User talk:Go Phightins!/Archive 22
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 15 | ← | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 |
Quakers
Um... I think 2013 Penn Quakers football team needs to be deleted because of 2013 Penn State Nittany Lions football team exists. We can't have two articles on the same school. Joking aside, is there any chance you have time to make sure the former article looks anything like the latter? Ryan Vesey 19:30, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
- Forget AfD, how about a CSD? Patent nonsense, right? I just took a look – I can't promise the same quality as the PSU article, but certainly I can add a similar game box and put in a summary of a paragraph or so ... I don't have enough background about Penn football to write the pre and post game stuff I write for Penn State. What newspapers cover Penn football extensively, and does Penn have a good student newspaper? Thanks. -- Go Phightins! 21:03, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
- The DP is probably going to be the only source. http://www.thedp.com/section/sports Thanks Ryan Vesey 22:13, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Look at the bright side - there's a chance you'll lose by a smaller margin than the stupid Eagles today. Go Phightins! 22:46, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
- Or even lose without having as many turnovers as the Bears today. ZappaOMati 03:17, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- On the bright side for you Phightins, the Eagles won, but not so good for me, as the Bears lost. At least my San Jose Sharks are 2-0; not sure if you follow the Flyers or not, since they're 0-3. ZappaOMati 03:18, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
WikiCup 2013 September newsletter
In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. 
Cwmhiraeth (submissions) currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. 
Sasata (submissions), 
Hawkeye7 (submissions)—who has never participated in the competition before—and 
Casliber (submissions) follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).
The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! 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 or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:16, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
The Signpost: 02 October 2013
- Discussion report: References to individuals and groups, merging wikiprojects, portals on the Main page, and more
- News and notes: WMF signals new grantmaking priorities
- Featured content: Bobby, Ben, Roger and a fantasia
- Arbitration report: Infoboxes: After the war
- WikiProject report: U2 Too
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- EdwardsBot (talk) 05:10, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.
IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.
Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:
- Views/Day
- Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
- Quality
- Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.
The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:
- Content
- Is more content needed?
- Headings
- Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
- Images
- Is the number of illustrative images about right?
- Links
- Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
- Sources
- For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?
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) 12:03, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 09 October 2013
- Traffic report: Shutdown shenanigans
- WikiProject report: Australian Roads
- Featured content: Under the sea
- News and notes: Extensive network of clandestine paid advocacy exposed
- In the media: College credit for editing Wikipedia
- Arbitration report: Manning naming dispute and Ebionites 3 cases continue; third arbitrator resigns
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- EdwardsBot (talk) 17:33, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Attention beloved talk page stalkers who like templates and code and what not - User:Dainomite, User:Ryan Vesey, and User:Technical 13, you in particular
I am working on 2013 Penn State Nittany Lions football team and am planning to add the team's starting lineup in a collapsible box for each game. I finally figured out the code to do it at 2013 Penn State Nittany Lions football team#August 31 vs. Syracuse, but would appreciate any input and/or modifications to make the layout look nicer, as well as change the background color of the collapsed box to either a neutral gray, or the Lions' navy blue and white. If someone could either a) do that or b) tell me how to, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks in advance. Go Phightins! 19:28, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
- Looks fine to me... Was there something specific you needed help with coding? Technical 13 (talk) 02:57, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Sorry GoP, I was at work all day otherwise I would've responded sooner. Atleast I caught a bit of the Badger game though
hehe. I'll play around with this in my sandbox some, see if i can reduce the code some. Is there any sort of modifications that you're looking for specifically? I'll make the background of the headers navy blue and change the header font-color to a white. Another idea that I got from the 'bama article's depth chart is to use the template Template:CFB Team Depth Chart. You could use that for a more visually stimulating way of displaying starters and their positions. What do you think? — dainomite 03:08, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- No need to apologize, Daino, and by the way, nice new signature. I saw that template as well, and may incorporate that once the season ends, but in the article, I was simply listing the game's starters, not the pre-game depth charts. Thanks. Go Phightins! 03:10, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thank ya! The font-color of "dain" changes from orange to blue every other day, needless to say I was very excited when I was finally done with it. I think it's cleaner and more crisp than my old one which I kind of cheated on. But, getting back to the Nitty Lions... I think I would just reduce the length of the code by putting the columns side by side, but that's about it. And that's just because it takes a bit to scroll down past the code to the end. — dainomite 03:20, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- I made some changes. Let me know what you think of them GoP and if I can help with anything else. — dainomite 03:43, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- No need to apologize, Daino, and by the way, nice new signature. I saw that template as well, and may incorporate that once the season ends, but in the article, I was simply listing the game's starters, not the pre-game depth charts. Thanks. Go Phightins! 03:10, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- Random idea but what about adding a redshirt icon next to the year?
