Talk:Florida State Seminoles

New Head Logo

FSU has changed the head logo. Whether or not you personally like the new logo is irrelevant. It is the new logo, and this page should reflect that. If the school changes its mind and goes back to the old logo, then we can put the old logo back. Mister Tog (talk) 00:10, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Also: the old logo is still shown on the page, a bit below. Mister Tog (talk) 00:20, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Basketball

I have attempted to clean this section up, and making it a bit clearer. Especially the first paragraph dealing with a short history of the men's progam.Knolefan (talk) 22:06, 26 July 2011 (UTC) The Basketball section is horribly written and is full of incomplete sentences and sparse information that make it impossible to understand. I dont know enough about FSU basketball to fix it, but I would suggest someone who does to fix it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.233.211.171 (talk) 20:01, 5 November 2008 (UTC) what the fuck

Suggestion

What about moving this to "Florida State Seminoles"? Other schools seem to use this format: Michigan Wolverines, Florida Gators, Duke Blue Devils, or specific to sports Notre Dame football, Miami Hurricanes Football, etc. AriGold 17:40, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Now you tell me. :-) Well I typed it in and it went to the page I'm creating. Noles1984 22:14, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I redirected it for now. Personally I think Florida State Seminoles might make more sense as more people are probably likely to type that in then "Florida State University athletics, no? AriGold 22:57, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

i know that the seminoles are a old tribe in flora

Mascot Issue

While this was a problem a few years back there are two users that are in an edit war on the validity if it should be posted.

FSU does not have a MASCOT we have a symbol sanctioned by the Seminole Tribe of both Florida and Oklahoma.

This should not be a major point in the article for it is resolved, also view the Atlanta Braves, Kansas City Chiefs and Cleveland Indians do not have anything indicating their controversy.

The Fighting Illini of Illinois had no support for their mascot, they did have a mascot.

I say this should not be a major category but rather a see also at the bottom of the page in line with the setup of Atlanta Braves, Kansas City Chiefs and Cleveland Indians --UkrNole 485 (talk) 14:43, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

If we aim to be encyclopedic (we do), the issue cannot be ignored, no matter how much editors who normally edit here love this team. Badagnani (talk) 19:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not a love of the team it's what is found to have importance, i am also in favor of a footnote rather that a useless topic. A footnote will appear and should satisfy your encyclopedic theory. Badagnani please wait for this issue to be resolved before changing the page--Nolephin (talk) 20:27, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

The controversy is long-standing (at least since 1990) and key to an understanding of this team and its selection of the name "Seminoles," and thus it is not unreasonable to add a brief mention of it; conversely, it is unreasonable to blank all commentary about the controversy. The highly unusual placement, with no commentary, makes the article "semi-encyclopedic" rather than fully encyclopedic, and editors with a strong love for the team should not feel threatened by a discussion of the controversy enough to blank all text about it and relegate it to a footnote without the briefest of commentary. Badagnani (talk) 21:20, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

While no one is arguing that there was a controversy the Florida State Seminoles were named in 1947. There is a somewhat POV here that we are attempting to maintain so that no favoritism ensues. Your comment of: "editors with a strong love for the team" is recurring and I can assure you that there the love of one's team, one's school is not expressed here in any way but to better the article. There is no controversy and I feel that the footnote should be sufficient. Support has been granted by the Seminole Tribe of both Florida and Oklahoma. A symbol and a mascot are two different things! Honestly the vote is 3-1 in favor of the footnote and the issue should be resolved. I thank you for attempting to make the article more encyclopedic but a person can search to find it if they so choose. Looking at other teams with Native American "mascots" I see now condition as so much as a footnote. This article is attempting to be as much agreeable as possible. One has to question why are you so adamant at this article when there are others to modify.

WP: Florida State University is doing a fine job keep up the work!!!!--68.35.201.31 (talk) 23:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

If Wikipedia aims to be encyclopedic (we do), love for one's team must not prevent a very important issue from being discussed. Badagnani (talk) 23:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

"Contrary to the NCAA’s statements, the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma is on record as unopposed to the use of the Seminole name. This past July, the Seminole Nation General Council, the legislative body for the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma, resoundingly defeated a motion to denounce the use of Native American nicknames and images in sports and other events. The vote was 18-2."

