User talk:Ksy92003/Archive-Sep2007

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

Vick article[edit]

I'm about to move the vick achievement back out of the article, the article is looooong - way too long according to WP:LENGTH. Got any objections to this? Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  06:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I assume the reason why the article is so long is because of the dogfighting allegations. However, I also see that there seems to be far too much information than is absolutely necessary. But looking at the history, you see that the article is 79 kilobytes, which I do agree is far too long. Personally, if I had to choose something to relocate, I personally would choose to branch off the dogfighting case, but that's too much more work than I am willing to do :) But on the other hand, I don't think that many people would be open to the idea of removing the huge section that gave Vick the national (and perhaps global) spotlight, so moving the achievements would be the next reasonable thing because those aren't as significant as anything else that is greatly described in bulk.
Seeing as how short the career achievement section on Vick's article is, I wouldn't think that removing that do another article would actually shrink the article that drastically, but aside from that, it wouldn't do any harm to move it now, even if it would only shrink the article by 5 kilobytes. I don't have any objections to you moving the achievements, and after you do that then perhaps we may go in there and cut down a lot of the other excess information. For example, the dogfighting situation has way too much information; most of it isn't what's gonna be considered important after his imminent jail sentence is announced, so that should (in my opinion) be shrunk drastically, as well as the first couple sections, which go way too much in depth into minor details. But that's something to concern ourselves with after the status of the article becomes more stable; with new developments of the criminal charges incoming day after day, the article will continue to expand until the charges are taken care of.
Long story short, no objections from me. I also want to tell you that all day Wednesday, I will not be able to do any editing, so don't expect to get any help from me until Thursday morning. I've got to go to my high school for pre-school year stuff, and I'm going to the Angels/Yankees game in the evening, which both will force me to be absent from my computer until I return early Thursday morning. Just want you to be aware of this. Ksy92003(talk) 06:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • There are already some {{main}} tags in place and I agree whole heartedly about expunging some of that other content. It's in horrible shape and will probably be like that for a while. I want to again commend you for your appology. I hope what follows is taken as a heartfelt statement and not a "i told ya so" or anything like that.
  • I'm a good bit older than you are (as I'm in my mid-30s) and I am in fact - essentially retired. I have made my living by actually mediating some very hotly contested disputes. I am, in essence, a dispute resolution specialist. Now that may seem somewhat surprising - and while true - it isn't something you can verify (unless i want to tell you my name). But i have been through many discussions with people who have egos the size of continents. Your extension of an olive branch to me is a sign of growth toward full maturity. If people involved in the "disuptes" i was looking over could have had the wherewithal to make statements like that - i'd be a poor man (in otherwords - i made money because I had to stick around for long periods of time). You are a passionate person and as you continue to go through life, if you keep that type of ideology close to you - you will do very well. I mean that with all the honesty and integrity possible. Thanks again and let's get this place cleaned up. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  06:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Although I am only in high school (I'm preparing to enter my senior year next month), I have quite a history when it comes to me being able to get out of doing things I don't want to. I'm kinda the "excuse king" of Long Beach. Although nothing compared to the disputes I had with you the previous two and a half weeks, I know what it's like.
  • Although if I knew that you were able to retire at your young age, then I would've backed out weeks ago :) Thanks for the life advice. To be honest, because I came out and apologized to you, ending this two week long dispute, I do feel like a different person. It's not a feeling like Michael Vick coming out and pleading guilty, getting the pit bull off his chest (metaphorically speaking, of course), but it's near there. The dispute I had with you was one of the most... involved, shall we say, that I've been in since I began on Wikipedia last November. And being able to go to sleep tonight, knowing that I won't have to worry about a hotly-contested debate with you anymore, is a great relief, a great feeling. Of course also going to sleep an Angel fan after watching Garret Anderson hitting 10 RBIs, a franchise record in an 18-9 Angels victory over the Yankees is a great feeling, as well :) Well, I'm gonna say good night for now, and I hope that everything goes alright for you all day while I'm gone, and I'll try to help as much as I can, beginning on Thursday. Happy Wednesday, and happy editing.
  • By the way, out of curiosity, could you tell me where you are located? I'm just kinda curious as to when I could most likely expect you to be active during the day. If you don't wish to divulge that information, then I understand. Ksy92003(talk) 07:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Travel here and there and everywhere, but my Ip will almost always come from one location for privacy reasons :-). I'm always up though - i'm semi-retired and do a few things to keep me occupied. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  22:33, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

DYK August 23[edit]

Updated DYK query On 23 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ramón Peña, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Andrew c [talk] 17:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg This user has been a major contributor to 1 article featured in the Did you know... section on the Main Page.
Congratulations.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

DYK criteria[edit]

The main body text (excluding templates, lists, images, references) must be expanded 5 fold.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 22:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

If you want to co-author a WP:GA, I think Hector Lopez has potential. He could use one of your boxes. Torres is an O.K. DYK. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 23:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


That was a very odd collaborative choice to remove all text. I am not sure that was necessary, but I will wait and see what you produce.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 23:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I have added a defensive positions chart. Feel free to help me reedit. Also, I need help finding a logo.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:20, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
I was having the dilemna you noted in your edit summary. I guess that is the right call.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:30, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

World Series Team templates[edit]

Do you know if there has been discussion at WP:MLB regarding Championship team templates like they use for National Basketball Association teams? I am going to post a query.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 01:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

