User talk:Chrishmt0423

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Chrishomingtang)
Jump to: navigation, search


User Page
User Page		 Talk
Talk		 Featured content
Featured content		 Sandbox
Sandbox (1, 2, 3)		 Edit
Tools

Hello, welcome to my talk page!

  • If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
  • I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. So if you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page–my talk page–as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere. (I will break this rule sometime, if I want to get your attention quickly)
  • I am busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.
  • If I have reviewed an FLC for you, I have watchlisted the page, and will return within a reasonable time to Support, Oppose, or otherwise address your nomination. Reminders are unnecessary. Thanks.

Archives
Please sign by adding ~~~~ at the end of your message when you post here. Thanks.

Contents

[edit] Help with WP:CBBALL project category

Do you know how to fix Category:Category-Class college basketball articles so that all of the categories in the Category:NA-Class college basketball articles are moved over to the cat-class category? This is my first attempt at setting up different classes in a WikiProject and I can't figure out why nothing is showing up in the cat-class, even though tons of categories are marked as such. Jrcla2 (talk) 03:37, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't know how to fix.—Chris!c/t 03:47, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Featured lists

Wanted to keep this off the Featured sounds discussion, because once you start with "I know this is still off-topic, but..." you've probably lost control of the discussion.

I think the problem with previous Featured list proposals is that they were too focused on a single list. What probably needs done to get them on the main page is something like what we're doing for sounds - get a good buffer together, have someone who's willing to take charge of preparing things for the main page, and - since I think people are a little concerned that lists might not adapt well when cut down to a paragraph or two - provide a few examples of how they'd look on the main page.

There's many ways you could do it - a bullet-pointed DYK-style list of lists, an FA-style extract, and so on, but you need to figure out how many lists you have, what your buffer is, and so on, and if you do that, I think you might get in.

The easiest "in" for lists might be to replace DYK or On this day with a list of interesting facts from FLs once a week. I'm not an FL regular, though. Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:34, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Book-Class NBA articles

Fixed - See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football for details. DeFaultRyan 18:05, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

[edit] List of female United States Cabinet Secretaries

Hi there. At User:The Rambling Man/Main page FL candidates, the above list has been proposed as one of the early ones to go on the main page. It has aged pretty well: there were a few dead links that I was easily able to fix, and at a glance it appears to meet WP:ACCESS. But I was wondering if you would be willing to take a quick look at the last paragraph of the lead? It's just that at the moment it doesn't have any inline citations, and I'm not too sure where I might turn for that info. Regards, —WFC— 13:51, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

I added the refs.—Chris!c/t 19:47, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 21 February 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 17:26, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Thank You!

Treble Clef Barnstar.png The Featured Sound Main Page Proposal Voter Barnstar
I was truly humbled by the overwhelming community support for the recent proposal to place featured sounds on the main page. The proposal closed on Tuesday with 57 people in support and only 2 in opposition.

It should take a few weeks for everything to get coded and tested, and once that is done the community will be presented with a mock up to assess on aesthetic appeal.

Finally, I invite all of you to participate in the featured sounds process itself. Whether you're a performer, an uploader, or just come across a sound file you find top quality, and that meets the featured sound criteria, you can nominate it at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. Featured sounds is also looking for people to help assess candidates (also at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates.)

Thanks again for such a strong showing of support, and I hope to see you at featured sounds in the future.
Sven Manguard Wha?
Adam Cuerden (talk)
(X! · talk)

[edit] WikiCup 2011 February newsletter

Trophy.png

So begins round two of the WikiCup! We now have eight pools, each with eight random contestants. This round will continue until the end of April, when the top two of each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers of those remaining, will make it to round three. Congratulations to Cherokeenationalflag.png The Bushranger (submissions) (first, with 487 points) and Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions) (second, with 459), who stormed the first round. Scotland Casliber (submissions) finished third with 223. Twelve others finished with over 100 points- well done to all of you! The final standings in round one can be seen here. A mere 8 points were required to reach round two; competition will no doubt be much more fierce this round, so be ready for a challenge! A special thanks goes, again, to United Kingdom Jarry1250 (submissions) for dealing with all bot work. This year's bot, as well as running smoothly, is doing some very helpful things that last year's did not. Also, thanks to Bavaria Stone (submissions) for some helpful behind-the-scenes updating and number crunching.

Some news for those who are interested- March will see a GAN backlog elimination drive, which you are still free to join. Organised by WikiProject Good articles, the drive aims to minimise the GAN backlog and offers prizes to those who help out. Of course, you may well be able to claim WikiCup points for the articles you review as part of the drive. Also ongoing is the Great Backlog Drive, looking to work on clearing all of the backlogs on Wikipedia; again, incentives are offered, and the spirit of friendly competition is alive, while helping the encyclopedia is the ultimate aim. Though unrelated to the WikiCup, these may well be of interest to some of you.

Just a reminder of the rules; if you have done significant work on content this year and it is promoted in this round, you may claim for it. Also, anything that was promoted after the end of round one but before the beginning of round two may be claimed for in round two. Details of the rules can be found on this page. For those interested in statistics, a running total of claims can be seen here, and a very interesting table of that information (along with the highest scorers in each category) can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:38, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 28 February 2011

[edit] 1975–76 Buffalo Braves season

Thanks for your efforts at 1975–76 Buffalo Braves season. The two preceeding seasons could also use your help, if you get a chance.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:57, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I plan to work on them within this week.—Chris!c/t 19:36, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing up 1974–75 Buffalo Braves season. My only other Buffalo Braves WP:GA is 1973–74 Buffalo Braves season, which could also use a little help.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:15, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Forget about this. I will do it tomorrow.—Chris!c/t 04:18, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 7 March 2011

[edit] Michael Jordan

Took a look at the edits of User:XiaotianDavid, per my Online Ambassador position, and it seems the user (who is new) was doing a fairly good job of trying to add information to the page, just didn't have the sourcing codes down right. By reverting en masse and not giving any helpful feedback other than "rv poor edits - please discuss first if you want to add something", you seem to be biting the newbies. Also, the last edit you made to the page appears to be while using Rollback access. As you should know, Rollback should only be used to "revert obvious vandalism" and this was not "obvious vandalism".

