Knowledge talk:Notability (sports)/Archive 17

2157:

the fact that notability is defined on Knowledge by the quality and abundance of sources on the subject. Yes, I realize you're pissed because you can't just go down a list of players who managed to appear in 100 games in random low-level leagues anymore. But now, as always, you are free to create articles where you can show the existence of multiple, reliable sources that are independent of the subject and cover them in non-trivial fashion. Just like how the notability of every other article on Knowledge is defined. You're not being "censored". You're being told to stop wasting everyone's time. Having to deal with the multitude of crap pages on non-notable subjects you create via AfD and the like only takes quality editing time away from those of us who care about crafting articles of merit for our readers rather than just wanting the ego hit of being the creator of a page.

3842:"One-size-fits-all is not what WP:NSPORTS wants to be, and is not what I suggested. Every sport can have their own standards, but they should be decided (or at least confirmed) in a central place, not only at and by the project members. For most sports, this doesn't seem to be a problem, the project can easily come here, point to their discussion, present evidence that people who meet rule X are indeed generally notable, and their suggestion gets adopted here. But shortcutting this process seems to me a very bad idea: if you have, like in this situation, someone who inserts a local consensus in this more global guideline, and someone disagrees, then the place to discuss the change is 2436:, I am fully aware of its size and significance. That said, it still is a rodeo that most anyone can enter, so the mere fact of showing up does not create a presumption of notability, though certainly being named a champion there is. In contrast, the US and Canadian finals are only open to people who qualify based on a stringent and competitive set of criteria, so merely being allowed to compete in those venues implies a clearer presumption of notability. It is POV to include just one big rodeo when there are at least five or six others that are of similar stature in the rodeo world. So that was why I changed the section; we really don't need the entire 4437:, months before the edit, was at best inconclusive. It really had not been discussed much at all. MATTs proposal was for multiple but nobody else reacted. We had not concluded how much of a showing at the meet constituted notability, but NOWHERE in the discussion was there a suggestion for removal. Even though I do watch the progress of this policy, the burst of edits effectively hid the edit from my attention at the time. Now, years later, I have to track this down as its absence becomes an issue. I'm going to replace the original language before the edit. We know MATT's opposing opinion. Do any other voices have an opinion here? 2229:

played a single game in that league. Whether you do it on purpose or out of incompetence I don't know. But you do do it. Then there are the hundreds of incorrect links you make where you create pages and put a "reference" on the page that is a completely different player. At best you are an extremely sloppy editor, at worst you are likely a vandal/troll that thrives on making a mess here. Your last sentence is ironic, because that is exactly what you are doing. Because you can't debate the issue at hand you are attacking the people. You have no argument against the change, nor anything to back up your position. -

2407:

higher number of leagues that would get people pages. So many so that listing them all on this page would get cumbersome. We used to get around it by saying "other such leagues". That stopped working when some editors started using that phrase as an excuse to include just about any league that paid players. So it was decided that we should take the soccer approach and model ours after theirs (I believe the first draft was literally copied from theirs). Being as how their list has been in NSPORTS since the very beginning I would say there is ample consensus that we handle it like that. -

1669:"is there any condition in equestrian sports that may happen to a rider or the horse that will assure that coverage of that rider or horse will come about? " --Well YES, didn't I just provide a significant number of examples? We already have HUNDREDS of horse and rider articles already in WP. Pitke just seems to be asking that we list the basic outline HERE as well as GNG - one reason is because (from my view) we've had trouble with folks getting all butt-hurt when we prod tag their non-notable articles about various riders, horses and farms; it's helpful to have this to point to. 1943:

list of leagues (however much vetted by the editors at the time) is mine. I suspect that Dolovis' intransigence stems not so much from his belief that we've suddenly become incapable of gauging leagues, but from a string of AfDs I've recently filed on fringe player articles he's created, gaming the system (and, in some cases, making outright bad faith characterizations of the NHOCKEY criteria) to exploit leagues not heretofore listed. We wouldn't need to come up with a more comprehensive and thorough list without such actions.

2734:

let's just add Badminton, Australian Rules Football and even the Gaelic Games to the list of sports that rodeo can probably top in terms of fans, prize money, and economic impact. I do not support deleting any of these, but I'd like to know what is considered in marking something as "notable"? TV coverage? Prize money awarded to top competitors? I suspect rodeo will easily compete, even with Curling... My point is many things are here that rodeo can match by the statistics used to justify them.

2978:

even counter-productive as you have pointed out) to list NCOLLATH as a criteria. I would prefer if we leave NRODEO with Criteria #1 and #2 (with the addition of the Cowgirl Hall of Fame) to put this issue to bed for now, and post the changes to NSPORTS. Nothing is written in stone, and this issue can be revisited at a later date if the need arrives. You might also want to think about a proposal to change NCOLLATH if you think that the wording there does not suit the Knowledge's needs.

3338:. 200 games is an arbitrary number... why are minor leaguers or second tier national leagues even included in the guideline? The hockey project has an inflated view of their sport. You should just go with the preminent honors thing and not create some arbitrary number of games limit for minor leaguers. D League Basketball players and minor league baseball players don't get admitted based on some game limit, and they get as much, if not more, coverage as minor league hockey players. 4684:

dozens and dozens of one-line articles about male rugby players (many of whom get little press) and which are poorly referenced, with the only reason for their being in Knowledge is that they happened to participate in the right tournament, from the right country, for the right years. So while it is easy for a male rugby player to qualify for a Knowledge article, it is extremely difficult for a female rugby player to do so. I advocate a rethinking of the point 1 to point 4 rules.--

4308:

raise GNG issues about horses having "biographies" and sometimes question whether people who work with horses quality as athletes/coaches - jockeys, trainers/conditioners - or are significant as owners. I was taking the lead on developing guidelines over in a sandbox at wikiproject horse racimg, and other than wanting to be sure that we have a proper international focus, there seems little objection to the concept; WP Horse racing has informally had guidelines on this for years.

400:

States) or whose top players end up playing in the major leagues (Dominican Republic, Venezuela, Puerto Rico). The only nation that dominates international baseball competitions whose "top-level" league is not specifically mentioned in the rule is Cuba, which is why I think it's league should be specifically mentioned as well. Looking further at the international performance of certain nations, I think the CPBL should be dropped from the list of assumed top-level leagues.

3477:. I agree with Spanneraol and would prefer to drop the arbitrary games number altogether, but any movement to raise the bar is good. That said, I think we are also seeing a move (at least within most hockey editors) where passing an SNG =/= guaranteed notability pass. Even with an arbitrary number, NHOCKEY only provides for presumptive notability. That presumption still must be justified when challenged by producing sources that allow for GNG, V, et al to be met. 3731:. If they come up with a consensus they should be able to implement it and only if people actually disagree should it be reverted, if you are reverting just to force a discussion (and don't actually disagree with the change) then that is sort of against the whole point of be bold. I would note that your comment about all sports being the same/consistent is the reason this page was created, it was found one shoe does not fit all sports. Thus the old 31: 119:

really are no other "top-level leagues" in the world today (save for one, more on that momentarily). If it is the latter, then it elevates all players in top national leagues to equal or near-equal significance and article-worthiness. This leads to a jumbled can of worms, which causes raging debates. The winter leagues in Venezuela and the Dominican Republic are technically the top-level leagues in those nations. Yet, they're still just

115:'s second point reads as follows: " appeared in at least one game in any one of the following active major leagues: Major League Baseball, Nippon Professional Baseball, Korea Baseball Organization, Chinese Professional Baseball League or any other top-level national league (active or defunct)." The most controversial part of that point appears at the very end: "...or any other top-level national league (active or defunct)." 4930:

again, the criteria requires competing for a national team at the top level of competition, such as the Olympic Games or at top-rung World Championships. If, in this particular instance, you can demonstrate that the typical competitor in this Women's Sevens World Series meets the GNG, that would be a good reason to amend the SNG. I recommend the FAQ link that isaacl posted uptopic for more clarification.

156:. To ensure that players from the predecessors of the top leagues mentioned in the rule are also covered, I would add something so the rule would look like this: " appeared in at least one game in any one of the following active major leagues: Major League Baseball, Nippon Professional Baseball, Korea Baseball Organization, Chinese Professional Baseball League or their predecessors." 1167:. (Pitke, may want to ping those folks too?) Horse racing, in particular, has huge viewership and interest (see above), as do the Olympics. I can say with some certainty that in the Olympic sports, anyone who has competed in an Olympic games should be presumed notable, (most already have articles) as would anyone medaling in equestrian competition in the Pan American Games or the 4747:

are highly notable. There are others where they seldom are. There are certain sports where low-level minor leagues receive national press coverage. There are certain sports that get noticed by the public only for so long as their competitions are on the TV during broadcasts of the Olympics. This is why we don't consider "sports" a homogenous heap when it comes to SNGs.

1497: 1608:

also award national teams. These individual people often become "stars" in the equestrian world just like elite atheletes in skiiing, golfing, or what have you: They have stories written about them, they have product endorsement deals, and so on. Again using Dressage (probably the most obscure to non-horse people) I'll take Anky van Grunsven as an example:

1580:

event)? Olympic winners (and participants) nearly universally get this (moreso from their local countries), so that's a reasonable one, but how about for these other sports that do not have a significant interest at the worldwide level? That's what needs to be judged. Remember : the GNG always works if these criteria aren't otherwise added to the work. --

3055: 2878:

WP Horse racing, the overwhelming majority of them people biographies or horse "biographies;" they've had a clear but informal guideline there for a long time. Of the 3000+ articles tagged by WEPQ, maybe half are "biographies" of horses or people. But there, we also animals famous but not necessarily for athletic pursuits (for example, see

2214:. Contrary to your rant, any editor who reviews my edit history will find no edits that are not verifiable, and will find no edits which are not not made in good faith. The only reason you are trying to discredit me on this page is because you are unable to reasonably assault my argument that NHOCKEY is being changed without due process. 4729:

closely align Knowledge's notability guidelines to reflect the reality of notability, to suggest the same general standard of notability for all athletes. That is what I am asking: for people who know rugby, know the rules, to take a good hard look at the point 1 point 4 business, and come up with a workable guideline.--

3658:) about the expansion of one criterion for one sport, as discussed at the project talk page for that sport. We can have a separate section for the discussion of this specific inclusion, that's not my concern here; I would like a discussion though over who decides on what to include in the NSPORTS page and what not. 432:

end of the bench guys aren't. The way this is done is a precedent setter for other sports (and frankly basketball is more of a global game than baseball or American football). Seems like in footy you just have to have played one game in a "fully professional" league, but other sports have a tougher row to hoe.

4922:, which holds that "Information on Knowledge must be verifiable; if no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, then it should not have a separate article." Neither that definition nor the GNG makes any reference -- nor should they -- to the decisions of sports national sanctioning bodies. Since 335:

playrs, but that may also be affected by other things (like quality of life in Japan vs. the Dominican Republic, language, etc.). Something more "egalitarian" might be to consider whether someone has appeared on the team's national baseball team in the Olympics or the World Baseball Classic, for example.

4513:. That different sports have differing notability criteria is plain common sense; collegiate-level play is highly notable in some sports and not in others, minor league play is highly notable in some sports and not in others, and women's competition is highly notable in some sports and not in others. 4728:

should qualify a player for Knowledge notability. From my viewpoint, it looks suspect, however, when there are numerous one-line article with the only reference being a link to a site saying player X participated in such-and-such a playoff match. It would be much cleaner, simpler, and smarter to more

4683:

notable, that this notability is reflected by numerous sources in respected media, and that the current Knowledge rugby guidelines (ie point 1, point 4, etc) fail to reflect this reality. That is, the more specific rugby-related guidelines are geared towards men, not women; as a result, Knowledge has

4477:

for men and women rugby players? According to the current (May 23 2014) rules, female rugby players are notable only if they participated from specific countries during specific (World Cup) years. All years are notable years for male players from Tier 1 and 2 countries. Seems unfair and in comparison

3989:

Yeah I did it a few minutes ago because it sat for 7 days without objection. Which proved my point, if you don't actually object to the edit then don't revert it. There is a reason we say here to be bold. If someone objects then we can discuss it. But to be fair, in the future you should link to your

3890:

a sportsman who has played in a professional team is notable". Also, they would be notable if they met the GNG, which the professional players would still need to do. On-topic though, I think it's a bad idea for WikiProjects to decide what's notable without discussion here or the only people who will

3449:

I see what you are saying, but personally I think there is a problem in minor league baseball bios because even if players meet GNG most baseball editors push for delete (ie wrongfully deleted) because they don't meet NSPORTS or they put the players info on those god awful prospects pages instead of

3034:

We can put in 1, 2, and 3 as agreed, so go ahead and do that. I do not think, however, that #1 covers non-PRCA or PBR, as my view is that just showing up at a not-as-major national competition doesn't necessarily mean someone is notable; I'd like to note that WINNING is what makes them notable. But

2897:

Frankly, I support expansion of the guidelines a bit because I have had enough deletionist discussions over the years about assorted topics animal and agriculture, so it would be nice to have a guideline to point them to. I like this page, and I like the disclaimer that GNG can also be used, but it's

2877:

I think it best to keep equine athletes out of this discussion, at least until we discuss it at WPEQ and have a criteria to insert - and, note there is a draft notability guideline for horse racing animals and people going over at WP Horse racing right now. There are about 9,000+ articles tagged for

1906:

containing a list of ice hockey leagues sorted by level of play is incomplete, subjective, misconceived, and inaccurate. While I agree that a list of ice hockey league's could be useful for the purpose of establishing a presumption pf notability (I suggested the idea about three years ago, only to be

1730:

LOL! But that's kind of my point; I am truly puzzled why some folks here seem hellbent on excluding equestrian sport from these guideline- which is international in scope and not just confined to the Olympics - when both rodeo and curling - primarily of interest in North America - have been here for

925:

Déjà vu. Looks neutered even worse than last time. Let me guess: this started because one or a series of AFDs failed because the player was from the top professional league in somewhere like Venezuela? Last time it was something over Triple-A minor leaguers or something of the sort. I still feel like

812:

In terms of notability team sites aren't independent of the subject because they are still owned by and controlled by those teams. So it is in their best interests to write up and talk up their "product" which is the players. They are perfectly fine sources for referencing information, but they can't

787:

I didn't change any of that stuff, which is a carryover from our original Baseball notability discussions ages ago... I'm fine with getting rid of everything in there after "the article must cite published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the

399:

I also think looking at international competition performance as a deciding factor in what "top-level" means may be a good idea. Not surprisingly, the teams that perform the best in international competitions come from the specifically mentioned "top-level" league nations, (South Korea, Japan, United

4911:

And so must any subordinate notability criteria. It's already been mentioned in this discussion that the various SNGs -- the NSPORTS criteria included -- have one essential premise: that someone meeting them would be reasonably assured of passing the GNG. Every such criterion has to be checked and

4822:

guideline; that is, either GNG or SNG works, that is, if a player meets either the GNG or the SNG, they're notable. Is this right? If I don't know much about rugby, I know about Knowledge, and what occurred to me, seeing article after article in Knowledge of male rugby players, which only had one or

4393:

is barely recognized by the IoC (it was a demonstration sport in 1952 with Finland, Norway and Sweden participating, but that's it), and Americans haven't participated in Bandy in the Olympics. I don't think that there is a case for inherent notability, but the article may be notable if it meets the

4392:

and that "the meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept. These are merely rules of thumb which some editors choose to keep in mind when deciding whether or not to keep an article that is on articles for deletion." In the case of the American Bandy Association, Bandy

3910:

I'm squarely on the fence on this. On one hand, it seems reasonable that the individual projects should set the criteria because they're generally more familiar with the topic. On the other hand, as a survivor of the MMA notability wars, I know firsthand how divisive and abusive this can be. I do

3677:

Local projects should present to the whole community. First, almost always having the whole community evaluate is better than a select group. Second, in my opinion, project groups tend to have a more favorable view of their sport and thus may have a biased opinion. While those project groups will

3364:

arbitrary. We arbitrarily presume, for instance, that someone who's played so much as a single game of major league baseball is notable, but presume that someone who's played a thousand games of minor league ball isn't. We arbitrarily presume, for instance, that someone drafted in the second round

3017:

Professional Bull Riders and notable non-PRCA competitorsare covered under criteria #1, and even though it is redundant, I am not against including “College rodeo athletes in NIRA competition will follow NCOLLEATH and young rodeo competitors will follow WP:NHSPHSATH.” as criteria #3. Do we have now

2977:

to the list of hall of fames. As for the issue of high school and college athletes, it becomes more difficult to argue for the presumption of notability based on an amateur record. As I have already mentioned, NCOLLATH covers such athletes, and I would further argue that it is redundant (and perhaps

2668:

Point acknowledged as to regional nature (though the "region" is much of the United States), but there has been a rodeo entry here long before this discussion arose. I must also note that the same "regional" argument is true of Curling (which I picked on a lot above, not to be critical of curling),

2406:

Ravenswing is correct, there is lots of precedent for it. The soccer one has been evolving for 4 years now. And discussions are always ongoing on it tweaking it where necessary. Hockey unlike baseball for example has high popularity in a number of countries around the world and has a correspondingly

1856:

that effectively moved the specific leagues from this guideline to an essay maintained by a single project. I'm sure there are likely more specific sport experts in a WikiProject, but is this a direction that is generally supported for all sports in NSPORTS. We get enough debates here about what to

1635:

Remember that again you still can fall back on the GNG , so for Grunsven, she'd be notable by that type of coverage. The question to ask is that is there any condition in equestrian sports that may happen to a rider or the horse that will assure that coverage of that rider or horse will come about?