WRT space, these templates are generally collapsible. See Robert Horry.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 01:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
I take that back. Baseball ones should be made collapsible probably, but lets wait for a response on the MLB talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 01:14, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
See Michael Jordan for New York Yankees solution.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 01:17, 24 August 2007 (UTC)--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 01:17, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
I now have two queries at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball related to Hector Lopez. Let me know if you know anything about the second.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 02:44, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
I missed your last post (17:34 8-24-07) because it came just before User:Chrisjnelson. I don't think the White Sox template would be preferred at WP:TFD or WP:MLB. I think Nelson's Braves template is the better one to go by. The more compact the better because many players and teams will have multiple templates. Thus, following what he said is just start with the World Series composite box scores of anyone who entered any world series game is a good start. I don't think that would meet with disfavor.
As far as the Lopez surprise. It is not that big a surprise. These types of articles could get you a bunch of GAs. Here are two others that could use the same work we are doing with Lopez: Dennis Martínez, Chan-ho Park. These guys are both groundbreaking national heros who will not likely make the HOF. Their articles should be slightly easier to write because they were All-stars with important black ink (league leadership) factors. Hideo Nomo is similar, but has a much less needy article. All three could be moved up to GA. Some of these players had important years in the internet era that would be much more easily cited than Lopez' career. If you want to start pumping out GAs, these are three good guys. I think Martinez will also need a Championship template. If the highlighted career statistics is looked upon favorably, these guys will be good to work on. I would suggest these three for baseball loving GA hunters.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 04:05, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
There was no opposition. If you don't want to do the 61 & 62 Yankee Templates, I will get to them this week, but how do you get the Jersey numbers? Do you use The Baseball almanac?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
P.S. If you wouldn't mind though it would be great if you did one and I did the other. If you want to split them I'll do 61 and you can do 62 using baseball-reference as a basis (realizing that a few players may be on the roster and not show in the stats because they did not play).--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I would go with Template:1995WorldSeriesBraves as closely as possible. I think baseball almanac may have jersey numbers.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I have added a category, a talk page notice and two talk page templates to the banners. I have also added a section at the bottom of New York Yankees for it. P.S. I am glad you got the banners on while it is still on the main page. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I am talking about the NYY Championship templates you created.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:47, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


Hector Lopez now has several redlinks that need your expertise. Also, Jim Finigan, Johnny Kucks, Tom Sturdivant, & Humberto Robinson need your boxes.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:11, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I shouldn't count my chickens, but this article is becoming the textbook GA construction. You start with a fact and 1500 words. Then, you expand and add facts. Then, you clarify your thoughts producing hooks for WP:DYK. Check out the hooks at T:TDYK right now. Then, you go back to your article and clean up your lead based on the various hooks. Then, you just keep expanding and copy editing. P.S., this one was easy for me because my father (born in Colon) was 1957 Athlete of the Year for the Republic of Panama and sort of a peer of Lopez'. As soon as I saw it was a stub, I knew I could get credit for a major expansion and likely a GA.
Hopefully, there will be no major objections to creating championship templates. If there are none by the end of the weekend, do you know how to figure out what is needed to create the 1961 and 1962 Yankee templates? --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:31, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
I see the redlinks are coming along. Since you 1) Like baseball articles and 2) want to learn how to make WP:GAs, here is a task for you that will help you in other articles. Check out what has evolved at Barry_Bonds#Career_statistics and try to make changes to Lopez with one color for top 10 and another for led the league.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:26, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
P.S. You can find colors of your choosing here: Web_colors#X11_color_names.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:29, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for the notice on logos. I was about to spread them all over. I had begun adding a statistical section to Roger Clemens. I guess this is proper. How come we have permission to use them in team articles and not other baseball related articles? I will remove Bonds and Clemens. Could you get Lopez and Young. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:34, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I assume you have some sort of program that grabs baseball-reference data and produces infoboxes. How does it produce colors? I want to convert the Roger Clemens team colors like Barry Bonds has team colors in his team column. Do you know a quick way to get the exact colors?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:56, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Wow. Someone should create such a tool. {{Infobox nrhp}} can be created by entering the name of the National Register of Historic Places property in a search box. I will have to go pirate the colors tonight. I think I am going to leave for the beach in a few minutes. Would you get the Lopez and Young colors, if I get all of the Clemens colors? --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
I just finished Clemens so you can steal his NYY colors.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:26, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


Updated DYK query On August 27, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Félix Torres, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations on the DYK. They are guaranteed to stay on the main page for 6 hours. I am on WP less than half the day so there is a good chance I will miss a DYK. I have missed a few. It happens. You can see the exact hours your DYK was on the main page by checking the history at T:DYK. Often it stays on the main page a lot longer than 6 hours.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:52, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I keep all my WP:DYKs here. DYK official credits go to the page creator and page nominator. On occaission, additional editors get official credits. I think they keep track of credits somewhere and give out 50 and 100 successful submission banners or barnstars. It is not common for muliple editors in addition to the page creator to get a DYK. I have only once in my recollection requested another editor be given one. I was not the most prominent editor at Chicago Board of Trade Building, but was the nominator. Since I had only done about a third as much as the main editor, I requested that he be given a credit as well although I did the nominating. On your first DYK I was going to let you have the whole credit. However, I was getting worried that the article would not get on the main page so I posted a comment on the submissions page and got a credit. In general, if I did the majority of the editing I do not ask for an official credit for another editor. I think this is the correct thing to do based on the common crediting procedures, but I am not sure. I wonder if this philosophy has caused me to lose editorial support at WP:CHICOTW. For WP:GAs I always give credit to other authors with 5 or more edits and for [[WP:FA] and WP:FL 8 or more. However, I am not sure such credits are counted anywhere. Your feed back on my philosophy would be welcome.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:11, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Updated DYK query On 27 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Héctor López, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--TonyTheTiger kindly nominated the article for inclusion in the most recent template. My apologies for the tardiness of the credit template :) GeeJo (t)(c) • 20:08, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I have been informed (see my talk page) that it is O.K. to be a bit more generous with DYK credits. I see you have already been credited. In order to get a Image:Dyk50.png banner you have to keep track yourself. I guess there is no log of credits. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 20:29, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Lopez GAC[edit]

