User talk:Echoedmyron

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Rene Rancourt[edit]

How was my edit to Rene not constructive? All I did was change Lewiston, Maine to hyperlink Maine separately so people can click on Maine as well as Lewiston. They are not test edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vaselineeeeeeee (talkcontribs) 02:48, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Withdrawn. I saw a number of similar edits with no edit summaries close together, and didn't look closely enough to see what you were doing. Echoedmyron (talk) 03:25, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Tim Regan (ice hockey)[edit]

Thanks for making all of those corrections. For some reason I had it in my head his name was spelled one way when it really wasn't. then there were a couple good ol' typos. Thanks again.--Mo Rock...Monstrous (leech44) 17:20, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Whenever I cross paths with another editor I always have a look to see what sort of work they do, picked that one at random and figured I'd help myself to the edits. Most of what I do is of that nature, unless it's subject that's of particular interest to me. But good work on dealing with the Olympians.Echoedmyron (talk) 19:09, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Toronto Roller Derby[edit]

It doesn't need to be in both Category:Sport in Toronto and Category:Sport in Ontario simultaneously, because the Toronto category is already a subcategory of the Ontario one. Wikipedia has rules about such duplicate categorization. Bearcat (talk) 05:51, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the explanation. I hadn't realized there was a conflict there. Echoedmyron (talk) 15:41, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Falling (Blue Peter album)[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:04, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Mike Allison[edit]

Hiya, juz whistling by to mention Iv had a look at your dyk - looks good except that you need to change a ref in the article - refer your nom for details [1]. You may consider using Google News Archive search for finding news refs from the past. Cheers, Around The Globeसत्यमेव जयते 08:51, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I found the things I referenced to that were also cite-able in other refs, so made the change. Have seen that particular blog used in other hockey-related articles, though. Echoedmyron (talk) 13:05, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Wayne Gretzky[edit]

There has been an endless edit war for months and months. I have simply removed the nationality from the lead altogether. I realy think per the MOS there is no need to mention his nationally in the lead at all - plus sounds odd hes a retired Canadian? We cant keep edit Waring over this silly point.Moxy (talk) 00:13, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
That's probably the best solution. Although it will be interesting to see how long until someone puts it back... Echoedmyron (talk) 00:58, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Mike Allison[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:05, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Diacritics[edit]

Yeah, that's one Elrith knows full well ... he's a noted language warrior, and is well aware of the ongoing consensus concerning their use on hockey team pages. He's expressed his contempt for consensus before, and it's no surprise he's going for a fast one again.  Ravenswing  03:40, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I noticed afterwards to what extent he was doing it, and that he clearly has an axe to grind. I only reverted the articles affected that were on my watch list. I imagine the others will get dealt with by other editors. Echoedmyron (talk) 12:05, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
You gentlemen might want to actually read the "consensus" you're referring to, as it clearly says "diacritics" are to be used on all player pages. Given that you don't seem to respect your "consensus" either, I'm not sure how you get on that high horse. Elrith (talk) 15:02, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
We are going by the "consensus", here is what it says:
  1. All player pages should have diacritics applied (where required).
  2. All North American hockey pages should have player names without diacritics.
  3. All non-North American hockey pages should have diacritics applied (where required).
As Leech44 points out, All North American hockey pages should have player names without diacritics. You're the one taking a loose definition of what "where required" means. Echoedmyron (talk) 15:16, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Last I heard, the first part of that rule took precedence over the later two. You can't simply re-interpret existing policies and call them "consensus" because it's what you've decided to do. Elrith (talk) 15:16, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
You heard nothing of the sort, because no such precedence was ever established; you can't simply take your wishful thinking and claim it to be a policy. That being said, we absolutely can interpret guidelines in a mutually acceptable fashion, and indeed call that a "consensus," which is the commonly used term for it on Wikipedia. Why, look, the Hockey WikiProject did just that. And far from behind the "half dozen buddies" at which you are sneering, the consensus has the broad support of several dozen editors who regularly contribute to the encyclopedia, as opposed to ones who show up every six months to cause trouble.  ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  17:18, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
This is purely your own interpretation; such a "precedence" was indeed established and was common consensus not too long ago. As you should know, given how "regularly you contribute to the encyclopedia". But if you want to re-write history, you'll find I'm not the only person who doesn't share your hallucinations. Elrith (talk) 21:34, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Re:NHL draft pick history[edit]

I am just going with what is listed at http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=566673 as this is the official and most reliable source. However, the notes below the respective round tables explicitly state that any trades happened with the Atlanta Thrashers, so there should not be much of a problem with preserving the trade history of a pick, at least in theory. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 20:38, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

George Kalinsky[edit]

Thanks for pointing out that there are some facts that need citations. If you could point out the specific facts, I'll be happy to have a look at getting citations for them. I've been a fan of Kalinsky's photography for years and want to make sure his page is as good as his work. Newyorksportsfan (talk) 16:46, 21 July 2011 (UTC)Newyorksportsfan

Great that you're looking into it; a fan of his work is an ideal person to improve the article, as you're likely to know where to look. Basically, everything in the Biography section is uncited - stuff about the Pope and Willis Redd for example, finding a reference and citing it that shows that it was Kalinsky that took a particular image would be a good thing. I don't have time this week, but I'd be happy to take a closer look at some point and see what I can find. I came to the page through my interest in the Rangers and working on player pages. Echoedmyron (talk) 17:49, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Response re: Toronto Roller Derby[edit]

Hi Echoedmyron; you asked me what would be required to be done to improve the rating of Toronto Roller Derby from C to B. I would refer you to the B-Class criteria and make sure there they are all covered. I don't know the subject all that well, but I suspect there might be areas where it could be improved in terms of completeness.

