed under that category are national championships won via the NCAA Tournament. I don't object to recognizing pre-1939 MNCs in the infobox, but, in my opinion, this should be done within a separate category -- one specific to retroactively awarded MNCs. ~ João Do Rio 03:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
I agree, the category say "tournament championships" 207.114.16.210 18:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
......so change it to just say "national championships"? It's not like we're forever bound to the current text of the infobox, and it's still a foolish idea to create a new category for something that would affect a small number of schools that cannot grow to include anyone else. --fuzzy510 22:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
No, I didn't say that I'd favor changing the existing category. NCAA Tournament Championships and the generally less prestigious retroactively awarded MNCs should not be conflated into a single category. If the latter are to be recognized in the infobox (and I have no problem with this), they should be recognized under a separate heading. Furthermore, I don't consider your objections to doing this particularly sound. Helms recognizes MNCs as far back as 1901, or almost four full decades before the inception of the NCAA Tournament. It's safe to say that a category for the 38 pre-tournament MNCs is something that would affect more than just a "small number of schools." ~ João Do Rio 06:50, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Considering that 26 schools were awarded MNCs, two of which (Chicago and NYU) no longer compete at the D-I level, I'd say that it's certainly a fair criticism, especially when you consider that the current categories are either the singular most important piece of info (tournament titles, 35 schools with room for growth) or applying to a large number of programs (Final Fours, 90 schools, not to mention conference titles). Taking this all into account, giving a separate category to MNCs just doesn't make sense to me, especially when the number of schools can't increase. --fuzzy510 07:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with João Do Rio, and my school is even a Helms honoree. Make a new field in the infobox for MNC's - keeping them seperate from true NCAA Championships - or don't list them at all in the infobox (keep them in the article's text). And, am I missing something? Doesn't the fact that it effects a small amount of schools (38 or 26) make it easier to implement this change? (We only have to add an extra line to fewer than 40 pages). Hoof Hearted 15:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

To me, this is another case of editors trying to cram too much stuff into the infobox. Since its not an NCAA Tournament Championship, it should definitely not go under that heading in the infobox. I don't think it should go in the infobox at all. The mainstream sporting public doesn't count anything except official NCAA tourney titles anyway. Mention the mythical titles in the articles, definitely, because the award is worthy of that. But it doesn't need to go in the infobox, some people try to stick the whole article in the infobox.These Ain't Loose Card in Ales Pitcher/Catcher 07:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
I might be a little late on this debate, so sorry about that, but I have to agree with These Ain't Loose Card in Ales. I'm an LSU] fan, and LSU actually claims an MNC from this era but I don't think it belongs in the infobox at all. I just made mention of it in the text of the article and figured that was enough. I noticed the Pittsburgh Panthers men's basketball has them listed in the infobox and with the way the infobox titles that section "NCAA Tournament Champions" well that means Wikipedia is providing just flat out wrong information, even with the MNC link after the year, it's still under the wrong heading. Just my two cents. Seancp 18:08, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vote for Deletion

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2002 Atlantic 10 Men's Basketball Tournament Is up for deletion. matt91486 23:47, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Coaches by conference?

If nobody's been able to tell by now, I'm in quite the coach-sorting mood, and of my least favorite parts about the whole thing has been the template that's used to group the SEC basketball coaches. ({{SEC basketball coaches}}) Basically, it's ugly and looks like crap. Now, I created this to replace it (using the lovingly-stolen NFL template) ({{SECBasketballCoach}}), but I'm not so certain that we even want to go this way. Any thoughts? I certainly don't mind having my couple of minutes' work go to waste. If we do want to make these, does anybody have an idea that more lends itself to conferences without divisions that still doesn't look like crap? --fuzzy510 04:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I like the new template much better! Вasil | talk 16:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
It's better... but I'd like to take this moment to say that these templates (coaches by division) suck in general (in terms of taking up space at the bottom of an article). If I wanted to know the basketball coaches in the SEC, my first thought would be to look for an appropriate category. Furthermore, I prefer bottom-of-page templates to take up the entire width of the page, such as the X coaches of school Y templates do. I think we just need to figure out how to nest them, and stick them all in some sort of container. So, if a coach has worked at several schools, his templates aren't longer than his article. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 16:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Team Logo

I propose that we add the winning team's logo to the page of each year's tournament to add more color and formality to the page. As you can see from the World Cup 2006 page, I implemented showing the flag of the winning country sort of as a badge/award for winning the cup. For example it will look something like this...