I think we are getting close to GAC quality. We need to make sure we review all the automated peer review comments on the talk page. I fixed one related to the infobox template. We need to address the others. Then after a good copy edit and a week or so wait for stability we could take it to WP:GAC. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 20:42, 27 August 2007 (UTC) P.S. I nomintated the article at WP:PR and WP:BIOPR. I will probably get to looking for Yankee numbers for the templates tomorrow.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 20:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

WS Champ templates[edit]

I see you made Template:2002 Anaheim Angels. I think WS Championship templates should also be on the proper YYYY World Series page and the Franchise page if you do any more.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 14:19, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, I think the title should be linkable (see changes to the Yankees templates). I am telling you directly because I feel as a baseball guy you might do others in the future.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 14:21, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


You may want to explore contributing your thoughts to the ArbCom case - I think that you should feel free to discuss our run-in as well. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  22:06, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I would be glad to, but can you please direct me there? Ksy92003(talk) 22:08, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Sure - there is an evidence page that is located at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson/Evidence and a workshop at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson/Workshop. Daniel may be able to advise you if you ahve any questions. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  22:16, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you... I'll get on that right as soon as I finish up what I'm doing now. Ksy92003(talk) 22:18, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
No problem - as an aside - it looks as if you have had a similar interaction with B (talk · contribs) as I have, I am not sure that the place to raise issues about him is at that location - so if you are going to jump in there - you might want to find out how to voice your opinions about B. I'm not sure if i'm doing it right, but I'm trying. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  22:21, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Oh, no, you misunderstood. I don't have anything against B (talk · contribs). I'm only commenting there because Chrisjnelson commented him about something I did, and I was defending myself. I don't have any sort of issue, at any level, with B. Ksy92003(talk) 22:23, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Okay - glad we cleared it up - I do have an issue with his handling of the situation; but i didn't want the ArbCom having to deal with that. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  23:45, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


I did see your revert of it - I actually was just making sure i called it to action by name as my "backlog of bickering" is extensive and I need to keep track of who does what! Thanks though and feel free to do it again! :-) Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  00:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Hehe no problem. It makes sense to me now that you explained it to me... your explanation was never one that I would've thought of myself. Ksy92003(talk) 00:22, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Good deal. You might be interested in reading my thoughts on the whole "article expulsion technique" that i use for long articles of sportspersons. It is located at User_talk:Corpx#Vince_Young. I think the suggestions that the content may not be ideal are excellent and if we can seperate out the "issues" some good editing may come out of this. I'm still not touching manning or favre right now though - but i did find that Wayne Gretzky had a list - it was just poorly named. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  00:26, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
I've read your thoughts on the page provided, but if you don't mind, I'm gonna remain impartial on the subject. By that, I don't mean that I don't have an opinion, but it's not really that major an issue where my input would be incredibly significant or make a significant-enough difference on the issue. Now, has this issue been brought up at Wikipedia talk:Article size or any similar discussion page? Ksy92003(talk) 00:35, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Many times in the past - it's why I keep referencing the information - there is also WP:LISTS. I have not commented on the quality of the information in the particular articles - just the fact that the size of the articles combined with the list guideline and the category all speak to the move. What someone might want to take the time to do is create a summary paragraph with a {{main}} tag pointing to the list. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  00:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  • It seems quite reasonable that if an article is too large (ie 60+ kilobytes) than it would be sufficient to relocate a huge portion of information to a branch of the main article. That way, you can give all the same information in much greater detail without clogging up the main article, and you can still give a short portion of the information in the main article, along with the {{main}} tag to link to the expanded version. It seems reasonable that this would be quite an acceptable path to take should the article be too large, such as Michael Vick, but before this is done on a drastically wide-spread scale, there needs to be a strong consensus supporting such an action. Ksy92003(talk) 00:48, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  • THANK YOU!!!! You are the first person outside of myself (or is it outside of me???) to explicity state an opinion based on the documentatio! Oh my god i'm so happy. This is a great point. Okay, i'm gonna let my thanks sink in - and i'll toss a few things about this. Really great approach and i mean that with all sincerity! Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  00:59, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow, you reacted much more... passionately, we'll say, than I was expecting you to. You can pass my thoughts along, if you wish.

On an unrelated note, in this edit [1] to Jonathan Smith (American football), I came up with a compromise for the intro... or at least what I think is good enough: a combination of mine and Chrisjnelson's version of the introduction. I see that you also edited that article recently, and that's why I'm telling you of this. Do you think that my compromise is a good enough version for the intro? Ksy92003(talk) 01:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I actually have a comment on your thoughts! I just wanted to the thanks to stand on its own and not as a thanks but... As for the smith article (which i was the moving editor for), i'm kinda done with it beyond what i've done. As you know, I don't have a lot of patience for one of the editors. There is a post on the talk page with regards to how one is "named" (he is referred to as the wide receiver). Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  01:10, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Notice of ANI report[edit]

CJN ani, you may want to comment there on your recent experiences. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  22:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