- [[File:Redshirt.svg|10px|Redshirt]] I got the idea from looking at our roster. — dainomite 18:30, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- That's a possibility - I just copied our roster from last year in to my sandbox to try to update, but no guarantee on that any time soon. Go Phightins! 18:37, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- Oh, another question, do you want the width for the navbox the entire width of the article? Or just wide enough for all three columns with a little buffer room? For an example of this see... User:Dainomite/sandbox#Nitty_navbox. (Please forgive my incredibly messy sandbox >.>) — dainomite 04:57, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
What I did / how I did it
- Oh! another another note, you did say you'd like to learn something. Here's what I did with the code essentially and a bit more.
table rows
|
|---|
|
This... |- | LT | Donovan Smith | SO |- means exactly the same as this... |- | LT || Donovan Smith || SO |- In a long table doing what I did in the bottom example just cuts down the amount of vertical space that is taken up. |
table caption
|
|---|
|
And when you added ;Offense for the headers for each wikitable there's a code you can use that adds a header above the wikitable, except it's called a caption. After {| class="wikitable" on the next line you add |+Offense and whatever is after |+ will be centered above the wikitable, for an example of this in an edit see this diff. |
Extended content
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Also, border="1" doesn't do anything if you have class="wikitable" there. Here's some examples of when it works and when it doesn't work if you're curious. I don't know about you but I'm a visual person so when I see the difference it makes a lot more sense to me.
|
That's all I can think of off the top of my head but if you want me to do some more stuff like this I don't mind. — dainomite 04:57, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
- All right, my head is literally spinning. Tell you what: pick one that you like, and go ahead and implement it, if you don't mind doing so. Go Phightins! 12:59, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Hatnote
Oh GoP. Just curious but did you want a timestamp for the hatnote on the top of your talk page? If so I can customize the format of it to have it display however you'd want it. The hatnote on my talk page has a timestamp if that gives you any ideas. Also, after perusing bleacher report a bit ago (and seeing this article in particular) I just realized you guys had an insane win today against Michigan. Congratulations! I also realize that if I actually looked at the Nitty lions article I would've noticed it haha. Cheers! — dainomite 04:59, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- Sure, why not! It will be blatantly obvious to anyone who knows me that I didn't code it, but fine. Thanks for lending me your technological coding prowess. Watching Penn State's game was the most fun I have had watching sports since the Phillies won the World Series in 2008. We have a dog who likes to jump up and bite when he gets excited; needless to say, with all of us jumping up and down, he was doing a lot of jumping and biting, but at that point who cares. Anyway, I almost think the game warrants its own article; I am going to read up on my game notability requirements this afternoon, but it was a four overtime game. That was one of the longest games in CFB history, but this was the longest ... 7 overtimes. Another good article on Penn State's game here. Thanks again for the code for the starting lineups; I copied it over to the others, though for fear of messing something up, I did not change the tables like you had the first one, didn't want a monumental error. Go Phightins! 11:01, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- No worries, I'll go back and shorten it up for the other ones like I did to the first one. :) Wow, watching that interview with Bill O'Brien was crazy, the crowd in that stadium was electric still! And it looked like it hadn't emptied out at all either! That reminds me of when a #18 Wisconsin upset #1 Ohio State in 2010 at Camp Randall in Madison, the stadium was just insane[1]. It wasn't a crazy 4OT win but I feel that was our last "incredible" win that comes to mind. — dainomite 03:49, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi GP,
I saw that the article Major League Baseball was delisted from good article status. Can you examine this article to see what needs to happen in order for it to go to GA status. I'd like to get it back to GA quality. Advice? Sportsguy17 (talk) 16:49, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- The place to start is with referencing. Consider "Multimedia and production", "Founding", "Other leagues", "New stadiums and artificial surfaces", "Spring training", "Regular season", "Radio", and "Internet". All of these sections have no references at all. Many other sections contain many unreferenced statements. Ryan Vesey 17:05, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Hi Sportsguy, I am going to ping a few other users to see if they have any thoughts as well: Muboshgu, EricEnfermero, and Wizardman, all of whom have significant experience in baseball good articles. A good place to seek advice would also be at the baseball wiki-project talk page. My initial thoughts are somewhat similar to the thoughts of the user who submitted it for reassessment over three years ago – more citations are needed, particularly in the media section. If you want to put together a team to rewrite some of the article to bring it up to GA status, I would be more than happy to be a member, or to stay out of the improvement and ultimately serve as the GA reviewer, but let's see what my fellow baseball editors think. Thanks for dropping by, and welcome to Wikipedia! Go Phightins! 17:08, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- I've made a notice about it. I'm going to find some references when I come back online later. Thanks for the advice. Sportsguy17 (talk) 17:27, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Quick check-in (as no one has responding at WT:BASEBALL yet.) I have referenced all sections, except for multimedia and production, but otherwise, I added 2-5 references per unreferenced section. Where should I go from here, or to the least, what criterion are not at GA standards yet? Sportsguy17 (click to talk • contributions) 02:34, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2013 Philadelphia Eagles season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Doug Martin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)