User talk:Go Phightins!

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60

This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by when more than 10 sections are present.

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Welcome!

Hello, Go Phightins!, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Talkback

Hello, Go Phightins!. You have new messages at 69.155.139.90's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Episcopal School of Dallas

Hi! I waited until the kiddies went to bed and rewrote the controversy section, removing the names and shortening it considerably. Hope that looks better to you. Happy editing! Gtwfan52 (talk) 05:46, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, it's better than it was. Thanks--Go Phightins! (talk) 14:48, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion contested: Importance of dress code at workplace

Hello Go Phightins!. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Importance of dress code at workplace, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not blatantly vandalism or a hoax. Thank you. →Σ σ ς. 01:00, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Davidson

Thanks for getting involved with the Bob Davidson article, it's good to see another editor take an interest in an umpire page. If you'd like to officially join the task force, that would be great! Of course, you don't have too and it really has little to no effect on your editing in general. With regards to our conversation on my talk page, I am leaning towards accepting your offer, perhaps in about a month. However, I might try to get advice from some other editors on whether or not running for adminship at six months could be harmful to a future RfA. AutomaticStrikeout 03:35, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All right, it's up to you, I just think you'd be good for it. Go Phightins! (talk) 03:37, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And no problem on the Davidson article. I'm one of those strange people who, when there are multiple non-Phillies games on, chooses which ever one has the plate ump I like the most. Go Phightins! (talk) 03:41, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. Most people don't even know most of the umps (I do). I enjoy the ejections. Btw, there have been no MLB ejections this week. AutomaticStrikeout 03:44, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Really? That's interesting. Anyway, I'm going to turn in. I wouldn't want to fall asleep in church tomorrow. Go Phightins! (talk) 03:46, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, getting your sleep in now is a much better idea. AutomaticStrikeout 03:58, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for the warm welcome! I am excited to start editing on Wikipedia. I've read many articles but I decided it was time to jump in and contribute as well. Happy editing to you! Tucsontammy (talk) 03:48, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Let me know if you have any questions. Go Phightins! (talk) 03:49, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do have a quick question. As I have been adding some references to articles, each time I add a link to an outside source (i.e. a newspaper article), Wikipedia asks me to type in some words to show that I'm not spamming the article. Is there something wrong with the links I'm adding (they are to online newspapers, so I don't think they are inappropriate)? After awhile, if Wikipedia sees that my edits are not indeed spam, will I not be required to type these words in anymore? Thank you for your help. Tucsontammy (talk) 18:13, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I have never had that happen to me. Are you adding the newspapers as citations or external links? Go Phightins! (talk) 18:15, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Municipality of Ashfield

The page Municipality of Ashfield is inaccurate and its content under controversies can not be verified. Please delete it or verify its accuracy. Please do not undo my deletes they are justified and correct in the procedure wiki suggests.

There are no reputable sources that verify any of what has been entered into controversies.

This is a blatant personal attack on one person. Why are there no other matters canvased. The author of the page has a personal grudge on Nick Adams. It does nothing for the reputation of Wikipedia to sponsor and support such attacks.

Why should I help destroy someones reputation. The author has a personal vendetta against Nick Adams. There have been many other controversies at the council. Why have these matters not been mentioned? Please do no support or harbor vindictive attacks on Wikipedia!! Delete controversies or mention them all. Do not be selective. It reduces Wikipedia's reputation to do so.Thankyou.

Please delete the section, if you can not verify it. It is vexatious and a deliberate attempt to sully the reputation of a person.Macashfield (talk) 06:00, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by your username, I'm guessing you're in affiliation with the municipality, which means you shouldn't be deleting anything for the sole purpose that it reflects poorly on the municipality. The content in question is referenced, so I'm not sure why you're arguing to the contrary. Go Phightins! (talk) 12:19, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

please do not treat me as a moron. Every link in the controversies section is dead. Have you verified the references? I have not been able to, even though I have tried exhaustively. Please take down the content that you or anyone else can not verify,Macashfield (talk) 12:31, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just re-read the section and there are three references which clearly substantiate the content in question. I'm not sure why you feel I'm treating you like a "moron". If I thought you weren't acting in good faith I probably would have ignored your posts and reported you to WP:AIV. I have no doubt that you question the content's legitimacy, but it is sourced and therefore will stay unless you or some one else provide contradictory sources. Thanks. Go Phightins! (talk) 15:59, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have already told the user many times that there three sources to back it up. But anyways it seems that another user has removed the information on the article with his edit summary saying weakly sourced negative material per WP:BLP. But I'll kept it that way, since it isn't 100% sourced. --Webclient101 (talk) 16:53, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think 3 sources is clearly enough to substantiate content of that nature...Go Phightins! (talk) 17:11, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Macashfield (talk) 20:06, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Downdate (q1)