Please stop bickering with him. It's not productive. I've locked that page, and I don't want to block you as well, because you're feeding the trolls. Please stop again, and although I don't want you to take this the wrong way, but treat this a final warning. Maxim(talk) 01:56, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I understand. Ironically, I noticed that it was protected as I had clicked on "Save page." Sorry for all the trouble. I guess it's hard to not try to defend yourself when you're being attacked by somebody. I'm sorry. Ksy92003(talk) 01:59, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
It's all right. I know Chris from a long time ago via a conflict, and it is hard to try to disengage. Maxim(talk) 02:11, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
It's kinda unusual how both Chris and Jmfangio, the two users I've most recently had disputes with, I first encountered them in an attempt to try to settle a dispute: Chrisjnelson with a dispute with Yankees10 (talk · contribs), and Jmfangio with a dispute with Chrisjnelson. This is just kinda strange. Ksy92003(talk) 02:16, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Will you stop edit-warring on Chris' page. I was about to block you for 3 hours for that when you sent me the message, and I though otherwise. I've posted on AN/I about this, and I hope a few more admins help me settle this, because I'm chasing Chris, and you chasing him, and I'm chasing you, Juan is trying to help settle this... Translation= We have a mess. Maxim(talk) 17:42, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry again. I just got kinda frustrated how Chris won't let me give my opinion, although it's perfectly relevant. I thought he was just trying to keep you from reading it so he could be unblocked. Ksy92003(talk) 17:45, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Copyright violation in User talk:B[edit]

Information icon.svg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on User talk:B, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because User talk:B is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting User talk:B, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 02:01, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Category:Sports champion navigational boxes[edit]

I see you are hard at work on Category:World Series championship templates, I have created its parent, Category:Sports champion navigational boxes, and am trying to find other categories to put in it. Let me know if you know of any.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 04:42, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Your Opinion[edit]

Do you think a player should have a category of being on the team if they never played a game for them, for example do you think Sam Rayburn should have the category San Francisco 49ers players, when he never played a game for the 49ers--Yankees10 23:47, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

thanks for your opinion--Yankees10 00:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


Because I do not feel our personal problems should flood the WikiProject NFL page, I'm replying here. Feel free to delete this... you know, despite the fact you've had a hard time letting me delete things from my talk page in recent days.

First of all - the revealing your name thing. I took PRIVACY from you. Give me a freaking break. Anyone in the world, brain dead retards included, could track you down based on your location, high school, class, future college, and looking for clues in your username. Nobody cares, get over yourself. But I hurt your privacy by revealing a first name? That's laughable.

If you don't want to believe me when I say it was intentional, that's fine. But tell me this - why would I reveal your name when it wouldn't change ANYTHING for ANYONE? No one cares what your name is. There isn't some bounty hunter out there with you on his agenda scouring Wikipedia for clues. Nobody cares, get over yourself. And no, I did not intentionally release your name.\

The Nazi comment - once again, I did not call you a Nazi. Never have, never would. The edit summary was a misunderstanding, and if you thought I was calling you a Nazi you were 100% wrong. I also was not comparing anything involving you to Nazi propaganda. There was no connection between you/what you wrong and my edit summary. That was the point. So stop saying I called you a Nazi - it's false.

Finally, I've never lied to you so that's wrong too. The end.►Chris Nelson 08:31, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll reply to each point by point:
  1. Because I've already revealed my location, birth day, age, high school, etc., those were things that I chose to reveal. Those are personal things that I chose to reveal, and I didn't like somebody else revealing something I didn't want revealed. You revealing my first name, along with the information that I wanted to reveal, somebody could put 2+2 together and find me, especially somebody from my school. Privacy is when you don't want other people to know something about yourself. Therefore, you ruined some of my privacy by potentially letting other people know something about me. And I didn't appreciate that. And again, you're lucky that I didn't report you for that, as you could be indefinitely blocked. And even if somebody could hunt me down or whatever based on what I've willingly revealed, you're not allowed to reveal any personal information about another user without his/her permission. Although you claim it to be unintentional, you revealed private information without my permission, which is grounds for a possible indefinite block.
  2. About the Nazi comment, whether you were calling me one or not, no matter what you claim now, as soon as I saw that edit summary, I felt very insulted and hurt because I felt that you were calling me one. "Nazi" isn't a word that you should use when talking to somebody in the manner in which you did, so I feel that was poor judgment on your part. And I still fail to see how using the word "Nazi" could possibly be a joke in any way. I can't think of any way to use that word to somebody else and it not be insulting.
  3. You said, and I quote, "I was simply lying in the edit summary, like Jmfangio does all the time." So, yes you were lying to me in this edit summary, per your own admission. If you don't think you were lying, then discuss that with Durova (talk · contribs), because s/he is the one who first brought that up.
Ksy92003(talk) 08:50, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
  1. I know it's against the rules, and that's why I'd never do it intentionally. My point is it doesn't really have an impact so there's no reason to freak out about it.
  2. I take full responsibility for you and anyone else misunderstanding it. Obviously, one would be offended if they made the assumption you did. Fortunately, it was not true, and considering I did not call anyone a Nazi or call anything Nazi propaganda, it doesn't really have the power to offend when understood. Simply uttering the phrase "Nazi propaganda", which in essence is all I did since I wasn't associating it with anyone or anything, is not offensive. And I'm sure Nazi-related stuff can be funny. There's a great line in Harold and Kumar that comes to mind. Guess it's just a matter of taste.
  3. Lie wasn't really an accurate description. I wasn't "lying" because I was purposely putting false info into the edit summary as a jab at Jmfangio, but this was not intended to be secret from anyone. Jmfangio, however, does lie in edit summaries (like saying I'm edit warring when I'm not) so that's where the wording came from. My edit summary, however, was meant to be known by all as false. Therefore, I simply didn't explain it well the first time and "lie" wasn't the right word. Not to mention, the edit summary wasn't directed at you so, lie or not, I wasn't lying to you.►Chris Nelson 08:57, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
  1. It matters to me. I'm not like you. I don't want people to know my name. If people from my school see that I go there, then big deal. But if they know who I am, that's not something that I want people to know. So it's a big deal to me. It's like bills. Some people by paper shredders to shred their bills for security. What are the odds that somebody's gonna dig through somebody's trash to find their bills to use for fraud or something? Not likely, right? But people still buy paper shredders for this extra security. That's why I haven't revealed my name: for extra security.
  2. Why don't you look at the edit you made in which you made the edit summary? I left you a notice about the personal attack you had previously made against me. To me, it seemed like you were telling me that the comment I left, the warning, was the propaganda, and I, the owner of said "propaganda," was the "Nazi." And as I've told you before, this was quite offensive to me. You continue to say that "Nazi propaganda" isn't offensive, and I don't see how it could be anything but. Nazi-related stuff isn't ever funny, especially when somebody feels that it's being directed towards them. But I don't want to get into a huge political debate about this, but that's something that could've happened if somebody saw that comment.
  3. You were lying to me because you admitted that you were lying in your edit summary, and the edit summary was a result of an action that I made, so therefore, a chain reaction. And now, you're trying to say that you were lying about lying. This doesn't make any sense... and something I just noticed. There is a flaw in your story. You say the "Nazi" comment wasn't directed towards me, but you say that you were lying in the edit summary. So that makes me think that the comment really was directed towards me. Ksy92003(talk) 09:11, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Ugh. It's like trying to explain something to a child and they simply cannot grasp it not matter how many different ways you say it. A frustrating feeling, no doubt. Forget it. Believe what you want - you've heard the truth from me, and it's up to YOU to believe it, or interpret it since you can't seem to understand all of it.►Chris Nelson 09:16, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
If you're in court, even if you tell the truth, what really matters is if the judge and the jury believe you. And so far, I've yet to see anybody who thinks "Nazi" wasn't offensive. I've yet to see anybody who thinks that you revealing my name was a good thing. And you admitted to lying in that edit summary, and others, specifically Durova (talk · contribs) and me, think that you might be lying about other things. All that matters is how other people have interpreted your comments, and I interpreted them as offensive, rude, incivil, and hurtful. Ksy92003(talk) 16:50, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Be thankful you got out when you did[edit]

