Since you've done a huge amount of work on the All-American articles, I thought I'd ask your opinion on this. A couple months ago I posted a question at Talk:2008 College Football All-America Team; that article has a ton of players listed together from all sorts of different selectors (Rivals, Scout, CBS, ESPN, etc.). As far as I know, AFCA, Walter Camp, the AP, FWAA, and the Sporting News are the current consensus (which I would say means "NCAA-recognized") selectors. The 2008 article has five different selections listed at QB for instance... I think the other publications selections warrant inclusion, but the way the information is currently presented is, to me, confusing, if not deceptive. Strikehold (talk) 21:54, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent job on William H. Lewis. I've been writing about Lewis for some 15 years, and I was overjoyed to see such a complete and well written article about this amazing man. You really gave him his due. Congratulations.CoyoteMan31 (talk) 22:52, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neutra House new listing, sandbox
Hi Cbl -- Today's new weekly NRHP "featured listing" is the Neutra Research House in Los Angeles. This is the "Van der Leeuw House (VDL Research House), 1932" that is listed in the Richard Neutra article, and it seems there's no article for it yet.
I'm starting an article for it at User:doncram/Richard Neutra House sandbox, which will link to the NRHP application document for it (hmm, an 81 page document, with house plans, a sketch, and 20 photos). It's located at 2300 Silver Lake Boulevard, and apparently fronts on Edgewater Terrace too. I should be able to get pics of it and perhaps there are historic ones available too. Possibly could request release of copyright for one or two of the included ones, there is contact name included for seeking permissions. I'd be very happy if you'd like to co-develop the article to put it up for DYK when ready. Could discuss development at corresponding talk page, User talk:doncram/Richard Neutra House sandbox. doncram (talk) 21:04, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for all of your contributions to Wikipedia.
Forward Pass
I edited Forward pass to reflect what primary references (numerous 1906 newspaper articles) show to be true, that SLU used the forward pass all that season. I cited one primary, contemporary reference for the SLU/KU game that was played three weeks before Yale/Harvard. With the contestants being St. Louis and Kansas, the setting Sportsman's Park and the crowd at 7,000, it would seem to meet any fair definition of "major."
The East-centric nature of most reporting of early football history is understandable and inescapable. It is informative to report what was going on in the East. But, Ms. Jenkins' research was demonstrably inadequate as any number of references reveal. Her opinion, therefore, is not instructive.
Paul Veeder
I have corrected a minor typo on Paul Veeder and leave to you the modifications that you deem appropriate based on the info available on SLU/KU.
Thanks for your reply. Frankly, the "first" status of St. Louis, while interesting in a Columbian sort of way, is relatively unimportant. If SLU happened to have the earliest opportunity to throw a pass by an accident of scheduling, who cares, really, who was first? I certainly did not mean to minimize the publications by calling them Eastern. I meant to identify them. They are, in fact, Eastern. I doubt if they had or have many readers in... or reporters assigned to... St. Louis. The opinions you cite that Harvard/Yale was the first "major" use of the pass must either 1)reflect an Eastern bias up to the time of the articles 2) or cede to the writers the right to define "major" to mean the games of the teams that interest them... or games with more than 12,000 attendees (SLU's top home attendance in 1906). So "major" really means the "major" population density in the vicinity of home fields. By that criterion, toss the Tampa Bay Rays from the "major" leagues. What is annoying is the implication that the invention of the pass wasn't really important until it was used in the East. The importance was, in fact, the invention itself. It was not formulated in some isolated gridiron lab... but envisioned, designed and refined... and the information disseminated across the country... by Cochems. Considering the contemporary, national understanding of what Cochems was doing at St. Louis, defining him down to sub-major does history a disservice. The importance of SLU's story to me is the degree to which the modern passing game was first envisioned and ultimately founded upon the collaborative creation of Eddie Cochems and Bradbury Robinson. This is the fascinating story and one that really had not been told until the source materials were brought together on Wikipedia. The contemporaneous documents are there... inportantly the account of Hackett (see Eddie Cochems) in 1906.... as well newspaper articles from the period and Ed Wray's columns from the 30s and 40s recounting the 1906 season... as well as the work of later historians. Ms. Jenkins' statement "one of the few significant forward passes" is simply incorrect, unless one cedes to her the right to define "significant" as the others have claimed the right to define "major". Cochems and SLU spent the whole season throwing significant passes... scores of them. But Ms. Jenskins has decided (de facto) that all but (at most) a handful of those were insignificant. This while Cochems was writing the book on the new passing game. Walter Camp recognized that... and published ten pages of "Cochems on passing" in his 1907 annual. More recently, Nelson and Watterson have come to profoundly different conclusions than Ms. Jenkins... and theirs have the benefit of being based upon more complete research. The Villanova reference added today proves the point... basketball passes in the East are the first "real" use... not the modern spiral throws to receivers in stride in St. Louis. Ruedetocqueville (talk) 16:31, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for a very interesting read about a fringe-figure in contemporary culture-- exactly the kind of subject that Wikipedia does well, yet exactly the kind of subject that is a constant target for deletion here... Keep up the good work! Dekkappai (talk) 06:42, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I received a phone call at the Wikimedia office from this fellow's daughter letting us know his name wasn't "John", it was "Jack". Not sure if you have sources for the name, "John", but those sources may also be wrong.