If you think the B-class criteria are met, you're welcome to change the rating, but you should document that you've considered all 6 criteria. PKT(alk) 17:05, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Bacatcha![edit]

Hi Myron. I so appreciate your patience and efforts. As I said a couple of weeks ago, the foundations of a GA are definitely here, and I'm grateful for the help and encouragement this interloper has received. Yours especially. --Nemonoman (talk) 20:50, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Roller Derby World Cup[edit]

Thanks for your kind words. I'm hoping to add some more to the article, although a 5x expansion may be pushing it. Only main body text counts, though, so I suppose it might happen. Can't wait for the actual event! Incidentally, have you seen the roller derby in Canada has been created, and that I've set up {{CWRDA}} to list Canadian leagues? I thought that these might be in your area of interest. Warofdreams talk 14:57, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

For sure! I had noticed the CWRDA template, but not the Canada article. Will set me sights on working on that at some point. The Suzy Hotrod article is interesting too - there's not too many skaters who warrant their own articles, but she is definitely one of them. A couple of Canadian ones might, but I think as I know some of them personally I would probably ask them first how they felt before writing one. On a side note, would you be attending World Cup or just watching online? Echoedmyron (talk) 15:48, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Just watching online, sadly, although I know a couple of skaters from Sheffield are going over for it. I'm currently writing an article on Atomatrix, and I think there are probably a couple of other skaters who merit an article, but as it is primarily a team sport, I'm not planning on creating a lot of articles on individual skaters. Warofdreams talk 15:53, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't know whether you noticed, but I managed to get the Atomatrix article on to DYK, with a link to the Roller Derby World Cup - so the event has been now at least been linked from the front page. Warofdreams talk 11:59, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know - I hadn't spotted that it was today. The drawing system looked very complex, but the groups look good. I think that England and Ireland will be pretty happy with their draw, while Scotland will doubtless be excited to be playing Team USA, yet should also have a good competitive bout against New Zealand. Can't wait! Warofdreams talk 23:26, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

WFTDA maps[edit]

I think Dreams is better than War! Thanks for your message. It's a good question - and there are actually two full members in Europe: London and Auld Reekie. The official WFTDA position is that there is a Canada Region and a Europe Region, but "until the Europe and Canada Regions are further developed, teams in those regions will continue to compete in the closest U.S. region for rankings and tournament eligibility" [2]. Perhaps the answer is to show the non-U.S. areas in a different colour, or to omit them entirely and retain something much like our current maps. If we do include the non-U.S. areas, I think we should show all of them, not just countries or states with WFTDA members, as the WFTDA line implies that the whole of Europe and whole of Canada constitute these regions. One possibility for the East would be to have a map of North America and a separate one of Europe. I assume that Australia will get added to the West (and I wouldn't be surprised to see a New Zealand league or two join soon), but as nothing has been said, we can't assume that it will be. Incidentally, the maps also needs updating for the 2011 adjustments - see [3]. Warofdreams talk 14:24, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

World Cup[edit]

Hope you enjoyed the World Cup as much as our delegation did! Have you seen that DNN are now linking to the World Cup article in their ticker? It says: "Check out the exhaustively detailed Wikipedia article on the World Cup! Nice work". Warofdreams talk 00:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

great job! I'm still sick from the weekend, but so worth it. Time of my life. More later.Echoedmyron (talk) 04:08, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Roller derby national teams[edit]

Good work on uploading the logos and adding colours, too. That's all the national teams for now, but I know Belgium and Wales are also both planning to send teams to the European Cup this August, and I expect that at least Denmark, Norway and the Netherlands will also get teams together - possibly Spain, Switzerland and some countries with less derby experience, too. I think that a reference to the team page is reasonable for something non-controversial; although there's a question as to how notable it is if it wasn't reported, I think the names and, in particular, the haka, were notable parts of the event. Pictures are more of an issue - it's a shame that we can only use things licensed for commercial reuse, as most people quite sensibly are reluctant to do that. It's always worth asking if you see something good on Flickr. Warofdreams talk 01:25, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Bay Area Derby Girls[edit]

Thanks for your edit to Bay Area Derby Girls. That image looks a lot better where you put it. --Stace Odyssey (talk) 22:02, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

MuchMusic Edit[edit]

"Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a Neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Much Music seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now."

Thoroughly covering MuchMusic's shortcomings as a music television station and using well documented facts to justify these claims in third person is not "less than neutral".

What we are talking about here is a negative and (like the title that I wrote under says) "Controversial" issue. The topic at hand in the Music programming department was already written about, albeit outdated and without the proper citations(It was last touched in 2008, and the story has evolved since then). So what I did was elaborate on the issue by using the proper facts.

I understand the need to be politically correct on a platform such as Wikipedia, so I try my best to speak in neutral terms. However, positive or negative, the point of Wikipedia is to cover all areas of facts and inform the reader about all areas of a topic, and by that I include public social opinion, and not without the facts. As you have seen, I cited my claims more than enough, and the citations I made sure were legitimate, because I had a feeling that somebody might come along and get a little apprehensive and unsure about what was said. Once again, remind yourself that the heading I wrote under was already titled "controversial", and what I elaborated on was already written about.