Since you have been here awhile, you should be aware of these two rules I have metioned above. I would like to see you give this user some positive feedback about how to source and work with him on the article, not just reverting. Remember, this is a collabrative editing project. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 06:27, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I was not in a good mood at the time and so I might have been "biting" the newbie. But in my defense, I did ask him on his talk page to add source for info he added, but he simply ignore me and continue to add the same unsourced info. Note that the article is an FA and all info must be sourced. Also I did not use rollback at all (check the edit you linked, please!), I simply used undo to revert him.—Chris!c/t 19:53, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
No worries, we all have bad days, 'tis cool. I missed the "star" on the top of the page (they need to make those slightly bigger), so you do have a point there. I have experience with FA articles, please see Stephens City, Virginia, so I know how those have to be sourced. My goof on the rollback, just seen the edit summary, which was similar, my apologizes on that.
I would, if you feel up to it, to see some help being given to the editor on this. Since they are brand new, some only editing the project page for their school, they don't know the rules for FA or even regular articles. So, I think a little message on the finer points of standard editing (nothing that requires an author and someone from Random House) would be helpful. I know the professor of this project, User:Jaobar, is looking for something similar, so perhaps you could help there. Please let me know if I can be of assistance on that. Otherwise, I appreciate your quick response and hope we can get this resolved so the new editor sticks around after his course is done. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 22:20, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Charlotte Bobcats all-time roster

Hello Chris, one of your finest works is outdated now. Charlotte Bobcats all-time roster has not been updated for almost two years. I updated some active players, but several players have to be added. I am just letting you know.--Cheetah (talk) 22:44, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me. I kind of forget about that list. I will update it once I got some time.—Chris!c/t 00:13, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 14 March 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:47, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] service award level

Award-star-gold-3d.png

There has been a major revision of the the Service Awards: the edit requirements for the higher levels have been greatly reduced, to make them reasonably attainable.

Because of this, your Service Award level has been changed, and you are now eligible for a higher level. I have taken the liberty of updating your award on your user page.

Herostratus (talk) 07:03, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 21 March 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:32, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] JJB

Hey, where does it say i reverted it because of vandalism? Was just wondering why the 2007 season where he played D-League was shown below the 2006-present text. Kante4 (talk) 00:02, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for that. But that change can easily be fixed without reverting, so when you revert without explanation, it gives an impression that it is vandalism.—Chris!c/t 00:05, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Ok to answer your question, the d-league assignment happened after he first played with mavericks.—Chris!c/t 00:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
I know when it happened but 2007 below 2006 looks kind of odd. Kante4 (talk) 00:25, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] For God's Sake

I've had it with your disruptive edits, when me and LOL came together to create a new infobox, we did it with the best of intentions, and everything was on and poppin, but two people (you and Zagalejo) keep messing everything else. For the love of God, get it through your head, this is not the old infobox, we have adopted an infobox similar to the NFL and MLB ones. There is no need fpr the small font in the awards section, we must keep it the teams in chronolgical order and the all-star games must be linked. I'm begging you to end this. Beast from da East (talk) 03:54, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I'd really love to read the consensus, just to get an ideaBeast from da East (talk) 18:24, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
WT:NBA records all the major discussions we had. Template:Infobox NBA biography/doc has some guidance on formatting. Some are probably not recorded anywhere, like listing All-NBA 1st/2nd/3rd team separately, because that is clearly beneficial for readers to see which teams a player was selected at first glance.—Chris!c/t 18:34, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 28 March 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:37, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Template:NBA team standings in previous seasons

Hey, I regret telling you this, but I don't think {{NBA team standings}} should be used for previous seasons. I created it solely to ease mid-season updates, and compared to the hard-coded tables it's computationally quite expensive according to the NewPP limit reports. Maybe I should mention in the documentation that the template should be fully subst'd at the end of a season and should not be used for previous seasons. —LOL T/C 06:27, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I didn't know. Yes mention that in the documentation, so others know that as well. Feel free to revert my edits.

[edit] WikiCup 2011 March newsletter

Trophy.png

We are half way through round two of the WikiCup, which will end on 28 April. Of the 64 current contestants, 32 will make it through to the next round; the two highest in each pool, and the 16 next highest scorers. At the time of writing, our current overall leader is Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions) with 231 points, who leads Pool H. Poland Piotrus (submissions) (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring.

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round three is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:54, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 4 April 2011

[edit] Re: Template:NBA Year

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Chrishmt0423. You have new messages at LOL's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

[edit] Template talk:Infobox NBA biography

Thanks for taking care of the discussion and updating the template documentation. I didn't mean to leave when the discussion is still ongoing, but unfortunate circumstances prevents me to go online, let alone editing wikipedia. Anyway, it's nice to see the consensus being formed and the columns for Career history looks good. — MT (talk) 13:15, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Bulls

Oh... I'm not sure, now that you mention it. I was mainly piggybacking off another user's edit (changing "most" to "second most"). If it's still a record, feel free to restore it. Zagalejo^^^ 04:10, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 11 April 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:20, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Invitation to take part in a pilot study

I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only 5 minutes. cooldenny (talk) 19:12, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of properly referenced/sourced content

Properly sourced doesn't mean it should be included. The fact that Global Times is controlled by the Chinese government has nothing to do with this incident. It is a simple edit and I don't see the need to discuss.—Chris!c/t 20:02, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Look I already start a discussion on Talk:Manila hostage crisis, please discuss there and stop blindly reverting.—Chris!c/t 20:39, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Pending the outcome of the discussion, what say you lay your hands off? As it is very ungentlemenly of you to keep reverting without getting a consensus first, don't you think so? --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 20:43, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
And it is very ungentlemenly of you to keep adding this in without getting a consensus first, don't you think so?—Chris!c/t 20:45, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
  • BTW, you just violated 3RR, need me to remind of the situation you're in right now? As for that verified entry, leave it alone until the outcome of the discussion. Take the hint, wil'ya? --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 20:48, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
You need to open your eye and read 3RR again. I am still one away from violating it according to the rule.—Chris!c/t 20:52, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
  • I have been asked to provide some input in this discussion; specifically about 3RR, but I note that you are a long established user and have no need to be reminded of the policy. What I am going to comment upon is WP:Consensus. You removed the previous edit to an article noting, in part, that 'everyone knows that the media in China is controlled by the state (or words to that effect)...' I would then ask you to provide a cite to that statement - not about the control of the media, since there is little dispute over that, but that "...everyone knows..." Presently, two editors have reverted your removal of the content, with one referencing WP:Verifiability. You have only provided an WP:OR reason (and not one grounded in policy, that I know of) for your actions. WP:3RR is only a clear bright line where there appears to be a genuine dispute over the application of policy, from what I have seen there is a WP:Consensus for the retention of the material per reference to policy. Unless you can provide a better argued rationale for the removal of the edit I would suggest that it is kept, and that a further non consensual revert - regardless of a time scale - is disruptive and liable to invite sanction. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:02, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
While the fact is sourced, I think its inclusion is a violation of WP:NPOV. It is biased to specifically note that Chinese government controls its media as if to tell readers to disregard their position or opinion in response to the incident. Last time I checked, WP:NPOV is also a policy. It seems we are only focusing on WP:V here without thinking about WP:NPOV.—Chris!c/t 22:13, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Hmmm... An interesting interpretation. I read it more as providing a basis by which a lesser known publication may be considered as an official outlet for statements by party officials. Perhaps asking the intent of the originating editor, and finding a way to ensure that a policy compliant version appears in the text, would be a reasonable option? LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:35, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
I will talk to the originating editor, I guess. Meanwhile User:Dave1185 seems to disagree with my edits, but he refuses to discuss with me. I can't force him to discuss, so what should I do?—Chris!c/t 22:43, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
As there now appears to be a discussion upon the substance of the issue, I shall invite him to review it and comment.LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:47, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Mark, thank you for calming him down while I went to catch some badly needed sleep. And his argument notwithstanding, not many people know that Global Times is produced under auspices of the People's Daily (I, for one, didn't knew it until I check to verify it~!), itself being the party's direct mouthpeice to the masses as well as being under the direct supervision of the Propaganda Department of the Communist Party of China. The addition of this little known fact is to let the ordinary readers understand this and leave it to them to their discretion on how they would interpret it, this alone has everything to do with NPOV already. Is that really that hard to comprehend? Chris, I'd suggest you go read up on WP:LAME, I'm done talking to you. --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 07:30, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Manila situation