2005 NCAA Basketball Champion
Image:Exmaple.png
North Carolina Tar Heels
4th Title

Let me know if you guys approve/disapprove or have any suggestions. Thanks!! Squadoosh 12:04, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I think this would make more sense as the center frame of a succession box. --dantheox 19:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I put it to the right of the scorebox. It looks a little better. Wrad 19:19, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I like the inspiration, but it's not fair-use. The flags are different, since they're in the public domain, but this would be rightfully removed as a fair use violation. --fuzzy510 19:20, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I've removed the logo from here. You can not use fair use images outside of article space. MECU≈talk 20:57, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tournament Info-Boxes

I also propose that we add info boxes for each tournament on the top right just like the World Cup pages to show total facts like the winning team, the MOP, attendence figures, leading scorer, etc. Again feedback welcome, hopefully we can get started on some of this soon. Squadoosh 12:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly support this addition. --fuzzy510 19:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I agree, we could also use one for the NIT and Conference basketball tournaments. Wrad 19:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Something like this? (P.S. - I realize Jared Jeffries didn't score that much, but as you can tell, it can take two entries) --fuzzy510 06:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
2002 NCAA Men's Division I
Basketball Tournament
2002 Final Four Logo
2002 Final Four Logo
Teams 65
Finals Site Georgia Dome
Atlanta, Georgia
Champions Maryland (1st title)
Runner-Up Indiana (6th title game)
Semifinalists Kansas (11th Final Four)
Oklahoma (4th Final Four)
Winning Coach Gary Williams (1st title)
MOP Juan Dixon Maryland
Attendance 720,433
Top scorers Juan Dixon Maryland
Jared Jeffries Indiana
(155 points)
NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournaments
«2001  2003»
In a possibly foolish move, I'm going to go ahead and add this to the pages. If there are any major complaints, I hereby volunteer to fix my mess. --fuzzy510 04:01, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I've removed the logo from here. You can not use fair use images outside of article space. MECU≈talk 20:57, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Naming standard for team pages?

I'm about to go through and start creating some of the team pages that are currently not there, but before I do that, I think it's worth bringing attention to the fact that we don't currently have a standard for naming the team pages. The Master Table links mostly to just basketball (i.e., not gender-specific), but as I'm finding, some pages go unnoticed because there's no redirect from the non-gender specific name. I'm leaning towards using men's or women's in the title, since some of the women's teams are more than notable enough to merit the creation of their own page, and keeping it separate will prevent anyone from trying to put both genders on the same page, which is something that I think we should avoid at all costs.

This is, of course, ignoring the teams which use different names for their men's and women's teams - Louisiana Tech, for instance, would have Louisiana Tech Bulldogs basketball and Louisiana Tech Lady Techsters basketball without the gender specification.

Thoughts? --fuzzy510 03:06, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

The standard is:
  • (Men's basketball) SchoolShortName NickName men's basketball (eg Virginia Tech Hokies men's basketball)
  • (Women's basketball) SchoolShortName NickName women's basketball (eg Texas Longhorns women's basketball)
  • If you are doing a page on a particular season, use the dual year, eg 2006-07, and add "team" at the end as in 2006-07 Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets men's basketball team
  • There is a template that I made awhile back that you should use when linking to a team where the article doesn't exist yet, but might in the future - {{Cbb link}}. Take Louisiana Tech as an example. If I am doing a page for a team in LA Tech's conference, I want to link to want to link to the LA Tech season page if it exists. If it doesn't, I want to go to the general men's basketball page. If that doesn't exist, I want the school athletics page and if that doesn't exist, I want the school page. So I would use this:
    • {{Cbb link|year=2007-08|sex=men|team=Louisiana Tech Bulldogs|sex=men|school=Louisiana Tech University|title=LA Tech}}
    • That link will try 2007=08 Louisiana Tech Bulldogs men's basketball team, then Louisiana Tech men's Bulldogs men's basketball, then Louisiana Tech Bulldogs, then Louisiana Tech University. By using this template, once you create the page for a particular team, all links automatically update.
I hope that helps. --BigDT 03:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Um, wow. That was fast. Thanks! --fuzzy510 03:31, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Portal:Basketball

FYI, all the monthly content for Portal:Basketball is all showing up as redlinks. Is there anyone from this WikiProject that wants to take on putting something there? (I'm also cross-posting this at Wikipedia:WikiProject Basketball. --BigΔT 20:47, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