It isn't hard to find articles by notable Canadian figures or well-respected writers speaking out about MuchMusic's deterioration and failure as a music channel. It's not your average daily gossip, this is a social issue that has been reported on numerous times. What I essentially did is collected some of these documents which would otherwise be unknown about by many, and put a spotlight on them to give them the attention that they deserve. The issue has always been there, and instead of complaining about it and burying my head in the sand, by using Wikipedia I shed light on the subject.

If you feel that it is a "less than neutral" written piece, that is your opinion. I on the other hand feel by taking away a fact-based written report, your justification is what is "less than neutral". Essentially what you're doing is taking away proven facts, just for the mere fact that it's negative content. It distorts the topic and misinforms the reader. I thought Wikipedia was supposed to be neutral as you said. If that is indeed true, you can't ignore the negative aspect of the facts for the mere fact that it's negative. You do that and your being "less than neutral" yourself. The negative side of the story will always be there, and Wikipedia's failure to acknowledge it will only make Wikipedia seem outdated or lacking.

Covering MuchMusic's "less than neutral" television programming may sound "less than neutral" to some readers no matter which way it is presented. I'm sure the adolescent females it is geared towards would disagree, though that still doesn't make my reporting any less true or any more bias. At it's most basic form, the issue is about a music channel being advertised for everybody when it is in fact abandoning it's music format and geared towards adolescent females. As someone who is passionate about music and grew up with MuchMusic as a proper music channel, it can only take someone like me to cover this issue because I have done the research, gathered the facts and know what I'm talking about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigBarnBed (talkcontribs) 12:18, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

It's not that one can not present information that reflects negatively towards Much, it's that the tone of that presentation needs to be presented neutrally. You are editorializing still, rather than merely stating facts. There are also statements you've made that amount to Original Research, such as offering comparisons to things that one sees on the website. You are also stating in this response that you are a music fan who is unhappy with how Much has evolved, and that is coming across in your prose in the article, which is where the POV comes in. With proper sources and scaled-back language, this section can be re-worked to have a more appropriate tone, and I am happy to do some of this work at a later date when I have the time to devote to this. For the record, I am friends with a former Much VJ, who left when they started scaling back the music side of things, so I could be considered as having as much interest in spinning this section negatively towards Much, however I'm aiming to find the right balance to present things with a neutral tone. For more information and explanation, have a look at WP:NPOV.

Ray LeBlanc[edit]

You said "If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page." I'm thankful that you took the time to show me the Wikipedia guidelines. The only source that I can find is http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1201781/index.htm It's sad too because the article wasn't very truthful. It's hard to find an editor that wants to report the story in truth rather then make it look colorful for his reputation. Ray's passion for winning in hockey is in comparison to his passion for living for God because of the love God demonstrated for us on the cross through Jesus, except now Ray's concern, his fire in life, is to see many more people come to know God's love. I know that no one wants to hear this truth and that I won't be able to post it on Wikipedia anymore, but at least this one last time maybe someone will hear that Ray's life radically changed by the power of the cross. Thank you again Echoedmyron, for helping me (Julie LeBlanc) understand the guidelines on wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JuJuBear29 (talkcontribs) 04:52, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Heindl[edit]

I've expanded on the personal life and added the stats table. Its easily DYK eligible now. I did add the Vic Grant blog story. The source is reputable, and it is hosted by a major university, so it should be good. I haven't added the Gretzky and Orr thing yet, however. Nor have I speculated on the cause of his death. DYK Checker counts yesterday as the first day of expansion, so we can wait to nominate until Saturday, at which time one of us should be able to get to the Free Press archives. If you get a chance before I do, definitely look for both the 1980 stories and a 1992 obituary. I'd probably check into both the WFP and the Vancouver Sun, since he died in Richmond BC. There may not be one, but I always check. Cheers! Resolute 03:12, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Cool. I think the Gretzky/Orr thing would make the best option for a DYK if you can find a way to cite that. I'm tied up with work this week so no access to archives for me. Curious - did you not add it in thinking the Grant source wasn't good enough, or did you just want to leave that out? Echoedmyron (talk) 14:50, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm torn because of conflicting sources. While I don't expect that Players would mention it, as you said yesterday, one would think it would have been a bigger deal for Orr and Gretzky to play together. Even in Gretzky's first NHL season. I wanted to get a look at the Free Press stories before deciding one way or another. Resolute 19:19, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Success! I've got stories from the game itself, and from the memorial story in the Free Press (can email them to you if you like... they're only 400kb each. just send me an email and I'll reply). And it confirms that it really was the only time Gretzky and Orr played together. If you're around today, I think you're ready to nominate at DYK (If you're not, I might do it late tonight.) Cheers! Resolute 22:28, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK has been burned in the past by poor sourcing. While I agree the reviewer isn't necessarily focused properly on the right things (they have not commented on the hook fact at all), looking at the overall article structure is fair. You mentioned you could duplicate existing sources in some places. I would suggest doing that to help alleviate their concern. Resolute 17:13, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough - I just did in fact do that, although I feel kinda silly repeating the citations like that. I'm more concerned about the fact that the reviewer's first comments a) had nothing to do with the hook and b) were completely opposite of what the article was stating. Echoedmyron (talk) 17:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Bill Heindl, Jr.[edit]

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:03, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Sean Avery[edit]

