Talk:Ed Orgeron

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Sports and Games

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	Sports portal This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as Low-importance).

College football Low‑importance

	College football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject College football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of college football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.College footballWikipedia:WikiProject College footballTemplate:WikiProject College footballcollege football
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

National Football League Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Football League, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the NFL on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Football LeagueWikipedia:WikiProject National Football LeagueTemplate:WikiProject National Football LeagueNational Football League
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Louisiana / Mississippi Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Louisiana portal This article is supported by WikiProject Louisiana (assessed as Low-importance).
	Mississippi portal This article is supported by WikiProject Mississippi (assessed as Low-importance).

Vandalism

Need to keep an eye on this one, with all the rumors swirling around about him being fired from Ole Miss and the obvious anger by some Ole Miss fans regarding the lack of game wins. -- ALLSTARecho 15:57, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And especially now that he's been fired. -- ALLSTARecho 14:38, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fan sites

Fan Sites are not part of the story... ImpeachClinton.com wouldn't go on the article about his impeachment. Also, unemployed is not a job title. That field should be left blank like other fired coaches. CJC47 (talk) 20:52, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These particular "fan sites" are part of the story as within a month of them going live and fans coming together to demand he be fired, he was fired. You can't say fan sentiment isn't part of the story or didn't become part of the firing.. even Ole Miss athletic director said so in an interview regarding the firing. It's one thing to be just fan sites linked for the hell of it, but these, at least firecoacho.com, were a significant part of his firing and the story. Do a google search for firecoacho.com and you'll see all of the media coverage it garnered. I wouldn't be surprised if someone created an article just for firecoacho.com -- ALLSTARecho 21:04, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine if they are noteworthy enough to be included in the body of the article, with a footnote citation or a wiki-link if they are notable enough to get an article. But just slapped at the bottom is not the way to go. CJC47 (talk) 21:15, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They were in the article and, I believe, in the external links. You could have just removed the external links. -- ALLSTARecho 21:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing I removed was the external links. I also edited unemployed out of the job title. CJC47 (talk) 21:43, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tennessee/LSU hiring

Please do not add any speculation/guessing/maybe content regarding his hiring at either school, per WP:CRYSTAL. Many media outlets say he will be at Tennessee and many say LSU so until one, or the other, or something else is a done deal, please leave it out of the article. - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 04:44, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also: Reverted an edit re: LSU/Tom Herman. As far as I can find right now (Nov 25th, 2016 5:29PM CST) Ed's the "backup plan" for LSU: http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/18135971/ed-orgeron-clear-cut-backup-plan-lsu-tigers

"well" known^{[peacock prose]} removed from lead section

Why on earth would editors insist on icluding this in the lead section?? Because the word has been there "a long time"? Can't we do better? --Tom 22:46, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed my last comment, not needed. I tagged the article per WP:PEACOCK. --Tom 23:24, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggesting injecting a little common sense here. Ed Orgeron is well known from his stint as the head coach at Ole Miss. It is where he came into the national spotlight. No one is debating that. The term "well known" is not harming the article in any way, in fact the stronger argument would be by just saying he is "known for ..." that would lower the significance of the article. Which is not what we are here today. I strongly suggest keeping the article as is. Rtr10 (talk) 04:01, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong. I am debating that. He is well known for that role according to whom? Also, have you read the link above about words to avoid, especially in the lead? The argument that this would lower the significance of the article is silly. Do you have a conflict of interest with this article or an agenda to promote here? --Tom 16:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well Mr. Philosopher, who is to say he is known for it at all? We could run down that road all day, but once again you are not using any common sense. I don't have an interest in it at all. I am simply an editor in the College Football Project that keeps an eye on the article. Do you have a particular interest in it? Seems like a pretty random and petty edit. And since you are "debating it" what debate do you bring that he is not well-known from that stint? I await your answer. Rtr10 (talk) 06:19, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also reverted a bad faith edit while this is being discussed. --Tom 16:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted again. --Tom 23:48, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) Rtr10, your point of who is to say he is known for it at all is exactly why we avoid POV/peacock terms. Have you read WP:PEACOCK? It is pretty clear, makes sense, and helps avoid this nonsense. I am here to improve this article so it complies with this guideline. I have no idea if this guy is "well-known" or not since it doesn't matter since that isn't the point per above. Is Barack Obama "well-known"? If you asked 10,000 random people who this guy is, zero have probably ever heard of him. If you asked 1,000 people on his old campus, probably most have heard of him, again, that is not the point. Removing the tag while this is being discussed is obvious bad faith. Why not get a few other editor's opinion, non-involved of course. Being in a football project, how are most of the other coaches bios handled? If most are handled this way, and most editors agree this this, I will ride off into the sunset. Cheers, --Tom 13:49, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree with Tom, I don't think 'well-know' is appropriate. Ndenison ^talk 14:04, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Needless peacock term. The fact that he was the head coach establishes the notability of the role. --Bobak (talk) 17:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the bad faith editor who just doesn't get it. Made time to stop feeding the trolls and escalate. --Tom 18:12, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ed Orgeron. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:01, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV Content

I think this page needs some significant update to remove unsourced and NPOV commentary. Much of it sounds like sports news commentary, not encyclopedic content. I’m not sure if the page warrants any tags pointing to this issue, but I wanted to see if anyone else shared my concerns. Aprude51 (talk) 14:36, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fallout of LSU win over Alabama.

Due to the fact of LSU win over Alabama, I am afraid this page may get vandalize a lot and may need protection for a few days until everything dies down. Ghost17570 (talk) 10:40, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ghost17570: You can make a request for this over at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. There has been quite a bit of action today. SportingFlyer T·C 11:16, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2021 season

Nothing regarding 2021 season yet? I would add reacent facts, if my english was good enough to qualify for english wiki 46.88.161.203 (talk) 22:43, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Florida

Ed Orgeron is not a coach at the University of Florida. Remove that from his bio. 108.67.43.158 (talk) 20:30, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]