User talk:Pats1/Archives/2008/January

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

André Davis

RE: “not what the highlights box is for” [1]

The heading in the box is “Career Highlights and Awards.” I’m pretty sure that returning two consecutive kickoffs for touchdowns could be considered a career highlight, especially since it has only been done seven times. If I’m misinterpreting “career highlights,” please explain. Thanks —Travistalk 15:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Hmmm... Maybe the header should be changed to “Career Records and Awards” to avoid future confusion. —Travistalk 15:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

New field for infobox

I was thinking of adding a new field to the infobox. I'm pretty sure it's a good idea, I just don't know where it should go. I'm thinking it should say something like "Status:" or "Roster Status:" And essentially just put Active, Practice Squad, Suspended, or whatever reserve list the guy is on. The Team History section, even with the asterisks, doesn't always fully explain a guy's current status, so I feel this would be a good, contributing addition. So where should this go? Under the guy's position, perhaps? Or do you have any other ideas?►Chris NelsonHolla! 19:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, sounds good. Anywhere is fine, I guess. Pats1 T/C 20:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

RC-0722

Why was my account blocked? 76.250.130.129 (talk) 21:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Problem at Ted Ginn, Jr.

Yo, can you help me out at Ginn's page? An IP editor keeps removing an appropriate trivia tag. See the last discussion on the article's talk page for more info. Thanks.►Chris NelsonHolla! 02:31, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Dude, I have called for arbitration in dispute resolution. Please call an admin who is not biased and is not a "dude" of Chris Nelson. Mr. nelson has behaved pretty rudly now and in the past (he has been suspended in the past). The other two objectors have also been quite rude to other recently. One kept changing your edits on the Pats 2007 season. I think there are rules and all I ask is that they be followed. I have read the Wikie rules on trivia and the list is fin as it stands. Styles can vary. So, please call an adminstator to arbitrate this and I would apprecite you not throwing a threat around like you did. I found it to be essential vandalism because you clearly didn't have time to investigate, you, apparantly, just listed listened to your "dude" and perhaps---PERHAPS abused your power.72.0.36.36 (talk) 03:02, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Now, I call on you to contact an administrator immediately. I have not broken any Wiki rules. You may very well have. You threats are unfounded, there is no reason for you to just take your "Dudes" side, you have not contacted me in a reasonable manner, you came at mewith nothing but threats when you had just a few moments to discern what was going on. How long was it aftter your "dude" asked you to do something that you just did it?. I have not broken the 3 revert rule and I have a legitimate concern about you behavior here. Please response as soon as you are able and please respons in a nice, reasonable, wiki-firendly tone, you are supposed to have certain responsibilites and I ask that you address them, Please. Thank you.72.0.36.36 (talk) 03:19, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


I have reported your behavior to dispute resolution. I told what I thought went wrong and you may tell your version.

Ted Ginn, Jr. I request an dispute resolution on this issue. I found an artice that I had reason to think had an inappropriate tiuvia tag. It was disputed. The three onjectors have a track record of being rude and ugly. One of them, a Chis Nelson, then contacted an administrator who now, rather than be a reasoned authority, I think, threated me ability to edit. When he did this, I had already requested dispute resolution and he did it anyway. he did not post a note explaining any rules that I was breaking. I think this editor, Pats1 may have abused his/her power by taking one person's side in a matter of moments, when he/she had little time to investigate. I may be unfamailair with some things and admit I am not perfect, but one I understood there were rules, I have been able to get along with folks. This, I think was abusive but a person who has the power to block me (as he'she claims). He should have looked and at least seen if my claims were valid before acting. Further, there was what lookied like a familiarity between Pats1 and ChisNelson. One that makes me question the objectivity of Pats1. It made me feel like it was "his way or the highway". I don't think that is the way disputes are supposed to be handled in WIKI, no? I thought there was consensus, there was dispute resolution and a 3 revert rule, a cooling off period. I posted this to Mr. Nelson and Pats1 but seemingly it was to no avail. I wish this matter to be looked into. thank you.72.0.36.36 (talk) 03:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

72.0.36.36 (talk) 03:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Possible abuse of power.