Hi. Easy mistake to make, but the edit you reverted on Sean Avery wasn't vandalism. It was a revert of a cited (although the cite isn't brilliant) and factually accurate paragraph. Some other IP editor is attempting to remove it for some reason. Thanks. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:41, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I have no idea what motivates the editor to add this. I'm just going by what the cite says. Now it's possible that the cite is Andy Cohen having a joke, I've no idea. As it's a weak cite I'm fine removing it. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 21:01, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Curtis Jospeh[edit]

Hi, I think you may have missed something in the Curtis Joseph article when you reverted only an edit[4] made by me and claimed I was using Facebook as a reference. I did not add any reference to Facebook and never would because I know the that it's not a reliable source. If you check the edit history, you would see that I had removed the Facebook reference and cleanedup manual of style only to be reverted minutes later for vandalism. I don't like being labeled a vandal, so I only cleanedup manual of style the second time and left an edit summary for another editor to remove the reference to avoid getting into an edit war with IP calling me a vandal. When you reverted my edit, you actually put the entire edit back in the article, including leaving the Facebook reference. Just check the difference in edits above, and you will see the change you made in the article. I'm sorry if I caused a problem here, but were dealing with IPs who keep putting unsourced info in the article and are now using Facebook and Twitter to source that info, but please note it's the IP editor who added Facebook, not me. Cmr08 (talk) 21:04, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake - I hadn't scrolled down enough to discover what your edit fully consisted of, and hadn't noticed the facebook thing was already there. Have reverted back to an earlier state now that pre-dates all that back and forth. I think. Something's off with how it shows up for me, maybe it's my browser being weird. At any rate, hadn't meant to lay blame at the wrong feet. Echoedmyron (talk) 17:57, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Ok, I understand, but you didn't need to revert because I had already done that. The revert you made[5] only moved the official website back to the bottom while also taking away the bullet point, which was an edit I fixed 2 edits after this revision. Cmr08 (talk) 21:37, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, not sure what happened there. I was trying to put it back to a point before all that business happened (there was a lot of intermediate back and forth editing along the way). It's all good as it stands now. Still think something odd was happening with my browser when I was trying to do the revert. Anyway, best intentions and all that. Echoedmyron (talk) 21:39, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Roberto Alomar[edit]

How about you leave it the way I wrote it? A respected tennis player with millions of dollars from career achievements and sponsors is much more relevant than some uneducated friend of some uneducated baseball legend. In fact I don't even know why a friend calling them gold diggers made it into his article, who the hell cares?! Is that supposed to make it a fact or...? Stop trying to correct whacko HIV infected morons' mistakes by trying to downgrade other people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivehearditallbefore (talkcontribs) 20:01, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Because the way you wrote it wasn't a) accurate b) sourced properly c) relevant to the article at hand. You'll notice that an Administrator had a look and found the entire section to be in violation of BLP. Your comments about the information you're debating show you have poor understanding of policy, and of the source that you yourself added to the article. If you're going to keep up this confrontational, uninformed attitude, you won't be long for wikipedia an an editor. You'd be well advised to read up on various policies for editing if you wish to continue. Echoedmyron (talk) 20:09, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

If you're not watching my user talk[edit]

I've started a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey#NHL_temporary_divisional_designations. Tiderolls 17:35, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh hey, yeah I saw it, got tied up at work. Discussion on the wikiproject page probably best, although whatever gets decided their will get wrecked by IPs who'll probably revert your reversions. I can go either way on it, but I brought it up thinking about how the IPs tend to edit hockey articles... Echoedmyron (talk) 17:37, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
I tend to a strict interpretation of WP:NOTNEWS but I realize my view is not universally held. More eyes are always a plus. Thanks for your interest and attention to the articles. Tiderolls 17:43, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

ipv6 rangeblock[edit]

Hi, I have just blocked the ip range you reported for a week, which might be a little short. Don't hesitate to re-report to AIV if vandalism continutes; The now blocked range is one residential assignment, on par with blocking a single ipv4 address, and no more problematic than that. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:56, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks - I didn't even know that was a thing. Will re-report if anything comes of it. Seems like the editor goes on about once a week or so. so it's possible they might not even notice the block. Echoedmyron (talk) 22:00, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
No problem, this stuff is pretty new for a lot of people, so I don't mind letting people know grips on how to handle it. How to effectively communicate on a talkpage of an ipv6 is completely beyond me though - it might be worth it to discuss treating a residential assignment as a single user in the software too. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 22:09, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Lee Aaron[edit]

Sorry for editing out your comments too. This is all new to me - It seems that I have come to a resolution with lee. I only changed what I wrote and left your comments. I am sure that I am allowed to remove my own material. Right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertwilliams232323 (talkcontribs) 18:28, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

yes, your own you may remove and edit, just not those of others. Echoedmyron (talk) 18:42, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Unavailable links[edit]

Please do not remove citations simply because a link to a source is not working, as you did to John Roberts (journalist). Dead links should not be deleted (See WP:LINKROT). Instead, please repair or replace the link, if possible, and ensure properly sourced information is retained. Often, a live substitute link can be found. Thank you. --SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 19:13, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

It's a dead link, and someone keeps adding (false) information that is supposedly corroborated by that reference. Better to remove the offending non-working link and add a citation needed tag, actually. And since no suitable, working link exists for what they want to add, this is really the only option. Echoedmyron (talk) 19:21, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
It would be better to repair or replace the link, if possible. If not, use the Dead link template as explained in the WP:LINKROT#Keeping dead links. I don't think the Nigerian IP that is adding that material is claiming that the dead reference corroborated it.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 19:30, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Charles Wang[edit]