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Chrishmt0423. You have new messages at Sleetman's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

[edit] reference in Kobe Bryant – Shaquille O'Neal feud

Your edit added a reference to "Heisler, p.45", but p45 doesnt seem to match with any of the other Heisler references in the article to SI.com or LA Times. Did you mean to refer to a book (not already listed)? —Bagumba (talk) 05:34, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

I copied this from Los Angeles Lakers directly, so I don't know. I think it is a book.—Chris!c/t 05:39, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 18 April 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 05:41, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Manila hostage crisis

I'm writing to invite you back to a focussed discussion on Talk:Manila hostage crisis about the remark on Global Times. For now, I protected the article in the version before the edit war began. --Deryck C. 12:17, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Ill-feeling

Chris, there's no ill-feeling between us. I'm not going to hate you because of your politics...but i would say this in the future don't generalize people. I know that as a hong konger the manila crisis affects you deeply, but that's no excuse to go on stereotyping the philippine country. in fact, many people from the philippine condemned their government for how they handled the incident and many philippiners sent their condolence to the people of HK. Sleetman (talk) 01:03, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 25 April 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Chrishmt0423. You have new messages at Bagumba's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

[edit] WikiCup 2011 April newsletter

Round 2 of the 2011 WikiCup is over, and the new round will begin on 1 May. Note that any points scored in the interim (that is, for content promoted or reviews completed on 29-30 April) can be claimed in the next round, but please do not start updating your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. Fewer than a quarter of our original contestants remain; 32 enter round 3, and, in two months' time, only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. Scotland Casliber (submissions), who led Pool F, was our round champion, with 411 points, while 7 contestants scored between 200 and 300 points. At the other end of the scale, a score of 41 was high enough to reach round 3; more than five times the score required to reach round 2, and competition will no doubt become tighter now we're approaching the later rounds. Those progressing to round 3 were spread fairly evenly across the pools; 4 progressed from each of pools A, B, E and H, while 3 progressed from both pools C and F. Pools D and G were the most successful; each had 5 contestants advancing.

This round saw our first good topic points this year; congratulations to Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions) and Assyria Nergaal (submissions) who also led pool H and pool B respectively. However, there remain content types for which no points have yet been scored; featured sounds, featured portals and featured topics. In addition to prizes for leaderboard positions, the WikiCup awards other prizes; for instance, last year, a prize was awarded to Democratic Republic of the Congo Candlewicke (submissions) (who has been eliminated) for his work on In The News. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!

Sorry this newsletter is going out a little earlier than expected- there is a busy weekend coming up! A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 19:11, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Shaq/Kobe

Just FYI, it might take me a while to get to it. I have a long to-do list, and somewhat limited free time. Zagalejo^^^ 05:37, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

I started looking at the article, but I'm not sure how much I'll be able to do, since I don't own the Lazenby book. My initial thoughts are that the article will need a fair amount of work. It often feels like ideas were just kind of thrown together, will little sense of paragraph development. For example, take a look at the first paragraph of the "Origins" section. That one was hard for me to get through. We introduce the idea that O'Neal and Bryant "sparred" from the beginning, but at least one statement seems to contradict the thesis (ie, O'Neal putting his arm around Bryant after a tough night). Zagalejo^^^ 04:31, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Commanders

The commanders of the battles are listed not the commanders of the war. In any case Osama was not in any kind of authoritative position and was client of his bodyguards. Imagine if the Humvee of the President of the United States was ambushed in Iraq. Do you really think he would be barking commands at his troops? Or would his military escorts do most of the commanding? Marcus Qwertyus 22:13, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

No, that person in Osama's case or in your example is not the commander, just the leader.—Chris!c/t 22:18, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 2 May 2011

[edit] Death of Osama bin Laden conspiracy theories

Hello. I am preparing a talk page post. I humbly request your input or suggestions. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

[edit]

President Obama on Death of Osama bin Laden
President Obama on Death of Osama bin Laden.ogv
Your Featured sound candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured sound status, File:President Obama on Death of Osama bin Laden.ogv, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another sound, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. Guerillero | My Talk 02:26, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 9 May 2011

[edit] File:Osama bin Laden watching TV at his compound.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Osama bin Laden watching TV at his compound.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 22:59, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

[edit] File:Osama bin Laden making a video at his compound.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Osama bin Laden making a video at his compound.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 23:01, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 16 May 2011

[edit] Template:2011 NBA Playoffs

Does WP:OVERLINK still apply in the same way to templates? I see no problem with having the links appear more than once in the format it is in. Isn't the general purpose of the rule to keep excessive blue links off of a page for readability? This wouldn't affect readability. There are also different rules for links in tables; although, this is all part of one table. I re-added links, and reformatted them so they applied to teams instead of cities. Feel free to revert again after thinking about this post, I just didn't want to lose the work and need to re-change all of the links if we decided they were necessary. Ryan Vesey (talk) 20:15, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

As far as I know, WP:OVERLINK applies everywhere in the main space. The reason I removed is that since all the teams are already linked, it is redundant to link again. But you are right that the purpose of WP:OVERLINK is to maintain readability, which is not affected by linking in this case.—Chris!c/t 20:24, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Kobe Bryant

Shouldn't the Kobe Bryant article mention him when he made a song with Tyra Banks called "K.O.B.E."? WayneSlam 23:06, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 23 May 2011

[edit] Infobox colors for NBA coaches

I saw your edit to not have team colors in the infobox for Mike Brown (basketball, born 1970). Is there a particular mos that dictates this restriction? Personally, I find it more aesthetic to associate coaches with their affiliated team. Otherwise, Template:Infobox_NBA_biography/doc should be updated to explicitly say it shold not be used for non-players. —Bagumba (talk) 15:50, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

No MOS that dictates these project things. But the status quo has been like that since the infobox was used on coaches. I think it is confusing to have color on non-players.—Chris!c/t 19:15, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Watch the video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjNNqA72mEI

Clearly the source is incorrect. Are you going to believe the source (which is a second or third hand account) or your own eyes?