1607:

every four years in off-Olympiad even-numbered years and assorted "World Cup" events annually. The FEI adds reining, vaulting and combined driving to its list of recognized equestrian sporting events, even though those are not yet Olympic events. All of these events award individual awards and many

1369:

I would value seeing what you deem a "level of coverage" necessary. Rodeo is already on the list and has been for years, probably with less extensive worldwide coverage than FEI-level equestrian sport. Is being broadcast on NBC network on a Saturday good enough (seriously, when was the last time

1354:

Was there consensus to include this stuff? I don't see it above.. Not sure that equestrian athletes receive the level of coverage that you are implying here... I would think the existing guidelines or olympic athletes should suffice... as the other competitions you reference in your listing are ones

930:

because he's a player that only baseball historians would vaguely know. while those that had only 1 at-bat will be removed. I'm sure the changes will be pushed through anyway, and we'll be stuck with this double-neutered notability guideline until someone else fails to get their way when a series of

883:

to determine if the standard for inclusion has been met does not require that the sources be in English, or part of the Anglophone world. As a practical matter, it's simpler for the English Knowledge community to maintain an article if most of the sources are in English, of course, which contributes

451:

I'm actually surprised that the national team thing isn't in the guideline, I thought it already was... That should certainly be added... I'd say that none of the leagues mentioned above should confer automatic notability.. and of those already listed I have serious doubts about the Taiwan league as

4746:

That being said, we broke up the old WP:ATHLETE into differing SNGs for each sport for the basic reason that one-size-fits-all doesn't work. There are certain sports where 14-year-old athletes are highly notable. There are many where they never are. There are certain sports where female athletes

4452:

World masters championships should be mentioned, although as my orginal post states, I think a single gold medal in an event that doesn't necessarily field the best masters running is questionable. I thought a multiple gold requirement (either through multiple years or multiple events) was the best

3822:

was that the notion of one-size-fits-all is singularly inappropriate to sports. There are sports where teenagers are notable competitors. There are sports where they're not. There are sports where leagues below top national level are quite notable. there are sports where they're not. There are

3359:

Because we don't fall into the fallacy, as some other WikiProjects do, that there's something about the minor leagues or second tier national leagues that's automatically non-notable. The NHL had only six teams as late as 1967, and before then -- and for many years thereafter -- minor leagues have

3318:

stricter standard, including deletion of NHOCKEY and all sports-specific guidelines. In practice, they primarily serve to bloat this encyclopedia with a never-ending supply of non-notables. Even if WP can physically store it, the dross impedes the usefulness of this encyclopedia. WP ≠ the Internet.

3113:

Won't really have an impact on WP:BASEBALL/N because NSPORTS wasn't written to catch 100% of cases. It specifically mentions at the top of the page that meeting it does not guarantee an article and not meeting it does not guarantee being deleted. In then end GNG needs to be met either way. Athletes

2873:

I can live without #4, as your argument that the person who wins, say, at Cheyenne Frontier Days is probably going to wind up competing at the NFR is probably true. That said, I am not so certain about the guys who win on the PBR circuit or who do those "bullfighter" (aka rodeo clown) competitions

2299:

You didn't just suggest an objective criteria be used. You edit warred to try to get your way against a clear consensus. And then what prompted to try and help tweak and adjust the list as needed you have so far refused and instead continued arguing, making disparaging remarks against other editors

2021:

It did happen like that. #1 happened, #2 happened through a link on the WT:HOCKEY. #3 happened through a link on this page. All of which is standard. You are the only one who has objected in over two weeks now. If you truly want a list of this sort as you claim to, then instead of wasting yours and

1597:

I guess I'm puzzled, but perhaps we horse people have been unclear: Equestrian sport has individual "stars" - both human and horse. It is far more worldwide in impact and extensively covered than many sports already in here separately, like relatively new things like Mixed Martial Arts or obscure

1320:

write proposed amendments to these subject-specific guidelines and seek broad consensus for inclusion so they are expected to conform to existing guidelines. Also remember, the goal here is to provide considers that allow an standalone article to be created on the presumption of notability and that

512:

Top-level has generally always meant the league at the top of the pryamid in a given country. Its not about skill relative to other leagues. The idea being that the top league in a given country would probably get lots of coverage in their own country whether or not the skill level compared to MLB.

127:

What we have to look at in determining what is a "top-level" league is where the best-of-the-best of that league ultimately end up. For example, the best-of-the-best players from the Caribbean, Central American and South American leagues, by and large, end up playing in the Major Leagues. The Major

4743:

A bit bewildered here: if you're unfamiliar with rugby, upon what basis do you consider yourself knowledgeable enough to challenge the guideline's accuracy? (I never have myself; I am not a rugby expert, and I presume that those on Knowledge who are know better than I do what competitions at what

4702:

the Knowledge article; she is not so much as mentioned in a single mainstream media article that could be found. The only sources you have produced come from rugby websites and from the subject's collegiate athletic department. Claiming that there are many articles on male rugby players that are

4047:

In some sports, where we discuss notability of coaches (snowboarding is not one, so this is by analogy), coaching Olympic medalists or an Olympic team (or one that has medalists) suffices. That's what I was thinking would be the key point. Though its not in his bio, it appears as well that he is

3726:

it would be discussed here to determine if there was a problem with what they had come up with or not. More often than not the people who are experts in their field are going to know when and where sources can be found better than generalists. Don't get me wrong the whole community needs to agree,

2956:

I see there is also a high school guideline there as well, so perhaps, due to the popularity of High School Rodeo (and even Lil' Britches rodeo, but let's just NOT go there unless there is a similar guideline for Little League and Junior football...) we could note a ref to the High School athletes

2733:

I'd really like to see the stats on curling! LOL! (Now Hockey, yes, I would agree...). But seriously, rodeo has significant coverage in the United States, not merely "pockets" - unless the entire nation west of the Mississippi and south of the Mason-Dixon line is a "pocket." I mean, seriously,

2696:

Curling and cricket are widely followed in entire nations. Rodeo, much as I enjoy the Stampede, does not have a significant presence beyond Western Canada and pockets of the US. That is what I meant by regional. I'm not saying that athletes in this sport aren't notable - many are - merely that I

2561:

The bottom line is that fans of the Calgary Stampede are very strong fans and that's fine, but just showing up creating a presumption of notability should not be done where competition is basically open to all comers, even if the reality is that only the best tend to show up. I would view evidence

2349:

Guys... ignoring the obvious personal animosity at play here between Dolovis and the others.... What is the rationale for removing the list of leagues from this page and putting it in a project essay? All the other sports list the qualifying leagues on this page so your removal of the leagues from

2156:

Spare me your crocodile tears. I ran out of assumption of good faith with you long ago. And it only took the creation of hundreds of garbage sub-stubs, sockpuppetry, long-term blocks and topic bans for abusing the system before it happened. As to the rest of your bitching, you continue to ignore

1967:

Being that there was no change at the discussion in the last few days and that the only opposition was from Dolovis and in accordance with the standard practice (from the origin of NSPORTS itself) that changes in specific sports can be discussed at the relevant projects or NSPORTS, I have reverted

1942:

I freely admit that I would prefer not to need such a list. The notion, however, that this list is somehow illegitimate, but the previous list is sacrosanct, is darkly amusing: as the Ice Hockey WikiProject editors know, I'm the original author of the NHOCKEY notability criteria, and that laundry

1934:

Several WikiProjects not only maintain such essays, but those essays are integral parts of the NSPORTS criteria: association football, figure skating, tennis and American collegiate football among them. The particular inspiration for this essay was the Footy WikiProject's list of notable leagues,

1602:

and the IOC basically uses FEI rules and FEI qualifiying events, just like they use the various international federations for other sports. There are also Equestrian events in the Pan American Games and Paralympics. Outside the Olympics, the FEI sponsors events all over the world every year, and

1213:

I just boldly aded criteria for Equestrians who compete at the international level -- Olympics and World Championships, borrowing concepts from the other Olympic sport sections in the guidelines. That's the low-hanging fruit and I don't see it being controversial. I'm not ready to go further than

528:

That is what I believed as well, but recent AfD discussions have suggested that some believe or can be led to believe that "top-level" refers to top-level in comparison to other leagues throughout the world. Hence, players who have played in the top-level national leagues in the Dominican Republic

431:

and was basically asked by admins to perform fairly extensive news/source research (in Greek mind you) to ensure the league was sufficiently covered. As a result I said to hell with it and the guideline still has the ambiguous statement in it. In truth, for many pro leagues stars are notable but

426:

player in the Japanese, Chinese and Korean leagues actually notable? When I have tried to add leagues for the basketball guideline (to eliminate a similar ambiguous statement), I have been told that I need to test the leagues to ensure they had ample coverage to include them in what is a de facto

4888:

sanctions international matches for both men and women for this reason. They are the gate keepers above the gate keepers of the national team selectors, so why should Knowledge then say international participation in your sport is not notable if there are both International and National governing

4879:

should be changed to be more reflective of the evolving growth of the game. As Stuartyeates noted, it sucks that women's sports generally do not get as much coverage as men's sports. This does not mean that there are not people interested in following those sports and the women making spectacular

4307:

If there is no significant objections, I would like to add a notability criterion for horse racing here. We have rodeo and equestrian sport (i.e. Olympic level stuff) in here already, horse racing is an even bigger sport. per NOTBUREAUCRACY, this isn't overkill - we occasionally have people who

2228:

Actually everything he said happened in edits you made to Afd's in just the last week or so. So it is 100% provable that you have not been acting in good faith. Secondly we have had to fix numerous one line stubs you created listing players as playing in a given league when in fact they had never

2114:

at WP:HOCKEY. In addition, I personally added a link within that section to the talk page for the league proposal and copied the discussion on the main project talkpage to the proposal talkpage, so I struggle to see how someone can say it wasn't discussed at the main talkpage. This was all done

1939:

now. As far as "tight controls" go, I'm all for that, which is why I set forth this assessment list in the first place. It was first discussed on the Hockey WikiProject talk page eleven days ago, a period in which Dolovis has made several edits to the talk page; if he wasn't paying attention to

1256:

I am personally OK with discussing if/what we need to expand upon what I added (and restored, BTW - does anyone here object that what was included was too much???) but I didn't feel OK about adding more on my own initiative - probably it should be done at the wikiproject level, should anyone else

676:

I might also suggest adding the former Baseball World Cup to the list of major international tournaments. Assuming the use of common sense is risky - if common sense were used as it should be, we wouldn't have kept articles on players whose claims to notability were that they played in Italy's or

4655:

As I mentioned in the AfD when you posted that self-same laundry list, if there are articles on male rugby players for which reliable sources can't be found, by all means prod or AfD them. For another, you're falling into a common trap of someone thirsting to save an article on AfD: that if some

2623:

and am familiar with rodeo in general and that rodeo in particular. So, is your beef ONLY with my not putting Calgary on par with the national championship rodeos, or do you have complaints about the other things being added? Let's separate this out: I appreciate that you pointed out that the

163:

Lastly, I would also suggest adding the Cuban National Series to the list of leagues specifically mentioned above since the top players from that circuit usually do not - or cannot - play in the other leagues. It also does extremely well in international competitions, meaning its players tend to

118:

That line is too ambiguous, leaving it open to multiple interpretations - does "top level" mean in comparison to the world's other leagues, or the top-level league in a country? If it refers to the former, then it is unnecessary because the world's top-level leagues are already mentioned - there

4929:

As far as your specific objection about international play goes, if you review the various NSPORTS criteria, you'll see that in almost every case, merely playing for an international team (and in every case of merely being named to a squad) is not sufficient to meet the criteria. Over and over

4528:

Perhaps, but can you see the problem here? Knowledge's contributors are almost all men (one estimate: 90%). You are a man I bet. I am too. Rugby is a male-dominated sport (although women are starting to catch on). So it is highly possible that the male-rugby-notability-rule writers came up with

4062:

There is not a one size fits all guideline so far for Olympic coaches, so an Olympic coach in one sport could conceivably be presumed notable, but not in another. It's all a matter of presumed coverage an Olympic coach in a given sport would receive. The more sure-fire way is just demonstrate

2992:

Yes, but humor me, I see no problem making a note of college rodeo. I deal with a lot of trolls when I work on the horse-related articles who think that anyone from west of the Mississippi is simply not worth the air they breathe. This will provide a guideline to prove that the issue has been

1579:

there is definitely significant coverage of these topics to meet the GNG. The question that has to be shown is that if you have a criteria such as "Winning this specific event", does that nearly-always lead to secondary coverage (more information about the person than just the fact they won the

1393:

Is there in depth coverage about the competitors at the FEI championships or the Show Jumping events you mention? That means something about them other than just that they competed in this event and how they did. The level of coverage would be what GNG implies "the subject of multiple published

602:

Two things, one are you then removing the Chinese Professional Baseball League which is currently listed? Secondly. You would be removing the wording which allows for leagues which are now defunct but would have been at an equivalent coverage level which the current wording allows for. Was this

159:

International players would then have to pass WP:BASEBALL/N point 6 ("Minor league players, managers, coaches, executives, and umpires are not assumed to be inherently notable.") I would also alter WP:BASEBALL/N point 6 to read "Players, managers, coaches, executives, and umpires from the minor

4723:

A systematic examination of those articles, with numerous AfDs, would be a gargantuan task, fraught with fuss. Frankly, I do not know enough about rugby, or rugby players, to even attempt such an undertaking. It might very well be that the rule-writers (point 1, point 4, etc) are correct, that

3825:

In my observation, charges that a project is "biased" get flung around a great deal more often than proven, and they almost always come from people who tacitly apply the standards of a sport with which they're familiar to one with which they're not. Now, sure, there are standards with which I

3661:

Is this a page where the consensus from the local projects gets compiled; or should local projects present their proposal here at the talk page, so that a wider group can discuss it and the guidelines remain reasonably consistent across sports (e.g. not one sport deciding that everyone who has

2893:

I disagree about excluding #3; for one thing, things like the CNFR do not necessarily translate into Pro Rodeo ranks, though a cross-ref to NCOLLATH would do the job, I suppose: "Rodeo competitors in college rodeos sanctioned by the NIRA such as the CNFR, shall be deemed notable under similar

334:

If we are to choose among the top-level national leagues for automatic notability, we should be very clear about the criteria for determining which of those leagues deserves that status. I understand your point about Asian players more often sticking in their home countries than Latin American

2633:

rodeo, yes, but other rodeos also can claim the title of "richest" of their type. But more to the point, the Stampede is not the "super Bowl" -- the Calgary newspaper is hardly a neutral source for that claim (!) - the NFR and CNFR are the "championship" events for the USA and Canada. (Note:

1128:

Regarding games, note this isn't to say that appropriate notability guidelines couldn't be created, but the particular set of editors who are interested in this article have chosen not to be involved in their creation. For any of these subjects, you can work with an appropriate Wikiproject on

735:

6. Minor league players, managers, coaches, executives, and umpires (as well as other international players who do not meet the criteria set forth in #2 above) are not assumed to be inherently notable. To establish that one of these is notable, the article must cite published secondary source

488:

I believe that players in the KBO, NPB and MLB are more than likely sufficiently covered by their media to be explicitly stated in the rule. Not so sure about CBPL, nor do I think it is a level of competition high enough to match the KBO, NPB and MLB. I especially agree with this part of what

4661:

I stand by what I said above: that the purpose of notability standards on Knowledge is not to enforce equal rights laws, but to reflect what the world finds notable or not. There are women's sports which by virtue of media coverage and public support have relatively loose notable standards:

2141:

How dare you question my motives or challenge my good faith. You do not own the Knowledge Ice Hockey Project, All that I have suggested it that objective criteria be used to establish a list. Your attempts you censor my input (and by extension the input of all other editors who are afraid to

3254:

200 games represents three seasons' worth of play and would eliminate some of the unimprovable sub-stubs we've been seeing. Rolling the "preeminent honors" clause into criterion #3 would also cover the possibility of someone setting the AHL on fire one year and have his career end the next,

489:

Spanneraol said, "I'd limit it to just MLB, NPB and KBO as the qualifying leagues and then add anyone who has competed in a major international competition as a member of the national team." Though there are other things I'd change and fix about the rule, I think that would be a good start.

