| Revision as of 19:07, 11 September 2021 editGiantSnowman (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators601,055 editsm backTag: Manual revert← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:48, 12 September 2021 edit undoGauchoDude (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers12,833 edits →"College soccer seasons do not merit separate articles": new sectionTag: RevertedNext edit → | ||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| {{User:GiantSnowman/Archive}} | {{User:GiantSnowman/Archive}} | ||
| {{TOCright}} | {{TOCright}} | ||
| == "College soccer seasons do not merit separate articles" == | |||
| Saw your note ]. I'd be interested in further elaboration. I tend to side with your viewpoint, however it appears that there are *many* collegiate soccer season articles that currently exist (I should know, I went through all the DI men's soccer ones just recently), and even more redirects which seem pointless. My loose interpretation of ] for bullet point 3 is that if a collegiate team is playing Division I soccer and makes the NCAA tournament, then it should qualify for an article as the guideline is currently written. As such, I've left those articles to exist out there. I'd be interested if you view it any differently or if I'm interpreting correctly. ] (]) 17:48, 12 September 2021 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:48, 12 September 2021
 Archives |
|
2006 • 2007 • 2008 • 2009 • 2010 • 2011 • 2012 • 2013 • 2014 • 2015 • 2016 • 2017 • 2018 • 2019 • 2020 • 2021 • 2022 • 2023 • 2024 • 2025 • |
"College soccer seasons do not merit separate articles"
Saw your note here. I'd be interested in further elaboration. I tend to side with your viewpoint, however it appears that there are *many* collegiate soccer season articles that currently exist (I should know, I went through all the DI men's soccer ones just recently), and even more redirects which seem pointless. My loose interpretation of WP:NSEASONS for bullet point 3 is that if a collegiate team is playing Division I soccer and makes the NCAA tournament, then it should qualify for an article as the guideline is currently written. As such, I've left those articles to exist out there. I'd be interested if you view it any differently or if I'm interpreting correctly. GauchoDude (talk) 17:48, 12 September 2021 (UTC)