User talk:Smith03

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Lacrosse

If you are going to manually write in the stadia used for lacrosse championships, I hope you plan to go back and do the same formatting was was used for all the other NCAA sports tournaments. "Same" has been nearly uniformly employed. WillC 00:49, 30 April 2006 (UTC)


I had initially thought about putting the site at Duke Blue Devils. However, I was told that Blue Devils (Duke University) was more in line with wikipedia standards. I'll just have the Duke Blue Devils and Duke University Blue Devils pages redirect to Blue Devils (Duke University)

[edit] Move from user to talk

No probs! Gotta love the Sens -- they never fail to disappoint! But I'm a diehard. Cheers - Samir धर्म 08:44, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] College Football Project

Hello!

Thank you for contributions. I noticed that you have edited a College football related article. You may be interested to know that there is a college football WikiProject which you can join and help us edit Wikipedia’s college football articles. If you have any questions just ask at the College football WikiProject. Also here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Also remember to use the edit summary when you contribute.

Again, Thank you for your help!



[edit] Indenting

Please indent your comment to help maintain a discussion thread as described here. Thanks. --MichaelZimmer (talk) 23:13, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Minnesota Golden Gophers

Anyone familiar with the U of M surely knows who John Mariucci and Dick Siebert are; however, I don't appreciate you reverting all of my work over two omissions. If it's important to you that they're listed in this section, it might behoove you to create articles for both of them so people outside of Minnesota know who they are. I'm reverting the page back to how I last edited it, minus Emily Fox at your behest. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by XMR (talk • contribs).

[edit] Correction

I apologize, Dick Siebert does have an article. However, the section is about Famous Gopher Athletes, not coaches, so I'm leaving it as is.

Points well taken. I included Emily Fox was because someone else had taken the time to write an article about her, not becuase I wanted to overshadow other people. If you're going to list someone that doesn't have an article, at least include why they are famous or at the very least, notable.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by XMR (talk • contribs).

[edit] You Win

I'm not going to waste my time writing about the merits of swimming coaches, gymnasts, or any other obscure people that you think are "famous." Even some of the well-known people on this list (particularly the football coaches) may have been at the U at some point, but their short tenures hardly definded their legacies. Most of the people I included facts about were at the U long before 2000. If you want to continue monopolizing this article, I'm not going to stop you. I'd sign my name, but you'd probably criticize that, too.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by XMR (talk • contribs).

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for your response. I don't see what difference it makes WHO adds a link, if it's pertinent to the content on the page. If my brother-in-law (or a complete stranger) adds a link to go to one of my pages, will that be allowed?

I'll try to use your suggestion for the Texans, Titans, and LA Chargers. Conceptually, I have a problem saying that Abner Haynes was ROY for the Dallas Texans and have the reader sent to the Chiefs' page, without first acknowledging the Texans' existence. Would the Wikipedia gods consider just having a Dallas Texans (American Football League) page that said:

"Dallas Texans ~ the Dallas Texans were an original American Football League franchise that moved to Kansas City, MO, in 1963. For more, see Kansas City Chiefs."?? RemembertheAFL 21:36, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks again

Yes, my comments were meant for you: I'm left-brained, these kinds of "discussions" are hard for me to conduct. I appreciate your frank comments. If I have an "agenda", I feel I have reasons for it, but they are not appropriate for this forum, as I DO understand that an encyclopedia should be impartial. All I'll say here is that I don't think Wikipedia is impartial regarding professional football. I'd love to discuss this with you in a place that wouldn't use up Wikipedia resources, or bore others with my "agenda". If you want to e-mail me at RemembertheAFL@aol.com, I promise not to reveal your e-address to anyone. If not, I understand. Regards, RemembertheAFL 03:45, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bloomington Town Hall

Sorry about that confusion; I was thinking that they were talking about city hall, not town hall :). I thought that old building on 102nd and Penn was just a museum, and not a town hall.