I have contacted wiki the best way i know how. If it is not the proper way then I ask that you follow-up and make sure it gets intp theright hands. Sonce you have chosen to make two threats, based on nothing, and have chosen not to contact me, I can only guess you will be silent and I find that unfortunate. However, I hope this can be reivewed quickly and reasonablly. This is nothign personal agaisnt you. I find your behavior offensive, not you personanlly. I think your behavior did not show good faith and was not up to wiki editor standards.

However, if you choose to answer. Please explain where and how you get the authority to threten a user with being banned. Who grants you that ability and where are the rule by which you must follow. I would like to read them, just as I read the rules on what triva tags are and are not supposed to be. Are you, with one with the power to ban, supposed to know those rules? I would like to know what your responsibilites are in this type of matter.72.0.36.36 (talk) 03:46, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I have looked it up, it seems that you can be reprimanded for actions that abuse power. You were to have read the rules and are to behave in a civil, appropriate manner, at least according to the rules.

Be careful, please! If you are granted access, you must exercise care in using these functions, especially the ability to delete pages and the ability to block IP addresses.

I beg to differ.

There is a dispute. I saw your comment there, I htink you should respond to me, if I understand the rules.72.0.36.36 (talk) 03:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow man. This is getting insane.►Chris NelsonHolla! 03:51, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Deleting articles

Do you have the ability to delete articles on your own if necessary?►Chris NelsonHolla! 23:46, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, as long as they meet criteria. Pats1 T/C 23:46, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Well one I think needs to be deleted is Brian Soi. He didn't make it out of camp when we signed him as a UDFA after the supplemental draft, and we haven't seem him sniff a practice squad in 2007. Also, I'm starting to think Template:MiamiDolphins and Template:MiamiDolphinsStartingLineup are kind of unnecessary.►Chris NelsonHolla! 23:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
What about Soi? Do you not think his article should be deleted? He's really not notable enough at this point.►Chris NelsonHolla! 01:11, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Eh, tough call. I don't see any harm in keeping it, but after the whole Tommy Davis thing, I'm not sure. Pats1 T/C 01:14, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, well how about this - even though he's probably not notable now since he never even made a practice squad his first year, why don't we wait until March and see if he can't latch onto an offseason roster. If he isn't on a team by the draft or so, I think it's safe to delete him. Unlike Tommy Davis, Soi's never even been on a practice squad. Right now, he's not notable enough in my opinion. But I guess we can wait in the event he gets picked up in the offseason. I doubt it though.►Chris NelsonHolla! 01:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Houston / Dukes

You'll notice I've moved these guys back to the reserve lists as they were before. Do we have any evidence that a player has to come off the Left Squad list once a season is over? If a guy's never reported, which they still haven't, why would they ever come off? I'd imagine the same would go for Plummer and the DNR list. What evidence do we have that they aren't on these lists, or can't be?►Chris NelsonHolla! 06:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that's fine. Just keep checking up on NFLPA. Pats1 T/C 13:06, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I've been keeping an eye out for guys like Strong and Sapp too. It's confusing for a lot of people because they all think they're retired, but it's still technically inaccurate at this point.►Chris NelsonHolla! 16:19, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

RC-0722

Hey ... when you block someone, it's important to put a template or personalized message on their talk page letting them know exactly why they have been blocked (shared accounts in this case) and that they can use {{unblock}} to dispute the block or if they have remedied the issue. In this case, from the user's comments, he saw the {{unb}} message and became upset because there is nothing wrong with his user name ... when really, he needed a personalized message (I doubt there is a template for it) telling him that the block was because of using a shared account and what he needed to do to remedy the issue (in this case, promise not to do that). --B (talk) 14:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Fox Announce Teams

