Jump to content

Talk:Brooklyn Lions / Horsemen (1926)

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jstuck21677 (talk | contribs) at 20:24, 7 March 2014 (Transferred Talk from Horsemen page.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
WikiProject iconNational Football League Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject National Football League, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the NFL on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconNew York (state) Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Article merged: see old talk-page here


Merge proposal

Since the Brooklyn Horsemen and Brooklyn Lions both existed only for one year (and having merged as the Horsemen for the last three games of the 1926), I'd suggest merging the articles here. While the Lions played eight games before the merger and there were "only" seven Horsemen games (four in the AFL, three in the NFL), a few "more notable" Brooklyn players actually were Horsemen for the entire season, and the two teams' combined history should be treated in the merged article. B.Wind (talk) 06:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]