I wouldn't know where to start with a rangeblock for those IP6 addresses! And all the "whois" pages I use don't work either. I supposed we'll have to get used to them eventually. Since he has the ability to switch IP, the easiest way is semi-protect - done.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 00:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Funny, I was just leaving you a thank you message on YOUR talk page... Echoedmyron (talk) 00:20, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Hey, looks like you're doing exactly what you need to. I've also got the page on my watch list, so you don't have to carry the entire burden of reverting this guy. --Rawlangs (talk) 03:33, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

WFTDA Rankings[edit]

Your approach looks good and is very similar to what I've done for some of the D1 teams - for example, Arizona Roller Derby#Rankings. Incidentally, good work on updating the national team articles! Warofdreams talk 21:38, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Cool. When I have a chance I may try to wade through some of the other WFTDA articles to standardize them. And yes, I started doing some updates to national artcles, anticipating that as 2014 rosters get named, some IPs may just purge the historical data. Someone started working on Team Brasil - there was some creative English happening there - so I started reviewing the others and tried to make them emulate each other. Everyone except Canada and Team USA have sortable charts for their rosters, so I still want to do that. And I stumbled upon a roster announcement for Australia. I understand that Canada's is coming soon - optimistic that friends of mine will make the squad this time around, and I'm also hoping to make the cut for announcing in Dallas again too. This time, I will bring a camera, with the aim of acquiring images to add to the articles where reasonable. (As it stands, I do have contact for many of the photographers who were there in 2011, I keep meaning to approach them for usage...) Anyway, thanks for the feedback! Echoedmyron (talk) 22:01, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
That all sounds great! I may well be able to get some photos - team photos, anyway - from the Men's World Cup over here. The UK women's team announcements are still some way off; England have only just announced their longlist, and Wales is just starting tryouts. Warofdreams talk 22:16, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Mike Bossy[edit]

Good catch, thx. RMc (talk) 00:17, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

The Bunker[edit]

Hi there. Is "The Bunker" also the Supply Depot? I thought they were two different buildings, but the Downsview Park website says they're both at 40 Carl Hall. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 21:11, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Just saw your addition to the Supply Depot article. Yes, must be the same building. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:15, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
I've never heard the term "Supply Depot" before, and I am - full disclosure - a long time derby volunteer. I can say for sure that the film studio folks use the same doors we do, and in fact the have spare keys for us, and I guess I'm possibly drawing an Original Research conclusion here, but I guess I felt safe in assuming that if they share the same address - and the photo used here is indeed the same building we use, although the doors we use would be on the right side of this image - then they must be the same building.Echoedmyron (talk) 21:17, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
By any chance would you have keys to the basement?? Magnolia677 (talk) 03:29, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Ha, no. The film studio people have keys to some areas that we don't; we just have keys to our space.Echoedmyron (talk) 11:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Zdeno Chara[edit]

Hey, not sure why you reverted the edit to Zdeno Chara as vandalism. The fact added was just mentioned on a national US broadcast and can be verified with several sources, including the one that was cited in the article.

Tcybulski (talk) 19:52, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Apologies. While a better source than Canada.com should be used, I mistook that edit for the usual vandalism that happens during the playoffs. Reverted. Echoedmyron (talk) 19:58, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Roller derby[edit]

Where do you take the "20" team members number from? Per rules "at most, 14 skaters may be on the roster for a specific game." Five participate in a jam, while the total is 14 on a team. --Khvmty (talk) 20:03, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

I could ask you where you got "5 in a game (14 in a team)" from, as that's simply untrue and inaccurate. Until recently, rule 1.1 said "Teams shall consist of a maximum of 20 skaters"[6] and yes, as I indicated in my reverting (and you seem to agree above) up to 14 are on the roster in a game. That the latest WFTDA ruleset doesn't specify this number of 20 appears to be an oversight, as the WFTDA is still capping charter submissions at 20 skaters. At any rate, there was nothing wrong with the previous phrasing, which was clear that a team has 20 members, and that 14 play in a game, which is why I reverted it; for your numbers to be accurate, you would have to say that "5 play in a jam", with "14 on - not "in" - a game roster", not a team. All distinctly different. If you wish to see that change go through, propose it first on the article's talk page for consensus. Echoedmyron (talk) 20:23, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
The link to the rules you posted above is dead. "20" is now an outdated number not supported by the official rules. I am using the updated rules WFTDA published on March 1, 2014. I propose we correct the infobox data under "Team Members" to clarify that 5 players participate in a jam, while there is a total of 14 players on the roster. I posted this on the article's talk page too. --Khvmty (talk) 20:42, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
The link I posted above was not dead, I inadvertently typed the wrong bracket, now corrected. Posting to the talk page is the correct course of action; it may pass just fine with proper grammar and terms. From looking at other sport infoboxes, some will list the number of players on the field at a time; others don't fill in that parameter at all. In the grand scheme of things it may not matter much one way or the other. But 20 is not an "outdated" number, IMHO. It's still considered the charter standard, but since the WFTDA is so poor at documenting finding official evidence of this is next to impossible.Echoedmyron (talk) 20:54, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
I do not have a problem with you correcting my grammar in the article. When I looked at the numbers in the infobox, it was confusing to me, because I could not find anything in the rules about 20 players. If it cannot be documented, it may fall under WP:NOR. If you wish you can elaborate in the body of the article concerning the "20." What do you think about updating the infobox to state the numbers according to the latest set of rules, to perhaps say "5 per side (14 on roster)?" --Khvmty (talk) 21:04, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Chris Kreider[edit]