The list with Mudkip in it and Mudskipper have both been full-protected because users are still adding the meme. I left a note on WT:PCP with regards to it; I noted that you were one of the people to contact for information regarding the meme in the past since you got involved long before Alison or I did.

If you get any talk page messages from the members of the PCP regarding the meme, simply answer them as best you can. Eternally frustrated with the bloody meme, Jéské (v^_^v Kacheek!) 19:38, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I can imagine why the 241-260 list would continue to be a target, but why Mudskipper? I'd have to look at the article to see how the meme was being included in that page. I don't see the purpose of adding the meme to the mudskipper article. I also saw your post at WT:PCP and I'll try to answer any questions to the best of my ability, should I need to.
Regards, Ksy92003(talk) 19:43, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Here's Mudskipper's history, if that helps. -Jéské (v^_^v Kacheek!) 19:47, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Man, it's like having a food fight in elementary school, stopping when the teacher enters, and continuing when the teacher leaves. As soon as I leave, the anons (in the immortal words of Emeril) "kick it up a notch." Using a reference that you used: different theatre, same people shouting "Fire!" Ksy92003(talk) 19:52, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


Was the stuff I added to Hector Lopez today too trivial?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:39, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure that it's necessary to list all the other players in the Maris/Mantle era. I think just saying how many were is enough. Ksy92003(talk) 21:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Comments[edit]

I really don't care about your "discussion" with Chris. It shouldn't take place at WP:NFL just because it somehow can't take place on a user talk page. It should take place outside (AIM, e-mail), and not spill over into Wikipedia, as has happened before in your situation. Pats1 22:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

As I've told you on your talk page, I left those comments there because Chrisjnelson has asked me not to post on his talk page, and I knew that he would be able to read it there. However, that still doesn't explain why you needed to get involved. Ksy92003(talk) 22:21, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
The fact that I told you not to post on my talk page does not make it a good idea to flood the project talk page with your personal problems with me. A mention is one thing. Telling me to go to your talk page because you have something to say is one thing. But writing endless paragraphs involving nothing but our past encounters is wrong and you know that. It was purely hypocritical for you to get on Pats1 for what he wrong on the project talk page, because you did far more "flooding" than he did.►Chris Nelson 22:28, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
It was not my intention to flood the project page. I typed my "endless paragraphs" to explain to you why I was leaving the discussion because of all the incivility from you towards me, and I was giving the examples of all of your incivility. And I never said that Pats1 flooded the page, did I? Stop putting words in my mouth, Chrisjnelson.
I can't even have a simple conversation with anybody without you butting in. Stop with the incivility towards me; you've made yet another personal attack towards me. I am not hypocritical in any way, and I ask you to prove that I am a hypocrite. Ksy92003(talk) 22:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
You can say things are uncivil and personal attacks all you want, but it doesn't make it so. I've tried it. I once said over and over that Jessica Alba was my girlfriend and she wanted my junk. But it didn't make it true.►Chris Nelson 23:03, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
I don't care if you told people that Jessica Alba was your girlfriend. I don't see what that has to do with this. The point is, if you say something and I interpret it negatively, it hurts. If I said something that I didn't think was offensive, but you viewed it as a personal attack and were offended, then it's still a personal attack, right? It doesn't matter if what I said made no sense to me, but if it hurts you, it's a personal attack. Using words like "hypocritical", "Nazi", and such might not make sense to you, but they offend me. You of course wouldn't think it's a personal attack because you're saying it, but I did. And that's what's truly important. The other users who have commented on your talk page after you made that remark (Durova) and others who have read that edit summary (Jmfangio) were also... for lack of a better word, "appalled" by that edit summary. Here is what Jmfangio said: "Okay, i'm circumventing the boards and just coming straight here - i'm about to go off on this guy - look at this edit summary: [2]. That's about as offensive as it gets!" You really need to be careful with how I, and others, like Durova and Jmfangio, interpret your comments and edit summaries. Ksy92003(talk) 00:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I think a good rule of thumb is to take whatever Jmfangio says, then believe the opposite.►Chris Nelson 00:52, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Well what if I don't want to do that? Right now, I believe Jmfangio a lot more than I would you. Ksy92003(talk) 00:55, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Well it's your life. Sometimes people just have to be allowed to make mistake on their own.►Chris Nelson 00:57, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure you understand me. The incivility towards me isn't just recent. When we first encountered, it was when you were being incivil, making personal attacks directed at Yankees10 (talk · contribs). You then later were making personal attacks at Jmfangio (talk · contribs), and now you're being incivil towards me. So your incivility towards other users has been around for quite some time, and I'm surprised that you still insist on being incivil. Ksy92003(talk) 01:06, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