[edit] Western League

""You know what is great about wikipedia anyone can edit. You know what is bad about wikipedia anyone can edit." Ain't it the truth! I did some Googling on "western league" "championship" "[year]" to see what it would come up with. First I tested with 1896. Then it was pretty easy to find the others, especially as Indy won 3 of them. That doesn't mean they are confirmed. I'm taking it on faith the writers knew what they were doing. Of course, you could always go the Hysterical Society and check the September-October editions of the Strib for those years. You've got nothing better to do, right? However, I expect the posted results are safe. Wahkeenah 05:01, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NFL History Project

In the course of writing an article about an early NFL player, Hap Moran, I thought I saw a page about an NFL History Project. Now I can't find it. I see your name on a number of pages that deal with early NFL history and was hoping you might provide a link - thanks. Revmoran 18:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for posting the link to my messages - I'll see if I think I can help in any way.Revmoran 21:50, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re: Vikings helmets

I uploaded the old helmet as Image:Minnesota Vikings helmet old.png and added it to the Vikings article -- hopefully it prevent anymore confusion. Best. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 05:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Having observed the Vikings up-close for some years now, it's worth noting that while the Vikings helmets may look fierce, they are mostly harmless. Especially at playoff time. Wahkeenah 10:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Minnesota

I came across your userpage after looking at the Ole Savior article and saw you were from MN. Currently I and several others are trying to get Minnesota to featured article status so if you'd like to help out it would be appreciated, thanks! -Ravedave 01:17, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vikings Helmet

I am not reverting the helmet on the Minnesota Vikings page, at least I am not purposely doing it...when I got your first message, I went to see what you were talking about. I have never reverted anything on Wikipedia and I am not familiar with how it is even done. Maybe you can show me how it is done so that I can make sure I am not doing it. Packerfan22


[edit] WikiProject Lacrosse

I have created a proposal for a new WikiProject about lacrosse, and I thought you might be interested in joining. Please check out the temporary project page at User:MrBoo/WikiProject Lacrosse and sign your name if you are interested.

Thanks --MrBoo (talk, contribs) 02:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I've created the real project: Wikipedia:WikiProject Lacrosse and I've added you as a member. Thanks for your interest! --MrBoo (talk, contribs) 04:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:1957flagdetail.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:1957flagdetail.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:15, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:1983flagdetail.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:1983flagdetail.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:10, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NFC information

How did you find the NFC information about the 5 choices picked out of hat? Also what were the AFC options, do you know? --Josh 23:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Minnesota meetup

A meetup of Wikipedians in Minnesota is proposed: please stop by the discussion page if interested. Jonathunder 19:56, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Small_bayhawks.zip

Thanks for uploading Image:Small_bayhawks.zip. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Image:MLL trophy.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:MLL trophy.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a free image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell (talk) (random) 20:08, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: 32 NFL "championship"

Thank you for your comments. A few responses as to why I propose keeping the text as-is (besides just my own vanity):

  • The text as written already includes the mention that the game was NOT sanctioned by the NFL as an official championship game; that it was a self-scheduled and impromptu by the Bears and Spartans for the purpose of breaking the tie.
  • The game is often retroactively considered the first NFL championship game in the same exact way that the 1967 AFL/NFL Championship Game and the 1968 AFL/NFL Championship Game are retroactively called "Super Bowl I" and "Super Bowl II". Though not called the Super Bowl when played, the name was retroactivly applied when the game was renamed the Super Bowl prior to the 1969 edition.
  • If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... It may not be a sanctioned Championship Game, but it served the EXACT same purpose of one. It was played (under the scheduling rules of the time) as an extra game after the regular season for the purpose of determining a league champion. Sounds like a duck championship game to me.
  • The game is important as it LED to the formalization of the "official" NFL Championship Game. The success of, and interest in, this game is directly responsible for the formation of divisional play, standardized schedules, and a real championship game. It is thus notable in that it directly caused the transformation of the NFL from an informal collection of midwestern industrially-sponsored football teams to a coherent professional sports league.

I would not object to editing the text to be clearer that this was not an official championship game (such as adding "quotes" to the section title) but I feel that the importance of the game to the development of the modern playoff system is too great to merit wholesale removal of the topic.