You do realize that, if the Canadiens lose the series because of the loss of Price and are still talking about this in June and beyond, I'm just going to re-insert what you took out since, by that time, it will no longer be a matter of "recentism". Case closed. By the way, the fact you are categorized in "New York Rangers fans" tells me everything one needs to know about your motivation for reverting my edit. GodFearingLib (talk) 21:46, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

If at that time it continues to garner controversy with coverage in reliable sources, then you are welcome to. WP:RECENTISM is intended of course to keep every single piece of minutiae from cluttering an article, and for something to have staying power it will need to be substantiated as having relevance. At this point it's simply premature. And while it ought to go without saying, you're going to want to keep your original research in check, and also watch your behavior with accusations and name-calling on talk pages such as here, and not to mention here: [7] Echoedmyron (talk) 21:56, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Fair enough. Yes, in retrospect, that talk page edit was overzealous hyberbole on my part. I have therefore reverted it. I sincerely apologize for that. GodFearingLib (talk) 22:01, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
No problem. Like I said, it may indeed have a place long-term, such as the Pacioretty incident section in Chara's article, or the section about the controversial Stanley Cup Final goal in Brett Hull's; for all we know, Montreal can still win this series and it may become a minor footnote in Kreider's career. Echoedmyron (talk) 22:05, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
If I may add, GodFearingLib, while it may be premature to note on Kreider's article, I believe an injury of this seriousness certainly warrants mention on Price's article, and likely also at 2013–14 Montreal Canadiens season. The question with respect to Kreider's perspective is whether this becomes forgotten as simply a hockey play (i.e.: Therrien is simply trying to rally his team) or if there becomes a longer term reputational impact. Cheers! Resolute 22:13, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
That is a good point, Echoedmyron. I concur with you and Resolute. The Rangers are a very strong team and are not a dirty team like the Pens. It's shaping up to be a good series and if the Habs are going to win they have to forget the past and focus on the next game. I hope they do, because then the focus will be on the two teams attempting to advance to the Finals and not on Kreider, whose collision with Price was definitely accidental. Take care! GodFearingLib (talk) 22:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

2014 NHL Playoffs[edit]

That was a hell of a Conference Final my friend - especially game 6 tonight. I was biting my nails, cursing, cheering, praying - but, in the end, the Rangers were the better team and deserved to win. I'll be cheering them on in the Finals. Also, I don't want to see the Blackhawks win the Cup for the 3rd time in 5 years and I really don't want to see the Kings win it for the 2nd time in 3 years. Simply put, GO RANGERS! ;-) Take it easy my friend. GodFearingLib (talk) 02:57, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Ha, thanks. Yeah, that was a doozy. At least it was a close one, and not a debacle like games 1 and 5. They're in tough against whoever they get from the West, but at this point anything's possible! Echoedmyron (talk) 13:39, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ann Arbor Derby Dimes[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Ann Arbor Derby Dimes requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Tchaliburton (talk) 21:17, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Ann Arbor Derby Dimes for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ann Arbor Derby Dimes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ann Arbor Derby Dimes until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Tchaliburton (talk) 02:43, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Wow.Echoedmyron (talk) 03:08, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Chris Wardman for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chris Wardman is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Wardman until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Tchaliburton (talk) 14:19, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Are you serious? That action is incredibly petty. Echoedmyron (talk) 14:31, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

2014 Roller Derby World Cup[edit]

Hi there! I see you created the 2014 WC article, and it followed the placeholder I had set up in other articles; great! One thing: there is an article for Spain's team here: Team Spain (roller derby) and I don't know how to link it using the template you set up. Can you do that where required, and also tell me how to set up future team articles should they get created? I worked on most of the team articles from the last Cup, and indeed created a few of them, and would like to follow the same formatting you've used when other articles (may) get created. Thanks! :Echoedmyron (talk) 15:48, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I just reused the template from the 2011 WC article. All the redlinks default to "(name of country) national roller derby team". But most pages have titles like "Roller Derby Team New Zealand" or your "Team Canada (roller derby)", as seen in Category:National roller derby teams. So, someone manually created redirect pages for those back in 2011. I just clicked on the redlink in the 2014 article and typed in the new page #REDIRECT [[Team Spain (roller derby)]]

I was so excited to update the 2014 WC page as the scores were coming in, but haven't gotten around to cleaning it up nor putting in citations. Must! And a good reason for me to learn how to add the logos.

Thanks much! OrhanCharles (talk) 03:54, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

No problem, and thanks for the info, and thanks for doing it. Full disclosure: I was on the announcing crew for both Cups, and funny thing, you'd think that being in the thick of it I'd have easy access to press pieces we can cite for the articles, but being as involved as I was I'm, in an odd way, even more removed from things. I plan though to do some more work on the team articles after the holidays are over, and will see just how many I am able to source. With the death of DNN, it's a bit trickier to find info on some of the team rosters than before, as even B&T's own website often had out of date or incorrect roster info. Like, I have a google doc that all the announcers were given with all the rosters, but even there we found lots of errors, and of course we can't use that for a reliable source... Echoedmyron (talk) 14:34, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Re: Murphy bed[edit]