How do you add a new section? You can do it on a talk page but I can't seem to do it on any other ones. - Downdate —Preceding undated comment added 02:15, 1 October 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Hi and welcome to Wikipedia. To create a new section in an article (or anywhere else) you type 2 equals signs, what you want the name of the section to be, and then two more equals signs. Go Phightins! (talk) 02:18, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I thought a section was something different. I already know how to do it. Note: I just figured out how to do referencing. Thanks for your help. - Downdate (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:21, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

For willingness to accept contrary evidence at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pontus Schultz.

Stuartyeates (talk) 02:26, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, not a huge fan of any animals, but it's the thought that counts. As I say on my user page, I make tons of mistakes, but when there are 17.5 million other editors around, a few are bound to find them and correct them as you did on that page. Go Phightins! (talk) 02:28, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for creation/Monda Market

Hi Phightins

The references given for this article are from two of India's most reputable newspapers. Its surprising you could not notice it. In case you are familiar with India you must be knowing that The Hindu and Times of India are India's two most reputed newspapers whose link incidentally is given in this article.

Regarding notability, let me introduce to you a city known as Hyderabad which happens to be the fifth largest city in India. Monda Market happens to be the oldest market in this city which was established more than 100 years ago.

I hope this clarifies your querries. An article of this size does not require any more references or the size of references will be bigger than the article itself.

For any further querries you can search the net regarding this market.

Regards

Sarvagyana guru (talk) 13:43, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I had to dig to find this article...it appears I felt that the sources didn't meet WP:GNG. I looked it up at the time and saw only the two sources listed in the article. I guess I'll move this to article space and allow it to go through AFD if someone objects. Thanks for dropping me the note. Go Phightins! (talk) 19:06, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your input into "Alan Ruddock" entry..follow-up question?

Hi Phightins,

Appreciate your insights re the Alan Ruddock entry- it's been very educational about how to proceed etc. I misinterpreted your 'nomination withdrawn' message from yesterday (on the at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page) as implying that the "proposed deletion' box should now be removed ..but just got a bot issued: "level 1 warning about removing AfD template from articles before the discussion is complete."....

> Do you know if I get some sort of notification etc as to when such a deletion is appropriate etc?

Many thanks again! ( ps your Nittany Lions stuff suggest you may located close to me ;-> ) NortSide505 (talk) 18:54, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The reason that you were warned was because you didn't close the AFD and I should've been more clear in my comment on the AFD discussion and closed it then and there. I've taken care of it. Thanks for your hard work and keep up the good work. Go Phightins! (talk) 19:09, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

2012 Carolina Panthers season (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Michael Turner and Greg Olsen

2012 Baltimore Ravens season (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Greg Little

2012 Houston Texans season (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to James Casey

2012 Tennessee Titans season (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to James Casey

Clete Blakeman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Attorney

Kyle Carter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to William Penn High School

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:59, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Mark Pegg (actor); Second Samoan Civil War; 1994 Minnesota Vikings season; 1963 Oakland Raiders season; Wilmer Flores; Gamlingay Meadows; 1977 New York Jets season; Peter Byck; Elvin Ramírez; Southern Oregon; Hordern Pavilion; The Pitmen Painters; 1983 New York Jets season; Jamie Fenton; Sedgwick Museum of Earth Sciences; 1980 Green Bay Packers season; The Man of the Year (2003 film); 1990 Chicago Bears season; 1977 Chicago Bears season

Cleanup: Tim Lincecum; Yakitori; Francisco Liriano
Merge: List of NFL nicknames; Discovery and development of proton pump inhibitors; Watch phone
Add Sources: 2010 San Diego Chargers season; Somers High School (Connecticut); 2011 Duke Blue Devils football team
Wikify: Lufkin Road Middle School; Culver City Police Department; Laura Kaczor
Expand: Gauhar Raza; Two and a Half Men; Westboro Baptist Church

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:31, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Message

Hello phightins.