"On June 17, 2005, the Tribal Council of the Seminole Tribe of Florida voted unanimously in favor of a written resolution to reaffirm its ongoing support of the university’s use of its name and symbols. The significance of putting this resolution in writing is enhanced by the fact that traditionally the Seminole Tribe of Florida has not seen the need to commit these kinds of relationships or agreements to writing. Their word is their bond. During the presentation of that resolution to me at the Tribe’s Big Cypress Reservation, Tribal Council member Max Osceola said, “We have to respect each other’s views, and in the Seminole Tribe of Florida’s view, you honor us by using the name Seminole.""--68.35.201.31 (talk) 00:11, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Was Sammy Seminole just blanked from the article as well? Why was that? Further, properly sourced text outlining Osceola's history and status vis-a-vis the two tribes and the NCAA was removed. Love for one's team must not interfere with our articles' encyclopedicity. NPOV and an endeavor to be properly encyclopedic must be maintained regardless of such love. Badagnani (talk) 00:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

In fact, it seems that even the footnote has now been removed. That is illogical and must have been a mistake (was it)? Badagnani (talk) 00:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Here is the properly sourced, encyclopedic text that was just blanked, along with an edit summary in all capital letters (but no justification), as well an uncalled-for comment which read, "Look i don’t care what your motives are but leave this page alone":

Mascot and symbol

See also: Native American mascot controversy § Florida State Seminoles

From 1958 to 1972, FSU sporting events featured performances by a mascot named Sammy Seminole. In 1978, Chief Osceola and Renegade first appeared at football games. While officially supported by the Seminole Tribe of Florida, some members of the Seminole Tribe of Oklahoma object to FSU's use of the Chief Osceola symbol. In July 2005 the General Council of the Seminole Tribe of Oklahoma voted against a resolution condemning college sports teams for their use of Native American mascots and names. In August 2005, the NCAA exempted FSU from its ban on Native American mascots, citing the Seminole Tribe of Florida's approval of its use of Chief Osceola.

Badagnani (talk) 00:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea what your deal is, you are just trolling for trouble. the compromise was in place but apparently that was not good enough for you. your information is outdated deal with it. please accept our compromise or leave simple. do you accept the footnote ore not ?--Nolephin (talk) 00:28, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I ask you kindly to moderate your tone. Please answer why Sammy Seminole should not be mentioned, in order to have a properly encyclopedic article. If he is excluded (is it because he is embarrassing to those who love the team?), then Doak Campbell or other important figures of past decades should also be blanked from the article. However, an important part of our project is that one's love for a subject should not dictate which aspects of the subject is discussed and which are not; we operate by verifiability (using proper sources) and notability. The NCAA issues came up in 2005, so discussion of such is not "outdated," and discuswsion of Sammy Seminole is not more "outdated" than other major figures discussed in the article. Please, now, actually read the text just above and address it in a thoughtful manner (free of attacks on other editors), and exactly what contained in the text is incorrect or improperly sourced. We either aim to be encyclopedic or not (we do), so the blanking of sourced text discussing a very important aspect of this team does not enhance our encyclopedia for our users. Badagnani (talk) 00:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

And we have asked you to stop an edit war. thank you for making a Sammy Seminole page, we will add it to our wiki project. Again with this love of the team crap, no i will not apologize for the tone. Its as if i came in ad edited an article without discussion that you and so many cooperated and worked so hardly on. A compromise was offered, you refused. Do you see an article on other sites, Braves, Indians.. have you not had the time to edit those yet. Understand the error of your way first sir! A neutral POV is what we are after, you slander and give a negative POV. Put it at the bottom of the article. THE OKLAHOMA TIBE VOTED 18-2 IN SUPORT OF FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSIY! THE FLORIDA TIBE VOTED UNANIMOUSLY! Where is that. The PC has spread to Wiki now huh, someone doesn’t like it must change it to benefit him/her. This controversy was brought out not by the Seminole People but rather business men of the NCAA. Again there is no controversy.--UkrNole 485 (talk) 00:49, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Please explain how the properly sourced, encyclopedic text was incorrect. In fact, the sources are all major ones and the text explains things that were not previously in the article (but should have been). Please attempt to refrain from using all capital letters, thank you. Badagnani (talk) 00:57, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I've come here having read the posting at Requests for Editor Assistance, here. If I understand the dispute correctly, Badagnani wants to add a paragraph concerning the history of the FSU Seminole symbol / mascot, the prior controversy surrounding the use of this Native American symbol, and its ultimate resolution. I think that some reference to this issue - even if the controversy is now old news - is warranted if for no other reason than to answer the implicit question raised by the sentence in the second paragraph of the article that currently reads, "The teams are represented by the symbols Chief Osceola and Renegade. This Native American name is used with official sanction of the Seminole Tribe of Florida, Inc."

