User talk:Soxrock/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  1. June 8, 2007 – June 29, 2007
  2. June 30, 2007 – July 18, 2007

Welcome!

Hello, Soxrock, 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:

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 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. Again, welcome!  Dr Debug (Talk) 01:13, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

IF YOU CLICK ON ANY OF THE NUMBERS FROM 101-135, YOU WILL NOT GO ANYWHERE. CLICK ON LINK 100 AND OPEN THE COLLAPSIBLE BOX LABELED "2007 MLB DRAFT" TO CONTINUE ON!

Contents

[edit] ABC Sports and Bowl Championship Series

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article ABC Sports and Bowl Championship Series, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Importance). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the issues raised at Talk:ABC Sports and Bowl Championship Series. If you remove the {{dated prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. --Maxamegalon2000 23:20, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] B.J. Averell

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article B.J. Averell, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Importance). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the issues raised at Talk:B.J. Averell. If you remove the {{dated prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached.

Note that Tyler actually has a series of accomplishments outside The Amazing Race which make him meet the minimum benchmark of WP:BIO's requirements. Only notable racers (i.e., those with an expanded set of career highlights like Ron Young or Brittney Rogers) have articles on Wikipedia. --Madchester 00:32, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shallow water blackout photo

Hi there. Whilst it's showing as uploaded by me, Image:SWB3 temp.jpg was originally taken by User:Ex nihil. You'd be best off asking him for the details. Shimgray | talk | 12:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair Use Images

Please do not inline fair use images into non-article namespaces. This is against policy with respect to the use of fair use images. Only GFDL and other free images may be used on your User Page. Retropunk 00:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Uploading images

I'm uploading a few images, but I still don't know exactly how to upload without problems.

Note, most images if not all are from sportslogos.net, so if I could get copyright info there I'd greatly appreciate it. Soxrock 23:08, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

For logos of sports teams, select "logo" from the dropdown menu and put the name of the team it's for and where you got the logo from in the summary box. --Carnildo 07:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cincinnati Reds logo

Soxrock -- I'm confused about the image of the 1961 logo you've reposted on the Cincinnati Reds article. The 1961 logo did not have a point on the back of the C -- the image you've posted has a point. And now there's a caption that calls it a "non-wishbone" logo, when clearly it's the same Wishbone C as in the other logos. Please discuss in the Cincinnati Reds discussion page before reposting. Acsenray 14:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image deletion warning

I am afraid I have nominated the files from your user page for deletion. They are not being used in any articles (and apparently more suitable files have already been uploaded for use in the articles about the sports teams), and fair use images shouldn't be used on user pages. (Wikipedia is not an image gallery.) For more details, please see Wikipedia:Fair use and Wikipedia:Image use policy. Thank you. - Mike Rosoft 10:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Not only that, but criterion #9 of WP:FUC clearly states you may not use fair use images on user pages. I have removed them. Roguegeek (talk) 01:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please do not upload images in the GIF format

Hello and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you've uploaded a number of images in the GIF format. In the future, please save GIF images in the PNG format before converting uploading (see Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload). PNG images almost always have a smaller file size, which decreases the amount of time they take to load. There are a bunch of other advantages to the PNG format such as lossless compression that you can read about on its Wikipedia article. ---Remember the dot 03:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Darrent Williams memorial.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Darrent Williams memorial.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 15:10, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use image above 500px

This is reminder that item #3 of Fair use policy states that:

The amount of copyrighted work used should be as little as possible. Low-resolution images should be used instead of high-resolution images (especially images that are so high-resolution that they could be used for piracy).

I have marked numerous images that are above 500px because that take up a majority of the screen on 800x600 monitors. Please do not remove the {{fair use reduce}} tags unless you are willing to save a smaller copy. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 20:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but Chris will tell you that he does not own any of the sports logos on his site -- all of the teams and leagues do. Chris does not have the power to grant usage rights to you or Wikipedia. Thus, they still fall under the fair use rules.
If you have some sort of image program, I suggest you reduce the images before you upload them to Wikipedia.
Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 20:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Please stop reverting my fair use reduction of images. --MECU≈talk 23:13, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use policy

Please review our fair use policy Wikipedia:Fair Use#Policy, in particular #9. Fair use images are not permitted inside of templates. Thanks -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 21:45, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Indianapolis Colts seasons

The logo that you placed on the 2003 Indianapolis Colts season, 2004 Indianapolis Colts season, 2005 Indianapolis Colts season, 2006 Indianapolis Colts season, and 2007 Indianapolis Colts season articles are too large and very unattractive for use. I reverted your unnecessary edits, and please refrain from making edits with excessively large images in places where they should not be. Thank you. Manningmbd 00:29, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2007 New York Yankees season

I am writing to ask you if you would like someome to work with to keep the article on the 2007 Yankees season up to date. I am more than willing to help you, because I know it is a large article to keep up with. --Willy No1lakersfan (Talk - Contribs) 01:42, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I fully understand why you signed up to maintain that article. I was getting ready to sign up for it when I noticed that you had, and I wanted to ask if you would like some help maintaining it. Please let me knowin which ways you wuld like me to help out, becaue I would lie to make the Yankees artcle one of the best. --Willy No1lakersfan (Talk - Contribs) 14:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why

Why do you completely ignore the talk page of the Green Bay Packers article and continue to engage in an edit war without discussing anything? I mean, you don't even have an edit summary in this edit. Would you please use the talk page?++aviper2k7++ 01:43, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Can you discuss this on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League before changing EVERY SINGLE LOGO to a larger, unneeded, duplicate version?++aviper2k7++ 02:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
If you want to settle this dispute, we can have an arbitration request. Read Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration.++aviper2k7++ 02:15, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for mediation

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Green Bay Packers, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.++aviper2k7++ 03:09, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Green Bay Packers.
For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk)
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
This message delivered: 12:15, 7 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Colts Logo.

Hi,


I reduced the size of your images to 100px, because it is too large for the format of the articles.

Your uploaded image is too large to begin with and should have been reduced offline. But in the meantime, it should be a smaller image to be in line with other logo images, the size of the text blocks in the articles and the fair use policy. I would appreciate it if you would give me a rationale for them remaining at 150px or reduce them yourself. No sense in us just swapping back and forth.