Comments? --Jayron32 04:27, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I noticed you were bold and edited the text yourself. Looks fine to me. I might clean up the language a bit, but I think the changes you made area good compromise between your position and mine. --Jayron32 04:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
You said: "Not quite the team that lost the game did not finish 2nd they finished 3rd. The league in 1932 was baseing the champions and standings on winning %. It was used to break a tie that resulted in one team being the champion ". Not to beat a dead horse, but it is rare, but not uncommon, for the loser of a championship game to be considered lower than "second" place. One example might be the loser of the BCS Championship Game, who often slips to third or fourth in the seasons final rankings. I already understand the inherant differences between this analogy (a "mythical" championship based on subjective polls vs. a championship determined by on field play), but I bring it up to point out that championship games are PLAYED between teams that are considered the best two teams BEFORE the game is played. Where they end up after the game is played is irrelevent. Also, the final accepted placement of the losing team does NOT determine whether or not it was a championship. The final acceptance of the winner is all that is needed here. --Jayron32 04:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Also, you note that your reference clearly states that the league arranged the game. My reference (see inline reference in the section) from Hickok Sports clearly states that the league APPROVED the game, but did not ARRANGE it. Hickok himself says: "The NFL had no policy for dealing with a tie for first place at the end of the season. The league didn't even handle scheduling--that was up to the teams themselves, so it was also up to the Bears and Spartans to figure out a way of breaking the tie. They agreed on a game at Chicago on December 11. It was not, formally, a post-season championship game, but a regular-season game tacked on at the end of the schedule." from [1]. This sentance both BACKS UP your point that the game is not "formally" a championship (though the mere mention of such indicates that it could be "informally" considered a championship) but it backs up my point that the game was improptu, and self-scheduled. We need a third, independant, source to adjudicate this controversy. --Jayron32 04:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

OK. Last try on calling this one a championship: It was not scheduled prior to the season. It was scheduled after the season ONLY as a means to break a tie and determine an outright championship. The other examples don't work as well as championships, since they were already scheduled Regular Season games, and coincidence merely caused the game to take on special significance as vital in determining the championship. None of those games were specificially scheduled to name an NFL champion. I will bold this point to make it clearer: The 1932 game was scheduled specifically to determine a league champion. It is therefore a championship game The other games you cite were merely late-season games that were already scheduled; they were not planned specifically to crown the champion like the 32 Bears/Spartans game was. --Jayron32 00:13, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

  • It's more like a "Pennant playoff" to determine a league champion, as with the Giants and Dodgers in 1951. Wahkeenah 01:09, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:RemembertheAFL

Hello. Just thought you might be interested to know that I sent an email to Ange today, asking him to consider coming back to Wikipedia and to contribute again to AFL articles. I think he could be a great help, so long as we can help him to abide by Wiki guidelines. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 16:40, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Roster photos

Hey, I've seen you doing a lot of work on sports pages, so I have a question for you. Do you know if we can use roster images from gophersports.com on wikipedia? I know for sure that the media always gets a CD with the headshots from the U, so it seems like they do not require permission to use the photos. Here's an example of one from Notre Dame: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Brady_quinn.jpeg thanks! Gopher backer 18:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1922 Chicago Co-Big Ten Football Champions

The University of Chicago recognizes 7 conference championships; 1922 being the year that they posted a 4-0-1 record in league play, despite Iowa and Michigan going undefeated and untied in league play that year. The Big Ten acknowledged that fact (see link below), but gave the co-title to Iowa and Michigan. I don't know why they labeled it that way, but both the league and university recognize 7 titles for UC. Frank12 20:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

PS: I wonder if it was one of those cases where the Big Ten gave the title to Iowa and Michigan for being unbeaten AND untied and then later on gave Chicago credit for being unbeaten. This could lead to an interesting discovery.

[edit] Stadium Address

It was announced at the GLC luncheon before the Iowa game on Friday. I looked for a link but couldn't find anything yet. Gopher backer 21:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oregon Secretary of State correction

Thanks for catching my error. I obviously hadn't thought that one through carefully enough... then again, math never was my strong suit. -- J-M Jgilhousen 05:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Minn Treas

Thanks. I know the feeling. Kablammo 01:04, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lieutenant Governors list

I noted you reverted the changes that were made to Stephen Pence's name on the list. I made those edits however I did make the mistake of not logging in first. I will give you the change in his name and will note that in his article but I am not sure why you removed the fact that he is retiring in 2007. He has announced that he is removing his name from Gov. Fletcher's ticket and that is referenced in his article. Dblevins2 03:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/m/i/User_talk%7ESmith03_1a3e.html"