I have a question - we are a company with a wikipedia page. Seems that some unknown user has been adding malicious and incorrect information to the page. We attempt to edit it out, but it automatically reappears within minutes.

This username was the source of the change.

What can we do to remedy this problem.

Busynoise2 (talk) 02:39, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you the owner of Sun-Mar? Go Phightins! (talk) 02:41, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Go Phightins!

Yes I am. I can be reached at mark@sun-mar.com. Would also like to determine who is adding the malicious content. Some of this information is confidential and possibly damaging to the company. We have suspicions but would like to confirm the identity. How do we do this.

Busynoise2 (talk) 03:29, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What specific confidential, damaging information is being added to the article? Go Phightins! (talk) 10:29, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Go Phightins!. You have new messages at Bagumba's talk page.
Message added 23:43, 5 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

—Bagumba (talk) 23:43, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2012 Penn State Football Team Game Notes

Hello, I am the person whose edits you recently made revisions to. Firstly, let me thank you for cleaning up my game summary. That was messy and your help is greatly appreciated. I am writing to you concerning the revert from a line score back to a semi-box score. I understand that while this format is often used on many pages, it has not historically been used on college football pages. For a more common style, please see 2002 Ohio State Buckeyes football team page. Just thought I would let you know. --98.179.165.213 (talk) 02:24, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for dropping by. Previously, there'd just been a blurb and the linescore, without any scoring summary or statistical leaders. If you look at my editing history, you'll see that I work on a lot of NFL team pages and update their box scores, so I thought that that might work for the PSU page. In consultation with another editor who has significantly contributed to the page, I made this box. If you have further concerns regarding this type of layout for information, we can discuss it on the article's talk page. Thanks--Go Phightins! (talk) 02:28, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TBBT

The fact that Raj stated he liked messing up wikipedia articles aint relevant is your opinion. If the fact that he once bought a wand from ebay is in there, I think that the fact that he stated he messed up Wikipedia articles is more relevant, even more so on Wikipedia. But whateva, It ain worth crying about.Markdarrly (talk) 18:19, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BRD enforcer

I've drafted out the proposal at User:Betty Logan/BRD enforcer#"Request for stable state" project proposal. Hopefully I've addressed any concerns people had, and this is the version that will go before the Wikiproject proposal committee. It's been streamlined a bit to focus on operation and the name has been changed, but other than that it's doing the same job. Anyway, this is a message I'm dropping on everyone's page so they can check it out and make sure they are ok with it. Betty Logan (talk) 22:59, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not sure I understand this from a logistical standpoint. An editor makes a request for BRD "protection". What happens next? Does a BRD enforcer come by and physically do something to "protect" the page while a discussion occurs so that only some edits can be made to it, or does this just become a policy so that if it's not adhered to, there are ramifications such as blocking that could occur. I guess I just need some more explanation from a technical, logistical standpoint? I think the policy is written overly-broadly in the latest revision and needs more specifics. Thanks--Go Phightins! (talk) 01:08, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The page isn't protected, it is basically reverted to the stable version by another editor. If you are faced by an IP who keeps trying to push through an edit, they probably have no vested interest in not violating 3RR, so the idea is that it protects editors (especially regular ones) from a 3RR/edit-warring incursion when faced by a single POV pusher. This has two goals: hopefully the editor will see that it is futile to keep pushing through an edit, and if it comes to it, they can be sanctioned for edit-warring if it goes that far. From personal experience many single editors will back down or start negotiating if they are reverted by different editors. Page protection prevents all editors from editing the article, blocking prevents an editor from editing all articles, while this system will see just their challenged edit removed from the article. Betty Logan (talk) 09:02, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, thanks. Go Phightins! (talk) 14:13, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yxaiio

hey there, i just added more references (market launches) to the page for Yxaiio i've created recently, and titled the reference list for a better overview; just wanted to ask if it's already fine with the notability guidelines. thanks, dowl --Dowl (talk) 20:38, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

bot assisted vandalism

Please refrain from reverting vandalism reverts. This is bot assisted vandalism. Humans know it better [1][2]. --80.129.92.13 (talk) 21:09, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]