If you want to be a good wikipedian instead of a knob, why not remove the clearly erroneous source link and not just undo someone's effort to make things better? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.29.14.54 (talk) 02:24, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Well per Wikipedia policy, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true."—Chris!c/t 03:14, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Sigh, if I wanted to go through the rest of the policies, I imagine I could find one counseling editors to not be assholes. You *could* have watched the video, saw that the page was clearly incorrect and then *sourced it yourself*. Instead (presumably because you are lazy) you did the easiest thing possible - just hit the undo button. Well hooray for you - you saved wikipedia by being a complete ass.

How is this for a source, ass? http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1927833 In this article it specifically says that Artest "attacked" the man because he DID NOT PUNCH HIM - as every video of the incident CLEARLY shows. Further it says that Jackson punched the guy he did in retaliation for the second cup being throw at Artest. JUST LIKE I WROTE AND YOU REVERTED.

Now are you going to stop being lazy and FIX the article, or are you going to find some other rule that says it is ok to have clearly erroneous entries in the wikipedia? Hmmmm?

I have half a mind to call Artest's agent David Bauman and let him know that the wikipedia article is making false claims of felonious acts by his client - because that is what we are talking about here.

Isn't there a wiki rule that says that there is a higher standard of proof required when you are claiming a person committed a crime? Well? Hmmmm??

Well first, please stop your personal attack. If you continue, I will report you. You said "You *could* have watched the video, saw that the page was clearly incorrect and then *sourced it yourself*." This shows you don't understand policy. Wikipedia:No original research tells us that we can't use our own observation as reference, instead we use a reliable published source. And it is crazy how you twist words in the source. Attack basically means punching someone in this case since that is what they were all doing. Quoting the source you listed, it says "Indiana's Stephen Jackson joins his teammate in the seats and starts throwing punches." Jackson joined the fight, but was he punching someone in retaliation for the cup thrown at Artest? We don't know if that is true because the source doesn't say. Finally we based our content on reliable sources. Whether or not the claims are actually "true" is really irrelevant.—Chris!c/t 18:48, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
My "personal" attack on you is completely on target. You give aspergers a bad name. As for the source above, you are correct - it did not make my point and I don't know what I was thinking - I was reading another page and pasted the wrong one in there. So here you go: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/mark_montieth/11/19/brawl/index.html
I don't care whether your attack is on target. Wikipedia:No personal attacks forbids that.—Chris!c/t 19:38, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Is Sport Illustrated good enough for you? Quote: "Artest, contrary to common opinion, didn't hit the fan he thought had thrown the beer. He grabbed him, lost his balance and the two grabbed on to one another."

And your point about original research is completely misplaced - my point was that anyone looking at the video can clearly see that the article is wrong - therefore it would follow that finding a source that was not full of clearly wrong information would be a good idea. And then correcting of the text of the article. I'm guessing that you would rather "win" this argument and leave a article incorrect with libelous charges in it than you would having a nice correct article and admit you were using the rules for your own personal glorification and to subjugate others to your view of things.

Also, why does a "source" have to be words that someone else has written? Why can't a source be video? I'm guessing that there are MANY videos on wikipedia that are the "source" for a particular point - I'm further guessing that you don't care about any of these and are really just arguing this line because you will do literally anything not to lose this argument. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.29.14.54 (talk) 18:04, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Video could be used as source when nothing else is available. But it is hard to use them because video is opened to interpretations. Different people based on their own pov will have a different take or observation on the event (exactly what original research is), it is hard to have a neutral way to say what happen. Using worded sources is often better. Because it is no longer based on original research, but based on a reliable published source.—Chris!c/t 20:01, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Wow, just read my messages. I'M making legal threats? That tears it. I am calling David Bauman's office on Tuesday. You can explain to him and his lawyers about how important it is to retain libalous claims regarding his client because you are not allowed to watch a video - or are just too lazy to do anything but continue hitting "undo". I'm giving him YOUR name too. Have fun. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.29.14.54 (talk) 18:09, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Here is the link I originally meant to send (and what my previous comments were based on:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/09/sports/basketball/09brawl.html?_r=1&fta=y

Quote: "Artest was charged with assault and battery for knocking over a Pistons fan, Michael Ryan, who Gorcyca said Artest mistakenly believed had thrown the drink"

AND

Quote: "Stephen Jackson, who rushed into the stands and punched another fan, William Pawlson, in retaliation for throwing the beverage on Artest, will plead not guilty. Pawlson was charged with assault and battery."

I realize you will still find some reason to not read this and to go off on some other tangent.

You are simply in the wrong in your zeal to follow rules. I'm sure you have access to google. If you cared AT ALL about the integrity of wikipedia you would have found these sources yourself - but no, you get too much personal satisfaction from undoing peoples working and then pasting wikipedia rules to them. To me this is clearly about power for you - it would have taken so little effort for you to look at the article and make sure it was correct. But you went the other way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.29.14.54 (talk) 18:22, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

First of all, you made a legal threat in violation of Wikipedia:No legal threats. I will report you on that. Back to the issue, when you add something, the burden is on you to find references, not the other way around. With that said, the reference you listed there works now because it explains that Jackson punched someone in retaliation for the cup thrown at Artest. That could now be added.—Chris!c/t 19:29, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Ummm, why have you not fixed the article? You have admitted that you were COMPLETELY wrong in every possible way - either you care about the integrity of wikipedia or you don't. Which is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.209.249.23 (talk) 15:49, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
I think you need to familiarize yourself with these pages also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Don%27t_bite_the_newbies

"If a newcomer seems to have made a small mistake (e.g., forgetting to put book titles in italics), *try to correct it yourself*: do not slam the newcomer. Remember, this is a place where anyone may edit and therefore it is in every sense *each person's responsibility to edit, rather than to criticize or supervise others*."

See how that might apply to YOU? Or do the rules only apply to others? Hmmmmm?

"Begin by introducing yourself with a greeting on the user's talk page to let them know that they are welcome here, and present your corrections calmly and as a peer. If possible, point out things that they've done correctly or well."

Did YOU do that? Maybe that rule does not apply to you?

"9. Take responsibility for resolving conflicts."

Another rule that does not apply to you? See, you start quoting rules to support your completely wrong position and you open up a book of worms....

