Talk:Ryan Day

Disambiguation

Any consensus on whether there should be a disambiguation page for Ryan Day (American Football) and Ryan Day (Snooker Player) rather than just showing the latter? --Analogue Kid (talk) 14:02, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

There absolutely needs to be one now that Day will become the head coach. A lot of readers are going to end up at the other Day's article and be very frustrated. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:3059:8016:5847:3E43 (talk) 15:09, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

I have proposed moving the articles at Talk:Ryan Day. Ostealthy (talk) 15:00, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Coaching tree

@Strikerforce: can we talk about your edit?

Coaching trees are pretty standard for coach articles on wikipedia, including Urban Meyer#Coaching tree, Jim Harbaugh#Coaching tree, Nick Saban#Coaching tree, Brian Kelly (American football coach)#Coaching tree, and even NFL coaches like Marvin Lewis#Coaching tree and Hue Jackson#Coaching tree (I have yet to find a current football head coach article that doesn't include a coaching tree). Rather than WP:TRIVIA, I think most editors see it as the pedigree of a coach, demonstrating what kind of playing styles they were exposed to. Hoof Hearted (talk) 18:12, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Sure, we can talk about it. My stance, in general, is that they're trivia. If I wanted to make a point, I would go to every coach's article on the project and make the same edit that I did to this article. However, that would be seen as being disruptive. It's neat information to know, as a fan, but is it really encyclopedic? Happy to hear other thoughts, however. Strikerforce^Talk 18:19, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

I have to agree with Hoof Hearted on this one. I'm a big sports fan and in my many years of reading articles here about coaches, I have always thought of coaching trees as standard, or at least widely accepted, content. I don't believe WP:TRIVIA applies at all to lists like this, but is instead intended for much more random, fluff type of information, often presented essentially as fun facts or entertainment. In other words, true trivia as in trivial information. I see a coaching tree as important, noteworthy information for coaches. It helps readers understand a coach's history in terms of the types of coaching styles and systems he was a part of as he worked his way up the coaching ladder. WP:TRIVIA says, " A trivia section is one that contains a disorganized and "unselective" list. However, a selectively populated list with a relatively narrow theme is not necessarily trivia, and can be the best way to present some types of information." As I see it, a coaching tree, is just the opposite of what we're trying to avoid; it is organzied and selective. And it's certainly quite relevant to the topic (the coach). So, to answer Strikerforces's very important question... yes, I definitely believe it's encylopedic. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:3059:8016:5847:3E43 (talk) 19:37, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

@2605:A000:FFC0:D8:3059:8016:5847:3E43: That's a reasonable perspective and interpretation of TRIVIA. I don't necessarily agree with the stance that it's encyclopedic (to me, that's information better suited for a sports almanac), but you've presented a reasonable case. Strikerforce^Talk 21:28, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:3059:8016:5847:3E43 (talk) 04:14, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Note: Upon re-reading WP:TRIVIA, there's a very important point that I missed originally; that the guideline is strictly about style, not about content. Thus, the reason it comes from the Manual of Style. In the lead, it says, "This style guideline deals with the way in which these facts are represented in an article, not with whether the information contained within them is actually trivia, or whether trivia belongs in Wikipedia." And in the What this guideline is not section, it says, "This guideline does not suggest the inclusion or exclusion of any information; it only gives style recommendations. Issues of inclusion are addressed by content policies." That leads us to WP:INDISCRIMINATE, part of the What Wikipedia is Not (WP:NOT) policy. So, WP:TRIVIA doesn't even apply to this discussion since Striker's objection doesn't have anything to do with how the information is being presented, but rather just whether it is encylopedic or not. And unless I'm missing something, I don't see anything in WP:NOT that would have us exclude a coaching tree. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:3059:8016:5847:3E43 (talk) 20:24, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I just realized that wikipedia has had an article on coaching tree since 2007, if that can be used as an argument that the topic is encyclopedic. It even survived a AfD nomination. Hoof Hearted (talk) 20:27, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I did see that right after you originally posted because I was curious to know if there was an article about it. I have to admit, though, that it's a pretty weak article that needs a lot of improvement. To be fair, I'm not sure that a notable subject automatically equates to enyclopedic content in a particular article. In this case, I just happen to think it's a natural, relevant fit. And just now, I randomly chose about 25 current college head coaches from major football programs to see if their articles had a coaching tree. Although some do not, the vast majority of them do. It appears to be so widely accepted for current and recent coaches, that calling it "standard" content would probably not be far off the mark. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:3059:8016:5847:3E43 (talk) 21:14, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

More input: I was directed to this thread regarding NFL coaching trees by another editor. I don't read a clear consensus there (but must say, our discussion is much more civil), but I like the opinion expressed that a short list of legendary coaches has merit vs. listing every single coach associated with a person. Of course, this would lead to a discussion of the definition of "legendary" (overall winning record? multiple Coach of the Year awards? National coaching awards?), and could prove to be a slippery slope. I would also acknowledge that coaching trees were removed from basketball and hockey articles with the given reason "they didn't improve the articles in any way". Hoof Hearted (talk) 14:20, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Ryan Day which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 15:00, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

The snooker player was moved off the primary topic; the closed discussion is now at Talk:Ryan Day (snooker player)#Requested move 9 July 2019. – wbm1058 (talk) 12:02, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 November 2021

Currently the profile shows he won the big ten east championship in 2021. That is not accurate. The University of Michigan did. 2603:900A:1701:D8DA:2598:8621:CE71:ED70 (talk) 13:22, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. - FlightTime (open channel) 13:26, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Michigan and Ohio State were co champions of the division in 2021. Michigan by tiebreaker got to play in the title game though. Kjtrill (talk) 22:24, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 November 2022

Ryan Day and the OSU Buckeyes were not the B1G East Champions. That would be the Jim Harbaugh led Michigan Wolverines 192.63.72.32 (talk) 05:06, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. MadGuy7023 (talk) 21:26, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Make a new picture of him

That picture is obvious vandalism. Hes obviously in the middle of speaking and also he has had a beard for years. Fix the vandalism pls. 2603:6010:A140:7D:69FE:A5CD:BBE1:D074 (talk) 00:51, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

"Coach Day" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Coach Day has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 8 § Coach Day until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:13, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Change the picture

The pic was intentionally used as vandalism because he was mid speaking when it was taken 2603:6010:A140:7D:F121:EB99:A1E5:FDED (talk) 23:10, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism? Lolwut? Can you suggest a better picture of Day that's in the public domain or has been licensed via Creative Commons? Jweiss11 (talk) 04:42, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

lol Jjazz76 (talk) 17:50, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Ryan Day which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 18:48, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• College-football-jan-20-cfp-national-championship---notre-dame-vs-ohio-state.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:06, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Big-Ten-Championship-Football-127.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:22, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• 77957696007-osu-24-celebration-ac-001.webp

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:08, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• RyanDay2022PeachBowlvGeorgia.webp

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:36, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Requested move 31 January 2026

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: MOVED. While there was some debate over whether the second criterion of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is clearly satisfied by the coach, there was none whatsoever about the first, and that was enough for this discussion to reach a consensus. (non-admin closure) Red Slash 17:26, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

---

Ryan Day (American football) → Ryan Day – Over the past year, 92.7% of total page views for the topic "Ryan Day" belong to the football coach and 95.3% of the median page views. As such, he should have the base, non-disambiguated page name for this topic. Debartolo2917 (talk) 02:47, 31 January 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 01:04, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose.Weak Oppose. My arguments in the requested move of November 2023 still apply. – wbm1058 (talk) 03:42, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

  I see where the wind is blowing in the discussion below, and concede that the gap between the two top contenders is widening — wbm1058 (talk) 03:50, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

  • page views during the 2023 snooker season 26–21
  • page views during the 2025 snooker season 53–23

  You can still find brief time windows when snooker rules. – wbm1058 (talk) 03:57, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

  That's interesting. Late April is a fairly dead period (under normal circumstances) for college football, spring practices notwithstanding. Mackensen (talk) 12:52, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Greedycell (talk) 05:06, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Give me a break. I had to look up what snooker is. It is essentially Pool played on a different size table. This game, although popular in some parts of the world, does not have close the number of fans as college football. We will move the Ryan Day page to a disambiguation page so that anyone looking for the other Ryan Days will have a clear path. --rogerd (talk) 19:09, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
  • This argument is lame, just because you don't know snooker doesn't make it irrelevant. There's no objective metric to say college football is more popular globally than snooker.--Ortizesp (talk) 15:24, 10 February 2026 (UTC)
• Comment from the original requester. I looked into the previous page move requested, and noted that wbm1058 argued (among other things) that the snooker player was sufficiently notable in the UK to warrant the disambiguation. In the year prior to that request, the snooker player averaged 139 views daily, and over the prior year to this request, that number is down to 108. Thus, in the year prior to the previous move request, the football coach averaged 91.2% of all page views, and only 80.4% of median page views. Those numbers, again, are up to 92.7% and 95.3%, respectively since 1/30/2025. The football coach additionally won a national championship in the intervening period, and while this is not necessarily a metric we use, does establish long-term legitimacy as the primary page for this topic. I would disagree that the same arguments made in 2023 are analogous to today. Debartolo2917 (talk) 22:25, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

  @Debartolo2917: You're missing my point. I just was pinged by the MediaWiki software to let me know that somebody made this edit to the 2026 World Open (snooker) article linking to the disambiguation page. Editors including me patrol for this, and disambiguate links. If coach Day was on primary topic, it's likely nobody would immediately notice this, and we would be telling the world that coach Day plays pro snooker in the UK during the football off-season. Primary topic assumes that such links invading the encyclopedia are nearly impossible because editors all over the world simply KNOW that coach Day is primary topic and would never think to add a non-disambiguated link intended for the snooker player. Maybe we can revisit this after the snooker player retires from playing the game. – wbm1058 (talk) 22:26, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

  I do understand your point, but I am missing its relevance. It seems unsurprising to me that a Snooker-specific page would have a disambiguation link point to the Snooker player. Do you have data on the percentage of un-disambiguated links pointing to each individual for this topic? In light of all that other commenters have noted --- overwhelming existing traffic towards the football coach, increasing traffic towards the football coach, and significant current-day relevance not matched by the Snooker player --- it is not rational to stake a claim solely upon the incidence of editors who are not careful enough to check for the proper link when they edit. Especially because that sides with editors and their mistakes over the convenience of access for users, who overwhelmingly are looking for the football coach. Debartolo2917 (talk) 23:56, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

  Readers looking for the Ohio State coach are mostly finding him with one click, of the over 11,000 readers of his bio, at most ~150 had to pass thru the disambiguation page on their way there. – wbm1058 (talk) 11:49, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose. No primary topic by long-term significance. Americans may not know what snooker is, but it has fans all over the world. College football, on the other hand, has fans... in America! Why would anyone else be interested in university amateur sports? Bizarre concept. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:35, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

  Tell me you're British without telling me you're British. Cheers, mate! Jweiss11 (talk) 04:32, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

  • Wikipedia doesn't belong only to Americans.--Ortizesp (talk) 15:24, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

  Yes, snooker has fans all over the world. In fact, the most recent world championship had more viewers than the most recent college football national championship. That doesn't have much to do with Ryan Day, the snooker player, who hasn't advanced to the quarterfinal since 2011/2012. He's no Mark Selby. Ryan Day, the football coach, led a team to a national championship a year ago and continues to be a prominent figure in the sport. No primary topic by long-term significance can't just be asserted; you need to make an argument backed by evidence. Mackensen (talk) 17:10, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

• Support move based on the 10-20 to 1 ratio of traffic. It might also be worth noting that the American football coach makes about 50 to 100 times as much money as the British snooker player annually, which might have something to do with the fact that the bizarre "amateur" sport that the American Ryan Day coaches has television contracts with American major networks worth several billion dollars per year. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:37, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
• Support per WP:PTOPIC. Readers are looking for the American football coach over other people of the same name. cookiemonster755 ^(talk) 18:04, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

  That graph is very enlightening. I looked back at the trend over 3 years and found that Ryan Day (American football) has consistently been widely more viewed than the others, although once the college football playoffs end, it does drop down, and the goes back up in the summer. --rogerd (talk) 18:12, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

• Support. Since the last move (and I'm going to borrow wbm1058's graph), the pageviews have shifted considerably toward the football coach. Compare 2023 to 2025. It appears that the snooker player's prominence has lessened some since that discussion, while the football coach remains in charge of one of the most prominent college football teams in the United States. I can't speak to whether snooker is more popular globally than college football is in the United States. It does seem to be the case that Ryan Day, the football coach, is of more interest to our readers than Ryan Day, the snooker player. The two men are contemporaries, so assessing lasting prominence isn't really possible. I do note that the football coach has won a national championship, while the snooker player is a "three-time World Championship quarter-finalist" (important, but not at the top of the sport) and does not appear to have won a ranked tournament since 2022. Mackensen (talk) 18:27, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
• Support. The simple fact is this Ryan Day is more well known than the other Ryan Day. One being American and one being non American is irrelevant. Jessintime (talk) 13:22, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
  • Yes, but only in America. Most people outside America will never have heard of him. That's the point. This is English-language Wikipedia, not American Wikipedia. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:59, 11 February 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose, not convinced there's a PRIMARYTOPIC by long-term significance.--Ortizesp (talk) 15:24, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

  What's the argument for the snooker player's long-term significance? This is a genuine question; I'm asking because I don't know and from reading his biography it wasn't obvious to me. Mackensen (talk) 23:48, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

  What's the argument for the coach's long-term significance? The argument is that none of them have real long-term significance. Hence no primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:59, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

  Sure. He's won a national championship during the more competitive era of the 12-team playoff. He is the highest-paid public employee in the state of Ohio and a frequent subject of long, in-depth pieces. The team that he is the coach of is a top-tier program, possibly the most prominent in the sport. He is considered one of the top coaches in the sport, and has been considered such for several years. If and when he leaves Ohio State, he's an immediate top candidate for NFL head coaching jobs. His four-game losing streak against Michigan (broken this year), occasioned much commentary and almost caused a full on fan revolt, despite the fact that his overall win/loss record is one of the best among active coaches.

  Long-term significance is tricky. The point is, there's already much to say about the football coach, and he's mid-career. The snooker player appears to have peaked over a decade ago. Mackensen (talk) 12:49, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.