I offered my sympathy; with her because my grandfather was given the name "Jack" at birth and people were always trying to make him "John" in articles and things (my grandfather held a world record once.) I'm letting you know, because while she won't be contributing (she's 80 and doesn't have internet), her cousin who sent her the article in the mail might be changing it or contacting us to figure out how to do it; but if you wanted to fix it yourself, you should feel free (especially if you have a source with the correct name!). Cary Bass. Bastiquedemandez17:51, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the note on Jack Blott. If the lady you corresponded with or her cousin want to contact me on my talk page, I'd be glad to discuss. I would not have listed him as "John Leonard 'Jack' Blott" unless one of the sources identified him that way. I would not have simply inferred that someone named Jack was really a John. When I have a bit of free time, I'll see if I can go back to my sources on this. Cbl62 (talk) 18:52, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am sorry if it seemed I was suggesting you put the name in that way. I absolutely meant to imply it was the source that got it wrong! I'm not sure if her cousin will know enough to put something on your talk page to discuss it. Just to be on the lookout for it. Hopefully he/she will decide to email info@wikimedia. Bastiquedemandez18:57, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Film articles
Hi there! It's nice to see that someone is interested in working on silent films, but if you're going to continue creating these articles could you please format them correctly? They should be in the following order: (1) Lead (2) Plot (the plot is not referenced and it can't be copied verbatim from other sources) (3) Production (4) Cast (not listed in a table) (5) Critical reception. Also, if you're writing an article about an American, dates of birth and death should use the American format of dating. (September 28, 1896 - March 3, 1955) and not (28 September 1896 - 3 March 1955). And filmographies shouldn't be numbered like you did in C. Gardner Sullivan. I hope you don't mind these helpful hints and I hope that your enthusiasm lasts! LargoLarry (talk) 17:04, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, this is the correct infobox template to use in film articles. You seem to be using an old one because you keep including links to imdb and amg and it was decided to remove these from infoboxes a long time ago. LargoLarry (talk) 17:08, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. I came across a few articles you've written recently while I was working on the list of WP:ACTOR articles that need assessment and all I can say is... Wow. You're very busy and doing what looks like some very good work. Bravo. I thought I'd let you know that so you wouldn't wonder why I've popped in on a few articles you've created and wonder why. I just wanted to note a couple small style things that you might need to know. One is that we have fairly much deprecated using the subtitle "Biography" at the beginning of the article, since the entire article is a biography. The other is that for the references section, it's recommended to use two columns when the number of citations exceeds 12. Great work and thanks for all your effort. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:44, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Films of C. Gardner Sullivan. Good luck with your project! When you complete an article, be sure to go to the discussion plate and add the film project template. Also, keep the plot section limited to plot only. In The Yankee Clipper, the plot section begins, "The film stars William Boyd, who later went on to fame as Hopalong Cassidy," which isn't relevant to the film. And in the plot synopsis, always refer to the characters by their names, not the actors playing them. Have fun! LargoLarry (talk) 13:29, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Italian (1915 film)
I see you recently shifted your attention to old films. Being a film buff myself, I appreciate your work - even though I haven't seen any of the silent films you are writing about. :-) --BorgQueen (talk) 19:53, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ernie Lopez
Mmmm, pugilism.. Cheers for the Ernie Lopez article. What an intriguing story! Thanks for your work on it. Have a donut. Scartol • Tok19:42, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Off-topic, but your photos of LA churches and temples were brought to my notice and I wanted to (1) compliment you on them and (2) ask whether you would object to a few being used to illustrate entries on an on-line Directory of Eastern & Oriental Catholic Churches [1] of which I'm the webmaster. There are 5 that I'd like to use - St Anne Melkite, St Mary Byzantine Cathedral, St Mary Coptic, St Gregory Armenian, and St Paul Assyrian-Chaldean. All are either ones for which I either have no photo at present or for which yours are significantly better than any available to me. Each would be attributed to you in the respective entry notes. (I realize that you've already released them under 2 licenses but I'd like to have an outright ok from you to use them.)
