text:
NFL playoffs

The National Football League (NFL) playoffs is the single-elimination tournament to determine the annual league champion. The four-round tournament is held after the league's regular season. Since the 2020 season, seven teams from each of the league's two conferences qualify for the playoffs based on regular season winning percentage, with a tie-breaking procedure if required. The top team in each conference receives a first-round bye, automatically advancing to the next round. The tournament culminates in the Super Bowl, the league's championship game, competed between teams from each conference.

NFL postseason history can be traced to the first NFL Championship Game in 1933, though in the early years, qualification for the game was based solely on regular-season records. From 1933 to 1966, the NFL postseason generally only consisted of the NFL Championship Game, which pitted the league's two division winners against each other (pending any one-game playoff matches that needed to be held to break ties in the division standings). In, the playoffs were expanded to four teams (division winners). When the league completed its merger with the American Football League (AFL) in, the playoffs were expanded to eight teams, which increased to ten in 1978, twelve in 1990, and fourteen in 2020.

Among the four major professional sports leagues in the United States, the NFL postseason is the only one to use a single-elimination tournament in all of its rounds. Major League Baseball (MLB) has traditionally used "best-of" series formats, though its Wild Card postseason round, initiated in 2012, was a single game until 2022 when it was replaced with a best-of-three series. Both the National Basketball Association (NBA) and the National Hockey League (NHL) continue to use "best-of" series formats.

Current playoff system
The 32-team National Football League is divided into two conferences, the American Football Conference (AFC) and the National Football Conference (NFC). Since 2002, each conference has 16 teams and is further divided into four geographic divisions of four teams each. As of 2020, qualification into the playoffs works as follows:

 * The four division champions from each conference (the team in each division with the best overall record) are seeded 1 through 4 based on their overall won-lost-tied record.
 * Three wild-card qualifiers from each conference (the three teams with the best overall record of all remaining teams in the conference) are seeded 5, 6, and 7.

If teams are tied (having the same regular season won-lost-tied record), the playoff seeding is determined by a set of tie-breaking rules.

The names of the first two playoff rounds date back to the postseason format that was first used in 1978, when the league added a second wild-card team to each conference. The first round of the playoffs is dubbed the wild-card round, wild-card weekend, or, since 2021, super wild-card weekend. In this round, the second-seeded division winner hosts the seventh-seeded wild card team, the third hosts the sixth, and the fourth hosts the fifth. There are no restrictions regarding teams from the same division matching up in any round. The team with the best overall record from each conference receives a first round bye, automatically advancing them to the second round, dubbed the divisional round, and hosts the lowest-remaining seed from the wild-card round. Meanwhile, the other two winners from that round play each other with the higher seeds hosting. The two surviving teams from each conferences' divisional-round playoff games then meet in the respective AFC and NFC Conference Championship games, hosted by the higher-seeded team. The winners of those contests go on to face one another in the Super Bowl which is played at a predetermined site.

The New York Giants and New York Jets have shared the same home stadium since 1984 (Giants Stadium from 1984 to 2009, and MetLife Stadium since 2010). Thus, if both teams need to host playoff games on the same weekend, they are required to play on separate days, even during the Conference Championship round when both games are normally scheduled on the same day. The only time such a scheduling conflict occurred was during Wild Card weekend in 1985 when only 10 teams qualified for the postseason and there were only two wild-card games. Instead of playing both Wild Card games on the same day, as was the case when the 10-team system was used from 1978 to 1989, the Jets hosted their game on Saturday, December 28, before the Giants hosted their game on Sunday, December 29. This same scheduling conflict could occur for the Los Angeles Chargers and Los Angeles Rams, who began sharing SoFi Stadium in 2020.

Breaking ties
Often, teams will finish a season with identical records. It becomes necessary, therefore, to devise means to break these ties, either to determine which teams will qualify for the playoffs or to determine seeding in the playoff tournament. The rules below are applied in order until the tie is broken. Ties within divisions are always broken first to eliminate all but the highest-ranked club in each division before breaking ties between teams in different divisions, however, it should be emphasized that other than for division winners, divisional ranking is not in itself a tiebreaker – for example, if a division runner-up ties with teams finishing third and fourth in another division, the runner-up's record will be compared to the team awarded third place in the other division without regard to the teams' divisional finish.

If three or four teams in one division are tied for the division title and/or division runner-up, and also if after breaking ties within divisions three or four teams in different divisions are tied, then should the one or two team(s) be qualified or eliminated at any step the tiebreaker reverts to step one for the remaining two or three teams. If multiple playoff spots are at stake, the rules are applied in order until the first team(s) qualify(ies) or are eliminated, then the process is started again for the remaining teams. Finally, once ties are broken between three or more teams qualifying for the playoffs, the relative positions of the seeds determined will not change regardless of wild card and divisional round results – for example, if division winners were to tie for the second, third and fourth seeds in a conference and the third and fourth seeds subsequently advanced to the conference championship game, the team that was originally awarded the third seed would host that game even if it lost a head-to-head tiebreaker against the fourth seed.

The tie-breaking rules have changed over the years, with the most recent changes being made in 2002 to accommodate the league's realignment into eight four-team divisions; record vs. common opponents and most of the other criteria involving wins and losses were moved up higher in the tie-breaking list, while those involving compiled stats such as points for and against were moved to the bottom.

The current tiebreakers are as follows, with coin tosses used if all of the criteria fail:

Overtime rules
The NFL introduced overtime for any divisional tiebreaker games beginning in and for championship games beginning in. The first postseason game to be played under these rules was the 1958 NFL Championship Game between the Baltimore Colts and New York Giants (the so-called "Greatest Game Ever Played"), decided by a one-yard touchdown run by Colts fullback Alan Ameche after eight minutes and fifteen seconds of extra time. Overtime under the original format was sudden death, the first team to score would be declared the winner.

In March, the NFL amended its rules for postseason overtime, with the rule being extended into the regular season in March 2012. If a team scores a touchdown, or if the defense scores a safety on the (other team's) first possession, it is declared the winner. If it scores a field goal on its first possession, however, it then kicks off to the opposing team, which has an opportunity to score; if the score is tied again after that possession, true sudden death rules apply and whoever scores next will win. True sudden death rules would continue from double overtime hereafter.

The league further amended its postseason overtime rules in March, allowing both teams to have at least one possession even if the first team with possession scores a touchdown.

Multiple overtimes
Since postseason games cannot end in a tie, unlike the preseason or regular season, additional overtime periods are played as necessary until a winner is determined. Furthermore, all clock rules apply as if a game had started over. Therefore, if the first overtime period ends with the score still tied, the teams switch ends of the field before the second overtime. With two minutes to go in the second overtime, there would be a two-minute warning (but not during the first overtime period as in the regular season). If it were still tied at the end of the second overtime, the team that lost (or deferred) the coin toss before the first overtime would have the option to kick off, receive, or choose a side of the field to defend. However, unlike in the first overtime period, true sudden death rules would continue from the start of any third and subsequent overtime period. If a game reached a fifth overtime, another coin toss would be held and timing rules would be as if another new game started. Although a contest could theoretically last indefinitely, or last several overtime periods like several National Hockey League postseason games, no NFL playoff game has ever gone past two overtime periods. The longest NFL overtime game played to date is 82 minutes, 40 seconds: Miami Dolphins kicker Garo Yepremian made the walk-off 37-yard field goal after 7:40 of the second overtime to defeat the Kansas City Chiefs, 27–24, in an AFC playoff game on December 25, 1971.

Playoff and championship history
The NFL's method for determining its champions has changed over the years.

Early years
From the league's founding in 1920 until 1932, there was no scheduled championship game. From 1920 to 1923, the championship was awarded to a team by a vote of team owners at the annual owners' meeting. From 1924 to 1932, the team having the best winning percentage was awarded the championship (the de facto standard owners had been using anyway). As each team played a different number of games, simply counting wins and losses would have been insufficient. Additionally, tie games were not counted in the standings in figuring winning percentage (under modern rules, ties count as ½ win and ½ loss). There was a head-to-head tiebreaker, which also was weighted toward the end of the season: for two teams that played each other twice, each winning once, the team winning the second game was determined to be the champion (the criteria used to decide the 1921 title).

1932 playoff game
In, the Chicago Bears (6–1–6) and the Portsmouth Spartans (6–1–4) were tied at the end of the season with identical winning percentages (.850). Of note, the Green Bay Packers (10–3–1) had more wins, but a lower winning percentage (.760) as calculated under the rules of the day, which ignored ties.

The Bears and Spartans had played to ties in both of their matchups, so the head-to-head tiebreaker did not apply. An additional game was therefore needed to determine a champion. It was agreed that the game would be played at Chicago's Wrigley Field, but severe winter weather and fear of a low turnout forced the game to be moved indoors to Chicago Stadium.

The game was played under modified rules on a shortened 80-yard dirt field, and the Bears won with a final score of 9–0. As a result of the game, the Bears had the better winning percentage (.870) and won the league title. The loss gave the Spartans a final winning percentage of .750 and moved them to third place behind the Packers. While there is no consensus that this game was a real "championship" game (or even a playoff game), it generated considerable interest and led to the creation of the official NFL Championship Game in.

Before the Super Bowl
Given the interest of the impromptu "championship game", and the desire of the league to create a more equitable means of determining a champion, the league divided into two conferences beginning in. The first-place teams in each conference met in the NFL Championship Game after the season. There was no tie-breaker system in place; any ties in the final standings of either conference resulted in playoff games in 1941, 1943, 1947, 1950 (2), 1952, 1957, 1958, and 1965. Since the venue and date of the championship game were often not known until the last game of the season had been played, these playoff games sometimes delayed the NFL title game by a week.

The playoff structure used from 1933 to 1966 was considered inequitable by some because of the number of times it failed to match the teams with the two best records in the championship game, as only the conference winners would qualify for playoff contention. Four times between 1950 and 1966 (in, , , and ) the team with the second-best win–loss record did not qualify for the playoffs while the team with the best record in the other conference, but only the third-best in the league, advanced to the championship game.

The AFL-NFL merger and the creation of the Super Bowl forced the NFL to adopt its first guaranteed multi-game postseason format. In, the NFL expanded to 16 teams and split its two conferences into two divisions of four teams each. The four division champions advanced to the playoffs. To remain on schedule, a tie-breaker system was introduced. The first round determined the conference's champion and its representative in the NFL Championship Game, played the following week.

During the three years (1967–69) that this playoff structure was in effect, there was one use of the tie-breaker system. In 1967, the Los Angeles Rams and Baltimore Colts ended the season tied at 11–1–2 for the lead in the Coastal Division. The Colts came into the last game of the season undefeated but were beaten by the Rams. Though the Colts shared the best win–loss record in the NFL that year, they failed to advance to the playoffs while three other teams with worse records won their divisions. This event figured into the decision in 1970 to include a wild-card team in the playoff tournament after the AFL–NFL merger.

During the 1960s, a third-place game was held in Miami, called the Playoff Bowl. It was contested in early January following the –69 seasons. Though official playoff games at the time they were played, the NFL now officially classifies these ten games (and statistics) as exhibitions, not as playoff games.

AAFC playoffs
During its brief history, the AAFC, which would merge into the NFL for the season, used an identical playoff format to the NFL from 1946 to 1948. In 1949 (its last year), the AAFC merged its two conferences when one of its teams folded, and used a four-team playoff system. In 1948, the aforementioned issue of playoff inequity came into play when the San Francisco 49ers would miss the playoffs with a 12–2 record; they were in the same conference as the 14–0 Cleveland Browns, who would go on to win the Western Conference and then the AAFC's championship game against the 7–7 Buffalo Bills (AAFC).

AFL playoffs
For the 1960–68 seasons, the AFL used the two-divisional format identical to the NFL to determine its champion. There was no tie-breaker system in place, so ties atop the Eastern Division final standings in 1963 and Western Division in 1968 necessitated playoff games to determine each division's representative in the championship. In both years, the playoff winner went on the road for the AFL title game and lost.

For 1969, the final season before its merger with the NFL, the AFL added a first-round whereby each division winner played the second-place team from the other division. The winners of these games met in the AFL Championship Game. In the only year of this format, the AFL champion Kansas City Chiefs were the second-place team in the Western division and played both games on the road. They won Super Bowl IV in January and became the first division runner-up to win a Super Bowl.

Super Bowl and merger
The Super Bowl began as an inter-league championship game between the AFL and NFL, an idea first proposed by Kansas City Chiefs owner Lamar Hunt. This compromise was the result of pressures the upstart AFL was placing on the older NFL. The success of the rival league eventually led to a full merger of the two leagues.

From the 1966 season to the 1969 season (Super Bowls I–IV) the game featured the champions of the AFL and NFL. Since the 1970 season, the game has featured the champions of the National Football Conference (NFC) and the American Football Conference (AFC).

When the leagues merged in 1970, the new NFL (with 26 teams) reorganized into two conferences of three divisions each. From the 1970 season to the 1977 season, four teams from each conference (for a total of eight teams) qualified for the playoffs each year. These four teams included the three division champions, and a fourth wild-card team.

Originally, the home teams in the playoffs were decided based on a yearly rotation. From 1970 to 1974, the divisional playoff round rotated which of the three division champions would have home-field advantage, with the wild-card team never having it; they and their opponents they faced in the divisional playoff game do not get home field advantage in the conference championship game. Starting in 1970, the divisional playoff games consisted of the AFC Central champions and the NFC West champions playing their games on the road. Then in 1971, it rotated to the AFC East champions and the NFC East champions playing their games on the road. In the 1972 divisional playoff games, the AFC West champions and the NFC Central champions were the visiting teams. And in 1973 it would start all over with the AFC Central and NFC West again, and again in 1974 with the AFC East champions and the NFC East champions playing their games on the road.

The divisional playoff match-ups were pre-determined year by year. The designated division champion assigned to play on the road would travel to play the division champion from the same division as the wild card winner. The wild card team was only allowed to play their divisional rival in the conference championship, but not in the divisional playoffs. In some years the designated road team was from the same division as the wild card team. In that case, the designated divisional road team would play one of the two other division champions, depending on the probable matchups from the previous year. For example in the 1971 divisional playoffs, the AFC Eastern division winner was assigned to play on the road. The reason they played the AFC Western division champion and not the Central division, is because the AFC Eastern division winner played host to the AFC Central division winner in the divisional playoffs from the previous year (1970). This idea was designed to rotate playoff matchups year by year and not repeat.

However, the rotation system led to several playoff inequities, such as:
 * In 1971, the teams with the two best records in each conference met in the divisional round. Meanwhile, the wild card teams had better records than the division winners they faced (the Browns and 49ers were both 9–5).
 * In 1972, the Dolphins had to take their perfect record to Three Rivers Stadium to face the Pittsburgh Steelers, who went 11–3, in the AFC championship game. Also, the 8–5–1 49ers, who had the worst record of any playoff team, hosted the 10–4 Cowboys.
 * In 1973, the 10–4 Bengals had to play at the 12–2 Dolphins in the divisional round, while the 9–4–1 Raiders hosted the 10-4 wild card Steelers.
 * That same year, the Cowboys finished 10–4, but hosted two 12–2 teams; the Los Angeles Rams and Minnesota.
 * In 1974, the 11–3 Dolphins had to play at the 12–2 Raiders in the divisional round, while the 10–3–1 Steelers hosted the wild card Bills.
 * In 1974, the Vikings hosted the Rams in the NFC championship even though both teams went 10–4 and Los Angeles defeated Minnesota in the regular season.

The league instituted a seeding system for the playoffs in 1975, where the surviving clubs with the higher seeds were made the home teams for each playoff round. Thus, the top-seeded division winner played the wild-card team, and the remaining two division winners played at the home stadium of the better seed, forcing the lowest-ranked division winner to open the postseason on the road. However, two teams from the same division could not meet before the conference championship game. Thus, there would be times when the pairing in the divisional playoff round would be the 1 seed vs. the 3 seed and 2 vs. 4.

Expansion
Following an expansion of the regular season from 14 to 16 games in, the league added one more wild-card team for each conference. The two wild-card teams played the week before the division winners. The winner of this game played the top-seeded division winner as was done from 1970 to 1977. However, the league continued to prohibit intra-divisional games in the divisional playoffs but allowed such contests in the wild-card round. This ten-team playoff format was used through the 1989 season. Under this system, the Oakland Raiders became the first wild-card team to win a Super Bowl following the 1980 season.

During the strike-shortened season, only nine regular-season games were played, and a modified playoff format was instituted. Divisional play was ignored (there were some cases where division rivals had both games wiped out by the strike, although each division ultimately sent at least one team to the playoffs), and the top eight teams from each conference (based on W-L-T record) were advanced to the playoffs. As a result, this became the first time that teams with losing records qualified for the playoffs: the 4–5 Cleveland Browns and the 4–5 Detroit Lions.

Several times between 1978–89, the two wild-card games had to be played on different days. Normally they both would be held on Sunday. In 1983 and 1988, the games were split between Saturday and Monday because Sunday was Christmas, and the NFL had avoided playing on that day at the time. In 1984, both games were played in the Pacific Time Zone, so they had to be played on Saturday and Sunday to accommodate for time differences. In 1985, both the New York Giants and Jets hosted wild-card games. As they have shared a home stadium since 1984, the games had to be played on different days.

For the 1990 season, a third wild-card team for each conference was added, expanding the playoffs to twelve teams. The lowest-seeded division winner was then "demoted" to the wild-card weekend as the home team. Also, the restrictions on intra-divisional games during the divisional playoffs were removed.

The season was the first with playoff games in prime time. Thus, the league no longer had the same restrictions like in 1984 as to when to schedule games in the Pacific Time Zone.

The 1990 format continued until the 2002 expansion and realignment into eight divisions. In this format, used until the 2019 season, the four division winners and two wild cards in both conferences are seeded 1–6, respectively, with the top two seeds receiving byes, and the highest seed in each round guaranteed to host the lowest seed.

A limitation of the 12-team format was that division winners, including one with a .500 regular season record or a losing season, could play a home playoff game against wild card teams who had superior regular season records. Home field advantage does not guarantee success, however; during the 2015–16 season, every road team won their respective Wild Card playoff game, the first such occurrence in NFL history. Through 2019 however, NFL owners remained adamant that every division winner should still be rewarded with a home playoff game regardless of record.

Calls to expand the playoffs to 14 teams began in 2006. Proponents of expansion noted the increased revenue that could be gained from an additional two playoff games. They also noted that the 12-team playoff system was implemented when the league still had 28 teams, four fewer than the 2002 expansion. The opposition to such a move notes that an expansion of the playoffs would "water down" the field by giving access to lower-caliber teams. Opponents of expansion further point to the NBA playoffs and the NHL playoffs where more than half of the teams qualify for the postseason, and there is often a decreased emphasis on regular season performance as a result. In October 2013, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell announced plans to revisit the idea to expand the playoffs to 14 teams, with the increased revenue gained from the two additional postseason games being used to offset plans to shorten the preseason. The 14-team playoff proposal remained tabled until December 2014, when no team in the NFC South could finish better than .500; Goodell stated that the league would vote on it at the March 2015 Owners' Meetings. However, by February 2015, the Washington Post reported that support among team owners had eroded, and league leaders expressed reluctance to make a change until the end of the 2015 season. The proposal then lost all interest by 2017.

The league eventually revisited and implemented the 14-team playoff format in 2020, placing a third wild-card team in each conference, and only giving the top seed a bye (as explained above).

NFL playoff appearances
Correct as of the end of the 2023 regular season (including 2023–24 playoff berths).

Current playoff appearance streaks

 * Bold italics including longest streak indicates that the streak is also the team's longest-ever streak for consecutive playoff seasons.

All-time streaks of accomplishment
Notable current streaks in the table are listed below in bold. Only the longest streak for each team is listed. Note that the regular season increased from 14 to 16 games in 1978, then to the current 17 in 2021, and teams only played 9 regular-season games in 1982.

All streaks can be verified on the team pages at Pro-Football-Reference.com.

Most consecutive playoff appearances all time
Streaks can be verified at Pro Football Reference.com Team Franchise Pages

Italics= Streak is ongoing as of 2023 NFL season.

Timeline for each team's longest streak.

Longest consecutive streak with a playoff win
Streaks can be verified at Pro Football Reference.com Team Franchise Pages

Timeline for each team's longest streak.

title: NFL playoffs


text:
Harry Jeffra

Harry Jeffra (born Ignacius Pasquale Guiffi on November 30, 1914 – September 1988) was an American boxer. Born in Baltimore, Maryland, he became a World Bantamweight and NYSAC World Featherweight boxing champion. Jeffra's career spanned from 1933 to 1950, and his final record showed 93 wins with (27 by KOs), 20 losses, and 7 draws. Jeffra was inducted into the World Boxing Hall of Fame in 1998. His manager was Max Waxman and his trainer was Heinie Blaustein.

Early life and career
Jeffra was born on in Baltimore, Maryland. He claimed to have changed his name from Ignatius Guiffie in the fourth grade, when his school principal said she couldn't pronounce it. According to Jeffra, he began boxing in 1929 at age fifteen, though his amateur career was rather dismal, fighting twenty-eight amateur bouts, and losing twenty seven.

Apparently his boxing fortunes changed for the better once turning professional around eighteen, and particularly after finding manager Max Wacman. Fighting exclusively in his hometown of Baltimore, Maryland as a professional between September 22, 1933, and August 2, 1935, he won twenty-six fights with only one draw and not a single loss.

First meeting with Sixto Escobar
On December 9, 1936, Jeffra first met the reigning World Bantamweight champion Sixto Escobar. Though barely 23 years old, Jeffra was awarded a 10-round decision at New York's Hippodrome. Both fighters boxed close to the 120 pound mark, slightly over the Bantamweight limit. It was an important early victory for a boxer aspiring to a world championship to beat a world champion, even if it was not in a title fight.

On May 13, 1937, he defeated Nicky Jerome handily at the New York Hippodrome. Two right hand shots in the second round put Jerome on the mat twice, once for a count of seven and the second time, 1:26 into the second round, the referee stopped the fight.

On July 19, 1937, he defeated Ruby Bradley, a well known opponent, at Arena stadium in Philadelphia in a fourth-round technical knockout.

Capturing the World Bantamweight Championship
Jeffra captured the World Bantamweight title at age 23 by outpointing Puerto Rican great Sixto Escobar on September 23, 1937 in a fifteen-round points decision in New York's Polo Grounds. A noteworthy source wrote that "he (Jeffra) deserved the decision by a wide margin, winning nine rounds to Escobar's two." The evening included three championship prizefights in one night staged by promoter Mike Jacobs, and included a bout by boxing great Barney Ross. The crowd numbered an extraordinary 32,600, though even more had been anticipated at Jacob's masterpiece of displayed boxing skill. The bout was Jeffra's first fifteen-round battle, and exhausted after the win, he was jubilant, but expected to take a month off from training.

Losing the World Bantamweight Championship
Jeffra, however, lost the title to Escobar in his home country in San Juan, Puerto, Rico, on February 20, 1938 in another classic fifteen round points decision before a crowd of around 13,000. Winning by a large margin, and probably inspired by the home crowd, Escobar floored Jeffra twice in the eleventh and once in the fourteenth. After the bout, Jeffra announced through his trainer that he would never again try to make the strict Bantamweight limit. At least one source considered the restrictive dieting and heavy work outs required by Jeffra to make the 118 bantamweight limit, and the resulting lack of stamina, to be one of the causes of his loss to Escobar.

On September 17, 1938, Jeffra defeated Nicky Jerome in a sixth-round technical knockout at Ridgewood Grove in Brooklyn. Jerome was an important opponent.

Capturing the World Featherweight Championship
Jeffra then moved up in weight to featherweight, where he fought several bouts against Joey Archibald. On September 28, 1939, Archibald won a very controversial split decision after 15 rounds against Jeffra. Most writers scored the fight for Jeffra.

On May 20, 1940, Jeffra outpointed Archibald to win the NYSAC (New York) version of the World Featherweight Championship in a fifteen rounds unanimous decision in his hometown of Baltimore. The title was also recognized by Maryland, and possibly California. Jeffra won by a large margin before an impressive crowd of 4,500. He came close to knocking out Archibald in the second where he scored three knockdowns using strong rights, two for counts of nine. Though Archibald attempted comebacks in the eighth and ninth rounds with a strong showing, it was not enough to affect Jeffra's wide margin.

On July 29, 1940, he successfully defended his NYSAC World Featherweight Title against Spider Armstrong in a fifteen-round Unanimous Decision at Carlin's Park in Baltimore.

Three bouts with Bill Speary
On November 19, 1940, he fought Bill Speary for the first time. He lost in a ten-round somewhat close Unanimous Decision at the Kingston Armory in Kingston, Pennsylvania. Most of the judges gave Speary only six rounds on points in the bout, though it was enough to win, as several of the remaining rounds were scored as draws. The Wilkes-Barre Evening News considered the bout the best of Speary's boxing career.

On January 6, 1941, he defeated Speary in their second meeting in a twelve-round Unanimous Decision at Carlin's Park in Baltimore. In their third meeting on February 2, 1942, he beat Speary in a ten-round Split Decision before a crowd of 7,000 at the Maple Leaf Gardens in Toronto, Canada. There were no knockdowns in the fight, which started slowly in the early rounds. Jeffra used a straight right and a less effective left to build a lead in points primarily in the last three rounds.

Loss of the World Featherweight Title
He lost to Archibald in a NYSAC title bout on May 12, 1941 in a fifteen-round split decision in Washington, D.C., though according to most sources, it is not entirely clear if he subsequently lost the NYSAC World Featherweight Title. Several articles noticed the split decision merely complicated the status of NYSAC World Featherweight Title. Archibald used the win to push his candidacy for the more widely recognized NBA World Featherweight Title.

On August 12, 1941, he matched Mike Raffa at Forbes Field in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania in a ten-round draw.

On September 8, 1941, he defeated well known boxer Tommy Forte in a ten-round unanimous decision at Shibe Park, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Forte was considered a World Bantamweight contender and fought former champion Lou Salica on several occasions.

On September 15, 1941, he defeated Lou Transparenti at the Colliseum in Baltimore in a twelve-round Unanimous Decision. Transparenti had been a contender for the World Featherweight Championship during his career.

On November 10, 1941, Jeffra again defeated great rival Joey Archibald gaining a ten-round Unanimous Decision in Providence, Rhode Island, taking the lead early and never losing it. It was their fourth and last bout together. Jack Dempsey, who shared management with Jeffra, acted as one of his corner men. Jeffra boxed at 128, quite close to the weight of Archibald.

Jeffra lost a NYSAC World Featherweight Title bout to reigning champion Chalky Wright on June 19, 1942, before a crowd of 6,000 at Oriole Park in Baltimore, in a ten-round technical knockout. Jeffra was down in the ninth, badly worn down from the blows of Wright. He returned for the tenth looking weak, and once he was down, the fight was immediately called. Some sources consider this bout as the official loss of his NYSAC Featherweight Title, as the outcome was more decisive than his loss to Archibald in May 1941.

Win against champion Lou Salica
On March 27, 1944, Jeffra fought an important non-title bout with former NBA World Bantamweight Champion Lou Salica, winning in a ten-round unanimous decision in his hometown of Baltimore. Salica won only one round in the bout that was described as "a cautious, cagey battle between ex-champions that afforded little excitement and no knockdowns." It would be Salica's last known competitive professional bout.

Win against champion Phil Terranova
On November 20, 1944, Jeffra scratched out an important but close victory in a non-title bout against former NBA World Featherweight Champion Phil Terranova in a ten-round split decision in Baltimore. The crowd of 5,000 probably cheered for Jeffra, their hometown favorite, who rallied in the late rounds to win the close decision.

Jeffra defeated such men as Lou Salica, "Pittsburgh" Jackie Wilson, Ruby Bradley, Joey Iannotti, Indian Quintana, and Bill Speary. Jeffra was inducted into the Ring Boxing Hall of Fame in 1982.

Life after boxing
After retiring from competitive boxing around 1946, but fighting a few bouts as late as 1950, he coached boxing at Western Maryland College for two years and worked as an agent for Jockey Sam Palumbo, an exceptional half mile track rider. In 1960, he joined the staff of Pimlico Race Course in Baltimore, as a Stable Manager where he continued to work for many years. He was married and had two boys and two girls, sending all to college.

In April 1982, Jeffra was named to the Ring Boxing Hall of Fame.

He died in September 1988.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Harry Jeffra


text: Category:Languages of Burkina Faso

title: Category:Languages of Burkina Faso


text: User talk:68.253.199.72

title: User talk:68.253.199.72


text:
Talk:Eurasian lynx

Untitled
I have a few questions, it's for a school project! I hope someone can help me!? I was wondering how do they travel? Like, in packs or alone, or what? Alexa Meadows
 * I'm not really sure, but I believe they generally are solitary animals. Also, they are quite shy.
 * It's true; lynx have trouble getting dates.

Do they conduct their behaviour appropriately in pacts or are they independent animals that find that to mate is a challenge in such isolated environments?

62.31.182.171 19:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Colleagues, don't you have a photo of a living Scandinavian lynx? A stuffed one looks ugly and miserable.

Victor Sudakov 212.73.124.9 06:32, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it does. I bet someone has, but a wild lynx is one of the thoughest mammals to get a good photo, since she doesn't eat (mostly) anything she hasn't killed. Only good photos of wild animals I've seen are taken on the den. A picture request might be in order. 88.195.46.112 07:12, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Lynx Grammar
Question regarding the article's grammar: In several places in the "Status" section the author uses "lynxes" as a plural. I thought the plural was simply "lynx." In other places, for instance in the status of the lynx in Norway, the author uses such phrases as "Lynx was" and "Lynx is." I am assuming this should be "Lynx were" and "Lynx are," but I wanted to get a consensus before editing. --12.154.39.254 18:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Both "lynx" and "lynxes" are correct for the plural. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:33, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Distribution
According to Reader's Digest North American Wildlife (Mammals, Reptiles and Amphibians) [ISBN 0-7621-0035-4] the L. lynx also lives in Canada, Alaska and small parts of the upper US such as the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. I wont edit the page till others agree, I just wanted to throw that out there. --IvanTortuga (talk) 20:59, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No it doesn't, L. lynx is the Eurasian lynx which lives in Eurasia, the lynxes you're talking about are L. canadensis, the Canada lynx, and L. rufus, the bobcat. Editor abcdef (talk) 05:52, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Lynx lynx is ENDANGERED according to the international trade and laws of Russia
Lynx lynx is listed as "under the threat of extinction" "category II"(literal translation from Russian) in the official letter from the Federal Customs Authority of Russia of January 21, 2005, Number N 06-59/1213. The letter in full can be found at: http://zooclub.ru/zakon/45.shtml

The above-referenced letter lists the species of animals considered as "under the threat of extinction" or, in common terms, ENDANGERED, under the Internation Convention on Trade of Endangered Wild Flora and Fauna (literal translation from Russian in the above-referenced official letter).

Whoever listed lynx lynx as "Least Concern" or "LC" conservation status made an error. I don't know how to edit the "Eurasian Lynx" page. Please help me correct the error because many illegal poachers in Russia and China are very happy to murder little wild Eurasian Lynx kittens by poisoning and sell the pelts to the furriers in Canada and the USA to make fancy coats. Each "Russian lynx" coat uses 18-25 Russian lynx pelts and sells for over $25,000 new and over $5,000 pre-owned. See http://www.purpleshoshana.com/results/details.asp?pc=1867

Please contact me if you need full translation of the Federal Customs Authority of Russia official letter of January 21, 2005 at nataliasid1@yahoo.com. Natalia Sidiakina. Nsidiakinawiki (talk) 00:02, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Nope, Wikipedia always use IUCN Red List first in conservation status, also, some Eurasian lynx populations are endangered, but not the whole species. Editor abcdef (talk) 05:55, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Range: Lynx is also found in Bulgaria
The absence of Bulgaria from the list of the Balkan countries seems discriminatory... Even if population is low, it's present - it has been filmed severa; times only in 2008 and 2009 in different parts of the country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.83.249.136 (talk) 17:49, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Scandinavian Lynx
It says under the caption of the "Scandinavian Lynx" "Lynx Lynx Lynx", this can not be correct, or there isn't documentation of a "Lynx Lynx Lynx" on wikipedia. I don't know what the classification of a Scandinavian Lynx is, but I thought I'd call it to attention to be corrected. '''Aryeonos''' (talk) 01:43, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Behavior
Currently, the "Behavior" section of the article only discusses hunting. Maybe someone knowledgeable on the subject might want to add information on other aspects, such as breeding and social behavior? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.65.213.82 (talk) 15:09, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Eurasian lynx. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.kora.unibe.ch/en/proj/elois/online/countries/estonia/main.htm
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.environment.no/templates/themepage____2253.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:24, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Eurasian lynx. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.np-plitvicka-jezera.hr/page.aspx?PageID=97&parent=70
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.rktl.fi/riista/riistavarat/suurpedot_2009/ilves.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:37, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Eurasian lynx. 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/20090319052245/http://www.lcie.org/Docs/LCIE%20IUCN/Arx%20KORA%20ELOIS.pdf to http://www.lcie.org/Docs/LCIE%20IUCN/Arx%20KORA%20ELOIS.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:46, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Eurasian lynx. 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 tag to http://www.catsg.org/fileadmin/filesharing/5.Cat_News/5.3._Special_Issues/5.3.10._SI_11/CatNews_Special_Issue11_76-77.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.naturvardsverket.se/In-English/Start/Nature-conservation-and-wildlife/The-large-predators/Council-For-Predator-Issues/
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5sZHax2Yu?url=http://www.jwildlifedis.org/cgi/reprint/38/1/84.pdf to http://www.jwildlifedis.org/cgi/reprint/38/1/84.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:23, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Eurasian lynx. 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/20070527230029/http://lynx.uio.no/jon/lynx/eulynx1.htm to http://lynx.uio.no/jon/lynx/eulynx1.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720193207/http://www.metsastajaliitto.fi/?q=node%2F446 to http://www.metsastajaliitto.fi/?q=node%2F446
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070527230029/http://lynx.uio.no/jon/lynx/eulynx1.htm to http://lynx.uio.no/jon/lynx/eulynx1.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070318083426/http://hr.dinaris.org/Glavna_stranica to http://hr.dinaris.org/Glavna_stranica

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:55, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Eurasian lynx. 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/20081029084442/http://lynx.uio.no/lynx/nancy/news/cn14_03.htm to http://lynx.uio.no/lynx/nancy/news/cn14_03.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150309224226/http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-03/09/lynx to https://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-03/09/lynx

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:52, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Distribution in Balkans
Following recent edits, I think we should clarify the distribution. Here are a few points I have gathered from a quick review. Before making any changes, I thought it might be helpful to discuss it first.  Jts1882 | talk 14:46, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) The IUCN say the Balkan lynx is found in Macedonia, Albania, Kosovo and Montenegro (both redlist and CatSG pages).
 * 2) The IUCN include Croatia, Serbia and Bulgaria in the Eurasian lynx distribution (geographic range section on redlist page)
 * 3) The link in the article for the Kora website shows nothing useful for me. However, this link to their English language Lynx in Europe page is more useful. According to the pdf of the Status, management and distribution of large carnivores – bear, lynx, wolf & wolverine – in Europe. Part II (Species country reports) the lynxes in Serbia and Bulgaria are likely Carpathian lynxes.
 * 4) It's not clear what group the lynxes in Croatia and Bosnia are. The IUCN seems to exclude them from the Balkan lynx subspecies.  The IUCN state the Carpathian lynx distibution as "East and Central Europe, inhabiting the Carpathian Mountains". Could that be taken as including Croatia and Bosnia?
 * 5) The Alpine lynxes of France, Switzerland and Italy and the Bohemian-Bavarian population are also unclear on subspecies.  By default anything else probably goes in the nominal subspecies, even though the range is stated as northern Europe and western Siberia.

 * Support strongly in Bulgaria as well: There are at least by my dimension 250 Balkan Eurasian lynxes in Bulgaria. I'm professional shooter, I've sighted with my eyes at least 5 lynxes in my lifetime. Including one in Kostenets around 1996, when by my childish dimension, I was 10-years-old, there mightn't has been more than 100. Now with 25 years later there might be around 250-300. I cannot provide any witnesses or pictures just what we saw several people when the animal attacked a cat by the hotel, but settled on the marmots nearby. It retreated immediately, after cars arrived in the snow-land and after it got its prey. We spoke with children at school. It was around New Year's Eve and once school restarted, I shared it with my schoolmates and teacher, but that was it. I hope that it'll be enough to provide it here that there are Balkan Bulgarian and Macedonian lynxes as well. Elan Morin Tedronai (talk)

Finland is not part of Scandinavia!
Under the section Scandinavia, the situation in Finland is covered. But Finland is not a part of Scandinavia. Scandinavia consists of Norway, Sweden and Denmark. I suggest to change the heading to "The Nordics" or similar to make it easy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.34.149.71 (talk) 03:24, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Sardinian wild cat
, regarding your recent revert:

Firstly, the cited |source states: "In 1908 Mola published two short articles in the Bollettino della Società Zoologica Italiana describing, firstly, a problematico incrocio di Felidi (Mola 1908a), then a Lince della Sardegna (Mola 1908b). Both descriptions were clearly and doubtlessly related to two Sardinian wildcats (Felis lybica lybica)." Secondly, the cats on Sardinia are actually feral cats. Ddum5347 (talk) 18:45, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

 * I know these refs, have added them myself. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:44, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Then why did you revert my edit, even though it was true to the source? Ddum5347 (talk) 18:45, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * If it was indeed introduced, it's highly likely not lybica. Why don't you read them yourself? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:47, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I read them myself, but if I put it was "lybica", as the source states, then you would revert it anyways. If I put it wasn't "lybica", and instead "catus", you would say that is incorrect according to the source. So either way I can't edit. See the problem? Ddum5347 (talk) 18:49, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * That's why it's best to leave it as it was : without a Latin name, but just the link. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:51, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't know why it's so hard for you to let me add information that may be relevant. Ddum5347 (talk) 18:55, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

These 2 refs are NOT relevant for THIS page's section on taxonomy of the lynx. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 19:00, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * For just adding "or feral cat"? That's just three words. It's not as out of context as you make it out to be. Ddum5347 (talk) 19:12, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * and for adding above 2 refs : none of them refers to 'Sardinian lynx possibly being a feral cat'. Obviously you did not read any of the 2. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 19:28, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The references are there to point out that the concept of 'Sardinian wild cats' does not exist; they are just feral cats. You obviously cannot analyse context. Ddum5347 (talk) 19:34, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

This kind of SYNTH is not my piece of cake, so I remove it when I see it : neither authors stated that Mola's lynx was a feral cat. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 21:31, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

scientific name vs Linnaeus
Why does the infobox have "Lynx lynx (Linnaeus, 1758)" while the Taxonomy section says "Felis lynx was the scientific name used in 1758 by Carl Linnaeus in his work Systema Naturae." So, that "(Linnaeus, 1758)" in the infobox is not correct although source(s) claim so. I'd like to know (and it would be good to be in the article, too) when the genus was changed to Lynx. My 70's animal book gives "Felis lynx", so probably in the end of 1970s at earliest, I think. Same thing at least with black grouse, it also claims Linné gave its current taxonomial name. 109.240.7.160 (talk) 08:45, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Sources for subspecies distribution
What are the sources for the distribution of the subspecies? This source does not mention "European Russia", for example. -- NGC 54  ( talk |  contribs ) 15:49, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It mentions Psebay for Lynx lynx dinniki and Kazan for Lynx lynx melinus. The latter is included in Lynx lynx lynx in the six subspecues recognised by the IUCN specialist cat group. —  Jts1882 | talk 16:26, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The source says "Russian Far East, Ussuri and Amur territories, North Korea, NE China (Manchuria)" for Amur lynx, but the article only says "Amur region". -- NGC 54  ( talk |  contribs ) 19:51, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Russian population
Why does the entire Russian population is listed at Eurasian lynx? -- NGC 54  ( talk ｜  contribs ) 10:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I've moved Russia to the end of the European list and qualified the Russian population with an estimate of the European population. The IUCN assessment says:
 * "'Lynx has been estimated to number 1,940 in the Central region, 4,110 in North-western region, 680 in the Northern Caucasus, 40 in the Southern region, 2,400 in the Volga region, 1,070 in the Ural, 6,390 in the Siberian region and 5,890 in the Russian Far East ...'"
 * According to European_Russia the first four regions are European, Volga predominantly European, Ural predominantly Asian and the others Asian. I've counted Volga as European to get approximately 9000 for the European total, which is the nearest thousand as long as less than 700 (~30%) are in the Asian part. —  Jts1882 | talk 17:08, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Should have added a ping given the time since the comment. . —  Jts1882 | talk 19:54, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Montane forest image
The image removed here should pe replaced with an image that depicts an Eurasian montane forest, not just simply removed. -- NGC 54  ( talk ｜  contribs ) 12:13, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Go for it.Unbh (talk) 15:55, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @Unbh: What is wrong with this image? Anyway, now the caption of the image is "Boreal and montane forest habitats", which is false, since in the photo there is only a boreal forest. -- NGC 54  ( talk ｜  contribs ) 13:09, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * It's a picture of a clump of Norway spruce. Its not a good image of European montane. Unbh (talk) 16:25, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Wolverines do not prey on Lynx.
I have yet to see any report of a wolverine killing a grown lynx. I don't even think wolves prey on them either, that'd be too difficult.47.197.29.147 (talk) 15:36, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Eurasian lynx


text: User talk:129.71.157.99

title: User talk:129.71.157.99


text:
Wikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul Music

Some Wikipedians have formed a project to better organize information in articles related to R&B, soul music, and funk music singers, musicians, bands, songs, and record labels.

This page and its subpages contain their suggestions; it is hoped that this project will help to focus the efforts of other Wikipedians. If you would like to help, please inquire on the talk page and see the to-do list there.

Scope
A significant number of articles on important and influential R&B and soul-related persons or organizations, both past and contemporary, are small, underwritten stubs, fancruft, or non-existent. R&B and soul music, more so than any major music genres, have poor coverage in the Wikipedia. Hip-hop generally fares better; whether hip-hop will be included as part of this project is a subject open for vote. The purpose of this project is to expand, copyedit, and/or create these articles.

I understand that this is going to be a big task, one that not one person can handle by themself. Also, I realize that there are a lot of articles to be made, which is why I will try and organize the project in steps and waves, so that we take care of everything, but we don’t try to do too much at one time.

R&B can stand for either rhythm and bass or rhythm and blues.

Navigation

 * Assessment
 * Taskforces
 * To-do list
 * Collaboration
 * Members

Parentage

 * WikiProject Music
 * WikiProject Music genres
 * WikiProject on R&B and Soul Music

Similar Projects

 * WikiProject Classical music
 * WikiProject Computer music
 * WikiProject Electronic music
 * WikiProject Metal
 * WikiProject Hip hop
 * WikiProject Punk rock
 * WikiProject Jazz

Related Projects

 * WikiProject Musicians for guidelines and assistance on articles about musicians and musical groups
 * WikiProject Albums for guidelines and assistance on articles about musical albums
 * WikiProject African Diaspora
 * WikiProject Mariah Carey
 * WikiProject The Supremes

Structure
In general, this project will follow the rules set up on the WikiProject Music page. Here are just a few added notes:

 * Do not create links for articles for albums, songs, or persons that do not exist, unless an article is seriously needed and you can create that article. When you do create an article for a song, person, or album, be sure to run a search and link your article on any other Wikipedia pages where it should be linked.

 * Try to be as concise as possible. The article should cover all phases of the group's career (even unpopular ones), but it should do so in as few words as possible. Try to include only important and major facts and group information; simplification and directness are important.

Specific to articles on solo performers/persons

 * Follow the same basic Wiki biographic format for the person. Be sure to mention their ethnicity, exact repertoire, record label, and significance.

 * The body of the article should focus on the performer’s career, including only significant personal information (marriages, offspring etc) and avoiding trivia (favorite food/color). If the person was in a major group, discussion of their participation in the group should be brief and focus on the person’s major contributions to the group.

Specific to articles on groups/bands/acts
Articles for performers should adhere to the following format:

 * The header should contain the band name, any important abbreviations or aliases, nationality, genre repertoire, year and place of creation, year of disbanding, record label, significance, and all members of the group. If there were more than ten members, list all founding members and any important successors.

 * The body of the article should focus on the group, including how the members met, how they started the group, and the inner workings of the act itself. Personal details about individual members should be mentioned only if they affect the group or its members.

Template/Examples
The articles on Michael Jackson, Mariah Carey, Janet Jackson and The Supremes are in the direction we want to push the other articles towards.

Use this example page as a guide to creating and/or cleaning up articles for each act. It contains editing directions and a style guide: /Example Page

Phase one: cleaning up present articles

 * Three articles are close to ready for being featured. These three need to be slightly revised to follow the format similar to the other music articles and the template.

 * The articles for R&B and soul music need formatting, link cleanup, and expansion. Other major genres in serious need of attention:
 * Doo wop
 * Funk

 * The article for List of number 1 R&B hits (USA) should be divided up and edited to match List of number-one hits (United States). The basis for the re-write is at List of number 1 R&B hits (USA)/temp.

 * Sound samples should be uploaded to both artist and genre pages.

In need of major improvement

 * The following pages are those of acts who need their pages expanded and/or corrected to follow the template, as they stand now:
 * Al Green: NED
 * Curtis Mayfield: IRSNED
 * George Clinton: RSED
 * The Delfonics: IRNED
 * Harold Melvin & the Blue Notes: IRSNED
 * Junior Walker & the All Stars: IRSNED
 * New Edition: IRSED
 * P-Funk: IRSND
 * Sam Cooke: RSED
 * Smokey Robinson: IRSNED
 * Martha & the Vandellas: RSE
 * Danity Kane: RSN
 * FAME Studios" IRE
 * Etta James: RSED
 * Barry White: IRSNE
 * The Spinners: IRSD
 * Philippé Wynne: IRSNED
 * Change (band): IRSED
 * I = needs image (photo in addition to album cover), R = needs references/fact-checking, S = needs sound samples, N = needs neutralizing/points-of-view attributing, E = needs major expansion, D needs full discography

(if you find more related articles that need cleanup, add them here).

In need of minor improvement
These articles only need a few minor fixes. No articles in this section should need major expansion or POV editing.
 * Beth Rowley: R
 * Boyz II Men: S
 * James Brown: S
 * Jodeci: S
 * The Marvelettes: RS
 * T-Pain: IRS
 * Mary Wells: RS
 * The Miracles: RS
 * Misha B: S
 * Solomon Burke: S
 * Little Richard: S
 * I = needs image (photo in addition to album cover), R = needs references/fact-checking, S = needs sound samples, D needs full discography

Sufficiently improved

 * The Jackson 5
 * Marvin Gaye
 * The Supremes
 * The Isley Brothers
 * LeToya Luckett (now a good article)

Phase two: creation of new articles
This will be a listing for important acts or figures who do not presently have articles.
 * Shai - ✅
 * Soul 4 Real - ✅
 * Jimmy Liggins - ✅
 * Steve Guyger - ✅
 * Big Joe Maher - ✅

R&B and Soul Music related article
WikiProject R&B and Soul Music Place this tag on top of all R&B or Soul related article talk pages:

Member
You may wish to put this on your userpage after you join. You can add it by copying and pasting the following code User R&B and Soul Music wikiproject. This template also adds you to Category:WikiProject R&B and Soul Music members. If you don't wish to use this userbox but still wish to be on this category then just add to your user page.

R&B and Soul Music Award
reason
 * If you notice an editor making excellent edits to a R&B or Soul related article, add this to his talk page using:

 * Thanks to our fellow User:Tom Morris there is an alternate version of the barnstar, accessible through:

Welcome
Welcome messages to be used for editors of hip hop related articles. ~ produces:

You may find useful to use this other template if the user is non- [ registered]  ~ produces:

Recruiting
We also need new members for this project, if you want to call your wiki-friends, go ahead, and use this template.

Would you like to tell many people in non-member talk area, so you can use. produces:

You can also use, it produces A special thanks goes to  Mi r a n da   who designed this banner.

Useful templates
Templates:

 * Infoboxes:

Stubs:
 * Infobox Musical artist — Infobox for a band/musician. Syntax is on its main page.
 * Infobox Album — Album infobox. Syntax found on its talk page or at WikiProject Albums.
 * Infobox Single — Song infobox. Syntax found on its talk page or at WikiProject Songs.
 * infobox record label — Record Label infobox. Syntax found on its talk page.
 * Within the project
 * R&B-album-stub — Place on stub R&B/Soul music albuns articles.
 * R&Bsoul-band-stub — Place on stub R&B/Soul music bands, duo or group articles.
 * R&Bsoul-bio-stub — Place on stub R&B or Soul biography articles.
 * R&Bsoul-band-stub — Place on stub R&B/Soul music bands, duo or group articles.
 * RnB-song-stub — Place on stub R&B/Soul music song articles.
 * R&Bsoul-stub — Place on general articles about Rhythm and blues or soul music.
 * General
 * musician-stub — Place on stub musician articles.
 * music-producer-stub — Place on stub producer articles.
 * record-label-stub — for record label stubs
 * Australia-record-label-stub for Australian record label stubs
 * Canada-record-label-stub for Canadian record label stubs
 * Europe-record-label-stub for European record label stubs
 * US-record-label-stub for United States record label stubs

Tools

 * Main tool page: toolserver.org

 * Checklinks - Edit and repair external links
 * Dab solver - Quickly resolve ambiguous links.
 * Peer reviewer - Provides hints and suggestion to improving articles.
 * Article list for Wikiproject R&B and Soul Music, sortable by quality, importance, review status, impact score, etc.

External watchlist

 * Wikiproject Watchlist - WikiProject R&B and Soul Music


text:
Talk:Chennai/Archive 1

TOC
Chennai my neighbouring city is having the "Table of contents" in the top. I want to put that thing ( With hide attribute) in our Coimbatore page. What is the code to put that thing? Chella

 * Wiki will automatically add the "Table of Contents" (TOC in short) when the page has 4 or more headings. If you don't want it to be appear, you can use anywhere on the page (just to avoid auto-TOC). You can test any such stuff in Sandbox -- Rrjanbiah 06:11, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Just type anywhere on the page. Angela. 01:16, Mar 10, 2004 (UTC)

 * Oops! He is not asking about notoc. He is asking about TOC. --Rrjanbiah 06:11, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Oh, sorry. I completely misread that. Here's how to make a TOC for a page with less than 4 headings. Angela. 08:11, Mar 10, 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your immediate response. But, this one is hardly matching with auto-TOC style (example: hide link and other formats). Anyway, it's a good solution. --Rrjanbiah 11:13, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

This is as close as you can get. The show/hide link relies on Javascript which isn't possible to insert into a page manually. Angela. 23:34, Mar 11, 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks Angela. I understand the difficulty as I'm aware of PHPWiki. Personally, I oppose this fix as it may result in unnecessary loads. What about adding another markup say __FORCE_TOC__ or something like that. --Rrjanbiah 05:30, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * If there are only 3 sections, and one of them is external links, I wonder if a TOC is a very useful thing to have. -- Arvindn 06:19, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I totally agree with you. But, my objection was to Angela's fix.--Rrjanbiah 10:18, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Sorry, I'm a bit confused now. What are you objecting to? I'm not saying this has to be used in this article, I was just answering the question about how it could be done if someone wanted that. Angela. 20:00, Mar 15, 2004 (UTC)

 * My objection is/was to suggest or use such fix in any article as it is sluggish. --Rrjanbiah 04:50, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

comma separators... xx,xx,xxx or x,xxx,xxx
the population figure was originally given on here in the format xx,xx,xxx - as often used in India (see Crore). That was quite confusing, as I read it as 60 million not 6 million, so I removed the commas. Now it's been changed to the x,xxx,xxx format. What's best? Matthewmayer 18:28, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * As this is the English wikipedia I think we should use what is most common among English speakers worldwide, which is he latter format. Arvindn 04:07, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * When I first added the info box, I used the Crore format 'coz I'd thought that it must be in localized format. Also, for the time zone, I used GMT even though the GMT is somewhat obsolete as per international standards; but GMT alone is used througout the India. --Rrjanbiah 05:25, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Chennai as Madras in Tamil
User:Hippietrail, Chennai has been referred to as Madras in Tamil just as other English words are used in urban Indian Tamil. If you speak urban Tamil, you'll notice that upto 20-30% of words could be English. For instance, the song "Madrasa Suttipaakka Poren" from the Tamil film "May Madham" uses Madras to refer to Chennai just as it uses a bunch of other English words. In other words, Madras is used in conversational Tamil just as Taxi, platform, time etc. are. I'm a native Tamil speaker and have been in Tamil Nadu for 20+ years, and have always understood the name of city to be Chennai in Tamil (and Madras in English until lately). Ambarish | Talk 21:14, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Hi and sorry for not replying sooner. I saw your response and probably misinterpreted it a little because I thought wouldn't have to respond. I know little of Tamil or Chennai but past experience has shown that in other cases there are conflicting rumours and stories and politics which come into play in the case of placenames. I had just read somewhere on the Internet that there were disputed etymologies for the word "Madras" with some believing it really did originate as a Tamil word, and that the person after whom "Chennai" has been known was not even a Tamil. I no longer recall where I read this but when I was searching for it came across a related thread on a blog called languagehat. I asked on that list whether the idea that "Chennai has never been known as Madras in Tamil" was political or not. I was told it was political. So I do not know which side is true and perhaps one would need to go back further than 20 years to find Tamils thinking of "Madras" in their own language. But I decided that the fact there exist two sides to the story at least warranted inclusion of the word "Chennai" in Tamil script. Perhaps some discussion will now ensue here. I hope I haven't opened a can of worms but it seems NPOV to include the Tamil script for both names. Respectfully — Hippietrail 06:53, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the link. Hmm, I guess my statement above might have given you a wrong idea of where I'm coming from. Just to clarify, I'm no Tamil fanatic reactionary, and I personally use Madras even in spoken Tamil (as I said, that is because I use quite a few English words), and almost never Chennai. I'm indeed aware that the city-renaming exercise is a political farce. Anyway, here are some thoughts:
 * * The fact is that the etymological origins of both "Madras" and "Chennai" are disputed. Most scholars believe that "Chennai" is derived from Telugu, either through a name (Chennappa) or through other means. Re. "Madras", on the other hand, there's no consensus whatsoever. All this you're aware of, I guess.
 * * The language used in the article ("Chennai, also known as Madras is a sprawling ...") implies that you (or whoever wrote that) think(s) Madras and Chennai reflect current usage. In that case, how is historical usage of Madras in Tamil of any relevance? The only thing relevant is whether Madras is used in Tamil currently, perhaps over the last 20-30 years. To which the answer is, of course, "No". If you want to rewrite the article as "Chennai, historically known also as Madras", that's fine then. Whether Madras was ever used in Tamil would still be contentious, but atleast the issue becomes then relevant.
 * * As for "Chennai has never been as known as Madras in Tamil", I think that's a quote taken out of context. First, that's just in the edit summary, where I couldn't explain all I had in mind. What I meant was that Chennai hasn't been known as Madras in Tamil for the last 70-80 years atleast, and that is what I've reiterated above in my original edit. Lastly, I have no idea who runs language hat, but I think "subordinating knowledge to politics" is far from what I intended to do and what I've done.
 * * This is just an aside. Madras written in Tamil is not மதிராஸ். It is, instead, மெட்ராஸ். If the discussion results in a consensus to retain the Tamil form of Madras, this could be used instead.
 * Hope we can arrive at a consensus. I don't think we're far from it anyhow. Ambarish | Talk 02:19, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I haven't see any response from User:Hippietrail for a week now, so I'm reverting Hippietrail's reverts back to my version. Ambarish | Talk 19:55, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Sorry I hadn't replied earlier. I took a few days holiday. Thanks very much for correcting my Tamil spelling. Sorry to see it go from the article but if that's what's felt I don't know enough to say otherwise. I did think it interesting that there are a number of Google hits in Tamil with the corrected spelling. Would you care to look at the pages and tell me what context the word is used in? — Hippietrail 00:24, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I'll be happy to undo my revert - I thought you were no longer interested as a week had passed by. I'm afraid I couldn't locate any such pages as you mention, probably because I don't know how to search for Tamil keywords. Could you provide links? Thanks. Ambarish | Talk 23:31, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Searching for Tamil words is easy. Just use Google. If you can't type Tamil directly into Google, you can cut and paste it from this page. Last week when I tried I was sure that I got a page of results however today I get only two. The word "மெட்ராஸ" is used several times on each though and in some inflected forms it seems. I would be delighted to learn the contexts however this discussion turns out. Here are the pages: vinobha.blogspot.com: 2 uses, maraththadi.com: 3 uses.

 * Hey sorry I'm late in responding. The reason you got only two results is probably because you searched for "மெட்ராஸ" (Madrasa) instead of "மெட்ராஸ்" (Madras). The hits that you get for the corrected form (30 odd) can be classified as:

 * Literal transliteration of an English proper noun - e.g. http://www.tamillinux.org/~balaji/archives/000334.html has the word in it's 3rd paragraph as a transliteration of "Madras Garden", apparently a restaurant.
 * Literal transliteration of an English/semi-English conversation - e.g. http://sooriyan.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=734&Itemid=1 Literally, , "Which part of India?", "Madras",
 * What I mentioned above about people (especially in cities) using English words routinely in Tamil prose and conversation. e.g. http://tamildubukku.blogspot.com/2004_05_01_tamildubukku_archive.html has a paragraph where the author uses, among other English words, "Madras, "air hostess" (sic) and flight.
 * Just in case you're curious, the two results that you did get for your typo involve a colloquialism of the noun "Madras" in the accusative (objective) case. Many Tamil nouns ending in a consonant are conjugated in the accusative case by adding the vowel "ai". Colloquially (in speech), the "ai" becomes "a", and modern writers tend to report direct speech as is. The result is "Madrasa", which is literally "Madrasai", which is "Madras" as an object.
 * Ambarish | Talk 18:24, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Was it Madraspattinam or Chengapattinam? Paddu
 * It was called Chennappattinam, AFIK. -- Sundar 10:51, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

சென்னை Vs. ெசன்ைன
சென்னை (&#2970;&#3014;&#2985;&#3021;&#2985;&#3016;)

ெசன்ைன (&#3014;&#2970;&#2985;&#3021;&#3016;&#2985;)

User:Vrajmohan is keep on changing சென்னை to ெசன்ைன and in the edit summary he wrote "I have tested this on Firefox - this is the correct sequence of characters", which I can't agree. For me it doesn't even work in IE itself. According to my knowledge the thunai ezhuthu has to be added after the mei ezhuthu for Unicode. Tried, DW, and , they all work as per my knowledge. Is there anyone who can solve this issue?? --Rrjanbiah 07:12, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Tamil, like the other Indic language scripts has glyphs which do not appear in the same order as the sounds they represent. Rendering systems and fonts have had to come to terms with this. Prior to Windows XP, Windows was unable to correctly render them. The rendering system of Windows is Called UniScribe. Newer versions of Uniscribe mean better rendering of Tamil and other exotic scripts. The rendering system on Linux is Pango but Mozilla used to do its own rendering - I haven't kept up with changes in this field. The correct order of unicode codepoints for Tamil is the order of the sounds, not the order the glyphs appear in written or printed text. Unfortunately I don't have a written version of the word here but this information should be enough for a Tamil speaker to analyze the Unicode and choose the right one. Chances are Explorer on Windows XP renders correctly using Arial Unicode MS. Firefox on whichever OS may not but it depends on several variabls. — Hippietrail 13:11, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. Fortunately, I found Chennai in Tamil Wikipedia itself; the author of the page has used like mine. I could see some dotted circles in the second word above in the heading ("ெசன்ைன") both in IE and FF, which is wrong. Just curious, couldn't you see such dotted characters? Mine is FF/XP. --Rrjanbiah 13:56, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * My apologies - I am using Firefox on Windows XP - I could not see any dotted circles - the letters were flipped and I went ahead and changed it. I was ignorant of the fact that the "thunai ezhuthu" should follow the "mei ezhuthu". I have now reverted it --Vrajmohan

Ok, no problem. I was also saying that the thunai ezhuthu was not merged; that is what I mentioned as dotted circled character. I'm also using FF on XP. Just curious, have you seen any browser in which both "சென்னை" and "ெசன்ைன" are rendered same? --Rrjanbiah 05:15, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Hi, just want to know what font i need to view the tamil text. i see it as hollow boxes. could you also provide a link please? thanks --Susheel c 08:41, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It is Windows XP with complex script support (Control panel->Language support->Install complex scripts; You need to have XP CD; I have some screenshots and will publish soon). Mozilla Firefox (my pet browser) seems to work without such support, but it is *heavily* broken. The font is Latha. --Rrjanbiah 08:23, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Many thanks Rrjanbiah, unfortunately for me i'm on win 2000. I'll try to find a workaround.thanks--Susheel Chandradhas 16:58, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Perhaps you may want to look at http://lrrc3.sas.upenn.edu/tamilonline/unicodehelp.html --Rrjanbiah 06:13, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chennai/Archive 1