Thanks!

Take care,

Larry Lmcelhiney 01:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Kingdome

Please note that Wikipedia's article naming conventions currently state:

If the definite or indefinite article would be capitalized in running text, then include it at the beginning of the page name. This would be the case for the title of a work such as a novel. Otherwise, do not include it at the beginning of the page name.

Thus, the article should be Kingdome not The Kingdome. If you feel strongly that this should not be the case, please let me know ASAP before I or someone else moves the article back. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 02:57, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

True, but I've never heard it of "The Netherlands" informally called "Netherlands", yet that is the example cited on the policy page I mentioned. Plus, throughout the article, there are numerous instances where "the Kingdome" is used. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:06, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yankee Stadium, Shea Stadium, etc.

It is against wikipedia policy to state scheduled future events as if they had already happened. This policy is called "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball". Wahkeenah 13:54, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lawrence Taylor

I noticed you are a member of the Wikiproject National Football League, I'd like to ask a favor of you. I've done a lot of work recently to improve the Lawrence Taylor article and recently made a request to have it peer reviewed. Would you mind looking it over and giving me advice on what to do next? The peer review page is here. Thanks in advance. Quadzilla99 14:02, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Joey Galloway.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Joey Galloway.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 freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. 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}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

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. mattbr30 15:56, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Pete Stoyanovich.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Pete Stoyanovich.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 freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. 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}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

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. mattbr30 18:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Replaceable fair use images

The following images fail the first fair use criterion:

  • Image:Norm Johnson.jpg
  • Image:Donald Hollas.jpg
  • Image:Carl Pickens.jpg
  • Image:Chris Mohr.jpg
  • Image:Leo Araguz.jpg
  • Image:Kyle Richardson.jpg
  • Image:Darrien Gordon.jpg
  • Image:Damon Gibson.jpg
  • Image:Jermaine Lewis.jpg
  • Image:Latario Rachal.jpg
  • Image:Derrick Cullors.jpg
  • Image:Tamarick Vanover.jpg

This message should be treated in the same way as the images in the above two notices.

Please do not upload any more images that fail the fair use criteria, because they will be deleted. This means you must also provide a fair use rationale. Please check over ALL of your image uploads to ensure they satisfy the fair use criteria, otherwise they may also be deleted. Thank you, mattbr30 19:09, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget to use {{Replaceable fair use disputed|Your reason why a free replacement is not available}} so that the reviewing admin knows that you dispute the tagging. Thanks, mattbr30 22:40, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tags on images

Hi Crazy Canadian/Soxrocks,

What's going on? Suddenly there are tags everywhere. Can that stop, because it's been fine for now, why is it bad now? Crazy Canadian 19:35, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Please read the fair use guidelines.

These images do not state their copyright holder. It is NOT copyright sportslogos.net and it came from sportslogos.net. They specifically state on their website that they are not the copyright holder and cannot grant permission for use.

Second, many of these images do not have fair use rationale, "why" they can be used as fair use. Please read the copyright notice on each of the images. It requires the Uploader to provide a rationale.


Third, please do not remove these tags without resolving the issues and communicating them on the talk page. Simply putting a comment in the edit summary is not adequate.


Thanks for your interest in helping.

Take care,

Larry Lmcelhiney 20:18, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Soxrocks,

I see that you have started using the Fair Use Rationale statements which I sent to you. They were a talisman for me, so I hope that you will find them useful as well. If it is your intent to create a version for use on the LOGOs and apply it to those which I'd previously tagged, I will be pleased to leave them alone. Please let me know if that is your plan?

Of course, that still leaves the image size issue unresolved and I realize that is not as simple as a written statement. I do believe that it will continue to be an issue until resolved, as I saw that others have also mentioned it to you.

I hope to hear from you soon!

Take care,

Larry Lmcelhiney 04:00, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale.

Hi Soxrock,

I have modified the Cleveland Browns helmet image with fair use rationale per our discussions:

Place a simple description at the beginning without any further copyright or location information:

Cleveland Browns helmet image (2006)

Then place the following statement (with modifications) as shown (remove the "nowiki" tags and leave the comments, if you want to make the rationale usable for others):

User:Soxrock asserts that the limited use of this copyrighted image in Wikipedia articles directly pertaining to it is a fair use of the image, for the following reasons:

  • It is of the logo, helmet or uniform of an NFL team <!-- Substitue other sport (i.e. NBA, MLB, etc.)-->which retains the copyright.
  • It was obtained from the Sportslogos.net website <!-- Substitute with actual website location name (not URL)--> which serves only to collect and archive these images.
  • No free-license alternatives are available that convey the same information.
  • The image is no larger, and of no higher quality, than required for its use in articles. <!-- To use this statement, you must downscale images which are significantly larger than that which will be placed in the article. -->
  • It is used in Wikipedia only for educational purposes and is not used for profit.
  • Its use on Wikipedia does not compete with the copyright holder.
  • Its use on Wikipedia is not expected to decrease the value of the copyright to its holder.



Of course, you will still need to resolve the image size issue, as that puts WikiPedia in a difficult postion.

In future, just place all of the information in the box when you upload an image, along with the "logo" tag.

Hope that this helps.

Take care,

Larry Lmcelhiney 14:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Los Angeles Dodgers logo section

Hi there. I understand that you want to include as many of the old logos as possible, but the captions obviously do not match the logos. Half of them are mis-identified. I'm going to delete those bad ones again. If you want to put them back, please correct the images. Thanks! --Chancemichaels 21:19, 22 February 2007 (UTC)Chancemichaels

[edit] Fair Use Rationale (cont'd)

Hi Soxrock,

I appreciate your attempt at putting copyright information on the Image:IndianapolisColts_1001.png, however it can be as simple as just saying that the Indinapolis Colts are the copyright holder...

On the other hand, you still have not addressed the Fair Use Rationale issue. Even something as simple as the bulleted list that I have provided for your use above would be adequate, but you must assert it there on the page, not on the Talk page or in the Edit Summary.

So, please do not remove the Fair Use Rationale tag until you have completed this step. You might also consider doing all of the others which you have uploaded under Soxrocks and any of your other aliases.

Thanks!

