Talk:Wade Wilson (American football)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Failed requested move[edit]

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article.-- Jreferee 23:01, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Contested move request[edit]

The following request to move a page has been added to Wikipedia:Requested moves as an uncontroversial move, but this has been contested by one or more people. Any discussion on the issue should continue here. If a full request is not lodged within five days of this request being contested, the request will be removed from WP:RM.Stemonitis 07:11, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There does not appear to be any consistency in the way this kind of article is named; "(football player)" is often used and seems sufficient until there is someone named Wade Wilson who plays a different type of football, but both the current and the proposed title seem to indicate that Wade Wilson is a ball. Dekimasuよ! 02:41, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is a surprisingly common misconception, but an absurd one nonetheless. The term in brackets denotes the general field to which the name applies. It indicates that this Wade Wilson is the one to do with football, not that he is a football. Whip (politics) does not suggest that the whip is (a) politics, but that it is the term in politics that is meant. Coach (sport) is not a sport, but a term in sport. Trial (law) is not a law, but a legal term. --Stemonitis 07:11, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yet we have Madonna (entertainer) (not entertainment), Jack Straw (politician) (not politics), Prince (musician) (not music), and the list goes on and on for any profession you choose: James Stewart (actor), Thomas Young (scientist), Gareth Roberts (physicist), Paul Cohen (mathematician), Pierre Cartier (jeweler), Bill Blass (designer), and a whole slew of articles on football (soccer) players with the disambiguator "(footballer)", of which I found more than 100 without really trying. I would like to point out that I did not contest this move; I simply asked for clarification because it's clear that no naming convention is being applied consistently. Dekimasuよ! 09:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP:D is pretty clear on this. Association football is most commonly referred to as simply football. Thus, American football is a necessary term. Adding the term player is a way of "over specifying" the title. That too is also in WP:D. Many other players have this type of disambig, and for those that don't, it is a failure of their name structure and not of the convention. Thus, this is a fairly "uncontroversial move". Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  07:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
American football is also most commonly referred to as simply football (in fact, it's never referred to as American football in the United States), and all kinds of football (including the American version) are covered in the article Football. "Football player" is a noun phrase - a common, inseparable set - in American English. It is equivalent to the one-word "footballer" in Commonwealth English. If adding "player" is overspecification, so is adding "American". Dekimasuよ! 09:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • More people in this world refer to Association football simply as football. Most english speaking people, refer to what the US calls soccer, as football. The only area of the world where football is the equivalent of American football is here in the US. This is exactly why the WP:D article addresses this. There really is very little room for interpretation on this one. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  12:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The fact remains that "football" is not ambiguous within the context of the Wade Wilsons who have articles on Wikipedia. Only one Wade Wilson plays any of the games called "football". There were several other recent move requests in this vein, including moving things like Notre Dame Fighting Irish football to Notre Dame Fighting Irish American football, and they were all found to be unambiguous at the "football" title; the moves were reverted. Anyone referring to "Fighting Irish football" is referring to American football; anyone referring to a Wade Wilson who plays football is referring to American football. Dekimasuよ! 14:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But I see you knew that already, as you were the one to make the Fighting Irish move. Having discovered that there has been some negative feedback on the issue of your changes to parentheticals for football players already at WT:CFB#Another issue with "American football" for the last 3-4 days, it now seems a bit disingenuous that you listed this move as an uncontroversial request. Independently, Johntex came to the same conclusion I did: *We should really stick with the simplest possible names. Virtually no one in the US says "football" when they mean "soccer". These teams in question are in the US and they call themselves "football" teams or "college football" teams, not "college American football" teams. Likewise, unless there is an American football player and a soccer player sharing the same name, we should stick to the simplest unambiguous name. In most cases, saying "football player" will accomplish this. Dekimasuよ! 14:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: In my opinion, the current name is slightly confusing, but we could simply use a version that would avoid these sorts of problems, like Wade Wilson (sport); for content, we've got the article, here we should simply avoid using potentially misleading titles.--Aldux 00:34, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • The general consensus on this (which has been discussed at WP:NFL for example - is pretty much in line with WP:D. The problem is that football is not the same as American football. The agreement has been to move (football) to (American football) for that reason. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  23:38, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Wade Wilson (American football). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:50, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]