I'm not citing, in the formal sense, pre-WWII comedies, but I am saying that the repeated use of Murphy beds as a prop in comedies - for over one hundred years now - probably contributed to a (perhaps cartoonish) perception of Murphy beds as potentially dangerous. It's something of a trope, which is why the article talks about their repeated use in film, and it's filled out by the fact that, on several occasions, news agencies have reported on actual accidents involving Murphy beds. The fact that most of the comedies are pre-WWII is immaterial; merely being old is not reason to disregard something. That, to my mind, makes it worthy of note - with a short couple of sentences; we're not talking about several paragraphs, here. Many things are dangerous when dropped (some are not; if you drop a penny on my head from an airplane, I will not die), but certain of those things show up repeatedly in fictional works, to the point where it's noteworthy. For instance, I'd think it rather irresponsible if we didn't include some mention of Wile E. Coyote in our coverage of anvils. (I don't know whether and how much coverage it gets at the moment, but I definitely believe it would be a glaring lack if we said nothing at all.) Chubbles (talk) 02:03, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Thanking you for your timely imput that may have deter an edit war between Gloss & GoodDay. Raul17 (talk) 22:47, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

My second Rvt, was my last. Thanks, for explaining my objections to Gloss' additions, better then I could've :) GoodDay (talk) 22:57, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Re: St. John's IceCaps[edit]

Like the team that's taking up this identity, the Hamilton Bulldogs, the IceCaps will have two consecutive franchises taking up their identity in the same league. Since the Bulldogs' timeline lists both franchises as part of team history (AHL at least), I figured it would be apropos for the IceCaps to do the same thing. I hope you understand. Tom Danson (talk) 22:16, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

I was trying to find examples, and it hadn't occurred to me that Hamilton fit the bill themselves. It does seem odd, though, to have this shared history, as typically articles stick with the single franchise. For example, neither the article for the current Winnipeg Jets nor the article for the previous version of the same name lists the other franchise in its infobox, so that's what I was thinking of. However, if this is more commonly done for AHL teams then so be it. Echoedmyron (talk) 22:21, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
It's more about there being a franchise with the name in consecutive seasons than anything else...after the first Bulldogs franchise moved to Toronto, the former Quebec Citadelles took up that name (however, I will probably create a new article for the Bulldogs' OHL team, as they're in a different league and a different style of hockey). Thank you again. Tom Danson (talk) 22:26, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Hope you don't mind if I jump in here but this could go either way, though I would lean towards keeping it as one team for the time being and split latter if there is enough of a management difference. Hamilton is actually a special case where for one season it was two merged franchises and editors at the time objected to splitting them. In the end the newer franchise stayed and the one owned by Edmonton moved but left the 'team history behind. Because of the temporary merger much of the staff and players stayed through the transition. Other examples of multiple franchises - same name are the Maine Mariners of the AHL and the Fort Wayne Komets currently in the ECHL. Each is a different case but mostly those two are together because there wasn't really enough info to keep separate pages for each franchise. In the end it will probably come down to whether the AHL and fans want it to be the same team regardless of business with franchise histories and affiliations. Yosemiter (talk) 03:49, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

A cookie for you![edit]

Choco chip cookie.png A big fan of your NHL contributions! Arise again, Arisedrew! (talk) 00:01, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Boston Molasses Disaster[edit]

Not sure what reference you're citing - but I'll add this new reference: https://books.google.com/books?id=VVJiAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA234&lpg=PA234&dq=there+was+a+rumbling+sound+like+a+machine+gun&source=bl&ots=YCpZDRM0vI&sig=vyWvmw4QxPPEHLi8c5u6lzGQ3t4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=t-4jVZiQMsjFsAW9-4CgDg&ved=0CD0Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=there%20was%20a%20rumbling%20sound%20like%20a%20machine%20gun&f=false Thanks, Garchy (talk) 15:09, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I was referencing the citation that is actually on the end of that sentence: [8]. I will say that other references don't make the same distinction, however. With some references referring to two separate sounds and others as one continuous, determining which is most accurate I'll leave for others to decide. Echoedmyron (talk) 15:13, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Ah yes, I changed that citation - I'm not sure which is accurate (and who really is this many years later), but I've certainly seen it more often the way I changed it to. I added the reference I found so others may find it useful as well. Thanks.

Garchy (talk) 15:23, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

New York Islanders[edit]

Hi,

You edit is good as you provided a source. And that obvious vandalism comment was made, because that other user is harassing me and reverts all my edits on many articles with no or with rubbish reason/reasons.

And I just looked at your edits. To be clear, at this – https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philadelphia_Flyers&oldid=669264413. Your reason was – Announced only, not inducted until November. There's the same discussion ongoing on various NBA teams' pages. I say the same as you that people should be added to respective team articles only after the actual induction ceremony, but most people disagree and don't really try to find a consensus and make edits according to their own taste... – Sabbatino (talk) 15:57, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the HHOF thing, I brought it up at the Ice Hockey wikiproject page here, and the reasoning I heard is largely couched in the fact that people will probably continue to add the info in, even if we remove or rephrase the addition about being an announcement and not yet an actual induction. As others noted, it's highly unlikely that any of the elected people will have their inductions cancelled, so I'm good with that. But that wikiproject talk page is a good venue should you ever have other questions or concerns about how certain things get done on hockey-related articles. Echoedmyron (talk) 16:05, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
I just find it interesting that there was a consensus in the past about adding people only after HOF induction, but suddenly that consensus is gone and people are doing what they want. I don't have a problem with hockey-related things. My biggest concern is about finding the same consensus in basketball, but it's impossible, because some people are incompetent in that, I think I'll just move away from that consensus thing and let people edit how they want until they get warned/banned/blocked/etc. – Sabbatino (talk) 16:11, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Whip It![edit]