Larry Lmcelhiney 00:43, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:IndianapolisColts 1000.png

Thanks for uploading Image:IndianapolisColts 1000.png. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation 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. Lmcelhiney 00:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Carolina Panthers

May I ask why you deleted half the Panthers article? JTRH 20:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I found the History page that you created, but I'm still wondering why you chose to delete the Seifert Era from the main page, while leaving Capers and Fox? JTRH 20:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re: spliting content

As stated on Wikipedia:Summary style, what you should do when you move a large section into a separate article is that you must leave a several paragraph summary in its place -- summarizing all of the content you moved.

However, if you are lazy about writing such a summary, the only other option is to remove all of the content from the history section and place {{further}} instead of {{details}} (Remember to wikilink the target pages when using {{further}}, it does not do it automatically like {{details}} does).

What you should not do, as you have done, is to remove selected sections, which leads to huge gaps. It is better to write a simple sentence like "The Bengals did not make the playoffs throughout almost all of the 1990s" instead of not mentioning what the team did during that decade at all.

Hope this helps. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Added Tags

Hi Soxrock,

I noticed that you'd identified User:CollegeGameDayRocks! with this account as well. I went ahead and placed a tag on your three user pages, User:Soxrock, User:Crazy Canadian, and User:CollegeGameDayRocks! to more clearly identify[1] that you are not attempting to violate policy WP:SOCK. Please feel free to add this tag to any other accounts that you might use or remove these if you feel that my assumption is incorrect.--Lmcelhiney 16:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:BearsNavyBlueOrange.png

Thanks for uploading Image:BearsNavyBlueOrange.png. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation 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. ↔NMajdan•talk 14:19, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of 2009 Green Bay Packers season

An editor has nominated 2009 Green Bay Packers season, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2009 Green Bay Packers season and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 19:53, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of 2008 Green Bay Packers season

An editor has nominated 2008 Green Bay Packers season, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2008 Green Bay Packers season and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 18:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Multiple accounts

You appear to have more than one account and to be using them both. This is not allowed on Wikipedia (See Wikipedia:Username and Wikipedia:Sock puppetry). Please choose one account and stop using the other account. You could put redirects from the account you no longer wish to use to the account you will continue to use. I saw this because you used one account to add another to the list of active participants at WP:CFB, see [2]. Thank you for understanding and your cooperation. MECU≈talk 13:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually multiple accounts don't always constitute violation of WP:SOCK. This does raise questions, though, since that sort of practice is so often employed by problem editors. Soxrock, thank you for declaring that these accounts are all yours. You could help ease the worries of other Wikipedians by posting an explanation of each account's purpose. I've been asked to look into this and I'd appreciate your help. Regards, DurovaCharge! 16:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Would you post the explanation in your user space, please? That would be a help to other editors who wonder what's up. DurovaCharge! 22:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] In re:

I have replied on my talk page. Navou banter / contribs 22:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Leonard Davis

I saw that you have reversed the colors of the Dallas Cowboys for Leonard Davis and you shouldn't do that because thats the Patriot's colors. --Phbasketball6 15:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Future Dolphins season pages

First of all, you probably should have made the 2008 and 2009 seasons at all. Secondly, you completely butchered them, by doing things like putting WRONG opponents on the schedule at times, talking about how they "look to do better" and assuming Cameron will still be there. I think it's a dumb idea to even have these pages at this point, but if you're going to do it then do it right.Chris Nelson 02:23, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

By incorrect schedules, I mean listing the Miami Dolphins as an opponent of the Miami Dolphins in 2009. Also, obviously you always look to do better, but to phrase it the way you did is to speak about it as if 2008 is in the past, and it's not. Plus for all you know, they could win the Super Bowl in 2008. Even though it's unlikely, if it happens no one would say they are "looking to do better" than they did in 2008. You don't know what will happen in 2008 and you don't know if Cameron will be there (even if it's probable) so there is no point in talking about those things as if it's already happened.Chris Nelson 03:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Giants_1950-1955.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Giants_1950-1955.gif. 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. 07:00, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Sox - I see you've uploaded most of the Giants logos/unis that now reside at Logos and Uniforms of the New York Giants, and even though it appears that you followed wiki rules about sourcing, copyright and fair use, etc., they are being deleted one by one. I have a vested interest in that page, and the Giants, and I'll see if I can get these images restored, if you don't have time. Thanks, 808 13:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi 808,

If you want to help to keep the affected images at Logos and Uniforms of the New York Giants and get others restored, the path is simple:

  • Identify the copyright holder. It is not sportslogos.net as identified on this image page.

New York Giants primary logo 1950-1955, claiming fair use Copyright: Sportslogos.net

  • Add a detailed Fair Use Rationale Statement per the requirments:

User:Soxrock asserts that the limited use of this copyrighted image in Wikipedia articles directly pertaining to it is a fair use of the image, for the following reasons:

  • It is of the logo, helmet or uniform of an NFL team which retains the copyright.
  • It was obtained from the Sportslogos.net website which serves only to collect and archive these images.
  • No free-license alternatives are available that convey the same information.
  • The image is no larger, and of no higher quality, than required for its use in articles.
  • It is used in Wikipedia only for educational purposes and is not used for profit.
  • Its use on Wikipedia does not compete with the copyright holder.
  • Its use on Wikipedia is not expected to decrease the value of the copyright to its holder.

That is really all that is necessary! Let me know if you have questions, please.

Take care,

Lmcelhiney 15:14, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2007 Articles

Hello. I greatly appreciate the edits you have made to the articles. However, please refrain from working on articles that you have not been assigned to monitor. The list is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Baseball/2007 MLB team articles. This causes confusion for those who have been assigned to work on them. Ksy92003 23:05, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I understand that. But still, it causes confusion for people like me who expect to have some work to do on the articles and to see that somebody has already taken away their responsibilty. I admire your work ethic, but if it's possible, unless an article has fallen drastically behind, please try to limit the edits you make to the articles which other people have signed up to do. Ksy92003 23:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
The only reason I was late updating mine was because I was at the game ;) ++aviper2k7++ 23:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Carl Lewis

  • Just to let you know, I restored the red links you removed from the Carl Lewis article. Red links serve a valid purpose on Wikipedia as a guide for expansion of the encyclopedia's coverage. See WP:RED for more. --Dystopos 21:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Updating stats in baseball player articles

Hi ... I'm a relative newcomer to WP and an avid Cleveland Indians fan. As such, I have all of the Indians players' pages on my watchlist. I see that you updated the stats in the info box on Grady Sizemore's page today. Are you planning on keeping each player's statistics up to date (or is there some group of people who are doing this)? It's certainly a monumental task and seems to me to be unnecessary in an encyclopedia since there are ump-teen other more reliable sources for current statistics. The problem I have with it is that unless the statistics are updated for every player on a regular basis, the currency of the player pages will be uneven. Also, the info box on the Sizemore page is now inaccurate since it says "Selected MLB statistics (through 2006)".