Late in the Giants-Bucs game, Joe Buck said that his team would be in Dallas for the Giants-Cowboys game next Sunday so that you know.. NoseNuggets (talk) 7:54 PM US EST Jan 6 2008 —Preceding comment was added at 00:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

your edit sumary

I notice your edit summary, in what I thin kis the above dispute: "(There isn't any "dispute" here. Trivia sections, no matter what they're named ("Notes" or "Personal" or whatever) are "to be avoided" unless temporary, when they're tagged to be inserted in prose.)" seems a little erroneous: There is no policy saying they are to be removed, & this does not justify a total removal of the material. The place for this, though, Is AN/I. , and I've advised the IP editor to take it there. DGG (talk) 05:41, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:TRIVIA says almost exactly what Pats1 said. --B (talk) 05:54, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
FWI WP:TRIVIA also says,

"What this guideline is not
There are a number of pervasive misunderstandings about this guideline and the course of action it suggests: This guideline does not suggest removing trivia sections, or moving them to the talk page. - If information is otherwise suitable, it is better that it be poorly presented than not presented at all. This guideline does not suggest always avoiding lists in favor of prose. - Some information is better presented in a list format. This guideline does not suggest the inclusion or exclusion of any information. - This guideline does not attempt to address the issue of what information should be included in articles — it only gives style recommendations. Issues of inclusion are addressed by content policies."

