User talk:Couillaud
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello Couillaud, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
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. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!
Contents |
[edit] Sports-related tasks
You may be interested in WikiProject Baseball, or other sports-related projects, and the sports and games portal.
|
|
Here are some Open Tasks :
|
— 0918BRIAN • 2005-12-28 22:58
[edit] Federal League
In my view, the categories "[year] establishments" is one of the dumber categories on this site. Unless or EVEN IF someone is planning to spin through EVERY LAST ARTICLE and mark them. What, pray tell, is the point of such a category? It makes about as much sense as the "living people" category. Wahkeenah 21:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
- I have no idea. Someone just added the category and showed the Federal League established in 1912, which I corrected to 1913 (its 1912 predecessor was not really the same league). As an ordinary user (as opposed to admin) here, I usually don't judge the sensibility of categories; if they appear in an article on which I work, I just try to make sure they're correct. I added the category to the Negro National League (the first) and the Eastern Colored League, but I wouldn't be at all upset if such additions were removed from all three entries.Couillaud 14:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
- Technically, you should change it to 1914, since that's the first year they claimed major status. That would be consistent with the American League page, which says 1901, even though it was named the A.L. in 1900, and dates back to the Western League of 1893 or some such. Basically I avoid this category stuff like the plague. People are constantly messing with them, so I leave that obsession up to them. It's obsessive enough just to be watching pages. :) Wahkeenah 17:10, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
- I'm going to remove those categories from the three articles, since (as you point out) there's frequently a dispute over when anything was "established".Couillaud 13:59, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
- Technically, you should change it to 1914, since that's the first year they claimed major status. That would be consistent with the American League page, which says 1901, even though it was named the A.L. in 1900, and dates back to the Western League of 1893 or some such. Basically I avoid this category stuff like the plague. People are constantly messing with them, so I leave that obsession up to them. It's obsessive enough just to be watching pages. :) Wahkeenah 17:10, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Baseball???
Someone's trying to pull a fast one. That picture labeled "baseball" is actually a COOPER 511T 11-INCH SOFTBALL. Wahkeenah 20:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC) For an actual baseball (an over-the-counter kid's ball, not a major league ball, but still an actual baseball) see Image:Baseball (ball) closeup.jpg Wahkeenah 20:40, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Invitation
As a Wikipedian in Kansas you are cordially invited to become a member of the WikiProject Kansas. If interested, simply add your name to the members list on the project page and add the template {{User WPKansas}} to your own user page. Thanks. StudierMalMarburg 13:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Tammy_Duckworth
Thanks for your note. I am not an admin. I don't know too much about the case in question. One thing you have to be wary of, though, as a practical matter in an obviously contentious article, is drawing conclusions. For example, if there is some question as to the robo-calling legality, it would be fair to quote both parties, since the question seems to be in dispute. It's like I can claim that something is illegal based on the law, but unless charges are filed, an argument can be made that no crime was committed. The arguments made by the parties sounds like typical "look what they did" and "we only did what you did" kind of stuff that we get from both parties all the time. Meanwhile, if you want to get better advice, from an actual admin, you could try User:Wknight94, with whom I've worked on various things. P.S. I'm a Democrat, in general, but I'm not blindly allegiant. Wahkeenah 02:21, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