A comment you made...[edit]

Sorry, I meant to post here, but I accidentally posted on your talk page. According to your edit summary, you don't believe me, but that's your decision not to believe me. I think this is a fair analogy of your actions.

Anyway, Chrisjnelson, I was looking through previous discussions on your talk page and I saw you made a comment at 07:49, 25 July 2007 (UTC). The comment, in a conversation with Jmfangio, reads as follows:

You are responsible for your own actions. You make a conscious decision every time you post on a talk page or edit an article, so take responsibility for your actions.

This comment can be seen per this version of your talk page. I bet you're wondering how this is even relevant. Well, you have repeatedly said, in defense of your "Nazi" statement that it wasn't directed towards me. Applying your comment to that, you are responsible for everything you do and you are responsible for the way that your actions are perceived by the rest of the Wikipedia community.

This is why I was offended by your "Nazi" comment. You continuously say that you weren't meaning that in a bad way, but you are always 100% responsible for what you say and how others react to it. To take an example, say you accidentally broke your mother's favorite vase by accidentally throwing a ball at it (just play along, it will make sense soon). Your mom is out at the grocery store, so you clean up the vase and stow it in your bedroom closet. She returns, and notices that the vase isn't there anymore. You tell her that you were playing baseball in the house because you didn't think you would break anything. But your mom still gets mad at you for breaking the vase, and grounds you for a week. You tell her that it was just an accident, that you weren't trying to break anything. But she says "it doesn't matter if you were trying to or not; it doesn't matter if it was an accident. You still broke it. You shouldn't have been playing ball in the house."

Now I'll make sense of that story. If you do something, you need to think of the consequences. You can tell your mom that you weren't trying to break the vase, but you still did it and there isn't any way of undoing it. With the "Nazi" propaganda statement and the revealing of my name, you did that, I was affected by it, and you can't go back in time and pretend it never happened. You've told Jmfangio this, and now I'm gonna tell you the same thing: you need to be responsible for your own actions. You make conscious decisions when you say things in posts and edit summaries, so "take responsibility for your actions." You offended me, and you can't pretend that you haven't.

Long story short, I have no idea why you're the one calling me a hypocrite, when I could say the exact same thing about you. Ksy92003(talk) 07:13, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Here's a more fitting analogy for the situation - Think of it like this. Let's say you see a group of people. To one of them, you yell, "Hey, you're a f-----g a--hole!" (Why, I don't know, just go with it.) Let's say another person thinks you meant it fir them, so naturally they'd be offended. But later when you make it clear it wasn't directed at them at all, there ceases to be a good reason for them to be offended. That's what happened here. You have no logical reason to be offended, considering I did not call anyone a Nazi and I did not compare anything to Nazi propaganda. In essence, I simply uttered the phrase "Nazi propaganda." The phrase in an of itself is not offensive - it's just a thing. I'm sure it's got it's own Wikipedia article. You have no right to be offended now that you know the meaning behind it (or lack thereof) so I do not acknowledge you being offended and I consider it a mental error on your part. The end.►Chris Nelson 16:34, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Calling somebody a "f-----g a--hole" is different to giving somebody the impression that you're referring to them as a Nazi. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson/Workshop#Extreme incivility by Chrisjnelson. Jmfangio said "link #2 in this section is particularly troubling for me" and Seraphimblade said "Chrisjnelson's behavior during this incident was highly uncivil and unacceptable, especially the "Nazi" reference." The issue for them isn't as much a fact that they think you called me one, but rather because you decided to use that word as your word choice.
And as far as being called a "f-----g a--hole," I'm in high school. Everybody calls everybody else stuff like that, so if somebody were to call me that, I wouldn't think too much of it. It's normal for high schoolers. But when you used the word "Nazi" you made me think that you were comparing my behavior to that of one. You say you didn't, but you also said you were lying in that edit summary, which makes me still think you were, and that hurts.
You are responsible for your actions, and for everything you say. If you say something offensive, then you should prepare to deal with the consequences. You can never say things like and not have anybody take offense to it. And let me ask you something: do you think that I took offense to that comment? Ksy92003(talk) 16:42, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
I do not get offended, period.►Chris Nelson 16:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
What does that have to do with this conversation? I was asking if you think I was offended, not of I offended you.
And let me use what you did with the "f-----g a--hole" scenario. If you wrote something on my talk page, a harmless comment, and I removed it with the edit summary "f-----g a--hole", you would probably think that I was calling you a "f-----g a--hole", am I right? Ksy92003(talk) 16:52, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I would think that. And that's why I've said before, I understand why you and others misunderstood the comment. But now I've clarified it, and it had nothing to do with you so you have no right to be offended. Just like if you clarified your comment for me and told me it was not related to me, I'd simply say "Oh, okay." I'm tired of talking about this. It's over. It's done. You're living in the past. Either get over it or don't, but there's nothing else for me to say on the matter.►Chris Nelson 18:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