It seems there is a reasonable "balancing" that needs to happen in these things, no? The desire for the information to be the desire that article have good style. Content policies would cover the trivia, no? Stlye policies would cover the lists. I think when looked at closely this was a content onjection, not a style one, based on previous posts by those invloved. 72.0.36.36 (talk) 06:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
there is general agreement that the material should be integrated when possible--this was done for some, but not all of the material in the section removed. Whether the material not integrated belongs in the article is a question for the editors at that page. But reverting back and forth over something like this is not a way to deal with it, whether for style or content. If the people at the article don't agree, WP:Dispute resolution is the way to get other opinions. And yes, it does help when people quote policy correctly. DGG (talk) 16:24, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I think this is right. I agree reverting back and for on my part was wrong, however, it did take two, or thre to tango. Pats1 should have seen that this was a "gang'up" then chisjnelson asked him to do something. Rather than respect that I had already called for WP:Dispute resolution, he saw, he knew it, he took one side and threantened me with being banned, which he had to power to do. He then, after I stood up for myslef and for therules, said there "was no dispute". I begged to differ. I appreciate your reasoned approach, DGG. Thank you.72.0.36.36 (talk) 19:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Again, the issue at hand here wasn't at all the removal of a trivia section. It was simply the tagging of a trivia section. And to 72.0.36.36: "calling for dispute resolution" doesn't have any real meaning. Dispute resolution is more of a set of guidelines to follow when there is a dispute, not an actual process like WP:ANI. Pats1 T/C 23:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
The fact that someone who possibly abused his power disagress cannot be relevant. Dispute resolution had meaning when I posted it. I had reason to beleive that there was content dispute. Had Pats1 respected that rather than threatening me he would not me in this mess. He saw that I climed there was a dispute, chrisjnelson and two others also stated this was about content not style. They kept quoting the wrong parts of the guidelines and said "I am right" etc. Pats1 then received a message and although he could see that I called for a fair and reasonable solution, even if it is a set of guidelines, he went ahead with his threat, which he had the power to follow through with. THAT is the issue now. The issue now is whether he behaved in a manner that a wiki admin should. Clearly, when Pats1 saw that I called for dispute resolution he should have helped in that process. Instead, he picked sides and acted. That is an abuse of power, IMO. What he says now, which is really after-the-fact compliance, and forgive me, "spin", for lack of another word. 72.0.36.36 (talk) 00:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
What power? I never used any admin tools, so I can't for the life of me see how I could even begin to "abuse my power." Anyone - including you, if you ever needed to, can issue a warning to any user. You "calling for dispute resolution" means nothing. Those are a series of steps that should always be followed, no matter if a user "calls for dispute resolution" or not. Whether you like it or not, it's my responsibility as an administrator to make a decision and act on it. Just because that decision didn't fall in your favor doesn't mean I'm "abusing my power," and quite frankly, I'm getting a little tired of you dragging that assertion on. Pats1 T/C 00:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
You know you had the power to block me. You said you were going to use your admin tools IF I did something else you didn't like. Calling for a dispute resolution means something according to wiki rules. I don't know why you didn't act on that. But you did not. You acted on chrisjnelson's reqeust not mine. Why? Why would you do what "dude" wanted and not come in as as an admin. You know that your misused your responsibility, you merely took a side and issued a warning that carried punitive consequences. That is the definition of a threat and an abuse of power. Now that I have seen you more in action, the more I am convinced that I will keep this going until there is a fair resolution. When I see a end who will make a snap decision and then say "End of subject". I see part of a pattern an practice. You were fair before and you were not fair with me and now that I have gone over your head, instead of waiting for a decision, you still try and justify what you did. I will await a decision as to whether you should be an admin or not, maybe it would do some good for you to loose that power for a while so you wouldn't say things like "End of Story". pretty curt, if you ask me72.0.36.36 (talk) 04:48, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
The above user wanted this posted.►Chris NelsonHolla! 04:54, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
But he was right to say that. There was no gray area in that debate, he was right so he said that was the ned of it, becasue it was. You're reaching.►Chris NelsonHolla! 04:50, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
To 72.0.36.36: You're exactly right. If you kept on deleting an appropriately-placed and justified tag, you were going to be blocked for deletion of material. Just as any user who issued any warnings to you probably would have found an admin to do the same. Besides, your next edit would have broken 3RR, so I would have had to block you anyway. "Calling for dispute resolution" means nothing. Do you want to argue this? WP:DISPUTE is a series of steps any user should ALWAYS take whenever there is a dispute. I have no idea what you think it was. But "calling for" dispute resolution or not has no meaning - they're just guidelines any user should follow as soon as any dispute arises, and they have nothing to do with "calling in an arbitrator." As far as your comments concerning Chrisjnelson's request go, they're starting to border on violating WP:CIVIL. Consider this your warning about your "dude" comments. And I'm not going to even start on the second part of your last post, because it demonstrates a clear lack of comprehension as to what WP:ANI is. ANI is not an official process in terms of having a clear set of steps and a definite resolution. Most often, a user (or IP) posts something on ANI and there's never any response. It's simply an area for administrators to be informed on and, if necessary, act on a dispute. Pats1 T/C 13:24, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I do want this to be resovled. I don't think your attitude is in keeping with your power and authority. You repeated denial that calling for dispute resolution "means nothing". It did to me. Also, if anyone is not being civil, I think it is you. Just because you may get mad does not mean I am not being civil. You knew I had an issue with your actions. You knew that you leaped when chrisjnelson posted to your talk page. That is beyond dispute. That happens to be the fact. Now, as you finally admit, you were going to block me which, if I read you right, is a contradiction to your earlier postions that you have posted.
You say that I don't have a clear "comprehension" of ANI, etc. With that, you and I agree. I don't. The rules are somewhay new to me and it is the rules I am trying to follow. I think that is what helps make my case. You, as one who has a conprehension of the rules of disputes, really ought not act the way you did. Rather than take a side, which you did, and make threats wich you were going to carry out, you could have, and I contend, SHOULD have acted in a more reasoned WIKI way. Your tone, attitude and threats, which seemingly, SEEMINGLY, continue . . . Consider this your warning . . . in my opinion are clear violations of WP:CIVIL. You crossed that line on your first warnings and threats. I contend your actions were not civil and I said so. I simply have pointed out how you acted. I am sorry that you are offended. That is not my intent. My intent is that you don't go around making threats and giving warnings whenbever you feel like it and the situation does not warrant it. By going over your head I have secured the possibility of fairness. So, I suggest you follow your the WP:CIVIL rules and treat my complaints against you seriously and fairly. I ask you to quit "warning" me since it is not called for. In my view, my opinion, it seems that you want one set of rules for me and that they not apply to your actions. I don't think that is right, I really don't. So, to answer you question, I want your actions examined and fairly acted on. So I do want to argue this. It seems, as a person of authority, you can help make this happen. And in one of your posts you said I was "begging" you for something. I ask you, was that WP:CIVIL? I think, maybe, it was not. So, again, yes, I want this reviewed.
Also, curious, is you didn't mention the 3RR, why is it you were not subject to that? Does it not apply to you and to chrisjnelson? When your actions mirrored his desires, does that not mean I have a reasonable--REASONABLE belief that you and he were not working together? I think any fair reading would agree that it was. It was then I had a reason to believe I was not being treated fairly. And, as your recent posts point out, I think I was right about that. Yes, I want this cleared up in a civil, reasonable way.72.0.36.36 (talk) 01:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Don't hold your breath for too long... Pats1 T/C 01:30, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Template help