I added one - St Mary's Coptic [2], so that you could view it in context. If you're not ok with the use, I will of course remove it. Thanks for your consideration of the request. Irish Melkite (talk) 09:48, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cbl62 - Thanks very much for the ok to use the photos. I don't know the LA area well enough to suggest other Eastern & Oriental Catholic churches that may be particularly photogenic. However, the Directory's host, ByzCath, also has a forum in which a fair number of regular posters are from that area. I'll pose the question to them and get back to you with whatever sites they suggest. Should you need to get in touch with me, you can do so via my talk page or e-mail me at ec_parish_webmaster@yahoo.com . Irish Melkite (talk) 05:23, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Michigan Wolverines football seasons
We've now got at least a stub for every one of Michigan football's 131 seasons since its inception in 1879. Michigan is the first college football team to have its full complement of season articles created. Thanks for all your great work on these and related articles and also for chiming in on the discussion today about season pages at the CFB project talk page. All the best! Jweiss11 (talk) 04:35, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Donald Goerke
Kudos on the Donald Goerke article. It's interesting, succinct, and well-cited. Articles about Pakistan and Brittany Spears will always be fucked up and subject to edit wars between morons. More esoteric articles like this often stay in good shape over long periods of time and are, IMO, the brightest stars in the Wikipedia constellation. --208.59.93.238 (talk) 08:55, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Louis A. Merrilat
This was a wonderful article. You deserve lots of kudos. Merrilat was an incredibly fascinating individual of another era--thanks for sharing his story with the world. Thanks for all your hard increasing the world's knowledge via WP.--Dpr (talk) 20:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Prep1 will run around 6am in Ireland - why bother with strong Irish lead there? With all do respect, Ireland is a small part of the world; having a promo/POV lead bother me much more and I would appreciate your comments on that part. Materialscientist (talk) 03:26, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fine. BTW, thanks for help - I was overstretching myself these days with the preps. Why careful with the images - two Commons images, which looked as PD-art to me, were pulled out of a good DYK lead article a few days ago, right at the main page, not because they were proven to be non-PD, but because they were not proven otherwise. Materialscientist (talk) 03:50, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Irving Kane Pond is a wonderful story. I do backflip myself, but that photo, at the age 80 is something - so pity we can't put that on the main page. Actually, your whole recent sport series was rather good; and I'm sorry that for various reasons they didn't get to the leads. Materialscientist (talk) 04:00, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I will take GA pass/fail for the article tomorrow at this time as the hold period ends tomorrow. Please fixed the remaining issues by then. --RedtigerxyzTalk16:22, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any chance that you might consider reverting back to the format of clarifying important players. As I look around at most University football templates, other list are not as extensive as ours and most are restricted to truly important players. We have a lot more Tyler Eckers and Ernest Shazors on our important figures list than is really desirable, IMO. I preferred the the old format and would encourage important active alumni being limited to players appearing on an NFL roster in the current or previous season with those not appearing on a current season roster being removed by January or February.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:38, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I have followed your extensive additions and edits. I appreciate your additional research. It would be better for me to jump in again after you have finished your round of work. Exchanges of competing edits may be confusing to the process and counterproductive. Ruedetocqueville (talk) 11:21, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I continue to follow your progress. Again, I think it's better for me to remain an observer until you want to take a pause. As I watch your edits, you are polishing some of the same things I would have addressed, so I feel comfortable just watching for now. Ruedetocqueville (talk) 02:37, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Provenance: Robinson’s late daughter gave me the scrapbook in about 1980. I was a journalist at the time. She wanted me to preserve it and try to disseminate the info it contained. Because Robinson died suddenly and unexpectedly, the scrapbook (which was an ongoing project) was not “finished”. Most of the material was loose, much of it undated and unidentified as to specific publisher. I have dated the material where