The point of adding that disambiguation was not because someone would confuse the song with the film, it's because the page "Whip It!" redirects to the film page. I don't think there are five notable songs with the exclamation mark in the title that would need to be added as "see also"s. It wasn't a see also template anyway. No need to be sarcastic when you revert someone; your reasoning is no more justified than mine. Ss112 16:23, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

I can see from even your recent edits you revert a lot of content added to the page and honestly, I wouldn't even bother contesting your revert because it's clear it would turn into a pointless edit war. Ss112 16:30, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
If your issue is that Whip It! redirects to the film page, change that redirect; since the only actual use of Whip It with an exclamation point is the song you linked to, I don't see why usage with an exclamation point should redirect to the film's entry in the first place. My edit summary did reference your edit as having been Good Faith, and if you thought that in the brevity allowed in edit summaries I was being sarcastic, that's your issue, not mine. Fact is, when you enter "Whip It" in the wikipedia search bar, you are given 7 suggestions: the film, this disamb page (which doesn't include the article you linked to) [9], songs by Devo, Nicki Minaj and yes, the one you linked to among other things. So picking just one item to include in the hatnote seemed odd, especially since no other article using this term includes that punctuation. To be fair, no, I suppose "5 songs" was an exaggeration, but I hadn't previously taken the time to count. If you looked at the edit history on the film's article you would see that the edit reverts by me are largely for overlinking, copyright vios, crazy excessive detail and in one case edits by someone who was subsequently blocked for their editing behavior. So, thanks for the show of faith in your judgement in your follow up insult in anticipating an edit war. Echoedmyron (talk) 16:53, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Sherbourne Health Centre[edit]

Just to let you know I intend to send Sherbourne Health Centre to AfD. Reads like a promotional piece with primary sources. Is it even a hospital? JMHamo (talk) 20:44, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

It certainly is. And as the article was just created by another editor this afternoon, and that new editor is currently adding secondary sources in good faith as they were asked to do, it sure seems disingenuous to nom it so promptly. Just because an article has primary sources doesn't make it useless or solely promotional, especially if it has more than primary sources. Perhaps advising the creator of the article ways in which to improve it would be more productive than discouraging them altogether?Echoedmyron (talk) 20:53, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
The WP:BURDEN is on the creator to prove notability. JMHamo (talk) 21:04, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
FYI, all accounts involved with editing Sherbourne Health Centre and similar Canadian health articles have been blocked for sock puppetry. JMHamo (talk) 11:50, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Boston Derby Dames Corrections[edit]

Hi! It seems we disagree on Boston Derby Dames Rankings in 2006, 2007, & 2008 as it related to WFTDA standings. In 2006, 2007, & 2008 leagues were ranked both Nationally and by Region. Please see titles of cited materials that state "National" rankings. You changed to be as "East", but this would be incorrect. Though they are considered an east coast team, the rankings cited were the National Rankings listings, so I have again changed those back to "WFTDA" rankings. In 2009, WFTDA began ranking solely based on region (no national or internation rankings) until 2013 when they began ranking Internationally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.68.85.32 (talk) 22:01, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi! I noticed you went back with new citations which I had not seen before, that's totally cool, and I will leave them as such. One thing though, is that the wikilink next to those numbers, the visible text now reads WFTDA, but it directs to the East Region article. So - if these are actually an overall WFTDA ranking, that designation in the table should link then to the WFTDA article (or possibly the Women's Flat Track Derby Association Rankings article instead). It's hard to find sources for early WFTDA rankings, good job on locating them. And nice to see someone take an interest in this article. Echoedmyron (talk) 22:05, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! I am really new here and don't really know all the in's and out's to wikilinks. Can you help to make the edits you mention? That would be fantastic! I was a founding member of Boston Roller Derby and also a founding WFTDA member. I skated with them for 7 years so I know the history well. Like you said, it's hard to find anything from WFTDA stating early rankings, so I did my best with other articles for reference. Just wanted to make sure people understood that WFTDA did start out with National Rankings, moved to regional, then to international. Trying to capture that history somewhere since WFTDA has done a poor job of it. Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.68.85.32 (talk) 22:12, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Sure, can do. As an aside, did you travel to Toronto with Boston last season? Echoedmyron (talk) 22:18, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks much! I did not, unfortunately. I do love those Toronto girls though!

I announce in Toronto, and also was in Omaha on the broadcast at D1 this year, was wondering if we'd crossed paths. I have made those edits I was suggesting to how the links were working - directing the first 3 years to the rankings article. If you have a WFTDA background, the main WFTDA article needs some work; I have worked on it periodically, but again the early years it's hard to find suitable links sometimes. I know a number of the WFTDA marketing people and have been meaning to bring it up with them - when I'm not busy doing other stuff! Echoedmyron (talk) 22:29, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Echoedmyron. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

"This event occurred last season"[edit]

This means whatever event happened that season can't remain on the article for years to come.

Megacheez (talk) 18:20, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

You removed the fact that a player's number was retired (Griffey Jr, plus the citation); this is a permanent circumstance and as such should remain in the article. I do not understand why you think that should be removed? Echoedmyron (talk) 18:23, 26 January 2017 (UTC)