There is more stuff you cannot be bothered to apply to yourself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Libel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiBullying http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BLP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.209.249.23 (talk) 16:17, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

You didn't make a small mistake, you added large amount of content based mostly on your observation. I reverted and then gave you an explanation here why your edit is problematic per Wikipedia policies. But if you refuse to listen, then I can't help you. I don't have time to deal with someone who refuses to listen. Also, I already update the article with that info. I don't know why you say I haven't fix the article.
You need to read those rules you listed. Wikipedia:Libel/Wikipedia:BLP both apply. But I think it is you who is violating the policies. Wikipedia:Libel says "all information need to be referenced through the citation of reliable published sources, so as to maintain a standard of verifiability." This is what I told you earlier. Wikipedia:BLP says "All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." This is also what I told you earlier. And I can't believe you bring out Wikipedia:WikiBullying when you yourself is doing the bullying. Make no mistake, asking you to follow rules is not bullying.—Chris!c/t 17:36, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

—Chris!c/t


God, you are SO lazy: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4191/is_20060105/ai_n15992572/

"My attitude wasn't to go into the stands to hurt nobody," Jackson said Wednesday afternoon, a few hours before the Pacers played the Denver Nuggets. "My attitude was to help my teammate. It just happened to be a situation that I had to throw some punches."

Also, it seems that you are taking OWNERSHIP of this article - why are you not discussing this in the talk page before undoing people's work and re-adding information that may SMEAR a living person? Hmmmm? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.209.249.23 (talk) 18:12, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Peabrain moment on my part

Please ignore. Sorry. --NellieBly (talk) 19:44, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 30 May 2011

[edit] WikiCup 2011 May newsletter

Trophy.png

We're half way through round 3 of the 2011 WikiCup. There are currently 32 remaining in the competition, but only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. Scotland Casliber (submissions), of pool D, is our overall leader with nearly 200 points, while pools A, B and C are led by Texas Racepacket (submissions), Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions) and Saskatchewan Canada Hky (submissions) respectively. The score required to reach the next round is 35, though this will no doubt go up significantly as the round progresses. We have a good number of high scorers, but also a considerable number who are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. Also, an important note concerning nominations at featured article candidates: if you are nominating content for which you intend to claim WikiCup points, please make this clear in the nomination statement so that the FAC director and his delegates are aware of the fact.

A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:23, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

[edit] List of Los Angeles Lakers seasons

Regarding this, I just realized that the score has always been listed that way in the previous entries even though the Lakers lost the series. However, I think this is confusing and should be the other way around, and also consistent with some other teams' season articles. However, other seasons FLs (List of Chicago Bulls seasons, List of New York Knicks seasons, List of Los Angeles Clippers seasons) and List of Phoenix Suns seasons (currently FLC) had similar style with the Lakers article. Anyway, I've raised this issue on the Suns' FLC. — MT (talk) 05:24, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 6 June 2011

[edit] Main page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this list know that it will be appearing as the main page featured list on June 20, 2011. You can view the TFL blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured list/June 20, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors The Rambling Man (talk · contribs), Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) or Giants2008 (talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! ۞ Tbhotch™ & (ↄ), Problems with my English? 02:13, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Hillary Clinton, current Secretary of State

To date, there have been 25 female officers in the United States Cabinet. No woman held a Cabinet position before the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in 1920, which prohibits states and the federal government from denying any citizen the right to vote because of that citizen's sex. Frances Perkins was the first woman to serve in the Cabinet; she was appointed Secretary of Labor in 1933 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. In 1953, Oveta Culp Hobby became the second woman to serve in the Cabinet, when she was named head of the then newly formed Department of Health, Education, and Welfare in 1953. This department was subdivided into the departments of Education and Health and Human Services in 1979. Patricia Roberts Harris, who was Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare before the department split and had earlier served as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development in 1977, became the first female Secretary of Health and Human Services in 1979. Harris was also the first African American woman to serve in the Cabinet.

[edit] The Signpost: 13 June 2011

[edit] The Signpost: 20 June 2011

[edit] The Signpost: 27 June 2011

[edit] Celtics-Lakers rivalry

Thanks for your recent edits to Celtics-Lakers. However, I had to revert your recent fix to the history section. It created several grammatical errors. For instance, Championship Series is a proper noun (former name of NBA Finals) and should be capitalized; in several places it used the present tense to describe events in the past; it also attempts to fix links for things like Big Baby Davis to Glen Davis, but you'll see that the former links directly to the basketball player's page while the latter links to a disambiguation page.

Several of your edits were helpful. In particular, I appeared to use the conditional past tense in several places where regular past tense was more appropriate. Thanks for pointing that out. It just became difficult looking at that revert to see what was appropriate and what was not, so I thought maybe I'd bring this to your attention and we could start over from scratch.

Also, is it proper WP etiquette to only capitalize the first word of section headers? Typically speaking, words in title are all capitalized except for articles, coordinate conjunctions, and prepositions (unless they're the first word). Thanks! TempDog123 (talk) 20:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, sounds good. I'm sure many of your corrections were fine, but some of them were incorrect as I noted. It was hard for me to separate them out since you edited them together at the same time. If you do them individually instead of all at once then it should be easier to catch. Thanks! TempDog123 (talk) 01:59, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello again, I made a few minor corrections to your recent edits. Mostly grammar stuff, and I was very specific with my reasoning since you had asked about it before. Thanks for separating your edits by section, it made it much easier to proofread. Your edits helped improve the article. TempDog123 (talk) 04:58, 29 June 2011 (UTC)


Thanks again for your edits and cooperation. I recently nominated this article for GAN and it was failed by a reviewer. I responded to several of his concerns, but cannot deal with many others (such as finding sources) at the moment because I'm short on time. In reviewing his concerns, I noticed that you addressed some of them already with your recent edits. As such, I was hoping to maybe recruit your help in addressing his remaining concerns since you've made several helpful edits. You can review the GAN discussion here: Talk:Celtics–Lakers rivalry/GA1. TempDog123 (talk) 22:55, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Twitter as a source

There is no rule against using Twitter as a source. See discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Soxrock24#Twitter_as_a_reference and Wikipedia:TWITTER#Self-published_or_questionable_sources_as_sources_on_themselves in particular. You removed not only the reference but the content! I have not restored it because I don't want to engage in an edit war. And restoring the content without the reference will surely have someone come along and challenge it for being unsourced. Can you please restore the content and the reference?

