User talk:Bmitchelf

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 A welcome from Master of Puppets 2 New York Rangers roster 3 Nice job!! 4 Your punctuation edits 5 Schedule edits 6 Jim Rome Is Burning 7 New York Rangers

[edit] A welcome from Master of Puppets

Hello, Bmitchelf, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
• Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments.
• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• Simplified Ruleset
• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style
• Wikipedia Glossary

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy editing!

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :) Master of Puppets ^{FREE BIRD!} 04:24, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New York Rangers roster

Yeah, I totally agree with your edits that are being reverted. Bring it up at WP:HOCKEY. I won't be around for the weekend, but you have my support. ccwaters 18:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nice job!!

- Lucky 6.9 06:28, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Yup. With all the really short stubs that come in, it's refreshing to see an article so well-thought out. Way too many of the "x is a y in z" sorts of nanostubs. - Lucky 6.9 06:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your punctuation edits

An edit you made to Pardon the Interruption happened to show up on my watchlist. Per the Manual of Style, ending punctuation (periods/commas) only go inside quotes when the quotation is a complete sentence. Note that this is not standard American English usage, so it may look wrong to some users. I was just letting you know, since you seem to be making a lot of these types of edits. It might be a good idea to change them back before they got lost in subsequent edits. --Fru1tbat 22:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I tend to disagree, based on grammar I have learned forever that periods go inside quoatation marks, without an exception that I can think of, in American English, Apparantly, according to this discussion, my use of the period is fine, and I believe technically correct. Bmitchelf 22:41, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

You're right about American English usage, but the MoS makes it clear that Wikipedia doesn't adhere strictly to American English usage, and the recommended style is in fact somewhere between American and British usage. The case that you referenced on the talk page is pretty specific in its discussion of a long sentence fragment that includes the end of a sentence. In that case, I would agree with you that the period belongs inside the quotation marks. However, the uses I'm talking about (e.g. the ones you changed in the Pardon the Interruption article [1]) are unrelated to that discussion. For instance:

Reali referred to it as a "squadoozle."

A very short quote like that clearly falls under the standard guideline on the main page. --Fru1tbat 23:04, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

And I would still rather stick to what I have learned, being that I am editing things in the United States. It just seems one way is correct based on "Wikipedia", and one way is correct based on "English." Bmitchelf 01:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Personal preference is ok, except when it goes against established guidelines. The idea is to have a somewhat consistent style for the entire encyclopedia. Also, remember that this is the English language encyclopedia, not the American encyclopedia. As I'm sure you know, some leeway is allowed, for instance, articles about British subjects usually favor British spellings, and articles about American subjects usually favor American spellings. But punctuation is something that is supposed to be standardized throughout. The guidelines are there for a reason, and you'll probably run into less resistance if you choose to accept them. We all make sacrifices to be part of the community here. --Fru1tbat 04:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Schedule edits

My first thought is that if we were a bit more generic with the dates (i.e., "early January" as opposed to citing specific dates) that it would pass muster. The reason I'm so married to making these changes is that there was the AfD vote for the station listings for each of the networks last month. I'm concerned that if these entries remain very specific, the hard-lined folks who are looking for an opportunity to yank stuff will use WP:NOT to justify doing just that. But if we remain more general (and certainly linking to Futon Critic, Broadcasting|Cable, MultiChannel News or wherever else we find the info on the web), it'll keep the hardliners at bay. --Mhking 01:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jim Rome Is Burning

ESPN may call it "Jim Rome is Burning", however there are guidelines that Wikipedia follows, which includes all verbs being capitalized in titles. I'm moving it back to Jim Rome Is Burning. Evan Reyes 22:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I can't find the specific WP rule right now, but it is supposed to go by its common or official name when possible, which has the lowercase "i", so I had to move it back. It seems many of your moves are controversial, so it is not wise to make rash moves. bmitchelf•T•F 22:40, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

From WP:NC:

"In general, titles of books, films, and other works are also capitalized, except for articles (a, and, the) and prepositions and conjunctions shorter than five letters (e.g., to, from, and). Examples: A New Kind of Science, Ghost in the Shell, To Be or Not to Be.

Because credibility is a primary objective in the creation of any reference work, and because Wikipedia strives to become a leading (if not the) leading reference work in its genre, formality and an adherence to conventions widely used in the genre are critically important to credibility."

"Is" is neither and article, preposition, nor conjunction. Just because ESPN renders the title of the show with a lowercase "i" does not mean that Wikipedia should as well. Being a sports network, it's highly doubtful ESPN is concerned with issues such as naming conventions and manuals of style. However, Wikipedia is, and therefore the correct title of the article is "Jim Rome Is Burning". Many articles possessing the seemingly "official" rendering have been overturned on Wikipedia. This is not the first, nor will it be the last. Evan Reyes 01:21, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Therefore, I'm going to move the page back to "Is". Evan Reyes 20:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Additionally, WP:MOS (trademarks) clearly states, "Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules even if the trademark owner encourages special treatment". "Jim Rome Is Burning" it is. Evan Reyes 22:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New York Rangers

The 'restrictive guideline' at Wikipedia: WikiProject Ice Hockey/Team pages format, has been removed (backed by consensus). All 30 NHL team pages' HHOF section may allow ALL HHOFers. Therefore 'Terry Sawchuck' is included in the Rangers HHOF section. See, WPTT for consensus. There's been past arguments about the HHOF section (who belongs, who doesn't). GoodDay 00:22, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

It easier 'not' to wiki-link 'interim' alternate captains (like Nylander). 1)it cuts down on adding & removing wiki-links (according to players injury status) & 2)it helps distinguish 'filling-in' alternates from the regular alternates. GoodDay 19:24, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I see what you mean, but it's not that big of a deal, man. There should be an easier way to sort it out. bmitchelf•T•F 19:26, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

If we wiki-link Nylander (NYR), Axelsson & Savard (Bos) and Liehtenen (Dal) 'A's? less familiar readers may mistaken the teams as having more 'alternates' then they really have. The only other solution would be to 'not' add the 'A's to interim alternates (that could be difficult as editors have gotten used to adding them, particularly anon IP adresses). GoodDay 19:50, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Do as you like, I won't fuss about it (anymore). GoodDay 20:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Nah, I understand where you're coming from. It just looks strange unlinked, and someone probably will link it again. bmitchelf•T•F 21:06, 23 February 2007 (UTC)