Do you know if this topic has been discussed by the community anywhere ... perhaps at WP:WPBB or WP:WPBBP? --Sanfranman59 22:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

  • I'd just like to add in on this topic, while I appreciate the enthusiasm it must take to update all sorts of player's stats, you should really just wait until each game is official, because technically, the stats aren't updated until the game is declared official (usually 30-60 minutes after the game). Wikipedia is not a news service. -- KirinX 02:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

You updated the stats for Jason Giambi but not the as of date. Could you make sure to make them match? Corvus cornix 22:56, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of 2008 Pittsburgh Steelers season

An editor has nominated 2008 Pittsburgh Steelers season, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2008 Pittsburgh Steelers season and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 19:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of 2009 Pittsburgh Steelers season

An editor has nominated 2009 Pittsburgh Steelers season, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2008 Pittsburgh Steelers season and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 19:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2009 Jacksonville Jaguars season

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article 2009 Jacksonville Jaguars season, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached.

I have also added {{prod}} templates to the other 2009 NFL team articles:

  • 2009 Kansas City Chiefs season
  • 2009 Denver Broncos season
  • 2009 Dallas Cowboys season
  • 2009 Cincinnati Bengals season
  • 2009 Chicago Bears season
  • 2009 Carolina Panthers season
  • 2009 Buffalo Bills season
  • 2009 Baltimore Ravens season
  • 2009 Atlanta Falcons season
  • 2009 Arizona Cardinals season
  • 2009 Miami Dolphins season
  • 2009 New Orleans Saints season
  • 2009 Oakland Raiders season
  • 2009 San Diego Chargers season
  • 2009 St. Louis Rams season
  • 2009 Tampa Bay Buccaneers season
  • 2009 Tennessee Titans season

Each of these articles contains speculation about where the teams will play (teams may move or change stadiums, disasters occur, etc), who will coach the teams, and how the league will be structured for home/away series. While some of these are more likely than others, I feel it is too soon to start speculating, and the AfD deletion of Green Bay's 2009 article and nomination of Pittsburg's seem to back that up. BigrTex 21:30, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of top 100 Major League Baseball home run hitters

I've requested that List of top 100 Major League Baseball home run hitters be merged into List of top 500 Major League Baseball home run hitters -- 500 should be able to cover anything you've put into 100. Jpers36 13:28, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments

Would you mind commenting here? They're thinking about re-opening that poll about the NFL infoboxes. Quadzilla99 21:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2007 NFL Draft

Please don't edit the page to post selections that have not occurred yet. Brady Quinn has not been selected 3rd yet, so putting that information there is deliberatly trying to add misinformation to the article. Pepsidrinka 16:37, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Again, do not add Brady Quinn for the sake of edit conflicting others.--Wizardman 17:29, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I just wanted to remind you that positions and universities are only linked the first time they are mentioned. Thanks. --Maxamegalon2000 19:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Again, would you mind not making duplicate links? --Maxamegalon2000 19:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NFL rookies on roster templates

Please stop putting rookies under the wrong positions on team rosters. If you don't know enough about the players being chosen, it's best to avoid editing things involving them altogether.Chris Nelson 21:11, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, if you're going to put drafted rookies on there, put the R notations!

[edit] Mistake

When you are creating new articles on players that are being drafted, when you add categories it says Brian Robison, for example this was on Dewayne Wrights page:

Category:Buffalo Bills player|Robison, Brian

Dewayne Wrights should say:

Category:Buffalo Bills players|Wright, Dewayne --Bucs10 16:20, 29 April 2007 (UTC)Bucs10

please stop adding 2007 NFL season to players infoboxes like you did with Jamarcus Russell and Calvin Johnson. It doesn't really make sense when only 2007 rookies have it when players like Michael Vick and Peyton Manning don't have that.--Yankees10 21:14, 3 May 2007 (UTC)Yankees10

where is it on the NFL project page. In my opinion it really isnt neaded because you can only go to the rookie year and not any other year.--Yankees10 21:26, 3 May 2007 (UTC)Yankees10

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:San_Diego_Chargers_helmet_new.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:San_Diego_Chargers_helmet_new.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BigDT 02:54, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Gary_Anderson.jpg

I have tagged Image:Gary_Anderson.jpg as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add {{not orphan}} to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. BigrTex 14:37, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Colors on Yankees Infoboxes

why are you taking the gray off the Yankees player infoboxes?--Yankees10 23:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)Bucs10

The gray looks much better though, and every other team has 2 different colors on there infoboxes, and if you changed it then the Yankees would be the only team with one color--Yankees10 01:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)Yankees10

Do you have an example of what that looks like--Yankees10 01:37, 8 May 2007 (UTC)Yankees10

I think the way it was would probably be the best right now--Yankees10 01:44, 8 May 2007 (UTC)Yankees10

[edit] Image:Navy blue script 2.png

I have tagged Image:Navy blue script 2.png as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. (ESkog)(Talk) 11:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Detroit Red Wings

It was agreed at WPTP (months ago) to leave the diacriticals off NHL team pages 'current roster' sections. Please respect this gentlemen's agreement. Thank you. GoodDay 22:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Blazers 5.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Blazers 5.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 19:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yankees Yearly

Hi, i saw the edits you made to the 1921 yankee season. i really liked the way you did the info box and the stats, and i need to add stats to the other pages (1903-1913) since thats on my job list for the WikiYank Group. wanna help? ThirdPoliceman 16:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Pistons 1997-2001.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Pistons 1997-2001.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 03:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] J.R. Richard

Sorry, but I had originally thought you were adding some random colors to the infobox to make it more aesthetically pleasing. In any case, I personally think it would be better to use current team colors, so that it will be easier for people to identify past and current players from the same team by looking at the player's infoboxes. Thanks, Nishkid64 (talk) 14:23, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Y

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Problem with autoblocks, now resolved.