If you can find a better reference than Keef's own words, by all means use it. Note that I original linked to http://www2.kusports.com/news/2010/dec/29/marcus-nickname-mook/ but that reference has his nickname misspelled so I also included the twitter link. Vroo (talk) 01:23, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. FWIW, you say Twitter is a "poor source" but sometimes a person's own words are the best possible source especially when it comes to something like how they spell their own name. Vroo (talk) 01:29, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

[edit] WikiCup 2011 June newsletter

Trophy.png

We are half way through 2011, and entering the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; the semi-finals are upon us! Points scored in the interim (29/30 June) may be counted towards next round, but please do not update your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. 16 contestants remain, and all have shown dedication to the project to reach this far. Our round leader was Scotland Casliber (submissions) who, among other things, successfully passed three articles through featured article candidates and claimed an impressive 29 articles at Did You Know, scoring 555 points. Casliber led pool D. Pool A was led by Ohio Wizardman (submissions), claiming points for a featured article, a featured list and seven good article reviews, while pool C was led by Norway Eisfbnore (submissions), who claimed for two good articles, ten articles at Did You Know and four good article reviews. They scored 154 and 118 respectively. Pool B was by far our most competitive pool; six of the eight competitors made it through to round 4, with all of them scoring over 100 points. The pool was led by Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions), who claimed for, among other things, three featured articles and five good articles. In addition to the four pool leaders, 12 others (the four second places, and the 8 next highest overall) make up our final 16. The lowest scorer who reached round 4 scored 76 points; a significant increase on the 41 needed to reach round 3. Eight of our semi-finalists scored at least twice as much as this.

No points were awarded this round for featured pictures, good topics or In the News, and no points have been awarded in the whole competition for featured topics, featured portals or featured sounds. Instead, the highest percentage of points has come from good articles. Featured articles, despite their high point cost, are low in number, and so, overall, share a comparable number of points with Did You Know, which are high in number but low in cost. A comparatively small but still considerable number of points come from featured lists and good article reviews, rounding out this round's overall scores.

We would again like to thank United Kingdom Jarry1250 (submissions) and Bavaria Stone (submissions) for invaluable background work, as well as all of those helping to provide reviews for the articles listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Please do keep using it, and please do help by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup.

Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here, for those interested, though it appears that neither are completely accurate at this time. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:28, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Re: List of career achievements by Kobe Bryant

My first edit was a mistake. I meant to edit his All Star appearances, which I did in my second edit (which you seem to have mistaken for me making the same edit twice). It doesn't make sense to say he had 11 consecutive appearances in the All-Star Games then say he missed the 2010 game. He was however, selected to play in all 11. --Ted87 (talk) 00:30, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Re: List of 2011–12 NBA season transactions

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Chrishmt0423. You have new messages at Martin tamb's talk page.
Message added 06:25, 3 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

[edit] Reversions to Ed Jew article

I spent a lot of time editing the Ed Jew article to tighten it, remove irrelevant information, and rework some awkwardly-written language. The previous version was very messy and difficult to understand. You undid all my changes with an unsupported accusation that "some changes introduce incorrect information." This is blatantly false - I introduced no new information whatsoever, only tightened/clarified information that was already there, all with proper citation. And the minor sentences I deleted were completely irrelevant to the article (such as procedural matters which were resolved years ago, or the fact that he has a brother).

While you're welcome to make changes to my edit, please don't "undo" my work again. It's rude. And please don't accuse others of fabricating information without providing specific examples. Thank you. 71.202.152.182 (talk) 17:02, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I want to say this again. Many of your rewriting was excellent and I did restore them. So I wasn't removing everything you did. The undo is simply a Wikipedia process that allows me to revert the edit. I did not mean to offend you. Please discuss if you still think the current state of the article is poor and hopefully we can work together. Please do not revert if you disagree. Just tell me and I can help. It is quite easy to restore an edit or parts of an edit from the page history. Thanks.—Chris!c/t 20:00, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
(This was my initial response and it sounded less polite. So I make any another above this one.) Well, you removed several large sections in your edit without any discussion. And that is rude. And undoing such an edit is certainly reasonable given that I spent tons of time writing this article. With that said, you did some good work rewriting it and I have restored some of that. So, I didn't remove all your change. As for introducing incorrect information. I did see incorrect information in your edit. Here is an example. you changed "Jew said that he had referred the owners of a chain tapioca drink shop, Quickly, to a man named Robert Chan from land use consulting firm, Bridge Consulting, to resolve tea shop's permit issues." to "Jew had been contacted by the owners of a local chain tapioca drink shop, Quickly, to resolve Quickly's business permit issues." You change is wrong because Jew was not contacted by the owners of Quickly. It was the other way around. Jew approached the owners of Quickly. And this is just one. As for removing irrelevant info. I disagree. Procedural matters are very relevant since it gives readers great detail about his case. Just because they were resolved doesn't mean they were irrelevant. The fact that he has a brother is relevant as this is info on his family and his personal life. So you're welcome to make changes but removing large sections without justification (my work, by the way) is not okay.—Chris!c/t 19:29, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 4 July 2011

[edit] The Signpost: 11 July 2011

[edit] The Signpost: 18 July 2011

[edit] List of stutterers

Thanks for reviewing. I've replaced the refs you mentioned. Please see my response. Thanks. PumpkinSky talk 01:31, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Can you look this over and comment again? Thanks. PumpkinSky talk 10:40, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Galatasaray and Besiktas men's basketball team

Hey Chris, maybe you want to weigh in on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Basketball#Basketball team_naming convention. I've always thought adding men's basketball team into a professional team's name sounds really weird, and I believe that you might think that as well when you requested the page move. —— MT (talk) 06:50, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 25 July 2011

[edit] WikiCup 2011 July newsletter

Trophy.png

We are half way through the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; there is less than a month to go before we have our final 8. Our pool leaders are New Zealand Adabow (submissions) (Pool A, 189 points) and Russia PresN (submissions) (Pool B, 165 points). The number of points required to reach the next round is not clear at this time; there are some users who still do not have any recorded points. Please remember to update your submissions' pages promptly. In addition, congratulations to PresN, who scored the first featured topic points in the competition for his work on Thatgamecompany related articles. Most points this round generally have, so far, come from good articles, with only one featured article (White-bellied Sea Eagle, from Scotland Casliber (submissions)) and two featured lists (Hugo Award for Best Graphic Story, from PresN and Grammy Award for Best Native American Music Album, from Flag of Portland, Oregon.svg Another Believer (submissions)). Points for Did You Know and good article reviews round out the scoring. No points have been awarded for In the News, good topics or featured pictures this round, and no points for featured sounds or portals have been awarded in the entire competition. On an unrelated note, preparation will be beginning soon for next year's WikiCup- watch this space!