That being said, I find the the tone of the disputed paragraph to be too contentious, and longer than necessary. And the proposed compromise - a subtle 'see also' link to a segment of a separate Wikipedia discussion of the controversy, here - seems to bury the matter a bit more deeply than anyone can reasonably be expected to find it. The most sensible thing to do, I think, would be simply to drop a footnoted reference to the other article right where the question enters the reader's mind, namely, following the sentence noting the sanction of the Seminole Tribe. JohnInDC (talk) 01:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Did someone post a request for assistance? This idea seems okay. I had only intended the paragraph as a start anyway, and expected it to be refined/modified rather than blanked. Badagnani (talk) 01:25, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I just re-read the new paragraph and wonder what is contentious therein. It's all drawn from actual news articles found on Lexis-Nexis. Badagnani (talk) 01:28, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I had this footnote in mind: "Although ostensibly a mascot, the team maintains that Chief Osceola is actually its 'symbol.'" With that, alongside the references to the objections of the Oklahoma tribe, the paragraph tends to read like an attempt to de-legitimize, rather than explain, the resolution of the dispute. JohnInDC (talk) 01:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

You're right. This issue was debated at Chief Illiniwek, because the university had a symbol (which appeared in 2-dimensional form on letterhead), but also called Chief Illiniwek (the dancing student) a "symbol," basically to avoid addressing the concern some had that its mascot was offensive. Using normal English definitions, the article describes the Chief Illiniwek symbol (on letterhead, apparel, etc.) and mascot (the dancing student); and the FSU issue really isn't quantitatively or qualitatively different. Badagnani (talk) 01:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your moderation JohnInDC, "...the Seminole Nation General Council, the legislative body for the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma, resoundingly defeated a motion to denounce the use of Native American nicknames and images in sports and other events. The vote was 18-2." This was in support of the Florida State University. thats what makes this issue complicated. I am not objecting to a footnote but the media and NCAA made it out to be that the tribes voted one in favor and one against and that was not the case. Seminole Tribe of Okalhoma voted 18-2 in favor, Seminole tribe of Florida voted Unanimously.--Nolephin (talk) 01:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

The source states that the vote was not to oppose the use of Native American names and mascots by collegiate sports teams, not FSU in particular. Please read the sources cited. You did favor the blanking of the entire section, and in fact did so more than once, then used abusive language. We either aim to be encyclopedic at WP or we don't (we do), but the insistence on blanking the entire section on a key issue related to the team--the history of the mascot--was not correct. Further, no statement from the properly sourced paragraph has been factually disputed. I made a request just below, yet neither you nor anyone else has disputed any of the text of the new paragraph. Badagnani (talk) 02:17, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, this seems like way too much noise for what is, ultimately, a collateral point. The existing sentence about 'sanctioning the symbol' leads the uninformed reader to wonder, 'huh, I wonder why there needs to be a sanction'; a footnote right there, linking to the Controversy article, will answer *that* question without cluttering up the article with multiple citations and contested inferences. If there's controversy yet about the controversy, elaborate on it on the page that's devoted to it.