4192:

but haven't really finished it, but mostly doe to boredom rather than disagreement. I'd say if it passes what's in there now, it's notable, though if it doesn't meet the criteria there, GNG is still a good default. How would folks like us to proceed with getting the project polished up?

3543:

It should help reduce the proliferation of one line stubs and stubs with nothing more than player X signed and ELC on y/y/yy date. Guys who play 100 games could still be kept given GNG supersedes NHOCKEY, but wouldn't grant lazy articles legs to stand on. Reducing the # of games played for

4234:

Frankly, I'd prefer you didn't do that; the one thing we do periodically run into are people who think that there shouldn't be an article about 1) a horse, or 2) people who work with horses. It doesn't come up a lot, but probably at least once a year. I'd actually like to add this in.

3243:

There's long been support for tightening up NHOCKEY's Criterion #3, which currently provides for presumptive notability for players who've played 100 or more games in a top-level minor league. This amounts to a season and a half, which isn't very much, and I propose the following change:

2600:

With a prize of $ 100,000 to the winner of each major discipline and $ 1,000,000 total on championship day alone, it also offers the richest payout. Only 20 athletes for each discipline (bull riding, barrel racing, steer wrestling, tie down roping, saddle bronc and bareback riding) and 32

1410:

Yes, of course! coverage within the equestrian press is extensive, and I am also sure that the various championships are covered by things like ESPN: To give you an example of the more obscure and esoteric of the main Olympic events, note what comes up (beyond the Olympic coverage) at

1270:

AND I am curious to know how the rest of the folks here would view our horse "biographies" -- in the race horse area, Wikiproject Horse racing has thousands and thousands of them. In the sport horse area, not so many, but a few hundred, at least. We also have horse articles like

1094:

Games such as chess have routinely been rejected as part of this page. As for the others I have to agree, there isn't enough coverage of any of these to make a sport specific guidelines for any of them. They would fall under the general guideline in the basic criteria section and

2180:

I am comfortable in accusing you of bad faith because that's what you've been practicing. When you create a sub-stub claiming that someone's played in a league that he hasn't, or you oppose an AfD claiming that the Central Hockey League is covered under criterion #3 when it was

2911:

Establishing objective criteria, which is reasonable and not overly inclusive, results in clear guidelines which should result in less room for subjective debate over what NRODEO means. Trying to address you concerns, I have made changes to my above proposal (new edits shown in

1419:

and hundreds of magazines and web sites, plus mainstream newspaper coverage. So I'm curious what you want - and a link to the relevant specific guideline - as we have dozens, if not hundreds, of these articles already, which have easily qualified under WP:NOTABILITY. (Examples,

4926:, we can not serve as an advocate for the growth of your sport. Ultimately, if the media chooses not to cover your sport, that doesn't impede the various sanctioning bodies from declaring anything "notable" they see fit. It just deters Knowledge from having articles about it. 3743:) As I said in my edit summary it would have been better if they linked to their discussion on this talk page first just to get more input, but I don't think it was strictly necessary. If people objected to the specific change they could then revert and open a discussion per 3942:. I added Ring magazine to the list of top 10 rankings that can show notability. It triggered the discussion above about who decides the notability criteria for individual sports. I view this as an especially minor change considering that Ring magazine's rankings were in 1598:

stuff like (my favorite) Curling. Let me explain: In the Olympics, the Equestrian events include Dressage, Show Jumping and Eventing (also Modern Pentathlon has an Equestrian component, but WPEQ has never dealt with that much). The governing body for these sport is the

4662:

basketball, soccer, hockey, tennis, golf. There are many that don't attract that attention, and don't. Now if you want to argue that WP:V and WP:N should be suspended if you believe they disparage groups you personally favor, I commend their respective talk pages to you.

657:

I wouldn't say we need to call out the exact competitions as those can be decided on a case by case basis using commonsense... Point 6 refers to the minor leagues, dont see how that would need to be changed unless you want to add "other international leagues" to that one..

2628:

is presumed notable, even though it too is limited to 20 entries each year, I still question if everyone who simply attends is to be presumed notable. I already suggested that anyone who is a champion there IS presumed notable. The Stampede has the most prize money for a

338:

Also, I'm curious whether anyone knows of similar discussions with American football notability. It seems the guidelines also mention "any ... top-level professional league," even though the NFL's quality of play (and league exposure) is much higher than any other league.

4541:

female rugby players considered notable, yet male players, whose only claim to fame is to have participated in one of the selected matches, qualify for pages in Knowledge. This is highly unfair in my view. Consider Griffeth. Her college magazine was so proud of her they

2279:

Djsasso is right here: either you are acting in deliberate bad faith, or you are editing with a level of carelessness and/or incompetence that would make me look favorably on a topic ban enjoining you from creating new articles. Which characterization would you prefer?

4678:

Generally I agree with your view that the purpose of notability standards in Knowledge is not to enforce equal rights, that their aim should be to reflect what the world finds notable. Given that, what I am arguing is this: that the world finds female athletes such as

330:

This is a tricky issue. Obviously the NPBL is a higher level of competition than the Australian Baseball League, but it is also not quite the same as Major League Baseball. From what I understand, MLB front offices treat NPBL stats as equivalent to AAA in the States.

4707:

argument -- is not an adequate or legal defense of Griffeth's article: it's an indictment of those other subjects' notability, and a good reason to make a systematic examination of those articles and weed out the ones which fail of references which satisfy the GNG.

3860:

Indeed. You can't have one rule for everything because for example a rule that says that "any sportsman who has played in a professional team is notable" would exclude all the GAA players because they're all amateur. I think that what we have at the moment is best.

3097:

is notable. Other sports with similar long histories might have had comparable issues arise. The people involved in the discussion would likely benefit from the experiences of editors who have expertise in these sports that have already addressed this issue. Thanks

2194:

how we dare to question your motives and challenge your good faith. Indeed, no one "owns" the Hockey WikiProject ... and that includes you. We are free to debate issues without begging for your input, and we are free to establish consensus without your approval.

147:

As it stands, the lateral promotion leagues are the handful mentioned in WP:BASEBALL/N. My ultimate suggestion would be to remove the controversial end line from WP:BASEBALL/N, point 2, which would make players who haven't played in the leagues already mentioned

1636:

Arguably, one could argue any horse that wins the Triple Crown will likely be covered, for example. But if there's aren't that many conditions, then we probably don't need to have additional criteria, and just reliable on the GNG for the sport's coverage. --

2300:

such as suggesting you are being censored. No one is censoring you. You have been asked multiple times now for your opinions on what might be needed to adjust the list. You have so far refused. If anyone is censoring anyone, it is you censoring yourself. -

2840:

I have omitted Montanabw's proposed criteria #3 and #4 because they are redundant to Criteria #1 and 2 above. I have found no example of a notable athlete who has won a major national event, who has not also competed at one events listed in criteria #1

3767:

about NSPORTS being able to point to pages maintained by WikiProjects. While I agree that project experts can be more knowledgable in many areas, I wouldn't be surprised if some have a more inflated sense of what is notable and if it really satisfies

1061:

The problem is that these sports do not get the coverage as the major sports listed, so there's very few criteria that can be made that create presumed notability. That doesn't prevent anything that is supported by the general notability guideline (at

4889:

bodies both saying yes, you are notable. That said, can we at least get rid of the qualification that women must have played in the semi-final or higher at the World Cup? And explicitly include the Women's Sevens World Series? Players must still meet

2653:

rodeo generates enough coverage to warrant a presumptive claim to notability. This is one of many sports that really should rely on GNG, not an SNG that allows certain editors to create poorly referenced sub-stubs on the basis of arbitrary criteria.

128:

Leagues are an advancement for them, it is the next step up - a promotion. Conversely, in Japan, Korea and Taiwan, the best-of-the-best often remain in their home countries, choosing not to travel overseas to play in the Major Leagues - the move is

3704:

Lets not pretend that this page represents "the whole community". We'd be discussing everything at a village pump of that was the intention. Likewise, I don't buy the assumption of bad faith inherent in arguing that a project will act with bias.

362:

Still, I don't think it's quite accurate to call it an equivalent league in terms of talent. Japanese replacement-level players and MLB replacement-level players are certainly not equivalent. And there is probably a bigger gap in Korea and Taiwan.

3389:

I would have to agree with Ravenswing here. To be honest it is pretty ridiculous that the baseball project doesn't have some sort of amount for minor league baseball players and assume they are all non-notable when that is very obviously false.

1188:

race as sufficient. There must be an equivalent for harness racing. I wouldn't fight to have people in horse breed-specific disciplines listed here, though my understanding is that WP:NOTABILITY will cover most we have already, such as, oh,

1113:

Agreed. It's not particularly convincing to suggest that competitors of a sport should get added to NSPORTS when the sport in question is a red link. For the blue links, I also doubt sufficient coverage exists and would need to be persuaded.

1300:

I had a read of that figure skating notability essay and thought it was good. The banner at the top of the article does say that projects are encouraged to write their own notability guidelines and the horse racing project ought to do that.

846:

I think the main thing in regard to this guideline is the level of coverage those countries have for their baseball teams. Baseball is a big thing in both Korea and Japan and their players tend to get a lot of coverage in the local medias.

427:

blanket notability (players can still be challenged on notability grounds in theory but in practice they pretty much always pass if the league is explicitly included in the guideline). I have tried to add significant leagues such as the

123:

leagues, where major leaguers go to stay in shape and where raw, developing players go for extra conditioning. Are players from those leagues equally deserving of articles? How about players from the top league in Spain? Or Bulgaria?

4787:

rests on the coverage that subjects achieve. Coverage of sports-played-by-males hugely outweighs sports-played-by-females, thus it's easiler for sports-played-by-males to achieve notability. I completely agree that this sucks, but

3258:

While I'm at it, I propose a small tweak to Criterion #7, to read "Are an honored member of a national or multinational hockey Hall of Fame." As currently written, someone in a Tiddlywinks Hall of Fame could meet the criterion.

2938:

NCOLLATH is a little football heavy, and I have a minor fret that the reference to the NCAA would be used by some troll against college rodeo athletes, as I think they are still governed by the NIRA, not the NCAA (but I could be

2930:

I agree completely with reasonable, objective criteria... On the right track, methinks. That said, not overly inclusive also must be balanced with not giving the deletionist trolls a club for being overly exclusive, either.

3911:

think a reasonable compromise is to let the projects develop the notability criteria and then post a link to the discussion here, so that editors who might have missed the discussion can weigh in using a "big picture" vision.

1880:

and the discussion began as a result of a series of AFDs where it became obvious that a list of what leagues each of NHOCKEY's criteria generally reflects was necessary. As always, these SNGs and their supplements still only

1487:

Yes, there is that level of coverage. Several horse magazines exist to cover the various disciplines, and they are independent of the various subjects. Barrel racing (part of rodeo) is covered by a number of magazines - see

1315:

Do note that Wikiproject-level notability guidelines will be overridden by en.wiki-wide guidance. If a WProject decided that "all caber tossers are notable", that likely will not stand up as an argument at AFD. WProjects

3369:

that the original WP:ATHLETE was broken down into individual sports was the painfully obvious one that different sports had widely different definitions of notability, and that one-size-fits-all suited us very poorly.

2431:

We seem to have a dispute about notability for rodeo and disagreement with my simultaneous tightening and expansion of that section. So taking to talk. Bottom line: As one of the people who assisted with the FAC for

4656:

excuse can be made for the subject not having the multiple reliable sources, which discuss the subject in significant detail, that the GNG requires, somehow WP:V and WP:N should be suspended in the subject's favor.

2185:

listed in criterion #4, or you claim that playing 100 games in bottom feeding semi-pro leagues is equivalent to playing 100 games in the AHL or the Allsvenskan, and you do these things over and over and over again,

2022:

our time fighting like this, go to the discussion and start discussing any tweaks you feel we need. The discussion was open and inclusive, it was linked to from multiple pages where interested editors could see. -

1340:

Trust me, I survived the infobox wars, I know the limits of wikiproject power! Also survived a couple AfDs where people thought that horses in general were not notable. Been there, done that, oh yeah. :-P LOL!

1885:

notability, and reliable sources must exist. Failure to meet certain parts of it does not necessarily mean an article should be deleted, nor does meeting some aspect of the criteria mean an article must be kept.

4338:, and like the figure Skating section from which I stole the idea, we will continue to flesh out the notability page too, but not post the whole thing here. If you want, we can sandbox the basic outline here. 543:@ DjSasso but many of those leagues, especially the European ones, baseball hardly get coverage at all. I agree with Spannerol, just limit it to those three leagues and international competition and that's it. 3526:, Personally, I would only allow certain national HOFs to be part of the list; Czech, Finnish, Russian/Soviet, Swedish, Slovak (on the fence for this one), and U.S. If Canada ever does one, it can be added. 2890:, etc...). So I think it's just a can of worms that doesn't need to be raised here, given that I've run into some very nasty deletionists a couple of times who basically have an "animals are stupid" attitude. 2456:. Also, being that any subject can use GNG to establish notability, any addition to NSPORTS needs to establish that it is warranted based on numerous past debates of specific articles. Remember, WP is not a 3721:

When this page was created the idea behind it was that the experts in their fields could decide on the qualifications of their sport and then make the changes as necessary here. And if there were objections

2581:

as suggested by Montanabw, who clearly has no understanding of what the Calgary Stampede means within the world of professional rodeo. It is not an understatement to describe it as the “Super Bowl of Rodeo”

1698:

On a side note, curling is well covered by mainstream media in Canada. Most of the criteria listed are related to events and persons that receive significant, notable coverage in reliable Canadian sources.

4546:; she earned plenty of media attention at Rugby magazine, Erugbynews, the International Rugby Board, 16 references in total, but because her matches did not happen to have the right nation or year, she is 2874:... the smaller leagues might be notable at the highest levels, but they may not have perfect cross-over to the other group? Dunno. GNG could cover it, haven't really run across a deletionist issue there 1940:

what others beside himself were posting, I can't help that. I agree that the list did not receive Dolovis' personal approval, but it did receive the unanimous approval of every other participating editor.

4018:(not an RS, but summarizes his accomplishments) had his page deleted in 2006 as NN ... but thought he would be notable now under our guidelines. Before I recreate the page, though -- any thoughts? Tx.-- 2993:

discussed and a consensus reached specific to the sport. How about something like "College rodeo athletes in NIRA competition will follow NCOLLEATH and young rodeo competitors will follow WP:NHSPHSATH?

1257:

care beyond myself and Pitke. Pitke and I usually reach a real workable consensus with a lot of good faith, even where we start out quite a ways apart, so I see no real "drahmah" problem on the horizon.