  • 28 August - expires 2 September
    • Rick Allen (commentator) (PROD by User:Lawrence Cohen; former P.A. announcer for "...the University of Nebraska's football and men's basketball teams.") --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 17:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Syracuse Orange 2002-03 NCAA champions

Template:Syracuse Orange 2002-03 NCAA champions has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 00:02, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ongoing vandalizm alert: Mike Davis (basketball coach)

Could you folks keep an eye on Mike Davis (basketball coach)? I stopped by, and discovered that since September 6, 2007, it has been a nonstop vehicle for trolling, POVs and nonency enhancements. I took out the crystal ball prediction from the UAB section from that date, otherwise reverting to that version. Partial protection is no use, because partizan logged-in users are in the istory doing it along with anonymous ones. Just keep an eye on it, please. I'm affraid it's going to require close supervision, whichever way UAB's (and its conference rivals') season goes. --Mareklug talk 07:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 1993 NCAA tourney needs work

On the 1993 NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament page, the Infobox is broken and the brackets are all wrong. It has random forfeits and 20-0 games. The games all happened, just that some were vacated. --AW 19:02, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I've taken a stab at replacing the information that was removed regarding the games that were played and marked all of Michigan's games as vacated. -- Upholder 19:28, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
THanks! --AW 17:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Lisa Harrisons Mix-Up

I am new to Wikipedia so I apologize for my lack of formatting skills. I edited one line of information on her profile because it seems like someone mixed up Lisa Harrison of basketball and Lisa Harrison the actress. It listed the actress' marraige under the basketball Harrison's page, so I erased that line. 07:51, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gregg Marshall

Much like the above poster, I'm not sure how to do this, but the color scheme of the template on Gregg Marshall's biography seems off. It awards him a national title in a year he merely won the conference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.127.50 (talk) 22:27, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Are game summaries allowed on conference tournament pages?

Conference tournament articles usually consist of a bracket and nothing more. Sometimes this leads to a deletionist squealing with joy that he/she gets to kill another article. Example

2007 Missouri Valley Conference Men's Basketball Tournament

With something like this for each game. The summary will obviously be rewritten as necessary.

[edit] Example

Team 1 2 OT Total
(9) Drake 51 37 13 101
(8) Evansville 47 41 8 96
  • With 47 seconds left in overtime, Klayton Korver pulled up and hit a 3-pointer to lead Drake past Evansville. The Bulldogs hit 15 3-pointers in the game, which was a new tournament record. The combined score of 197 points was also the most in the tournament since the tournament had been moved to St. Louis in 1991.

I suppose the real question is.. should I even bother? Right now these tournaments are in tact, but what's to stop a deletionist getting consensus from three other people to just torch these? I have very little confidence that any effort I put forth to create and expand all Missouri Valley Conference tournament articles will be still standing in 2010. It's easier to destroy on this site than it is to create.

That's probably the reason why these articles haven't been expanded yet. After all, the drama mongers control discussion on this site, so why try? SashaNein (talk) 17:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Because most people are against their deletion. They realize that the articles have potential. I've actually only ever seen one of these nominated for deletion. We just showed them the 2007 Big 12 Men's Basketball Tournament article and they went down in heaps. Wrad (talk) 18:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
I've seen conference season articles deleted, specifically for the ACC. With all the reliable sources that could go into an ACC season, why was it trashed? All it takes is catching WikiProject College Basketball on an off-day (which won't be hard since the first response to my problem came 5 weeks after posting it), and a perfectly fine article will be gone.
I also want to make articles of a team's individual season, using a paid newspaper archive service. I may not do that, though, since I've been donating all my money to a friend in need. At least baseball has a free digital news outlet through The Sporting News, but college basketball appears to have none, especially through the likes of the Missouri Valley Conference.
I noticed that someone has already begun making season articles for the Drake Bulldogs, no doubt out of respect for their completely unexpected resurgence under their new coach. What will stop the deletionists from taking down the 07-08 season? Say that one survives.. what will happen to 68-69? 1910-1911? Again, all the higher up deletionists have to do is catch the supporters on an off-day, swoop in, and destroy the article. I've seen it done countless times, where the AFD discussion is stopped after 6 hours with a snowball delete, usually with the same people voting in succession. It's gross!
I would edit Hoopedia, hosted on the NBA website, but I just feel like they have it there as a gimmick and will abandon the project within 2 years.
I cannot add all the absolutely needed and well-referenced material to Wikipedia until I know there are a lot of people ready to back me up whenever a deletionist is aiming for a few brownie points to someday gain adminship. WikiProject College Basketball appears to be very, very inactive. Sure, one other guy might come along and defend the article, but all it takes is a good shoutdown from admins and that's the end of that.
Until then, I'll either improve articles of baseball players I have a great amount of respect for, or not edit the mainspace at all. Even though today the rule for baseball is, "If you've played one game in MLB, you are notable," that could all change with a 'consensus' of 6 players on some random hidden talkpage that was deliberately hidden from most WikiProject Baseball editors. I've seen that kind of crap happen, too.
Best of luck to getting this project running again. Without this, Wikipedia's college basketball article count full of content and references can never be expanded. SashaNein (talk) 15:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Infobox NCAA Division I men's basketball season