(I kept wondering why no one was implementing this excellent suggestion, then remembered I could do it myself. I've made the edit the way it makes sense to me. With luck it will leave all parties equally dissatisfied. I hope as well that it is consistent with general footnote form, and trust that someone will tweak it if it is not.) JohnInDC (talk) 03:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

So, in your "solution," all the text is gone? What happened to Seminole Sammy, the history of the usage of the mascots, the NCAA, tribal opinions, etc.? This article either historicizes the issues completely or it doesn't. In your "solution," it doesn't. Making the paragraph slightly smaller was what you had earlier said. This eliminates all discussion of the issue, not satisfactory. Badagnani (talk) 03:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry you don't like it. It just seems logical that the better place to delve into the nuances of the Native American mascot controversy insofar as it relates to the Florida State Seminoles would be at the Wikipedia entry entitled Native_American_mascot_controversy#Florida_State_Seminoles; or if not there, then on the Wikipedia pages specifically devoted to the mascots at issue. JohnInDC (talk) 04:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Support for the FSU Symbol

MSNBC

2004 article

FSU 2005 article

NY TIMES

Oklahoma Giving support —Preceding unsigned comment added by UkrNole 485 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Please answer the questions above. How do these links obviate the blanking of Sammy Seminole, as well as the other properly sourced text about Osceola's history and status vis-a-vis the two tribes and NCAA? We really have to have the highest standards here at WP in everything we do. Badagnani (talk) 00:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

With a proper tone i have no problem, did you state that "At the request of leaders of the Seminole Tribe of Florida, they were retired." No again you leave it for a negative POV--UkrNole 485 (talk) 00:53, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Missinformation, Seminole tribe of Oklahoma granted us their support--UkrNole 485 (talk) 00:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Mentioning that the leaders of the tribe asked for the mascot to be retired is a good idea. However, without a section about the mascots/symbol this will be impossible. Please address how the properly sourced text just above is incorrect. Your love for the team must not prevent the article from being as encyclopedic as possible, and having a section about the history of the various mascots/symbols is quite important. The blanking of Sammy Seminole, as well as the other properly sourced text about Osceola's history and status vis-a-vis the two tribes and the NCAA really is quite unjustified. Badagnani (talk) 00:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

&$%^ you: "Your love for the team must not prevent the article from being as encyclopedic as possible" comeback it is old--68.35.201.31 (talk) 01:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, some of the characters in your posting didn't come through correctly; are you writing in a foreign script? Badagnani (talk) 01:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

RESOLVE THIS ISSUE ALREADY--Nolephin (talk) 01:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality of Basketball Section

I placed a POV tag on the basketball section. It reads like an FSU press release. Would a watcher of this page please clean up the "boosterism" of the first paragraph in particuliar. thanks.  Ahodges7   ^talk 18:42, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Historical Error

Right now the article gives the impression that the Seminole successfully resisted removal, but that is not true. Most Seminole were removed after the 2nd and 3rd Seminole Wars. There were only a few small pockets deep in south Florida that were able to resist removal. Those pockets are the Seminole of Florida today, while those removed became the Seminole of Oklahoma. Shouldn't the article reflect this, by saying that SOME of the Seminole avoided removal? Emperor001 (talk) 21:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I have removed the word "successfully", although that may or may not be enough. I think it is, since it doesn't imply a result either way. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 15:37, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Florida State Seminoles. 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/20080113171625/http://unirel.fsu.edu:80/seminoles/pages/timeline.html to http://unirel.fsu.edu/seminoles/pages/timeline.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:19, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Florida State Seminoles. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070703111234/http://seminoles.cstv.com:80/sports/m-footbl/mtt/bowden_bobby01.html to http://seminoles.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/bowden_bobby01.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 02:42, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Florida State Seminoles. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://seminoles.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/bowden_bobby01.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071002020025/http://www.sportingnews.com/blog/3peatTrojans/23667/ to http://www.sportingnews.com/blog/3peatTrojans/23667/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131105061801/http://theodysseyonline.com/campus/florida-state/article/sod-cemetery-fsu-tradition to http://theodysseyonline.com/campus/florida-state/article/sod-cemetery-fsu-tradition
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130701202454/http://www.rugbymag.com/men-di-college/4098-mens-di-aa-college-top-25-april-9-2012.html to http://www.rugbymag.com/men-di-college/4098-mens-di-aa-college-top-25-april-9-2012.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 19:09, 2 October 2017 (UTC)