Talk:Waivers (NFL)
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | On 21 August 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Waivers (National Football League). The result of the discussion was Moved to Waivers (NFL). |
Requested move
edit- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: no move. This discussion was evaluated together with discussions at Talk:Waivers#Requested_move and Talk:Waivers (NHL)#Requested_move. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 14:02, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Waivers (American football) → Waiver (American football) — Per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (plurals). While often used in the plural, this is not a term "always in a plural form in English", nor any of the other specified exceptions to the usual naming convention. Inbound links are variously from text such as "waiver", "waived", "waivered", etc, so a rename would actually be somewhat useful for link-piping, as well as more conventional. See also Talk:Waivers#Requested move and Talk:Waivers (NHL)#Requested move Smartiger (talk) 20:13, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
- Support move to singular.
This should be WP:SNOW-able.-- JHunterJ (talk) 00:37, 11 January 2011 (UTC) - Oppose a player isn't put on waiver, they are put on waivers. It's always multiples in this case. WP:COMMONNAME applies here. -DJSasso (talk) 03:00, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
- I wasn't proposing that as a usage, however. If you look at the inbound links, they're frequently from singular forms: "waiver wire", "waiver claims", and elsewhere I've seen "waiver number", "waiver pick", etc. (As well as no few "waive", "waiving", "waived", etc) Granted those are all attributive forms, so actual usage as a singular noun phrase does seem to be on the scarce side. Alternatively, would it make sense to move to "NFL waiver system", "American waiver procedure", or similar? Smartiger (talk) 18:55, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
- This article is about the system called Waivers....that is its name. Its not about waiver number or waiver pick or waiving, its about the system known as waivers. Always used in plural. It doesn't matter what the incoming links are. The system itself is known as waivers. -DJSasso (talk) 14:44, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
- But that's clearly not its sole, singular name: it's frequently referred to as "the waiver system", for example, and indeed that's what the NFL's own Collective Bargaining Agreement calls it. (The same document also refers to a singular "waiver" as a noun phrase, as well as variously using it attributively.) Just because "put on waivers" is a fairly common idiom does not rise to it being "always in plural form", as I've demonstrated. As you agree the article is about the system, and not the idiom, I don't see what the objection to a move to NFL waiver system (say) would be. Smartiger (talk) 18:30, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
- WP:COMMONNAME is why. We are supposed to use the name something is most commonly known by. In this case Waivers. This is so that when people do a search they end up where they expect to end up, and things like auto complete will show them what they want. By using something like NFL Waiver system you are likely to break those types of searches and search aids by not starting with the letter the most common name goes by. -DJSasso (talk) 16:51, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
- I dispute that "waivers" is the common name for "the waiver system"; it's simply a term that occurs a lot in idioms like "put on waivers", which isn't precisely synonymous. This article isn't about the idiom, it's about the system. As for your suggestion about searches: that seems to me to be supposing that people's searches are unreasonably specific, or are using a search engine that's unreasonably fragile. Smartiger (talk) 05:19, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
- The search issue I mention is one of the biggest reasons we use common name. It is brought up in almost all move request discussions. And yes you can dispute that waivers is the common name, but look at just about article that mentions the subject and they will call it waivers. The idiom is exactly the reason it should be named waivers. -DJSasso (talk) 12:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
- I did, as I already mentioned. They're about evenly split between "waivers" -- almost always in the canned phrase "put on waivers", and singular usages, generally in the attributive. Plus a few usages of "waive" in a verbal sense. There's just not the predominant plural usage you're claiming, so I'd argue for some weight being given to the "official" term, which has the happy merit of being more conventional by the "singular noun" criteria. (Interestingly, the NHL links are much less mixed.) Smartiger (talk) 01:03, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
- The search issue I mention is one of the biggest reasons we use common name. It is brought up in almost all move request discussions. And yes you can dispute that waivers is the common name, but look at just about article that mentions the subject and they will call it waivers. The idiom is exactly the reason it should be named waivers. -DJSasso (talk) 12:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
- I dispute that "waivers" is the common name for "the waiver system"; it's simply a term that occurs a lot in idioms like "put on waivers", which isn't precisely synonymous. This article isn't about the idiom, it's about the system. As for your suggestion about searches: that seems to me to be supposing that people's searches are unreasonably specific, or are using a search engine that's unreasonably fragile. Smartiger (talk) 05:19, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
- WP:COMMONNAME is why. We are supposed to use the name something is most commonly known by. In this case Waivers. This is so that when people do a search they end up where they expect to end up, and things like auto complete will show them what they want. By using something like NFL Waiver system you are likely to break those types of searches and search aids by not starting with the letter the most common name goes by. -DJSasso (talk) 16:51, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
- But that's clearly not its sole, singular name: it's frequently referred to as "the waiver system", for example, and indeed that's what the NFL's own Collective Bargaining Agreement calls it. (The same document also refers to a singular "waiver" as a noun phrase, as well as variously using it attributively.) Just because "put on waivers" is a fairly common idiom does not rise to it being "always in plural form", as I've demonstrated. As you agree the article is about the system, and not the idiom, I don't see what the objection to a move to NFL waiver system (say) would be. Smartiger (talk) 18:30, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
- This article is about the system called Waivers....that is its name. Its not about waiver number or waiver pick or waiving, its about the system known as waivers. Always used in plural. It doesn't matter what the incoming links are. The system itself is known as waivers. -DJSasso (talk) 14:44, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
- I wasn't proposing that as a usage, however. If you look at the inbound links, they're frequently from singular forms: "waiver wire", "waiver claims", and elsewhere I've seen "waiver number", "waiver pick", etc. (As well as no few "waive", "waiving", "waived", etc) Granted those are all attributive forms, so actual usage as a singular noun phrase does seem to be on the scarce side. Alternatively, would it make sense to move to "NFL waiver system", "American waiver procedure", or similar? Smartiger (talk) 18:55, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Waivers (American football). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080910180417/http://blogmedia.thenewstribune.com/media/Roster%20Rules.pdf to http://blogmedia.thenewstribune.com/media/Roster%20Rules.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:49, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Requested move 21 August 2023
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Moved to Waivers (NFL). (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 23:29, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Waivers (American football) → Waivers (National Football League) – This article is NFL specific. There are other American football leagues with their own waiver processes. Groupthink (talk) 17:58, 21 August 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Lightoil (talk) 10:27, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- Alternatively, this page could be merged to Waivers (sports). The page could also be rewritten to include other Am. football leagues but I'm not sure that would be ideal. Groupthink (talk) 19:15, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Propose Waivers (NFL) as more concise, weakly support as proposed, also I think a merger isn't a bad idea? Red Slash 05:39, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- Move to Waivers (NFL). 162 etc. (talk) 16:14, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- Move to Waivers (NFL). Seems like (NFL) is the preferred disambiguator to (National Football League); the only one using the latter I could find is Training camp (National Football League), which should be moved on consistency grounds if this does get moved to the (NFL) form, based on the many team articles that need the disambiguator (ex. St. Louis Cardinals (NFL)) and the few other various articles (I only found China Bowl (NFL), but it's hard to search because the Wikipedia search function doesn't pick up parenthesis). As for here, the article is about NFL waivers, not any waivers in American Football, so it should be moved to reflect that. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 20:50, 5 September 2023 (UTC)