I wanted to let people on this project know that I created this template to be used for the main regular season articles, like 2007-08 NCAA Division I men's basketball season. The documentation for the template explains all of the parameters I believe, but if there is a problem with it I should be able to help if someone drops me a note. There are parameters on it to put the NIT champion and the (apparently new) College Basketball Invitational champions, but if people believe these don't belong then they can easily be taken out. Additionally, there are parameters for the Naismith player of the year and Wooden Award winners, but likewise, if people believe these don't belong they're easily removed. If there is something else that should be in the template, leave a suggestion here or on its talk page and hopefully someone will be able to add it. Additionally, I believe it is possible to make the template work for both women's and men's seasons so if anyone thinks it would be prudent I can try to work on that and we can move the template to Template:Infobox NCAA Division I basketball season instead. Phydend (talk) 21:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tournament pages need better organization

I'm noticing a lot of organization problems between Conference tournament articles. Can we set up a task force to be in charge of writing some guidelines for tournament pages so we can all be on the same page? Wrad (talk) 21:29, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures of the 2008 tournament

If anybody in this project is going to any of the games, I would encourage you to bring your camera, take pictures, and upload the best ones so that we can put them on the tournament page. Wrad (talk) 02:33, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proliferation of CBB Infobox categories

Someone added a large number of information categories to Template:Infobox CBB Team a few days ago, expanding it to include information about NCAA tournament runner-up finishes and Elite Eight, Sweet 16, Second Round, and NCAA Tournament appearances. What does everyone think about this? I guess I'm undecided, but I lean toward thinking that this is an excess of information for the infobox and that the template potentially adds too much clutter to pages, extending too deeply into the article space, when all new fields are filled out (e.g. Kansas Jayhawks men's basketball and Arizona Wildcats men's basketball). I could be persuaded otherwise, but it seems preferable to me that articles list these other accomplishments in some manner in the body of the article itself (as in the season record tables at UCLA Bruins men's basketball, Texas Longhorns men's basketball, North Carolina Tar Heels men's basketball, Texas A&M Aggies men's basketball, and Wisconsin Badgers men's basketball; or in other sections or tables dedicated to NCAA Tournament information as at Arkansas Razorbacks basketball, Tennessee Volunteers basketball, and at Arizona Wildcats men's basketball prior to recent changes). What do people think about this? 24.153.205.19 (talk) 01:47, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the fields can be useful if used wisely. I think if a school has been in the tournament even once, that should be in the infobox. That one appearance is a big deal for that school and thus, for that article. Schools with many appearances should excersize judgment to make sure the box doesn't start eating up the page. Just be smart about it. Wrad (talk) 00:41, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Incentive

The Florida Gators Barnstar
For good and thorough work pertaining to articles about the Florida Gators.

[edit] NAIA

There is a smaller colege basketball tournament going on in Kansas City this week. Could anyone help me with these pages? I'm trying to get the NAIA on par with the bigger schools, but it's a lot of work. Help would be greatly appreciated! :-) 2008 NAIA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament Also the years 1938-2002 all could do with a bit of a starting up. Information can be found in places, but if you or a loved one knows what the NAIA is, you'd probably want to help. I know, I know, there's no money, or cool lookin' barnstars like the above, but we have heart! NAIA doesn't even get coverage by ESPN for the National Championships... It wouldn't hurt them to announce the winner. haha well I'm monolouging...and I'm sorry. I just need some help if ya can! thanks so much!Moonraker0022 (talk) 09:49, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rating needed for Kyle Hines

The Kyle Hines page I've created needs a rating on the quality and importance scales for WikiProject College Basketball. Go to his talk page here to rate it. Thanks. -Jrcla2 (talk) 01:18, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] College basketball article