But it doesn't take away all the hurt you caused me the instant you posted that comment, unless you can go back in time and retract that statement, but you can't. Just like the vase, even if it was an accident, it doesn't take away from the fact that you did it and it offended somebody. Perhaps you should try to convince Durova or any other admin who knows about this dispute that what you said wasn't offensive, because you won't convince me. I know it was, and so do you. And you could've been blocked for it. Ksy92003(talk) 18:16, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Then I guess you'll remain hurt. But I take no responsibility for that aspect (the duration, not the hurt itself) so don't bother me with your problems. And I don't care to convince anyone it wasn't offensive. If you were offended, you misunderstood. Therefore when you DO come to understand it, you should cease being offended. If you choose to keep being offended, that's no one's fault but your own. So I will not reply on this subject anymore, it's a dead issue for me and I wish you good luck in getting over it one day yourself.►Chris Nelson 18:19, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
How can you not take any responsibilty for any of your actions? Despite everything you do, you always claim to be perfectly clean. You take absolutely no responsibility for offending me greatly. This is why you are always being accused of being incivil, and why there have been RfCs, ArbCom cases, and ANI cases filed against you: because you continue to be incivil, and you don't take any responsibility. Ksy92003(talk) 18:29, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

List of Christians[edit]

Please go see my response on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Christians (2nd nomination). Thank you. Canjth 22:36, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Templates on team pages[edit]

Don't forget to put the WS roster templates on the franchise pages. I am doing the Dodgers, Pirates and Yankees.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 01:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I will when I've got the opportunity. At this time, I'm not entirely ready to edit articles for now. I'll do it when I'm ready. Ksy92003(talk) 01:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Just a note[edit]

I'd say leave it be. Be well, but don't get yourself in any more worked up. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  02:18, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I assume this is about the conversation(s) between me and Chrisjnelson. I'm sorry for getting involved. It's just that, as you can probably tell, Chris just frustrates me in so many ways. He's always being incivil, and of course I still believe the "Nazi" remark he made was directed at me, despite what he says. And I'm sure you already have the following page marked on your watchlist, but if you haven't seen it yet, please look at my examples of Chris' incivility that I recently posted about remarks he made months before you even created an account: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson/Workshop#Further examples of Chrisjnelson's extreme incivility, as well as the additions I made to Extreme incivility by Chrisjnelson while you were on vacation. Ksy92003(talk) 02:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
My feelings with regards to the comment "not directed at anyone" are very strong. I do have that page on my watch list, as well as Durova's which is why I dropped in. I would urge you to minimize your interactions with users you don't get along with to few and far between. As you remember from our dispute, it is certainly difficult to disengage when others do not allow you to do so, but try your best. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  02:35, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I suppose so... it's just kinda hard to keep away from other users when they offend you in such a despicable manner, such as Chris' inappropriate comments related to me. Ksy92003(talk) 02:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

So your solution is to harass them incessantly and living in the past instead of moving forward?►Chris Nelson 02:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

How the heck am I harassing you? Ksy92003(talk) 02:44, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
If you can't see how, then I can't help you. You've been doing it forever now. You jump into conversations between myself and others. You bring past problems into unrelated discussions. It's impossible for me to have a civil discussion with anyone or simply talk about a football issue without you coming along and making some ridiculous accusation or bringing up a personal attack I made in April. You can't let anything go. No one will ever move forward if you keep doing this.►Chris Nelson 02:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
How is that harassing you? You've jumped into conversations between me and other users before... like this one right now. You say it's impossible for you to have a civil discussion, but did you ever consider that might be because you fail to be civil in any of your discussions? Ksy92003(talk) 02:51, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

