Misplaced Pages

Talk:New England Patriots: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:25, 28 January 2006 editGhgfhfhfdh (talk | contribs)16 edits History section← Previous edit Latest revision as of 12:53, 30 December 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,298,161 editsm Archiving 18 discussion(s) to Talk:New England Patriots/Archive 3) (bot 
(766 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{facfailed}} {{Skip to talk}}
{{NFLproject}} {{Talk header}}
{{American English}}
{{peerreview}}
{{Article history
|action1=FAC
|action1date=22:51, 12 October 2005
|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/New England Patriots/archive1
|action1result=not promoted
|action1oldid=25294887
|action2=PR
|action2date=19:59, 28 January 2006
|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/New England Patriots/archive1
|action2result=reviewed
|action2oldid=37108071
|action3=FAC
|action3date=20:31, 31 January 2006
|action3link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/New England Patriots/archive2
|action3result=promoted
|action3oldid=37564398
|action4=FAR
|action4date=00:02, 20 March 2008
|action4link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/New England Patriots/archive1
|action4result=removed
|action4oldid=199202906
|action5=GAN
|action5date=22:40, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
|action5link=Talk:New England Patriots/GA1
|action5result=listed
|action5oldid=
|maindate=April 3, 2006
|currentstatus=FFA/GA
|topic=Sports and recreation
}}
{{Top 25 Report|Feb 1 2015 (7th)|Feb 5 2017 (7th)|Feb 4 2018 (20th)|Feb 3 2019 (13th)}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject National Football League|patriots=yes|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject American Football League|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject United States|importance=Low|Boston=yes|Boston-importance=Top|MA=yes|MA-importance=High}}
}}
{{Annual readership|days=90}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|algo = old(60d)
|archive = Talk:New England Patriots/Archive %(counter)d
|counter = 3
|maxarchivesize = 150K
|archiveheader = {{tan}}
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|minthreadsleft = 2
}}


== GA concerns ==
Is it legal for us to include these logos? They are copyrighted, is it acceptable for us to put them here? -- ]


I am concerned that this article no longer meets the ]. Some of my concerns are listed below:
I think as long as its not generating any profit, its ok.


*At over 10,000 words, ] recommends that the article be trimmed or ]. After quicklying skimming the article, I think there is information that can be cut. Some suggestions on what to move/trim are below.
==Current Event Tag==
*"Franchise history" should be sub-divided into level 3 headings for easier reading.
I'm a huge fan of the Pats and I love to see them get coverage, but the current events tag doesn't belong on this article. As described on ]:
*The captions on some of the images are much too long. This information should be in the article body and cited.
*Records vs opponents and playoff records should be spun out into new articles or removed, as this is too much detail.
*Various team leaders should be moved into a new article as this is too much detail.
*I do not think the "NFL All-Decade and Anniversary team selections" is necessary for this article and can be removed.
*The "Patriots All-Decade teams" can be spun out into its own article.
*"Patriots Anniversary teams" Can be moved to its own article.
*"Pro Bowl selections" is too much detail and can be removed.
*"Controversies" section is, in my opinion, inherantly not-NPOV as it focuses on negative aspects. I think this section should be moved into the history section, where its impact on the team culture can be interpreted with other team historical events.
*There are uncited passages throughout the article.
*There is an extensive "Further reading" section: should these be used as inline citations or removed from the article?


Is anyone willing to help resolve the above concerns, or should this go to ]? ] (]) 02:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
:''The tag was created for two reasons:''


:As much as I absolutely despise the Patriots, and I do not regularly edit in football, I may attempt to fix the things you've listed here. Several of them seem quite simple. As for uncited passages, it would depend on the era. I'm not paying for print sources to save it, if those are necessary. ] <sup> ] </sup> 12:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
:*''So that users would know that the article was undergoing major revisions as events were happening.''
::{{ping|MFTP Dan}} Are you still working on this? If not, would you be interested in bringing this to GAR outlining the remaining concerns? ] (]) 01:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
:*''So that editors would know the same so that they could keep that in mind if/when they decided to add to or edit the article.''
:::I'm already working on another GAR at the moment and I'll be busy for most of the rest of the week. ] <sup> ] </sup> 01:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
:''It was originally designed for short-term use as a warning for editors and readers if an event was occurring right that very second (or very, very recently).''