There is little else to be said beyond the usual. Please list anything you need reviewing on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, so others following the WikiCup can help, and please do help if you can by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup- points are, of course, offered for reviews at GAC. Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 11:25, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 01 August 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:33, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 08 August 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:05, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Hong Kong meetup

You're invited to the next Hong Kong meetup on 19 August in Think Cafe, Causeway Bay. Please sign up to the meetup on the meta meetup page. Hope to see you there! Deryck C. 16:10, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards and prizes

Please be advised of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards and prizes.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:57, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 15 August 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 08:29, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 22 August 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:21, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 29 August 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 07:49, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

[edit] MfD nomination of Portal:National Basketball Association

Portal:National Basketball Association, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:National Basketball Association and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:National Basketball Association during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 00:52, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

[edit] WikiCup 2011 July newsletter

Trophy.png

The finals are upon us; we're down to the last few. One of the eight remaining contestants will be this year's WikiCup champion! 150 was the score needed to progress to the final; just under double the 76 required to reach round 4, and more than triple the 41 required to reach round 3. Our eight finalists are:

  • Scotland Casliber (submissions), Pool A's winner. Casliber has the highest total score in the competition, with 1528, the bulk of which is made up of 8 featured articles. He has the highest number of total featured articles (8, 1 of which was eligible for double points) and total did you knows (72) of any finalist. Casliber writes mostly on biology, including ornithology, botany and mycology.
  • Russia PresN (submissions), Pool B's winner and the highest scorer this round. PresN is the only finalist who has scored featured topic points, and he has gathered an impressive 330, but most of his points come from his 4 featured articles, one of which scored double. PresN writes mostly on video games and the Hugo Awards.
  • Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions), Pool A's runner-up. Hurricanehink's points are mostly from his 30 good articles, more than any other finalist, and he is also the only finalist to score good topic points. Hurricanehink, as his name suggests, writes mostly on meteorology.
  • Ohio Wizardman (submissions), Pool B's runner-up. Wizardman has completed 86 good article reviews, more than any other finalist, but most of his points come from his 2 featured articles. Wizardman writes mostly on American sport, especially baseball.
  • Principality of Sealand Miyagawa (submissions), the "fastest loser" (Pool A). Miyagawa has written 3 featured lists, one of which was awarded double points, more than any other finalist, but he was awarded points mostly for his 68 did you knows. Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, including dogs, military history and sport.
  • Canada Resolute (submissions), the second "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Resolute's points come from his 9 good articles. He writes mostly on Canadian topics, including ice hockey.
  • Greece Yellow Evan (submissions), who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool A). Most of Evan's points come from his 10 good articles, and he writes mostly on meteorology.
  • Australia Sp33dyphil (submissions), who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Phil's points come from his 9 good articles, 4 of which (more than any other finalist) were eligible for double points. He writes mostly on aeronautics.

We say goodbye to our seven other semi-finalists, Flag of Portland, Oregon.svg Another Believer (submissions), Poland Piotrus (submissions), United Kingdom Grandiose (submissions), Bavaria Stone (submissions), Norway Eisfbnore (submissions), Saskatchewan Canada Hky (submissions) and Wisconsin MuZemike (submissions). Everyone still in the competition at this stage has done fantastically well, and contributed greatly to Wikipedia. We're on the home straight now, and we will know our winner in two months.

In other news, preparations for next year's competition have begun with a brainstorming thread. Please, feel free to drop by and share any thoughts you have about how the competition should work next year. Sign ups are not yet open, but will be opened in due course. Watch this space. Further, there has been a discussion about the rule whereby those in the WikiCup must delcare their participation when nominating articles at featured article candidates. This has resulted in a bot being created by new featured article delegate Ucucha (talk · contribs). The bot will leave a message on FAC pages if the nominator is a participant in the WikiCup.

A reminder of the rules: any points scored after August 29 may be claimed for the final round, and please remember to update submission pages promptly. If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:54, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

[edit] List of Chicago Bulls seasons

Just letting you know that I gave this list that you worked on a review at Wikipedia:Today's featured list/submissions. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 19:30, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 05 September 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:34, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 12 September 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:15, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 19 September 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:24, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Thank You!

Thank you Chris for your advice. I really appreciate that GDGS (talk) 04:55, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 26 September 2011


Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:01, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

[edit] WikiCup 2011 September newsletter

Trophy.png

We are on this year's home straight, with less than a month to go until the winner of the 2011 WikiCup will be decided. The fight for first place is currently being contested by Principality of Sealand Miyagawa (submissions), Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions) and Australia Sp33dyphil (submissions), all of whom have over 200 points. This round has already seen multiple featured articles (1991 Atlantic hurricane season from Hurricanehink and Northrop YF-23 from Sp33dyphil) and a double-scoring featured list (Miyagawa's 1948 Summer Olympics medal table). The scores will likely increase far further before the end of the round on October 31 as everyone ups their pace. There is not much more to say- thoughts about next year's competition are welcome on the WikiCup talk page or the scoring talk page, and signups will open once a few things have been sorted out.

If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 12:30, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 3 October 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 04:53, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] NBA lockout

Can you have comment at Talk:2011 NBA lockout#Players impacted by insurance? Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 03:47, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] WP:CBBALL discussion

Before making wholesale changes on certain types of navboxes at WikiProject College Basketball, we'd like to get some other editors' feedback. If you feel so inclined, there's a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College Basketball#College basketball program navboxes - standards which could use some input from editors such as yourself. Thanks. Jrcla2 (talk) 01:46, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 10 October 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:10, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Help with Chinese?

Maybe you could help. I'm a little confused about which Zhejiang team J. R. Smith plays for. Asia-Basket lists him with the Zhejiang Lions, but it was originally reported that he had signed with the Zhejiang Chouzou team. (He's even pictured on what I think is their official website.) Do you know anything more about this stuff? Thanks. Zagalejo^^^ 04:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

This says he signed with Zhejiang Golden Bulls, which is called Zhejiang Chouzou. Their record matches. Zhejiang Lions is a different team.—Chris!c/t 05:13, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Cool, thanks for the reply. Zagalejo^^^ 05:31, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Oddly, this recent Denver Post article says that Smith is a member of Zhejiang Guangsha, who are the Lions. I wonder if Smith originally signed with the Golden Bulls, but then ended up with the Lions to replace Earl Clark, who left for family reasons. Maybe I'll post something to the NBA project page. Zagalejo^^^ 06:03, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 17 October 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:03, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] New Page Patrol survey

NPPbarnstar.jpg

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Chrishmt0423! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

[edit] The Signpost: 24 October 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:18, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] WikiCup 2011 October newsletter

Trophy.png

The 2011 WikiCup is now over, and our new champion is Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions), who joins the exclusive club of the previous winners: Dreamafter (2007), jj137 (2008), Durova (2009) and Sturmvogel_66 (2010). The final standings were as follows:

  1. Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions)
  2. Australia Sp33dyphil (submissions)
  3. Greece Yellow Evan (submissions)
  4. Principality of Sealand Miyagawa (submissions)
  5. Ohio Wizardman (submissions)
  6. Scotland Casliber (submissions)
  7. Canada Resolute (submissions)
  8. Russia PresN (submissions)

Prizes for first, second, third and fourth will be awarded, as will prizes for all those who reached the final eight. Every participant who scored in the competition will receive a ribbon of participation. In addition to the prizes based on placement, the following special prizes will be awarded based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, the prize is awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round.