1183:

to the above -- world champion riders/drivers would be presumed notable. In horse racing, given the worldwide impact, I think WP Horse Racing already uses the criteria of winning the equivalent of a USA

926:

we're on the long road to making baseball notability guidelines so high that a player needs to be in a minimum of 1000 MLB games or have a certain stat-line to stay on this site, kicking off players like

4841:, which is included within the guideline page, and linked to at the top of this page, for more information on the role of the sports-specific guidelines with respect to the general notability guideline. 4572:

played for US rugby teams in international competitions. She played for 7s; she played for 15s. But she is a WOMAN. Now, check out the following American male rugby players who have only 1 reference (a

831:

I'm not really in favor of including the KBO—I think the U.S. and Japan leagues are much better—but my objection is not strong. And I certainly agree with the inclusion of international competitions. --

4577:

usually, just a few lines each for each article, but who, BECAUSE THEY ARE MEN and happened to play in the "right" (according to Knowledge) competitions, have Knowledge pages which are unchallenged:

3089:

since little to anything has ever been found about them in reliable sources beyond their last names and the minimal stats they generated in their brief careers. This discussion may have an impact on

2898:

a pain to always have to craft the same stupid argument over and over again to the trolls who live in their mommy's basement and wouldn't know the front end of a horse from the back end (sigh).

3148:

WP:NCRIC has guideline 1 which states "has appeared in at least one major cricket match since 1697 as a player or umpire." However, when you click on "major cricket" you are sent to the page

2638:) If it will keep the peace, we can put Calgary with the national events (even though I disagree), but I'd like the other criteria to be added. Do you have a problem with the other material? 4884:

is unfortunately more difficult for women than for men, but as an athlete that has competed internationally, it is notable. Period. End of story. People find out and they're awed by it. The

4358: 4246:

No problem adding it in when it is ready. You can revert my change if you want, but I don't see the point in referencing a guideline for horse racing that doesn't (yet) exist on this page.—

2369: 740:, and team sites are generally not regarded as independent of the subject. Although statistics sites may be reliable sources, they are not sufficient by themselves to establish notability. 2945:

Should we also note historic rodeo competitors inducted into the Cowboy/Cowgirls Hall of Fame, with the caveat that they must be rodeo atheletes, or is that a can of worms that brings in

3365:

of the NBA draft is notable, but presume that someone drafted in the third round (back in the day) isn't. And so on. Finally, your slam of the hockey project is out of line. The whole

4823:

two references at most, that something was amiss. My sense is the culprit here is the point 1 point 4 rules, that it is poorly written or needs to be rethought, that's all I'm saying.--

2264: 4482:. My name is Valerie Griffeth. I am a female rugby union player who represented the United States in both 7s and 15s, and now because of a notability-rule technicality which I view as 2078:. Such bullying tactics do not serve to encourage other interested editors to participate, and without a full discussion it cannot be said that there is a consensus to change NHOCKEY. 2384: 1947: 3747:, but if you don't have an issue with the content of the change all your are doing is wasting peoples time forcing a new discussion about something that possibly no one objects to. - 1805:

Would every player on those teams be expected to be covered in multiple sources? I don't follow the sport so I can't answer. But my gut feeling suggests they probably wouldn't be. -

3408:

Yep, I've long had a problem with the hostility of the baseball project towards the minor leagues, given the great prominence of the minors throughout baseball history. Heck, the

3255:

situations for which GNG-worthy coverage could result. Explicitly naming a different standard for goaltenders, who play far fewer games than the average skater, is also overdue.

452:

well.. I'd limit it to just MLB, NPB and KBO as the qualifying leagues and then add anyone who has competed in a major international competition as a member of the national team.

2697:

don't think an SNG is really appropriate here because the RS coverage varies far too wildly to be able to grant that presumption on the basis of appearing in any specific event.

2275:, you make the amazing assertion that a player who actually performed in an exhibition for college club hockey teams had played for the "national team." And this is just in the 3891:

comment on the proposed criteria will be those with an interest. Uninterested, impartial others should also comment, and that is unlikely to happen unless it is discussed here.

2059:

Absolutely untrue. What I am saying is that it is premature to change NOCKEY. What is first required, and which has not yet taken place, is a full and proper discussion on the

1922:

It's not my essay. But since the AFDs I mention were mostly from incomplete, subjective and misconceived crap you create, I am not at all surprised you aren't happy about it.

3427:

Unless there was a huge problem with minor league baseball bios being wrongfully created and/or AfDed, it would seem that GNG is sufficient and there is no need to create a

2582: 621:

Yes, I'm removing the Chinese league as I and others in the discussion didn't feel that one should remain listed. The defunct leagues that are relevant are included in #3.

1984: 1903: 3614:

How about phantom major leaguers - those players who were promoted to the major league 25-man roster during the regular season, but did not appear in a big league game?

3035:

that won't interfere with the way things are worded now, and I suppose if someone wants to argue for being second in the PBR making them notable, I guess there's GNG.

2007:

page. Until an open and inclusive process has been followed and accepted by a consensus of all interested editors, the current reading of NHOCKEY should not be altered.

4505:

The purpose of notability standards on Knowledge is not to enforce equal rights laws, but to reflect what the world finds notable or not, whether or not that suits our

1968:

his revert. Any further discussion on how to refine the list itself even further is more than welcome to continue happening at the discussion linked to by Ravenswing. -

3082: 3692:

Sport-specific WikiProjects are the experts, and we should trust their judgment on these matters, but any notability changes should be agreed by the whole community.

2381: 2378: 2272: 1215: 3564:

Is being named a Second-Team All-American in college baseball generally considered notable enough for an article? I'm leaning toward no, but just want to be sure.

4793: 2190:

you have a history of such antics (which has led to permanent topic and page move bans for you in other areas, as well as multiple blocks for sockpuppeteering)?

1599: 1432:) I think that Pitke's idea here is that we are just asking to have this sports project add a general guideline to explain for newbies what is already happening. 1089:

and for the rest, c'mon! You've got badmiton and curling already on the list! Hardly scintillating events of worldwide import...other than in an Olympic year...

2562:

that entry into Calgary is predicated upon invitation, previous winnings or some other prequalifier would change my view, but I could not find evidence of this.

4918:

On Knowledge, "notable" has a precise definition at variance with the general public's definition of "I think this is important." That meaning is set forth in

4335: 4189: 3735:

was splintered into this way with each sport having its own specific set of guides. (ie playing in a national championship might be a big deal in one sport say

2669:

or, for that matter, Cricket (Cricket is not played in America, to speak of). And I would agree with Dolovis that rodeos do get a LOT of significant coverage;

2252: 94: 89: 84: 72: 67: 59: 4956:

Articles that are not sourced to published material providing significant coverage of the subject (beyond just statistics sites) may be nominated for deletion.

672:

Yes, I think something about other international leagues should be added to #6 so that international players that don't meet the previous points are included

4434: 2815: 2520: 1907:

rebuffed by the Ice Hockey Project), the purpose of Resolute's essay has not been fully discussed, nor has "the list" itself been fully discussed or vetted.

1155:

I'm a little confused; are we talking about Guidelines for presumed notability of people? We have a ton of articles out there already, particularly in the

1742:

I'm not opposed to it myself, Equestrian has just as much right to be here as curling. I just had to defend my sport ("represent" as the kids say). --

1084: 4380:

Very few things on wikipedia are inherently notable (the only ones that come to mind are plant/animal species and high schools). In fact, the top of

2974: 2821: 1995:

will be informed and have the opportunity to take part in the discussion; 3) Post the proposed changes, as determined by the talk page consensus of

1542:

And, as we enjoy saying around here, "moar" examples of non-equestrian press coverage of not-Olympic but national and worldwide equestrian sport:

865:

Knowledge. In general, Japanese baseball is more well-known to the Anglophone world, I would think. Or is that not supposed to be a major factor? --

206: 4875:

Thank you all for your input on this. I really appreciate the discourse my small page has sparked. After reading the discussion, I still think the

3492:

I would personally like it to just be like #4 that it is all preeminent honours. But I will take raising the number as a first step towards that. -

2003:

page so it may be discussed by all interested members of the Knowledge. 4) Make changes to NHOCKEY according to the consensus of the discussion on

3450:

a stand alone article. So personally I feel its needed. But I suppose that is off topic for this particular request since its a different sport. -

2542: 236: 231: 221: 1819:

They could be, given that the match itself is covered by numerous sources including ESPN and the BBC. I think clarification would be beneficial.

3662:

competed in the national championship is notable, and another comparable sport requesting participation in a major international champiosnhip).

3597:

he is notable. So if you have sources he can have an article. He just can't be "assumed" to meet the GNG based on the second team all-american -

2538: 2375: 226: 201: 3251:

achieved preeminent honors (all-time top ten career scorer, First Team All-Star) in top-level minor leagues or second tier national leagues."

2589: 4533:

male oriented such that if a male player participated in such-and-such a competition, in such-and-such a year (point 1), he is automatically

4509:. In particular, the underpinning of the NSPORTS subordinate notability criteria is that those who meet it should generally be able to pass 3216: 3172: 2093: 1988: 3128:

The AfD was closed as "Delete". WP:BASEBALL/N makes a presumption of notability, not an assumption. Thus, a few failures is not abnormal.—

773:

What is meant by "team sites"? MLB.com and MiLB.com are written independently of MLB and MiLB, respectively, and shouldn't be discounted. –

4033:

Which section were you thinking presumes he is notable? FWIW, looking at the deleted contents, the 2006 article was on a different person.—

2942:

Could you handle a piped link for ], as that's the "real" one, odd as that sounds (it's the one that includes the historical figures, etc.)

788:

subject" as the rest of it was someone's opinion as to what a reliable source is and probably doesn't need to be listed in the guidelines.

3152:. At no point is the term "major cricket" defined nor even mentioned. After searching I found a semi-definition on major cricket on the 736:

material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject. Fan sites and blogs are generally not regarded as

4121:

This section does not encompass notability issues for individuals in the sports of horse racing or rodeo, which have separate guidelines.

3629:

The guidelines say "has played one game"... phantom guys haven't played... they need to satisfy GNG or some other part of the guideline.

2735: 3431:

with more rules in NSPORTS for no particular problem. I trust that there is a problem in hockey project that necessitates more rules.—

4149: 47: 17: 2624:

rules apparently changed in 2006 when they struck out on their own. But I still think that just like not every horse that enters the

1321:

additional sources can be found or will be created to build out the encyclopedic article within the open-wiki way of doing things. --

301: 4838: 3939: 2797: 1156: 3961:

This is ridiculous, my edit is reverted and I'm told to post here and no one makes any comments. I'm going to put my edit back in.

4111:, which was tagged for notability, and was checking for the guideline here to see if there was a horse-racing specific guideline. 2601:

professional chuckwagon racing teams - which is the event's largest attraction, will qualify to compete at the Calgary Stampede.

2584:

To perform at the Calgary Stampede means that you have proven yourself to be one of the of the best rodeo athletes in the world.

2452:

I know nothing about rodeos. However I have no problem with removing Calgary Stampede if enough entrants are found to not meet

2811: 2585: 1021:

and some others?) <- racing other than Greyhound and Whippet need to be assessed as sports as well. And written, of course.

1775:

I would like clarification on rugby union player notability. Would players who have played for either Oxford or Cambridge in

3193:. The use of the term major cricket has been the subject of much debate. There used to be a standalone mainspace article at 1159:

disciplines (Dressage, jumping and eventing) already. I believe that WP Horse racing has a sense of general notability for

4876: 4819: 4797: 4776: 4543: 4381: 3153: 2846: 2527: 2263:, both of which you created and edited, assert that the players performed in leagues they haven't actually played in. In 2243:

There is a .sig I use on VBulletin-based forums: "It's not that I don't understand what you're saying. It's that I don't

1983:

The process to follow before changing NHOCKEY should be: 1) Formulate a list of "top leagues" (as started at Ravenswing's

4698:

As I responded at length in the AfD, I disagree with your characterization. A Google News search for Griffeth turned up

3156:. I recommend changing the link in guideline 1 to that of the Wikiproject Cricket page so that the link is more useful. 1371: 2368:

On the contrary, a number of the NSPORTS guidelines have league lists and/or additional notability criteria elsewhere.

2160:

If you really want to show that a certain league should be added to these lists, then stop being lazy and show us why a

1421: 713: 567: 1946:

That being said, I invite any editor with the expertise to gauge the relative merits of professional hockey leagues to

717: 571: 216: 3826:

strongly disagree ... but I am not active in those WikiProjects, and don't feel it's proper to play backseat driver.

3294:. Makes this guideline more of a useful rule-of-thumb, and less of a backdoor for letting non-notable subjects dodge 902:

Again, a fair point. OK, I strike my objection to the inclusion of Korea. I'm on board with Spanneraol's language. --

4800:

is a shortcut for our collective feeling for where the various lines are for notability are in the field of sports.

4357:

Is the national governing body of an IOC recognised sport in it self inherently notable? The question has arisen at

4208:). Since none exists right now, I'll remove from the reference from NSPORTS for now to address Kahastok's problem.— 4789: 4704: 4622: 4362: 4204:

If there hasn't been any problems going off GNG, there's no need to create a guideline for the sake of having one (

246: 38: 1557: 3619: 3569: 3324: 3303: 2164:

of notability may be warranted. And by that, I mean that you need to show that enough sources exist that we can

764: 737: 682: 648: 534: 494: 405: 318: 172: 2129:

Yup. I appreciate your aims here Bagumba, but Dolovis' complaints are both without merit and not in good faith.

4818:

makes things notable, except that (if I understand things correctly) a player can qualify if he/she passes the

4205: 3946:

until last October's revision. However, I have been told it needs to be discussed in this forum so here it is.

2512:, where entrants must pre-qualify to participate based on accumulated points, purse money, or similar winnings. 2350:

here seems to be against the overall tone of the page and consensus hasn't really been established to do that.

1394:

non-trivial secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject"

3818:

The whole reason why subordinate notability criteria, created by the various Wikiprojects, was devolved from

1218:

for additional detail. We could do something like that at WPEQ and ping WP Horse racing about theirs, too.

4606: 4458: 4166:

In any event, just looking at the ref list (without actually looking to see if it is significant coverage),

3103: 296: 291: 251: 164:

stack up against the best from Japan, the United States, South Korea, the Dominican Republic and Venezuela.

160:

leagues and all leagues not mentioned in WP:BASEBALL/N point 2 are not assumed to be inherently notable..."