== "]" listed at ] ==
The information on this article isn't changing rapidly and there doesn't seem to be a problem with edit conflicts. However, if someone wanted to put the tag back up for Super Bowl Sunday '''only''', I don't think that would be a problem. ] 14:03, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
]
The redirect <span class="plainlinks"></span> has been listed at ] to determine whether its use and function meets the ]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#2026 New England Patriots season}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> ] (]) 18:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)


== Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2024 ==
My favorite ] team! ] 17:28 February 7, 2005 (EST)


{{edit semi-protected|New England Patriots|answered=yes}}
==Improvement drive==
Under nicknames:
] is currently a candidate on ]. Vote for it if you are interested!--] 20:39, 10 August 2005 (UTC)


America’s Team ] (]) 00:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
==Tedy Bruschi's status==
:{{Not done}}: please provide ] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> ] (]) 01:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
FWIW, it is correct that Tedy Bruschi has ''stated'' that he plans to sit out the 2005 season. That said, his current status--PUP, or Physically Unable to Perform--allows him to come back midway through the season. ]

Which he did. See ]]

== Putting the history section into a separate article ==

Since the history section of this article is getting long, I might split this into a separate article. ] ] 02:06, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

== Game by game ==

The history section of this article is getting ridiculous. We do not need a summary of each game for the 2005 season. --] 17:50, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

==Pat Patriot a symbol of ineptitude?==
I'm not sure if "many saw Pat as a symbol of ineptitude" is an accurate statement. On the day the Flying Elvis was unveiled at the stadium, the fans cheered for Pat and booed Elvis. --] 13:07, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

I was the one that put that in there. I stand by that, by 1992 when it was retired in game use, "Pat Patriot" to many had become a symbol of ineptitude - just like Tampa Bay's pre-97 "pirate" logo had long been a symbol of embarassment. Of course, that is not to say that people loved the Flying Elvis when it was rolled out - indeed, a lot of people didn't like it and I even read one wag refer to them as "USFL uniforms."--] 01:33, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

==Greatest lineman of all time?==
John Hannah was a guard, right? This might be reaching, but has anyone ever hear of this obscure LEFT TACKLE named Anthony Munoz???????

==Not To Be Forgotten==

I personally like this section and have added to it myself, but in doing so a question occured to me: how do we determine who is "not to be forgotten?" Isn't that a little bit POV by definition?]
:sort of POV, i guess, but i guess we just do it by consensus. If someone makes an unreasonable addition, then we take it off. i think it should stay "not to be forgotten" and not changed to Alumni.--] 19:47, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
::I'll agree...the change to "alumni" makes it ''more'' POV, in my mind. The teams in its 46th season (right? well, roughly, in any case), so there have been a lot of players who've moved through the system. Will anyone remember Matt Bahr, placekicker of the mid to late 90s? Probably not. Yet it's liklely he'll never be added to a section entitled "alumni." at least "not to be forgotten" makes it clear at the outset that these really were exceptional members of the team. And also, although its a touch POV, you bring up a good point that if someone WERE to add matt bahr with the claim that he was an influential member of the squad that lost to the packers in the super bowl, the consensus would be to take him off. and it's a good section, so i agree it should stay; i was really just wondering how it was that it was justified. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:50, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

How is alumni more POV than "not to be forgotten?" Alumni is a "one who is a former member, employee, contributor" according to Merriam Webster's dictionary . The definition and use of "forgotten" in this situation is very subjective. The list is really notable former players, so reffering to them as alumni, or even "former players" would be more in keeping with WP policy than using "not to be forgotten." Just because most sports pages have "not to be forgotten" doesn't make it right. I will propose a across the board change to those pages which use the terminology. Granted the section itself is POV, as with your point about Matt Bahr, but using subjective words in the heading shouldn't be the answer. For now can we at least agree to "Notable alumni?" That wouldn't change the intent of the list and would better describe it with less opinionated language. In the end its all POV, but at least we will be calling it for what it is. ] 21:12, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
: ''"In the end its all POV, but at least we will be calling it for what it is."''
:Ex''actly'' why i prefered "not to be forgotten" over "alumni." However, I do like "notable alumni," as it does purport a reason to list them without the name being ''nearly'' as POV. I'll support it. ] <sup>]</sup> 21:38, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
::Sounds good. I will change it, and hopefully people will agree that its more in line with what the subsection is all about. ] 22:44, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

== Unverified claims ==

At 03:55, 2 January 2006 (UTC), an anonymous IP user added some unverified content about when the team was being owned by James Busch Orthwein. Most of the content has no sources and does not seem to follow a ]. ] ] 07:07, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
*It looks like another anonymous IP removed some of the questionable, unverified content , but not all of it... ] ] 07:22, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
*Look slike the original anonymous IP user restored the questionable content again . ] ] 05:20, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