I'm not sure if you know how to do this but I'll ask anyway. I can't get {{WikiProject Indianapolis}} to include a Lists category in the Indianapolis articles box, they are just thrown under the Unassessed category. I have tried but I have no idea what I'm doing nor how to even go about fixing this. If you don't know what to do either, could you please direct me to someone who could help, thanks. HoosierState 23:17, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Edit summaries on roster templates

Hey man, can you do me a favor when you're editing roster templates and put the names of the players involved in the transaction in the edit summaries like I do? Or at least the last names, like "Smith, Jackson, Thomas signed" or something like that. I ask because sometimes I go to the history page to try and find a transaction, or maybe look back for a guy's number if he's been on a team previously, and it's easier to find it if I can press CTRL+F and type the guy's name. Thanks.►Chris NelsonHolla! 08:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm lazy. I will though. Pats1 T/C 20:20, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Bill Belichick

Hey I just want to let you know that User:Louis Alberto Guel keeps putting the Gridiron Infobox for Bill Belichick. I'm not sure if your for or against this, however I'm against it. Thanks --Phbasketball6 (talk) 21:21, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject Boston Celtics

 Please accept this invite to join the Celtics WikiProject, a WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles associated with the Boston Celtics. Simply click here to accept!

Ohmpandya (Talk to Me...) 01:08, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Tonight's game

That interception at the end sealed it there, eh? Good playing all around. :D GlassCobra 04:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it was tougher than I thought it would be. The Jags looked good, to say the least. Pats1 T/C 04:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Agreed, Garrard was throwing some good passes. Still couldn't compare to Brady, though. You think we can beat the Colts? GlassCobra 05:09, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Before last night I would have said no, just because the Jags haven't really stepped up to big opponents like the Colts or Pats yet. But after last night, I could certainly see it happening. Just need to shore up that secondary. Pats1 T/C 12:12, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Argh! We were so close. Congrats to the Patriots. BTW, thanks for the reverts on the Jags' article, the trolls are getting annoying. — BrotherFlounder 05:48, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

IP user removing stub tags

I notice you commented on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/24.129.42.16 this guy's] talk page in July because he was removing stub tags. He's doing it again on current Jaguars player articles from what I can tell. Any way to mass-revert him?►Chris NelsonHolla! 23:09, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Not directly, but it's easier for me to do it with rollback. Just a leave a talk page message so he knows what's up. Pats1 T/C 23:14, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Already done.►Chris NelsonHolla! 23:38, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Spygate discussion

Personally, I disagree with your revisions to the Spygate article (see above for my thoughts). I posted my thoughts on the article's talk page. I think my older version was more descriptive, but I would appreciate your response. CVW (Talk) 20:53, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Giants

You should probably protect 2007 New York Giants season too. IPs all over it. ;] ✰ALLSTAR✰ echo 03:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello

My name is Chris, I'm a 20-year-old Leo that likes long walks on the beach, romantic dinners by candlelight and crossword puzzles in bed.►Chris NelsonHolla! 21:52, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Now where have I heard that before... ("giggles...") Pats1 T/C 21:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Spygate, my ass

Super Bowl here we come! GlassCobra 21:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I hate this 2-week thing. Pats1 T/C 21:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, true. It's already cold out there (did you see the Packers/Giants game?); why not let the guys finish the season so they can go home? Anyway, we're the faves by 14 points, so it should be a fun time. GlassCobra 22:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Indianapolis Colts

Hey just letting you know the page has been under attack by vandals today and yesterday. ClueBot has been getting it but still maybe a protection is due? Thanks. HoosierStateTalk 03:28, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Craig Nall

Tell me where you found out about his release.