4940: 4923: 4902: 4864: 4850: 4832: 4809: 4805: 4757: 4738: 4718: 4693: 4672: 4650: 4563: 4523: 4499: 4462: 4446: 4414: 4374: 4344: 4329: 4314: 4286: 4255: 4241: 4217: 4199: 4179: 4161: 4138: 4090: 4076: 4057: 4042: 4027: 3999: 3984: 3970: 3955: 3920: 3899: 3881: 3855: 3836: 3807: 3793: 3790: 3781: 3756: 3712: 3699: 3696: 3687: 3671: 3638: 3623: 3606: 3588: 3573: 3553: 3535: 3518: 3501: 3484: 3459: 3440: 3422: 3399: 3380: 3347: 3328: 3307: 3286: 3269: 3228: 3206: 3184: 3165: 3137: 3123: 3107: 3070: 3041: 3027: 3012: 2999: 2987: 2967: 2925: 2904: 2862: 2743: 2704: 2691: 2661: 2644: 2610: 2568: 2550: 2469: 2446: 2416: 2397: 2359: 2342: 2339: 2309: 2290: 2238: 2223: 2211: 2205: 2175: 2151: 2136: 2124: 2105: 2087: 2054: 2031: 2016: 1977: 1960: 1929: 1916: 1893: 1870: 1839: 1814: 1799: 1750: 1737: 1721: 1708: 1675: 1648: 1630: 1604: 1592: 1569: 1516: 1438: 1403: 1379: 1364: 1347: 1333: 1310: 1281: 1263: 1241: 1224: 1203: 1168: 1142: 1123: 1108: 1078: 1055: 939: 912: 897: 885: 875: 856: 841: 822: 797: 782: 768: 753: 721: 686: 667: 652: 630: 612: 593: 575: 547: 538: 522: 498: 483: 461: 441: 409: 393: 380: 373: 349: 322: 286: 241: 211: 191: 176: 3509:, though I might raise the limits higher, to maybe 300 games for skaters and 150/200 games for goalies. 861:

That's a fair point. I'm just not sure how much that matters when discussing the notability criteria for

4537:, whereas the chances for women are meager (point 4). The result is highly discriminatory, so there are 4483: 4425:

At one point in time, this was mentioned in NSPORTS. It was inauspiciously removed in a burst of edits

4114: 3428: 3094: 2807: 2793: 2789: 2587: 2516: 2509: 2505: 2457: 2256: 2111: 2041: 1747: 1718: 1713:

Indeed, curling certainly isn't obscure in Canada! Thanks for being non-Canadian-centric, Montanabw! --

709: 563: 306: 281: 271: 261: 4680: 4569: 4487: 2649:

When push comes to shove, rodeo is a highly regional sport. I would question whether participation in

2526:

Have won national-level championships at rodeos sanctioned by groups other than the PRCA, such as the

2040:

person opposed seems to be you ... and you've yet to proffer a concrete alternate proposal other than

4931: 4919: 4860: 4856: 4828: 4824: 4748: 4734: 4730: 4709: 4689: 4685: 4663: 4646: 4642: 4559: 4555: 4514: 4086: 4053: 4023: 3874: 3827: 3634: 3615: 3584: 3565: 3413: 3409: 3371: 3343: 3320: 3299: 3260: 3090: 2635: 2388: 2355: 2281: 2196: 2045: 1951: 1832: 1792: 1399: 1360: 852: 793: 760: 749: 678: 663: 644: 626: 589: 530: 490: 457: 401: 314: 168: 112: 2066:

on “the list” suggesting that objective criteria should be established, I was hit with a barrage of

1014: 4898: 4495: 4442: 4370: 3798:

If it is "wrong", it seems like there's a lot of history there to fight through to get it "right".—

3212: 3194: 3006:

Oh and we could tweak to note PBR and other non-PRCA, I still think my #3 is needed in some form.

2946: 2260: 1087: 1018: 428: 256: 4048:

the coach of more than one notable snowboarder. Tx. And tx as to the info on the 2006 article!--

1546: 4842: 4454: 4430: 4133: 3916: 3897: 3709: 3683: 3481: 3161: 3099: 2850: 2831: 2701: 2658: 2554: 2328: 2172: 2133: 1926: 1890: 1700: 1621: 1513: 1185: 1134: 1119: 910: 889: 873: 839: 778: 725: 481: 437: 391: 371: 347: 187: 2598: 2267:, you assert that the Central Hockey League falls under criterion #3 when the NHOCKEY criteria 1508:. There are a LOT of horse magazines out there - they will cover most aspects of horse sports. 360: 4801: 4574: 4325: 4251: 4213: 4175: 4157: 4072: 4038: 3995: 3819: 3803: 3787: 3777: 3752: 3740: 3732: 3693: 3602: 3549: 3531: 3514: 3497: 3455: 3436: 3395: 3224: 3180: 3133: 3119: 3066: 3023: 2983: 2921: 2858: 2619:

You fail to assume good faith, and you need to stop hyperventilating. I helped on the FAC for

2606: 2465: 2412: 2336: 2305: 2234: 2219: 2147: 2120: 2101: 2083: 2027: 2012: 1973: 1912: 1877: 1866: 1810: 1776: 1425: 1104: 1066:) from having an article, just that there's no shortcut way of doing this for these sports. -- 818: 608: 518: 266: 4550:

excluded from notability. The male-oriented rugby notability rule goes against all the other

4125:

But I cannot find any evidence of the horse racing guideline. Could we have a link, please?

4846: 4610: 4479: 4403: 3980: 3966: 3951: 3678:

also likely have more knowledge on the sport as well the community is the better way to go.

3149: 2883: 2785: 2620: 2546: 2433: 1743: 1714: 1704: 1552: 1180: 1138: 1010: 893: 3360:

had franchises in major metropolitan areas. Beyond that, the NSPORTS criteria are nothing

1232:

As for ^^ I do insist that equestrian sportspeople AND sportshorses need to be included. --

4630: 4598: 4108: 4082: 4049: 4019: 3864: 3630: 3580: 3339: 3171:

To be consistent with other sport-specific sections, it should point to an essay with the

2351: 2067: 2063:

talk page, which encourages all interested editors to participate. When I made my comments

1858: 1822: 1782: 1644: 1588: 1395: 1356: 1329: 1306: 1237: 1074: 1051: 995: 848: 789: 745: 659: 622: 585: 453: 4388:

to help evaluate whether an article is notable, but that the article still must meet the

641:

what defines a 'major international competition' outside the ones specifically mentioned?

3765:

Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(sports)/Archive_17#Notable_leagues_maintained_by_WikiProjects

2251:

rant, coming up with examples is easy. Want to see a few, in articles you created? In

1613: 1214:

that, i.e. figuring out national-level notability and such, but I like what they did at

4894: 4618: 4602: 4491: 4438: 4366: 4339: 4334:

Well, I suspect the basic simple version for this page will be what is in this section

4309: 4281: 4236: 4194: 3943: 3935: 3928: 3851: 3769: 3728: 3667: 3202: 3190: 3036: 3007: 2994: 2962: 2899: 2738: 2686: 2639: 2625: 2563: 2441: 2437: 2372: 1987:); 2) Post the list of "top leagues", along with a proposal that to change NHOCKEY, at 1732: 1670: 1625: 1564: 1433: 1374: 1342: 1276: 1258: 1219: 1198: 1190: 1028: 1005: 927: 708:

2.Have appeared in at least one game in any one of the following active major leagues:

196: 3085:

concerning baseball notability. There are quite a few players who would normally fail

2849:

champion is redundant because they are already presumed notable under the criteria of

643:

If we alter the wording for point 2, however, point 6 may need to be changed as well.

4890: 4881: 4815: 4784: 4780: 4590: 4551: 4510: 4474: 4394: 4389: 4167: 4127: 4064: 3912: 3892: 3744: 3706: 3679: 3594: 3478: 3295: 3279: 3157: 3086: 2842: 2698: 2678: 2655: 2537:

Have won championships at major rodeos sanctioned by major organizations such as the

2453: 2332: 2169: 2130: 1923: 1887: 1609: 1509: 1429: 1370:

anyone watched curling in prime time? And it has a separate entry on th list): i.e.

1194: 1164: 1130: 1115: 1096: 903: 866: 832: 774: 562:

Have appeared in at least one game in any one of the following active major leagues:

474: 433: 384: 364: 340: 183: 153: 2475:

Well, here is the proposal that is causing heartache, material removed indicated by

4594: 4321: 4247: 4209: 4171: 4153: 4068: 4034: 3991: 3799: 3773: 3748: 3598: 3545: 3527: 3510: 3493: 3451: 3432: 3391: 3220: 3176: 3129: 3115: 3062: 3019: 2979: 2950: 2917: 2854: 2806:

Have been inducted into a national or international rodeo hall of fame such as the

2804:

Animals, athletes and other people involved with rodeo are presumed notable if they

2602: 2461: 2408: 2301: 2230: 2215: 2143: 2116: 2097: 2079: 2023: 2008: 1969: 1908: 1862: 1806: 1100: 1001: 991: 972: 933: 880: 814: 604: 514: 473:

an interesting summary of one person's observations of talent equivalents, FWIW. --

182:

Let's start off by listing the leagues that are most in question, as I see them: –

2515:

Have been inducted into a national hall of fame for rodeo competitors such as the

813:

be used towards proving notability which is what that sentence is talking about. -

4912:

tested against that premise; if athletes who fulfill that criterion generally do

4638: 4626: 4614: 4578: 4398: 3976: 3962: 3947: 2887: 2255:, you falsely assert that there are notability criteria covering inline hockey. 1272: 1063: 1024: 987: 544: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

4724:

participating in certain matches, from certain countries, from certain years,

4586: 4582: 1637: 1581: 1387: 1322: 1302: 1233: 1067: 1047: 1039: 2674: 3847: 3663: 3198: 2670: 2596: 1861:, this could be used to circumvent tight controls, for better or for worse.— 276: 3846:, not at the individual sports project (who should of course be informed). 2845:

can still be used to cover a notable exception - if there is one), and the

3823:

sports where collegiate competition is notable, and sports where it isn't.

3278:- especially as it finally rids us of the "fully professional" ambiguity. 470: 140:

from would not be inherently notable, while the leagues that players move

4634: 4015: 3886:

But that wouldn't exclude the GAA players unless you reworded it to say "

3736: 2879: 1493: 976: 968: 729: 579: 1083:

Note horse racing is second only to soccer in the UK and tops cricket:

1038:

a general guideline for discipline notability! I'm thinking of the many

4336:

Knowledge:WikiProject_Horse_racing/Notability#Notability_of_individuals

3579:

No.. first team all-american doesnt even have consensus for inclusion.

1176: 981: 720:

or have participated in a major international competition (such as the

574:

or have participated in a major international competition (such as the

1412: 167:

I hope you take my thoughts into consideration. Thanks for your time.

4641:, etc etc. Is this fair? It is not fair. The rules need rethinking.-- 3786:

That's the wrong way around; WikiProjects should point to this page.

3093:'s assumption that everyone who has appeared in at least one game of 1160: 136:

promotion. Therefore, the players from the leagues that players move

2636:"The National Finals Rodeo is essentially the Super Bowl of rodeo. " 2545:(WPRA) that draw national and international competition such as the 950:

Everyone, please feel free to strike these out as they get covered.

2682: 1275:

that are notable outside the realm of sport. Complicated issue.

1042:

breeds that almost without fail have their specific racing schemes.

3211:

The project definition is lacking the disclaimer that it is not a

2770: 2487: 1489: 963: 3114:

in many sports are often deleted that do meet these guidelines. -

2784:

at the highest level of professional competition such as the the

4916:

meet the GNG, then the criterion is flawed and must be stricken.

2816:

National Cowboy & Western Heritage Museum Rodeo Hall of Fame

4146:

Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(sports)/Archive_17#Topics_to_include

3764: 1416: 1129:

drafting a proposed set of guidelines, and then go through the

4796:

has some great hints on attempting to avoid perpetuating it).

3412:'s the second oldest professional sports league in the world. 1505: 1172: 103:

Proposal to remove or replace line from WP:BASEBALL/N, point 2

25: 3990:

discussions on changing these criteria from this talk page. -

359:

in 2002 concludes NPBL deserves to be called a major league.

2142:

challenge your "admin authority") is pitiful. Shame on you.

3940:

WT:WikiProject Boxing#Notability via Ring magazine rankings

1501: 959: 4359:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/American Bandy Association

2440:

in there, but Calgary isn't the only one that's special.

1617: 2595:

athletes must qualify to be invited the Calgary Stampede.

639:

I like it. But of course, the next debate is going to be

4775:

This discussion appears to rest on a flawed assumption.

4658:

This curious doctrine forms no part of Knowledge policy.

2949:(thought they too are remarkable athletes) and even the 2094:

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey#WP:NHOCKEY_changes

1876:

The best way to look at that list is as a supplement to

1549:(scroll past the stuff on Zara Phillips, though, LOL...) 1355:

that don't seem to get the level of coverage necessary.

4426: 3656: 3654: 3652: 3650: 3247:"Played at least 200 games (90 games for a goaltender) 2075: 2071: 2064: 1853: 4885: 4880:

achievements in them. Finding publications to support

2210:

No editor should have to put up with your attempts at

2830:

Are college rodeo athletes who meet the criteria of

2591:

As the world's richest and most famous rodeo event,

4703:similarly poorly referenced -- aside from being an 2768:

Athletes and others who participate in the sport of

2096:

to address the concern raised about participation.—

2115:within a few hours of the proposal being raised. 3083:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Smith (baseball) 1935:which has been part of the NSPORTS criteria for 132:necessarily a step up for them. It is more of a 2168:most or all players at that level are notable. 1624:, and so on. Does that answer your question? 1216:Knowledge:WikiProject Figure Skating/Notability 529:and Venezuela have had their articles deleted. 4794:Knowledge:WikiProject Countering systemic bias 3649:There has been a minor and friendly edit war ( 3544:goaltenders is a much needed new provision. -- 313:I might suggest adding the CBPL to that list. 4190:Knowledge:WikiProject_Horse_racing/Notability 2271:states that it falls under criterion #4. In 8: 4814:I agree with Stuartyeates somewhat, in that 4554:. Can you begin to see how unfair this is?-- 3219:does for similar project-level definitions.— 2074:reply, and Ravenwing's reply accusing me of 3593:That being said if the player can meet the 4790:Knowledge is not the place to correct this 4490:is being put up for deletion. Wondering.-- 2497:Have participated at the highest level of 1848:Notable leagues maintained by WikiProjects 1388:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZDw1Bf3IZo 1133:process to establish community consensus. 4148:, but not sure the outcome. Will notify 3560:Second Team All-American baseball players 2036:Djsasso does make a telling point -- the 881:Knowledge's guideline on reliable sources 4924:Knowledge is not a vehicle for promotion 3018:have agreement to post this to NSPORTS? 2975:National Cowgirl Museum and Hall of Fame 2822:National Cowgirl Museum and Hall of Fame 2577:- The Calgary Stampede is certainly not 2490:competition are presumed notable if they 1553:New York Times' coverage of show jumping 1197:- plus others we may want to add later. 4949: 2247:with what you're saying." Contrary to 237:Panamanian Professional Baseball League 232:Nicaraguan Professional Baseball League 222:Venezuelan Professional Baseball League 4145: 2543:Women's Professional Rodeo Association 2539:Professional Rodeo Cowboys Association 1779:be considered notable for an article? 227:Colombian Professional Baseball League 202:Dominican Professional Baseball League 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 4421:Masters Athletics World Championships 4384:specifically says that the page is a 3217:Template:WikiProject notability essay 3173:Template:WikiProject notability essay 1989:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey 1171:. I would add people who compete in 1013:and other major types of dog racing ( 207:Liga Paralela de Béisbol en Venezuela 7: 4320:Do you have a link to the proposal?— 4433:, an opponent. As you can see the 3763:There was an earlier discussion at 3081:There is currently a discussion at 2671:CBC covers the Stampede extensively 2387:There is ample precedent for this. 1413:http://search.espn.go.com/dressage/ 4779:is not what makes things notable. 4150:Knowledge:WikiProject Horse racing 2973:I have no qualms about adding the 2076:“wikilawyering and outright lying” 886:systemic bias of English Knowledge 24: 18:Knowledge talk:Notability (sports) 4478:there is no such distinction for 2798:National Finals Rodeo (Australia) 1157:Equestrian at the Summer Olympics 1033:amateur sports persons in general 732:) as a member of a national team. 582:) as a member of a national team. 4544:devoted an entire article to her 4511:the General Notability Guideline 4469:Question about rugby union rules 4280:OK, I'll post a request below. 3053: 2070:responses including Resolute's “ 1175:non-Olympic disciplines such as 29: 4839:frequently asked questions page 4016:this 2014 US Olympic Head Coach 3727:but there is the whole idea of 2812:Canadian Pro Rodeo Hall of Fame 1558:Australian coverage of Eventing 355:Then again, this analysis from 4783:is what makes things notable. 4429:without further discussion by 3739:, but nothing in another, say 1: 4480:association football (soccer) 4395:General Notability Guidelines 4390:general notability guidelines 4382:Knowledge:Notability (sports) 3166:12:27, 30 December 2013 (UTC) 2968:20:10, 31 December 2013 (UTC) 2926:21:19, 30 December 2013 (UTC) 2905:18:07, 30 December 2013 (UTC) 2863:16:36, 30 December 2013 (UTC) 2847:College National Finals Rodeo 2744:05:33, 30 December 2013 (UTC) 2705:03:06, 29 December 2013 (UTC) 2692:02:35, 29 December 2013 (UTC) 2662:06:10, 28 December 2013 (UTC) 2645:05:53, 28 December 2013 (UTC) 2611:22:53, 27 December 2013 (UTC) 2569:21:13, 27 December 2013 (UTC) 2528:College National Finals Rodeo 2470:20:51, 27 December 2013 (UTC) 2447:20:22, 27 December 2013 (UTC) 2343:15:39, 31 December 2013 (UTC) 2176:23:55, 31 December 2013 (UTC) 2152:23:38, 31 December 2013 (UTC) 2137:23:25, 31 December 2013 (UTC) 2125:23:08, 31 December 2013 (UTC) 2106:22:31, 31 December 2013 (UTC) 2088:21:34, 31 December 2013 (UTC) 2055:17:09, 31 December 2013 (UTC) 2032:17:02, 31 December 2013 (UTC) 2017:15:34, 31 December 2013 (UTC) 1991:so all interested members of 1978:04:37, 30 December 2013 (UTC) 1961:08:49, 29 December 2013 (UTC) 1930:03:01, 29 December 2013 (UTC) 1917:02:16, 29 December 2013 (UTC) 1894:01:10, 29 December 2013 (UTC) 1871:00:20, 29 December 2013 (UTC) 1840:17:28, 31 December 2013 (UTC) 1815:17:22, 31 December 2013 (UTC) 1800:22:03, 28 December 2013 (UTC) 1751:19:13, 16 December 2013 (UTC) 1738:18:53, 16 December 2013 (UTC) 1722:23:43, 14 December 2013 (UTC) 1709:23:32, 14 December 2013 (UTC) 1676:18:53, 16 December 2013 (UTC) 1649:22:10, 14 December 2013 (UTC) 1631:21:48, 14 December 2013 (UTC) 1622:covered by the New York Times 1593:20:09, 13 December 2013 (UTC) 1570:19:43, 13 December 2013 (UTC) 1517:19:33, 13 December 2013 (UTC) 1492:for one. Dressage likewise - 1439:19:29, 13 December 2013 (UTC) 1404:18:57, 13 December 2013 (UTC) 1380:18:40, 13 December 2013 (UTC) 1372:NBC broadcasting the 2010 WEG 1365:18:13, 13 December 2013 (UTC) 1348:17:54, 13 December 2013 (UTC) 1334:15:07, 13 December 2013 (UTC) 1311:15:02, 13 December 2013 (UTC) 1282:17:54, 13 December 2013 (UTC) 1264:17:54, 13 December 2013 (UTC) 1242:06:49, 13 December 2013 (UTC) 1225:05:37, 13 December 2013 (UTC) 1204:19:14, 10 December 2013 (UTC) 1143:16:38, 10 December 2013 (UTC) 1124:16:32, 10 December 2013 (UTC) 1109:16:27, 10 December 2013 (UTC) 1079:05:09, 10 December 2013 (UTC) 1056:04:07, 10 December 2013 (UTC) 940:17:58, 23 November 2013 (UTC) 913:05:35, 16 November 2013 (UTC) 898:04:01, 16 November 2013 (UTC) 876:01:17, 16 November 2013 (UTC) 857:22:24, 15 November 2013 (UTC) 842:22:16, 15 November 2013 (UTC) 823:14:08, 15 November 2013 (UTC) 798:21:32, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 783:20:47, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 769:20:20, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 754:20:14, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 687:19:44, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 668:19:37, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 653:19:29, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 631:19:11, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 613:19:09, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 594:18:11, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 548:16:42, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 539:16:26, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 523:19:49, 13 November 2013 (UTC) 499:16:26, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 484:19:47, 13 November 2013 (UTC) 462:16:36, 13 November 2013 (UTC) 442:16:02, 13 November 2013 (UTC) 410:16:26, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 394:16:06, 13 November 2013 (UTC) 374:16:02, 13 November 2013 (UTC) 350:15:51, 13 November 2013 (UTC) 323:16:26, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 192:15:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC) 177:14:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC) 3975:I see someone beat me to it. 3934:I recently made a change to 3554:01:10, 10 January 2014 (UTC) 3460:13:06, 10 January 2014 (UTC) 3441:04:40, 10 January 2014 (UTC) 3329:03:11, 10 January 2014 (UTC) 2894:circumstances to NCOLLATH??" 2773:are presumed notable if they 2762:Revised proposal for NRODEO 1417:http://www.hrtv.com/english/ 1415:There is also stuff such as 714:Nippon Professional Baseball 603:intended in your proposal? - 568:Nippon Professional Baseball 556:Proposed new wording for #2: 302:División de Honor de Béisbol 3938:based on the discussion at 3536:20:35, 9 January 2014 (UTC) 3519:20:35, 9 January 2014 (UTC) 3502:13:29, 9 January 2014 (UTC) 3485:04:05, 9 January 2014 (UTC) 3423:18:59, 9 January 2014 (UTC) 3400:13:29, 9 January 2014 (UTC) 3381:07:10, 9 January 2014 (UTC) 3348:03:48, 9 January 2014 (UTC) 3308:01:56, 9 January 2014 (UTC) 3287:01:29, 9 January 2014 (UTC) 3270:21:16, 8 January 2014 (UTC) 3229:03:14, 3 January 2014 (UTC) 3207:01:14, 3 January 2014 (UTC) 3185:01:01, 3 January 2014 (UTC) 3138:00:56, 3 January 2014 (UTC) 3124:20:13, 2 January 2014 (UTC) 3108:18:34, 2 January 2014 (UTC) 3071:00:52, 3 January 2014 (UTC) 3042:00:44, 2 January 2014 (UTC) 3028:16:12, 1 January 2014 (UTC) 3013:02:19, 1 January 2014 (UTC) 3000:02:18, 1 January 2014 (UTC) 2988:00:05, 1 January 2014 (UTC) 2417:00:36, 2 January 2014 (UTC) 2398:22:37, 1 January 2014 (UTC) 2360:22:23, 1 January 2014 (UTC) 2310:05:40, 1 January 2014 (UTC) 2291:21:07, 1 January 2014 (UTC) 2239:17:22, 1 January 2014 (UTC) 2224:15:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC) 2206:00:56, 1 January 2014 (UTC) 718:Korea Baseball Organization 572:Korea Baseball Organization 217:Puerto Rico Baseball League 4973: 4623:Bill Hayward (rugby union) 4363:American Bandy Association 3956:23:07, 24 March 2014 (UTC) 3921:04:11, 25 March 2014 (UTC) 3900:13:02, 24 March 2014 (UTC) 3882:09:58, 24 March 2014 (UTC) 3856:08:22, 24 March 2014 (UTC) 3837:01:35, 22 March 2014 (UTC) 3808:20:40, 21 March 2014 (UTC) 3794:20:28, 21 March 2014 (UTC) 3782:20:26, 21 March 2014 (UTC) 3757:17:59, 21 March 2014 (UTC) 3713:23:24, 21 March 2014 (UTC) 3700:16:44, 21 March 2014 (UTC) 3688:14:11, 21 March 2014 (UTC) 3672:13:06, 21 March 2014 (UTC) 3639:23:30, 20 March 2014 (UTC) 3624:23:18, 20 March 2014 (UTC) 3607:12:35, 19 March 2014 (UTC) 3589:12:06, 19 March 2014 (UTC) 3574:05:32, 19 March 2014 (UTC) 3175:disclaimer placed on top.— 2479:and new material added is 2092:I've left notification at 1948:take a look for themselves 1563:Need more? Let us know! 247:Australian Baseball League 4475:separate notability rules 4353:National governing bodies 4345:21:30, 7 April 2014 (UTC) 4330:00:48, 7 April 2014 (UTC) 4315:20:51, 6 April 2014 (UTC) 4287:20:51, 6 April 2014 (UTC) 4256:19:04, 6 April 2014 (UTC) 4242:19:00, 6 April 2014 (UTC) 4218:17:54, 6 April 2014 (UTC) 4200:02:05, 6 April 2014 (UTC) 4180:20:26, 5 April 2014 (UTC) 4162:20:26, 5 April 2014 (UTC) 4144:I see there was plans at 4139:20:00, 5 April 2014 (UTC) 4091:07:31, 4 April 2014 (UTC) 4077:06:13, 4 April 2014 (UTC) 4058:05:54, 4 April 2014 (UTC) 4043:04:40, 4 April 2014 (UTC) 4028:02:34, 4 April 2014 (UTC) 4000:19:01, 1 April 2014 (UTC) 3985:18:32, 1 April 2014 (UTC) 3971:18:31, 1 April 2014 (UTC) 3189:The link should point to 2957:section as well under #3. 2110:There has already been a 1857:add that, at the risk of 379:What we need is a global 4941:08:49, 8 June 2014 (UTC) 4903:00:50, 8 June 2014 (UTC) 4865:01:09, 26 May 2014 (UTC) 4851:00:55, 26 May 2014 (UTC) 4833:00:17, 26 May 2014 (UTC) 4810:23:36, 25 May 2014 (UTC) 4758:22:57, 25 May 2014 (UTC) 4739:20:59, 25 May 2014 (UTC) 4719:08:56, 25 May 2014 (UTC) 4694:15:14, 24 May 2014 (UTC) 4673:06:40, 24 May 2014 (UTC) 4651:19:09, 23 May 2014 (UTC) 4564:19:09, 23 May 2014 (UTC) 4524:16:43, 23 May 2014 (UTC) 4500:14:34, 23 May 2014 (UTC) 4463:20:47, 25 May 2014 (UTC) 4447:01:39, 23 May 2014 (UTC) 3154:WikiProject Cricket page 3077:Single Named Individuals 2501:competition such as the 2486:Athletes who compete in 2385:Mixed martial arts does. 1854:recent change to NHOCKEY 1610:over 300,000 google hits 4607:Dan Payne (rugby union) 4415:17:23, 7 May 2014 (UTC) 4375:16:54, 7 May 2014 (UTC) 4188:Hi, yes, we started on 1614:a named line of saddles 1575:No one is denying that 1017:at least, perhaps also 994:disciplines as well as 986:various breed specific 297:Latvian Baseball League 292:Italian Baseball League 252:Italian Baseball League 108:(and other suggestions) 4877:WP:Notability_(sports) 4855:Interesting, thanks.-- 4820:WP:Notability_(sports) 4798:WP:Notability_(sports) 4777:WP:Notability_(sports) 4123: 2551:Cheyenne Frontier Days 2376:College football does. 2072:Don't waste your time” 2061:WikiProject Ice Hockey 1997:WikiProject Ice Hockey 1993:WikiProject Ice Hockey 1605:World Equestrian Games 1169:World Equestrian Games 722:World Baseball Classic 677:Mexico's top leagues. 