Request handled by: Martinp23 22:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Preakness Game

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Preakness Game, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Updating scores

Hey. I kindly ask that you please refrain from updating scores for several sporting games which are currently in progress. It isn't Wikipedia's responsibility to host up-to-the-second scores on games. This is too WikiNews-ish. We are an encyclopedia, not ESPN.com. Please stop. --Ksy92003 (talk) 02:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Responding to your comment on Ksy92003's talk page; Actually there is rule in place against what you are doing. Wikipedia is not a publisher of news reports, (Number 6 in the linked section) which is an official policy of the English Wikipedia. Please stop. --Michael Greiner 03:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
And even if there weren't a rule, making constant edits like that clusters the server a lot. It makes it go a lot slower if you're making 5 edits per minute to a particular article. If there weren't a rule in place, I don't think that updating it that frequently would be worth jamming the "online traffic" so to speak.
Anyway, I was just checking out Michael Greiner's contributions and I saw this note at the top: "Due to high database server lag, changes newer than 30 seconds may not be shown in this list." Wikipedia is a massive website and contains a bunch of articles and users. If you continue to make continuous edits, the server could fall behind. Only make the vast amount of edits you have if they're absolutely necessary (Wikipedia restrictions aside).
However, as Michael Greiner said, there is a rule against what you are doing. Wikipedia has a sister project for that, WikiNews. Leave the up-to-the-moment stuff to that project and leave Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, not another ESPN.com. --Ksy92003 (talk) 03:12, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Soxrock, I'm curious as to your purpose for updating the scores to a game in progress?--Mikebrand 03:05, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Me too. Why even bother changing it while a game's in progress? It's not like someone's on Wikipedia specifically to get a score update. All we need is the final score anyway. Dknights411 19:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Don't listen to Ksy92003, you didnt do anything wrong

There is no need for you to listen to user:Ksy92003 since there is no rule on wikipedia that bans user from updating. What he did is against the rule of consensus. The rule WP:CON indicates that every action here is based on consensus. Just because one user here dislike what you did, you can bring it up to the talk page. Hiding the score is like doing nothing. Remember, I support what you are doing right now. Chris 01:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Never mind what I said. The above discussion shows that only you and I support the updating of score. Chris 01:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, he is doing something wrong. Violating WP:NOT is not something to condone. --Michael Greiner 02:52, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Moreover, it makes it extremley dificult to backtrack an article's edit history if there are hundreds of edits made within a very short period of time, as well as trying to make an edit while the game is in progress. I'm imploring you to please stop this practice. It may be conveniant to you, but it makes thing even more difficult for everyone else. Dknights411 19:59, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] LOL

You must be watching the hockey game as well; you got that 3-0 score up before the announcer at the Pond even said it!  :) Keep up the great work! Jmlk17 02:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2007 Stanley Cup Playoffs

Why did you keep making edits as if Anaheim had won the game while the game was still in progress? There was 10 minutes left in the game when you started making those edits. Wait until the game has completed. V-train 03:56, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Wikipedia is not the place for "crystal balling," as you called it. You can't presume one team will win and change factual info based on it. Detroit was inches from tying the game in the last few minutes. The game wasn't even close to over when you starting making presumptions. V-train 20:11, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
    • The game was not close at the end. Detroit had a legitimate chance to tie the game up at the last minutes. We are a "factual" site, and giving scores to games that are still in progress, treating them as if the game is over, isn't accurate. Please refrain from updating anything that is still in doubt. --Ksy92003 (talk) 22:13, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Around the Horn

Oh my gosh. That's all I have to say after I saw the edits you made to Around The Horn. You changed the record of the four "contestants" before a winner was decided. Changing the record just because they're in the show isn't good. What that does is it changes their record when they don't have a win or loss yet. For example, you changed Boston's appearance total to 663, LA to 800, Denver to 902, and Chicago to 931. You also did this to the city's overall record (see this edit). What you did was adjusted the record of these four cities, indicating that they had all lost. You did this when the show just started, also. A city can't be charged with a loss if the game hasn't begun yet, can it? So I encourage you to PLEASE stop doing stuff like this, as it makes everything more inaccurate. And remember? There's a rule (#6) against this. Please don't blatently ignore official Wikipedia policy because you want to. The policy prohibits editing in a news-like fashion, and you are ignoring that policy because you don't feel it does any harm to update them as constantly as you can. This is Wikinews' job, not your job. Wikipedia policy states that an encyclopedic article should be kept up-to-date as possible, but at the same time by not updating with something that is either unverifiable or incomplete. And a game-in-progress is considered "incomplete." Please refrain from doing this again. Please refrain from intentionally ignoring a Wikipedia policy. --Ksy92003 (talk) 22:39, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I mean you no disrespect at all, but to me it simply appears that you're lazy. Don't you see how what you did is devoid of accuracy? Not to mention that you're violating WP:NOT#PUBLISHER. I am being serious, Soxrock. Stop violating / ignoring official policy. --Ksy92003 (talk) 23:02, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, that isn't good enough. Tell me something, Soxrock: why do you think that you can overrule an official Wikipedia policy? --Ksy92003 (talk) 23:19, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Fine. Just make sure that you don't change a person's or city's record until they have been eliminated. And try to get out of the habit of updating something as soon as possible, as there is a rule against that. --Ksy92003 (talk) 00:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Game logs