indicated in the book and have done some detective work to get dates on others. As more info becomes available on the Internet, we will be able to find electronic copies of the same pieces and get more info. The book contains his memoirs, letters among Robinson, Cochems and others in the 30s and 40s, photos, etc. Many of the key personalities were communicating with Wray, who served as something of an arbiter as the "official" history was laid out in a years-long series of articles in the pages of the Post Dispatch. Remember, Wray was a young journalist in STL in 1904-1906 and he covered these people and events. Wray interviewed Referee Hackett in what is (to me) the most important contemporaneous opinion available – that’s why I copied it and put it in the wiki article. Hackett is the best available authority in trying to decide who was doing what in 1906. Hackett’s opinion (with no axe to grind) is that nobody in the East or in Chicago (i.e., Stagg, whose game Hackett had just officiated the week before the SLU-Iowa game) was doing anything like SLU. I will take Hackett’s unbiased opinion one week after officiating Stagg’s game with Nebraska over Stagg trying to take credit (based on his own unsubstantiated recollections) some 40 years later. Stagg’s inescapably self-serving, unsupported claim cannot be given equal weight to Hackett’s unbiased, ultimately (if not uniquely, as an eyewitness in the East and Midwest) expert, contemporary observations. Giving Stagg and Hackett equal standing serves not to educate, in my opinion, but is more likely to confuse the reader. The same with Harold Claassen, who makes the demonstrably FALSE statement about the first spiral being thrown years after we have pictures and accounts of Robinson throwing spirals. Claassen’s opinion, in this case, is in no way enlightening, except to demonstrate the inadequacy of later reporting on these events and, possibly, the bias for the Eastern powers. Claassen is unequivocally WRONG. I give much more weight to David Nelson’s opinions over all other non-eyewitnesses. He was the unquestioned authority on college football history of his era. Just read his Wiki article. Again, a writer/reporter, as we are trying to be, needs to make judgments and weigh reported facts and opinions. To treat all opinions equally is not appropriate. Nelson had no axe to grind. He spent decades researching the history of college football. No other author can approach even a small percentage of the research and recognized expertise brought to the table by Coach Nelson. I understand your confusion as to Robinson’s apparent contradictory points of view. In reading the materials, Robinson clearly gives Cochems the credit for developing the offensive schemes, once Cochems was given the basic idea by Robinson and his former teammates at Wisconsin. What irritated Robinson was Cochems’ version of the story in which Cochems thought up everything to do with the pass. Cochems’ anecdote that Robinson told him at Lake Beulah with great surprise that “I can throw the dang thing 40 yards” really annoyed Robinson, according to his daughter. Remember, Robinson never took credit for thinking up the pass. Savage introduced him to the pass at Wisconsin in 1904. Once he saw how Savage threw the ball, Robinson says didn’t need any more convincing. Robinson knew that throwing the ball like a baseball could fundamentally change things. Plus, importantly, Robinson knew he could really throw a pass. Robinson contends that he gave the idea to Cochems at Wisconsin in 1904-05 (remember, Robinson continued to work out with the Badgers even after transferring to SLU). Robinson freely admits, Cochems began working on schemes in the 1906 preseason, after Robinson had gotten Cochems the job at SLU, specifically to work on developing the pass. A contemporary article confirms that Robinson was principally responsible for Cochems getting the SLU job. So: Robinson felt he took the idea of the pass to Cochems… and with some pushing from his SLU players (according to the SLU forward pass centennial piece)… Cochems used it at Carroll and it was Cochems who developed the inspired offensive scheme. My reading of the situation is that it was the Cochems/Robinson pair that led to the development of the first modern passing offense. Robinson had the vision, the drive and the pull at SLU to actually get a coach hired there who could run with the concept. On the On-Side kick, I have the 1907 Spalding book that has Cochems’ article on the Pass and On –Side Kick and, in that piece, he is an advocate of both plays. Ruedetocqueville (talk) 15:38, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your additional thoughtful and generous comments. Gregorian and the SID office at SLU have talked to me about doing such a book -- Gregorian wanted to co-author -- but so far, it's been just talk. It is a fascinating story... how the whole thing evolved at Wisconsin and SLU. The personalities are also interesting... not only Cochems and Robinson but several of the others. I put all that stuff in there (footnotes) about Acker and other teammates just because they provided info on more strange circumstances and interesting tidbits. I would love