==2005 and beyond==
This seems to be getting kind of long, especially as a sub-subheader. Do we really need information about individual games (such as the game vs. the colts and the wild-card playoff game)? Perhaps there should be a separate Patriots 2005 season in review article or just remove some of the excess stuff. ] <sup>]</sup> 18:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*There has been discussion on this topic, both on this article's ] and ]. There seems to be consensus that the history should focus more on summaries and high points of the season, but nobody is really willing to start the clean up until February when the season is over. ] ] 19:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*to add to that, i think the title should be changed. as the 2005/6 season is over, "2005 and beyond" doesnt seem as appropriate to me. i suggest a 2005 section and then perhaps a "future" section of some kind. i havent put much thought into it, it just occured to me after looking at the last few edits (mostly changes of the title to reflect the "end" of the "dynasty". (Such as "Transition and dethronation - 2005 and beyond" and "End of a Dynasty - 2005")--] <sup>]</sup> 21:40, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
::Altough, is the dynasty really ended yet? It is called a dynasty by most people because they won three out of four NFL Championships. That second year, they didn't even make the playoffs. This year they did (winning their division). So if they happen to win it all next year, it would mean the start of a new dynasty? No, it would be said they won 4 of 6 years. And who knows after that. To say the dynasty is over is still premature. I'd say they still have two more years to win another Championship before we can say for sure the dynasty is really over. <small>And I never called it a dynasty to begin with. 4 years does not establish a "dynasty".</small> Just my thoughts though. --] <sup><font color="#3D9140">]</font></sup> 04:08, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
:::"end of a dynasty" is inappropriate. I agree with Voldemort. We can't see into the future.--] 04:32, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
::::Yeah, we all have different ideas on what is a dynasty. I feel that one must win the majority of the super bowls over a period of time to be considered a dynasty, with a minimum of two in three years. Right now, they are at three in five years (including this season). In my opinion, they have another shot. This logic seems to stand, so I will rename the section. ] 04:34, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
:::::I added a few sub-sub-sub headers to help organization, and simply named the seasons "The XXXX season" until we reach an agreement. ] 04:51, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

== History section ==

As per featured article suggestions, I plan on trimming the history section down to about one paragraph per header, and perhaps 2 for the dynasty era. All of the info has been moved to ]. ] 22:40, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
:I trimmed it down somewhat; I'm thinking that this level of information looks pretty good. Once we replace it with beautiful prose (I wrote it in somewhat of a hurry) and cite, we might be ready for feature article or at least good article status. ] 00:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
*A suggestion for FA: You should also begin a section on the logo and uniforms too, and how it evolved from the "Pat Patriot" logo to the "Elvis" logo. ] ] 00:37, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
:Okay, sounds like an awesome idea. ] 00:42, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
:I added the brief section from the history page to get the ball rollong. ] 00:45, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
::I admire your dedication, Deckiller. keep up the good work!--] 03:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
]

Latest revision as of 12:53, 30 December 2024

Skip to table of contents
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the New England Patriots article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 2 months 
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Former featured articleNew England Patriots is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Good articleNew England Patriots has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 3, 2006.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 12, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
January 28, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
January 31, 2006Featured article candidatePromoted
March 20, 2008Featured article reviewDemoted
August 6, 2016Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Former featured article, current good article
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 4 times. The weeks in which this happened:
This  level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconNational Football League: Patriots Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject National Football League, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the NFL on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Football LeagueWikipedia:WikiProject National Football LeagueTemplate:WikiProject National Football LeagueNational Football League
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Patriots task force.
WikiProject iconAmerican Football League (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject American Football League, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.American Football LeagueWikipedia:WikiProject American Football LeagueTemplate:WikiProject American Football LeagueAmerican Football League
WikiProject iconUnited States: Massachusetts / Boston Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts (assessed as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts - Boston (assessed as Top-importance).

GA concerns

I am concerned that this article no longer meets the good article criteria. Some of my concerns are listed below:

  • At over 10,000 words, WP:TOOBIG recommends that the article be trimmed or WP:SPINOUT. After quicklying skimming the article, I think there is information that can be cut. Some suggestions on what to move/trim are below.
  • "Franchise history" should be sub-divided into level 3 headings for easier reading.
  • The captions on some of the images are much too long. This information should be in the article body and cited.
  • Records vs opponents and playoff records should be spun out into new articles or removed, as this is too much detail.
  • Various team leaders should be moved into a new article as this is too much detail.
  • I do not think the "NFL All-Decade and Anniversary team selections" is necessary for this article and can be removed.
  • The "Patriots All-Decade teams" can be spun out into its own article.
  • "Patriots Anniversary teams" Can be moved to its own article.
  • "Pro Bowl selections" is too much detail and can be removed.
  • "Controversies" section is, in my opinion, inherantly not-NPOV as it focuses on negative aspects. I think this section should be moved into the history section, where its impact on the team culture can be interpreted with other team historical events.
  • There are uncited passages throughout the article.
  • There is an extensive "Further reading" section: should these be used as inline citations or removed from the article?

Is anyone willing to help resolve the above concerns, or should this go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 02:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

As much as I absolutely despise the Patriots, and I do not regularly edit in football, I may attempt to fix the things you've listed here. Several of them seem quite simple. As for uncited passages, it would depend on the era. I'm not paying for print sources to save it, if those are necessary. mftp dan 12:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
@MFTP Dan: Are you still working on this? If not, would you be interested in bringing this to GAR outlining the remaining concerns? Z1720 (talk) 01:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
I'm already working on another GAR at the moment and I'll be busy for most of the rest of the week. mftp dan 01:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

"2026 New England Patriots season" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect 2026 New England Patriots season has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24 § 2026 New England Patriots season until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Under nicknames:

America’s Team Bodiaz1 (talk) 00:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. LizardJr8 (talk) 01:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
Categories: