Talk:CyberPatriot

Cleanup tags

I have applied cleanup tags to the article, per WP:TMC I will explain. The first two are self explanatory: the only references are primary sources on [uscyberpatriot.org]. They clearly do not pass WP:SELFSOURCE for everything stated in the article. The article needs citations to reliable sources in order to be verifiable, specifically inline citations. Finally, the tone is promotional. This reads like what I would expect to read on their website to advertise the competition to prospective members. It doesn't read like an encyclopedia article. The Criticism section is just one example. Leijurv (talk) 03:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Can we not delete this whole page

It looks like a lot of people put a ton of work into this and deleting the ENTIRE PAGE seems a bit excessive. We should just fix it instead and add more sources. Bluerobinwiki (talk) 19:53, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

I completely understand that there are some problems with the page (such as the illilois section, which should be removed because of a lack of sources at all) but the page should still be up Bluerobinwiki (talk) 20:01, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

There are no sources independent of CyberPatriot that support anything written in this article. It would be hard to justify keeping it. See the section above. Reconrabbit 20:54, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

There may only be sources from CyberPatriot, but other competitions also have similar issues. Wikipedia pages on competitions like DECA and NCCDC all have similar issues, yet they aren't redirected. This article is still necessary as the AFA is only just a sponsor. Deleting the whole page is not necessary, adding cleanup tags is enough. Thecat201011 (talk) 16:50, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Exactly, we should definitely stop nuking it

If information about the competition is provided by the competition itself, I see no need for more than one source aside from ideas provided from other sources & competition specifics not provided by the actual competiton source.

It's hard to find third party sources for a competition like Cyber Patriot Bluerobinwiki (talk) 03:44, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes, same thing applies to other competitions/programs like FLL (FIRST Lego League)/other FIRST programs, DECA, etc. 128.54.12.194 (talk) 20:11, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Fixing Tags

We should remove the Goals and Objectives section to hopefully the scientific review tag as well as encyclopedic. What parts of the article is non-encyclopedic? It's in a formal tone and does not contain any pronouns. There is no bias synthesis whatsoever. Reconrabbit, Onel5969, and justlettersandnumbers: if you are reading this, please tell us what part of the article has these issues. Thecat201011 (talk) 21:39, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

For now, I'm just going to add some sources to the Goals and Objectives section Thecat201011 (talk) 21:40, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

Ok so now there are 11 sources that are not from cyberpatriot and around 8 sources that are not primary I believe. This justifies removing the tag. If no one replies within the next 2 days I will remove the tag because silence is assertion. Thecat201011 (talk) 20:40, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

so that is 1:2 ratio, which is better than the following pages: Deca, FBLA, AMC, International Olympiad in Informatics, Vex robotics, HOSA, Technology Student Association, Imagine Cup, TechOlympics, and a bunch more. I just searched up a couple. After going through these articles, I realized that they don't get redirected and some don't even have tags. The ones with many citations come from competition winners, and i can't realy find CyberPatriot winners outside of their website and CyberAegis' website doesn't have their wins every year. Thecat201011 (talk) 21:13, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

I would recommend putting a message on their talk page to inform them of the potential change as they may not have this page watchlisted. Thewindbird (talk) 12:18, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

i swear we need to start making web hooks Thecat201011 (talk) 14:38, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

55 sources! Thecat201011 (talk) 22:01, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Just to let you know, the number of sources on an article is immaterial is they do not meet WP:RELIABLE. For reference, the article on Federal government of the United States has less than 50 references as of this comment. Thewindbird (talk) 23:30, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

These are all reliable as they are not biased and the ones added are not associated with the afa or cyberpatriot Thecat201011 (talk) 00:47, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Any comments on encyclopedic tone? Thecat201011 (talk) 15:58, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

What happened

Do we realy need to have team details? It's taking up a lot of spaceThecat201011 (talk) 03:15, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

be careful in adding info that you are not completely sure about and make sure to have an unbiased, encyclopedic, and formal tone Thecat201011 (talk) 03:51, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

school names and affiliations can change, making it hard to identity. plus, there are no easy-to-access sources of verifying team info besides school name (and as mentioned, affiliations can change 128.54.12.194 (talk) 20:09, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

even coaches can change/differ between team (like troy or san diego's cyberaegis). details just allow easier cross checking and referencing 128.54.12.194 (talk) 20:18, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

• between teams and years

128.54.12.194 (talk) 20:18, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Also the team or club name(s) could even change, like CyberFalcon to CyberAegis, by the same coach and consisting of mostly the same members. This would allow it to be easier to compare and analyze the data, and cross reference/identify same or similar teams, even with multiple types of name or other changes, making it more resilient, reliable, as well as harder to hide teams/(from) data. 2600:1012:B1C6:4D3D:70B0:7725:D352:B189 (talk) 21:14, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Agreed, it can even help ensure integrity and prevent loopholes 169.228.153.121 (talk) 21:44, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Especially regarding the two-team limit - its easier to see and track who's winning and coaching at a glance 137.110.68.157 (talk) 18:53, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

This is becoming WP:OVERCITE. The refs section was initially intended to remove the insufficient amount of independent sources to remove all the maintenance tag, hence "Independent Refs." Adding more AFA sources changes nothing and might make the article more vulnerable to the "One source" maintenance tag. It's also making the chart go into the sidebar. I highly suggest removing the non independent ones. Also, if you want, my username is a_person9852 on discord if you want to communicate with me more directly. If you want a good example of what I wanted to do, take a look at the MATHCOUNTS article Thecat201011 (talk) 22:32, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

I am going to revert this unless someone says something in the next 7 days Thecat201011 (talk) 18:03, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

We are going to remove the citations, but we should not delete the whole table. 137.110.68.157 (talk) 18:48, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

We would keep the table due to the reasons listed above. We are also adding the challenges by year, similar to how the FIRST Lego League pages lists the challenges/themes by year: FIRST Lego League Challenge 137.110.68.157 (talk) 18:50, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Good luck on finding citations for that! Also, should we change the current season to CyberPatriot 18 now? Thecat201011 (talk) 19:30, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

would archive.org be ok for citations? that's where most (if not all) of the citations for this would come from. that or the rulesbook, or nationals competitors guides 137.110.68.157 (talk) 19:49, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

It should be fine, as long as you use it in conjunction with the original page url, like the |url=, |archive-url= fields. Also, until you have all the stuff filled up, I suggest to remove the table for now. Thecat201011 (talk) 23:45, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

and yea we can either change it now or wait until august/September when registration closes and the season starts 137.110.68.157 (talk) 19:50, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Yea, I was just saying remove non independent Citations Thecat201011 (talk) 19:27, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

we can also fix the overflow with text wrapping on the table. additionally, for the earlier seasons, its hard to find independent sources verifying the facts 137.110.68.157 (talk) 18:57, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

That is why I left out citations and had it as N/A Thecat201011 (talk) 19:28, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

So are we fine if I remove the Non independent sources now from the table? Thecat201011 (talk) 23:46, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

I'll take a look to verify, but some (maybe one per year) might need to remain (e.g. for coach names, earlier years with no other details abt who won) 128.54.41.108 (talk) 19:08, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

As an alternative, maybe I can find the national finals program/other source for each year, and have the citations next to the coach's name, and have the refs column just for independent? I'll talk with my friend working on this too 128.54.41.108 (talk) 19:09, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Yea I it should be fine for the first couple of years without sources, but still some of them are overcited. Maybe 2 sources per each? Thecat201011 (talk) 19:24, 6 June 2025 (UTC)