to know more about Schneider. He came to SLU with Cochems from Wisconsin. From reading the scrapbook, Schneider and Robinson were always working out together... with what were probably the first-ever modern passing drills... described, again, by more than one contemporary observer. Cochems comes off as a somewhat mysterious and maybe even a tragic figure in later life. Gregorian and I discussed this after we each finished our own research in 2006. Thanks to the Internet, we have found out a lot more since then, but in Robinson's correspondence, you get the impression that Cochems' former players regarded him as something of a failure later in life. I have not gone there with my reporting -- frankly, I haven't had the heart and it didn't relate to what he did accomplish at SLU. You should not interpret my comments about Stagg v Hackett as suggesting that Stagg be removed from the article. But, I think it is entirely appropriate to point out in the section quoting Stagg that Hackett had refereed his game a week before being quoted by Wray and Hackett failed to mention that Stagg was doing the same thing as SLU... in fact Hackett explicitly stated that SLU gave "the most perfect exhibition... of the new rules ... that I have seen all season." Hackett's statements, again, are from a leading authority of the period -- he was on the Rules Committee shortly thereafter. He may have been the only expert -- period -- to have personally seen the teams and the coaches who would later contend for the recognition as the earliest developer of the forward pass. His quote certainly should be attached to Stagg's argument, which it somewhat deflates. Wray would write about that interview even decades later, but I was thrilled to find the original sidebar and I resolved to get that on the Wiki site so that everyone could read the original language. Having a news background from the 70s/80s, I am fact-sensitive and balance-sensitive (that dates me!). So, I would never want to come down on any side except that of the truth. Claassen's statement can't be true, unless one concedes that St. Louis's repeated, spectacular use of the pass didn't constitute a "major weapon". How could it have been anything else? What is clear from my reading over the years is that this period was rife with overblown personalities, in many aspects of life, not just sports. Few seemed shy about blowing their own horn. That's why the scrapbook is so valuable, because it has observations by not just one or two... but many contemporary journalists. And, in response to your question, some of them came from outside StL, writers for the opposing teams, so they couldn't be suspected as "homers". I just wish Robinson had been better about noting exact dates and newspapers. As you know, the writers of that era got tons of space... many inches with tiny font. So, there is a lot of great stuff there. Again, with the Internet, these articles will become accessible sooner or later. I have searched and have found none of those for which I have clippings. I am excited each time I (or you) find something from the online archives. New stuff is being added all the time. When I found the story a few months ago giving a detailed account of Robinson's alleged 87-yard pass... from a nationally syndicated and highly regarded journalist/cartoonist (Robert W. Edgren)… it was quite a thrill. I had never heard of Edgren. I started to research him and created a Wiki article on him. He is another interesting character. I don't live in StL but my wife is going out of town to see family for several weeks late this summer and I thought about visiting friends in StL at that time to go through the archives of the old newspapers. I wish Wikipedia had a means for people to scan and post materials such as the scrapbook, so everyone would have access to the original materials. Although I have been out of the business for years, I have a few aged friends who still write for newspapers and journals. I discussed Robinson with a local sports columnist in the spring and he was interested, just because we were colleagues for many years. I still write occasional opinion pieces that get published regionally. Maybe a detailed enough piece can be written to get some of this info on the record and accessible. In the case of Robinson, the entire Wikipedia article (as it existed in mid-2009) was serialized and reprinted, essentially word for word, in the little paper in Bellevue, OH, where he was born. In seeing your edits, I admit that I have been trained as a storyteller rather than an encylopediaist. It is not natural for me to write chronologically but rather to try to tell a story with the goal being that, if the reader runs out of time or the editor runs out of space, when the end of the piece is not read or the end is cut off, what is read and what is published contains the most important information. Telling a story also leads me away from throwing in comments such as Claassen’s, which detract from the reader’s understanding of the fundamental things I want him to remember. This is less a defense as it is an explanation of my writing style. I actually wanted Claassen in the piece to demonstrate how the deck was increasingly