There is a likely chance that I have much stronger feelings on the topic than you do; regardless, this situation continues to mushroom, the best thing for people like us (who have already asserted our opinions on topics) is to maintain a status quo until the arbcom or an independent admin decides to help put an end to this. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  02:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I would strongly suggest that you just stop talking to him. There is little that can come of it as he does not appear likely to move away from his position and all you are going to do is put yourself in the same situation i am in - an arbcom.Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  02:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I seriously am trying. As I've already told you, sometimes it's hard for me to keep out of it when other users don't take responsibility for their actions. I'll seriously try to keep out of it as much as I can.
Out of curiosity, how long does the arbcom generally take before actions are taken, and when did this one between you and Chrisjnelson begin? I just would like some sort of approximation (is that a word?) as to when I can expect this to end. No particular reason, I'm just curious. Ksy92003(talk) 03:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
No idea on how long. As far as when this began - he first contacted me toward the end of july, so approximately 5-6 weeks. This will show you some of our early interactions. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  03:08, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Now, don't take this the wrong way, but I hope the arbcom ends soon, because I think some action needs to be taken about these long disputes. Again, I said don't take this the wrong way. I'm not saying I want you to be punished, but I hope that whatever deserves to happen happens as soon as possible. I think that the disputes have gone on for far too long. Ksy92003(talk) 03:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I assure you that I want these to be over and done with as quickly as possible. I would strongly urge you to adjust your 5th note at the top and remove the "identifying" information. I'll try and find the guideline for you - but it might be looked at as baiting a user who is "blocked" (or is it banned - those two terms are very confusing). I am going to be asking someone (hopefully Durova) for some clarification on a guideline and after I get that, I will get back to content related discussions. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  03:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, "ban" and "block" are two confusing terms for me, as well. As for the fifth note, I had that since much earlier this morning, before I knew that Chris was gonna be blocked. I'll adjust it as you suggested, although those were my true feelings. Ksy92003(talk) 03:40, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
No worries, you may or may not have noticed an editing status notification on my talk page. If you want to look at how it has changed you can look through the header history. Regardless of the other users editing status - making them as "impersonal" as possible is probably ideal. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  03:44, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I have adjusted it, changing it to "recent circumstances" which shouldn't sound worse than my previous formaet. As for the editing status, I actually hadn't noticed a similarity behind that and the one I had. Ironic; they are somewhat similar, and it took me until just now, when you pointed it out to me, to notice out.
That aside, as I've also previously told you on your talk page, most of my recent time has been devoted to I know your main focus is football articles, but if you have any sort of interest in basketball, feel free to help improve it (created Monday). Additionally, for me, school begins tomorrow, so my time will be cut back even more because of that, but I should be around during the evening. Ksy92003(talk) 03:55, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
The funny thing is i just fixed the NFL wikia last night. I don't really want to edit "other wikias" right now, but that's a great suggestion and i'll keep it in mind. I think the way you have stated point 5 is much better. I think you might want to consider removing your recent statement on CJN (or at least - not commenting further). I am in this up to my neck and I'm okay with that, but there is no reason for you jeopardize your editing status as well. JmFangio| ►Chat  22:12, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I was thinking about that when I posted that comment. Although I don't feel that I shouldn't be able to say anything relevant just because he's blocked. I feel that the recent comment I posted may help the situation, as well as the understanding of the situation. I won't comment any further unless Durova, Seraphimblade, or Chrisjnelson requests I do so. Thank you for looking out for me, Jmfangio. Ksy92003(talk) 22:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a touchy situation and I completely understand. It seems CJN has refractored your comment anyway. If you feel it should be there - you should place it back in as the removal does not qualify under WP:TPG. However, be advised that putting it back in will probably cause a revert war. JmFangio| ►Chat  22:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, he can remove the comment if he wishes. Since it's his talk page, he is absolutely able to remove anybody's comments if he wishes, with the exception of policy violation warnings and whatnot. Because of that, I'm not gonna restore the comment, as well as the potential edit war. If I need say something else, then perhaps I'll post it at Durova's talk page. But I wasn't expecting Chris to respond to my comment, and I was expecting him to remove it, but I've said what I needed to, and if Chris doesn't care, that's on him. But again, if it's absolutely necessary, I'll leave the comment on Durova's talk page if I need to. Ksy92003(talk) 22:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
No problem - since he removed it without comment or reason - he should not have expunged this. (see WP:TPG#Others.27_comments). Just a thought, be well and see you around. JmFangio| ►Chat  22:53, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I do see that it says "...removing comments without any reason is generally regarded as uncivil." Although, because of the circumstances, I wouldn't consider this to be an uncivil gesture. Ksy92003(talk) 23:04, 5 September 2007 (UTC)


Please see WT:NFL#Continued_discussion JmFangio| ►Chat  19:21, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

It turns out that Jmfangio is a reincarnation of Tecmobowl. [3] Small world, ain't it? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 16:36, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


The discussion I mentioned you in was about Chris's recent block. That block was due to Chris's behavior over a long period of time. You have, directly or indirectly, partially affected Chris's behavior in the past. Therefore, it is perfectly reasonable for me to mention you in the discussion. ugen64 02:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Hector Lopez[edit]

There was no big problem at WP:PR so I am going to nominate Hector Lopez at WP:GAC.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:49, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Kevin Everett[edit]

Nice catch on Losman's comments on the Kevin Everett page. You were absolutely right. Snowfire51 01:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

When it said I had a new message, I said "I bet $15 that it's about [Kevin] Everett" but I didn't think it'd be a compliment. Thanks. Ksy92003(talk) 02:11, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

2007 Los Angeles Angels season[edit]

Have you been editing this page lately? —Preceding unsigned comment added by LADodgersAngelsfan (talkcontribs) 06:09, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

No, I haven't been editing that page recently... in fact, I haven't really been editing much lately, at all. But with school beginning in September, and me having to go back to my job a couple weeks ago, as well as hockey season (season ticket holder, Los Angeles Kings), I haven't had a lot of time, and truth be told, I just haven't felt like updating it every single day with all this text that I need to come up with, so I kinda dropped away from it. Ksy92003(talk) 02:19, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Stat color usage[edit]

Your opinion is needed at Talk:Barry_Bonds#stats_section_use_of_color. We are debating the use of colors in stats tables with respect to WP:WAI section 4 and the current Barry Bonds page versus the former color scheme. The debate will probably shape color scheme usage throughout baseball bio article stat sections so be thoughtful. You may want to look at other pages that have colorized section such as Roger Clemens, Good article nominee Hector Lopez, and Chris Young (pitcher). Keep in mind what Bonds before colorization looked like.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 14:19, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Pictogram voting keep.svg Done. Ksy92003(talk) 22:21, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Infobox for football[edit]

Do you know anyone who does football NFL boxes. Pop Ivy played with a few NFL teams and coached teams across three professional leagues. He needs an infobox.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 15:52, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

The only user I can think of is Chrisjnelson (talk · contribs); however, because of conflicts, he is in a topic ban, which prohibits him from editing all football articles except for two: 2007 Miami Dolphins season and another. Ergo, he can't edit the player articles except for reverting vandalism. So I'm sure you can ask him about what to do, but he can't do it himself. Ksy92003(talk) 22:22, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I've added the Infobox for Pop Ivy. Let me know what you think. --Niceguyedc Go Huskies! 19:40, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Baseball player in need of infobox[edit]

Here is a guy who needs one of your boxes: Melido Pérez —Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyTheTiger (talkcontribs) 16:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)