He wasn't released, he's a free agent this offseason. The thing is, you can't just change the style on one of the roster templates, because we've worked to main a standard format this whole season. If you have a suggestion for a change in format (though your recent edits wouldn't work) then it needs to be discussed before being implemented.►Chris NelsonHolla! 00:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

conflict of interest edit on new england patriots

hello,

I just wanted you to know that I was not the original poster (76.167.78.209) of the note that specified "kevin loh" created the current logo of the new england patriots. I was merely correcting the name. Of course, I can see now, how that can constitute a conflict of interest and self promotion since it's about me, but I was simply trying to correct an error. I didn't even know such a policy existed on wikipedia.

Much in the way the original artist, Phil Bissell is credited in the opening paragraph, I think it's relevant to add my name to the page as a factual statement, but I do not wish to get into an argument about it so I don't intend on changing it back. The Bill Platschke article from the LA Times should be a legitimate source of information, which user 76.167.78.209 did cite with his original edit.

Just wondering if you would have a different opinion about the inclusion of my name if it's written from an objective POV.

Regards,

-Ken Loh —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kloh69 (talk • contribs) 04:33, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Brett Favre

So, where did you find out that he was not going to be in this year's Pro Bowl? Y5nthon5a (talk) 16:44, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

--Nevermind, I found the information. Next time you add information to pages, you are supposed to give references. I looked on the Packers official website, as well as all over the NFL.com site and I couldnt find it. I finally decided to google it and I found it. I will add the reference to the pages. Y5nthon5a (talk) 16:50, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Deleting comments

"Policy does not prohibit users from removing comments from their own talk pages, although archiving is preferred. The removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user. Deleted warnings can still be found in the page history." [2]

"If a user removes a comment from their own talk page, (legitimate or not), it should remain removed. By removing the comment, the user has verified that they have read it. The comment is still in the page history, so it is not important to keep it visible just to prove that the user was told about it." [3]

I just wanted to give support of my opinion that what you did was inappropriate. Many issues have been raised in the past, and have seemed to have no effect on your behavior. Please refrain from editing my page in the future. Grsz11 (talk) 16:44, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

It appears you'd be wrong in this regard, Pats. He's fully within his rights to delete a warning of yours, as it indicates he's read it.►Chris NelsonHolla! 16:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Chris, I have to partly agree with you. He can delete it if he's read it, but, archiving would be much better. Pats, if you want to stop pressing the issue, I'll easily support you in that. :) Burner0718(Jibba Jabba!) 19:48, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, It's "legal", as long as he doen't mark as vandalism. But as they say, Hesky tesky shatzkabini putchi on the beatnica with knifis. Bye! RC-0722 communicator/kills 20:25, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Totally random move request

I know nothing about this show or this character, but this page name period at the end, Tom Horton., but from the article's contents I see no reason for it to be there other than by mistake. Wanna move it to the place without the period at the end?

Also, that Jcurtis guy has NEVER checked his talk - it's like he's totally oblivious to the New Message thing at the top of his screen. It's a lost cause.►Chris NelsonHolla! 04:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Yo man I should know this, but can you still use the franchise tag on a player in consecutive years?►Chris NelsonHolla! 15:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
You can use it for 100 years if you want. But like A$ante did before he signed his tender last season (and Clements the year before), players will usually sign a clause preventing it. Not sure how binding it is though. Pats1 T/C 21:50, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Invite to WP:CELTICS

 Please accept this invite to join the Celtics WikiProject, a WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles associated with the Boston Celtics. Simply click here to accept!

STORMTRACKER 94 18:21, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Sean McDermott

I think you're getting your Sean McDermotts mixed up.►Chris NelsonHolla! 23:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The world only needs one Sean McDermott. Pats1 T/C 23:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of Chicago Bears starting quarterbacks

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of Chicago Bears starting quarterbacks, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Chicago Bears starting quarterbacks. Thank you. Jdchamp31 (talk) 02:44, 29 January 2008 (UTC)