stacked against Cochems in the years following his death. Another thing that struck me: I have the ballot from when Robinson was nominated for the NFF hall of fame in the 1960s. I got it from the NFF. It says something like, Bradbury Robinson, end, 1904-07, St. Louis. Nothing about the pass at all. How could anyone have been expected to vote for him for the HOF when, by that time, the story of Cochems and Robinson and the Pass was almost totally unknown? Ruedetocqueville (talk) 01:11, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed the offending sections, since references cannot be given. (I also removed Claassen, as we discussed in the summer.) I must admit that I am not cut out for this medium. It is too difficult to be reading original copies of the correspondence among Robinson, Wray and Cochems from Robinson's scrapbook... and Robinson's thoughts in his own hand... but having to yield to interpretations of what they were all thinking based on selected Wray articles. But, that is the situation. You have made significant contributions to this article, for which I thank you. You're doing a better job based on publicly available sources. I will check in from time to time to follow your progress. Ruedetocqueville (talk) 18:31, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Stan Noskin
Cbl62, nice work on Stan Noskin. The father of one my good friends from high school graduated from Michigan with the class of 1959 and was Noskin's fraternity "big brother". I emailed him the article a few days ago and he passed it along to Noskin and all of their old fraternity brothers. They all got a kick of out it. Noskin wanted to let it be known that he's not that old though. He was born in 1938 (June, my friend's father thinks), not 1937. ;) As my friend's father regales, in the fall of '58 the underclassmen in their fraternity challenged the upperclassmen to a game of touch football. My friend's father pushed the game off until after the Ohio State game so that Noskin could play. The upperclassmen went up 36 to 0 (six TDs, no conversions in the game), before the underclassmen conceded. Good stuff. I told my friend's father he should write that up and submit it to the Michigan alumni mag so it can be published and then you can source it for the Wikipedia article. ;) Jweiss11 (talk) 04:29, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cbl62, I've been building out List of college football coaches with a .750 winning percentage, paralleling a lot of what you did at List of college football coaches with 200 career wins. I'd like to bring the formatting for these two in line with one another. I added a few additional columns on the win pct list, notably columns for First Year and Last Year. I think those are pretty handy because they allow you to sort the list by era and isolate the active coaches. In addition, instead of noting active coaches with an asterisk as you did, I went with bold type, which I think stands out more and is in keeping with what sites like Baseball Reference do, e.g. [3]. What do think? I didn't add a rank column to the win pct field yet for two reasons. 1) Win pct is so volatile, it really begs for a way to dynamically rank. 2) I'm not convinced this list is complete. I think I have all the NCAA guys, but I know there are at least a few NAIA guys still missing.
Also, I see you added Spurrier to the list of coaches nearing 200 wins. He's at 181 right now. I think we ought to add a cutoff in the notation above the table, e.g. Active coaches with at least X wins are included to standardize it. Shall we make the cutoff 180? That will catch anyone who is within a season of the 200 milestone as 15 wins is about the most you can get in one season. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:36, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad to see that you took on the challenge of expanding Amos Alonzo Stagg, Jr.. It was clear to me that there was a lot that could be added there, but you found more material than I was aware of. Good job! --Orlady (talk) 03:31, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cbl62, a question has come up at the featured list review for this article about why Michigan had no coaches until 1891. I tried to give an explanation, but I thought you might have something better. If you get a chance, please chime in. Thanks. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:26, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can you direct me to your source for Tom Davies's middle initial J? Looks like you did the expansion on that one wherein the middle initial was added. The College Football Data Warehouse and the Allegheny football media guide (probably the source for CFDW) have his middle initial as V; see [4]. Thanks. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:18, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
William Wilson Talcott / List of Michigan Wolverines head football coaches
I just read your new article on William Wilson Talcott. Quite a story. Almost sounds like a side story out of Erik Larson's The Devil in the White City. I just made a few minor edits (endashes and some wikilinks) and added some categories. Nice job on that one.