No prize was awarded for featured pictures, sounds or portals, as none were claimed throughout the competition. The awards will be handed out over the next few days. Congratulations to all our participants, and especially our winners; we've all had fun, and Wikipedia has benefitted massively from our content work.

Preparation for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Interested parties are invited to sign up and participate in our straw polls. It's been a pleasure to work with you all this year, and, whoever's taking part in and running the competition in 2012, we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn and The ed17 00:34, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 31 October 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 16:59, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 7 November2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 12:03, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 14 November 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:13, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 21 November 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:33, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 28 November 2011

[edit] The Signpost: 05 December 2011

[edit] cHRIS PAUL

He's a Laker. It's all over ESPN. I included a source. KING GRIM LOL YO WHATS UP (talk) 00:03, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

They JUST SAID it's official. ESPN NEVER acknowledges moves as OFFICIAL UNTIL they actually are. He's a Laker. I'll hit you up tomorrow and clown. GO LAKERS KING GRIM LOL YO WHATS UP (talk) 00:06, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 12 December 2011

[edit] Nomination for deletion of Template:NBA labeled map 2

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:NBA labeled map 2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Bulwersator (talk) 23:24, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 19 December 2011

[edit] The Signpost: 26 December 2011

[edit] 2012 WikiCup

Hi! As you've previously expressed interest in the competition, I'm just letting you know that the 2012 WikiCup is due to start in less than 24 hours. Signups are open, and will remain so for a few weeks after the beginning of the competition. The competition itself will follow basically the same format as last year, with a few small tweaks to point costs to reflect the opinions of the community. If you're interested in taking part, you're more than welcome, and if you know anyone who might be, please let them know too- the more the merrier! To join, simply add your name to Wikipedia:WikiCup/2012 signups, and we will be in touch. Please feel free to direct any questions to me, or leave a note on the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! You are receiving this note as you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Please feel free to add or remove yourself. J Milburn (talk) 01:42, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Knicks task force

Please accept this invitation to join the Knicks Task Force of the WikiProject National Basketball Association.
It is dedicated to improving all articles associated with the New York Knicks. Simply click here to accept!
NYCRuss ☎ 19:09, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 02 January 2012

[edit] No "A" in Naismith

I do not have the skills to edit Wikipedia articles but have noticed that you have posted on the bio of Dr. James Naismith. On his bio it has his name listed as Dr. James A. Naismith. He never did have the middle initial “A” as attested to by several of the Naismith clan – including one of his daughter's now passed away - who this writer had talked to in the past. Theory is that it was a clerical error in a publication and the good Dr. Naismith never went about in correcting it. I have had the factual error corrected in countless publications and other encyclopedias over the last 25 years. The Basketball Hall of Fame also agrees with the historical importance and that he did not or ever adopt the middle initial A. at anytime. Britannica said they will be changing the info also. Problem is when I change it on Wikipedia it keeps going back to original mistake.

Curtis J. Phillips Basketball Historian — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.65.73.112 (talk) 01:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] San Francisco meetup at WMF headquarters

Hi Chrishmt0423,

I just wanted to give you a heads-up about the next wiki-meetup happening in SF. It'll be located at our very own Wikimedia Foundation offices, and we'd love it if some local editors who are new to the meetup scene came and got some free lunch with us :) Please sign up on the meetup page if you're interested in attending, and I hope to see you soon! Maryana (WMF) (talk) 22:50, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 09 January 2012

[edit] The Signpost: 16 January 2012

[edit] The Signpost: 23 January 2012

[edit] The Signpost: 30 January 2012

[edit] WikiCup 2012 January newsletter

Trophy.png

WikiCup 2012 is off to a flying start. At the time of writing, we have 112 contestants; comparable to last year, but slightly fewer than 2010. Signups will remain open for another week, after which time they will be closed for this year. Our currrent far-away leader is Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions), due mostly to his work on a slew of good articles about The X-Files; there remain many such articles waiting to be reviewed at good article candidates. Second place is currently held by Minnesota Ruby2010 (submissions), whose points come mostly from good articles about television episodes, although good article reviews, did you knows and an article about a baroness round out the score. In third place is Mauritius Jivesh boodhun (submissions), who has scored 200 points for his work on a single featured article, as well as points for work on others, mostly in the area of pop music. In all, nine users have 100 or more points. However, at the other end of the scale, there are still dozens of participants who are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly!

The 64 highest scoring participants will advance to round 2 in a month's time. There, they will be split into eight random groups of eight. The score needed to reach the next round is not at all clear; last year, 8 points guaranteed a place. The year before, 20.

A few participants and their work warrant a mention for achieving "firsts" in this competition.

  • Florida 12george1 (submissions) was the first to score, with his good article review of Illinois v. McArthur.
  • Florida 12george1 (submissions) was also the first to score points for an article, thanks to his work on Hurricane Debby (1982)- now a good article. Tropical storms have featured heavily in the Cup, and good articles currently have a relatively fast turnaround time for reviews.
  • Russia Sp33dyphil (submissions) was the first to score points for a did you know, with Russian submarine K-114 Tula. Military history is another subject which has seen a lot of Cup activity.
  • Russia Sp33dyphil (submissions) is also the first person to successfully claim bonus points. Terminator 2: Judgment Day is now a good article, and was eligible for bonus points because the subject was covered on more than 20 other Wikipedias at the start of the competition. It is fantastic to see bonus points being claimed so early!
  • Byzantine Empire Speciate (submissions) was the first to score points for an In the News entry, with Paedophryne amauensis. The lead image from the article was also used on the main page for a time, and it's certainly eye-catching!
  • Mauritius Jivesh boodhun (submissions) was the first to score points for a featured article, and is, at the moment, the only competitor to claim for one. The article, "Halo" (Beyoncé Knowles song), was also worth double points because of its wide coverage. While this is an article that Jivesh and others have worked on for some time, it is undeniable that he has put considerable work into it this year, pushing it over the edge.

We are yet to see any featured lists, featured topics or good topics, but this is unsurprising; firstly, the nomination processes with each of these can take some time, and, secondly, it can take a considerable amount of time to work content to this level. In a similar vein, we have seen only one featured article. The requirement that content must have been worked on this year to be eligible means that we did not expect to see these at the start of the competition. No points have been claimed for featured portals or pictures, but these are not content types which are often claimed; the former has never made a big impact on the WikiCup, while the latter has not done so since 2009's competition.

A quick rules clarification before the regular notices: If you are concerned that another user is claiming points inappropriately, please contact a judge to take a look at the article. Competitors policing one another can create a bad atmosphere, and may lead to inconsistencies and mistakes. Rest assured that we, the judges, are making an effort to check submissions, but it is possible that we will miss something. On a loosely related note: If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] The Signpost: 06 February 2012

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Chrishmt0423&oldid=475662891"
Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
Interaction
Toolbox
Print/export