User talk:PassionoftheDamon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello PassionoftheDamon! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the summary field. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! -- --Nishkid64 20:46, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Getting Started
Getting your info out there
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Getting Help
Getting along
Getting technical

[edit] Barnstar

The Running Man Barnstar
The Running Man Barnstar: given in appreciation for substantial contributions to articles about college football and 2001 Miami Hurricanes football team.

CJC47 21:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CFB Football

Hi, and welcome to the College football Wikiproject! We are a group of editors who love college football and work to improve Wikipedia's coverage of this sport.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

If you have any ideas you would like to share or if there is any way your fellow college football fans can help you, please feel free to ask on the project talk page.

--MECU≈talk 20:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wide Right (Florida State)

I reverted your changes back to how I had it. YOu keep trying to distinguish the BCS form the BCS "computers" which does not make sense for purposes of the article. The formula that is used to determine the BCS rankings incorporated polls that were both computer generated and human generated. The BCS itself ranked FSU higher, it was the totality of the formula, not the computers alone, although they played a large part in it. Also, why you want to add that Miami beat FSU twice in one paragraph is beyond me, unless you are just a Miami fan who is trying to exemplify sour grapes. Stating the outcome once is enough, twice is redundant, especially in such a short span of a section.

PS I'm helping out on your 2006 football team page. GREAT start!! Good job. AriGold 17:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Glad I can help. Now, a couple of things about the changes you just made to the 2006 FSU page:

1) You changed the "Pro set" offense to "Veritical pass". FSU is considered by everyone to run a "pro set" offense. There is no such thing as a "vertical pass" offense. You can proof of that on these pages [1], [2]. If you need more proof, let me know.
2) You changed Florida State University Seminoles to Florida State Seminoles but there is no reason to, as the name of the link is Florida State University Seminoles, and not the other way. YOu said ""X University" and "University of X" are dropped from the titles of CFB articles" but that does not apply here as there is an actual wikipedia article about the Florida State University Seminoles. Hopefull, to make you happy, I retained the "University" for purposes of the link, but kept the name FS Seminoles, I hope you will approve.

For those reasons I changed them back. AriGold 20:22, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Ok, I changed it to pro set, since you said it was ok. Also, I don't think you understand what I did. I changed the wikipedia link for "Florida State Seminoles" to simply link to "Florida State University Seminoles" but it STILL SAYS Florida State Seminoles. All I am doing here is making the link correct, that's it. There is no link for "Florida State Seminoles", it redirects to "Florida State University Seminoles", so what I did is proper wikipedia procedure. If you want, I can bring in mods to back this up. AriGold 12:52, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, PassionoftheDamon. With regards to your comments on Talk:2006 Florida State Seminoles football team#Offensive scheme: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. "Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users." Please keep this in mind while editing. Thanks. Accurizer 13:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

PassionoftheDamon, I performed my own cursory research on the web and found references to "Pro Set" as a formation and also "Pro Set" as a scheme. (I understand this differs from the current Wikipedia article Pro Set, which may need to be amended.) If you are able to provide verifiable sources for "Pro Style", please cite it in the 2006 Florida State Seminoles football team article. Without verifiable sources, it does not satify Wikipedia policy and cannot be kept. Thanks for your understanding. Regards, Accurizer 23:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AFCA National Championship Trophy

Okay. I agree. You could have changed it yourself, it's not like what I think is the final word. But I do appreciate your efforts in trying to convince me. I've changed it to high. I think that page needs a (free) picture badly. But I don't know what else could go on that page since the list of winners is already on the DI-A NC page. --MECU≈talk 23:05, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Need for namecalling? Editing vs. vandalizing Miami Hurricanes football

Removing what looks to me like a peacock phrase ("all-time") is called editing, not vandalizing. I explained the change and have yet to receive a civil counter-reply. Instead, you resort to name-calling and threats. Of course the score is 29-21. My question is why you are calling this "the all-time advantage." It sounds like boosterism. Is there some other reason? Explain that, and I'll drop that particular edit. And you can use the article talk page to do so, which is how editing on wikipedia works. You might familiarize yourself with wikipedia policies on assuming good faith, as well as on peacock terms. Have a nice day.--Anthony Krupp 13:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you should take a look at the definition of "namecalling," as I have yet to call you a name. Referring to a 29-21 advantage in the all-time series between Miami and Florida State is hardly a peacock phrase. Perhaps you're new to the sports world, but the historical series between two teams is typically called the all-time series, and the team that holds the edge holds the "all-time advantage" [3] [4] [5] [6][7] You've been warned. If you persist in vandalizing the page, you will be reported.-PassionoftheDamon 18:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
You used a verb (vandalizing) rather than a noun (vandal), but you still failed to assume good faith. Your explanation that a historical series is typically called the all-time series completely satisfies me. Thanks for (finally) explaining that. Your rude statement ("You've been warned") is uncalled for, given that I specifically asked you to please explain the term. Your threat is empty, since I have never vandalized that page. People who throw around terms as loosely as you do tend not to fare well here. Good luck with that. -Anthony Krupp 18:28, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
You vandalized the page, I caught you, that's the end of it. Vandalism is very much not appreciated here at Wikipedia. Good luck with that.-PassionoftheDamon 18:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Your definition of vandalism is wrong. Ask anyone.-Anthony Krupp 22:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
We both know you vandalized the page and that you're a bad faith editor, offering such illuminating edit summaries as "b.s" and "hardly called for." You're not fooling anyone. If you expect to have a productive Wiki career, you'd be wise to change your ways.-PassionoftheDamon 22:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Anyone reasonable who bothers to look at the edits will realize I made a good faith but mistaken attempt to edit the page. That reasonable person will also see that I asked for information about the edit, and after receiving it, left it alone. And my editing history speaks for itself. I have lost interest in your chest-thumping, and will no longer respond to your overtures. I trust we'll both go back to just working to improve wikipedia. Ciao. -Anthony Krupp 04:35, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
We both know otherwise.-PassionoftheDamon 05:02, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked for 3rr violation