Hey again. I'm sorry if I'm butting in again. But I was just wondering why, when you update stuff like the game logs and division standings, why do you do it piece by piece? I see you update like one team's pitcher, then the other pitcher, then the attendance, then the record, then the bgcolor (or some other order). Why do you do this all in separate edits instead of simply doing it all in the same edit? --Ksy92003 (talk) 03:01, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, that creates more edit conflicts. If you do it piece by piece, then you have to click "edit this page" 5 separate times. This is more likely to cause an edit conflict than if you simply have to click "edit this page" once. For example, if you add one piece of info, like the winning pitcher, somebody looking at the "recent changes" might see that you only added a small piece of the whole data and attempt to edit the page to finish filling in the data. Then, you would click on "edit this page" to add the other pitcher, for example. The other user would already be trying to enter all the info in the template when you click to edit, thus causing an edit conflict. This can be extremely problematic, as I myself check the "recent changes" constantly simply to monitor the project. And if I see something that is incomplete, then I'll be tempted to finish what you started. Now, although I am aware that you take this method, another user checking the "recent changes" might not be aware, thus causing another edit conflict. --Ksy92003 (talk) 04:25, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Baseball Players Infoboxs

Please stop removing players who have their current teams listed, please instead revert where it is formerteams to teams, as this removal of the current teams will create more work for the baseball players task force. Thanks. MetsFan153 03:52, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, stop fucking things up.Chris Nelson 06:11, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] In-Game edits of 2007 NBA Playoffs article

On the 2007 NBA Playoffs talk page, it has been decided that we will stop in-game score updates because of the strain it puts on the page's own history section. Since we have a big problem with vandalism on this and other NBA pages recently, we need to be able to monitor these articles as effeciently as possible. I hope this doesn't discourages you from editing in general. If you want, you can do a score update at the end of a quarter, instead of after every single score. If you have any concerns, please feel free to contact any one of us. Thank you for understanding. Dknights411 20:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I don't get this...

Seriously, I ask one more time that you please stop making all these edits piece-by-piece. While there is no policy against this, you are actually making too many edits. I honestly don't understand why you can't simply make all the changes in the same edit. Here is a list of edits you made to {{2007 Detroit Tigers season game log}}:

  1. Background color
  2. Score
  3. Winning pitcher
  4. Losing pitcher
  5. Attendance
  6. Record

You took an easy job and split it up into 6 edits. The last five you made in a combined 3 minutes, for an average of :20 per edit. Now, here is a list of edits you made to {{2007 St. Louis Cardinals season game log}}:

  1. Score
  2. Background color
  3. Winning pitcher
  4. Losing pitcher
  5. Saving pitcher
  6. Attendance
  7. Record

You took the same easy job and split it up into 7 edits. You made these edits in a combined 4 minutes, for an average of :34 per edit.

I ask you again PLEASE add all these in one edit instead of splitting them up piece by piece. It drastically extends the page histories, not to mention makes it harder to read the Recent changes page if all 50 edits shown are for only 6 or 7 pages. It makes it even more difficult for somebody like me who always monitor the articles. It's a lot easier to watch 30 articles one one page than it is to watch it on 7 pages.

I appreciate your edits, but I really ask that you PLEASE add all the information in one edit rather than 7. --Ksy92003 (talk) 00:36, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not banking on that, to be honest. I just want you to be aware that doing it with as many edits as you do makes it very hard to monitor the project for me (and probably for other users who check the recent changes).
I don't believe that this is a large amount of info to update, anyway. On average, it's around 100-120 characters, about 120 bytes of data. That's not really a lot, actually, considering how that's about .4% of the entire page's data. I understand that habits are hard to get out of. But I honestly think that if you can get out of this habit, it will be a lot better for everybody. For instance, if all the edits are made in one edit, then if you make any errors, there would be a better chance of me being able to see it and correct it. If you can, could you please try? --Ksy92003 (talk) 00:52, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
That's cool. Thank you for meeting me halfway on this. --Ksy92003 (talk) 01:01, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. This is a lot easier to monitor from the Recent Changes page. Thank you so much. --Ksy92003 (talk) 04:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Updating MLB player pages with current stats

Hi ... if you're going to update the statistics in the infoboxes on MLB player pages, please be sure to change the statyear parameter to be the date of the stats. Otherwise, the infoboxes are inaccurate. Note that although the parameter is named statyear, you can enter a complete date. Frankly, with the possible exception of players approaching milestones, I'm not crazy about the practice of updating statistics for some players but not others. But I recognize that this is just my viewpoint. However, I think it's imperative that statyear is updated along with the statistics. Thanks. --Sanfranman59 05:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Infobox

Once again, please STOP removing the former teams from the infobox, instead replace the former teams, with teams, this is the 2nd time I've had to tell you this, but you just don't seem to get it. MetsFan153 13:01, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Then why did I just click on a player before, his old formerteams box not there and you edited it to delete it, today. MetsFan153 13:05, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Stop

Stop changing from 2003 in baseball|2003 in 2003 in MLB|2003, the edits you are making are wrong and are not policy and will be reverted. MetsFan153 13:18, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't know what your problem is but you are creating more work for everyone and revert these unauthorized changes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball/Players/Archive_1#sucession_boxes

and all examples on the infobox examples use 2003 in baseball|2003,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Infobox_MLB_player

Now please stop these edits, next time before you do any of this post on the baseball players task force talk page, so it can be discussed and decided as a whole if it is a good idea. MetsFan153 13:51, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits to Eric Gagné

Please be more careful when editing userbox data. Your recent edits to Eric Gagné removed several important parameters from the infobox, leaving it broken (diff). I'd suggest using the Preview button to prevent this from happening in the future. Thanks, Caknuck 14:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Danny Kanell.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Danny Kanell.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aksibot 14:30, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Cell

I am trying to figure out why you readded an obviously outdated and poorer quality picture to the U.S. Cellular Field infobox and cannot come up with any reason why? I reverted the change as the stadium has been extensively remodeled since the picture you added to the article was taken, please discuss any further changes at Talk:U.S. Cellular Field. Thanks and happy editing. IvoShandor 20:36, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why are you creating duplicate articles???

