User talk:Buster7

Tip of the day...

Acronyms and initialisms

Do you need to know what an acronym or initialism stands for? See Wikipedia's List of acronyms and initialisms.

Prior tip – Tips library – Next tip

Read more:

Category:Acronyms  

Become a Wikipedia tipster

To add this auto-updating template to your user page, use {{totd}}

This biscuit is an Orphan. No other biscuits link to it!

quote

This project does not exist to help editors grow a thicker skin. Our mission is to build an encyclopedia, not establish limits for low-level abuse that we think our volunteer editors should be willing to suffer. If we drive away more people than we attract, then it's a genuine loss to the project and we should fix it rather than label those who would prefer to work in a civil environment as "thin skinned." -- User:Cool Hand Luke [2]

Talkback

Hello, Buster7. You have new messages at OlEnglish's talk page.
Message added 14:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

RE:Bulls

I added the player stats for a few of my favorite teams (Suns, Thunder, Bulls), I update most all of the game logs, keeping up on the player stats and the team records on the team season pages take a little too much time.

If you wanna update the records and the Bulls that'd be cool. The Bulls stats are on here (http://www.nba.com/bulls/stats/). It's not updated until the day after the latest game. Just go down to the player stats section on the page, update the numbers in each column. Whoever's leading the category, paste that code (style="background:black;color:#d40026;" |) in front of the number to highlight it. PDTantisocial (talk) 21:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Some tips

Although I haven't done any significant editing to the Bulls page, I have it on my watchlist, and wanted to make sure you were aware not to repeat links that have already appeared in an article. In articles on sports team people will frequently add new info to an article and link a team's name even though it has been linked several times before. We're having this problem on the Lakers article we're getting ready for FAC over at the NBA WikiProject. Also the first time something appears, its full name should be used like with the Memphis Grizzlies link you added which was not in the article. Sometimes I fudge on this rule if there if I have to abbreviate for the sake of prose but its supposed to be avoided. Don't take this the wrong way, I just noticed that I did it a ton of duplicate wikilinking myself on Hakeem Olajuwon when I edited it long ago, and recently had to remove a ton of those dupes. AaronY (talk) 11:09, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

You can link if they are very far apart, but I've found its best to do it infrequently because editors will complain about it if the article ever gets nominated for anything. Thanks for understanding.

Incidentally, its great that you're working to make the article more accessible to the general reader, I find that a lot of editors forget that someone besides a fan of the topic might want to read their article, and that annoys me too. I've recently been trying to write sports articles that can be understood clearly by anyone in the first take. Like Kermit Washington for instance, which I wrote like more of a character piece than a basketball card. AaronY (talk) 15:09, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Our discussion reminds me of something. You can probably tell--I'm a Bulls fan. So, I know who Jerry Krause is. His mention within the article is an example of a "courtesy link". While reading the article prior to editing I noticed that it had that common flaw that sometimes happens. Krause is mentioned,linked...mentioned a few more times,no links....no prob....but then,way down the line,after quite a bit of reading,his name surfaces again. At this point he could be linked, again, as a courtesy to our unfamiliar reader. Anyway, nice to meet ya!Buster7 (talk) 15:36, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

RE:NBA

No worries, I just wait until all the games in the conference/division are over to update the whole thing. PDTantisocial (talk) 06:29, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Sarah P

Yeah. My post did end up in a not quite perfect spot, but I think I got a reply, so don't worry about it.

I'm giving up on that discussion now. Maybe it's the intensity of party politics in the USA, but it's incredibly frustrating when so many "replies" don't actually address anything I've said. It's like two sides arguing two entirely issues, but in the one place, and never really paying attention to what the other posters say. Ah well, I'll just watch for a while. Maybe it will all become clear in time. HiLo48 (talk) 21:58, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

What may become clear is that it is a tactic that politicizes (and polarizes) any discussion over there. It definitely leads to disfunctional conversations that are hard to follow and harder to participate in. Actually, its the main reason that I wanted to clarify who you were responding to while the entry was still fresh. I wanted to be sure in order to prevent later problems. The constant polarization often leads astray the simplest of developing editor interplay. Buster Seven Talk 23:04, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm pretty frustrated with the attempts to shut down discussion. It doesn't matter what the consensus was two years ago, if there really was one at all. What matters is that we need to be able to raise issues, have them directly addressed, and not be bullied into silence. Dylan Flaherty 07:44, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

My effort was to remove one of the roadblocks to that discussion. What was being presented as a prior definite line in the sand was nothing of the kind. Some Palin supporters were referring to prior Africa archive discussions as tho they were happening every few weeks for the past few years...as tho there was a wall of words written in stone. When I went to look, it turned out they were written on a bar napkin! As to being bullied into silence, well, I won't disagree that it is one of the prime tactics used against all "less-than-agreeable" entries. But that is the battlefield you have chosen. I support ALL efforts to level the playing field at SP. Your stand for inclusion is valid. It's getting it past the guards that is the problem.Buster Seven Talk 15:05, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Buster7. You have new messages at WP:Help desk.
Message added 07:07, 17 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your query

Further to your query, here is a link to Wikipedia policy on WP:Dispute resolution. I have not looked into whether you have supported or opposed Dylan Flaherty's edits. However you should follow the procedures set out under policy which you will find helpful in resolving disputes. TFD (talk) 23:34, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Article probation

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Sarah Palin, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Talk:Sarah Palin/Article probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. -- Kelly ^hi! 21:09, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Apologies for the template...but just a reminder, debate gets heated at that talk page, and it's more important than usual to ensure that you are polite and don't make things personal, otherwise a huge flamewar erupts and wastes everyone's time. I'm talking about your comments in this section. Kelly ^hi! 21:09, 18 December 2010 (UTC)