I'm blocking you for your silly edit warring over emphasis on the Talk:Miami Hurricanes football page. Since this is your first offense, I'm only making it a 12 hour block. However, regardless of whether you violate 3RR, please avoid edit warring in the future, especially over such a picayune matter. It's not really your place to decide where the emphasis should be placed in other editors' words on a talk page. Nandesuka 13:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] USC Football

Any particular reason you keep reverting the nat'l championship totals in the info box? This seems particularly irresponsible given the lengthy discussion about that issue on the article's talk page. ProfessorFokker 16:43, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit war on Michigan Wolverines football

Thank you for proceeding to the third party discussion to resolve the content dispute on the Michigan Wolverines football article. I have gone ahead and notified Wolvve85 of this discussion so he can weigh in. Hopefully next time you can try discussing this issue directly with the user directly before provoking/continuing an edit war. Terryfoster 13:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] College football barnstar

The College football Barnstar
I, BigDT, present you with the new college football barnstar for your phenomenal work with college football articles this season, including creation of a large number of new articles. BigDT 22:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Patrick Nix

Do you know any of the information missing from Patrick Nix's infobox? —Disavian (talk/contribs) 08:31, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] U Miami Userbox

Regarding the template you recently created at {{UMiamiUser}} - userboxes in template space should begin with "User." Also, there is already a U Miami userbox. You would be better off to modify or improve the existing box instead of creating a new one. Let me know if I can be of assistance. --NThurston 19:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Please reconsider your revision of Wikipedia:Userboxes/Education/United States. Your revision has replaced a userbox that is used by many users with a version that is used only by you. In addition, your userbox does not meet the User xxx naming format (See Wikipedia:Userboxes#Creating_a_new_userbox). I highly recommend that if you do not like the existing userbox, you modify and improve it rather than creating a new one. --NThurston 22:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I concur with NThurston and have reverted your reversion of him. --Durin 22:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Any particular reason you're ignoring myself and NThurston regarding this issue? --Durin 03:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Why do you continue to insist on reverting the well reasoned reversion of your edits? Would you please communicate with us? PLEASE? --Durin 04:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Add me to the list of people confused by PassionoftheDamon's actions. I've reverted as well. auburnpilot talk 06:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Just a side note to my above comment: Instead of replacing a userbox that is already widely used, simply make the changes you believe should be made the the existing one. As a wiki, anyone can edit anything. auburnpilot talk 06:59, 1 February 2007 (UTC)


  • (PassionoftheDamon has responded finally on my talk page) Thank you for communicating. Please understand that engaging in a revert war is very negative behavior, most especially when people are attempting to communicate with you. Being dismissive of other people's opinions and refusing to communicate is bound to lead to additional problems. I recommend you avoid this sort of behavior in the future. I'd also like to point out that neither userbox's colors match those of the logos found at either [8] or [9]. Further, your userbox does not follow standard naming conventions. Userboxes have all sorts of verbiage in them and there is no particular standard. The userbox you disagree with also does link to the University of Miami. In short, you're acting on your opinion alone and have been quite reluctant to engage in conversation to build consensus or to achieve an amicable compromise in this dispute. Rather than continue to revert people (and someone has reverted your change, again) I recommend you contact the people listed at [10] who have the userbox you do not like transcluded, and begin a discussion on the issue, perhaps at Template talk:User University of Miami. --Durin 14:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Once again, wrong on all counts. The colors in the previous userbox did not match the shade of the University of Miami's colors. What's more, the userbox made no mention of the fact that it was a "University of Miami" userbox (including nothing more than the phrase, "I'm proud to be a 'Cane!"). As the userboxes on that page deal with "education," the userbox should make some mention to the actual university, not just an ambiguous reference to the school's sports nickname. This proposition is further supported by the fact that just about every other userbox on the page includes language identical to "This user attends or has attended...". Perhaps if you would have taken the time to compare the prior userbox to the one that it was replaced with, these changes would have been apparent. But as I stated before, you engaged in egregiously lazy-editing, which is all the more troubling considering you're an administrator. In the future, it would be a good idea to actually take a look at the changes that were made before reverting. Otherwise, your reversions, as in this case, are bound to lack a reasoned basis--let alone a "well reasoned" one.-PassionoftheDamon 16:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I have reviewed your suggestions on Durin's talk page and find that you are quite reasonable in your request. You probably approached it in a less than efficient manner, however. In reviewing the history of this userbox, I doubt that anybody would object to your proposals since they seem to fit well with what has already been done. I have activated the talk page on the original u-box and made some initial edits. Feel free to add to the discussion and continue to improve the existing userbox. It would be kind of you to nominate your recent boxes at WP:TfD for speedy delete. --NThurston 14:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../p/a/s/User_talk%7EPassionoftheDamon_32db.html"