On another note, I've expanded the lead for List of Michigan Wolverines head football coaches. I'm working on getting that one promoted to Featured List and the short lead was a major criticism. Nothing too fancy there as I modeled it off of the lead for the analogous Oklahoma Sooners list, but if you get a chance, take a quick look. You should be happy with how I placed Rodriguez in historical context. I know what a big fan of his you are. ;) Jweiss11 (talk) 22:59, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
John Maulbetsch
I've been doing some cleanup and formatting on John Maulbetsch. I can't seem to find his coaching record at Phillips for 1917 and 1918. Most of your sources for this article seem to be offline. If you get a chance to go back to those sources, or if you come across those records in your ongoing research, it would be great to add them and complete Maulbetsch's record table. Thanks. Jweiss11 (talk) 23:39, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cbl62, I'm still working on the Featured List nomination for List of Michigan Wolverines head football coaches. The review has drawn attention to an uncited passage in the section about William McCauley: "Undefeated against Western opponents, the 1895 Wolverines laid claim to Michigan's first Western football championship". This is mentioned in the lead of 1895 Michigan Wolverines football team, but no citation was ever made in that article for it. Do you have a source for this?
Also, I saw your expansion on Ace Gutowsky with mention of Pappy Waldorf recruiting him to play at Oklahoma City University. Did you happen to come across Waldorf's coaching records at Oklahoma City. Those are missing from the article about Waldorf and tough to find since the program is defunct.
Thanks for chipping in here. I looked Warren up in the 1898 Michiganensian, thanks to your handy links from the Michigan football articles, and he is listed as "Class Athletic Manager". Jweiss11 (talk) 18:41, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Brady Hoke
Great job on the Hoke article. Quick, too! TheKuLeR 3:33, 12 January 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.41.91.17 (talk)
Cbl62, when you get a chance take a look at John W. Hollister. I just did some expansion on this one and wanted to get your input regarding his playing at Michigan and piecing together all the elements of his career. The Beloit/Morningside coach looks like the same guy who played on the 1893 Michigan Wolverines football team and 1895 Michigan Wolverines football team: same full name with a connection to Beloit, Wisconsin, although his age is a couple years off in the 1896 Palladium versus this source [5]. The Beloit Hall of Honor source corroborates his attendance at Michigan, but the chronology looks pretty messy. I'm also not sure about his coaching at Ole Miss in 1896.
Also see this pic of Hollister and his three brothers in 1913: [6]; there seems to be a good resemblance between John Hollister there and in the 1895 Michigan team photos, considering 18 years of aging. His older brother, Charles M. Hollister, coached Beloit and Northwestern. There's also an obit for John Hollister in the Chicago Tribune here [7], but I don't have access to read it. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:23, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cbl62...just wondering, do you have an Ancestry.com subscription? There's a WWI draft card for H. G. Hadden that most likely contains his DOB, but I can't access it - [8]. IF you do have a subscription, would you be so kind to get his DOB and add it to the article? Thanks. Connormah (talk) 18:35, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, any chance you can check out this member family tree what has William McCauley on it? [9] It says it has 1 attached record and 2 sources, and it looks to have a full DOB...I know it's just a member tree, but possibly the sources may be acceptable for some info, eg. DOB? Just curious...I should think about getting a subscription. Connormah (talk) 18:58, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting...yeah, it's a pretty common name - I contacted the Bentley Library again to see is they have any DOB info on him. Connormah (talk) 19:19, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Any chance you can also pull Ralph Warren (football)'s DOB out of [search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?gl=ROOT_CATEGORY&rank=1&new=1&MSAV=1&msT=1&qid=e5069e246e8344158904f55d85a6f602&gss=angs-c&gsfn=Ralph+Herbert&gsln=Warren&msbdy=1871&msddy=1928&cpxt=1&uidh=ah6&cp=0]? Thanks. Connormah (talk) 22:04, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
An article that you have been involved in editing, Bill Dague, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Paul McDonald (talk) 13:15, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Irving Kane Pond for things which need to be addressed. Redtigerxyz Talk 05:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
passed the GAN. –Grondemar 14:19, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Bill Dague, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Paul McDonald (talk) 13:15, 26 March 2011 (UTC)