Why are you creating all of these "yyyy Major League Baseball season" articles that have the exact same information as the corresponding "yyyy in baseball" articles? It looks to me like you're just copying the information from the "yyyy in baseball" article, but presenting the information in a slightly different order. I suggest that you stop what you're doing since I'm guessing that all of these articles you're creating are just going to be deleted, given that they're completely redundant. Before you undertake major projects like this, you really should bring them to the community first (WP:WPBB and/or WP:WPBBP). After all, that's what WP is all about, right? --Sanfranman59 00:42, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

All you did was add a few paragraphs of text summarizing the season. The rest of the page is identical to the 1995 in baseball article. Why not just add your written summary to that article? --Sanfranman59 00:58, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

The only references to baseball GLOBALLY in the 1995 in baseball article is the small "Other Champions" section. I still think you could simply add whatever you have in mind to add to this article instead of creating new ones with so much overlap. --Sanfranman59 01:07, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, so if I'm interpreting your last message on my talk page correctly, you're going to do what you want to do and the hell with what anyone else thinks? Do I have the right? --Sanfranman59 01:13, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

It seems to me that your definition of a "good opinion" is one that agrees with you. You have not yet made a case for why you can't simply add your text to the existing articles instead of copying 99% of what's in the existing article and adding your text in the new article. Why is this necessary? --Sanfranman59 01:20, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you should make your own Wikipedia-style website where you can put whatever you want on it. No one likes your edits from what I can tell.Chris Nelson 01:25, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

First of all, I'll thank you not to yell at me anymore. It's rude and completely unnecessary. Secondly, the 1995 in baseball article has exactly 2 red links. Thirdly, if you simply add whatever it is you want to add to the existing articles, we can decide to branch them off to other articles if they become too big and unwieldy. As they currently stand (at least in my opinion), they are neither too big nor too unwieldy. --Sanfranman59 01:28, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Your edits are clearly unnecessary and you know it. You're just editing for the sake of it.Chris Nelson 01:34, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

In your eyes.Chris Nelson 01:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Indy 500

There's no need to edit the Indy 500 article for each lap. It generates a lot of pages in Wikipedia server and it's hard to avoid mistakes that way.

Please wait for the end of the race to edit. Garavello 18:09, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh my gosh. You know darn well that there is a rule against this. It has been brought to your attention NUMEROUS times. If you continue this... if you do this ONE MORE TIME, I WILL get an admin and bring this to their attention. There is a rule against this and you WILL be punished accordingly. One more time you do this... just one more time, and I will bring this to an admin's attention. --Ksy92003 (talk) 18:14, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
What gave you the idea that that rule only applies to basketball? THERE IS A FREAKING RULE AGAINST IT!!! I am being serious here. Stop updating it the way you are or I will be forced to take action against you. I don't want to, but you may leave me no other choice. --Ksy92003 (talk) 18:21, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
But it ISN'T over yet. So you are violating it. Don't do anything until the race has been declared over and a winner has been named. --Ksy92003 (talk) 19:24, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I think it isn't over yet. See? We both have different opinions. There hasn't been an official announcement saying that the race is over, so we can't put anything and pretend that it is. --Ksy92003 (talk) 19:29, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
  • I see what the above user is trying to say. Basically, there's no reason to post results of a match while it's happening, it's just as easy to wait until the end of it. There's a difference between throwing up draft picks every pick (since those aren't going to change), and posting every time someone shoots a basket in the playoffs, or there's a change in lap positioning. Just slow down a bit, you only stress yourself out by making all those edits.--Wizardman 20:36, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Report

I think it's only fair to alert you that I have reported you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Soxrock. --Ksy92003 (talk) 20:34, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] It's over ?

Oh, no it isn't. Turn to ESPNews (or whatever channel the race was on). The race is currently going on. So, my friend, you were wrong. Therefore, please apologize to all for saying that you were updating it because you thought the race would be ended. You were wrong; it's still going on.

Sorry, I simply had to bring this to your attention. --Ksy92003 (talk) 22:11, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your frequent edits

I'll point out one more time that your edits violate the WP:NOT#PUBLISHER policy, there's no reason to update every single score every time it changes one little bit. If I catch you again doing this I'll have no reservations about blocking you, it's starting to get distracting.--Wizardman 12:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

an additional point (and the one that lead me here to make a comment) when you edit someone like willy mo pena's career stats you actually provide incorrect information, on someone like david ortiz his selected career stats are listed as current, on willy mo those stats are listed AS OF 2006. changes you make to players listing the end of last year as the correct date for the stats listed is wrong unless you ALSO re formate the player id block to list a valid and accurate date. Childhoodtrauma 00:07, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Baseball Tourney

I appreciate your help in updating the article, but why are you filling in the losers brackets? The games have not yet been played...we have no idea which teams will be in the losers brackets. Seancp 17:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smile

James, La gloria è a dio has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

[edit] Response

To make a hidden comment, click on the button at the top after the "X-squared", or type <!-- your hidden comment --> like so. --Ksy92003 (talk) 01:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:AmericanFootballLeague1960-64-2.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:AmericanFootballLeague1960-64-2.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aksibot 04:02, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Hamiltontigerslogo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Hamiltontigerslogo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aksibot 05:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sox?

Which Sox rock? Boston or Chicago? --RockRNC 20:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering that myself. I see you edit the Yankees articles a lot, I wouldn't think a Red Sox fan would do that? --rogerd 20:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Not without shovels and rakes and implements of destruction. :) DarkAudit 19:33, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chicago White Sox

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use Wikipedia:Sandbox for test edits. Thank you. IrishGuy talk 20:52, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. IrishGuy talk 20:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

No, the article isn't meant to be there. There is no reason to fork the bulk of the White Sox article. You have gained no consensus for such an overtaking. Stop. If you delete from Chicago White Sox again you will be blocked. IrishGuy talk 21:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please stop removing information until...

