Talk:Who Dey
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
History
[edit]Almost the entirity of this section is lifted directly from [1]. I'll give someone a good-faith chance to clean it up before asking for a determination of its copyright violation status. --Kinu t/c 00:51, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
^^^ FYI: its spelled, g-r-a-m-m-a-r and s-k-i-l-l-s, but don't let your idiocy get in the way of a bad joke.
If Football Fans are so dumb; and you are so smart...Why are you reading about football on Wikipedia? Oooh I get it, you're a Steelers fan and you really don't know anything about football (as usual). You just know it's easy to root for the Steelers and you have a cousin who once lived close the Pitts, so you think you have a life long connection once she bought you that Steelers t-shirt in the 80's. (I'm not bitter though) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.37.46.7 (talk) 17:27, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
1800s - last paragraph is speculation
[edit]The NFL Saint's offical page lists the date the franchise was awarded as 1966. Claims of the 1800s are pure speculation.Palewook 11:59, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Speculation of what? That just because the Saints didnt exist until '66 that the phrase "Who Dat" didnt exist? 68.222.26.6 15:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
It would be rather unlikely as the last paragraph claims, "Who dat say they gonna beat dem Saints?" has been around since the 1800's. Unless you believe people started cheering for the Saints 150 years before the team was formed.Palewook 11:54, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Fight Song?
[edit]"Who Dey" doesn't appear to fit the definition of "Fight Song", not being a song. It might be interesting to start an "NFL chants" category, if orchestrated chants such as "J-E-T-S! JETS! JETS! JETS!" and "GO PACK GO!" were to get their own pages. But a fight song? Nope. I'm removing the cat. SixFourThree (talk) 16:34, 19 August 2009 (UTC)SixFourThree
Merge?
[edit]Since there's a merger discussion tag....
The article doesn't appear long enough to be worth it - this material could be incorporated to the main article (which seems to have ample room) for better presentation. SixFourThree (talk) 16:57, 11 September 2009 (UTC)SixFourThree
Agrred. Will do it. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 06:06, 19 March 2010 (UTC)