576:World Baseball Classic 287:Israel Baseball League 242:Veracruz Winter League 212:Mexican Pacific League 4552:notability guidelines 4119: 3314:I would also support 3095:Major League Baseball 2808:ProRodeo Hall of Fame 2794:National Finals Rodeo 2790:Canadian Finals Rodeo 2517:ProRodeo Hall of Fame 2510:National Finals Rodeo 2506:Canadian Finals Rodeo 710:Major League Baseball 564:Major League Baseball 307:Elitserien (baseball) 282:Irish Baseball League 272:Greek Baseball League 262:Bundesliga (baseball) 42:of past discussions. 4920:Knowledge:Notability 4744:levels are notable.) 3410:International League 2579:"open to all comers" 2460:needing more rules.— 2382:Figure skating does. 1390:NBC 2010 WEG promo. 1131:Request for Comments 4705:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS 4431:user: MATThematical 4152:to comment here. — 3869:God Save the Queen! 3546:Mo Rock...Monstrous 3144:Cricket Guideline 1 1827:God Save the Queen! 1787:God Save the Queen! 1547:BBC coverage search 931:AFDs utterly fail. 429:Greek Basket League 357:Baseball Prospectus 257:Honkbal Hoofdklasse 4435:earlier discussion 2953:? Just a thought. 2836: 2805: 2780:Have participated 2736:this may be useful 2555:Pendleton Round-Up 2521:Rodeo Hall of Fame 1901: 998:gait championships 759:That sounds good. 726:Baseball World Cup 4633:(no references), 4412: 4206:WP:NOTBUREAUCRACY 4137: 3741:underwater hockey 3552: 3239:NHOCKEY #3 and #7 2828: 2803: 2685:all cover rodeo. 2631:tournament -style 2503:Calgary Stampede, 1899: 1777:The Varsity Match 1426:Anky van Grunsven 946:Topics to include 396: 100: 99: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 4964: 4957: 4954: 4937: 4754: 4715: 4681:Valerie Griffeth 4669: 4611:Henry Bloomfield 4570:Valerie Griffeth 4520: 4410: 4402: 4342: 4312: 4303:Add horse racing 4284: 4239: 4197: 4131: 4107:I was reviewing 3927:Minor change to 3895: 3880: 3877: 3870: 3867: 3833: 3548: 3419: 3377: 3283: 3266: 3150:Forms of cricket 3061: 3057: 3056: 3039: 3010: 2997: 2965: 2902: 2884:Bamboo Harvester 2786:Calgary Stampede 2741: 2689: 2642: 2621:Calgary Stampede 2566: 2547:Calgary Stampede 2444: 2434:Calgary Stampede 2394: 2287: 2202: 2051: 1957: 1838: 1835: 1828: 1825: 1798: 1795: 1788: 1785: 1735: 1673: 1641: 1628: 1585: 1567: 1436: 1377: 1345: 1326: 1279: 1261: 1222: 1201: 1181:combined driving 1071: 1011:Greyhound racing 936: 908: 871: 837: 738:reliable sources 703:Revised proposal 479: 389: 378: 369: 345: 144:from would be. 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 4972: 4971: 4967: 4966: 4965: 4963: 4962: 4961: 4960: 4955: 4951: 4933: 4750: 4711: 4665: 4631:Richard Tardits 4599:Jonathan Vitale 4516: 4471: 4423: 4404: 4355: 4340: 4310: 4305: 4282: 4237: 4195: 4170:is likely met.— 4109:Sam Waley-Cohen 4105: 4012: 3932: 3893: 3875: 3868: 3865: 3862: 3829: 3647: 3562: 3415: 3373: 3321:Hobbes Goodyear 3300:Hobbes Goodyear 3281: 3262: 3241: 3146: 3079: 3054: 3052: 3037: 3008: 2995: 2963: 2900: 2764: 2739: 2687: 2640: 2564: 2442: 2429: 2390: 2283: 2277:last two weeks. 2198: 2047: 1953: 1850: 1833: 1826: 1823: 1820: 1793: 1786: 1783: 1780: 1773: 1733: 1671: 1639: 1626: 1620:, she has been 1618:a clothing line 1583: 1565: 1500:. Also rodeo - 1434: 1375: 1343: 1324: 1277: 1259: 1220: 1199: 1069: 996:Icelandic horse 948: 934: 904: 867: 833: 705: 558: 475: 385: 365: 341: 105: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 4970: 4968: 4959: 4958: 4948: 4947: 4946: 4945: 4944: 4906: 4905: 4873: 4872: 4871: 4870: 4869: 4868: 4867: 4773: 4772: 4771: 4770: 4769: 4768: 4767: 4766: 4765: 4764: 4763: 4762: 4761: 4619:Patrick Danahy 4603:Blake Burdette 4575:primary source 4568:Consider that 4566: 4484:discriminatory 4473:Why are there 4470: 4467: 4466: 4465: 4422: 4419: 4418: 4417: 4407: 4361:regarding the 4354: 4351: 4350: 4349: 4348: 4347: 4304: 4301: 4300: 4299: 4298: 4297: 4296: 4295: 4294: 4293: 4292: 4291: 4290: 4289: 4267: 4266: 4265: 4264: 4263: 4262: 4261: 4260: 4259: 4258: 4225: 4224: 4223: 4222: 4221: 4220: 4183: 4182: 4164: 4115:WP:NEQUESTRIAN 4104: 4101: 4100: 4099: 4098: 4097: 4096: 4095: 4094: 4093: 4081:Thanks. Done. 4011: 4010:Notable coach? 4008: 4007: 4006: 4005: 4004: 4003: 4002: 3931: 3925: 3924: 3923: 3908: 3907: 3906: 3905: 3904: 3903: 3902: 3815: 3814: 3813: 3812: 3811: 3810: 3760: 3759: 3718: 3717: 3716: 3715: 3702: 3646: 3643: 3642: 3641: 3612: 3611: 3610: 3609: 3561: 3558: 3557: 3556: 3538: 3521: 3504: 3487: 3471: 3470: 3469: 3468: 3467: 3466: 3465: 3464: 3463: 3462: 3444: 3443: 3429:WP:BUREAUCRACY 3425: 3403: 3402: 3384: 3383: 3351: 3350: 3332: 3331: 3311: 3310: 3289: 3240: 3237: 3236: 3235: 3234: 3233: 3232: 3231: 3145: 3142: 3141: 3140: 3126: 3078: 3075: 3074: 3073: 3050: 3049: 3048: 3047: 3046: 3045: 3044: 3032: 3031: 3030: 2961:Back to you! 2959: 2958: 2954: 2943: 2940: 2935: 2934: 2933: 2932: 2908: 2907: 2895: 2891: 2875: 2870: 2869: 2838: 2837: 2826: 2801: 2777: 2776: 2774: 2763: 2760: 2759: 2758: 2757: 2756: 2755: 2754: 2753: 2752: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2746: 2718: 2717: 2716: 2715: 2714: 2713: 2712: 2711: 2710: 2709: 2708: 2707: 2626:Kentucky Derby 2614: 2613: 2559: 2558: 2532: 2523: 2513: 2494: 2493: 2491: 2473: 2472: 2458:WP:BUREAUCRACY 2438:List of rodeos 2428: 2425: 2424: 2423: 2422: 2421: 2420: 2419: 2401: 2400: 2363: 2362: 2346: 2345: 2325: 2324: 2323: 2322: 2321: 2320: 2319: 2318: 2317: 2316: 2315: 2314: 2313: 2312: 2297: 2296: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2241: 2178: 2158: 2108: 2042:WP:IDONTLIKEIT 2034: 1965: 1964: 1932: 1897: 1896: 1849: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1842: 1772: 1769: 1768: 1767: 1766: 1765: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1761: 1760: 1759: 1758: 1757: 1756: 1755: 1754: 1753: 1696: 1695: 1694: 1693: 1692: 1691: 1690: 1689: 1688: 1687: 1686: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1561: 1560: 1555: 1550: 1540: 1539: 1538: 1537: 1536: 1535: 1534: 1533: 1532: 1531: 1530: 1529: 1528: 1527: 1526: 1525: 1524: 1523: 1522: 1521: 1520: 1519: 1464: 1463: 1462: 1461: 1460: 1459: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1455: 1454: 1453: 1452: 1451: 1450: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1445: 1444: 1443: 1442: 1441: 1422:David O'Connor 1298: 1297: 1296: 1295: 1294: 1293: 1292: 1291: 1290: 1289: 1288: 1287: 1286: 1285: 1284: 1211: 1210: 1209: 1208: 1207: 1206: 1191:Helen Crabtree 1165:horse trainers 1148: 1147: 1146: 1145: 1126: 1092: 1091: 1090: 1044: 1043: 1035: 1034: 1031: 1029:Dogsled racing 1022: 1015:Whippet racing 1008: 1006:Harness racing 999: 984: 979: 966: 956: 955: 954:Sports persons 947: 944: 943: 942: 928:Hobie Landrith 923: 922: 921: 920: 919: 918: 917: 916: 915: 829: 828: 827: 826: 825: 805: 804: 803: 802: 801: 800: 742: 741: 733: 704: 701: 700: 699: 698: 697: 696: 695: 694: 693: 692: 691: 690: 689: 634: 633: 616: 615: 597: 596: 557: 554: 553: 552: 551: 550: 510: 509: 508: 507: 506: 505: 504: 503: 502: 501: 465: 464: 417: 416: 415: 414: 413: 412: 328: 327: 326: 325: 310: 309: 304: 299: 294: 289: 284: 279: 274: 269: 267:Division Élite 264: 259: 254: 249: 244: 239: 234: 229: 224: 219: 214: 209: 204: 199: 197:Mexican League 104: 101: 98: 97: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4969: 4953: 4950: 4943: 4942: 4939: 4938: 4936: 4927: 4925: 4921: 4915: 4910: 4909: 4908: 4907: 4904: 4900: 4896: 4892: 4887: 4883: 4878: 4874: 4866: 4862: 4858: 4854: 4853: 4852: 4848: 4844: 4840: 4836: 4835: 4834: 4830: 4826: 4821: 4817: 4813: 4812: 4811: 4807: 4803: 4799: 4795: 4791: 4786: 4782: 4778: 4774: 4760: 4759: 4756: 4755: 4753: 4742: 4741: 4740: 4736: 4732: 4727: 4726:automatically 4722: 4721: 4720: 4717: 4716: 4714: 4706: 4701: 4697: 4696: 4695: 4691: 4687: 4682: 4677: 4676: 4675: 4674: 4671: 4670: 4668: 4659: 4654: 4653: 4652: 4648: 4644: 4640: 4636: 4632: 4628: 4624: 4620: 4616: 4612: 4608: 4604: 4600: 4596: 4592: 4591:Hayden Mexted 4588: 4584: 4580: 4576: 4571: 4567: 4565: 4561: 4557: 4553: 4549: 4548:automatically 4545: 4540: 4536: 4532: 4527: 4526: 4525: 4522: 4521: 4519: 4512: 4508: 4504: 4503: 4502: 4501: 4497: 4493: 4489: 4486:, my article 4485: 4481: 4476: 4468: 4464: 4460: 4456: 4455:MATThematical 4451: 4450: 4449: 4448: 4444: 4440: 4436: 4432: 4428: 4420: 4416: 4411: 4409: 4400: 4396: 4391: 4387: 4383: 4379: 4378: 4377: 4376: 4372: 4368: 4364: 4360: 4352: 4346: 4343: 4337: 4333: 4332: 4331: 4327: 4323: 4319: 4318: 4317: 4316: 4313: 4302: 4288: 4285: 4279: 4278: 4277: 4276: 4275: 4274: 4273: 4272: 4271: 4270: 4269: 4268: 4257: 4253: 4249: 4245: 4244: 4243: 4240: 4233: 4232: 4231: 4230: 4229: 4228: 4227: 4226: 4219: 4215: 4211: 4207: 4203: 4202: 4201: 4198: 4191: 4187: 4186: 4185: 4184: 4181: 4177: 4173: 4169: 4165: 4163: 4159: 4155: 4151: 4147: 4143: 4142: 4141: 4140: 4136: 4135: 4130: 4129: 4122: 4118: 4116: 4112: 4110: 4102: 4092: 4088: 4084: 4080: 4079: 4078: 4074: 4070: 4066: 4061: 4060: 4059: 4055: 4051: 4046: 4045: 4044: 4040: 4036: 4032: 4031: 4030: 4029: 4025: 4021: 4017: 4009: 4001: 3997: 3993: 3988: 3987: 3986: 3982: 3978: 3974: 3973: 3972: 3968: 3964: 3960: 3959: 3958: 3957: 3953: 3949: 3945: 3941: 3937: 3930: 3926: 3922: 3918: 3914: 3909: 3901: 3898: 3896: 3889: 3885: 3884: 3883: 3878: 3872: 3871: 3859: 3858: 3857: 3853: 3849: 3845: 3841: 3840: 3839: 3838: 3835: 3834: 3832: 3821: 3817: 3816: 3809: 3805: 3801: 3797: 3796: 3795: 3792: 3789: 3785: 3784: 3783: 3779: 3775: 3771: 3766: 3762: 3761: 3758: 3754: 3750: 3746: 3742: 3738: 3734: 3730: 3725: 3720: 3719: 3714: 3711: 3708: 3703: 3701: 3698: 3695: 3691: 3690: 3689: 3685: 3681: 3676: 3675: 3674: 3673: 3669: 3665: 3659: 3657: 3655: 3653: 3651: 3644: 3640: 3636: 3632: 3628: 3627: 3626: 3625: 3621: 3617: 3608: 3604: 3600: 3596: 3592: 3591: 3590: 3586: 3582: 3578: 3577: 3576: 3575: 3571: 3567: 3559: 3555: 3551: 3547: 3542: 3539: 3537: 3533: 3529: 3525: 3522: 3520: 3516: 3512: 3508: 3505: 3503: 3499: 3495: 3491: 3488: 3486: 3483: 3480: 3476: 3473: 3472: 3461: 3457: 3453: 3448: 3447: 3446: 3445: 3442: 3438: 3434: 3430: 3426: 3424: 3421: 3420: 3418: 3411: 3407: 3406: 3405: 3404: 3401: 3397: 3393: 3388: 3387: 3386: 3385: 3382: 3379: 3378: 3376: 3368: 3363: 3358: 3355: 3354: 3353: 3352: 3349: 3345: 3341: 3337: 3334: 3333: 3330: 3326: 3322: 3317: 3313: 3312: 3309: 3305: 3301: 3297: 3293: 3290: 3288: 3285: 3284: 3277: 3274: 3273: 3272: 3271: 3268: 3267: 3265: 3256: 3252: 3250: 3245: 3238: 3230: 3226: 3222: 3218: 3214: 3210: 3209: 3208: 3204: 3200: 3196: 3195:Major cricket 3192: 3188: 3187: 3186: 3182: 3178: 3174: 3170: 3169: 3168: 3167: 3163: 3159: 3155: 3151: 3143: 3139: 3135: 3131: 3127: 3125: 3121: 3117: 3112: 3111: 3110: 3109: 3105: 3101: 3100:Kinston eagle 3096: 3092: 3091:WP:BASEBALL/N 3088: 3084: 3076: 3072: 3068: 3064: 3060: 3051: 3043: 3040: 3033: 3029: 3025: 3021: 3016: 3015: 3014: 3011: 3005: 3004: 3003: 3002: 3001: 2998: 2991: 2990: 2989: 2985: 2981: 2976: 2972: 2971: 2970: 2969: 2966: 2955: 2952: 2951:pickup riders 2948: 2944: 2941: 2937: 2936: 2929: 2928: 2927: 2923: 2919: 2915: 2910: 2909: 2906: 2903: 2896: 2892: 2889: 2885: 2881: 2876: 2872: 2871: 2867: 2866: 2865: 2864: 2860: 2856: 2852: 2848: 2844: 2835: 2833: 2827: 2824: 2823: 2817: 2813: 2809: 2802: 2799: 2795: 2791: 2787: 2783: 2779: 2778: 2775: 2772: 2769: 2766: 2765: 2761: 2745: 2742: 2737: 2732: 2731: 2730: 2729: 2728: 2727: 2726: 2725: 2724: 2723: 2722: 2721: 2720: 2719: 2706: 2703: 2700: 2695: 2694: 2693: 2690: 2684: 2680: 2676: 2672: 2667: 2666: 2665: 2664: 2663: 2660: 2657: 2652: 2648: 2647: 2646: 2643: 2637: 2632: 2627: 2622: 2618: 2617: 2616: 2615: 2612: 2608: 2604: 2599: 2597: 2594: 2590: 2588: 2586: 2583: 2580: 2576: 2573: 2572: 2571: 2570: 2567: 2557: 2556: 2552: 2548: 2544: 2540: 2535: 2534: 2531: 2529: 2524: 2522: 2518: 2514: 2511: 2507: 2504: 2500: 2496: 2495: 2492: 2489: 2485: 2484: 2483: 2482: 2478: 2471: 2467: 2463: 2459: 2455: 2451: 2450: 2449: 2448: 2445: 2439: 2435: 2426: 2418: 2414: 2410: 2405: 2404: 2403: 2402: 2399: 2396: 2395: 2393: 2386: 2383: 2380: 2377: 2374: 2373:Cricket does. 2371: 2367: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2361: 2357: 2353: 2348: 2347: 2344: 2341: 2338: 2334: 2330: 2327: 2326: 2311: 2307: 2303: 2298: 2292: 2289: 2288: 2286: 2278: 2274: 2270: 2266: 2262: 2258: 2254: 2250: 2246: 2242: 2240: 2236: 2232: 2227: 2226: 2225: 2221: 2217: 2213: 2209: 2208: 2207: 2204: 2203: 2201: 2193: 2189: 2184: 2179: 2177: 2174: 2171: 2167: 2163: 2159: 2155: 2154: 2153: 2149: 2145: 2140: 2139: 2138: 2135: 2132: 2128: 2127: 2126: 2122: 2118: 2113: 2109: 2107: 2103: 2099: 2095: 2091: 2090: 2089: 2085: 2081: 2077: 2073: 2069: 2065: 2062: 2058: 2057: 2056: 2053: 2052: 2050: 2043: 2039: 2035: 2033: 2029: 2025: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2014: 2010: 2006: 2002: 1998: 1994: 1990: 1986: 1982: 1981: 1980: 1979: 1975: 1971: 1963: 1962: 1959: 1958: 1956: 1949: 1944: 1938: 1933: 1931: 1928: 1925: 1921: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1914: 