Even if you are creating a new article, please don’t remove content from another article. Even if you are going to move all that information to another article, please don’t remove the content until after the article has been created and the content has been added. From what I’ve seen, you haven’t created the other article yet. Please don’t remove information from Chicago White Sox until you have created History of the Chicago White Sox. --Ksy92003 (talk) 21:03, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I deleted his duplicate article because he was dismantling the bulk of the Chicago White Sox article without gaining any level of consensus for his activities. A move like this should be taken to the article talk page first before such a move. IrishGuy talk 21:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, please stop anyway. Discuss the topic with Irishguy and find out why he is deleting the article after you create it. Then, if cooler heads prevail, re-create History of the Chicago White Sox and add the information there; then you can remove it from Chicago White Sox. But please don’t remove content from an article unless it will remain an article on a related topic. But please don’t get involved in an edit-create article-delete article war with Irishguy. --Ksy92003 (talk) 21:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't think it's a bad idea, but I don't think that it should be done if only a select few of the teams can have it done. My lifelong philospohy is:
“ DO IT FOR ALL OR DO IT FOR NONE. ”
If all 30 teams will eventually have it, then I think it's a good idea. --Ksy92003 (talk) 21:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Please my post at Talk:Chicago White Sox. --Ksy92003 (talk) 22:38, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Roberto Clemente

look man all I was saying is that the yellow should not be on the background of the black. I agree with you it is hard to read the white with the yellow--Yankees10 03:11, 31 May 2007 (UTC)Yankees10

[edit] NBA playoff Edit

I saw that you made a bracket update in-game with the assumption that the game was over. While I know the Jazz had no chance tonight, it's NEVER official until the clock reads 0:00. So could you PLEASE hold off on these types of edits until the game OFFICIALLY ends? Besides, miricles DO happen! Dknights411 04:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

And I have taken that information and reported it to Wizardman. I'm not sure if anything is going to materialize from this recent edit, but however, it is my responsibility to report it to this admin. One more time, please don't do this again. Your edit summary itself suggested that the game wasn't over and that you were [in a way] admitting to violating WP:NOT#PUBLISHER.
You don't own Wikipedia. You can't do what you darn well please. There are rules and everybody, including you, must abide by those rules. Nobody is above the law. And nobody is above the rules, not admin nor anon. Everybody must follow the same rules; this includes you. So please don't violate this rules again because you think that you're above everybody else... or at least that's what it seems like:

[edit] from Irishguy / Talk:Chicago White Sox:

“ The user was warned repeatedly to stop deleting content. He continued. He was warned he needed to discuss wide-scale changes...he ignored it and continued. Please read Wikipedia:How to fix cut and paste moves and see that simply cut-and-paste moves screw up the page history which is bad. This particular user has a history of simply up and doing whatever he wants regardless of how many admins ask him not to. ”
Again, please stop doing this or action will be taken upon you for your edits. --Ksy92003 (talk) 05:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cardinals owners

I filled out the owners on St. Louis Cardinals managers and ownership to help you out. Great work by the way.Timpcrk87 21:40, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MLB player stats in infoboxes

Hi Sox ... When you update MLB player stats in the infoboxes on their pages, please be sure to update the "statyear" option with the exact date through which the stats are complete. Otherwise, the information in the infobox is inaccurate. Although the parameter is "statyear", you may enter a complete date (i.e. June 3, 2007 rather than just 2007). Thanks. --Sanfranman59 17:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi again, Sox ... before you update statistics for additional players, please go back and change the dates on the players you've already updated over the past several days. It's your mess. You should clean it up. Thanks. --Sanfranman59 01:22, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject NASCAR

Please to explain to WikiProject NASCAR why you made the decision to move all of the NASCAR seasons (for example 2007 in NASCAR Nextel Cup has been moved to 2007 NASCAR Nextel Cup Series). You singlehandedly made this decision without discussion. This move away from the longstanding method was not discussed at the WikiProject. A thread has been started here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_NASCAR#Seasons_being_moved. Royalbroil 20:39, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why did you do it again?

Just wanted to let you know that your edits, specifically these: [3], [4], [5], and [6], have once again violated WP:NOT#PUBLISHER. I have alerted Wizardman and am awaiting his response. --Ksy92003 (talk) 03:10, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:St_Louis_Cardinals_1967-1997_logo.png

I have tagged Image:St_Louis_Cardinals_1967-1997_logo.png as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add {{not orphan}} to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. MECU≈talk 17:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yankee Seasons

You said you would do the NYY pennant and World Series years, which you did. You also made it clear that you did not want anybody doing those pages for you, so I respected that wish and only edited non-pennant/WS seasons. However, you've edited every single year I've put my time into, and basically obliterated any progress I've made on the seasons. I didnt touch your work, so dont mess around with mine. ThirdPoliceman 23:43, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

You can't do this, Soxrock. This violates WP:OWN. Everybody has the right to edit whichever articles they want and no one user can say "I don't want anybody doing these pages for me." Anybody can edit whatever they want, and you can't get them. Please don't get in trouble... again. --Ksy92003 (talk) 00:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Okay... very well. Just please try to avoid any confusion. You're walking on thin ice in my eyes now.
Also, why are you still making all of your edits to a single article in 25 separate edits? You did this with at least 1950 New York Yankees season and I know you did it to others, as well. Please, for the sake of the page history and monitoring your edits, as well as to avoid the database from locking for a continuous input of data into the server, make all your changes in a single edit instead of 25. Thanks. --Ksy92003 (talk) 00:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I understand. But I don't understand how this is a huge problem to correct. I would think that you wouldn't have any problems with stopping that, but as long as the edits are made and the info is added, then it doesn't make much a difference.
One thing that is kinda annoying is that you always get the game logs updated before I can. I have the stuff all ready short of attendance when the game ends, and you still manage to get it updated before me. Grr... keep it up. I'm glad that I do have somebody else to rely on for getting these all updated. Before, I was doing 10 logs a night. Since then, I can barely even do my teams. I kinda like that actually. Keep up the good work, mate =) --Ksy92003 (talk) 04:39, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Non-free use disputed for Image:St Louis Cardinals 1967-1997 logo.png

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:St Louis Cardinals 1967-1997 logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kobe Bryant

Please don't delete large chunks of cited content without explanation as shown in this diff. Thanks. Spellcast 05:38, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2007 Draft

Thanks a ton for helping out with the 2007 Major League Baseball Draft. I discovered, just before the draft started, that the Mayo predictions changed again in the afternoon - and was struggling to get that section updated to be "correct" and verifiable. I think we crossed edits a few times, but it seems to be OK now. Watch out for vandals! It is hard to repair random vandalism hits that happen between proper updates without notice. Thanks again. --T-dot ( Talk/contribs ) 18:55, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Around the Horn statistics

Is it possible for you to limit your edits of the Around the Horn statistics to less edits, in order to not clog up the edit log? You don't need to do one edit for each change; try doing one or two instead. In addition, I appreciate the fact that you are updating it every day, but I don't think they are right still. bmitchelf•T•F 21:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)