This 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.National Football LeagueWikipedia:WikiProject National Football LeagueTemplate:WikiProject National Football LeagueNational Football League articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject American football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of American football 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.American footballWikipedia:WikiProject American footballTemplate:WikiProject American footballAmerican football articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
You seem to be the only one contesting the footnote, and you did little in your edit summaries to raise valid objections to its inclusion. WP:UNNECESSARY is not a sufficient rationale for reversion. schetm (talk) 19:02, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
User:Hey man im josh has reverted a footnote I've added to the position line within the key box. The footnote reads The designated position as listed at Pro-Football-Reference.com for that player that year. The player may have scored points playing other positions.
This footnote is necessary because several of the players played primarily at other positions in that season, and historic accounts (newspapers, etc) sometimes name the players, within their respective seasons as scoring leaders, as playing other positions than are given in the PFR source.
The problem with relying largely upon a single source, in this case Pro-Football-Reference.com, is that "without additional citations providing access to further information about the single source's contents, it is possible for inaccurate or outdated material to persist." (see WP:ONESOURCE)
I don't see anything at WP:NFL or that PFR is to be preferred over other sources. I've got offline sources ready to add to each line that I added a different position to earlier today that will WP:VERIFY my edits - I won't do it until there's more feedback here. Or, we could let my proposed footnote stand. schetm (talk) 19:02, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Schetm: It doesn't matter whether it's one person or multiple contesting the changes, it should be discussed if the changes are contested.
Based on some of your changes, I'm concerned you're looking to reflect the player's positions throughout their entire career instead of the position listed for the specific year. Some players are officially listed as another position while others are not. George Blanda for example was never officially listed as a kicker, despite the last several years of his career being only kicking. Positions were simply not as well defined or cared about back then.
Yes, I have offline sources (mid 20th Century newspapers) that can be added. The problem with solely relying on PFR is that it sometimes retrospectively places a modern notion of positions on historic players, and allows for only one position. It doesn't cite anything itself, which makes it a problematic source in and of itself. That's why my proposed footnote in the key box is an ideal solution. It keeps the citations clean while making clear how the position for a given season is assigned to a particular player. schetm (talk) 19:13, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Could you be more specific about which player(s) those offline source apply to?
I'd argue that by adding the position of "kicker" for these players that you're actually the one retrospectively applying a modern notion of positions to players. Many players kicked without such a designation. What would we do for Don Hutson? He was a two-way player who has scored via rushing, receiving, a safety, by returning blocked kicks / field goals, and by kicking. For reasons such as these, where player's positions were not defined in the modern sense, I've gone based off their positional listing for the season. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:23, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"you're actually the one retrospectively applying a modern notion of positions to players" - not if the sources I'm using are from the time period in question, i.e. early 1960s. schetm (talk) 19:26, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds like the WP:BURDEN is on you then to prove that sources exist and that it's more appropriate to list players at the alternate positions. As mentioned, NFL positions were ill-defined back in the day, and while players may have kicked, they may not have been considered "placekickers". I think you'd find a very large portion of this list actually did kick field goals in addition to their primary position. Another example of this is Dutch Clark, who did so some of the time but not all of the time. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:38, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's appropriate to list players at multiple positions, if they're found in reliable sources at those multiple positions. However, the better solution is to include the footnote that I mentioned above which, for the record, was the main issue I raised here at talk. What is your policy-based objection to that footnote? schetm (talk) 19:42, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. The methods of scoring are outlined in the lead and further clarifications are unnecessary. Especially given that you're applying modern views of positions to past players. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:34, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