1910: 1905: 1902:Ravenswing's 1895: 1892: 1889: 1884: 1879: 1875: 1874: 1873: 1872: 1868: 1864: 1860: 1855: 1847: 1841: 1836: 1830: 1829: 1818: 1817: 1816: 1812: 1808: 1804: 1803: 1802: 1801: 1796: 1790: 1789: 1778: 1770: 1752: 1749: 1745: 1741: 1740: 1739: 1736: 1729: 1728: 1727: 1726: 1725: 1724: 1723: 1720: 1716: 1712: 1711: 1710: 1706: 1702: 1697: 1677: 1674: 1668: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1664: 1663: 1662: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1658: 1657: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1653: 1652: 1651: 1650: 1646: 1642: 1634: 1633: 1632: 1629: 1623: 1619: 1615: 1611: 1606: 1601: 1596: 1595: 1594: 1590: 1586: 1578: 1574: 1573: 1572: 1571: 1568: 1559: 1556: 1554: 1551: 1548: 1545: 1544: 1543: 1518: 1515: 1511: 1507: 1503: 1499: 1495: 1491: 1486: 1485: 1484: 1483: 1482: 1481: 1480: 1479: 1478: 1477: 1476: 1475: 1474: 1473: 1472: 1471: 1470: 1469: 1468: 1467: 1466: 1465: 1440: 1437: 1431: 1430:Beezie Madden 1427: 1423: 1418: 1414: 1409: 1408: 1407: 1406: 1405: 1401: 1397: 1392: 1391: 1389: 1385: 1381: 1378: 1373: 1368: 1367: 1366: 1362: 1358: 1353: 1352: 1351: 1350: 1349: 1346: 1339: 1338: 1337: 1336: 1335: 1331: 1327: 1319: 1314: 1313: 1312: 1308: 1304: 1299: 1283: 1280: 1274: 1269: 1268: 1267: 1266: 1265: 1262: 1255: 1254: 1253: 1252: 1251: 1250: 1249: 1248: 1247: 1246: 1245: 1244: 1243: 1239: 1235: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1223: 1217: 1205: 1202: 1196: 1195:Sheila Varian 1192: 1187: 1182: 1178: 1174: 1170: 1166: 1162: 1158: 1154: 1153: 1152: 1151: 1150: 1149: 1144: 1140: 1136: 1132: 1127: 1125: 1121: 1117: 1112: 1111: 1110: 1106: 1102: 1098: 1093: 1088: 1085: 1082: 1081: 1080: 1076: 1072: 1065: 1060: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1053: 1049: 1041: 1037: 1036: 1032: 1030: 1026: 1023: 1020: 1019:Saluki racing 1016: 1012: 1009: 1007: 1003: 1000: 997: 993: 989: 985: 983: 980: 978: 974: 970: 967: 965: 961: 958: 957: 953: 952: 951: 945: 941: 938: 937: 935:Agent Vodello 929: 924: 914: 911: 909: 907: 901: 900: 899: 895: 891: 887: 882: 879: 878: 877: 874: 872: 870: 864: 860: 859: 858: 854: 850: 845: 844: 843: 840: 838: 836: 830: 824: 820: 816: 811: 810: 809: 808: 807: 806: 799: 795: 791: 786: 785: 784: 780: 776: 772: 771: 770: 766: 762: 758: 757: 756: 755: 751: 747: 739: 734: 731: 727: 723: 719: 715: 711: 707: 706: 702: 688: 684: 680: 675: 671: 670: 669: 665: 661: 656: 655: 654: 650: 646: 642: 638: 637: 636: 635: 632: 628: 624: 620: 619: 618: 617: 614: 610: 606: 601: 600: 599: 598: 595: 591: 587: 583: 581: 577: 573: 569: 565: 560: 559: 555: 549: 546: 542: 541: 540: 536: 532: 527: 526: 525: 524: 520: 516: 500: 496: 492: 487: 486: 485: 482: 480: 478: 472: 469: 468: 467: 466: 463: 459: 455: 450: 449: 448: 447: 446: 445: 444: 443: 439: 435: 430: 425: 421: 411: 407: 403: 398: 397: 395: 392: 390: 388: 382: 377: 376: 375: 372: 370: 368: 361: 358: 354: 353: 352: 351: 348: 346: 344: 336: 332: 324: 320: 316: 312: 311: 308: 305: 303: 300: 298: 295: 293: 290: 288: 285: 283: 280: 278: 275: 273: 270: 268: 265: 263: 260: 258: 255: 253: 250: 248: 245: 243: 240: 238: 235: 233: 230: 228: 225: 223: 220: 218: 215: 213: 210: 208: 205: 203: 200: 198: 195: 194: 193: 189: 185: 181: 180: 179: 178: 174: 170: 165: 161: 157: 155: 151: 145: 143: 139: 135: 131: 125: 122: 116: 114: 113:WP:BASEBALL/N 110: 109: 102: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 4952: 4934: 4932: 4928: 4917: 4913: 4802:Stuartyeates 4751: 4749: 4745: 4725: 4712: 4710: 4699: 4666: 4664: 4660: 4657: 4595:Chad Erskine 4547: 4538: 4534: 4530: 4517: 4515: 4507:amour propre 4506: 4472: 4424: 4405: 4385: 4356: 4306: 4132: 4126: 4124: 4120: 4113: 4106: 4103:Horse racing 4013: 3933: 3887: 3866:The C of E 3863: 3843: 3830: 3828: 3824: 3723: 3660: 3648: 3645:Who decides? 3613: 3563: 3540: 3523: 3506: 3489: 3474: 3416: 3414: 3374: 3372: 3366: 3361: 3356: 3335: 3315: 3291: 3280: 3275: 3263: 3261: 3257: 3253: 3248: 3246: 3242: 3213:WP:GUIDELINE 3147: 3080: 3058: 2960: 2947:trick riders 2913: 2839: 2829: 2819: 2781: 2767: 2650: 2630: 2592: 2578: 2574: 2560: 2536: 2533: 2525: 2502: 2498: 2480: 2476: 2474: 2430: 2391: 2389: 2379:Tennis does. 2370:Soccer does. 2284: 2282: 2276: 2268: 2261:this article 2257:This article 2248: 2244: 2199: 2197: 2191: 2187: 2182: 2165: 2161: 2060: 2048: 2046: 2037: 2004: 2000: 1996: 1992: 1966: 1954: 1952: 1945: 1941: 1936: 1898: 1882: 1851: 1824:The C of E 1821: 1784:The C of E 1781: 1774: 1576: 1562: 1541: 1383: 1317: 1212: 1045: 992:fine harness 973:Show jumping 949: 932: 905: 868: 862: 834: 743: 673: 640: 561: 511: 476: 423: 419: 418: 386: 383:, dammit. -- 366: 356: 342: 337: 333: 329: 166: 162: 158: 149: 146: 141: 137: 133: 129: 126: 120: 117: 111: 107: 106: 78: 43: 37: 4935:Ravenswing 4893:of course. 4752:Ravenswing 4713:Ravenswing 4667:Ravenswing 4639:Alec Parker 4627:Tom Billups 4615:Junior Sifa 4579:Mike Mangan 4518:Ravenswing 3831:Ravenswing 3417:Ravenswing 3375:Ravenswing 3264:Ravenswing 2888:Clever Hans 2851:WP:NCOLLATH 2832:WP:NCOLLATH 2782:as athletes 2541:(PRCA) and 2392:Ravenswing 2329:WP:FOOTBALL 2285:Ravenswing 2200:Ravenswing 2162:presumption 2049:Ravenswing 1955:Ravenswing 1744:Earl Andrew 1715:Earl Andrew 1273:Clever Hans 1025:Dog agility 988:Saddle seat 36:This is an 4857:Tomwsulcer 4825:Tomwsulcer 4792:(although 4731:Tomwsulcer 4686:Tomwsulcer 4643:Tomwsulcer 4637:(2 refs), 4587:Mark Aylor 4583:Owen Lentz 4556:Tomwsulcer 4529:something 4453:solution. 4083:Epeefleche 4050:Epeefleche 4020:Epeefleche 3820:WP:ATHLETE 3733:WP:ATHLETE 3631:Spanneraol 3581:Spanneraol 3524:Support #7 3507:Support #3 3340:Spanneraol 2679:CBS Sports 2675:NBC Sports 2481:underlined 2352:Spanneraol 2331:maintains 2269:explicitly 2183:explicitly 2112:discussion 1937:four years 1900:Resolute's 1878:WP:NHOCKEY 1852:I saw the 1612:, She has 1396:Spanneraol 1357:Spanneraol 1040:sighthound 849:Spanneraol 790:Spanneraol 746:Spanneraol 674:somewhere. 660:Spanneraol 623:Spanneraol 586:Spanneraol 454:Spanneraol 95:Archive 20 90:Archive 19 85:Archive 18 79:Archive 17 73:Archive 16 68:Archive 15 60:Archive 10 4895:Vgriffeth 4492:Vgriffeth 4439:Trackinfo 4386:guideline 4367:Bandy guy 4341:Montanabw 4311:Montanabw 4283:Montanabw 4238:Montanabw 4196:Montanabw 3550:(leech44) 3282:Cjmclark 3038:Montanabw 3009:Montanabw 2996:Montanabw 2964:Montanabw 2931:Thoughts: 2901:Montanabw 2868:Thoughts: 2740:Montanabw 2688:Montanabw 2641:Montanabw 2593:of course 2565:Montanabw 2477:strikeout 2443:Montanabw 1734:Montanabw 1672:Montanabw 1627:Montanabw 1566:Montanabw 1435:Montanabw 1376:Montanabw 1344:Montanabw 1278:Montanabw 1260:Montanabw 1221:Montanabw 1200:Montanabw 1186:"Grade I" 1163:and race 277:Interlyga 4837:See the 4635:Dan Lyle 4539:very few 4128:Kahastok 3913:Papaursa 3894:James086 3737:baseball 3680:RonSigPi 3158:RonSigPi 2939:wrong??) 2880:Prometea 2499:national 2273:this AfD 2265:this AfD 2253:this AfD 2212:bullying 1859:WP:BEANS 1577:at times 1510:Ealdgyth 1116:Muboshgu 977:Eventing 969:Dressage 906:Jprg1966 869:Jprg1966 835:Jprg1966 775:Muboshgu 730:Olympics 580:Olympics 477:Jprg1966 434:Rikster2 420:Question 387:Jprg1966 367:Jprg1966 343:Jprg1966 184:Muboshgu 152:to pass 4535:notable 4322:Bagumba 4248:Bagumba 4210:Bagumba 4172:Bagumba 4154:Bagumba 4117:says, 4069:Bagumba 4035:Bagumba 3992:DJSasso 3944:WP:NBOX 3936:WP:NBOX 3929:WP:NBOX 3800:Bagumba 3791:Snowman 3774:Bagumba 3770:WP:WHYN 3749:DJSasso 3729:WP:BOLD 3697:Snowman 3599:DJSasso 3541:Support 3528:Patken4 3511:Patken4 3494:DJSasso 3490:Support 3475:Support 3452:DJSasso 3433:Bagumba 3392:DJSasso 3292:Support 3276:Support 3221:Bagumba 3191:WP:CRIN 3177:Bagumba 3130:Bagumba 3116:DJSasso 3063:Dolovis 3020:Dolovis 2980:Dolovis 2918:Dolovis 2914:italics 2855:Dolovis 2603:Dolovis 2462:Bagumba 2409:DJSasso 2340:Snowman 2302:DJSasso 2231:DJSasso 2216:Dolovis 2166:presume 2144:Dolovis 2117:Patken4 2098:Bagumba 2080:Dolovis 2068:uncivil 2024:DJSasso 2009:Dolovis 1970:DJSasso 1909:Dolovis 1883:presume 1863:Bagumba 1807:DJSasso 1771:Varsity 1731:ages. 1177:reining 1161:jockeys 1101:DJSasso 982:Reining 884:to the 863:English 815:DJSasso 605:DJSasso 515:DJSasso 134:lateral 39:archive 4891:WP:GNG 4882:WP:GNG 4843:isaacl 4816:WP:GNG 4785:WP:GNG 4781:WP:GNG 4399:Ahecht 4168:WP:GNG 4065:WP:GNG 4014:I see 3977:Mdtemp 3963:Mdtemp 3948:Mdtemp 3745:WP:BRD 3595:WP:GNG 3367:reason 3357:Reply: 3336:Oppose 3296:WP:GNG 3087:WP:GNG 2843:WP:GNG 2575:Oppose 2454:WP:GNG 2333:WP:FPL 2192:That's 1701:isaacl 1384:More: 1135:isaacl 1097:WP:GNG 1002:Racing 890:isaacl 545:Secret 471:Here's 154:WP:GNG 121:winter 3788:Giant 3694:Giant 3215:, as 2796:, or 2771:Rodeo 2488:Rodeo 2427:Rodeo 2337:Giant 2245:agree 1999:, to 1985:essay 1904:essay 1303:Bcp67 1234:Pitke 1048:Pitke 964:Chess 424:EVERY 422:- is 16:< 4899:talk 4861:talk 4847:talk 4829:talk 4806:talk 4735:talk 4700:only 4690:talk 4647:talk 4560:talk 4531:very 4496:talk 4488:here 4459:talk 4443:talk 4427:here 4408:PAGE 4406:TALK 4397:. -- 4371:talk 4326:talk 4252:talk 4214:talk 4176:talk 4158:talk 4134:talk 4087:talk 4073:talk 4054:talk 4039:talk 4024:talk 3996:talk 3981:talk 3967:talk 3952:talk 3917:talk 3888:only 3876:talk 3852:talk 3848:Fram 3844:here 3804:talk 3778:talk 3753:talk 3724:then 3710:lute 3707:Reso 3684:talk 3668:talk 3664:Fram 3635:talk 3620:talk 3616:Alex 3603:talk 3585:talk 3570:talk 3566:Alex 3532:talk 3515:talk 3498:talk 3482:lute 3479:Reso 3456:talk 3437:talk 3396:talk 3344:talk 3325:talk 3304:talk 3298:. -- 3225:talk 3203:talk 3199:Hack 3181:talk 3162:talk 3134:talk 3120:talk 3104:talk 3067:talk 3059:Done 3024:talk 2984:talk 2922:talk 2859:talk 2702:lute 2699:Reso 2683:ESPN 2681:and 2673:and 2659:lute 2656:Reso 2607:talk 2466:talk 2413:talk 2356:talk 2306:talk 2259:and 2249:your 2235:talk 2220:talk 2173:lute 2170:Reso 2148:talk 2134:lute 2131:Reso 2121:talk 2102:talk 2084:talk 2038:only 2028:talk 2013:talk 2005:this 2001:this 1974:talk 1927:lute 1924:Reso 1913:talk 1891:lute 1888:Reso 1867:talk 1834:talk 1811:talk 1794:talk 1748:talk 1719:talk 1705:talk 1640:ASEM 1616:and 1603:the 1584:ASEM 1514:Talk 1506:here 1504:and 1502:here 1498:here 1496:and 1494:here 1490:here 1400:talk 1382:and 1361:talk 1325:ASEM 1307:talk 1238:talk 1179:and 1139:talk 1120:talk 1105:talk 1086:and 1070:ASEM 1064:WP:N 1052:talk 1004:and 990:and 975:and 962:and 894:talk 853:talk 819:talk 794:talk 779:talk 765:talk 761:Alex 750:talk 683:talk 679:Alex 664:talk 649:talk 645:Alex 627:talk 609:talk 590:talk 535:talk 531:Alex 519:talk 495:talk 491:Alex 458:talk 438:talk 406:talk 402:Alex 319:talk 315:Alex 188:talk 173:talk 169:Alex 150:have 142:over 4914:not 4886:IRB 3362:but 3316:any 2916:). 2820:or 2651:any 2519:or 2508:or 2188:and 1600:FEI 1318:can 1193:or 1173:FEI 1099:. - 728:or 578:or 381:WAR 130:not 4901:) 4863:) 4849:) 4831:) 4808:) 4737:) 4692:) 4649:) 4629:, 4625:, 4621:, 4617:, 4613:, 4609:, 4605:, 4601:, 4597:, 4593:, 4589:, 4585:, 4581:, 4562:) 4498:) 4461:) 4445:) 4413:) 4373:) 4365:. 4328:) 4254:) 4216:) 4178:) 4160:) 4089:) 4075:) 4067:.— 4056:) 4041:) 4026:) 3998:) 3983:) 3969:) 3954:) 3919:) 3854:) 3806:) 3780:) 3772:.— 3755:) 3686:) 3670:) 3637:) 3622:) 3605:) 3587:) 3572:) 3534:) 3517:) 3500:) 3458:) 3439:) 3398:) 3346:) 3327:) 3319:-- 3306:) 3249:or 3227:) 3205:) 3197:. 3183:) 3164:) 3136:) 3122:) 3106:) 3069:) 3026:) 2986:) 2924:) 2886:, 2882:, 2861:) 2853:. 2818:, 2814:, 2810:, 2792:, 2788:, 2677:, 2609:) 2553:, 2549:, 2468:) 2415:) 2358:) 2335:. 2308:) 2237:) 2222:) 2150:) 2123:) 2104:) 2086:) 2044:. 2030:) 2015:) 1976:) 1950:. 1915:) 1869:) 1813:) 1746:- 1717:- 1707:) 1647:) 1591:) 1512:- 1428:, 1424:, 1402:) 1363:) 1332:) 1309:) 1301:-- 1240:) 1141:) 1122:) 1114:– 1107:) 1077:) 1054:) 1046:-- 1027:, 971:, 960:Go 896:) 888:. 855:) 821:) 796:) 781:) 767:) 752:) 724:, 716:, 712:, 685:) 666:) 651:) 629:) 611:) 592:) 584:- 570:, 566:, 537:) 521:) 497:) 460:) 440:) 408:) 363:-- 339:-- 321:) 190:) 175:) 138:up 64:← 4897:( 4859:( 4845:( 4827:( 4804:( 4733:( 4688:( 4645:( 4558:( 4494:( 4457:( 4441:( 4401:( 4369:( 4324:( 4250:( 4212:( 4174:( 4156:( 4085:( 4071:( 4052:( 4037:( 4022:( 3994:( 3979:( 3965:( 3950:( 3915:( 3879:) 3873:( 3850:( 3802:( 3776:( 3751:( 3682:( 3666:( 3633:( 3618:( 3601:( 3583:( 3568:( 3530:( 3513:( 3496:( 3454:( 3435:( 3394:( 3390:- 3342:( 3323:( 3302:( 3223:( 3201:( 3179:( 3160:( 3132:( 3118:( 3102:( 3065:( 3022:( 2982:( 2920:( 2857:( 2841:( 2834:. 2825:. 2800:; 2605:( 2530:. 2464:( 2411:( 2354:( 2304:( 2233:( 2218:( 2146:( 2119:( 2100:( 2082:( 2026:( 2011:( 1972:( 1911:( 1865:( 1837:) 1831:( 1809:( 1797:) 1791:( 1703:( 1645:t 1643:( 1638:M 1589:t 1587:( 1582:M 1398:( 1386:[ 1359:( 1330:t 1328:( 1323:M 1305:( 1236:( 1137:( 1118:( 1103:( 1075:t 1073:( 1068:M 1050:( 892:( 851:( 817:( 792:( 777:( 763:( 748:( 744:- 681:( 662:( 647:( 625:( 607:( 588:( 533:( 517:( 513:- 493:( 456:( 436:( 404:( 317:( 186:( 171:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge

talk:Notability (sports)/Archive 17 - Knowledge

Index