I wrote a section about the differences between NBA and NCAA play on the college basketball article. Please copy-edit the section and check if I got all the facts straight. Thanks in advance! BlueAg09 (Talk) 22:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Team infobox problems

Until the mid 1950s or so, the NIT was THE tournament that determined the national champ. That's a big deal. If a team won a national championship in the 50s, they should be able to put that fact in the infobox as an important part of their history. However, the infobox doesn't have NIT parameters anymore. We need to fix this. Also, there is no way to determine the difference between an NIT national champ and a NCAA national champ within the infobox. Wrad (talk) 16:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I think you're definitely overstating the case here. The NIT was certainly a much more prominent tournament than it currently is until the mid 1950s or so, but it was never "THE tournament that determined the national champ." The NCAA Tournament was from its inception a tournament reserved for conference champions. This originally meant, of course, that many strong unaffiliated teams as well as many strong non-conference-champion teams were excluded from the field, but it also meant that the champions of the strongest conferences played in the NCAA tournament and not in the NIT. 66.68.114.160 (talk) 18:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vacated Final Fours / NCAA appearances

Does WP have a consistent policy for vacated NCAA tournament appearances and honors? Or more generally, for dealing with sporting honors that are subsequently rescinded? I noticed this in University of Memphis, not a project article but one with a lot of MCBB content.

My opinion is that schools that vacate honors shouldn't be able to claim them; for example, UM can't claim it went to the Final Four in 1985, because that result was vacated. The school gave the money back and can't hang banners for that honor. But for reasons totally beyond my comprehension, the US sports media treats tainted honors without any taint.

I was say Memphis' last Final Four before 2008 cannot be 1985 because Memphis didn't make the Final Four in 1985. However, I satisfied myself by adding parethesis in one instance rather than changing it to 1973. I'm still considering how best to address it in the paragraph about 1985. - PhilipR (talk) 04:12, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Even though the NCAA rescinded the result a year later, UM still went and played in the 1985 Final Four. In fact, there are two sides to this issue: one side says UM went to the Final Four, and the other says that the Final Four result was vacated. It's best to combine these two sides in accordance with WP:NPOV, and you just did this by adding the parenthetical text. BlueAg09 (Talk) 05:08, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Issue with Template:2008 Kansas basketball

I'm currently having a mini-edit war with an editor in the navbox Template:2008 Kansas basketball. I have stopped editing to avoid violating the 3RR, but I was wondering if some of the other project members could provide input/assistance on the dispute. As some of you may know, the navboxes for NCAA championship teams typically include players that meet certain notability requirements, which are, generally:

  • Star players, did something particularly notable, played or likely will play professionally
  • Not notable as a player, but became notable later on for something else (i.e. Dean Smith, who was not an itegral part of Kansas' championship team in the 50's but became notable later on as a coach)
  • All of this keeps in mind that WP does not assign inherant notability to college athletes as it does to professional athletes

Additionally, the changes made by the other editor do not conform to the other NCAA champion navboxes.

I have tried addressing the issue with the editor, but my points are often answered by emotional arguments about players "deserving" to be in the navbox. If you happen to agree, disagree or have a different take on the issue, please chime in so we can come to a consensus. Thanks. - Masonpatriot (talk) 18:57, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Does every season?

Of every team need to have its own page? 2007-08 Drake Bulldogs men's basketball team is a great example of someone putting in a lot of hard work to generate a good page, but is it really necessary? If every college program gets its own page and then every season of that program gets its own page, wikipedia will max out its bandwidth. Let me know what you think. -GoHuskies9904 (talk) 21:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I think teams who make the NCAA tournament are notable and thus should have their own season article. If a team does not make the tournament, however, it can still have a season article, as long as there are enough sources to meet WP:N. Most Division I teams, particularly the ones with a good deal of NCAA tournament history, receive much attention from the media. Don't worry about Wikpedia's bandwidth—see WP:NOTPAPER. BlueAg09 (Talk) 20:56, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NCAA Champion navboxes - possible TFD

He folks, wanted to make you aware of an ongoing TFD regarding NBA championship navboxes here. This follows the TFD discussion that resulted in Stanley Cup championship templates being deleted. It's a pretty active discussion, and seems to be one that may affect other sports projects down the line. Feel free to chime in on the discussion if you are interested. - Masonpatriot (talk) 17:34, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

This issue is currently under deletion review here. If you haven't already and are interested in this topic, please provide your input. If the deletion holds, it is likely that the championship navboxes will be deleted. - Masonpatriot (talk) 16:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)